MoonDog
-
Posts
568 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
News Articles
Tutorials
Forums
Downloads
Posts posted by MoonDog
-
-
-
Those are not facts as not everyone agrees with them. I used an example to show my personal feelings, tastes and or opinions to draw a comparison. Which is the text book definition of a thing that is subjective.
This article only slightly touches what I found wrong with the combat:
This article finds the combat amazing:
http://www.gamesradar.com/bioshock-infinite-review/
There is no formula or exact plan for what makes a game great. There is no Mendeleev table of elements for video game building blocks and elements. Pretending that a great game comes down to a series of absolutes that are not subject to a high degree of elements based on personal opinion in design is a fallacy. In fact most people can't even articulate the reasons why something is good or bad.
-
-
No it's not.
But on topic: The game doesn't look very bad and from what I read it seems to be doing many things right. This, alongside the reboot of Shadow Warrior, makes me feel slightly more optimistic about the genre in general.
Is it not?
Bioshock Infinite is lauded as a very good FPS game. It is in a lot of ways. Its a narrative masterpiece. So for a lot of people, its a fantastic FPS that made a lot of memories for them.
However, it has some of the most horrid combat ever. If you look at it from a combat perspective, it's a series of arena combat type slogs where they throw AI at you haphazardly. There isn't a lot of rhyme or reason to geometry in terms of FPS gaming standards. You'll be met with frequent irritating design choices, such as enemies shooting you from a great distance while you have enemies spawning in behind, fighting behind you, or fighting in your face.
So on the other hand, it fails as a fun FPS experience for a lot of people, because the game fails to decide how it should balance FPS mechanics and the mastery of narrative.
So in closing. Yes it is.
Circa likes this -
Because saying game is great by watching trailer is objective.
No one said anything but that the trailer looks good.
-
lol.
+1
-
You dont need to put the shader in a pk3 until you are finished and testing. Just test with sv_pure 0 and you can leave the shader in the base/shaders folder.
Also, textures/colors/white is already a shader in system.shader.
textures/colors/white{q3map_nolightmap{map $whiteimagergbGen const ( 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 )}}^^^^^Rename yours to something else. Example: textures/colors/my_glowy_white.Also also, make sure you aren't adding the .shader extension to the name in shaderlist.txt. dynamiclight will suffice. -
Yeah I've been following the limited previews and play descriptions lately. Its come a long way since the 2013 plays.
-
did he send them!! so cool man!! hehe!! you should do it !!!
-
You need to add the custom shader file to the shaderlist in base/shaders.
Perhaps the brushes are degenerate and being removed at compile. Try running brush cleanup on them. Or split them if they are complex geometry.
-
Make a small, square brush at the center of the object. Look under system shaders for a shader called "Origin". Select the origin, the object and turn them into a func_rotating entity.
Asgarath83 and Langerd like this -
cool stuff.
-
http://web.archive.org/web/20120815103646/http://www.japlus.net/index2.php
More than enough info there.
-
Fantastic architectural work! Then again, your maps have always had great designs to them.
You mean they are pretty.
Omicron likes this -
-
LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!11!11!1one!
-
I'm going to say words, but don't get offended. I just mean to help.
The light textures on those (crates?) look pretty stretched. Aside from that, it look like you are using white lights to produce "illumination" from them. I notice only one stack appears to have light entities close to it. Perhaps you'd be happier with using shaderlighting for those surfaces.
Probably a WIP type thing, but i notice some light silhouettes without apparent sources.
The black and blue pipes going over that room appear sort of float-y structurally speaking. Considering placing a support that clamps both pipes in their center and then ties into a roof support. Flushes out the detail a bit better.
All in all, I'd say you are doing pretty well. Look into using some q3map_surfaceLight shaders to produce some of lighting. If I remember right, that level was pretty low lit and had very cool colors. surfaceLight shaders will help a lot with that feel.
-
I tend to turn off motion blur in games that have it. Just my preference since I find it a bit distracting.
AshuraDX likes this -
-
Do some fact checking before offering advice like this. Ungrouping all func_groups could be detrimental to someone who doesn't know any better... Aside from this not doing anything for the entity count, it's a major waste of valuable time.
-
Why am I asking myself all these questions? I'm being shot at right now.
But really, you're right. The balance thing is kind of how JK2 and JKA handle the force powers. You gradually earn more and your current ones get more powerful to balance it out a little and let the player learn to use different strategies.
These are thought processes that can happen while the action is occurring, and the player is coming to terms with acquiring a new mechanic. I'm not saying that's a conversation a player sits and has with themselves (unless they are into game development and trying to comprehend the choices of other developers to improve their own design skills ).
I'm not saying it's necessarily a terrible idea, or a no-no to provide a large amount of choices to a player immediately. But you need to do it in a way that is intuitive and adds value to the gameplay. When you are working on the same thing everyday, its really hard to know when you've achieved that, because you can't distance yourself from what you just created. It takes a bit of practice I think. Give your intuition a workout. What, intuitively, feels right to you from a design perspective? Do that. When you play it, if it doesn't feel right, change it. I think when you have a fully progressable first level that people can try out, you can get some pretty good opinions by having it played by a lot of different people. What players actually want, and what is fun are not the same things.
It's a crazy process, but you'll grow to love it.
Circa likes this -
The original game only has E-11's on all bosses with a few thermal dets & fists. Probably should have asked a better question: Do players want more variety in enemies/weapons in the first level?
Typically, no. Players tend to like to be introduced to mechanics gradually in a manner that teaches them how to use them, without actually explicitly teaching them. Granted, this is a really old series of games and most people get the idea by now, but giving players a lot of options in equipment right of the bat can come across as unelegant and cluttered if you catch my drift. If you can justify gaining a lot of weapons and facing enemies using those weapons early, then you should find a way to balance it.
Players have a lot of thought processes that they might not even be aware of :
- Okay, I'm in a bar, shit has gone down. I've got a blaster. it uses energy packs. Okay, that guy dropped a more powerful and less accurate blaster, but it uses the same ammo, so I'm not worried. But wait, this guy dropped a bowcaster and it uses a different resource. How can I use this weapon, is it better than the other two I just got? Should I not use those? Do I have to worry about maintaining resources for both? What am I supposed to do? Why do I have such a large arsenal already? Now I have grenades. I understand grenades, but should I have grenades all the time at the push of a button without switching weapons? Why do I have to switch to my grenades just to use them?! Is there any rhyme or reason to my equipment? What meaningful choices do I have to make when it comes to using this instead of this? Should I use this new weapon exclusively for the rest of the level?
therfiles likes this -
I'm just showing you how I would do it. Global variables. As for timing, other directions, order, etc... you'd need to iterate on your own until you find a way to make it work which makes you happy.
This is Icarus. Icarus is weak.
Boothand likes this -
I don't know the inner workings of Icarus in the codebase, but I'm pretty sure affect isn't going to put all entities with the same script_targetname in an array for you and run logic on all of them.
I'd need a coder to clarify on that point.
I'm also pretty sure that you are only allowed 8 total parms on an entity. I'm not entirely 100 percent on that one either. It was just something I was told when I started modding JKA, and I was never shown any of the coding behind that. But it's a safe assumption to work off of.
You might have better luck using global variables so you don't need to rely on trying to pick parms off of individual entities.
For instance, this could be a script for one of the blocks.
//Generated by BehavEd rem ( "This is just to show what it looks like to declare variables" ); //(BHVDREM) rem ( "You'd usually put all your declares in a separate scipt that is ran when the map starts" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block1_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block2_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block3_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block4_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block5_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block6_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block7_note" ); declare ( /*@DECLARE_TYPE*/ FLOAT, "block8_note" ); //(BHVDREM) rem ( "SPACING_FUNCTIONS!" ); //(BHVDREM) rem ( "SPACING_FUNCTIONS!" ); //(BHVDREM) rem ( "SPACING_FUNCTIONS!" ); if ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$, $=$, $0$ ) { set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_PARM1", "+1" ); set ( "block1_note", $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); print ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$, $=$, $1$ ) { set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_PARM1", "+1" ); set ( "block1_note", $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); print ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$, $=$, $2$ ) { set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_PARM1", "+1" ); set ( "block1_note", $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); print ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$, $=$, $3$ ) { set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_PARM1", "+1" ); set ( "block1_note", $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); print ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$, $>=$, $4$ ) { set ( /*@SET_TYPES*/ "SET_PARM1", "0" ); set ( "block1_note", $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); print ( $get( FLOAT, "SET_PARM1")$ ); } } } } }Then instead of having to depend on grabbing variables off of the entities, you could read the global variables without running any affect blocks. For this, you'd probably have to setup a script for each block with multiple scriptrunners. Target the trigger_multiple at a target_relay and target the relay at all the scriptrunners.
//Generated by BehavEd if ( $get( FLOAT, "block1_note")$, $=$, $0$ ) { sound ( /*@CHANNELS*/ CHAN_AUTO, "null" ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "block1_note")$, $=$, $1$ ) { sound ( /*@CHANNELS*/ CHAN_AUTO, "my_fruity_sound1.mp3" ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "block1_note")$, $=$, $2$ ) { sound ( /*@CHANNELS*/ CHAN_AUTO, "my_fruity_sound2.mp3" ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "block1_note")$, $=$, $3$ ) { sound ( /*@CHANNELS*/ CHAN_AUTO, "my_fruity_sound3.mp3" ); } else ( ) { if ( $get( FLOAT, "block1_note")$, $=$, $4$ ) { sound ( /*@CHANNELS*/ CHAN_AUTO, "my_fruity_sound4.mp3" ); } } } } }
New Wolfenstein Game
in Art, Media & Technology
Posted
So I can take one game and test it across different nationalities, ages, psychological maturities and without fail always get the same exact opinion on that game. That's pretty much what you are arguing. That makes no sense. A vast degree of personal experience goes into whether or not a person is going to label something as "good" when they play it. I do not honestly care what game journalists say, it was merely an example. Their personal experience across genres is so varied, that their basis for forming an opinion and writing reviews( Reviews are opinion pieces mind ) is going to be different because they have a great deal of memories to draw comparisons off of.
We are talking about the core experience of a game. I'm not even trying to touch on assets such as textures and models. An experience is different for each individual. If every experience is different, how can every opinion be the same? This is why they are called opinions, and the experiences themselves are subjective. If you have a very competitive video gaming history, your values are going to be night and day different from a casual gamer who has played maybe 2 hours of a game on average per week over a year.
Let's even talk about culture. Chinese youths were not raised playing the same kinds of games as lets say, Americans or some Europeans. We are conditioned, for example, to know that glowing or shiny objects are good and should be collected. (Pacman, Mario, Zelda, Etc... etc... etc.. etc... ). When we play an experience that capitalizes on this ingrained lessons, (Kill confirmed in CoD), we know that collecting these glowing objects is a good thing to do. We understand the experience, and we have fun.
Chinese youths for the large part( Extremely large part ) never learned these lessons because their gaming industry has developed a little slower, and in a different direction. When they are presented with a mechanic such as collecting a dog tag(Or any glowly spinny thing) they have no frame of reference or ingrained knowledge that they should collect it. It's not understood, its ignored, the experience makes no sense, they go back to playing CrossFire. That's an FPS they understand based on personal experience, preference, opinion and knowledge. They do not have fun or even appreciate the same experience that is lauded as a great innovation in other parts of the world.
Meaning that the experience is subjective to so many factors, its not even funny.