[project1dev] Re: Project1 - SVN Update 270
- From: Nick Klotz <roracsenshi@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 24 Jun 2009 12:26:34 -0500
"we should make it as simple as possible and i am for simplicity for the
record"
You guys have no idea how true this is. You wouldn't believe the ideas and
systems I had to rethink when coming up with a basic combat design.
On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 12:21 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> no problem :P hehe... yeah if it was an arcade game i would be in total
> agreement that we should make it as simple as possible and i am for
> simplicity for the record - as long as its not at the cost of versatility
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 24, 2009 at 1:15 PM, katie cook <ktmcook@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> My bad E =P I have had no idea really how far/deep you guys were wanting
>> to go (hence me saying I wasn't for sure. I though I caught a while back you
>> guys mentioning launch on XBLA and I just got arcade in my head. Thanks for
>> the clarification E.
>>
>> With my new understanding of the game =), I am on board with all the
>> previously mentioned scenarious on abilities for jumping/armor, etc. Not
>> that I wasn't before, I was just slightly concerned about overthinking
>> simplistics.
>>
>> --- On *Wed, 6/24/09, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>* wrote:
>>
>>
>> From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>> Subject: [project1dev] Re: Project1 - SVN Update 270
>> To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> Date: Wednesday, June 24, 2009, 6:27 AM
>>
>>
>> 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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>>
>>>>>>> >>> From: Chris Riccobono
>>>>>>> >>> <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >>> Subject: [project1dev] Re: Project1 - SVN Update 270
>>>>>>> >>> To:
>>>>>>> >>> project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>>>>>>> >
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> recall
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *Kent is having megaman flashbacks*
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Alan Wolfe
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Man that's awesome
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 2:16 PM, Apache
>>>>>>> User
>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <dhapache@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<http://us.mc361.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=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:
