|
devilmouse posted:Oh god, yes please. I spent at least 4 months trying to find our team a tech designer to take some of the workload off me and the other lead. The engineers turned designers were generally not well versed in design and the designers who could "code" were sloppy at best. Out of curiosity, what's your benchmark for being "well versed" in design? (as a programmer turned tech designer/etc. for a smaller outfit with some concerns about hiring expectations elsewhere if said outfit met with financial tragedy...)
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 08:30 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 17:11 |
|
|
Can anyone talk about Kabam? I put in for the player experience associate position, but I think I'm most excited by the fact that they claim to explicitly avoid the resume black hole.
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 18:55 |
|
|
icking fudiot posted:Out of curiosity, what's your benchmark for being "well versed" in design? (as a programmer turned tech designer/etc. for a smaller outfit with some concerns about hiring expectations elsewhere if said outfit met with financial tragedy...) Let's see - Unable to critically analyze a game (system). Not knowing how to handle feedback cycles past just "I dunno, just ask people if it's fun?". Not understanding how to prototype a feature, review it, cut it if needed, or becoming too attached to it. Being an "academic" designer who's not really concerned with the realities of what's going on. An unfamiliarity with good and bad practices that have come before. Being unwilling to take criticism. Too readily accepting criticism. Being too much/not enough of a player's advocate. No real familiarity with probabilities and statistics or methods of storytelling. Not having a good handle on pacing and flow. And so on and so on. It's a pretty fluid set of concerns, and it largely depends on the candidate in question (the dude with a heavy math background gets the lightweight questions on story, and the dude who writes novels in his spare time doesn't get grilled on fitting regression), so it's not like there's a checklist I walk down in my head, but certain things can certainly work against you and others for you. And this is petty - but if you answer, absent of any financial concerns, that your dream is to work on Game of Thrones or something in space, I'll probably cry quietly and show you the door. That's a horrible answer, I realize, but it's far too much of a grey area to give a concrete answer.
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 19:26 |
|
|
devilmouse posted:Too readily accepting criticism. Being too much of a player's advocate. Can you qualify why these are negative items?
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 21:09 |
|
|
Is anyone here planning on attending DIG 2011? Has anyone gone in the past and if so, how was it?
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 21:28 |
|
|
Vino posted:Can you qualify why these are negative items? I'm not devilmouse but I think I get what he meant. Too readily accepting criticism I take to mean not defending something that's good, just passively accepting/agreeing with people saying it's bad. Not to say the proper reaction is to aggressively defend everything you do, but rather, that you should stand up for something if you legitimately think it's right, and that criticism should be a process of discussion and and examination and dissection of good points and bad points, not one person dishing out and the other person meekly accepting. "Too much of a player's advocate" is a little harder to figure out, but something like the attitude of... "this is too hard, nothing can be challenging at all, only some of them will get/understand/like/enjoy Feature X so we should cut it, everything should be changed to perfectly reflect what, statistically, our players are likely to want"
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 21:34 |
|
|
Vino posted:Can you qualify why these are negative items? The first one, at least, leads to a watered down experience. If you accept all the criticisms and don't stand up for your 'outlandish' ideas you'll get a middle-of-the-road result when your ideas get 'polished' away. There are appropriate times to take criticism, and there are appropriate times to not receive criticism.
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 21:35 |
|
|
Pretty much what others have said. On the first, if you're rolling over whenever someone disagree with you, you're doing yourself and the team a disservice by not actively participating and pushing back. If you take input at face value every time, you're little more than a doormat and will soon hate your job and resent your coworkers. The work product will suffer as well as it becomes a mishmash of everyone's feedback without a clear owner or direction. On the other, people that overly advocate for players basically end up trading short-term gains ("Gotta make those players happy!") for long-term retention ("Great, everyone quit because we gave the players too much...."). This is more of a concern in MMOs, F2P, and online games in general, but it's a very real concern when designers claim to just want to "make things as fun as possible" without concern for the ramifications of their actions.
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 22:44 |
|
|
devilmouse posted:On the other, people that overly advocate for players basically end up trading short-term gains ("Gotta make those players happy!") for long-term retention ("Great, everyone quit because we gave the players too much...."). This is more of a concern in MMOs, F2P, and online games in general, but it's a very real concern when designers claim to just want to "make things as fun as possible" without concern for the ramifications of their actions.
|
| # ? Oct 3, 2011 22:49 |
|
|
Diaghilev posted:Can anyone talk about Kabam? I put in for the player experience associate position, but I think I'm most excited by the fact that they claim to explicitly avoid the resume black hole. 
M4rk fucked around with this message at Oct 4, 2011 around 01:16 |
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 00:34 |
|
|
Hey. I'm intending to try and break into the game industry, and while I do have a pretty good idea of how I'm going to go about it, I would like some goon opinions just to see what misconceptions I might have/where I might be led astray. I currently live in Austin, and am intending to start Austin Community College's Game Design degree, it's a 2 year thing. But it has a large tie in with a bunch of the companies based here in Austin. It's also known that graduates get some QA positions and work their way up from there here locally. (Now that I've read this thread, I'm unsure which type of QA it is, the dead-end one or not, I'll have to check) I thought this would be a no-brainer really. Between all of the studios based here and more coming (EA's opening a branch here soon I believe) and other things (GDC Austin being here) I thought I wouldn't have to worry about moving far away or having to worry about spending 4 years getting a CS degree. However, this thread has me rather concerned that my course of action (getting hired by a local studio after graduation, if that even happens) would be best. You all've mentioned transferring over to a mainstream college to get a CS degree, and I might end up doing that, despite not being a big fan of programming (I'm learning java and moving from there. I know java isn't used much/at all by the gaming industry but I'm starting somewhere) I honestly want a design position, and not a programming job, but I know that if you want to be a designer you need to know a little of everything, so that's what I'm trying to do. I'd really appreciate any advice you guys can give me.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 01:50 |
|
|
FighterKnuckles posted:Hey. I'm intending to try and break into the game industry, and while I do have a pretty good idea of how I'm going to go about it, I would like some goon opinions just to see what misconceptions I might have/where I might be led astray. What's up ACC game design buddy  I'm going in a fairly similar route to you. After 13+ years in IT, I've had about enough and am picking up the C++ -> C# -> XNA / GameDev route. While I'm not an expert by any means on the industry, I would say you're on the right track but missing a few steps. If you're gonna Dev, you might want to look into SS3. As I understand it correctly, it's going to be shipping with a basic level editor. Back in the day we old fogies impressed our friends with DOOM / Duke Nukem 3D / X-Wing / TIE-Fighter / X-Wing vs. TIE-Fighter / X-Wing Alliance levels. Using that kit, build levels with good scripting, balanced but challenging encounters and work your way up from there. Some of the most popular mods came as a result of awesome level editor usage. After a decade plus of working with people in all levels of technology, especially here in Austin, being able to prove yourself is more important than the paper you spit out. EA might care about a degree; the other studios may care more about what's in your portfolio. Study the company you want to join carefully and ask yourself "Does this company care more about looking good or about solid, proven work?" As far as the QA tie in for ACC, yeah, it's the dead end side. You end up doing this half intern position doing QA. As I understand it though, some of the kids that went in with proven designs under their belt moved up. But those were the really driven, talented ones.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 02:06 |
|
|
You have to be willing to fight for what makes your game your game at times. Compromise is good, but there have to be certain hills you're willing to die for.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 02:09 |
|
|
Xexre posted:What's up ACC game design buddy 'Sup. Alright, well, I'll definitely take your advice. A question though, what is SS3? I've done some googling with no luck. I know I've heard the term before, probably heard the full name, but I can't remember for the life of me. this is really bothering me now that I can't remember.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 02:46 |
|
|
We just soft launched our first title. Give it a whirl, it won't kill you. https://www.facebook.com/WordTrick
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 12:10 |
|
|
devilmouse posted:Too readily accepting criticism. Is there any way to tell if the interviewer is just pushing for more in depth explanations or if they are seriously trying to tell you "You did bad" and want you to go back to the drawing board? I've been in situations where they outright say, "So I'll pretend I'm not really getting the idea you're pitching and I don't like it. I think it fails to address X, Y, Z. Explain to me how it actually does" but in other situations it might have been, "That idea completely misses the point of what we wanted you to come up with. You don't know what you're talking about" and, before you can get a word in edgewise to explain how you thought it did address the point, the conversation moves on or they say "Well, that's all the time we have for this part of the interview." Do you go so far as to interrupt and talk over the person interviewing you to explain yourself or is it obvious that they aren't just testing you at that point.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 12:47 |
|
|
FighterKnuckles posted:'Sup. Serious Sam 3, I imagine. Although if so, I'm not sure why you'd want to muck around with Serious Sam 3 (no offense to Croteam, their engine is always great) when you can instead use UDK. Sad as though it may be, Unreal engine is the most widespread and getting familiar with the tools means not only for one of the most commonly licensed engines on the market, but also with many other toolsets that have been trying to ape Unreal's.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 13:58 |
|
|
cgeq posted:Is there any way to tell if the interviewer is just pushing for more in depth explanations or if they are seriously trying to tell you "You did bad" and want you to go back to the drawing board? I'm a tough interview from everything I've been told by co-workers who sit in with me, but for me personally, I actually make this distinction fairly clear. In one interview, the candidate was trying to weasel out and talk around what I was asking them. It was a fairly important part of the job, and I wasn't going to let them out of it. "I'm going to press you on this for something concrete. Maybe I wasn't clear, so here's an example of what I'm trying to get a feel for... <example> Does that make sense? Great, let's talk through the original question again, starting from the beginning." If I'm just asking people to think through something more fully, there's usually a lot of "Well, sure, but what if/about X?...." Sometimes I'm just curious about something they said earlier and I want to hear them talk through it, but other times, I'll take a slightly more aggressive stance where I challenge their reasoning and I push for them to defend it. "Interesting idea but it falls apart in the following ways... This can't work!" If they just capitulate instead of trying to solve the problems put forth, it's a knock against them and we'll probably move on to the next topic, but if they try to come up with solutions and hold their ground, it often leads to a better and more interesting discussion.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 14:16 |
|
|
Jan posted:Serious Sam 3, I imagine. I was trying to approach it from a starting small stand point. Getting to know UDK is critical in my opinion but ya gotta start small. Another to consider, of course, is the CryEngine. Build some maps, script some encounters, balance it, then worry about putting together an entire world.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 14:57 |
|
|
FighterKnuckles posted:I'd really appreciate any advice you guys can give me. Your focus needs to be working on a portfolio, and making awesome games. College... might?... help you do that, but you should already be putting in the time yourself. Whether it's building the games up from bare metal if you're an engineer, or using one of the high level engines (Unity, Stencyl, UDK, etc), you should be starting on that already. The kinds of people that get into design via a college are, typically, the kinds of people that could have also gotten into design without college. They're self-directed and motivated, and spend their free time making awesome stuff just because they enjoy making awesome stuff. As a result, they emerge with a sterling portfolio, and find work easily. Someone without that work ethic will emerge with a couple of relatively poo poo group projects that just aren't very good, and likely be passed over.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 15:47 |
|
|
Xexre posted:I was trying to approach it from a starting small stand point. Getting to know UDK is critical in my opinion but ya gotta start small. Another to consider, of course, is the CryEngine. From a tools point of view, UDK is as small (in the "simple" sense) as it gets. The interface is highly streamlined and easy to use, importing/exporting is smooth as it gets. Crytek SDK is a distant second, then pretty much every other engine is miles and miles behind from a user experience point of view.
|
| # ? Oct 4, 2011 16:16 |
|
|
Monster w21 Faces posted:We just soft launched our first title. Give it a whirl, it won't kill you. I would, but there is no reason for a game that ostensibly looks like Scrabble to require me to allow it to access my information, send me email, post to my FB account, and read my news feed in order for me to play it.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 03:37 |
|
|
Alright, all stellar advice. Question though, what's the base opinion on working with the source engine? I've messed with the Source SDK some myself already, since I'm much more familiar with that than unreal, even though I know that it's a lot less user friendly. I'll be looking into the serious sam thing as well as picking up unreal.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 04:03 |
|
|
There's not nearly as much work out there for Source than there is for Unreal. Source won't look bad on a resume, but the bar is a bit high for a job at Valve (pretty much the only people who use Source) whereas a lot of studios use Unreal. Couldn't hurt to pick up some Unreal experience.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 05:34 |
|
|
FighterKnuckles posted:Alright, all stellar advice. Question though, what's the base opinion on working with the source engine? I've messed with the Source SDK some myself already, since I'm much more familiar with that than unreal, even though I know that it's a lot less user friendly. I'm just starting to learn the UDK as well. It's not nearly as horrifying as everyone always says it is. That said, I do encounter about one rage inducing scenario every session. Also, be prepared for it to restart your machine without warning when you install it. Edit: Unrelated bonus question! Let's (hypothetically) say I've got an application in at a company, and during the time my materials are being reviewed another position opens up that I'm also interested in. Now, I know you are supposed to target a single position rather than the shotgun approach, but is there a proper way of saying, "That other opportunity is also highly interesting to me..." or is it best to let the interview process sort that out? Pfhreak fucked around with this message at Oct 5, 2011 around 05:41 |
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 05:36 |
|
|
Go for it. I've literally have companies bid over me before, I can't think of anything bad coming from two companies wanting you at once. Edit: Oh, at the same company!  Um... don't really know for that one.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 05:53 |
|
|
I'd wait for an interview to ask about it, personally. If an interview never happens for the first job, then there's no harm in submitting for the other job. And (assuming you get to this stage) at the part of the interview where they ask you if you've got any questions, inquire about the other opportunity and if the company is open to lateral job movement (assuming that other job isn't higher up the chain, in which case you ask about promotion opportunities and if the second position is a possibility).
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 05:53 |
|
|
Got a call from that QA outsource company asking about my availability, since they want to bring me in for a couple of days to see how I work on the team and such. did I screw up by saying I can't do Friday or Monday because I have interviews. They know I've been out of work for a long time, and that I've not signed a contract with them or anything, but will they be put off by the fact that I'm trying to work places that won't be paying next to gently caress all to work in an arsehole of a town? The non-game job didn't come good either. I'm trying to do mod stuff in my own time but being so miserable makes it pretty hard to do anything at all.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 21:10 |
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:I'm trying to do mod stuff in my own time but being so miserable makes it pretty hard to do anything at all. I'm no authority, but I'm on the jobhunt, too. Soldier on, friend. There are worthwhile positions to be had, and the only way to guarantee you won't get one is to give up the search.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 21:55 |
|
|
I know, but it's pretty hard when every application seems to come back saying "that thing you thought you could do? You can't do that." Aside: I just updated myblog and would like a little feedback. I feel like it's "Publish or perish" if you want to keep a blog going, and it's been a while since I've posted anything meaning full. I'm a little concerned the way I go back and forth between two games may confuse readers, would like to know what someone thinks of that.
|
| # ? Oct 5, 2011 22:33 |
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:The non-game job didn't come good either. I'm trying to do mod stuff in my own time but being so miserable makes it pretty hard to do anything at all. Try not to let it get you down too much, I'm in the same situation and I'm sure many others are too. Recently I've been interviewing with Playground Games (Telephone, then face-to-face) and got shot down in a blaze of hopes and dreams, blocked by the experience barrier again. I did however get the following feedback, "...They spoke very highly of you and want to stress that you came across very well in both interviews. But on this occasion they have a few who were stronger and with more relevant experience within the games industry." Same old story, but gave me a tiny twinkle of hope, so I continue on modding, mapping... etc. (As a side note try to avoid getting into Data Entry work if you can, an already depressing job with with depressing news kinda sets the tone for the whole week)
|
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 00:13 |
|
|
That's part of why I decided to go back to school. I can continue to work on games and get experience while learning about all of those things that I lack knowledge in. Anyway they wouldn't say that if it weren't true, you're probably very hireable and you just need to go out and have some more interviews.
|
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 04:09 |
|
|
Vino posted:That's part of why I decided to go back to school. I can continue to work on games and get experience while learning about all of those things that I lack knowledge in. This simply isn't an option for me, the last job paid so badly I have nothing but what DWP give me.
|
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 08:40 |
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:I know, but it's pretty hard when every application seems to come back saying "that thing you thought you could do? You can't do that."
|
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 16:43 |
|
|
r2x posted:Beat NG2 on Master Ninja, then rewrite the article (that said, play Ninja Gaiden Black - the combat flows better). ... but, that article, recast as Ninja Gaiden 1 vs Batman? NG, easily. The only action game I've played in recent memory that was anywhere near that tight was Bayonetta. EDIT: The biggest gripe I have with Batman is a complete lack of cancels. It really isn't an action game, it is a brawler, and stripped of the fancy animations you'd mostly find a series of flat-hierarchy moves that lock you for their entirety / cancel only into another flat freeze punch. That, with a second "hit this when they do that" button. No real way of combining moves beyond the specific combos given, but as a combo-based game it fails because it simply has no combo trees of note, etc. None of this makes the combat bad or implies Batman is a bad game, just, it isn't something to compare with NG, God Of War, Bayonetta, DMC3, etc. It'd be like comparing Final Fight to Street Fighter II. Shalinor fucked around with this message at Oct 6, 2011 around 17:29 |
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 17:07 |
|
|
Shalinor posted:I'd have to agree with the article as-written. They completely blew the combat out in NG2, it didn't have the flow that Ninja Gaiden had. The problem is that NGB is quite literally perfect. How do you make a sequel to a perfect game? Their idea was to literally rework the combat to be significantly more aggressive while not turning it into dynasty warriors. They took a Marvel vs. Capcom 2 approach to balancing, they made everything AS POWERFUL as they could IMAGINE (knowing well that there was some broken stuff). Then they made the game as LUDICROUS as possible (on the higher difficulties) and it almost seems like they thought it would solve itself out. It kind of works and I think it would have been a pretty great game if they had enough time to finish it. Even though the combat is pretty much 99% about exploiting everything possible, it still feels better to me than Batman AA. NG2 is one of the few games where after playing it for a long time I went to play something else and it felt like the whole game was in slow-mo. NGS2 was alright but it had a huge give-take thing going (they should have just fixed / added). r2x fucked around with this message at Oct 6, 2011 around 17:48 |
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 17:42 |
|
|
r2x posted:It is just that alot of the points he makes would make the game quite literally impossible to beat on the higher difficulties. Without the invulnerability on the OT, it would quite literally be insane. The combat lacks as much finesse as NGB but upon playing the higher difficulty you can generally get what they were going for. I'll try out Black sometime maybe, perhaps trade NGII against it. Anyway, I don't think I would like OT invulnerability any more if it was the only thing making the game possible, especially when the number of animations seems so limited. With regards to AA (which I did worry I was going too easy on) I don't think cancels would have worked, moves are quick and commit you to them, you have to be thinking of the next move as you make the last one. The only times I found issue with this were the quick Bat-claw in combat, which you can just forget about unless you want maximum variation bonus on the challenge mode, and the "ground and pound" takedowns where Batman just seems to momentarily stand there. I think the Bat-claw animation could just be sped-up, since it's not much good compared to triple-baterangs as it is, the mounted takedown sort of needs to be leave you open for the sake of the scoring mechanic, and to stop it being too easy to take guys out the first time you knock them down. Scoring 100x your combo multiplier means you want to finish guys off that way, but need to create the opening to do so, which is what makes players use Baterangs, the Bat-claw and cape stun. BizarroAzrael fucked around with this message at Oct 6, 2011 around 18:34 |
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 18:22 |
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:With regards to AA (which I did worry I was going too easy on) I don't think cancels would have worked, moves are quick and commit you to them, you have to be thinking of the next move as you make the last one. The only times I found issue with this were the quick Bat-claw in combat, which you can just forget about unless you want maximum variation bonus on the challenge mode, and the "ground and pound" takedowns where Batman just seems to momentarily stand there. I think the Bat-claw animation could just be sped-up, since it's not much good compared to triple-baterangs as it is, the mounted takedown sort of needs to be leave you open for the sake of the scoring mechanic, and to stop it being too easy to take guys out the first time you knock them down. Scoring 100x your combo multiplier means you want to finish guys off that way, but need to create the opening to do so, which is what makes players use Baterangs, the Bat-claw and cape stun. ... and, yes - the bat-claw was particularly damning, and it was a near worthless move as a result.
|
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 18:54 |
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:I'll try out Black sometime maybe, perhaps trade NGII against it. Shalinor is right, it is not really a fair comparison. Most action games are pure combat whereas Batman AA is not. The problem is people keep comparing them. I can't even count how many times I have heard "Batman AA has the deepest combat!". Then I say that other games have better combat and they go "You did not even TRY the challenge maps did you?" I say yeah they were easy to 3 star and I ask if they ever played Ninja Gaiden Black on Master Ninja. Then they say that Ninja Gaiden is lame and cheap. Also I don't really get the problem with the obliteration technique - the execution animations are really short. The whole point is to give you an opportunity to get a bearing on surroundings while being invulnerable. The UT animations do drag on though. The OT also create a unique risk reward because on the higher difficulties it can be really dangerous sometimes to go for the OT. r2x fucked around with this message at Oct 6, 2011 around 19:06 |
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 18:57 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2013 17:11 |
|
|
You know, I know this is a near double-post, but gently caress, that's the way I roll  It seems like we have a few combat-knowing people in here, and I am neck-deep in designing a combat system right now, so now seems like a great time to ask questions. The present system has a concept of damage frames and cancel frames, and I can put as many "blocks" of them as I want scattered through an animation. Cancel frames can cancel into any other move, so - I could put cancel frames before damage frames that cancel into a dodge, and then cancel frames after that cancel into the next move to make a combo (combos and cancels are effectively the same). If you fail to cancel out of the move's leadout, it resolves as usual and drops you back to neutral stance. ... but where I am running aground is in figuring out how the input buffering works. If I do straight up input buffering with no limit, well then hey, I can buffer 2 minutes of combat and then I'm screwed. So clearly there's a limit. But even if I limit it to a buffer of X moves, and then even if I make certain moves (the end of a combo chain / dodges) clear the queue, it will mean the player is left there in a 3-punch combo mashing dodge but - oh hey, they already queued up 5 punch buttons, too bad, your dodge is move 6 on the buffer. So is the thing I am missing that cancels ignore the input buffer, whereas "combos" do not ignore the buffer? So - if I am setting up a "dodge cancel," I want that to scan immediate input and ignore the buffer, whereas when I'm setting up my "combo cancel," I want that to read the next move on the input stack and, if it matches, pop the button off the input stack and play the next move? Or is there some other way of doing this? Shalinor fucked around with this message at Oct 6, 2011 around 19:07 |
| # ? Oct 6, 2011 19:04 |
|
