[project1dev] Re: Use button plan of attack
- From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 12:46:32 -0400
if they are under the same sonar, then nothing would be hidden! :P
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:44 PM, Matthew Morgan <MMorgan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hmm. But wouldn’t the first cover the second as well then?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *eric drewes
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:43 AM
>
> *To:* project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [project1dev] Re: Use button plan of attack
>
>
>
> i think there will be two sonars, one for ALL interactive stuff, one just
> for hidden stuff, yeah?
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:41 PM, Matthew Morgan <MMorgan@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> Couldn’t you just make it so sonar doesn’t pick up normal use things, but
> picks up the “hidden things” or is that just crazy talk?
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
> project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *eric drewes
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 11, 2009 9:41 AM
>
>
> *To:* project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> *Subject:* [project1dev] Re: Use button plan of attack
>
>
>
> i think the sonar thing is the way to go, and when you're near an
> interactive object it glows or if its hidden, when you press search it
> glows. we'll have to be smart and not place numerous interactive objects so
> close to one another and the radius of it can be perception dependant. this
> works well with the avarice perk and maybe we can have a ttreasure hunting
> perk as well as maybe some sort of trap identifing perk? i dunno, skies the
> limits!
>
>
>
> telekenisis was a very very early system but i dunno if it even works with
> the game as it is now... maybe we just nix it.
>
>
>
> as far as the old man goes, i was thinking if you got near the old man (in
> a pretty wide radius so you couldnt get past him without talking to him) it
> would start the dialogue.
>
>
>
> i know i need to write that stuff out, sorry work is killin me... i will
> try to get to it tonight so you can start.
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I don't think Eric has ever layed out his telekenis plans. Have they been
> fleshed out yet or is it more of an idea still?
>
> I was saying I liked the sonar bubble being a skill that detected nearby
> stuff. There could be range variations as well as how well it detects
> variations.
>
> Question for Eric: In the milestone 2 description you mention the oldman
> calling out to the player and telling them they dont have a body. Thus the
> player talks to the oldman and forms his body. Now do you want the old man
> to yell out to the player or do you want the player to walk up to the old
> man and speak to him or both?
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 8:40 AM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> i dont mean to be contradictory but i think it doesnt work too well with
> the telekenesis idea, I think we'll have to do something seperate for that
> if we want it.
>
> Reason being, this system can be used for talking to people, reading
> plaques on walls, activating lifts, and anything else where the player hits
> the use button to make something happen.
>
> For some of those things like opening a treasure chest telekenesis makes
> sense but for talking to someone from a distance or activating an elevator
> platform that we want the player to be standing on, telekenesis seems like
> something we wouldn't want.
>
> shrug
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 5:19 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> the thing with alan's idea is it works hand in hand w/ our idea for
> telekenisis, i.e. people w/ mental powers could have a longer rope... i
> dunno though, it seems a little unwieldy though having to directly control
> it... i think we'd have to see it in practice.
>
>
>
> a side option to keep in the back of our minds if that doesn't seem easy to
> use would be, we could have a search button that uses the same radius as the
> interact, and when you search a place and there's a hidden interactive piece
> near you, THEN you'd get the interact button.
>
>
>
> I don't know
>
> On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 1:04 AM, Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Both seems like a fine idea.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> i actually kinda dig that idea cause we get the user friendlyness of the
> pop up bubbles, while also still bein able to do secret stuff
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 8:58 PM, Nick Klotz <roracsenshi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> I would say yes. Hidden interactables such as finding a secret passage way,
> pulling a hidden lever, etc, could easily be made to line up with the body.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:56 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
> It seems like it might be weird cause think about this...
>
> #1) you walk around and periodically a message pops up that says "Press A
> to read the book" without you even looking at the book
> #2) Othertimes you look at stuff and press A and it interacts.
>
> ok actually that doesn't seem that weird :P
>
> if we went that way, would the single ray from the middle be enough? we
> are at the origional question again hehe
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 8:51 PM, Nick Klotz <roracsenshi@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hidden interactables such as pushing a statue or bookshelf could make use
> of the ray originating from the center of the body like you said.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> That's a good idea.
>
> The only downside i can think of is if multiple items are in range, we can
> make it pick the closer one easily but if we have a lot of them in range it
> might be hard to pick the one you want (although we also have control over
> this so if you are ok with it it's not an issue).
>
> Oh and another possible downside is we wouldn't be able to have hidden
> objects to interact with cause every interaction would pop up that message.
> Like if you interact with a statue it opens a passage way or something, it
> would be real obvious. what do you think about that?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 8:43 PM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> what if we just have objects that are usable/pickupable have a radius and
> if you are in the radius a little button pops up that you can press, seems
> easier from a player standpoint but maybe there are downsides?
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 11:25 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Ok so in 2d RPG's it's easy to tell what the player is intending to do when
> they press the use button because the world is just one later and everything
> is broken up into a grid.
>
> In our game, since it's real 3d, we could have items like a book on the
> ground, or a floating orb, or a book case that the player is trying to use.
>
> Also, we could have multiple floors of map (like in cavemap how we have the
> bridge over the boss area).
>
> so that makes things harder. Here's what i was thinking for finding out
> what the user wants to interact with.
>
> 1) User presses the "use" key (enter on the keyboard, A on the controller,
> whatever)
> 2) The game shoots an imaginary ray out of the player that originates in
> the middle of their body (ie bellybutton-ish) and goes the direction they
> are facing for about a foot of distance
> 3) If that ray hit an object, that's the object they are trying to interact
> with.
>
> There could be a problem if there was a book on the ground the player
> wanted to "use" since our ray starting at the middle of the body wouldn't
> hit the book.
>
> There could also be a problem if something was floating above the middle of
> the body, or if there was a hole in the object that the ray shot through
> hehe...
>
> but, since we have control over where objects are placed we could just be
> careful and make sure these cases never came up.
>
> what do you guys think, think that'd work ok?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
> *******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
>
> This e-mail is the property of Oakley Inc. It is intended only for the
> person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that
> is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure.
> Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein,
> to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
>
>
>
Other related posts:
