Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Logodae

Member
  • Content count

    420
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

332 Neutral

About Logodae

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Ocean: Okay, I'll stop trying to play designer. ;) Just let me know what/when you need for art. Though if you're curious, you can see what little I got done on my prototype here. (Don't be alarmed by the graphics quality; the fish is just a quick placeholder.) Sephyx: Welcome to Gamedev. I'm glad to see another artist taking an interest in this project.
  2. Quote:Original post by Sadr Well you see, that would kinda ruin the challenge in it. If you've tried that heli-game, you've noticed that you really have to time your ascents/descents really well in order to avoid the blocks. Yeah, I noticed. I got sick of it after about thirty seconds (and a half-dozen tries), which is the other reason I suggested a different control scheme. I think your game would have much broader appeal with more intuitive controls, and a more forgiving "loss" mechanism (i.e., losing one of your fish v. losing your entire progress). The essential challenge of avoiding obstacles would remain -- especially since you'd be trying to keep multiple fish out of harm's way. Also... I assume the "Game Over" screen is when you're making your "save the fish, sign the petition!" pitch? If so, I really don't think you want a game that kills the average player ten times in the first minute. Some people react to that kind of frustration by playing the game compulsively. Most people find something else to do. Give them five minutes of less-frustrating gameplay, and they'll be more likely to give five minutes of their time to your petition. Especially if they've been trying to "save the fish" throughout those five minutes, and actually watched their little school of fish dwindle. Quote:I think that with what is created for the first game, we could quickly create a sequel with similar objectives but different kind of gameplay, and I already have many ideas in mind for a steam-of-fish kind of game. But well, I shouldn't start talking about sequels at this point, hehe. We've barely started making this first game. I think you should be talking about it -- in fact, I think you should skip straight to the sequel. Why clone a game with limited appeal, which doesn't particularly reinforce the point you're trying to make, when you could spend just a little more time to create something that's more original, more playable, and more on-point? I'm all for keeping designs "affordable," even when you're measuring the cost in volunteer hours. Depending on the programmer's experience and interest, flocking might be out of reach. It might be a bit tricky to design suitable obstacles for it, too. A "stream of fish," though, really isn't much harder to code than one fish, and leads to some interesting gameplay possibilities... Tell you what. A prototype is worth a thousand words, and Flash is nothing if not amenable to prototyping. I'll throw something together, and you can decide if it has any potential.
  3. Quote:Original post by Kest Quote:Original post by Logodae Don't give your player menu options like "kill him" and "free him." Give your player the ability to use a deadly weapon and the ability to unlock doors. That's an interesting idea, and it works with that scenario, given that there's a door or a way to exit the scene. But there are many choices that would be impractical or impossible to represent through gameplay. Well, you'll need to pick choices and gameplay elements that work well together. Either figure out what sorts of scenarios your gameplay can support, or approach it from the other side -- decide how you want your "big choices" to play out, and then design the rest of the game to use the elements necessary to those choices. And for the record, I think that multiple-choice dialog is a good choice mechanism for a lot of scenarios, and I wouldn't suggest that you eliminate it.
  4. Logodae

    Focusing on the story

    Quote:Original post by makeshiftwings Plus, the GBA graphics aren't "sucky", most games have some very talented artists who make the most of the hardware that is available. QFT. High-quality pixel art trumps mediocre 3D every time, in my opinion. Quote:Don't get caught in the idea that because some people download pirated copies of old games and don't mind the dated graphics, that they would pay for a new game that looked as dated as the classics. That's the real thing you should look at: how many people do you know that are buying new games with sucky graphics? FYI, there are modern 2D RPGs, with decent-looking but relatively "dated" 2D art, that are commercially successful. Aveyond was something of a surprise hit on the "casual" portals, and Spiderweb Software is self-supporting. But yeah, if you're going the freeware route, you don't need to worry nearly as much about visuals. You might even consider going to pure text, and using an interactive fiction engine.
  5. Avatar God makes some excellent points on project management. Some thoughts on the design: I think the "click to ascend" helicopter control makes less sense when applied to fish. I'd suggest a simpler follow-the-mouse control scheme... which will also work better with my primary suggestion: The player should control a school of fish, not a single fish. One of these fish is the "leader" and follows the mouse. The other fish will use a flocking behavior to follow the leader, while maintaining an appropriate spacing. And, of course, they'll often end up getting hooked or netted or whatnot. In a typical videogame, the concept of a "life" is very abstract, and really only represents another chance to play through a level. But in this design, the player's "lives" are actual fish swimming on the screen. When they die, they're gone, and the player has to keep playing without them. The resulting gradual attrition will help to reinforce the concept of overfishing, in a way that a single fish with multiple "lives" wouldn't. I don't know if Ocean mentioned, but I'm willing to help out with some art, particularly animation. I'm not really a concept artist, but I can try faking it if you don't find one.
  6. I think keyword guessing is always going to be a bad idea, and Storytron's method just seems inherently awkward and mechanical. Kylotan makes a good point, though. Don't give your player menu options like "kill him" and "free him." Give your player the ability to use a deadly weapon and the ability to unlock doors.
  7. Logodae

    Focusing on the story

    Quote:Original post by chosendl To wrap up this post: if I were to make such a game, it would have small elements of rpg and adventure in it, sucky grapics, Stop right there. Sucky graphics = no downloads. You'll need to find a way to get decent-looking screenshots. For a story-driven game, nice portraits of the characters and some kind of map-based interface for locations might be enough. You don't need state-of-the-art graphics, but you do need something that looks appealing. Quote:very long game play, This is actually in the "minus" column for me. I want games I can finish without devoting my countless hours of my life to them. But opinions will vary. Quote:and no text (voice-overs really bring your characters to life, even if they are 2D sprites!). Only if you can find good voice actors. Bad acting will damage your characters and annoy your players -- especially if you don't provide a text option. That said, I'd love to see more story-driven games.
  8. Logodae

    Infinite object games in 2D

    Quote:Quote:Original post by Logodae I think that's part of what makes games fun -- the fact that they're relatively simple systems, which can be understood much more completely than reality. That's a pretty large generalization. Maybe that is what you like in games - I personally like both complex chess and super-mario. Those are both simple systems. Anyone of normal intelligence can quickly learn the rules of chess, and understand them completely. The complexity of the game arises from the many possible board configurations, and the need to predict your opponent's moves. It's not a simple game, obviously. But everything you do is based on a very simple system of allowable moves. You don't need to think about whether you should set your opponent's pieces on fire, or try to knock them off the board with a squirt-gun, or take out the king by setting up a domino effect of falling pawns. Quote:I also enjoy playing basketball in real life where the 'system' is so complex I wouldn't be able to calculate wind speed/air pressure/etc when I shoot for the basket... The "system" of real life is incomprehensibly complex. But the "system" of basketball, the rules of what you can do, is very simple. Sure, the physics of you throwing the ball, or trying to catch the ball, would be complicated to simulate. But it's simple to you. You have the equivalent of a physics card running in your head. You don't need to consciously think about which muscles to activate to put your body in the right place so that you can reach with your hands (remembering to activate the muscles to extend your fingers) to put them in the place where you've calculated the ball is about to be. You just run and catch the ball.
  9. Logodae

    forever the mystical first moment

    Here's a thought: Forget the persistent world. There's a persistent area, but it's not where the game happens -- it's just for meeting people and for holding portals to the playable areas. These areas are procedurally generated, and exist for a single game session. Characters are persistent, but while players can customize their appearance, they don't "level" or otherwise improve. All of their special abilities are based on items. These items are not persistent, and have to be found in each area. A game session begins by forming a group of players and requesting a portal to an area. You can select the size and difficulty, PvP or PvE, type of environment, etc. An area will then be generated based on those parameters. You go in, you explore, you find the items that let you do cool stuff, you do that stuff, and (hopefully) you achieve the area's objective. It's a different game every time. It's easier to introduce new content incrementally, since it doesn't need to be integrated with a pre-existing world. You could tweak an old template to add a new possible weapon, or create a new template that uses old items. Players could be allowed to create new content, too, since game balance will be much less of an issue.
  10. Logodae

    Infinite object games in 2D

    Quote:Original post by origil Take worms, lemmings, super mario, sandgames and the incredible machine, stir them in a bowl and you will have a very interactive gameplay enviroment for the playe Now instead of having one solution to the puzzles presented to the player, he/she/it will be able to use the many object properties as can be done in real life. But solving problems in real life is generally less fun than solving them in games. You might have fun building something in The Incredible Machine, but when presented with a real box of random objects, most people would not enjoy trying to turn them into something functional. The Incredible Machine presents a simplified version of reality, which is easier to understand and manipulate. I think that's part of what makes games fun -- the fact that they're relatively simple systems, which can be understood much more completely than reality. This allows the designer to create puzzles that are just challenging enough to be fun -- because they know everything the player can use to solve them, and they also know that the player knows those things. The more possibilities you introduce, the harder it will be to balance your game. Puzzles may be too easy, because you've overlooked a possible solution, or too hard, because the solution that seems clear to you isn't so clear to the player. I think there's room for more simulation in some games -- Little Big Planet looks like it could be an excellent demonstration -- but it will take careful design work to enable that simulation to make those games more fun, rather than less.
  11. Logodae

    Infinite object games in 2D

    Setting aside the question of how this can (or can't) be done, my question is: why? What would this level of simulation get you, in terms of gameplay?
  12. Logodae

    Artificial Romance

    Quote:Original post by Kest One answer is to have several former Peacekeepers at hand's length that all just happen to have the exact same background. Another is to dynamically change Aeryn so that she can be male, or cute, or short, or giddy, to fit the player's preference. Both are unacceptable for me. The only acceptable solution would be to build two or more completely seperate story arcs - one for each character. And once that work is doubled, it's no longer worth the effort. You're right. So stop defending your decision and start implementing it. I want to play this game. ;)
  13. Logodae

    Rendering 3d models into 2d isometric

    512 / 64 = 8. So if you're rendering 512x512, position your camera so that eight tiles of the grid are visible in each horizontal row. (Well, every other row will have seven fully visible tiles and then two half-visible tiles on the end. But you get the idea.)
  14. I want a story I can actually play. Unfortunately, most games with story just use it to sandwich gameplay, rather than integrating the two.
  15. Logodae

    Artificial Romance

    Quote:Original post by dbzprogrammer First off, if the game is unrealistic visually and unnatural, you'll kill any chance of this happening. If a person cannot believe that they are dealing with another person, then you can't trigger an emotion. Most people can easily project "person-ness" onto visually unrealistic characters. I cite comics, anime, and romance novel covers. And I think most people are going to be willing to "play along." It's unlikely that their concept of the character's persona will be so specific as to preclude the suggested romance. It's not like a pen-and-paper RPG character that's been invented from scratch, and often in depth. I would try to avoid having any NPCs who might seem more attractive to the average player, unless there are obvious reasons why the main character wouldn't be interested in them.
  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

We are the game development community.

Whether you are an indie, hobbyist, AAA developer, or just trying to learn, GameDev.net is the place for you to learn, share, and connect with the games industry. Learn more About Us or sign up!

Sign me up!