next »

[sb3dgraph]

I must try this. Wow. Is it available for Mac or Linux? I'm on my phone right now, so I can't really check the link.

This project is testing under Linux Wine. Should work correctly there.

when i the hero dies, i have to restart the whole game, restarting it from the main menu leads to a crash (every time)

Wow, this is a bad surprise. And what a message says windows?

but i think you need the gameplay sorted out first.

Yes, yes! Finally started talking about the gameplay in this thread!

So, gentlemen, I am waiting for your criticism of gameplay! And you are all this time writing to me about the graphics and the bad performance.  

-------------

In the meantime, I think about a new idea. Look: if the player is written too often, the game challenges is lost! Hence, we must limit the player to save game.

To do this, I plan to add a special items. One item - one possible to save a game. When the player starts, we give him, for example, ten such items. Further, one save - one item. For more saves, the player must find these items in the chests.

Total:
a) The player will appreciate life more.
b) Will no longer bypass game challenges through a frequent save.
c) Will more active search for treashures and chests.

What do you think about the mechanics of this?

[nikki]

And what a message says windows?

that the program is not responding, and or if i want windows to look for a solution, then i press cancel and it quits (offcourse)

[sb3dgraph]

that the program is not responding, and or if i want windows to look for a solution, then i press cancel and it quits (offcourse)

This is not a program bag, the game simply generates a map for a long time. Wait a couple of seconds, and game start responding again.

You made me jittery. I was thinking that there is indeed a bug. Thanks!

[Recs]

In the meantime, I think about a new idea. Look: if the player is written too often, the game challenges is lost! Hence, we must limit the player to save game.

To do this, I plan to add a special items. One item - one possible to save a game. When the player starts, we give him, for example, ten such items. Further, one save - one item. For more saves, the player must find these items in the chests.

Total:
a) The player will appreciate life more.
b) Will no longer bypass game challenges through a frequent save.
c) Will more active search for treashures and chests.

What do you think about the mechanics of this?

seems an interesting idea and a good compromise between a "full roguelike" (no saves or only save on exit) and free saves, if you aim to an experience similar to roguelikes.

probably it needs testing to find the right balance with the number of starting saves available and the spawn rate of "save items" in chests.

maybe you could also make it so save items are found in chests tied to specific boss/challenges.

[sb3dgraph]

seems an interesting idea and a good compromise between a "full roguelike" (no saves or only save on exit) and free saves, if you aim to an experience similar to roguelikes.

Lack of roguelike option is that if we do "permanent death", we need to reduce the game difficulty, so that player can go through the whole game without dying even once.

Look:
a) Difficulty reducing is bad: in the game will be no hard challenges.
b) Do not reduce difficulty - is bad too: the player will regularly die and start game again. And in the end, our player simply will backup saves.

So I do not like permanent death, version of the classic roguelike.

[Morroque]

Why a rougelike?

This is my immediate response after playing. No other information biased.

I know this game has a lot going on for it right now, but it seems like the grid-based movement of blocky characters doesn't feel natural to actually control. When I'm playing a game like Dwarf Fortress it is okay because so much of the game is an abstraction. This is not the case here. Your graphics are so beautiful and painterly that it actually feels a bit jarring to move block by block. The look and feel of your gorgeous tileset does not in any way tell me what "16 pixels squared" measures to. That, combined with the fact that time only flows when I move, feels like I'm controlling a Game and Watch when my eyes are telling me I should be playing Cave Story. What my mind is telling me is not matching what my eyes are seeing.

Are you working towards having more fluid, pixel-based movement? Would it conflict at all with your ideal version of the game if the controls felt more like a platformer?

[sb3dgraph]

MW, in this game, I plan to introduce a lot of complex mechanics. Many creatures. If I start draw graphics with animations for they all, it will be hard for me.

Look, without graphics I can do 100 creatures, with static picture I can made 20, and with good animation for each creature, I can add only few creatures in the whole game.

Tell me, what choice is better, do you think?

-------------

Meantime, I made ​​the first images of creatures.


I would be delighted if visitors of this topic will help make them better. Accept and your advices, and pictures.

[Manuel Magalhães]

Looks nice. It's also awesome that you are making the game of your dreams.

[Paul Eres]

isn't everyone though? i mean, aside from people who make casual games for sales, or games made just to learn, any indie is probably making the game of their dreams

[namragog]

isn't everyone though? i mean, aside from people who make casual games for sales, or games made just to learn, any indie is probably making the game of their dreams

Yes 

[Gabriel Verdon]

isn't everyone though? i mean, aside from people who make casual games for sales, or games made just to learn, any indie is probably making the game of their dreams

Not really, no. Most people are too scared to try. Or they've forgotten.

[sb3dgraph]

Manuel Magalhães, thanks!

isn't everyone though? i mean, aside from people who make casual games for sales, or games made just to learn, any indie is probably making the game of their dreams

Not so simple. Usually, any author wants his work became popular. (And I am, too) Therefore, usually the author does not just his dreams, but trying to make a popular game.

But, I want to move away from the desire of popularity. This difference of this game from my past projects.

By the way, the creation of dreams does not prevent discussing of the game. I'm always glad to your thoughts and criticisms.

[Paul Eres]

hmm -- i don't really see that many indies making games for popularity rather than because it's the game they want to make. could someone name some examples? the closest i can think of would be intentionally controversial games like muslim massacre and stuff like that. but those are pretty rare

i think the biggest reason an indie wouldn't be making the game of their dreams is more likely that they feel they can't handle it yet, and that it'd be overambitious to make a game that has all the features they'd want in their dream game. and usually that's true: dream games take a lot of time compared to more limited games

[Manuel Magalhães]

You're spot on on your second paragraph. The reason why there isn't more dream games being made is due to the developer's limitation, either of time, money, or skill.
For instance the game I'm making, Sea Air, is one of my dream games (I've some of them, but some require some of the problems I explained above).
It doesn't mean I've done my other games for getting solely for getting popularity/money (they are extras), I wanted to do something that other people would enjoy and that I would enjoy making too. But if I woke up in an universe where I had infinite amounts of money, skills or time I would have created my dream games over these other games I've done.

[sb3dgraph]

hmm -- i don't really see that many indies making games for popularity rather than because it's the game they want to make.

No, not rather. Indie games always consist both of these factors, I think.
And I think, that any game author like popularity. And this affects the game in any way. More or less.

Less in case of the game of this thread.