Ok well there is really not much to update this week.
I put in all the codes with no bugs whatsoever, and now all that is left to do is find what Drew needs.
He needs a window messaging code and a code to track variables.
Thursday, November 29, 2007
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
Crits on the last 4 games: Nov. 13th
Aquila:
Mechanics:
Each unit has a certain amount of space they are allowed to move. Each unit has a specific # of damage. The game ends when all of 1 unit dies. Each player takes turn to move. There is AI which tells the units to move and kill certain units. There are different units which has different statuses.
Dynamics:
Everytime a player makes a turn, they will be able to choose to attack or defend. Everytime the unit attacks another unit, the unit that was attacked will lose hp. When all the hp are gone, the unit will disappear. When all the units of one team are gone, the game is over and the team with no units loses. The level changes when the user wins.
Aesthetics:
The aesthetics this game mainly goes for is challenge as player has to strategically think to win. It also has a part of fellowship as well when played with multiplayer. If the game is based on world war theme then it also holds a very slim part of Fantasy.
Chop Stick Chung:
Mechanics:
The mechanics are pointing and clicking, collision detecting for certain motions, and depending on what kind of minigames they input, the mechanics will vary. So far the rules are certain task must be done in a level.
Dynamics:
Every level has a unique task to be done. when the task is done, the level will change. Each unique task will have a time limit or some kind of constraint so that you must complete them with some kind of challenge.
Aesthetics:
The aesthetics for this game is most likely challenge for user to get a high score. There is also submission because the games are short and it's very easily used to pass time.
Deep Field:
Mechanics:
It seems like the mechanics of this game will be using a lot of collision codes. Some clicking and pointing mechanics, and I believe it has a clock mechanic as well to keep track of time. There will be AI as well which the purpose of it is still unknown.
Dynamics:
When a ball is touched the ball will be thrown back and will knock whatever it is that needs to be knocked back. There is a time limit, and I believe you have to push back a certain amount of stuff. Actually i am not quite sure because it wasn't really explained how the main gameplay works. There will be level changes for sure however.
Aesthetics:
Since they took away the story, this is one of those addicting game that will be part of submission. I don't really think there is another aesthetics here except that because it seems like it's just mindless clicking and throwing for high scores. Maybe there will be challenge as well as the level progresses.
Dynasty:
Mechanics:
Looking at the game, it seems like and adventure game. There will be points and clicks. There will be triggers which will be hit when certain objectives are reached. If there will be Dungeon and Dragon elements, then there must be some kind of damage system and some kind attack system.
Dynamics:
When a objective is fulfilled or when a puzzle is solved, then a new puzzle or area will surface. When every puzzle is solved , a new era/stage will appear. The user will collect information as they progress the game to solve the puzzle and activate new triggers. When all the triggers are activated and puzzles solved. The game will end.
Aesthetics:
This is fantasy, expression, discovery, and narrative all into one. Players will explore and find out more about china in a fantasy era which will be narrated. The player will learn more about themselves when they learn about China.
Mechanics:
Each unit has a certain amount of space they are allowed to move. Each unit has a specific # of damage. The game ends when all of 1 unit dies. Each player takes turn to move. There is AI which tells the units to move and kill certain units. There are different units which has different statuses.
Dynamics:
Everytime a player makes a turn, they will be able to choose to attack or defend. Everytime the unit attacks another unit, the unit that was attacked will lose hp. When all the hp are gone, the unit will disappear. When all the units of one team are gone, the game is over and the team with no units loses. The level changes when the user wins.
Aesthetics:
The aesthetics this game mainly goes for is challenge as player has to strategically think to win. It also has a part of fellowship as well when played with multiplayer. If the game is based on world war theme then it also holds a very slim part of Fantasy.
Chop Stick Chung:
Mechanics:
The mechanics are pointing and clicking, collision detecting for certain motions, and depending on what kind of minigames they input, the mechanics will vary. So far the rules are certain task must be done in a level.
Dynamics:
Every level has a unique task to be done. when the task is done, the level will change. Each unique task will have a time limit or some kind of constraint so that you must complete them with some kind of challenge.
Aesthetics:
The aesthetics for this game is most likely challenge for user to get a high score. There is also submission because the games are short and it's very easily used to pass time.
Deep Field:
Mechanics:
It seems like the mechanics of this game will be using a lot of collision codes. Some clicking and pointing mechanics, and I believe it has a clock mechanic as well to keep track of time. There will be AI as well which the purpose of it is still unknown.
Dynamics:
When a ball is touched the ball will be thrown back and will knock whatever it is that needs to be knocked back. There is a time limit, and I believe you have to push back a certain amount of stuff. Actually i am not quite sure because it wasn't really explained how the main gameplay works. There will be level changes for sure however.
Aesthetics:
Since they took away the story, this is one of those addicting game that will be part of submission. I don't really think there is another aesthetics here except that because it seems like it's just mindless clicking and throwing for high scores. Maybe there will be challenge as well as the level progresses.
Dynasty:
Mechanics:
Looking at the game, it seems like and adventure game. There will be points and clicks. There will be triggers which will be hit when certain objectives are reached. If there will be Dungeon and Dragon elements, then there must be some kind of damage system and some kind attack system.
Dynamics:
When a objective is fulfilled or when a puzzle is solved, then a new puzzle or area will surface. When every puzzle is solved , a new era/stage will appear. The user will collect information as they progress the game to solve the puzzle and activate new triggers. When all the triggers are activated and puzzles solved. The game will end.
Aesthetics:
This is fantasy, expression, discovery, and narrative all into one. Players will explore and find out more about china in a fantasy era which will be narrated. The player will learn more about themselves when they learn about China.
Update for Nov.20th
This week is about getting the prototype done. The first draft of the prototype is still very glitchy and buggy.
My job was to put all the codes in and change any graphics or stuff that is necessary for the code to work. I got them in, but found at the same time some error as well.
Because we are making an active time bar, it's heavily focused on agility. There were 2 options to choose from. #1 We compare the agi of both the enemy and player to determine how fast the the bar fills up. Or we just determine it by how much agi the player has.
Right now it is still unsure which one is the best choice. On one side some enemies are too fast in the beginning of the level and thus making it impossible to win. Some enemies of the first level is too slow, and thus making it a very easy win. As a result we need more variation.
There are 2 solutions in sight right now. Either change all the agi of characters and enemies so that they progressively gets faster and faster, and you progressively get faster and faster or. Put a bigger variety of agi monsters in the game so that there is no impossibility or extreme ease.
My job was to put all the codes in and change any graphics or stuff that is necessary for the code to work. I got them in, but found at the same time some error as well.
Because we are making an active time bar, it's heavily focused on agility. There were 2 options to choose from. #1 We compare the agi of both the enemy and player to determine how fast the the bar fills up. Or we just determine it by how much agi the player has.
Right now it is still unsure which one is the best choice. On one side some enemies are too fast in the beginning of the level and thus making it impossible to win. Some enemies of the first level is too slow, and thus making it a very easy win. As a result we need more variation.
There are 2 solutions in sight right now. Either change all the agi of characters and enemies so that they progressively gets faster and faster, and you progressively get faster and faster or. Put a bigger variety of agi monsters in the game so that there is no impossibility or extreme ease.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Critics for Nov. 6
Stick Ninja
Mechanics:
The mechanics for this game are the set values that the character has and the abilities that the character gains throughout levels. The character also has cards to will add on to the set values the character possesses. There are also 2 types of character (ethereal and physical) that will give the game a different mechanic depending on the character chosen.
Dynamics:
The dynamics of the game are the change in character abilities everytime a character is defeated. Similar to megaman except you don't see that hidden ability until you encounter the enemy. There is a set amount of enemies to defeat before the level advances/progresses. In order to advance further, the character must defeat certain enemies.
Aesthetics:
The fun I think the game is trying to achieve is challenge and maybe a bit of Expression and submission. If it is just enemy onslaughts, then it definitely is submission. The people who made this game probably wanted to challenge the users to defeat levels that gets progressively harder with weapon up. Therefore, it will create addiction.
Zodiac War
Mechanics:
The mechanics for this game is that each character has a set move and each move has a frame rate, hit box, and priority value. Each character will have a set amount of hit point and a time limit. The player must deal enough damage within the time limit in order to win. The player must stay within the stage set for the character.
Dynamics:
The player will be executing different movesets when playing. Depending on hit box and priority, the character that execute a move that out prioritize the other character will do the damage. The player will be forced to do as much damage as possible before time runs out so that the player would not lose.
Aesthetics:
The game is focused on Challenge, and Fellowship. The point of fighting games is to make friends and play against them to test if oneself's skill. I guess that also falls into Expression as well. The game makes the user memorize all the movesets and learn to determine the time and place for a good execution of the moveset.
Crack Quest
Mechanics:
The mechanics are the characters have are coded to do only certain actions. The type of actions changes as you gain weapons. These actions will increase certain values of the function. For example, speed or power values may increase. Enemies will spawn at certain coordinates. Player must win by either shooting up all the enemies or completing a certain level by reaching a certain coordinate.
Dynamics:
Players will win within a time limit and as the player shoot the addicts, the player will gain points. Enemies spawn in certain locations and they will oppose or prevent the character from achieving his/her goal. When the player gets a new weapon, the player will have a new change in their power spped or whatever values they have inside the player.
Aesthetics:
The type of fun this game is engaging is Challenge, narrative, and maybe submission. The challenge is to overcome all obstacles to reach a target. The narrative is the story behind this game. They even want to put cut scenes in so that the story is more engaging. I thought it was submission as well because of the mindless killing.
Mechanics:
The mechanics for this game are the set values that the character has and the abilities that the character gains throughout levels. The character also has cards to will add on to the set values the character possesses. There are also 2 types of character (ethereal and physical) that will give the game a different mechanic depending on the character chosen.
Dynamics:
The dynamics of the game are the change in character abilities everytime a character is defeated. Similar to megaman except you don't see that hidden ability until you encounter the enemy. There is a set amount of enemies to defeat before the level advances/progresses. In order to advance further, the character must defeat certain enemies.
Aesthetics:
The fun I think the game is trying to achieve is challenge and maybe a bit of Expression and submission. If it is just enemy onslaughts, then it definitely is submission. The people who made this game probably wanted to challenge the users to defeat levels that gets progressively harder with weapon up. Therefore, it will create addiction.
Zodiac War
Mechanics:
The mechanics for this game is that each character has a set move and each move has a frame rate, hit box, and priority value. Each character will have a set amount of hit point and a time limit. The player must deal enough damage within the time limit in order to win. The player must stay within the stage set for the character.
Dynamics:
The player will be executing different movesets when playing. Depending on hit box and priority, the character that execute a move that out prioritize the other character will do the damage. The player will be forced to do as much damage as possible before time runs out so that the player would not lose.
Aesthetics:
The game is focused on Challenge, and Fellowship. The point of fighting games is to make friends and play against them to test if oneself's skill. I guess that also falls into Expression as well. The game makes the user memorize all the movesets and learn to determine the time and place for a good execution of the moveset.
Crack Quest
Mechanics:
The mechanics are the characters have are coded to do only certain actions. The type of actions changes as you gain weapons. These actions will increase certain values of the function. For example, speed or power values may increase. Enemies will spawn at certain coordinates. Player must win by either shooting up all the enemies or completing a certain level by reaching a certain coordinate.
Dynamics:
Players will win within a time limit and as the player shoot the addicts, the player will gain points. Enemies spawn in certain locations and they will oppose or prevent the character from achieving his/her goal. When the player gets a new weapon, the player will have a new change in their power spped or whatever values they have inside the player.
Aesthetics:
The type of fun this game is engaging is Challenge, narrative, and maybe submission. The challenge is to overcome all obstacles to reach a target. The narrative is the story behind this game. They even want to put cut scenes in so that the story is more engaging. I thought it was submission as well because of the mindless killing.
Update on Nov. 13th
This week, I've just fixed some glitches in the active time system.
Still working on a event based on map combat system, but it doesn't seem too good right now. It seems almost impossible in fact. I hope this will change as time go on.
What I plan to have accomplish next week is some more coding on combat systems and maybe the character movement as well.
Still working on a event based on map combat system, but it doesn't seem too good right now. It seems almost impossible in fact. I hope this will change as time go on.
What I plan to have accomplish next week is some more coding on combat systems and maybe the character movement as well.
Monday, November 5, 2007
Update on Nov.5
I have finished the active time bar, and I have taken someone's Battle interface in order to finish it. The time bar works for now if all we do is base how fast it goes on the amount of speed the character has.
1 thing that came up though was Drew sending me the buggy game prototype. It seems like he couldn't get his characters to move as it should move. I have tried to play around with it, but I didn't really find the cause that made this problem. For now, I'm not quite sure how we can fix it and I hope Drew is able to find a way to fix the problem. However, 1 thing I need to work on is getting codes for the monster reappearance.
I will post the active time bar as soon as possible for my teammates to work on. My next few weeks will be focused on getting everything into place although the Chrono Trigger battle system isn't made yet.
My Ruby forum isn't progressing very well thus far, so I can't promise a fully functional Chrono Trigger battle system. However, we will at least have a finaly fantasy sprite system...
1 thing that came up though was Drew sending me the buggy game prototype. It seems like he couldn't get his characters to move as it should move. I have tried to play around with it, but I didn't really find the cause that made this problem. For now, I'm not quite sure how we can fix it and I hope Drew is able to find a way to fix the problem. However, 1 thing I need to work on is getting codes for the monster reappearance.
I will post the active time bar as soon as possible for my teammates to work on. My next few weeks will be focused on getting everything into place although the Chrono Trigger battle system isn't made yet.
My Ruby forum isn't progressing very well thus far, so I can't promise a fully functional Chrono Trigger battle system. However, we will at least have a finaly fantasy sprite system...
Critiques For part 1 and 2.
Sorry, I wasn't aware that I was suppose to critique every week. I thought I was suppose to critique them all in 1 post.
So I will do my critique for both weeks.
Week 1:
AntLion
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
AntLion, originally a real time strategy game (RTS), was scaled down to a simple strategy game instead. I agree with the idea of making it a strategy board game instead of a RTS because I believe that a board game of this type of game will be much more fun than a RTS. RTS are usually for games that has a huge variety of teams and units; however, for this game, the units are limited to ants and antlions which doesn't give the player too many options. Hence, making it a board game is much more suitable. The game is interesting, but I think making it an educational game about antlion in a board game style interface will be very awkward because I cannot imagine in anyway how it could be educational when the ant is trying to run for their lives. The only way I can imagine it is if event cards comes into play and gives information of ants and antlions. However, the idea of having information cards popping up during a ant escaping game feels out of place itself.
Fins of Fury
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
The most interesting aspect of this game is the fact that the fish or tadpole is evolving along your journey. If it gains ability through evolution, then I can't wait to try it to see what kind of new interesting abilities it would gain. From what I've heard, the manager plans to input weapons. This is both a good and bad idea because weapons can add or destroy the game itself. I rather have the tadpole learn new skills to fight or solve problems than giving it a grenade launcher. I hope the team can find a balance in the game so that the weapons doesn't destroy the character of the game.
Unless their original idea was comical, then by all means add as many silly things in as possible. I don't mind having some laughs on tadpoles shooting random things at other stuff.
Mizu
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
Mizu, or water in English reminds me of a game call Dewy's Adventure that was recently released for Nintendo Wii. Infact, if I didn't know better, I'd thought it was the same game because the main character and enemies looks very identical. I like the concept of the game, and it sounds like they are planning to create the platforms Mario style. However, I was wondering if splash attack is all they are going to put inside the game. I would like some power-ups in the game, especially for a game about a character made of water. The ideas of power-ups should be unlimited as water can be in many forms and temperature to do different types of interesting abilities. What made the original Mario interesting was the challenging, yet dynamic platforms. What made the later Mario more interesting was the different interesting power-ups. I am almost sure that everyone who played all Mario games will never forget Raccoon and Frog Mario. I hope they follow these roots to make their game fun.
Testing 1…2…3…
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
When I saw the presentation, I didn't really understand much about this game. It seems like it's just a game where you walk from room to room solving puzzles and killing things. They gave a lot of detail about what the character and stage would be like, but I couldn't grasp their concept or story behind their game. Hence, I can't remember anything special or important about the game itself. Why would you go from room to room solving puzzles? What are you doing there? And a lot of things that really should be there to drive my interest, but wasn't really there.
Week 2:
Food Fight:
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
From what they described in their prototype, I didn't really understand how the game will be played. The idea and concept behind the game is very interesting and comical, but the gameplay seems frustrating. When I hear a game that's named 'Food Fight' I wouldn't expect something that's complicated. Instead, I would expect very simple and fun even if it is a battleship game. I think instead of focusing on how deep the mechanics will be, they should focus on how they want the user to play the game.
Drive Thru Tycoon:
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
A tycoon game is always fun, but this tycoon game doesn't have enough tycoon characteristics to make it fun. Tycoon games are based on building and expanding to make money, but this game is about making money through repetitive tasks. This isn't what I expected when they named their game after Tycoon. I think they should change their game name as it is very misleading. This is more of the Diner game instead. I dislike their ways of forcing user to memorizing tasks. In games, memorizing should be fun, but what they showed us thus far seems like a chore instead. Maybe they should change it to recognizing patterns instead.
Circular Strife
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
The concept of the game is very interesting. It sounds simple and fun because blowing things up for no reason is always fun! They didn't show or tell how this game will be challenging as players advance. The only thing I got was that the challenging part was the time trials. I would like to learn more about the game because right now the game sounds like something that you'd get bored after playing a few times, or even an hour or 2. I guess it's the addicting gameplay of placing bombs and being precise that will get players back into playing the game. I will need to see more to understand more about the game.
So I will do my critique for both weeks.
Week 1:
AntLion
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
AntLion, originally a real time strategy game (RTS), was scaled down to a simple strategy game instead. I agree with the idea of making it a strategy board game instead of a RTS because I believe that a board game of this type of game will be much more fun than a RTS. RTS are usually for games that has a huge variety of teams and units; however, for this game, the units are limited to ants and antlions which doesn't give the player too many options. Hence, making it a board game is much more suitable. The game is interesting, but I think making it an educational game about antlion in a board game style interface will be very awkward because I cannot imagine in anyway how it could be educational when the ant is trying to run for their lives. The only way I can imagine it is if event cards comes into play and gives information of ants and antlions. However, the idea of having information cards popping up during a ant escaping game feels out of place itself.
Fins of Fury
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
The most interesting aspect of this game is the fact that the fish or tadpole is evolving along your journey. If it gains ability through evolution, then I can't wait to try it to see what kind of new interesting abilities it would gain. From what I've heard, the manager plans to input weapons. This is both a good and bad idea because weapons can add or destroy the game itself. I rather have the tadpole learn new skills to fight or solve problems than giving it a grenade launcher. I hope the team can find a balance in the game so that the weapons doesn't destroy the character of the game.
Unless their original idea was comical, then by all means add as many silly things in as possible. I don't mind having some laughs on tadpoles shooting random things at other stuff.
Mizu
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
Mizu, or water in English reminds me of a game call Dewy's Adventure that was recently released for Nintendo Wii. Infact, if I didn't know better, I'd thought it was the same game because the main character and enemies looks very identical. I like the concept of the game, and it sounds like they are planning to create the platforms Mario style. However, I was wondering if splash attack is all they are going to put inside the game. I would like some power-ups in the game, especially for a game about a character made of water. The ideas of power-ups should be unlimited as water can be in many forms and temperature to do different types of interesting abilities. What made the original Mario interesting was the challenging, yet dynamic platforms. What made the later Mario more interesting was the different interesting power-ups. I am almost sure that everyone who played all Mario games will never forget Raccoon and Frog Mario. I hope they follow these roots to make their game fun.
Testing 1…2…3…
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
When I saw the presentation, I didn't really understand much about this game. It seems like it's just a game where you walk from room to room solving puzzles and killing things. They gave a lot of detail about what the character and stage would be like, but I couldn't grasp their concept or story behind their game. Hence, I can't remember anything special or important about the game itself. Why would you go from room to room solving puzzles? What are you doing there? And a lot of things that really should be there to drive my interest, but wasn't really there.
Week 2:
Food Fight:
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
From what they described in their prototype, I didn't really understand how the game will be played. The idea and concept behind the game is very interesting and comical, but the gameplay seems frustrating. When I hear a game that's named 'Food Fight' I wouldn't expect something that's complicated. Instead, I would expect very simple and fun even if it is a battleship game. I think instead of focusing on how deep the mechanics will be, they should focus on how they want the user to play the game.
Drive Thru Tycoon:
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
A tycoon game is always fun, but this tycoon game doesn't have enough tycoon characteristics to make it fun. Tycoon games are based on building and expanding to make money, but this game is about making money through repetitive tasks. This isn't what I expected when they named their game after Tycoon. I think they should change their game name as it is very misleading. This is more of the Diner game instead. I dislike their ways of forcing user to memorizing tasks. In games, memorizing should be fun, but what they showed us thus far seems like a chore instead. Maybe they should change it to recognizing patterns instead.
Circular Strife
Mechanics:
Dynamics:
Aesthetics:
Final Comment:
The concept of the game is very interesting. It sounds simple and fun because blowing things up for no reason is always fun! They didn't show or tell how this game will be challenging as players advance. The only thing I got was that the challenging part was the time trials. I would like to learn more about the game because right now the game sounds like something that you'd get bored after playing a few times, or even an hour or 2. I guess it's the addicting gameplay of placing bombs and being precise that will get players back into playing the game. I will need to see more to understand more about the game.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)