Yeah, some pretty awesome changes coming in this this next version.
Valve must be having more of an influence on the games balance since nerfing jungling/trilaning in general seems like something icefrog would absolutelynever do

Bows
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Y-PBYQg-oE

Has a multiplayer-only game every won an IGF award?
Would the IGF judges even play a multiplayer-only game in multiplayer? (I've heard they are more fun like this)

The magic effect looks like high tech, that is the first thing that comes to my mind.

I think part of that would be because I've drawn a fake anamorphic lens flare which are only really used by things like star-trek and battlefield 4.
Another thing would be that blue flares are always associated with science fiction  / space.

I think I might need to make the magic look more like fire, my issue with that is I'm trying to give the game a super consistent color theme all throughout the interface and stuff.

I'm trying to steer clear of red or gold as it's pretty much what every fantasy/medieval game ever has used, it makes things look samey/generic

mgs vibe. but i havent played mgs so dont believe a word i say.
based on what you say you want to show on your cover, look at this cover, too:
*image*
think it conveys what u can do in the game p well.

Yeah that's a really good example, it gets everything across really clearly.

I guess I'll try find a better color to use for the hand-on-fire part

I've started planning out the box art for my game, this is my current idea


I'm wanting to convey that the game has both sword fighting and magic in it.
I'm also trying to make the cover resemble the covers of other games that are similar to my game in some way


Feedback plz!

[In general the interplay of attack and recovering-time would not be modeled correctly]

To point out a flaw you would have with measures based on elapsed time:

In general the interplay of attack and recovering-time would not be modeled correctly. As example imagine you block a certain attack and counter it with something appropriate which is intended to be tightly possible. Now imagine the last frame before your attack hits takes a little more processing time so that your opponent can block again. That moment changed the intended mechanics of the game, like if in chess the horse is jumping 4 instead of 3 fields all of a sudden. Of course one can come up with ways to take that elapsed time and try to restore the correct happening but there are still rounding errors, which means your mechanics cannot always be perfectly clean.

Of course there are ways to help it but the tendency is against you. This would be all solved if the happening is modeled in discrete frame-time intervals and not in real elapsed time. That is why fixed timestep.

Yeah, I see what you are saying, we do have measures in place which enforce rules like re-attack time but it's still an internet networked game.
Delay and bandwidth are always going to try and create inconsistencies in the game so it's kind of pointless for us to worry about small differences in frame render times (especially when most people will be running the game at 60fps)

Anyway, today I started working on a Steam banner image;

I think I'm over paying money so that people with more pixelated games than mine can get trophies

It's that biaised ?

That's explain why everyone today make pixellated games.

I was wondering why.

*whispers* it's not only igf

Exactly, it's every indie award
They can't go encouraging a game unless it's something that their clientele believe they could have made.
Giving an award to a game that doesn't look "indie" alienates 99% of the people paying their entry fees year after year.

I think I'm over paying money so that people with more pixelated games than mine can get trophies

Hnnnn
It's worse then BF3, so much worse!

You will see me on the betafield soon! (Altho I'm really not expecting much)
But you never know, perhaps BF4 is like BF3 but if it wasn't full of EA bullshit, painstaking unlocks, countless layers of DLC and terrible balance decisions (See, I'm an optimist)

here's all the tutorial videos in a playlist
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-oe6UQiCIg0&list=PLu902UBtzp4Qd7CRm5Xwqw7yWNxgpg2e9

Sorry for temporal offtopic, I just want to know why you prefer UDK to Unity for this game.

I would also like to know whether you use a fixed frame-rate for game-mechanics.

If I was working alone I'd be using unity for sure, programming a game in unreal is a whole lot more difficult than in unity.
The art pipeline is also a whole lot more complex in UDK due to all their clever stuff to optimize performance and load times etc.
So basically a game will take 10 times as long to make in UDK but it will likely run 10 times faster and look 10 times better, it's just a trade off you need to make one way or the other depending on your needs.

This game probably couldn't be made in anything other than UDK, it really makes heavy use of all the animation functions available in UDK which other engines just don't really have.
I also really wanted it's graphics and effects to be on par with the current technology rather than having to do something cartoony or low poly so that it would run smoothly in unity.

We don't ever code things to a fixed frame rate, frame rates are never reliable and code should always be based on the time a frame actually took to render or tick (deltatime) . This is especially true in a multiplayer game like ours where all the players need to be kepy in sync and getting consistent messages

I wonder what it would be like to have a mouse with a trigger, for those of us who like the triggers on controllers for shooting a gun but don't mind using the mouse for aiming.

When I see triggers on controllers I just think "slow"
Often in shooters you need to click at a really high rate, you just can't achieve the same shots per second with a trigger squeeze compared to a mouse click. It also puts more time between your cognitive reaction and and in game action

Perma-death might make a game more intense but it is an artificial difficulty increase. I prefer difficulty coming from the variety of depth.

Yeah, it could be called a "cheap" type of difficulty, and it also has trouble fitting in with the concept of flow.
When a player dies, it can be an big interruption in the flow but with perma-death it's the complete end of any flow you might have got going.

I think this is where games like SuperMeatBoy should be commended, in creating a prime example of non-distruptive player failures/deaths. The time invested in each attempt is short, the death is quick and has no lasting penalty. Dying in SMB is essentially just an instant pieces of negative feedback coming from the game, it doesn't get all sentimental about it, it's very self aware and makes perfect sense in the context

This might be why more games are going down that road, using a death as player feedback is easier and probably a lot more effective than trying to convince a player they just did something wrong while their character bumbles on still living

Conveying negative feedback takes some working out, if players don't absolutely get the message then they could spend thier time losing without knowing why - or becoming unable to pass some challenge because they never properly understood the rules.
Fully killing the player removes this risk

I find myself wishing more games had a perma-death mode.
It instantly makes a game more intense and I think a lot of developers have noticed this.

Developers can make less content knowing that very few players will live to see it.

Right now, for all I know, Spelunky could only have 2 tile sets, that's all I've managed to see so far.
However if splunky had checkpoints, or saves I would have blasted through all the content and been finished with the game. I wouldn't ever want to replay it.

Same amount of effort for both games, only one is the Spelunky we know today and the other is just another one of those samey platformers you never heard about

I wish my current government would shut down

The only time i ever remember that consoles are a thing is when I go to buy some game and find that it is only on one of those.
Even then I usually wait for a PC version to exist

CS:S was a superficial remake of CS 1.6 made by people who didn't understand or care about the intricacies of the original. The problem is not that it's different from 1.6 in key ways, it's that it's apparent that a lot of those differences were not considered design decisions, they were arbitrary.

It's always strange and frightening when the customers who use your products become far more knowledgeable about them than the person who created them.

I think it would be super flattering to have people care even more about playing your game than you cared about making it
Its got to be one of the highest achievements for a developer right?

I'm working on a video tutorial series to teach people how to play KR

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4JUiV2dUC0

these will come with the game and you'll be able to play each one individually from the "tutorial" tab

Here's a first draft of the first video, meant to teach "Basic Melee"

other ones i still need to make include;
Advanced Melee - Counterattacking
Advanced Melee - Locking
Advanced Melee - Combos
Basic Movement
Character Creation

and then I was going to do a short intro video to each spell as we add it.

Please tell us any improvements you can think to make to that first vid

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u6l4dAHKL-E