[project1dev] Re: Use button plan of attack
- From: Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:48:56 -0700
No worries Eric I have placeholder dialogue. Whenever the real dialogue gets
made its real easy to pop in.
I like the current search idea.
So, the old man yells at you when you approach him. The player has no
choice. Then he will talk about how you look. Then he will send you to the
fortune teller. Right?
On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:44 AM, 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:
