|
How do you guys think about "end games" or "win conditions" in smaller scale projects that don't necessarily have a story or natural endpoints, like a Clicker or something? Is it okay to have a game where the player just plays until they get bored or they run out of new things to see? Is it counterproductive to invent some arbitrary victory condition? More broadly, how do you even begin approaching something like a game-jam sized project, what angle do you approach it from? Start with a high level concept? Start with the fundamental moment to moment game loop? Start with a time length in mind? Start with the end goal? Start with technology? My partner and I are kind of flying by the seat of our pants as hobbyists but these are some of the fundamental questions we struggle with that other smart people surely must have solved already.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2017 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Scoss posted:How do you guys think about "end games" or "win conditions" in smaller scale projects that don't necessarily have a story or natural endpoints, like a Clicker or something? Is it okay to have a game where the player just plays until they get bored or they run out of new things to see? Is it counterproductive to invent some arbitrary victory condition? I answer that question the same way I decide if the main character is red or blue. Seriously, though, just pick whatever is fun. If one option is seemingly as fun as another option but easier to implement, do that one. If it's easy to implement both, do that. If you wrack your brain on this for a week, then that's a week you're not spending making your next game. Pareto's Law solves 99% of my problems in life, so like, yeah, it works here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 00:00
|
|
|
Scoss posted:How do you guys think about "end games" or "win conditions" in smaller scale projects that don't necessarily have a story or natural endpoints, like a Clicker or something? Is it okay to have a game where the player just plays until they get bored or they run out of new things to see? Is it counterproductive to invent some arbitrary victory condition? Clickers, meanwhile, are a genre/form that literally have no end. They're designed as such. Arcade games are another sort that are designed to have no end. If you're really that fresh, you'd probably be well served by picking a target, and trying to make that, rather than noodling in the void. Which is to say, decide what you're making, and then that question will be answered for you. Noodling in the void is how you end up with artistic quasi-games that you'll have difficulty getting people to go anywhere near. You may hit gold eventually, but more likely, you'll just spin off your axis for a while. Without some experience to guide your design, you won't really know how to direct the noodling in viable directions. Mind, all of that is 100% fine, if that's what you want, just, by your questions, it sounds like you're not coming at things from quite that direction. Shalinor fucked around with this message at 01:16 on Feb 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 01:14
|
|
|
The project that we're thinking about is definitely intended to be more of a gamey-rear end game rather than some kind of interactive artistic thing. I would describe the concept broadly as something like a management / strategy game where your goal is to increase your income and recruit more units to work for you, which would unlock more features and options and feed back into more growth. We found ourselves wondering if just getting richer and more powerful was compelling enough though, and I started thinking about other games where that's truly all you do-- hence Clickers. Our idea wouldn't really be suited to endless gameplay or any kind of high-score hunt, so I think I'm convinced now that it's important to have some kind of clear end goal, however contrived. As far as emulating existing ideas, we're drawing on some concrete inspiration for particular elements even if I don't think I can point to any one game and say "it's like this". Hopefully that will serve as training wheels for us, but we're probably going to bumble into the weeds anyway. Our previous project was actually one where we pretty explicitly set out to recreate a beloved game and we knew exactly how it needed to work, and even though we thought we were being conservative, we still let ourselves get way way too excited about scope and cramming ideas in before we had even gotten all the fundamentals spinning. We totally blindly marched ourselves into a game that we couldn't finish and was way bigger than we initially imagined. Going to be extra careful about that this time around, though I'm sure our experience there is hardly unique in any way.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 04:27
|
|
|
I think traditionally those types of games give you a goal to complete (earn X $ by year Y) and congratulate you when you do, but allow you to continue playing after.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 10:03
|
|
|
This is more personal preference than any kind of hard rule, but for small projects I would also highly encourage embracing iterative development, where you focus on finding the fun early; it's possible to pour tons of effort into something, only to discover that the end result isn't a whole lot of fun. If part of your idea doesn't work well in practice, that's something you want to know on week 1, not two months in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 10:58
|
|
|
anothergod posted:Did you hand draw everything and then import all of the hand drawings? it's more likely than you might expect it's about as nuts as you're thinking though
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 11:05
|
|
|
I still don't understand why you folks do this to yourselves.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 11:46
|
|
|
Well for me it's 'cause it's the only way I know how to animate. Plus it's got a low financial production cost, and that's more important to me than keeping the time expense down  And I know I keep saying it, but no matter how high-quality you cut it, I've never seen digitally-tweened animations that didn't creep me out. Besides, it can't spontaneously make unique frames, it's just taking static paper doll parts and doing marionette stuff to 'em. That's just me personally, though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 12:52
|
|
|
Making them sails sway! (Does timg stop gifs from clogging up load times? Is this gif too big for foruming? Let me know if it's too much and I'll link it instead)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 13:34
|
|
|
That is one awesome gif. But I was checking the shadows and they are too crisp for being on a water surface. Any possibility to make them lobe'y or at least a little fuzzy? I think it would sell your otherwise extremely good looking water surface even better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 14:05
|
|
|
Good catch, I relayed the message to the shaderwizard and he went "neener neener" Then he started brainstorming a solution
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 14:15
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Ha haaa, maybe don't go whole hog on that. If you haven't heard, Cuphead's schedule/budget are in the loving toilet because they have insisted on drawing all the art as actual physical animation cels that they then scan in. Got any more info about that?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 14:33
|
|
|
retro sexual posted:Got any more info about that? Sadly I do not, I recall hearing about it on SA someplace. Bear in mind I'm talking about physically painting on celluloid, here. EDIT: It looks like google is contradicting my memory and none of what I said is true? Oh well. Still don't underestimate the value of a digital work process! LordSaturn fucked around with this message at 16:17 on Feb 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 16:13
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Sadly I do not, I recall hearing about it on SA someplace. Bear in mind I'm talking about physically painting on celluloid, here. It seems atleast part of their process is digital, but I also remember traditional animation being one of the "unique selling points" of the game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 16:27
|
|
|
crab avatar posted:Responses like this are what keep me going. Apart from, you know, an unhealthy obsession with getting ideas out of my head. To further motivate, your game is one of the main reasons I follow this thread. Looks awesome! Do you have any way for interested people to support development or a playable demo?
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
LordSaturn posted:Sadly I do not, I recall hearing about it on SA someplace. Bear in mind I'm talking about physically painting on celluloid, here. When it comes to animation like they're looking for, fully drawn and not rigs like you'd do in Spine or something, there's probably not a major slowdown by doing it on paper. Scanning can be tedious, but animating itself might be faster for them... and most importantly, might help them stick to their style, as there won't be so much temptation to fix "imperfections." Finding good software for traditional 2D animation is hard as hell, honestly, it's not a well-served market. They could easily be just as slow trying to work in TV Paint or Photoshop. I'm doin a game with some traditional animation stuff, and I'm working in Clip Studio Paint, personally, but man... it'd be awesome to do it on my light table. Pencil tests suck to set up at home though. Harvey Birdman fucked around with this message at 18:19 on Feb 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 18:16
|
|
|
If I remember right all their visual effects are done by hand too though. Which seems silly in an era with GLSL as powerful as it is. Don't quote me on that though because my brain is dumb and likes to manufacture facts.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
kinnas posted:Making them sails sway!
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 19:04
|
|
|
FYI there is a viable C# solution for Unreal now. Here is the source https://github.com/xiongfang/UnrealCS, however I was unable to get that to work. The method I found to get it to work was to go to his forum (note it's in chinese but google translate works) http://www.unrealcs.com/ Register for an account, wait for 30 minutes, comment on this thread http://www.unrealcs.com/read.php?tid=1&page=1 then download the compiled version. Take that zip grab the plugins folder and copy it into your plugins folder you can use the launcher version. Then in the Unreal Editor you will have a new menu for UnrealCS. Click open project, it will create the C# solution although will fail to open it. Go to your directory and find the script.sln file, open it to edit the sln file. Then you can do something similar to the https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9DVY4dsotFA to add a new behavior in the editor. Note you have to build, and make your class public to be seen by the editor. Also make sure to make your cube movable so it can rotate. To package a shipping build you can do the following steps. 1. Make a "good build" with Launcher Down Arrow -> Project Launch, Advanced Options set Data Build to "On The Fly" 2. Confirm it works then rename the folder ex. C:\Users\stick\Documents\Unreal Projects\MyProject5\Saved\StagedBuilds\WindowsNoEditor -> C:\Users\stick\Documents\Unreal Projects\MyProject5\Saved\StagedBuilds\WindowsNoEditor = Works 3. Go to Package Project -> Packaging Settings and turn off use PAK file 4. Set packaging type to shipping 5. Package for Win64/32 6. Attempt to run the project note that it fails to run 7. Copy your unreal directory EX. C:\Users\stick\Documents\Unreal Projects\MyProject5\Saved\StagedBuilds\WindowsNoEditor\MyProject5\Content\Scripts to the same folder under your packaged location. 8. Run your shipped executable and marvel at Unreal C# working on 4.14.3 (at least). This allows you to use C# to create Unreal behaviors on actual shipping code. As far as I can tell right now there is no way to have interactive debugging but I have not yet attempted to attach to a process. Some of these steps (like the path not being correct, or having to copy the files as part of packaging) likely can be fixed in code or by adding the files to the packaging process. Personally I'm really excited for the possibility even if it currently is a little janky but it does work to package a shipping build (something I never got the old Unreal Mono to do). This is completely separate from the Xarmarin/Mono Unreal CS that's apparently working but stuck in limbo for many months now between Microsoft and Epics lawyers. Sources: https://forums.unrealengine.com/showthread.php?137312-UnrealCS-Unity-alike-C-Plugin-for-Unreal-Engine http://www.unrealcs.com/read.php?tid=1&page=1
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 19:06
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:This is crazy pretty. Small team thing? Studio thing? Thing thing? Small team effort! This is us: http://zaumstudio.com/ Crazy eastern european intellectuals doing to the RPG what Marx did to Hegelian dialectics. edit: interesting tidbit - the white swirls on the water are generated off of Gogh's Starry Night. I tried but to be honest I don't paint swirls quite as well as that old lunatic. kinnas fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Feb 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 19:23
|
|
|
Harvey Birdman posted:I'm doin a game with some traditional animation stuff, and I'm working in Clip Studio Paint, personally, but man... it'd be awesome to do it on my light table. Pencil tests suck to set up at home though. I think the silver bullet for traditional animators might be in hardware. I'm not artistically inclined but I've seen some people with a drawing tablet that had a built-in screen so that they could look at what they were drawing with their hands which just happened to be digital. No idea what such a thing would cost, probably bunches, but for people who are serious about applying traditional drawing techniques digitally they seem invaluable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 19:33
|
|
|
Hammer Bro. posted:I think the silver bullet for traditional animators might be in hardware. I'm not artistically inclined but I've seen some people with a drawing tablet that had a built-in screen so that they could look at what they were drawing with their hands which just happened to be digital. This is actually super common now, the Surface was the first to make it mainstream I think but as of 2016 you had several options available in the ultrabook or convertible lines that provide stylus drawing on the screen. So you can buy into that tech in the $1k to $2k range, and also get a nice laptop out of it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 19:43
|
|
|
InevitableCheese posted:To further motivate, your game is one of the main reasons I follow this thread. Looks awesome! That is extremely flattering considering the amount of talented, dedicated, and established developers and designers in this thread. My new year's resolution was to release an alpha some time this year. I still have quite a few core mechanics to figure out before I'll feel ready to do that. Also, it would be my first release so the thought is kinda making me nauseous. 
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 20:05
|
|
|
Hammer Bro. posted:I think the silver bullet for traditional animators might be in hardware. I'm not artistically inclined but I've seen some people with a drawing tablet that had a built-in screen so that they could look at what they were drawing with their hands which just happened to be digital. I have a Wacom Cintiq 21UX so I draw directly on the screen into Photoshop, no paper or scanning involved. It's a $2000 piece of hardware though, but it's worth every cent if you draw every day. You also get to be the odd person with a 4:3 monitor in TYOOL 2017. A benefit of working entirely digital is I use layer transparency to quickly tween my frames, and I have an alignment dot I merge with layers to make all my frame offsets easy peasy, just click the dot and its perfectly aligned. Reiley fucked around with this message at 20:19 on Feb 22, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
The best idea would be to shell out for a slightly older cintiq like the 22hd. You can get one for less than $1000 2nd hand and, while it isnt absolutely necessary for illustration, for fbf animation it's invaluable. Im lucky enough to have been using them at work for, wow, 10 years now, and I would never go back to animating on anything else. They are amazing pieces of hardware.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 20:15
|
|
|
Yeah cintiqs and their ilk are good, if expensive, and way better than using tablet pcs like the Surface.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 20:29
|
|
|
Wow, this past week has been pretty nuts. A four-way of big-time Youtubers playing We Need To Go Deeper and uploading it to their respective channels (Markiplier included!!  ) and shipping boat-loads of daily patches. The whole team is simultaneously jumping for joy and collapsing from sleep deprivation.  RE: Tablets - Incidentally, my Wacom Intuos 3 tablet has been a tried and true friend that's lasted me for 4 years running, and I don't recall it being quite as outlandish as some of these newer tablets go for. Somewhere around the ballpark of a few hundred bucks? I'm not even sure they sell it anymore, but for any of you hand-drawing folks murdering yourself with the time it takes to scan things in, I swear, these bad boys make that job go way quicker and with almost the same results if you just draw your frames directly in photoshop. (or if you want a proper animation program, any version of ToonBoom works pretty well for your basic animation needs.) Bert of the Forest fucked around with this message at 02:55 on Feb 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2017 23:37
|
|
|
kinnas posted:Small team effort! This is us: http://zaumstudio.com/ Your poo poo is really good. That's... uh... all I have to say. Real good. Fangz posted:Yeah cintiqs and their ilk are good, if expensive, and way better than using tablet pcs like the Surface.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 02:32
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:Is this actually true of Surfaces after the Surface 3, especially if you get a good pen? Supposedly, they've gotten pretty dang good, and while they're expensive, they aren't expensive at all in comparison to a Cintiq + PC. The Surface Pro 4 sensitivity isn't as good as even a now ancient Intuos 3. It feels like it's still a generation behind that. I've barely used the pen nib and it's already worn way more than said Intuos 3's pen with original nib. Lazy mouse in ZBrush is practically a requirement to get smooth strokes. I got a great deal on a pretty much maxed out i7 Surface Pro 4 and I'm basically a dabbler in the art game so it's fine but my guess is absolutely unacceptable to serious artists as anything more than portable/secondary use.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 02:46
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:Arcade games are another sort that are designed to have no end.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 02:56
|
|
|
Has anybody here had any experience using Unity on Linux? Last I heard the state of the port was "you're better off running it under Wine," but I was wondering if things had changed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 03:52
|
|
|
kinnas posted:(Does timg stop gifs from clogging up load times?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 04:56
|
|
|
OneEightHundred posted:Nah, most arcade games have an end so they can crank the difficulty through the roof in the final stages and drain the people that got that far by bringing a $20 bill and being willing to throw as many quarters at the game as it takes to win. Huh. What the hell do you call a classic arcade game at this point, that has morphed into endless-genre score driven games? The sort that was designed for arcade gaming first, and seldom had a home port, or if it did, it was terrible, as opposed to the reverse being more accurate? "Score attack" seems really dumb, but maybe that's the more accurate term currently? Shalinor fucked around with this message at 06:29 on Feb 23, 2017 |
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 06:23
|
|
|
I always thought of "arcade game" as a skill-based game, something you can fail and improve at through repetition, something less story-driven and more stressful. Modern games especially can take many forms and do many things, but "arcade games" tend to test and track performance more than provide an experience. At least that's how I see it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 07:31
|
|
|
Huh, learning moment of the day: my steam engine and boiler were originally emulated pretty realistically- boiler pressure, fire temperature, fire mass, and all that jazz rose slowly and realistically, so you could see problems coming far in advance and gently massage the system in an attempt to head off the trouble. Switching that to instant changes (drag fire temperature from 10-5, boiler pressure instantly drops in turn) and making the punishments for a screwup less severe and more frequent feels way better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 07:35
|
|
|
Shalinor posted:They're more like arcade ports of console games, though. quote:Huh. What the hell do you call a classic arcade game at this point, that has morphed into endless-genre score driven games? The sort that was designed for arcade gaming first, and seldom had a home port, or if it did, it was terrible, as opposed to the reverse being more accurate? "Score attack" seems really dumb, but maybe that's the more accurate term currently?
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 07:43
|
|
|
Re cintiq and surface pro and sensitivity SP2s were the last SPs to have Wacom digitizers. The levels of sensitivity actually aren't that important it's the angles and robustness of input. The nTrigger SP3s are pretty bad with unintended noize. Most artists who I've heard reports from say that this is better/almost fine in the SP2 and to a lesser extent SP4, but the SP2 has a weird size while the SP4 is less responsive. I actually bought a SP2 earlier this year to do digital art and it's been pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 08:27
|
|
|
Did anyone in here ever do game dev/programming twitch streams? We've been doing art streams on our channel for close to a year now, and now our programmer wants to try and stream himself. I was wondering if there were any tips or known pitfalls you guys might be aware of, since this is going to be our first time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 10:21
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 5, 2024 02:02 |
|
|
Bert of the Forest posted:Wow, this past week has been pretty nuts. A four-way of big-time Youtubers playing We Need To Go Deeper and uploading it to their respective channels (Markiplier included!! That is hella cool. I estimate by you having 200 reviews on steam that you have sold about 20K copies. (1% review rate) Congrats again!
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2017 13:58
|
|