I love it when I find a glitch or error, something definitively wrong in some way. I'm not being sarcastic or funny, I actually get a sense of personal satisfaction from solving problems. The bigger the headache you're getting from something the more it excites me to take on the challenge. Which is why I always say that problems are fun.
That in mind what I'm currently dealing with isn't quite a traditional problem, just a lack of forethought. One tester found an almost game ruining strategical oversight. Apparently because my system for releasing bosses is based on the items (souls?) you've collected, and if you chill in one area and get a ton of kills in advance, while you may not get extra keys you do still get these pick ups. You can then proceed into the next level and unlock all the bosses at once, use an overpowered spell to kill them all, and move right along, rinse and repeat.
Right now I'm playing with several solutions, for starters instead of letting you choose when to release a boss it's now immediate with no choice which honestly I'd planned from the start but received some complaints and after talking with them about what specifically they didn't like about it we've now managed a solution I think they'll find quite satisfactory. The second is to have a tracker for each floor of how many you killed on that floor so the doors don't automatically unlock based on that, the number was previously incremental and now it's more of a slightly fixed number altered by the floor number variable (non-multiplicative) and they're happy about the idea of seeing how well they did on each floor though I'll have actual results tomorrow of how much they like it. I've also added a behind the scenes timer tracker that shows after you game over how long you took on each floor. I'm also dumping that info to see how the game progresses from floor to floor to make sure the variables are balanced right, because if everyone consistently dies on the same floor then obviously I've done something wrong.
I also added a little spice by picking bosses at random, there were previously 12 bosses alternating a set to each floor, now it just picks one for each cage with fixed master boss levels every 10 floors in which you encounter 4 of the same boss and a 5th super powered version of that boss, though to my knowledge none of the players have made it to the 120th floor yet without that slight cheat or whatever you'd call it.
I'm doing other minor tweaks to make it easier for them to get that far and thinking about making an actual final level. The final level however will be beyond nintendo hard, I'll make it level 1,000 and have it include every single mega boss, and enemy you've killed that far along with a final gatekeeper with an ungodly health bar, just so you'll have hope that I can crush.
Though not to be in direct defiance of occams razor as it pertains to entertainment (a bit of a stretch I know) I'm also thinking about overstepping the apparent simplicity of my current auto-allocation system available to the player and implementing a more sophisticated system of balancing regen rates, accelerated regen rate, mana tank max storage per rank and overall, along with spell power and related in a more calibrated methodology. Essentially the idea is that you can invest points (again thinking I might just call them souls) into categories and each category will have a graphed curve you can view to see how powerful the spell is, how long it takes to charge / cast (for power spells not streams) and mana cost, and any other variables and based on how you invest determines how the curve changes to reflect these stats. For example you might want a simple power spell to charge really quickly so you'd invest in its early stage mostly, but if you charge it into its second or third stages it means you really want more power so you'd invest in that area for that stage, and perhaps you instead want to cast a standard power spell really cheaply so you'd invest there, and while if you invest enough all the stats can improve you'll likely suffer in other areas for it.
This principal also applies to your actual mana regen, the max mana per tank by rank in which you effectively have 3 mana tanks and each of their regens are based on the investments in them, and you can invest in how potent the magic in them is because they all basically boil down to a value of the first tank after all the math is processed. Right now they're set up so that a single point of mana from the second tank is worth several mana points, which when you use mana from that tank your spells by default charge quicker, are more powerful, etc.
I can tell you right now I will not be letting you cast different spell types together, and even lasting spells like the lava do not interact with other spells and I won't be programming them to either. That is just beyond my current skill and wouldn't really make a huge difference in players. I'm still considering screens for you, I'm just still playing with the HUD, if any of you are familiar with UDK and unrealscript just let me know and we'll collab a bit so you can help me get it displaying right. Right now I'm working on getting the "crosshair" or otherwise known as reticle to be based on a variable which is the current range of the spell whether you're doing an area effect spell, a target cone, or a straight stream/beam. I can manage it slightly by state but nowhere near where I want it at.
I should save some more for another post.... Say something about all this in the comments so I know you exist please.
Showing posts with label Idea. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Idea. Show all posts
February 23, 2012
February 01, 2012
Mental notes.
Message received, you don't want to know about my personal life. Moving on I'll direct your attention to the classic "mental note". I frequently jot down notes in my project logs mostly because I keep them open for just such an occasion. Today however I was thinking on a feature for one game that I'd already pretty much locked down all features I wanted in it. The simple idea was how the MW3 killstreaks even under "support" generally don't do much supporting, and the ballistic vests have to be applied by everyone every time etc. I was thinking on a scenario in which the better an individual does the better equipment the team gets. While the squad leader gets his main abilities he could get additionanl unlocks by having a high performing team. Other things like the ballistic vests could be set up to automatically be applied to everyone when they spawn, although I don't have such a thing in my game and it wouldn't fit, if it were however then that's how I'd have it set up. I have a feature already in the game that could take advantage of this....
But the whole idea of killstreaks just doesn't fit my game. If ever I do a game with killstreaks though I'd definitely remember this. Certain features like that would be early work to make sure they're in good. Vests, extended mags, hollow points, w/e point is that if it's reasonable for a team to have it then it'd be an option. Picking on MW3 specifically for a moment I'm fairly aggravated at the perk setups. In MW2 there was a system and it made sense as to why a given perk was classified as a type 1, 2, or 3, and that's no longer the case. Additionally I still wish I could have something like extreme conditioning or slight of hand with my scavenger perk without using the specialist strike package. Ideally slight of hand should be a weapon perk not a class perk, and things like the attachment perk should be levelable like attachments pro and allow you more attachments at once. Realistically the average soldier would probably have a scope and extended mags for starters if not a different kind of ammo and or a silencer and would carry more than 3 clips of ammo. Any movement towards that reality would make me very happy. There's all kinds of tweaks I'd make but I won't rant, instead my only serious complaint that I have beyond anything else in the game is the gun balancing and selection, rebalance the guns and give us a few new ones (or at least bring back some of the ones in previous games you took out) and I probably would be so happy I'd never even think to complain. Dual fmgs, too powerful, m4 too weak, handguns too weak, sub machine guns in general too powerful, juggernaut dies way too quickly. Which on a side note I might add that the juggernaut armor isn't meant for combat scenarios, they do have a suit of armor that is, why didn't they use that instead of E.O.D.? Why will we never be able to switch firing modes? (single shot, three round, full) Shotguns are a secondary why did you put them back to primary? What's being done about spawn camping? rant rant rant
Back to one of my games, the multiplayer (still heavily under work) is structured into squads, with one squad leader in 2 squads and the other two squads report to one of them. The squads with direct leaders are foot soldiers basically while the other two are specialist and vehicle based squads such as driver and gunners or pilot and co pilot etc (won't reveal other details). Similarities can be drawn to MAG in that manner but that's where it ends. A majority of the gun leveling system is like a hybrid of fallout 3 and FFXIII chrystarium. While I've made the majority of the system, certain aspects still need fine tuning which is why I'll refrain from specifics for now. Basically though you do have stats that generally level up though repetition. The more you reload the quicker you reload, the more you run the faster and further you can run, the more you get shot the less you flinch, etc. There are perks you buy, but they all stick with you and instead of picking classes you can pick characters that you level differently. You can change your weapon loadouts within a character as well however from early tests that generally wasn't a big wanted feature. Originally I had a stock system in mind for the game as a way of earning money which you would then spend on loadouts and you'd earn contracts etc but my testers didn't like it so I removed it. At various points after significant alterations and tweaks I've added it back in and out as the testers like the idea just not the execution. When it's out they say it feels like something is missing, and I've used that to add several features which have helped significantly diminish that demand for more however it still remains. There's no veterancy however there is something distantly similar, in which after you've reached your level cap by playing in a higher rank you can increase your level in the levels below. So a normal character cap of 55 or 65 if reached on every rank of MP might end up with a level 255 at the lowest rank.
The one thing that unfortunately will deter more players than anything else is the fact that I've implemented a mandatory campaign completion to play the highest level of multiplayer. You have to beat a section of the game to unlock a rank, sections are essentially acts and difficulties. The first act is easy and will unlock rank 1. Act 3 is hard and unlocks rank 3. The epilogue is nearly impossible and unlocks the final rank 4 and the persistent world mode but only the upper echelon of players will ever get that far. If you couldn't do mile high on the original modern warfare you'll never beat this. Persistent world I'm thinking about opening up early on like rank 1 instead though to draw a wider range of players. The whole idea of the ranks and campaign link was to weed out complete and total noobs for players looking for a challenge. Persistent world however is as it sounds, you start with the main location of the story and it's a never ending multiplayer deathmatch intended to have minor overarchs such as clan HQ's where a clan can claim territory, and factions which every clan would have to chose a side and they'd claim street sections as you play. Trying to get a significant number of players to make this interesting though has been proving difficult in terms of connectivity and bandwidth. Right now the average game has 32 players, while persistent mode has roughly up to 128 if nobody is doing anything, I wanted to increase this number to something more ambitious like 640. The entire persistent world is all destructible and so you start with a pristine city and over time you see how it gets destroyed and buildings collapse and how warfare evolves on the fly. Right now I'm thinking on isolating sections of the city and having roughly 64 players in a territory at a time and filter it that way so while the whole city is still being destroyed by other players you're only dealing with info relevant to your area.
These are just some of the small features in the game. I'm saving the really big ones for the "BIG" announcement. Suffice to say if your mind was blown by this, it'll likely be liquified and vaporized when you get the full details. And for those of you worrying about guns, so far I've put in a little over 60 working guns, and have plans to implement over 100. And they're not all "modern" weapons, I have plenty of sci-fi futuristic weapons as well I'll tell you in a later post. However I absolutely do not have any "ancient weapons" or old school classics. No thompson or ppsh or model 1887 and I also don't have any swords or crossbows or longbows. I have a couple items that might be considered a sword or bow in the right context however you'd probably call it a lightsaber before you call it a sword, and it's nothing like that either so don't freak out and start calling lucas or think it's a star wars thing because it's not, go play TOR if you want that sort of thing. The GOW torque bow was similar to a futuristic crossbow, and I may have something you could compare to that however I believe you'll find them distinctly different in several key areas. With that in mind I'll leave you to stew on the awesomeness.
But the whole idea of killstreaks just doesn't fit my game. If ever I do a game with killstreaks though I'd definitely remember this. Certain features like that would be early work to make sure they're in good. Vests, extended mags, hollow points, w/e point is that if it's reasonable for a team to have it then it'd be an option. Picking on MW3 specifically for a moment I'm fairly aggravated at the perk setups. In MW2 there was a system and it made sense as to why a given perk was classified as a type 1, 2, or 3, and that's no longer the case. Additionally I still wish I could have something like extreme conditioning or slight of hand with my scavenger perk without using the specialist strike package. Ideally slight of hand should be a weapon perk not a class perk, and things like the attachment perk should be levelable like attachments pro and allow you more attachments at once. Realistically the average soldier would probably have a scope and extended mags for starters if not a different kind of ammo and or a silencer and would carry more than 3 clips of ammo. Any movement towards that reality would make me very happy. There's all kinds of tweaks I'd make but I won't rant, instead my only serious complaint that I have beyond anything else in the game is the gun balancing and selection, rebalance the guns and give us a few new ones (or at least bring back some of the ones in previous games you took out) and I probably would be so happy I'd never even think to complain. Dual fmgs, too powerful, m4 too weak, handguns too weak, sub machine guns in general too powerful, juggernaut dies way too quickly. Which on a side note I might add that the juggernaut armor isn't meant for combat scenarios, they do have a suit of armor that is, why didn't they use that instead of E.O.D.? Why will we never be able to switch firing modes? (single shot, three round, full) Shotguns are a secondary why did you put them back to primary? What's being done about spawn camping? rant rant rant
Back to one of my games, the multiplayer (still heavily under work) is structured into squads, with one squad leader in 2 squads and the other two squads report to one of them. The squads with direct leaders are foot soldiers basically while the other two are specialist and vehicle based squads such as driver and gunners or pilot and co pilot etc (won't reveal other details). Similarities can be drawn to MAG in that manner but that's where it ends. A majority of the gun leveling system is like a hybrid of fallout 3 and FFXIII chrystarium. While I've made the majority of the system, certain aspects still need fine tuning which is why I'll refrain from specifics for now. Basically though you do have stats that generally level up though repetition. The more you reload the quicker you reload, the more you run the faster and further you can run, the more you get shot the less you flinch, etc. There are perks you buy, but they all stick with you and instead of picking classes you can pick characters that you level differently. You can change your weapon loadouts within a character as well however from early tests that generally wasn't a big wanted feature. Originally I had a stock system in mind for the game as a way of earning money which you would then spend on loadouts and you'd earn contracts etc but my testers didn't like it so I removed it. At various points after significant alterations and tweaks I've added it back in and out as the testers like the idea just not the execution. When it's out they say it feels like something is missing, and I've used that to add several features which have helped significantly diminish that demand for more however it still remains. There's no veterancy however there is something distantly similar, in which after you've reached your level cap by playing in a higher rank you can increase your level in the levels below. So a normal character cap of 55 or 65 if reached on every rank of MP might end up with a level 255 at the lowest rank.
The one thing that unfortunately will deter more players than anything else is the fact that I've implemented a mandatory campaign completion to play the highest level of multiplayer. You have to beat a section of the game to unlock a rank, sections are essentially acts and difficulties. The first act is easy and will unlock rank 1. Act 3 is hard and unlocks rank 3. The epilogue is nearly impossible and unlocks the final rank 4 and the persistent world mode but only the upper echelon of players will ever get that far. If you couldn't do mile high on the original modern warfare you'll never beat this. Persistent world I'm thinking about opening up early on like rank 1 instead though to draw a wider range of players. The whole idea of the ranks and campaign link was to weed out complete and total noobs for players looking for a challenge. Persistent world however is as it sounds, you start with the main location of the story and it's a never ending multiplayer deathmatch intended to have minor overarchs such as clan HQ's where a clan can claim territory, and factions which every clan would have to chose a side and they'd claim street sections as you play. Trying to get a significant number of players to make this interesting though has been proving difficult in terms of connectivity and bandwidth. Right now the average game has 32 players, while persistent mode has roughly up to 128 if nobody is doing anything, I wanted to increase this number to something more ambitious like 640. The entire persistent world is all destructible and so you start with a pristine city and over time you see how it gets destroyed and buildings collapse and how warfare evolves on the fly. Right now I'm thinking on isolating sections of the city and having roughly 64 players in a territory at a time and filter it that way so while the whole city is still being destroyed by other players you're only dealing with info relevant to your area.
These are just some of the small features in the game. I'm saving the really big ones for the "BIG" announcement. Suffice to say if your mind was blown by this, it'll likely be liquified and vaporized when you get the full details. And for those of you worrying about guns, so far I've put in a little over 60 working guns, and have plans to implement over 100. And they're not all "modern" weapons, I have plenty of sci-fi futuristic weapons as well I'll tell you in a later post. However I absolutely do not have any "ancient weapons" or old school classics. No thompson or ppsh or model 1887 and I also don't have any swords or crossbows or longbows. I have a couple items that might be considered a sword or bow in the right context however you'd probably call it a lightsaber before you call it a sword, and it's nothing like that either so don't freak out and start calling lucas or think it's a star wars thing because it's not, go play TOR if you want that sort of thing. The GOW torque bow was similar to a futuristic crossbow, and I may have something you could compare to that however I believe you'll find them distinctly different in several key areas. With that in mind I'll leave you to stew on the awesomeness.
January 13, 2012
Groundwork
So yesterday I was tweaking projectile properties and trying to get a better flamethrower going in game. I also spent a lot of time working on a logo and fleshing out other ideas for subsequent games. Interviewed a couple story writers but I'm still looking for more / better. I'm starting to get a budget together to be able to pay for some things, probably by project basis / commission.
The real question though is once I'm done with the first game should I follow up with another mini game / arcade game or go for a full game which would still likely be short but have some substance to it all the same. Does story matter? If I just came out with the most insane plot that at least stuck together but was otherwise seemingly random, would you still play it?
The real question though is once I'm done with the first game should I follow up with another mini game / arcade game or go for a full game which would still likely be short but have some substance to it all the same. Does story matter? If I just came out with the most insane plot that at least stuck together but was otherwise seemingly random, would you still play it?
January 12, 2012
Looking Forward
Today isn't so much about advice as it is a wish list for future hardware. Some older systems had genius ideas that were lost at some point that need to be brought back, others aren't taking full advantage of the evolution of tech.
Most of us remember the N64. One key idea that they had right was the expansion card, essentially an updated graphics card. This prolonged the life cycle of the console significantly in addition to allowing better games to be made, this feature isn't in any modern consoles, and it's not my place to say whether or not it should be, but it wouldn't have been such a bad idea for the xbox 360 given it knew that ps3 would have better graphics simply by waiting a little while longer.
It used to be that almost every game was run from cartridges and back then there was no "loading screen". The main reason we switched to disks were for higher capacity and cost effectiveness. Now with the new speeds provided by USB 3.0 and the significantly larger capacities it wouldn't be unreasonable to give it a try, because you never need to blow out dust from a usb or worry if its fitted correctly and it's remarkably cheap these days, perhaps not as much as discs which may be a downside, but it would allow for more content at faster speeds than disks and they take up much less space. I dream of the day we'll never see another loading screen.
This is about looking forward though. To that I must say that in about 4 years when we really start considering new consoles, perhaps slightly sooner for xbox probably 2 years, there should be advancements in input methods and content creation methods, and content sharing. The Vita for example could completely replace the dual shock controller and be your controller on the ps4, of course by then there'd probably be a new handheld and ideally for such a high price tag as I'm sure it will have then the console should come with one of these controllers that serves as a portable as well. Xbox could adopt such an idea, break into the portable market by including one with every new xbox as the controller for said box, and if they can somehow match graphics or get close to doing so then even have it so you can take your game on the go.
Then there's content, focusing specifically on the one thing that's always bothered me about console content, once you buy it, it's for life. Sad truth about this is that I honestly almost never play halo 2 anymore which I bought so many map packs for, or oblivion now that skyrim is out, and all that content will almost never get played again, and with game of the year editions out if I really wanted the content I could just grab a copy of those instead. The next iteration of consoles should include a system for gifting games, sharing games (temporarily loaning it to a friend) and optionally revoking my rights to a game or its content in exchange for some form of currency I can use on the marketplace for new games and content. I would love to revoke my claim to old map packs and content to get some points and buy an arcade game or get new map packs for newer games. I like to give gifts when I can spare it for a good friends birthday or christmas, and in the case of oblivion since I'd mastered it completely I gave it and the guides to a friend only to remember he'd have to buy the content like knights of the nine and shivering isles so I had to help him grab a game of the year, which he could turn around and sell back to the store if he ever got tired of it. A lot of these features such as gifting already exist on steam, and I like it sometimes when me and friends can go in on a 4 pack and get the game slightly cheaper. I might not be able for afford full price for one copy myself, but if my friends put their cash together we can save 10$ a piece sometimes and all get a copy. Then there's another nuisance that I'm sure will never be addressed, but it's the fact that a lot of games are multiplatform but you can only play them on one console for various reasons. It would be nice however if I bought a copy of the game on xbox I could turn around and play it on pc or ps3 through steam or similar without having to buy extra copies. Mass Effect was generous in this area by giving me an extra copy for pc, and for that I am extremely grateful, it did a lot to turn my views of EA, even if it was BioWare's idea (not sure but probably). BioWare was awesome enough to make sure that any DLC I bought for dragon age, dragon age 2, mass effect, etc I could get on any console or pc without any problems and I could get it for all consoles and pc if I wanted, which because now I had a pc copy of mass effect 2, and had bought an extra dragon age copy for pc I certainly wanted to do so.
One thing I'm happy to see recently that I was going to include here was that nobody makes controllers that can be used on both xbox and ps3, given that they aren't technically too different as opposed to the wii controler which is wildly different from either. As I said though, recently I've begun seeing such controllers around and that makes me very happy, now they just need to get it down pat. In my case I unfortunately have friends that sometimes don't use common sense, which means they spill liquids on my controllers sometimes and sometimes I can't fix the problems that come from that. However because they are cool enough to replace what they break I have parts to play with in the future. This one day lead to a stroke of genius in which I gutted a ps3 controller and more or less installed it in an xbox mw2 controller with the xbox buttons and sticks. After a lot of strenuous work and probably breaking several laws not to mention warranties I managed to get it to work with the ps3 flawlessly including plugging it in and charging when the battery gets low, something I've always wanted to be so easy on the xbox but instead of regular usb they insist on the play and charge kit which breaks after a while and has large battery areas that feel unnatural by my fingers. Through my efforts though I also managed to manipulate the controller to work on xbox as well, however sometimes the xbox freaks out because of it, and I never use it online because I'm fairly sure I'd get B& almost immediately. However when using it on the pc it's a lovely little item to have around and that gyro-sensor can be mapped to do some very nice things that you just don't get on regular consoles, such as leaning in call of duty.
Last but not least there's online premium services. PSN has always been free, granted it hasn't had many exclusives specifically shooters that make great use of it, but when MAG came out I was overjoyed that I knew I'd never have to pay to play online with friends. XBL however 60$ a year to play anything online at all, I rarely get discounts or freebies that silver members don't get, and I could just rant on it all day, the end point being that I have never once felt like I'm getting my moneys worth. PSN plus service however, I've already saved my moneys worth and I've hardly bought anything, tons of free content that gets updated regularly, and useful system features that I'm comfortable in the idea that I shouldn't expect them for free because they aren't necessary but are very welcome additions all the same. The PSHome experience is also much more mature than the childlike avatars we get on xbox with cheaper additions. Yet I maintain my XBL, not only for the exclusives such as halo or gears of war but because of the friend system involved and the better controller for shooters which is what I play most on xbox. However, if XBL doesn't do some serious improvements or somehow lets their exclusives start slipping I might actually end up cancelling. right now I would be happy to pay 30$ a year for XBL, and if they were to implement a cloud save system, automatic updates while I'm not playing, and various other features the Plus service has, I'd almost be happy for even a 50$ a year service. I love logging on to PSN to find all my games have been updated, latest system update, etc knowing that I won't have to ever wait to get into a game because it's updating. The Plus service I was worried about at first, and early on it definitely wasn't worth the money but now it's getting into a groove and I feel that it's money well spent, enough so that I bought several gift cards and plus service cards for my psn friends over the holidays hoping that they'll get hooked on it as well. Now if only playstation could actually get more exclusives.
Most of us remember the N64. One key idea that they had right was the expansion card, essentially an updated graphics card. This prolonged the life cycle of the console significantly in addition to allowing better games to be made, this feature isn't in any modern consoles, and it's not my place to say whether or not it should be, but it wouldn't have been such a bad idea for the xbox 360 given it knew that ps3 would have better graphics simply by waiting a little while longer.
It used to be that almost every game was run from cartridges and back then there was no "loading screen". The main reason we switched to disks were for higher capacity and cost effectiveness. Now with the new speeds provided by USB 3.0 and the significantly larger capacities it wouldn't be unreasonable to give it a try, because you never need to blow out dust from a usb or worry if its fitted correctly and it's remarkably cheap these days, perhaps not as much as discs which may be a downside, but it would allow for more content at faster speeds than disks and they take up much less space. I dream of the day we'll never see another loading screen.
This is about looking forward though. To that I must say that in about 4 years when we really start considering new consoles, perhaps slightly sooner for xbox probably 2 years, there should be advancements in input methods and content creation methods, and content sharing. The Vita for example could completely replace the dual shock controller and be your controller on the ps4, of course by then there'd probably be a new handheld and ideally for such a high price tag as I'm sure it will have then the console should come with one of these controllers that serves as a portable as well. Xbox could adopt such an idea, break into the portable market by including one with every new xbox as the controller for said box, and if they can somehow match graphics or get close to doing so then even have it so you can take your game on the go.
Then there's content, focusing specifically on the one thing that's always bothered me about console content, once you buy it, it's for life. Sad truth about this is that I honestly almost never play halo 2 anymore which I bought so many map packs for, or oblivion now that skyrim is out, and all that content will almost never get played again, and with game of the year editions out if I really wanted the content I could just grab a copy of those instead. The next iteration of consoles should include a system for gifting games, sharing games (temporarily loaning it to a friend) and optionally revoking my rights to a game or its content in exchange for some form of currency I can use on the marketplace for new games and content. I would love to revoke my claim to old map packs and content to get some points and buy an arcade game or get new map packs for newer games. I like to give gifts when I can spare it for a good friends birthday or christmas, and in the case of oblivion since I'd mastered it completely I gave it and the guides to a friend only to remember he'd have to buy the content like knights of the nine and shivering isles so I had to help him grab a game of the year, which he could turn around and sell back to the store if he ever got tired of it. A lot of these features such as gifting already exist on steam, and I like it sometimes when me and friends can go in on a 4 pack and get the game slightly cheaper. I might not be able for afford full price for one copy myself, but if my friends put their cash together we can save 10$ a piece sometimes and all get a copy. Then there's another nuisance that I'm sure will never be addressed, but it's the fact that a lot of games are multiplatform but you can only play them on one console for various reasons. It would be nice however if I bought a copy of the game on xbox I could turn around and play it on pc or ps3 through steam or similar without having to buy extra copies. Mass Effect was generous in this area by giving me an extra copy for pc, and for that I am extremely grateful, it did a lot to turn my views of EA, even if it was BioWare's idea (not sure but probably). BioWare was awesome enough to make sure that any DLC I bought for dragon age, dragon age 2, mass effect, etc I could get on any console or pc without any problems and I could get it for all consoles and pc if I wanted, which because now I had a pc copy of mass effect 2, and had bought an extra dragon age copy for pc I certainly wanted to do so.
One thing I'm happy to see recently that I was going to include here was that nobody makes controllers that can be used on both xbox and ps3, given that they aren't technically too different as opposed to the wii controler which is wildly different from either. As I said though, recently I've begun seeing such controllers around and that makes me very happy, now they just need to get it down pat. In my case I unfortunately have friends that sometimes don't use common sense, which means they spill liquids on my controllers sometimes and sometimes I can't fix the problems that come from that. However because they are cool enough to replace what they break I have parts to play with in the future. This one day lead to a stroke of genius in which I gutted a ps3 controller and more or less installed it in an xbox mw2 controller with the xbox buttons and sticks. After a lot of strenuous work and probably breaking several laws not to mention warranties I managed to get it to work with the ps3 flawlessly including plugging it in and charging when the battery gets low, something I've always wanted to be so easy on the xbox but instead of regular usb they insist on the play and charge kit which breaks after a while and has large battery areas that feel unnatural by my fingers. Through my efforts though I also managed to manipulate the controller to work on xbox as well, however sometimes the xbox freaks out because of it, and I never use it online because I'm fairly sure I'd get B& almost immediately. However when using it on the pc it's a lovely little item to have around and that gyro-sensor can be mapped to do some very nice things that you just don't get on regular consoles, such as leaning in call of duty.
Last but not least there's online premium services. PSN has always been free, granted it hasn't had many exclusives specifically shooters that make great use of it, but when MAG came out I was overjoyed that I knew I'd never have to pay to play online with friends. XBL however 60$ a year to play anything online at all, I rarely get discounts or freebies that silver members don't get, and I could just rant on it all day, the end point being that I have never once felt like I'm getting my moneys worth. PSN plus service however, I've already saved my moneys worth and I've hardly bought anything, tons of free content that gets updated regularly, and useful system features that I'm comfortable in the idea that I shouldn't expect them for free because they aren't necessary but are very welcome additions all the same. The PSHome experience is also much more mature than the childlike avatars we get on xbox with cheaper additions. Yet I maintain my XBL, not only for the exclusives such as halo or gears of war but because of the friend system involved and the better controller for shooters which is what I play most on xbox. However, if XBL doesn't do some serious improvements or somehow lets their exclusives start slipping I might actually end up cancelling. right now I would be happy to pay 30$ a year for XBL, and if they were to implement a cloud save system, automatic updates while I'm not playing, and various other features the Plus service has, I'd almost be happy for even a 50$ a year service. I love logging on to PSN to find all my games have been updated, latest system update, etc knowing that I won't have to ever wait to get into a game because it's updating. The Plus service I was worried about at first, and early on it definitely wasn't worth the money but now it's getting into a groove and I feel that it's money well spent, enough so that I bought several gift cards and plus service cards for my psn friends over the holidays hoping that they'll get hooked on it as well. Now if only playstation could actually get more exclusives.
January 11, 2012
Army of One
It's important early on to not only have clear focus but clear perspective. Most games are not done by the so called "One Man Army". While in this case my early game /s will likely be just me, in order to grow I'll have to establish a reliable team of skilled people. The reason I don't say professionals is that generally refers to experience, that's not necessarily such a great thing in the face of fresh and upcoming titles. Seasoned vets of this industry have become locked into a certain way of doing things and are less likely to take risks. I'm not afraid of a setback or failure if it was outside the box.
Advice aside I'm also establishing this as an open call to anybody with skills willing to work for free or consignment, or otherwise no money up front. I've already got groundwork for a topdown shooter that should take me about a month to finish by myself (I'm already about a month and a half in so I'm fairly sure that's not an unreasonable timeframe). Right now I've been using UDK but that might change with the next game. Before dismissing it I'd like to point out I'm not using it exclusively and that I don't develop assets in it.
Advice aside I'm also establishing this as an open call to anybody with skills willing to work for free or consignment, or otherwise no money up front. I've already got groundwork for a topdown shooter that should take me about a month to finish by myself (I'm already about a month and a half in so I'm fairly sure that's not an unreasonable timeframe). Right now I've been using UDK but that might change with the next game. Before dismissing it I'd like to point out I'm not using it exclusively and that I don't develop assets in it.
Opening moves.
Having grown impatient in my efforts to break into my industry of choice it's time to break out and claim territory for myself. I am a game developer.
The first point to start with is a name and a business plan, which is already well under way. This leads me to the current preliminary model, which is based on tactics I've learned to be effective in competitive games. Establishing a base of operations, or a territory, or some groundwork for a base and income or other resource is all important.
Evolving into a refined machine and finding more efficient methods of completing current objectives in terms of cost, time, speed, etc.
Then taking this momentum and being aggressive with it, expanding outward and claiming additional resources establishing new bases or camps, forward operating bases and using this as a new establishment for a subsequent evolution.
This process is repetitive until victory is attained, however each phase should be progressively longer than previous to ensure stability.
Ideally each phase has primary and secondary sub categories simultaneously being worked on and thus each primary phase includes parts of the other phases. While you may sometimes be on the defensive a strong and continuous offense is important even in the midst of a strong defense you should have some kind of offensive strategy at play unless your goal is merely survival which ultimately leads to defeat. During most offenses your attack should include some plan towards damaging the resources and income of your adversaries, this economical advantage you create for yourself should prove itself invaluable in the future. Preventing an adversaries expansion or sabotaging it to strain their resources is also quite important as simply letting them expand will give them a foothold to establish a new offense quicker and stronger than before.
The focus right now however is exclusively on establishing myself, otherwise nothing else matters. The best methods for this are unavailable to me right now however thus I will establish myself with a simple game using the best of my abilities, it will be creative, addictive, and cheap to encourage new followers to join me and establish my income. For these reasons my first commercial game will be short and likely have a lot of replay value. Perhaps a cross between a top down shooter and a dungeon crawler...
The first point to start with is a name and a business plan, which is already well under way. This leads me to the current preliminary model, which is based on tactics I've learned to be effective in competitive games. Establishing a base of operations, or a territory, or some groundwork for a base and income or other resource is all important.
Evolving into a refined machine and finding more efficient methods of completing current objectives in terms of cost, time, speed, etc.
Then taking this momentum and being aggressive with it, expanding outward and claiming additional resources establishing new bases or camps, forward operating bases and using this as a new establishment for a subsequent evolution.
This process is repetitive until victory is attained, however each phase should be progressively longer than previous to ensure stability.
Ideally each phase has primary and secondary sub categories simultaneously being worked on and thus each primary phase includes parts of the other phases. While you may sometimes be on the defensive a strong and continuous offense is important even in the midst of a strong defense you should have some kind of offensive strategy at play unless your goal is merely survival which ultimately leads to defeat. During most offenses your attack should include some plan towards damaging the resources and income of your adversaries, this economical advantage you create for yourself should prove itself invaluable in the future. Preventing an adversaries expansion or sabotaging it to strain their resources is also quite important as simply letting them expand will give them a foothold to establish a new offense quicker and stronger than before.
The focus right now however is exclusively on establishing myself, otherwise nothing else matters. The best methods for this are unavailable to me right now however thus I will establish myself with a simple game using the best of my abilities, it will be creative, addictive, and cheap to encourage new followers to join me and establish my income. For these reasons my first commercial game will be short and likely have a lot of replay value. Perhaps a cross between a top down shooter and a dungeon crawler...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)