[project1dev] Re: We have a QA department yay!

  • From: Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 22:09:01 -0700

yeah it'll be good cause we can use any web server as our server, we don't
have to write crazy server code, and integration with our website is a
breeze.

That's how i set it up w/ line rider and it worked really well (:

you could upload / download maps and share content from the wii, DS or PC
version straight to the website from inside the game.

On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 10:02 PM, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> That sounds like the way to go, for sure.
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:59 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > well i was thinking more like we'd still have a central server that is
> the
> > authority, but that the games would talk to it as little as possible.
> >
> > it'd just be a php script hooked up to a database and is where the
> important
> > info is stored.
> >
> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:54 PM, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> That's a good point.  A lot of games will support only locally created
> >> servers which players must connect to (I serve, you join)
> >>
> >> We could try something like that and then just serve the host list,
> >> like fps games do.
> >>
> >> Maintaining something like say, battle.net is only for the big devs
> >> that already have a massive fan base, and for games that are designed
> >> to be mp over sp.
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:47 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
> >> > The plan is either to sell the game on the web or to see if we can
> find
> >> > someone who wants to buy it and publish it so we don't need to have
> >> > people
> >> > make donations or do micro sale stuff.
> >> >
> >> > Since KOL is a game w/ a server they probly need the donations to keep
> >> > themselves alive!
> >> >
> >> > For our multiplayer stuff we want to keep the traffic to the server as
> >> > minimal as possible.
> >> >
> >> > We have ideas for future games that will need servers and some kind of
> >> > way
> >> > to pay for the bandwidth, but that wont be for a while for sure (like
> >> > multiple games before we do anything like that i think)
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:42 PM, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Achievements is a great way to go, for sure.  We could even add tiny
> >> >> bonuses (seriously, tiny ones, so that people don't feel a need to
> get
> >> >> them) - I think WoW does this as a perk system?  Hellgate was also
> >> >> doing this.
> >> >>
> >> >> Special items are also good - a lot of small companies make it so
> >> >> donators can pay and get some of these.  I have observed that players
> >> >> in general are accepting of this if done correctly.  For example, if
> >> >> the game is free from an unknown startup, if the items aren't
> >> >> overpowered to the point that people feel a need to have them, if you
> >> >> can trade these items within the game with the game currency, and if
> >> >> you only have limited runs of each item - all of these seem to work.
> >> >>
> >> >> Kingdom of Loathing is one of the most successful free web games that
> >> >> is completely driven by profits gained from purchased items.  A lot
> of
> >> >> Korean games do this too.. Maple Story is the biggest I believe?
> >> >>
> >> >> What do you think of this?  Should we just focus on the free game
> >> >> being high quality, and have that draw in players, and then maybe
> >> >> later we add features for donators?
> >> >>
> >> >> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:27 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> > yeah i guess it would be better if we limited mltiplayer to
> >> >> > minigames,
> >> >> > seems
> >> >> > like what everyone is kinda agreein on.  Pretty kewl stuff though,
> it
> >> >> > should
> >> >> > be rad bein able to have some multiplayer (:
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Since our game isnt gonna have a huge userbase, we'll have to make
> >> >> > the
> >> >> > minigames fun on their own (obviously) but also make a reason for
> >> >> > people
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > keep playing them.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Like acheivements, special items, some kind of leader board on the
> >> >> > website,
> >> >> > etc.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > That will make it so there are more likely people to be "grinding"
> in
> >> >> > these
> >> >> > minigames i guess, which will make multiplayer easier to happen.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > we might have to do something too like if you want to play game X
> >> >> > with
> >> >> > real
> >> >> > people, that you can join a queue or something and get auto matched
> >> >> > based on
> >> >> > skill or something like that.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I dont expect us to have a ton of players playing this game so
> we'll
> >> >> > have to
> >> >> > make sure it's easy for people to find other people in the
> >> >> > multiplayer
> >> >> > stuff
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:22 PM, Chris Riccobono <
> crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I totally forgot about the rep points too.. that almost completely
> >> >> >> rules out multiplayer for story parts.  This isn't bad though,
> >> >> >> because
> >> >> >> single player games shine in those areas.  There isn't a mp game
> in
> >> >> >> existence that does the best of both worlds.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Yeah, I am glad you picked up on my strengths Alan - this is what
> I
> >> >> >> have more experience with anyways.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 9:01 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> > I've heard whispers in the wind about some difficulty settings /
> >> >> >> > options
> >> >> >> > (;
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > i think we'll wanna get like 2 or 3 full on testers to help you
> >> >> >> > out
> >> >> >> > as
> >> >> >> > we
> >> >> >> > ramp up more.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > What i think will be hard about testing this game is if we have
> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> > rep
> >> >> >> > system where your actions change things in the game, it will be
> >> >> >> > really
> >> >> >> > hard
> >> >> >> > to test out all the combinations :P
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > But you are 100% right... with good documentation and other such
> >> >> >> > organization it should make it alot easier for everyone and make
> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > game a
> >> >> >> > lot better in the end.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > I knew you'd be good at this stuff! (:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:57 PM, Chris Riccobono
> >> >> >> > <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I laughed muchily at the cons :P
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I am thinking testing this game won't be as tough as it could
> be,
> >> >> >> >> because you document things very well Alan.  Part of testing is
> >> >> >> >> knowing what is possible in the game, and that is not an issue
> >> >> >> >> here.
> >> >> >> >> But that is not to say it won't be a challenge.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> You also need to think like 3 different types of players -
> >> >> >> >> casuals,
> >> >> >> >> normals, and experts.  Casuals and normals are pretty similar,
> >> >> >> >> except
> >> >> >> >> only casuals will blow all their gold on items and use them a
> ton
> >> >> >> >> while normals think they're too good for that.  Experts will do
> >> >> >> >> stuff
> >> >> >> >> like go through the game using the weakest gear possible with
> >> >> >> >> only
> >> >> >> >> one
> >> >> >> >> character...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Speaking of this, do we plan on adding difficulty settings to
> >> >> >> >> this
> >> >> >> >> game?
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Anyway, for the more mundane stuff of testing (such as making
> >> >> >> >> sure
> >> >> >> >> you
> >> >> >> >> can't jump through any texture seams into infinity, collision
> >> >> >> >> with
> >> >> >> >> enemies and props, making sure the game doesn't crash when
> >> >> >> >> infrequently used models are present) I am going to post
> >> >> >> >> guidelines,
> >> >> >> >> and if anyone on the team is willing to help, it will be easy
> for
> >> >> >> >> them
> >> >> >> >> to pitch in.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> You also need to document what you test very thoroughly (I will
> >> >> >> >> also
> >> >> >> >> post about this), and communication is a biggie.
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> I'm really glad to help in this area!
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 8:43 AM, Alan Wolfe <
> alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
> >> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >> >> >> > Ok so our game is getting to the point already where having
> >> >> >> >> > some
> >> >> >> >> > QA
> >> >> >> >> > would
> >> >> >> >> > help.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > In game dev, much like the government, the different
> >> >> >> >> > departments
> >> >> >> >> > act
> >> >> >> >> > kind of
> >> >> >> >> > like a balance of power.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Here's a tongue in cheek caricature of the different
> >> >> >> >> > departments
> >> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> > how
> >> >> >> >> > they work together hehehe
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Design:
> >> >> >> >> > Pros - makes the game BE AWESOME!
> >> >> >> >> > Cons - asks for impossible things on a whim then changes
> their
> >> >> >> >> > mind
> >> >> >> >> > when
> >> >> >> >> > they see them.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Art:
> >> >> >> >> > Pros - makes the game LOOK AWESOME!
> >> >> >> >> > Cons - uses up all your RAM budget and CPU time on a single,
> >> >> >> >> > perfectly
> >> >> >> >> > awesome, uber poly count animated model.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > Coding:
> >> >> >> >> > Pros - makes stuff work
> >> >> >> >> > Cons - makes stuff NOT work, tells you everything is
> >> >> >> >> > impossible,
> >> >> >> >> > and
> >> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> > your art takes too much memory and CPU time (hahahah)
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > QA:
> >> >> >> >> > Pros - Ensures that crazy special cases have been thought of,
> >> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> > nothing
> >> >> >> >> > is broken, and that things make sense to players who have
> never
> >> >> >> >> > seen
> >> >> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> >> > game before.
> >> >> >> >> > Cons - wants to do designs job for them
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > (Kent you as a scripter live in 2 worlds, both in coding and
> >> >> >> >> > design
> >> >> >> >> > hehe)
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > LOL ok so now that I've offended everyone I'd like to
> announce
> >> >> >> >> > that
> >> >> >> >> > Chris R
> >> >> >> >> > is going to be our Head of QA! (:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > YAY!
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > We'll probably be grabbing i think like 2 or 3 more testers
> as
> >> >> >> >> > time
> >> >> >> >> > goes
> >> >> >> >> > on
> >> >> >> >> > and he'll be coordinating their efforts to make sure our game
> >> >> >> >> > isn't
> >> >> >> >> > buggy
> >> >> >> >> > etc.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > It's going to be a rough task for this kind of a game but I'm
> >> >> >> >> > glad
> >> >> >> >> > he's
> >> >> >> >> > up
> >> >> >> >> > to it.
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> > You rock Chris thanks for taking this on! (:
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
>
>

Other related posts: