• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.

Hawkins8

Members
  • Content count

    125
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

100 Neutral

About Hawkins8

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Quote:Original post by Edtharan Quote:Original post by Hawkins8 Today's MMO is emphasizing on making a "world" for everyone. So I keep wondering if this can be changed such that the everyone can have his own world, while the MMO only occurs to a common portion of the whole world. To simply, this is to make a main world on the client side instead of on the server side, where just like the old-fashioned RPG games, it goes through a main story line. But, if all you can do in the game is kill things or transport things, then you don't have that many roles to take on. Sure, it might give the more hard core RPers more tools with which to work with, but for them to RP as they want, they have to ignore your game to do so. This is the problem, RPers have to ignore the games (as they are) in order to role play, this is because the games do not provide the mechanics to allow player to take on other roles. The design is in the very contrary, this is not to introduce fight-only element to the game. The world separation is an attempt to pull players away from the grind treadmill. Actually, without pulling players from the grind treadmill, there's nothing can stop the players from hack'n slash 24/7. For other game elements to be introduced to the game, you need to somehow pull away the grind from the players. Of course you need to do this very carefully to maintain addictiveness/fun of the game to keep at least a certain portion of the player base, in this case the RPers. The world separation is to make the game more assemble the classic RPG games where fighting is driven by storyline and mission instead of the grind treadmill. In current MMOs quests are crapy because everything is grind centric which stops the design from adding depth to the game, all other elements are superficial other than the hack'n slash. In order to change this, you need to take the grind treadmill abit far away, but not completely removing it.
  2. Quote:Original post by theodore italik Hi, After watching a review earlier today of "Scott Pilgrim vs. The World" the game (not the movie!) the reviewer mentioned it has a wonderful combat system. It's a beat 'em up game so is the combat system the specific animation rendering and collision detection for a beat 'em up? I don't really understand and would appreciate if someone could explain the term. Thanks, Theodore A combat system is how a fight should be carried out in game. Whether swords or magic or arrow or guns or nukes should be used and how they cause damage to opponents. Better collision detection means a more realitic fight can be emulated such that the player can make decision on attacking the different body parts of his opponent, say, whether to cut his leg or cut his arm, or hurt his torso, or shoot his head. And a precise collision detection can detect down to body parts such that whether those parts of your opponent is hit can be correctly managed/detected. For example, you try to shoot your opponent's arm, while your opponent is trying to dodge, precise collision detection can simulate whether your arrow hits or the dodge succeeded. Yet IMO, such a precision down to body parts brings in no more fun at all, it's just some gimmick by software improvement. It may gain some fun in the case of action type games but totally meaningless in RPGs and MMORPGs. Will you find it fun to see the following messages in the screen? your right hand is hurt, now you have to use your left hand to fight. now your right leg is hurt, so your walking speed decreases now your left hand is 10% disable and you find it difficult to hold your sword I find those details totally meaningless and adds nothing but boredom to the game.
  3. It is because I've got the feeling that the classical standalone RPG games may not satisfy what the RPers want, and today's MMOs also may not satisfy what the RPers want. I think that they want a MMO but leaning more on a classic RPG game like. Today's MMO is emphasizing on making a "world" for everyone. So I keep wondering if this can be changed such that the everyone can have his own world, while the MMO only occurs to a common portion of the whole world. To simply, this is to make a main world on the client side instead of on the server side, where just like the old-fashioned RPG games, it goes through a main story line. In the game Civilization, the whole game goes through a technology hierachy, new technologies are unlocked along time. So I wonder if this can be applied to the MMORPGs. Instead of a technology hierachy, the game goes through a NPC network hierachy. If you ever played the Ultima series, you may remember that Avatar gets to know his friends alone time, Iolo, Shamino, Dupre, Sentri, Jaana, Julia and etc. Avatar gets to know them one by one alone time. So just like in the game Ultima, every player has a world Britania, yet a common world Sosaria is for teh MMO part. So that everyone is following one of the several story lines to establish a human network with in game NPCs, that is, Iolo, Shamina...and so forth. Each player will establish his own NPC network and even PC network by adventuring and questing. In game success will depend on the quality of such a network instead of your gears. And such a network is built alone real time, so that you hack'n slash 24/7 may not make you a in game hero. And a casual player can thus compete with a hardcore player in terms of his NPC network quality which is not depending on how much time you spent in game. Resources farming and items are still on the server side. The world is seemlessly divided into the client side game world for RP and the server side world for MMO. Grouping is made smarter, such that you don't need to yell LFG. You just need to receive the server side quests, nominate yourself as 'available' for some specific quests, then the game mechanic will automatically form a group for you.
  4. I think that what the current MMOs failed to do to favor RP include, 1) an open world doesn't exist a quest driven open world is needed for RPing, instead of a level dependent linear world. A linear world model is adapted in 99% of today's MMORPGs such that the lowbies can never go to the region maps for high level while the high levels will never go back to newbie towns regions simply because monsters there are too low in level to get anything out. on the other hand, an open world is more or less UO-like. Even as a newbie you can go to anytowns/cities of every corner of the world, as similar to reality (reality of a fantasy world) that it is less dangerous near cities. Nasty monsters are only located deep under and dungeons or deep forests and some dead cities and etc. So in an open world design, a lowbies can be anywhere (towns and cities in game) just as the high levels but they cannot go deeper into the dungeons, they cannot achieve high level quests and etc. Only when such an open world design is adapted and together with other designs, the game can leave room for RPing. Else, the game can only be another grind treadmill (thou a grind treadmill itself is not an odd for RPing). 2) game pace needs to be slowing down if by design the game pace cannot be slow down in a way, not much room can be left for RPing as in the end, the 13 year old punks will dominate and become 'heros' of the game. From a design point of view, to counter a fast paced game requires risk taking as the EQ is usually safer to bet, easier to make and easier to succeed. A slow pace MMORPG is more risky than the already risky MMO business. I always think that if you can make a game which is NPC/PC network and quest dependent, then you can have slow paced game which may potentially hit a success. Say, you have to spend a certain period of time to establish a NPC network, that is, you've slowly got alot of NPC friends for your quests to be achieved. Even when you have tons of time in game like the 13 year olds, it by no means says that you can establish the correct in-game relationship with the NPCs. Such a unique NPC network/relationship will finally bring in unique quests and unique storylines of which RPing can be built on. 3) a slower combat system current MMORPGs are all about hack'n slash, not much tactics can be developed. You simply zerg to finish the combat. On the other hand, I ever played a game where a squad of 7 must be formed and every combat is in the form of 7 vs 7 group fight. And a high quality squad can win like 5 squads as to a certain extend a squad's status is partly 'reset' after each fight such that it can continue to fight other squads till being beaten down. Boss-raidings are also achieve through a 7-member squad team. In such a team, you need 1 to 2 tanks, a healer, a bard, a rogue, a mage and 1 or 2 other damage dealers. Group members need to be highly co-operative in order to survive. In a boss-raiding, a slide mistake made by one of squad memebers can kill the whole team. There are other factors to consider but this time I would only mention 3 of them.
  5. 1) Don't make a world too large to cause a direct competetion with the giants, or you'll lose. Make a smaller but fun enough world. Make a more open world in a way. 2) make quests find players instead of players find guests 3) make groups find individuals instead of individuals find groups 4) slow paced instead of hack'n slash 5) a slower but more tactical combat system
  6. I have 2 wishes which I hope that Unity may consider to include them as optional tools for the game engine. They should be money making in my opinion. 1) a better Terrain Tool (can be sold separately) According to my knowledge, it seems that no game engine so far in the market can provide a Terrain tool which can join up different Terrain maps together. This will do a great help to the designers who demand large maps in RPG based games. And technically speaking, it's not that difficult to make the tool. It is just some smart calculation of adjacent heightmaps, together with a smoothing tool which allows the world builders to smoothen the terrains (usually mountains) between adjacent terrain cells (in Unity each terrain cell is 2km x 2km by default). 2) A fantacy game 3D character generator. In almost all the new MMORPGs, a 3D character generation/creator is included in the game which allows players to get a unique 3D toon, such as the one in the MMORPG game named Aion is almost a perfect example. Again, no other game engine ever provides this as optional parts of the engine. And I think that this should be money making because it saves mass of time for the less rich (thus less fund) designer, game writters to get their 3D toons. For example, in my own RPG games I need like 8 models, namely a pair of humans, elves, dwarves, orcs. So I need to spend perhaps a year to craft these models (as I am not a professional artist), worse still the time spent won't guarantee that I'll get the toons pretty enough to be commercial. If however, such a tool (as already in WoW, Aion and etc.) is sold as a commercial package to allow the designers to generate the toons with basic animations. It not only does a great help, but also should find it commercial value to exist. I think that you can make large amount of money by doing something the market is in demand while other will not do it because the lack of awareness. Provided that they are actually not that difficult to achieve technically speaking.
  7. From my understanding, terrain tools are usually for the generation of a map of around 2km~4km square. As a result, large amount of such small maps must be joined together to form a large seemless world. My problem here is that, is there any tools out there which do this job of joining maps more smoothly and seemlessly. Or do I need to handle this manually by scripting the heightmap and etc., in order to obtain a large seemless world? Thanks for help.
  8. Are there any good sound libraries out there for mini games such as card games or board games? Thanks.
  9. I would like to write a simple card game more or less like Solitaire. Since I am more of a programmer and never an artist, I am quite clueless about where to start with the artistic stuff. So can anyone teach me how to get to the graphic of the 54 cards. Is there any free liberaries for those cards. Or do I need to scan the 54 cards than manipulate them in Photoshop? Would someone just shed some light on this to me? Thanks.
  10. I think that guild size never matters. I think that there are 3 basic factors we need to deal with correctly for grouping to be encouraged, instead of adjusting the guild functionality. 1) Difficulty of grouping In current MMOs, it is difficult for both groups to look for individuals and it's also difficult for individuals to look for groups. EQ clones are more or less adapting the forced grouping strategy but not much is done to ease the life of grouping. It is thus left to the guilds own duty instead of the game mechanism to facilitate grouping. That doesn't sound reasonable. It can even be considered as a design flaw. IMO, much shall be done in the game mechanism itself to encourage grouping especially for the group-based EQ clones. I think that the following should be introduced in a way, 1) individuals can nominate themselves as "available" for grouping, such that a team leader in the same map region can browse to see who are available for grouping. At the same time, team leaders can well define the nature of their teams, say, aim for a certain quest, general hunting in a certain area, looking for specified drops, dungeon exploring and etc. Such that all individual in the same region can browse which teams are looking for individuals. The current situation however is an individual will have to yell LFG all the times, while a team leader will have to yell looking for members in certain locations in the hope that someone passes by may be interested in the teaming up. That's almost stupid. 2) the building up of a trade centre in game. Each game should have one or two dedicated locations act as a player trade center or market place such that all players will be attracted to do trading in these places. And these places should have the common characteristic that they are the locations giving easy access to all (or a mass of) game areas/regions. Natually, people will stick to these marketplaces to do trading and at the same time, they facilitate grouping as these locations can give much easier access to the different in-game spots. This is however not done in most MMOs. Most MMOs don't even give a world feeling to the players. What they can provide are just level-based descrete region maps. Say, level 1-10s go to region A, level 11-20s go to region B and etc. And worst still, you need to pay dear to go from one region to another. Under this situation, even a trade centre can be built, it can hardly act as a grouping centre at the same time, as a result that the same location doesn't provide easy access to the different world maps. 3) Combat style needs to be tweaked. Currently, zerging with hack'n slash becomes the main theme of combat style in almost all MMOs exclusively. This combat style doesn't provide with enough room for party members to chat with each other. More combat patterns should be involved to provide rooms for party members to chat with each other and communicate with each other. Sometimes, to keep the team to wait for awhile can be a good introduction of commnunication between team members. For example, certain types of in-game dungeons can only be entered with a full team of 7 members, and they have to do some quests inside the dungeon in order to get some must own items (say for level or career advancement), team members will have to naturally wait outside the dungeon entrance (can be designed as an instance for each team). Then you'll find that players have to wait alot in order to gather a full team of 7 members. And during the waiting, players will start to chat with each other alooooooooot! Inside the dungeon, they have to fight several boses (not too difficult ones) for certain drops required by the members. So if they have to kill the same boss 2 to 3 times to complete the job. And they have to chat in between the the respawns. Hack'n slash makes it too quick for chatting, on the other hand waiting too long may lead to bordom. The designer must make a good compromise to facilitate both the fun and communication in group huntings. [Edited by - Hawkins8 on August 9, 2010 8:33:37 PM]
  11. That's not a good idea, as alot of "events" are supposed to be happened inside cities. Say grouping and interplayer trading. I think that a big world design might cause some network issues as players crowds are difficult to predict for resources allocation. Your net codes must be smart enough to deal with the tons of players who might suddenly appear in an unexpected location. I don't know but I think you may have to bury some memory loading spots such that a memory load will occur during region swtiching such that the traffic can be handled more smoothly. A true seemless world is difficult to tackle with AFAIK. I could be outdated about the technology though.
  12. Quote:Original post by Metallon I never said that. I just stated that just because you think one thing doesn't necessarily mean everyone else agrees. Good. I never intended to ask everyone to agree with me. All I said here is that, the below arguments are legitimate points for a discussion. No? cookie-cutter games are made in reality, or not. players are getting sick of such a kind of EQ clones, or not. players' desires are not met due to the lack of genius designers, or not. The 'or not' choice is always available for anyone to choose. Yet it seems to me that those proclaimed indies are offended whenever the legitimate discussion points are voiced out.
  13. Quote:Original post by Metallon OK, let me correct this. YOU are sick of EQ clones. Since people are buying EQ clones and playing them vigorously, I suppose it's not THAT bad. They are hopping one after one. I already said that. It won't make your statement more regitimate. Continue to live in denial all you want. Quote: Your desires. Don't mix the rest of us into your discontent. Hmm..what make you think that you are more legitmate to represent more? Just another pointless one trying to justify how legitimate it is to live in denial.
  14. Quote:Original post by Kaze it makes sense to make a un-revolutionary sequel if the production cost is low and some sales are guaranteed. Just another denial the cookie-cutter games made that players are getting sick of them. However, it is noted that you start to refrain from the denial of cookie-cutter games are made at all. You change your side's stance on that cookie-cutter games are made, but 'it is necessary' as another denial on that 'players are actually getting sick of them'. Quote: if you think you can make games with multi-million production budgets and ignore business concerns your either rich or living in fantasy land. That's not what I said. You have to impose this upon me for the lack of argument on your side. This is not even the argument. The argument is that, cookie-cutter games are made in reality, or not. (your previous denial now sounded your retreat) players are getting sick of such a kind of EQ clones, or not. (you still deny this) players' desires are not met due to the lack of genius designers, or not. (and this) You are such a group of pathetic indies(?I start to doubt that you are truly legitimately representing the indies) who can't even live with the reality. [Edited by - Hawkins8 on October 20, 2008 11:07:19 PM]
  15. Quote:Original post by Delphinus Some designers may be sloppy or unimaginative, as you believe, but I think the real reason behind so many cookie-cutter game is that... Very good insight, sir. The problem is that, the mediocre designers deny that they are actually making cookie-cutter games. There are many reasons making lame games, lacking in genius designer is one of them.