[project1dev] Re: Project1 - SVN Update 270
- From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:34:41 -0400
ok and just another note... like nick and kent both said "we would give up
using heavy armor for the extra speed and manueverability" well yeah-
exactly, that is the point :) i want you to be able to make that decision on
your own and not have it thrust upon you. I would make the same decision!
having those kinds of options for customization is a major part of the
design philosophy.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:29 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> well the jump differences i gave were just examples that could be tweaked,
> i.e. the athletic jump could be 2x or 3x whatever we decided to give them
> over the normal.
>
> heavier armor -
>
> well let me start by saying the design is meant to keep most people from
> using heavier armor, if you're exploring, you shouldnt be wearing full plate
> or heavy chain armor, it is unrealistic. I am a fan of medium and light
> armors being the de facto standard but giving people who WANT heavy armor to
> use it if they desire.
>
> Heavy armor would absorb damage from attacks, the main advantage to heavy
> armor being that it protects better in combat. People can decide whether to
> trade manueverability for the extra protection if they want, or maybe they
> just wear heavy armor when going up against a particular boss or maybe
> before going into a big battle with multiple foes and the extra protection
> is worth the loss in dodging, etc.. basically, heavy armor is a special
> case scenario and not something most characters will want to wear most of
> the time, especially in exploration. The design is meant to LEAD people to
> discover this on their own, so we're not forcing them to not wear heavy
> armor all the time but we're making it beneficial for them not to.
>
> as far as removing armor, going through a trap, then putting it back on...
> well like i said, i don't encourage players to use heavy armor during
> exploration, if they want to go that route they can, but no one is forcing
> them to.
>
> Also remember that heavier armor could be something you'd equip to party
> members rather than the hero if you wanted a pure tank in your group, and
> that would not affect manuevering.
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I was thinking there should be another tier for exploration's sake. In
>> your example you mentioned athletic being 1.5x jump and magical being 3.0x
>> jump. I was thinking there should be a middle ground to create more levels
>> of advanced areas you can reach. If we design the game properly this can be
>> avoided and not an issue.
>>
>> Heavier armor - What about out running enemies? In the cave our enemies
>> chase down the player. If the player is wearing heavier armor he is just
>> kinda fucked by comparison to someone wearing lighter armor and is better at
>> avoiding enemies. A trade off would be taking less damage in combat but the
>> player will most likely fight slower as well.
>>
>> What are the pros and cons to heavier armor?
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 9:15 AM, Nick Klotz <roracsenshi@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>
>>> Are there over-world benefits for wearing heavier? Such as resistance to
>>> different traps? If no, what's to say a player won't remove armor for doing
>>> maneuvers, then putting it back on to fight an enemy; such a case could get
>>> tedious fairly quickly.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 11:10 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>> just a quick clarification:
>>>>
>>>> 1) can't jump - only used to penalize people who wear armor they aren't
>>>> strong enough for or for certain other special case scenarios
>>>>
>>>> 2) small jumping ability, used for injured players and players using
>>>> plate armor
>>>>
>>>> 3) normal - the baseline we design for
>>>>
>>>> 4) extra-ordinary - this is for super athletic characters (or maybe
>>>> special boots) that let you jump extra far, gives access to some special
>>>> areas.
>>>>
>>>> 5) magically imbued - this is very rare special case scenario, i
>>>> actually think this one is possibly superfluous and could probably be
>>>> eliminated without losing much.
>>>>
>>>> the reasons for this is that people can understand their capabilities
>>>> and limitations easily, there's less variables for them to understand and
>>>> for us to design for, while still allowing a versatile system that benefits
>>>> players who go with lighter armor or find special items that let them jump
>>>> farther, etc. etc.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:06 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> "I like Eric's system but I feel like there should be more than 5
>>>>> tiers. I was writing out a big counter point but in the end I convinced
>>>>> myself that I like this method best. I think there should be a tier
>>>>> between
>>>>> 4 and 5. A tier where the player is better than most but not magically
>>>>> imbued."
>>>>>
>>>>> well that was sort of the purpose for tier 4, to give something between
>>>>> a normal person and someone who is magically imbued. that way there's a
>>>>> clear distinction between normal and extraordinarily athletic
>>>>> characters...
>>>>> i personally think adding another tier between the two is ok but it
>>>>> creates
>>>>> another segment to design places for and i am not sure having 2 better
>>>>> than
>>>>> normal tiers is good bang for the buck... maybe some hypothetical examples
>>>>> would help clear up the issue?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:00 PM, Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I like Eric's system but I feel like there should be more than 5
>>>>>> tiers. I was writing out a big counter point but in the end I convinced
>>>>>> myself that I like this method best. I think there should be a tier
>>>>>> between
>>>>>> 4 and 5. A tier where the player is better than most but not magically
>>>>>> imbued.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> With the lax attitude of letting the player go where they want we can
>>>>>> design difficult to access dungeons to require a reoccurring use of
>>>>>> whatever
>>>>>> skill is needed. For example if you need level 5 jump to access a secret
>>>>>> dungeon then the secret dungeon should have parts in it that require the
>>>>>> level 5 jump. That way if a player does get in there they will not be
>>>>>> able
>>>>>> to finish it. If they somehow find a way to exploit the system we could
>>>>>> reward them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't see any major problems with having multiple jump levels.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:21 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Jumping is a stat based on quickness, facets, skills, armor,
>>>>>>> injuries, and special scenario items/boosts/uses. As the player went
>>>>>>> along
>>>>>>> in the game, increased their stats, got facets, etc; their ability to
>>>>>>> jump
>>>>>>> would increase marginally rather than "look I suddenly jump higher". An
>>>>>>> analog system would allow for extreme versatility without having to
>>>>>>> measure
>>>>>>> out specific jump levels. Getting injuries could slow you down in
>>>>>>> minor/major degrees, rather than "will this injury drop me down a jump
>>>>>>> level?" same goes for armor."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> the problem with this is... there's no clear tier for us to design
>>>>>>> for, which means we're aiming at a moving target and there's no clear
>>>>>>> "minimum" to design for, etc. All the problems chris brought up are
>>>>>>> magnified 10x when there's no tier system. I actually picked the tier
>>>>>>> system as a bridge between 1 jump level and a purely analogue system
>>>>>>> for the
>>>>>>> reasons i mentioned above.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 10:35 AM, Nick Klotz
>>>>>>> <roracsenshi@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I like to mix things up a little, but try to keep an open mind here!
>>>>>>>> No levels of jumping! That's right, none. You can jump, that's it.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jumping is a stat based on quickness, facets, skills, armor,
>>>>>>>> injuries, and special scenario items/boosts/uses. As the player went
>>>>>>>> along
>>>>>>>> in the game, increased their stats, got facets, etc; their ability to
>>>>>>>> jump
>>>>>>>> would increase marginally rather than "look I suddenly jump higher".
>>>>>>>> An
>>>>>>>> analog system would allow for extreme versatility without having to
>>>>>>>> measure
>>>>>>>> out specific jump levels. Getting injuries could slow you down in
>>>>>>>> minor/major degrees, rather than "will this injury drop me down a jump
>>>>>>>> level?" same goes for armor.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Re: Redux. Yeah, back in Gemstone3 I was a master of the system and
>>>>>>>> for my level was point-by-point the toughest warrior in the game.
>>>>>>>> Gemstone4
>>>>>>>> changed the system and it became to fuzzy to learn (nobody would
>>>>>>>> release the
>>>>>>>> exact system either), and I wasn't about to test warriors from 0 to 30
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> another year to try and figure it out. :\
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 8:27 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 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:
