[project1dev] Re: Project1 - SVN Update 270
- From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 09:27:58 -0400
i want to explicitely thank chris, alan and katie for offering the counter
points to my original thought, i really think having alternate perspectives
of things will allow us to fully explore elements of game design like this
and that it will ultimately deliver a better, more intuitive and most
importantly more FUN gaming experience. I do not mind debating the points
as I have done below because frankly, if I cannot defend the game design
philosophy then the system we're discussing is probably broken and i need to
work on it some more. besides that, it has been my experience in designing
the combat with nick that when debating ideas like this it occasionally
inspires great new ideas. I actually consider this to be a vital part of
"pre-testing" so please, I encourage you to continue offering your insights
and perspectives!
To give you a specific example, your idea about armor making you
slower and jump shorter will generally make players avoid doing that
in any instance they can. In action based games, skilled players will
go towards what is as fast and damaging as possible, and will avoid
things like that on purpose.
- this is by design, we want to encourage people who are exploring to use
lighter armor, it makes no sense to go on a journey into a mysterious temple
that is bound to have traps, puzzles, etc. in full plate armor. We want
that style of armor to be reserved for people who accept the penalty of
speed/jumping for the enhanced ability to take hits without getting damage.
this is a player choice.
Also, having injuries slow you down will make players feel like they
can't be damaged. For things like this you want to flip the tables,
and instead create armor that gives players more speed, but they take
more damage. It might seem like a small thing, but in the eyes of a
player it can make a huge difference in gameplay.
- also by design. We want players to feel like there are concequences to
being injured and it should be avoided as much as possible. There are
penalties for being injured or dying - that is a major part of the combat
design here. We are trying to break away from the constant
healing/ressurection that has been the common thread in most rpgs. we're
trying to get away from the attrition system. more info on this below
Basically ask yourself if you would play the game and have fun doing
the things you imagine.
- one of my favorite gaming experiences is america's army, and what makes it
so great and so immersive is that you are constantly in fear of your life so
there is actual tension on the battle field, its not like tf2 where you run
out, spam attacks and if you get killed, oh well, respawn. I love the idea
of players figuring out the best strategies to stay alive and learning
tactics and skills to do it. yes, it is a challenge - but that is what makes
it so great! Another game I love, as alan pointed out, is gemstone.
Gemstone was ruthless with one shot kills, getting your leg chopped off and
not being able to climb stuff, etc. like there's areas in the game you have
to take your armor off and be athletic enough to jump in order to make it
over there. staying alive is a major part of that game and everytime you
got hit, you would bleed and feel the effects of it. as a player you had to
learn to adapt your skills and player style to prevent yourself from getting
damaged as much as possible. this is a key element to the game design we
are trying to go with. so to answer your question - yes, i think it'd be
fun :P
Okay guys, this is just my opinion. =) For me when I play arcade-ish style
games like I the ones I think (if I understand correctly) that we are trying
to make, I think Chris has got a really good point. I like to take the
easiest route possible to get to the next step. Not that we should flake on
stuff. But we should make sure to not scrutinize/overthink things too much
if that makes sense.
- this is an rpg, not an arcade game! :P the emphasis is on exploration,
not just going as quickly as you can to get to the next level (although you
can if you so choose). what makes rpg's (and adventure games) fun for me is
finding all the little secrets that are hidden all over the world. also,
everyone is acting like 5 settings is so complex, really the first one is
only for special case scenarios and isn't meant to be used during actual
gameplay, and the 5th one is really only to serve as a special thing for use
like spells, flying, etc. there are only 3 main ones, a weak jump for
heavily armored players, a normal one for most people, and a long jump for
people who choose to sacrifice armor for speed and manueverability
I'd bet this jump level thing would more or less be invisible / automatic to
the player. Like when you were heavier you just dont jump as high or as
far. The player might not know there are 5 levels of jumping ability, they
might just realize "hey when i take off my armor i can make that jump to
that cave i couldnt get to before" (and of course maybe an NPC tips you off
to that fact). Or there are boots that have the description of "wear to be
able to jump higher"
-right, this is all an under the hood system. its funny because when i
write stories, etc. i try to keep things as close to the vest because i like
the reader to be surprised, i like keeping a mystery and something for them
to discover for themselves. this is also true in my game design philosophy,
give players a ton of neat stuff they can find out for themselves if they
want to... the irony is, as a team we're ALL under the hood so i have to
express all the hidden things to you guys so it can get made/discussed, but
then everyone is like "oh that is overly complicated there's no reason for
that!" without putting themselves in the shoes of the player who doesn't
even know the system exists and that its just there for them to discover if
they are curious and interested.
5 different jumps will matter only as much as we design the game for
them to matter. In Diablo 2, the barb jump skill only let you cross
certain terrain that wasn't walkable, so having so many different jump
lengths was easily solved - just make the pits larger. If we can find
an easy solution in our game - an equivalent to "just making the pits
larger" - then we can add as many jumps as we want, and even make them
scale into flying!
I recently learned how to do the shinespark tricks in Metroid
Redesign, and if we could make our jumps in the game require a skill
curve somehow, that would reward the player for the ability to jump
higher... almost like how in 3d Mario games, you have to jump right as
you hit the ground again, within a certain amount of time, so you can
do the triple jump.
-i actually view it as a really simple system that allows for a lot of neat
versatility in game design and player strategy... something that allows for
more skill based movement if people are interested because i know some crazy
people (like nick) enjoy finding crazy challenges and trying to exploit
gameplay tools to get into areas, etc. i think that is fun and great and
should be part of our design. i picked 5 as the number so there would be
differences between teh playing styles while keeping things we needed to
design/test for to the minimum.
okay so lets get down to brass tacks here (how much for the monkey?) (3
adunai points to whoever gets the reference)
IMO we have 2 options:
a) 2 jump system - 1 for armor too heavy for you (basically, non-jumping)
and 1 for normal.
pros: easier to design for, easier to test for, no need to think about armor
choices for the player beyond "is it too heavy?"
cons: less versatile, no differences between wearing light/heavy/medium
armor for adventurers, no hidden areas only accessible by people who invest
and discover ways to jump farther.
b) 5 jump system - as illustrated above
pros: more for the player to discover, another "tool" in our tool box, gives
extra strengths/weaknesses when picking armor and character style
cons: harder to design/test, may baffle some characters.
now obviously i am biased towards B (the 5 jump system) so my pitch for it
is, it'll be simpler in practice for the player/designer than it may seem to
you right now, it's important for game balance between heavy/light armor,
players can really just make sure they are at level 3 (normal) and they will
be able to get through the entire game without worrying about the difference
in jump so i think there is zero bafflement chance, and it gives us another
neat tool for desiging exploration and hidden stuff in the game.
I am definitely open-minded and can be convinced to go with A) - so lets
open it up to the forum and take a little poll and if you want to post
comments/thoughts/ideas - then it'll give us more information to make a good
and intelligent decision.
:)
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 7:55 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> i didnt have time to read everythign yet but basically here is my take...
> level 1 is basically a "your character is broken level" and doesnt need to
> be designed for, its basically a penalty thing we can use. it is the
> extreme
>
> level 2 is needed to differentiate heavy armor from light armor
>
> level 3 is what we will design for, it is "normal"
>
> level 4 is to sepparate quick characters with ultra light armor from people
> wearing normal armor
>
> level 5 is a special case scenario type of thing
>
> we're basically just designing the game for level 3, with maybe a small
> amount of special case scenario areas for level 4/5 (like under 2-3 per
> chapter)
>
> i really don't think that it is overly complicated at all and this will be
> a SUBTLE thing, i.e. again, most of the things like this are only designed
> for people who want the bonus, but dont have to have it
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> yeah actually thats a good point, i remember playin zelda and you see
>> objects which are obviously repeated (ie black rocks in link to the past, or
>> the docks in zelda 1 etc) and knowing "there is something up with those" but
>> you dont know til you have the item. I forgot about that, that was kinda
>> fun gameplay :P
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> Yeah, that's part of the fun of Zelda and Metroid style games... getting
>>> those items that make you able to do things you didn't predict were
>>> possible, so then the player wonders what cool thing is gonna come out next
>>> :)
>>> That's a pretty cool idea for introducing game mechanics.. the player
>>> doesn't know about them at all in the game until they actually get the item
>>> for it.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:40 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>
>>>> yeah totally i agree with you.
>>>>
>>>> we were talkin about this before, we were saying having lots of optional
>>>> things to discover in a game makes it seem bigger because we don't
>>>> advertise
>>>> what the "edges" are.
>>>>
>>>> so yeah totally, if we advertise there are 5 jump levels it ruins the
>>>> magic, but if the player discovers "wtf i jump higher now?" they might try
>>>> to see just how high they can jump. Maybe they get to level 4 and never
>>>> cap
>>>> out at level 5, as far as they know the sky is the limit even though they
>>>> are almost at the cieling hehe.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:36 PM, Chris Riccobono
>>>> <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Also, about the player not knowing there will be 5 jump levels, that
>>>>> would trigger the "yay I discovered something" emotion. It's really
>>>>> fun to learn how to do something to reach new places, you know?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:35 PM, Chris Riccobono<crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> > I do believe simplicity brings about the most fun when done
>>>>> correctly!
>>>>> > I think part of the fun of a game is learning how to use the system,
>>>>> > too, so when you can learn it very easy at first, you are open to
>>>>> > learning new mechanics as things go on.
>>>>> >
>>>>> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:27 PM, Alan Wolfe<alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >> You deffinately have a good point. Our game isn't arcadey per se
>>>>> but it is
>>>>> >> a game where you can go deeper if you want but don't have to.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Like there will be lots to explore but it's all optional (Eric
>>>>> correct me if
>>>>> >> im wrong lol).
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> I'd bet this jump level thing would more or less be invisible /
>>>>> automatic to
>>>>> >> the player. Like when you were heavier you just dont jump as high
>>>>> or as
>>>>> >> far. The player might not know there are 5 levels of jumping
>>>>> ability, they
>>>>> >> might just realize "hey when i take off my armor i can make that
>>>>> jump to
>>>>> >> that cave i couldnt get to before" (and of course maybe an NPC tips
>>>>> you off
>>>>> >> to that fact). Or there are boots that have the description of
>>>>> "wear to be
>>>>> >> able to jump higher"
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> But yeah there is deffinate wisdom to keeping it simple, especially
>>>>> keeping
>>>>> >> the end result the player sees simple.
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> Someone should be able to pick up the game and be able to play
>>>>> without
>>>>> >> having to read some huge manual :P
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> the old saying "easy to learn difficult to master" yadda yadda
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:13 PM, katie cook <ktmcook@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Okay guys, this is just my opinion. =) For me when I play
>>>>> arcade-ish style
>>>>> >>> games like I the ones I think (if I understand correctly) that we
>>>>> are trying
>>>>> >>> to make, I think Chris has got a really good point. I like to take
>>>>> the
>>>>> >>> easiest route possible to get to the next step. Not that we should
>>>>> flake on
>>>>> >>> stuff. But we should make sure to not scrutinize/overthink things
>>>>> too much
>>>>> >>> if that makes sense.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> I like the opportunity to get a little bit deeper with a game if I
>>>>> choose
>>>>> >>> to at the time, but appreciate when I don't have to. Usually
>>>>> arcades games
>>>>> >>> tend to be shorter in hours played. When I play a short game, I
>>>>> don't wanna
>>>>> >>> have to invest a lot of time and deal with frivilous features. The
>>>>> easier
>>>>> >>> the game the funner it is for me (for arcade/short games. I hope
>>>>> this makes
>>>>> >>> sense.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> --- On Tue, 6/23/09, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> From: Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> Subject: [project1dev] Re: Project1 - SVN Update 270
>>>>> >>> To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> >>> Date: Tuesday, June 23, 2009, 9:46 PM
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> 5 different jump levels is going to complicate things a bit more
>>>>> than
>>>>> >>> we want. Try to keep in mind that the ideal is to make the game
>>>>> more
>>>>> >>> fun. Ask yourself, will 5 different jumps enhance the game enough
>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> warrant the amount of coding, designing, and bug testing they will
>>>>> >>> require?
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> To reiterate what I tried to stress early on, we want the game to
>>>>> be
>>>>> >>> as fun as possible, as simply as possible. Having a complex game
>>>>> is
>>>>> >>> great if it enhances the experience, but if it doesn't, it becomes
>>>>> a
>>>>> >>> hinderance - just another game, in other words.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> To give you a specific example, your idea about armor making you
>>>>> >>> slower and jump shorter will generally make players avoid doing
>>>>> that
>>>>> >>> in any instance they can. In action based games, skilled players
>>>>> will
>>>>> >>> go towards what is as fast and damaging as possible, and will avoid
>>>>> >>> things like that on purpose.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Also, having injuries slow you down will make players feel like
>>>>> they
>>>>> >>> can't be damaged. For things like this you want to flip the
>>>>> tables,
>>>>> >>> and instead create armor that gives players more speed, but they
>>>>> take
>>>>> >>> more damage. It might seem like a small thing, but in the eyes of
>>>>> a
>>>>> >>> player it can make a huge difference in gameplay.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Basically ask yourself if you would play the game and have fun
>>>>> doing
>>>>> >>> the things you imagine.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 6:14 PM, Alan Wolfe<alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> > you know the kind of cool thing about this too
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> > we could actually make situations that you couldn't escape from,
>>>>> and
>>>>> >>> > have
>>>>> >>> > things like pits that when you fall into them you die instantly
>>>>> and
>>>>> >>> > return
>>>>> >>> > to the void.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> > those are really mean (literally!) features but if we use them
>>>>> sparingly
>>>>> >>> > or
>>>>> >>> > in some kind of "i told you not to look in the box" situations
>>>>> that
>>>>> >>> > could be
>>>>> >>> > actually pretty funny.
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> > im not sure if you are down with it, but it would bring a feeling
>>>>> of
>>>>> >>> > mortality :P
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> > ps i'll add the previous ideas to the wiki once i get home if no
>>>>> one
>>>>> >>> > else
>>>>> >>> > has by then. I dont mind but just can't right now :P
>>>>> >>> > On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:44 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>
>>>>> >>> >> yes - harsh but like i said, its an emergency only option to be
>>>>> as a
>>>>> >>> >> last
>>>>> >>> >> resort... i think any other way of doing it will allow too many
>>>>> holes
>>>>> >>> >> for
>>>>> >>> >> exploits (such as exp or item farming, etc)
>>>>> >>> >>
>>>>> >>> >> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Alan Wolfe <
>>>>> alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>
>>>>> >>> >>> so would you lose all exp, gold and items gained then?
>>>>> >>> >>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:41 PM, eric drewes <
>>>>> figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>> yeah i think that is what we';ll do, you can recall to the
>>>>> void at
>>>>> >>> >>>> any
>>>>> >>> >>>> time but it effectively just restores a saved game so you gain
>>>>> no
>>>>> >>> >>>> benefit to
>>>>> >>> >>>> it. We'll make this sort of a last ditch option, so we'll try
>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>> design it
>>>>> >>> >>>> so people never have to use it under normal circumstances
>>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Alan Wolfe <
>>>>> alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>> no, im just here to poke holes in your ideas <g>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>> jk but no im not sure... other than perhaps the player can
>>>>> return to
>>>>> >>> >>>>> the void at any time, and the cost is that you've lost all
>>>>> the time
>>>>> >>> >>>>> you've
>>>>> >>> >>>>> taken to progress to where you are (ie you have to walk back)
>>>>> >>> >>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:38 PM, eric drewes <
>>>>> figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>> wait i take that back, i'll have to think of a real
>>>>> solution. any
>>>>> >>> >>>>>> ideas?
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:35 PM, Alan Wolfe <
>>>>> alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> ok
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> is recall always going to be available?
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:35 PM, eric drewes <
>>>>> figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> recall
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> ok sounds good. the lax attitude and not needing
>>>>> perfection
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> will
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> make it alot easier to test and build. We'll just have
>>>>> to make
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> sure and
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> keep that in mind when designing things.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> actually i think we will probably still have to do a lot
>>>>> of
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> testing
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> with the various jumps to make sure people can't get
>>>>> somewhere
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> they arent
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> meant to be that they cant get out of - ie i can enter
>>>>> this
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> level 3 jump
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> area but i can't escape.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> what's your thoughts on that situation?
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:29 PM, eric drewes <
>>>>> figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> well 2 things...
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 1 - i am comfortable with the testing, i think it'll add
>>>>> a lot
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> the game - what do you guys think?
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> 2 - alan i would really say we'd only need to test for 2
>>>>> things
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> -
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> the ability for level 2 to get past areas that have no
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> non-jumping route
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> through and to make sure tier 5 people can't exploit
>>>>> anything
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> we don't want
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> them too... i would say if a tier 3 person can find a
>>>>> way to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> get over
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> something designed as a secret for level 4 people, then
>>>>> that is
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> ok w/ me,
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> and likewise with level 4 getting to level 5 areas. if
>>>>> they
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> can find a way
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> to overcome the handicap, i dont want to stop them :)
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:25 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> and of course another option is we just design it where
>>>>> fine
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> tuned details like that aren't important
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> like if you can jump it instead of having to get a rope
>>>>> and
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> climb
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> up, who cares!
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> but shrug just wanted to point out this aspect of the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> solution!
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:17 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> I like the idea. It deffinately makes thigns more
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> exploration
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> based since we could put places that you can't get to
>>>>> while
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> starting out
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> This isn't a deal breaker but i want to point out this
>>>>> will
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> increase testing and designing time:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * all maps will have to be played with the highest
>>>>> jump level
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> make sure they cant exploit anything they shouldn't be
>>>>> able
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * all maps will have to played with the lowest jump
>>>>> level to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> make sure the minimum we want passable is passable
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> * for maps which have a specific jump requirement
>>>>> areas (ie
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> level 3 lets you get to this area) we'll have to play
>>>>> with
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> that level as
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> well as the next level down to make sure the one below
>>>>> can't
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> get up too.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 5:11 PM, eric drewes
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> what do you guys think of that scale? that way we
>>>>> dont have
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> guess when we design and we have a baseline standard
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:58 PM, eric drewes
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and a voice spoke from the mountain tops, "and let
>>>>> it be
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> spoken, there shall be 5 different tiers of jumping
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ability, one for hardly
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> any jump at all, the next for between the current
>>>>> jump and
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the previous
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> levels not-really-a-jump, the third is what is
>>>>> there now,
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the fourth for a
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jump equal to 1.5x as high/far as the 3rd and a
>>>>> fifth that
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is triple the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> normal jump - this will be reserved for special
>>>>> facet,
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> item boosts or a max
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 100 quickness bonus.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basically it is like this:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level 1) barely a jump at all, this will be for
>>>>> incredibly
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> fat characters (w/ the fat facet) people with super
>>>>> heavy
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armor that they
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> aren't strong enough to wear, incredibly injured
>>>>> people,
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> people with snake
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> torsos, etc :-P
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level 2) this is what people wearing plate/heavy
>>>>> chain
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> armor,
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> or have relatively strong long injuries, etc. etc.
>>>>> will
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level 3) most characters will have this jump,
>>>>> traps, etc.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> should be designed with this as the minimum -
>>>>> though
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> basically we want it to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> be a challenge for level 3 people. some areas can
>>>>> be
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> designed so it's
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> inaccessible without level 4 though, but nothing
>>>>> vital to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passing the map -
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also, traps/jump areas that aren't accessible
>>>>> except
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> through jumping should
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use level 2 as a minimum.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level 4) super athletic character with light or no
>>>>> armor
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have this, they can reach special areas the other 3
>>>>> levels
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't, jump
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> puzzles should be easier for level 4
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level 5) these characters are magically imbued or
>>>>> have
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> super
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> humanly agility, maybe they have little wings, etc.
>>>>> by
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> passable traps, areas
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that can only be reached via long distance travel,
>>>>> etc
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> these characters have
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a big advantage on all jumping matters.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 7:29 PM, Kent Petersen
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Man, that sounds awful. At least we have learned
>>>>> these
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> lessons and now know how to prevent them
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> btw line rider had the same issues tee hee
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In line rider, people were exploiting a simple
>>>>> physics
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> simulation to do tricks like gravity wells and
>>>>> nose
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> grinds and other stuff.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> when we made the commercial version of the game
>>>>> we had
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> make sure all the tricks were still possible and
>>>>> we
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> brought in tech dawg to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> play it and make sure everything was still
>>>>> kosher.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the parts that sucked - whenever we optomized
>>>>> something
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the game it would break all existing test maps we
>>>>> had
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> made so we had to wait
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> til the very end of the game to make the puzzle
>>>>> maps.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> also, since the DS, Wii and PC all have different
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> floating
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> point math chips in them (and ds had diff code),
>>>>> maps
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't work the same
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> on all the different platforms so we had to keep
>>>>> sharing
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be on the same
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> platform it was created on.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:50 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> its ok man ::shakes you:: the wars over, nixon
>>>>> is outa
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> office now
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:48 PM, Kent Petersen
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Kent is having megaman flashbacks*
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> indeed! I'm going to re-iterate what you said
>>>>> Kent
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> so people understand the importance
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> we should figure out how high / far we want
>>>>> the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> player
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be able to jump and how strong gravity
>>>>> should be
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> muey importante~!
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> once we decide we can't change without having
>>>>> to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rebuild
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and rebalance any existing physics dependant
>>>>> maps (ie
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> skill jumps, gaps that
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the player should or should not be able to
>>>>> jump over
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> etc) which is a total
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> pain and could really be really really
>>>>> destructive to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> our game having to
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rebuild and rebalance a whole bunch of crap
>>>>> later.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, lookin at you Eric, we should talk about
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> finalizing.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is there anything specifically you for sure
>>>>> want the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> player to be able to do? IE jump across a
>>>>> certain
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> distance, jump over a
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> certain hight object etc
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Kent Petersen
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What did you want to do for the first trap? I
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> imagined
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that there would be 5 or so different looking
>>>>> tiles.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then there would be one
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> correct kind of tile (not the diamond). Then
>>>>> the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> player would have to jump
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> about through the tiles to the correct ones.
>>>>> I
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> figured it would work
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> similarly to the ones that were on kenttest.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What's your thoughts on that?
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before you get to into designing the temple I
>>>>> would
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> highly suggest that we nail down player
>>>>> control and
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> jumping physics. Let me
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> warn you from experience, if we change how
>>>>> any of
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that works your temple
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will become obsolete.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:25 PM, Kent
>>>>> Petersen
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Been really busy today and will probably be
>>>>> busy
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> next couple days. I would suggest leaving
>>>>> the trap
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> areas open for now. If
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you are willing to push on anyway and have
>>>>> specific
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> questions, send em my
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> way and I will be happy to help out when I
>>>>> get a
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> chance.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 2:23 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Man that's awesome
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Apache
>>>>> User
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <dhapache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> User:rorac
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Message: Expanded a little on templemap,
>>>>> added
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> template code as per Kent's advisement.
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Need a sign (next room is diamond path).
>>>>> Kent, I
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will need your help to help build that
>>>>> part and
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> begin putting traps in the
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hallway (first right = first trap area).
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <Files Changed>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> U Scripts/Maps/templemap.lua
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A Scripts/Maps/templemap_geometry.lua
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >> ;>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>>
>>>>> >>> >>>
>>>>> >>> >>
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>> >
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Other related posts:
