Indie Game Development Discussion Thread | Of Being Professionally Poor

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hey Everyone,

I've been working on a game with a friend of mine as Pandaknifetree. We hadn't been intending to go public just yet but we were randomly featured on RPS yesterday (Which is amazing! Someone liked our little techy preview site!).

image_1.jpg


I just thought I'd paste a little about our game here too and see what you think

image_3.jpg


there's also a little gameplay video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IOh3jBgHMg

Our game is massively multi-player in the open world sense. We also have instances to allow players to take part in boss encounters and such for specific player counts.

Anyway I hope you like our game!

P.S. Ultimate party is a working title. We'll be changing the name once the story is a bit more complete!
 
That looks really nice and I like that the combat seems to have a really nice flow. Controls are always a difficult thing to get right though so I can't say if it feels right yet. For me the best example of getting it just right it Titan Quest and then games like Sacred 2 I think really had issues with controls and combat flow.

Have you guys watched the GDC Talk about refining Diablo III? There are some really good tips when it comes to animation, skill design and health so I definitely recommend checking it out if you haven't yet.
 
Hey thanks for your comments _machine

_machine said:
Controls are always a difficult thing to get right though so I can't say if it feels right yet.
Click to expand...

bcbo.gif


there's a gif of a slightly longer section of combat so you can see a couple of the mechanics.

For the warrior specifically the controls are loosely based around an action game. The left and right mouse button cause the character to perform different combos and moves based on timing and order. For example:

Left, Left, Left - Pause - Left -> spinning whirlwind

All characters also have a dodge which interrupts any attacks and is triggered with control at the moment, it has a cool-down to prevent it being constantly spammed and i imagine we'll end up with some skill tree style unlocks to reduce this.

we also have 3 number slots (you can probably see them on the bottom right of the screenshot) which are used for instant cast abilities which are a bit more similar to the diablo franchise

Our other character (the gunner) is based around an FPS character. You can place 3 different guns in the slots on the bottom right then switch between them with the number keys. Different guns have different primary and secondary fire attacks so for example you can combine a shotgun with a *cough* railgun and rocket launcher *cough*.

_machine said:
Have you guys watched the GDC Talk about refining Diablo III?
Click to expand...
I'll definitely check that out as I've not seen it yet. Thanks for the heads up!
 
PandaKnifeTree said:
Hey Everyone,

[...]

there's also a little gameplay video here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IOh3jBgHMg

[...]
Click to expand...

I'm loath to complain, since I really like most of what I'm seeing, but a couple of things stick out to me in a bad way.

Wr0NQ29.jpg


Isolated, the above looks fine, but in connection with the rest of the game the color palette seems off. It feels more like a Mexican fiesta than a Renaissance marketplace. The blue and pink dyes are probably the main reason for this, as well as the triangular pennants. Most medieval pennants were shield or swallowtail shaped. I don't have full context, so maybe this works better than I'm imagining in-game. It just jumped out at me in the video.

cmcmEOL.png


These red outlines should be replaced by something else. They really break the art style for me.

FOG6BoR.jpg


This guy's color feels far too saturated. It looks like a cheap effect used to show that he's poisoned.


The reason I'm being nit-picky is because I love the aesthetic you have going here, but a few small issues throughout is enough to make something feel cheap and unpolished.

The gameplay looks pretty fun. I'm definitely interested in following this game's development. Hopefully I've been helpful! :)
 
PandaKnifeTree said:
Hey thanks for your comments _machine



bcbo.gif


there's a gif of a slightly longer section of combat so you can see a couple of the mechanics.

For the warrior specifically the controls are loosely based around an action game. The left and right mouse button cause the character to perform different combos and moves based on timing and order. For example:

Left, Left, Left - Pause - Left -> spinning whirlwind

All characters also have a dodge which interrupts any attacks and is triggered with control at the moment, it has a cool-down to prevent it being constantly spammed and i imagine we'll end up with some skill tree style unlocks to reduce this.

we also have 3 number slots (you can probably see them on the bottom right of the screenshot) which are used for instant cast abilities which are a bit more similar to the diablo franchise

Our other character (the gunner) is based around an FPS character. You can place 3 different guns in the slots on the bottom right then switch between them with the number keys. Different guns have different primary and secondary fire attacks so for example you can combine a shotgun with a *cough* railgun and rocket launcher *cough*.


I'll definitely check that out as I've not seen it yet. Thanks for the heads up!
Click to expand...

Will this game support gamepad controls? Please say yes.
 
Started work on the planet lander / rover. Just the drop sequence so far.

UI isn't in yet, but there will be an altitude indication on the side and you use thrusters to slow decent. Depending on planet gravity it will be easy/hard to have a soft landing. For those who are not sure where I'm going with this, the genesis port of starflight had my favorite planet roving. It will be similar... but a mix of it and some other ideas I'm kicking around.

Opinions?

(note: camera shake didn't gif well youtube link)
PeriodicGrandChamois.gif
 
Watched the YouTube link. For the first half, I was convinced I was seeing a version of this optical illusion where there's the perception of perpetual motion but in actuality nothing is achieved.

mVHtBon.gif


Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it supposed to be the main craft is descending very rapidly, then suddenly halts and drops off the lander? I had to watch it three or four times first to understand as much.

I think something that would help would be if there was some translation of the surface as well, so it looked like you were descending near parallel instead of vertically.

Also, why is the dust cloud black? Lastly, I think the dust cloud erupts just a bit too early. It starts before the lander hits the ground, which is technically correct, but then the distribution should follow the inverse square law so more must is disturbed the closer the lander is to contact. Most of the dust has already settled by the time the lander stops falling.
 
definately is a work in progress. i noticed the glitch that makes it look like two ships (its only one). the redhot glow particles pop behind the ship during the transition to to final part of the landing. ill be making quite a few tweaks tomorrow. thx for the feedback though, helps to get new eyes on ot after staring too long.
 
Left handed guns FTW. Funny though, I havent yet finished the projectiles / bullets, so it just looks like you are throwing the bullets at things lol.

tFRscL7.png
 
Ok its been awhile I posted. I don't know if some of you remember or has been following the screenshots I have been posting here but still, I'll always keep my fellow gaffers and dev-gaffers posted on what's going on with my game.

Short reminder, its a short retro 2D metroidvania, more focused on exploration (like Knytt series) but well, there's still combat.

99% of my coding is done except for some mobs so I did some more graphics lately and transitioning from pure coding to level design is pretty cool. This is screenshot from a mountain village. I started making NPCs this week. Along with intelligent text boxes that never overlaps the player. The NPCs can move around, stop, turn, etc.

npcs_zps21215a5b.png


Once the village is done, its going to be time to code the rest of my needed mobs.
 
Platformer fanatics, do you like preservation of momentum when you jump? Right now, in the following scenario, the player has to hold right in the air to match the movement speed of the platform. Would it be better if jumping straight up retained the momentum so little or no directional input was required?

CHQCKzU.gif
 
Ranger X said:
Personally I prefer the "preserve". Not only its fun but it might open up more gameplay possibilities/uses for you too.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm leaning towards right now, but I need to work out the nuances. The game doesn't lend itself well to preservation of momentum because the controls are very tight, but I think I've discovered a suitable workaround. I turn off the friction at the jump instant and ramp it back up over the next second or so. I'll play around with it and continue testing to see what feels best.
 
friken said:
Started work on the planet lander / rover. Just the drop sequence so far.

UI isn't in yet, but there will be an altitude indication on the side and you use thrusters to slow decent. Depending on planet gravity it will be easy/hard to have a soft landing. For those who are not sure where I'm going with this, the genesis port of starflight had my favorite planet roving. It will be similar... but a mix of it and some other ideas I'm kicking around.

Opinions?

(note: camera shake didn't gif well youtube link)
PeriodicGrandChamois.gif
Click to expand...

Are you planning to do something like Starflight? ,that would be funny, my game is inspired on starflight, plus many more games including dwarf fortress :) , but I am not going to allow my main ship to land on planets, instead shuttle pods will have to land since my ships are for interestellar travels only, not planetary landing yet.

I was thinking you were trying to do something like Start Control.
 
Abe Bly said:
Platformer fanatics, do you like preservation of momentum when you jump? Right now, in the following scenario, the player has to hold right in the air to match the movement speed of the platform. Would it be better if jumping straight up retained the momentum so little or no directional input was required?

http://i.imgur.com/CHQCKzU.gif
Click to expand...

Is the camera alwas following the pc? I personally tend to prefer a lose following and not a hard one like in that gif.
 
Mystic River said:
Are you planning to do something like Starflight? ,that would be funny, my game is inspired on starflight, plus many more games including dwarf fortress :) , but I am not going to allow my main ship to land on planets, instead shuttle pods will have to land since my ships are for interestellar travels only, not planetary landing yet.

I was thinking you were trying to do something like Start Control.
Click to expand...


for planet landing, i guess Im after a bit of a hybrid between starflight, star control, and sundog. You wont be able to send your main ship, the one in the video is the dropship. instead of a rover like starflight, once landed you can send out crew who will be automated explorers and stay within a radius of the dropship. your gameplay will be trying to keep them alive and dropship undamaged while your they scan for minerals, biologic data, and any special storyline things like artifacts, tech, civilizations etc.

starcontrol, i think the lander minigame was a bit shallow compared to starflight, especially the genesis version which was quite different than the pc version. but starcon did a great job keeping the rover feeling arcade-ish in movement and interaction.
 
friken said:
for planet landing, i guess Im after a bit of a hybrid between starflight, star control, and sundog. You wont be able to send your main ship, the one in the video is the dropship. instead of a rover like starflight, once landed you can send out crew who will be automated explorers and stay within a radius of the dropship. your gameplay will be trying to keep them alive and dropship undamaged while your they scan for minerals, biologic data, and any special storyline things like artifacts, tech, civilizations etc.

starcontrol, i think the lander minigame was a bit shallow compared to starflight, especially the genesis version which was quite different than the pc version. but starcon did a great job keeping the rover feeling arcade-ish in movement and interaction.
Click to expand...

nice! well one of the things that bothered me when playing starflight was the mining :p it was kind of boring and grinding after some time but exploring was more interesting, that's why I won't have mining like that , I felt also that mining in Mass Effect was boring and grinding. I loved Sundog! it was amazing when I played it on Atari ST and still I think is amazing but saddly the resurrection project is still running very slow
 
Abe Bly said:
Platformer fanatics, do you like preservation of momentum when you jump? Right now, in the following scenario, the player has to hold right in the air to match the movement speed of the platform. Would it be better if jumping straight up retained the momentum so little or no directional input was required?
Click to expand...

My vote is to either not preserve at all, or only "carry over" a slight bit of the momentum from the platform, with the momentum carried over tapering off within a few frames, just for slightly more realistic physics.

I'd like to be able to jump straight up as a way to get off the platform (as it moves out from under me) if I want without having to do a hard left jump.

Also, what if I DO jump right? If it preserves momentum, than logically I should jump further than the platform moves, which I would find quite frustrating, or if it didn't, then you have jumping right and jumping straight up both doing the same thing, which means less options for the player, and thus less ways for you to take advantage of those options in the level layouts.
 
Abe Bly said:
Platformer fanatics, do you like preservation of momentum when you jump?
Click to expand...

How much air control do you have is sort of the companion question to this - if there is no preservation, from a standing jump directly upwards, if you can easily land on a moving platform solely via air control from the apex of the jump, then preservation isn't needed.
 
Hi Indie Gaf while I'm not really ready to talk about what I'm working over the last few months of graduating and working on my own projects I've ran into some problems that I was hoping you could give me some advice on. As someone who is primarily focused on art and level design I used Playmaker to handle my coding needs but now I feel limited so was wondering if you could recommend what are good books on learning C# and using optimizing in Unity. Another concern I have is keeping the rest of my team motivated and was wondering how you guys keep yourselves focused. I really look forward to being able to show off what I'm doing a talk about it daily with everyone here.
 
since pretty much no one
(apart from Dani - thanks, man ... you're awesome :P)
bothered to notice my post before I'm just gonna post it again ;)

---

well - here's a small prototype I'm currently working on :) feel free to give it a try and let me know what you think (be gentle, please :P)

 
Abe Bly said:
Platformer fanatics, do you like preservation of momentum when you jump? Right now, in the following scenario, the player has to hold right in the air to match the movement speed of the platform. Would it be better if jumping straight up retained the momentum so little or no directional input was required?
Click to expand...
This is a difficult question to answer without having tried it myself. A lot of your question boils down to what "feels" right when you're playing it, but it seems like you have a pretty good handle on what "feels" good when you're controlling the player.

My advice would be:

1. Air friction should be a little bit less when jumping, so the player has some extra control over where they're landing.

2. Depending on the game type, having alternate jump heights for holding and tapping the button generally feel better. You know the type: tap for a short jump, hold of a longer/higher jump. This one depends entirely on how "cartoony" or "gamey" you want the game to feel, so it may not be applicable.

3. Momentum preservation is fine, as long as it makes sense. Generally speaking, I would base it off of player movement, not world movement. This means that if you're on a moving platform and jump, you don't get momentum from the platform. However, if you were on a moving platform and the player was moving, you get momentum from the player's movement. Essentially, tie momentum to input, not realistic physics, since that generally feels better for the player since they have more control. EDIT:
MrNyarlathotep said:
How much air control do you have is sort of the companion question to this - if there is no preservation, from a standing jump directly upwards, if you can easily land on a moving platform solely via air control from the apex of the jump, then preservation isn't needed.
Click to expand...
This is a good point too. Preservation would also tie in to air friction, I would think.

My advice is probably a lot of "duh, I knew that" so if you already have a handle on it, feel free to ignore me. :) I'm much more used to explaining things to people who don't have a handle on things, so I often end up explaining to the lowest common denominator. :P

lashman said:
since pretty much no one
(apart from Dani - thanks, man ... you're awesome :P)
bothered to notice my post before I'm just gonna post it again ;)
Click to expand...
Hey, I gave you feedback...
It wasn't in the thread, but I still gave you feedback. ;)
 
Mystic River said:
nice! well one of the things that bothered me when playing starflight was the mining :p it was kind of boring and grinding after some time but exploring was more interesting, that's why I won't have mining like that , I felt also that mining in Mass Effect was boring and grinding. I loved Sundog! it was amazing when I played it on Atari ST and still I think is amazing but saddly the resurrection project is still running very slow
Click to expand...

I think mining in general for space games is a polarizing mechanic. Some gamers love it and can do it for ages while others find it tedious and terrible that it exists in the first place.

Mining in starflight was terrible on the pc version (imo) and pretty fun on the genesis ver. Starcontrol was fun but very shallow. Resource building will be needed in our game, but we plan on offering a handful of methods to achieve it. scrapping ship remains after battle, mining, asteroids, skimming gas giants, a few gambling sort of options tied to story etc. Hopefully we can make mining fun for a lot of gamer types and for those that hate the idea of it give them an alternate method of getting resources that they do find enjoyable.

I really like what you are doing w junkcraft -- so many different gameplay things to do in space games. Having crew and on-ship gameplay is a lot of fun. There was a really old, not-so well known game called Universe2 by Omnitrend that had a really fun ship to ship boarding game. Of course this was really early dos days and it had very very minimal graphics but your newest screenshots remind me of it. In Universe2 you had to hire all crew and they had training levels for their job. There were three shifts a day and you either had to have three crew per post of pay money to "astrogate" the crewmember so they didn't require sleep :)

So many good ideas to pull from the old classics.
 
Abe Bly said:
Watched the YouTube link. For the first half, I was convinced I was seeing a version of this optical illusion where there's the perception of perpetual motion but in actuality nothing is achieved.

mVHtBon.gif


Correct me if I'm wrong, but is it supposed to be the main craft is descending very rapidly, then suddenly halts and drops off the lander?
Click to expand...

I've cleaned up the sequence a bit. See if this helps remove the perpetual motion illusion and is obvious that there is only ever a single ship descending to the surface.

InferiorShockedCaterpillar.gif


and youtube link

still on todo for cleanup/polishing of the drop sequence:
- dust particles start small and get bigger the closer the ship is to ground
- lerp the camera during the follow down transition to when camera stops for final landing
- ui altitude inticator so player knows how fast/hard they are going to hit if they don't arrest the decent w thrust.
 
Long post. Sorry.

Jobbs said:
I think I sent keys to all my neogaf PMs. if I missed you let me know.
Click to expand...

Got mine! I'm very excited to try it out after I finish writing this here essay.


friken said:
I've cleaned up the sequence a bit. See if this helps remove the perpetual motion illusion and is obvious that there is only ever a single ship descending to the surface.

[/IMG]http://giant.gfycat.com/InferiorShockedCaterpillar.gif[/IMG]

and youtube link

still on todo for cleanup/polishing of the drop sequence:
- dust particles start small and get bigger the closer the ship is to ground
- lerp the camera during the follow down transition to when camera stops for final landing
- ui altitude inticator so player knows how fast/hard they are going to hit if they don't arrest the decent w thrust.
Click to expand...

What you've done certainly helps a lot. What you're planning sounds great! I'm excited to see where you'll take it.


derFeef said:
Is the camera alwas following the pc? I personally tend to prefer a lose following and not a hard one like in that gif.
Click to expand...

For now, yes. It lerps hard to a position centered about a tile in front of the player and at the player's height plus a multiple of the player's vertical speed. The idea is that jumping up would give you a better view of things above, and falling down would help you see what you're falling on. That said, it definitely feels a bit too snappy right now, so it's open to changes.

Rubikant said:
My vote is to either not preserve at all, or only "carry over" a slight bit of the momentum from the platform, with the momentum carried over tapering off within a few frames, just for slightly more realistic physics.

I'd like to be able to jump straight up as a way to get off the platform (as it moves out from under me) if I want without having to do a hard left jump.

Also, what if I DO jump right? If it preserves momentum, than logically I should jump further than the platform moves, which I would find quite frustrating, or if it didn't, then you have jumping right and jumping straight up both doing the same thing, which means less options for the player, and thus less ways for you to take advantage of those options in the level layouts.
Click to expand...

This is turning out to be a trickier thing to "solve" than I imagined. It's not super obvious from the GIF above, especially since it only runs at half the game's framerate, but the platforms shown never have a constant speed. I just used a sine function on the global clock. What this means here is that the platform speeds up after you jump off because its delta translation is greatest in the center, where the obstacle is. So simply setting the character's momentum to the same value as the platform's when it left is not enough to keep the character centered over top, and finding some magic multiple to apply is proving hard to balance.

As such, I'm aiming for a fairly nuanced solution. If the player is giving directional input at the time of the jump, only a small fraction of the momentum is preserved. It's subtle enough that the player probably won't notice it because the only time it really does much is in the middle of a platform's travel, not towards the ends of it, so its main purpose will be to give a little extra oomph to jump these obstacles.

If the player is not giving directional input, then a larger fraction of the momentum is preserved. Not enough to clear gaps or even always keep the character on the platform, but enough to help out with that a little bit.

This is one of those things where I wish I had some legitimate playtesters. Maybe I'll set up a super small demo.

MrNyarlathotep said:
How much air control do you have is sort of the companion question to this - if there is no preservation, from a standing jump directly upwards, if you can easily land on a moving platform solely via air control from the apex of the jump, then preservation isn't needed.
Click to expand...

You have about about 90% as much control in the air as on the ground. This was my original thought as well. The game's air control makes it very possible to perform the jump, but it's not that easy. So I thought adding in a little bit of momentum could assist in some amount.

electroflame said:
My advice would be:

1. Air friction should be a little bit less when jumping, so the player has some extra control over where they're landing.

2. Depending on the game type, having alternate jump heights for holding and tapping the button generally feel better. You know the type: tap for a short jump, hold of a longer/higher jump. This one depends entirely on how "cartoony" or "gamey" you want the game to feel, so it may not be applicable.

3. Momentum preservation is fine, as long as it makes sense. Generally speaking, I would base it off of player movement, not world movement. This means that if you're on a moving platform and jump, you don't get momentum from the platform. However, if you were on a moving platform and the player was moving, you get momentum from the player's movement. Essentially, tie momentum to input, not realistic physics, since that generally feels better for the player since they have more control.
Click to expand...

Friction is only very slightly less in the air from a usual jump. The purpose of this is to feel tighter, so the character stops moving when no input is pressed. Jumping is definitely variable. The formula I went with is that vertical speed is halved when the jump button is released, assuming vertical speed is still upward of course.


You guys are amazing to jump out and write your thoughts like this. Thank you! :)
 
Ranger X said:
Personally I prefer the "preserve". Not only its fun but it might open up more gameplay possibilities/uses for you too.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Gives the physics a more natural feel. And in this way, the player can press left to slow down the jump - just a negative force at this point.

Platformers are really just physics games, in the end. Just playing with the physics to overcome your obstacles. At least that's how I see them. That's what the gameplay is defined by. So as long as the physics are fun to play, the game will be fun (probably...)
 
friken said:
I think mining in general for space games is a polarizing mechanic. Some gamers love it and can do it for ages while others find it tedious and terrible that it exists in the first place.

Mining in starflight was terrible on the pc version (imo) and pretty fun on the genesis ver. Starcontrol was fun but very shallow. Resource building will be needed in our game, but we plan on offering a handful of methods to achieve it. scrapping ship remains after battle, mining, asteroids, skimming gas giants, a few gambling sort of options tied to story etc. Hopefully we can make mining fun for a lot of gamer types and for those that hate the idea of it give them an alternate method of getting resources that they do find enjoyable.

I really like what you are doing w junkcraft -- so many different gameplay things to do in space games. Having crew and on-ship gameplay is a lot of fun. There was a really old, not-so well known game called Universe2 by Omnitrend that had a really fun ship to ship boarding game. Of course this was really early dos days and it had very very minimal graphics but your newest screenshots remind me of it. In Universe2 you had to hire all crew and they had training levels for their job. There were three shifts a day and you either had to have three crew per post of pay money to "astrogate" the crewmember so they didn't require sleep :)

So many good ideas to pull from the old classics.
Click to expand...

Never saw Universe2, did a quick search and found only very few screenshots of it and no let's play video :-/ but sounds interesting didn't think about shifts at the moment since i make crew members go to their beds when tired, but I have robots too that can take over those responsibilities and robots can work almost 24x7 , sounds more like slaves...

looking forward how you make mining interesting! I was thinking to leave some machines do the mining while your ship explores but that may change, I am more inclined to the Sundog type of thing, trading and become smuggler if you want, I am implementing secret compartments as upgrades in cargo bays for that in the event that your ship gets boarded or space police come by, trying to give as many game play options to te player and see how it goes in the beta.
 
Abe Bly said:
I'm loath to complain, since I really like most of what I'm seeing, but a couple of things stick out to me in a bad way.
...
The gameplay looks pretty fun. I'm definitely interested in following this game's development. Hopefully I've been helpful! :)
Click to expand...

Hey good points thanks! I'm all for feedback.

So as you might notice from my first pic we are doing a bit of work to improve the town (note the changes to the road edging). Our game is generally pitched at being vibrant and almost super real but that said I agree the look of the market doesn't perhaps quite gel with the rest of the town as well as it could. We'll review it after our current polish!

Do you have any suggestions for switching the red targeting outlines? I'm quite hesitant to change something players are familiar with!
 
Vigilant Gambit said:
Will this game support gamepad controls? Please say yes.
Click to expand...

Hey I can't say for 100% sure right now but I think it's very likely! We've done quite a bit of the dev with more game-pad like controls and I actually prefer the game like that personally although our testers hated it so we ended up going with the standard click to move controls.

Anyway short answer: Yes probably!
 
anthn said:
I stink at anything related to platforming, so stuff like this terrifies me. Keep it up!



Looks great!
Click to expand...

Thanks!

I wanted to ask you guys, how do you feel about Quake 1 like level design versus something randomly generated like Ziggurat? I am worried about the pacing and enemy encounters with randomly generated levels, but I am also afraid of not having the talent or resources of making great abstract levels.
 
PandaKnifeTree said:
Hey good points thanks! I'm all for feedback.

So as you might notice from my first pic we are doing a bit of work to improve the town (note the changes to the road edging). Our game is generally pitched at being vibrant and almost super real but that said I agree the look of the market doesn't perhaps quite gel with the rest of the town as well as it could. We'll review it after our current polish!

Do you have any suggestions for switching the red targeting outlines? I'm quite hesitant to change something players are familiar with!
Click to expand...

I don't think I realized before that the red outline was targeting. I'd love if some other people here spoke into the matter, but I don't like outline effects in 3D games. It's really inelegant to me, even when it appears in a AAA game like Assassin's Creed:

15157165401_4fc749190e_o.gif


I prefer a traditional target indicator like the pointer arrows Zelda games invented and everyone else copied.

anthn said:
I stink at anything related to platforming, so stuff like this terrifies me. Keep it up!
Click to expand...

Ha, then I can't wait to show off what I was working on last night! >:D
 
Abe Bly said:
I don't think I realized before that the red outline was targeting. I'd love if some other people here spoke into the matter, but I don't like outline effects in 3D games. It's really inelegant to me, even when it appears in a AAA game like Assassin's Creed:

15157165401_4fc749190e_o.gif


I prefer a traditional target indicator like the pointer arrows Zelda games invented and everyone else copied.



Ha, then I can't wait to show off what I was working on last night! >:D
Click to expand...

I have to agree. It just makes things really 'gamey', even more so than arrows. Really breaks immersion for me.
 
I feel like games being gamey is probably a good thing, but I suppose that's an immense unresolvable philosophical argument kind of like the Miyamoto policy on gameplay vs. story. :P

Personally I suppose it comes down to aesthetics and frustration for me. If it looks ugly, that's probably bad. But if all other alternatives are frustrating to play, then I'll take ugly.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

  • Poll
Indie Game Development Thread 3: Indie Jones and the Template of Doom
0
64K
MrMysterio replied
  • Poll
STEAM | Discussion Thread - Everyone's favorite PC Platform
0
686K
Django.Mango replied
3D games model swap / moveswap thread
3
3K
Happy1996 replied
Like The Witcher games? Join me in my quest to create a "readthrough" of the books GAF
4
2K
mindfreak191 replied
  • Locked
Gamergate Community Thread
13
4K
J Bro replied
Top Bottom