[-Entry 22-My statements]

Happy new year!
Been working like crazy on the game, but I'm at that awful spot where progress doesn't translate in visible improvement.

-Entry 22-
My statements

I made the first one a long time ago to test the feasibility of the feature, but as the Trial comes together, the time to add all the others had come.

Basically, My statement is where you select the Information YOU are willing to share. Everyone else does that when they mention where they have been and what they have seen, it is only fair that you do it too. (note, the others are just as free as you are to lie and omit information.)

The first one I made was choosing the location you have been at. Looking back at the devlog, it seems I never shared it. It was reused in the Opinion Clash though, its the part where you select where you think the murder happened.
Anyway when it comes to "my statement" in alibi, you choose the locations where you have been.

If you recall the trial flowchart (top page 3) I made an input equivalent for every section (excluding Other that doesn't exist yet)
One big thing I did was add an evidence use option. I felt it might be a pain to manually select every input when some evidence flat out lays it out.(directly or indirectly) When using evidence, only evidence related to the question will show.

For time, you can simply select the time period you will claim to have last seen the victim. (thinking of adding location too)


For location you actually use evidence of "suspicious" elements in rooms that COULD be the crime scene.
can also claim you have seen nothing.


Weapon, you can suggest a weapon that could have done it. Directly select it from your "known weapon database" or select it through evidence (ex: I saw knife in kitchen = could be the Knife)
Alibi is the one I first explained, you pick the locations you have been at.

And finally weapon access is simply stating whether you Knew of the weapon or not and if you did, did you have access to it or not. Can be selected directly or through evidence (Automatically known, but will select access depending on if you saw it or not)

Oh all the input you choose obviously gets translated in full sentences, variation is a problem though.
under the hood, every evidence has some "bullet points" about what it entails and when they are selected those are added to list of claims. That's what can be used to retrieve contradicting claims and place people at scene of crime, access to weapon etc.

That's all for now, got a bit of fine tuning to do and after that, not sure. Ill probably stay on the trial side, working on either sentences making more sense when generated (mostly the older ones) or Others (AI) detecting and calling you out on your lies. Looking forward to that, hope you do too 

[Strenght]

Can't say I really started working on the stats, but I had it in mind for a long time, so i can share what I have.
Everything subject to change of course.

I was thinking like a good old rpg;
Strenght: Better combat abilities
>Gym
Intellect: more ideas/possibilities; leave less evidence.
>Reading
Charm: more convincing, get more info
>interacting with others
?Speed: move between rooms faster, better combat evasive abilities.
>moving around, gym
Looking back at the first time I brought it up, I also had luck, but I guess I no longer feel like its relevant.
im also unsure on if I should have speed.

By ideas & possibilities i mean essentially unlocking "actions" or giving ideas that can be executed in the game.
More convincing would be an effect in trial, getting more info would apply to investigation.

given the amount of opportunity to raise these stats, they'll probably function with xp/lv.

That's all for now, open to suggestion & feedback on it.

Thanks guys!
Things are moving along quite nicely, and im hoping to reach quite a milestone soon!

I have been on the trial side of things for a while, decided to make a little return in the everyday life side.
Added a whole new room, the gym.

It's pretty useless so far, but when I add a stat system(i decided ill go with it), it should have plenty of use.
plus location count is important, the more rooms, the more spread out people can be and...

Also fixed the object interaction (got broken when I changed the talking)


now ill be working on animations, for when all the other characters move around, doing art is quite long but i hope to do more than just that.

Whole new room! the gym! it doesn't get much safer than that!

from project killer

I just realized I didn't change the agreeing  . It was always meant to be smaller though, Objections litterally stop the progress of the trial and go on a tangent. I want agreeing not to be intrusive, more of a btw sidenote. I wasn't even sure I should make the camera go to the agreeing person. but yes the font would have to change. The phrase is not a placeholder, it is meant to be informal but its not the only one.I had others like "yep" and "agreed" but those you suggested are great and i'm suprised I didn't think of them.
Speaking of those bubbles, Objections also used to be multiple different ones, and I do plan on going back to that. but each character would have their own "objection" phrase.

Thanks for the criticism and the ongoing support you provide, it's really appreciated!

[-Entry 21-Weekly update]

-Entry 21-
Weekly update

Alright! its good to be back on this!
Very happy to see the speech bubbles be liked! I had that idea pretty early on, and thought it would look pretty cool!
Little story on that
It was inspired by comics and "hurtful comment" bubbles portrayed as arrows piercing the target.
turning a bubble into a shield just felt appropriate, reflection came later on.
-I originally planned on the mode having an attack and defend phase.
-when it came to it, attack phased seem hard/not implementable.
-it became defense only making it kind of unfair.
-the solution was reflecting successfully defended attacks!
-I also added (at least when receiving an insult) insulting back: It doesn't bring up a shield, it straight up throws an arrow at the opponent.
-failing to respond in time will leave you defenseless
-responding a bad answer will bring up a shield... that gets shattered by the upcoming arrow. (but not done yet)
---

The whole project has been quite challenging, I also happened to take a courses that thought me a lot and is making me feel bad about some implementations (as in I could have done them better). But hey its working so its all good! might still go back over some stuff though. The dialogue is very much insane and i'm kind of postponing it a lot (lots of placeholder) the faction stuff should be a lot less challenging as its more of a number thing. Strings are really annoying to play with.

Anyway, don't have much to show for today, just did a little warm-up and added health bar shake upon damage!(and size increase!)
Agree gone wrong?!

Don't think I ever showed agreeing.
the opposite of objecting should cause a mutual healing.
but you can't just agree with anything, if you agree to a Lie, that someone else can spot, you all get called out.
oh and people have reactions and talk now.

I really like that "NOT THE PLAYER" using objection!

Anyway, not sure what ill do next, but more updates should come soon.

I finally thought about it!
I kinda missed the last two weeks, realizing I forgot to post on Sunday, but being an individual of order, waited the whole week to post on Saturday!
Might not be super recent, but its my lastest progress (finals season and all)

can't wait to get back on this!

Last but not least, we believe no great game is without a blob enemy!

This guy know whats up!

But seriously, this looks great!

[-Entry 20-Meltdown continues]

thanks, it feels great to find out people are still following.

-Entry 20-
Meltdown continues

Fairly small update, but I wanted to post something for screenshot saturday!
I worked a lot on the characters reaction/emotions models so they aren't always neutral and indifferent.

I felt it was very flagrant in the meltdown exchange and went to remedy that.
I also wanted to show how it looks in movement because its probably the most "animated" part of the trial. So im curious on if the whole thing is fitting.
It's still missing some little things like the health bars, impact & maybe a bit of flash/particles but its what im going for.

Ever had a friend so out of it he had to clam down?

what do you think?

Thats it for today, short & sweet!

[-Entry 19-Meltdown begin]

-Entry 19-
Meltdown begin

Another extended down session, Game is still alive and well though, simply was fairly busy for a while.
Anyway got to work on this a bit slowly yet surely I have been building the Meltdown mode; the final main gameplay mode of the trial.
Not sure it will play as expected though
Currently I have 3 types of attacks planned out (thrown by the opponent)
-Swearing
-Fact checking
-Questioning

I started with the simplest: Swearing.
When the opponent swears there is really no right answer. At first I wanted to make it so there where but I came to the conclusion it was too subjective, I mean whats the proper answer to “fuck off”?
Instead I made it so there are only 2 possible answer, Insult back or calm down/spin it. They come in multiple form and my goal would be to have enough of them so you cant just learn them all and the same ones wouldn’t pop up too often.
As I said, that mode really isn’t hard, Its more about not screwing up then being clever. At hardest, maybe the subtleties of passive aggressive responses and whether they count as “lowering yourself to opponent level”.
That being said, I want to make it so that by insulting back: you would take damage (loss of credibility) but also deal some more to the opponent, the choice becoming essentially: Self damage+more damage on opponent or simply “basic damage” by deflecting the insult. (fail to defend yourself and youd take the damage alone, but there’s no reason for that to happen.)

early screen (clearly I need to work on new reactions for the characters)


Haven’t started working on the two others yet, but the idea of fact checking would be asking question about stuff that was said in trial. In that situation there would be good & bad answer hurting either you or the opponent.
Questioning is more random question that don’t have anything closer to a trivia with good bad and neutral answers. They are there to add variety, a true feeling of “what the hell is he even saying anymore” and actual opportunities to screw up. + Maybe some question would look a lot like they belong in one the other group.
Ill admit though, even im not sure if it will end up interesting/compelling so im realy curious of opinions or even suggestions (improvements or even different ideas).

I really need to get to making new emotion/reactions for the characters, looking forward to having the whole trial a bit more alive. 

Made a little menu for them relafriendships

cross-post from devlog, more on it there.

[-Entry 18-Relationship system]

The UI's a bit plain, of course, but everything moves around and is arranged on the screen nicely. All of the visual information's conveyed clearly in a way that makes sense, which is the important thing.

Thank you, UI is indeed plain, not sure where im going to go with it but I definitly plan on improving it! (hell if it weren't for the lines could have had that update a bit earlier but it was so dead.
It good to hear the info is well conveyed, that's kind of important!

I think it looks pretty cool! I don't really have any constructive feedback at this point but I'm looking forward to more updates!

No need to always bring constructive feedback, although it always help, simply a post letting me know your still interested is just as if not even more powerful . It always feels great to know people are interest in what your doing and waiting for more! (and then you feel bad for failing to deliver fast enough)

Any update finally!

-Entry 18-
Relationship system

My free time has taken quite a hit, so sorry for not updating as much as used to.
Finally managed to get something done though. Or at least started: The relationship system. its similar to social link/bounding.
For now I just did a simple menu from which you can check your current relationship with the others. The white squares represent the level of closeness. You increase it by hanging out with the character. For now one hang out gives one level, but I think I might make it a bit more complicated like a hang out and actually doing good in conversation (answering questions).

Each level and hang out will let you learn more about the character. Might make you actually like a character, or dislike him or you might learn stuff to frame him or reasons not to.
I mean if a character happened to say: “I don’t know about you but I always take a dump before dinner” that’s good to know I guess, but you know what: IT IS GOOD to know. Don’t be in the bathroom before dinner red-handed.

I just made up the above, but its an exemple of the kind of info I’d like to be obtainable from hanging out. And no, not everything you learn has any use. Some will be useless and some might be a lot more subtle in use.
So character will have 6/5 hang outs clearing them all for “max friendship” I put friendship in quotation because its not really friendship and more closeness. The closer you are to someone the more you know about them, and the more friend you are likely to be.

But doing dick move/ betrayals won’t reduce the “friendship level”: what you learned is learned. It will just make the character not like you; even though he still shows lv 4/5 to you.
The way id put it is the same way you could just “grind” a relationship just to better eliminate that person; someone you actually like might not like you back as much. The relationship levels are not exactly mutual (still, you do have much sway) and the way others feel about all the cast stays in a black box. Or who knows! Maybe you could learn some stuff by talking with them!

As for why its all so complicated, well id just rather avoid any abuse, and masterful relationship playing for victory. Since relationships have a major say in trial results.

Oh and I explained there being 5/6 levels of relationship. And I would call those “main line” events, but I also want to have some more hidden special events. They would be obtain in unique situations a bit like easter eggs, but still relevant if not more than normal events.

Still subject to change of course, so id like to know what you guys think.
also, this(Tigs) is still my main devlog but having recently gotten 1 new follower (such humble beginings  ) if tumblr is your thing you can follow me there too!

[changed from study.]

An Opinion Clash gif #screengifsaturday?
Just according to plan.

A bit of Fastfoward here and there and placeholder text, but im not too worried, got all the info needed to make it work already.

Fairly straight foward;
We are asked if we agree with the current consensus: the murder location being the study (default, where the body was found)
By selecting no, we cause an opinion clash. (the "I dont think so!" scene is placeholder)
first you select (for this case) the location
Then the evidence you can pick as much as you want, anything wrong gets called out and is ignored for voting process.
-REASONS- Well, that would be the very reasons used to make it the current consensus in the first place.
-TBD- Well, I explained in my previous post that the people have independant reasons for voting, Right now they are not "sentences" so I hid them to keep their reasoning secret 

Then there is the whole voting and verdict as you can see, the verdict is listening to my awesome new idea (because my argument was valid and the previous idea had nothing for it)
This is also seen by the fact that after it all,
"Thus the murder location is the kitchen" <- it changed from study.

If we were to re-listen to the testimonies, the whole thing would have had changed. (that's what went so wrong last week)

Anyway, glad to finally have something to show. Does this look good? Any feedback and questions would be appreciated.

[Project KillerOpinion Clash]

A sequel to my previous entry?
Now in animated gif form!
Project Killer
Opinion Clash

A bit of Fastfoward here and there and placeholder text, but im not too worried, got all the info needed to make it work already.

[-Entry 17-Weekly update]

-Entry 17-
Weekly update

RAAAGEE‼! Never have I wasted so much time on something! And honestly this

is exactly what happened. I have no idea why it didn’t work and I have no idea why it now works; ill just avoid playing around with that part.
All I wanted to do was cause a “route” switch when you opinion clash and win.
Since the first “current opinion is always where the body was found” the sentences didn’t make sense after the consensus changes. And that was no problem really because I already had an alternate route for it. The Only problem was I needed to add a third route (basically just an alternate ending to the second route) But the game just wouldn’t have it. Whenever I added it, the 2 nd  route got broken (breaking the whole thing) But adding a third level was nothing new, So I have no idea why that happened. After a while, even removing the third route left the game broken (any dev worse nightmare: when backtracking doesn’t work‼) So yeah… after hours (read most of my day) The third route worked and while I know what I did (not why) I still have no idea what it has to do with what was getting broken.
Whatever now it works.

-fresh rant, written right after the event.

All this route/level talk probably makes no sense since I never detailed how the trial works under the hood. Not sure if I should keep it secret or share it, tell me if interested, might do an entry on that.

 
Reached 100 th script, It feel like a lot really, and at the same time like too little. On one hand for what the game actually contains 100 feels like a lot. (then again I do have a “sub program” in it) At the same time, the amount of time im disappointed in my own efficiency, makes me feel like I didn’t compartmentalize enough. Well Cheers 100 th script, I probably wont double that so It’s a pretty good sign that code wise, game is coming toghether!
What is the 100 th script? Well it simply creates the evidence list for the specific section at hand. I mentioned many time that too much evidence‼ This is launched during the trial creation at the end of each section. It goes through all speech and check all  evidence that works (and you possess) and creates a list. That list is the evidence list that will be used in that section.

I originally had plans to do a code clean up if I ever reached 100 scripts, Well it’s a bit intimidating and I probably won’t go through with it, I am kind of curious though: Anyone ever did that? Recheck/organize/format previous code just to have everything cleaner? Is it worth it?


I didn't manage to make the clash proper (in looks) enough to show it in gif; it is progressing though heres a screenshot!

Select the location of the crime you will propose

Oh and I did other stuff.
I made it so the trial can now flow from one section to the next (instead of doing it from the overview menu)
Theres even transition text!

And as described by the 100th, the different sections now get unique "sub-selections" of all the evidence available to you. I guess thats a lot like danganronpa, but no way someone could scroll through dozens of choice in time.

Ill try and get a Opinion clash gif for screenshot saturday, Next ill take a break from the trial section and go back to everyday life. Ill work on adding new locations(rooms) and start working(thinking) on the relationship system!

I participate to as many jams as possible, and became pretty good at "leaving it at that" the Jam nature really helps with that: Short time limit prevents making to big a prototype/project.
Jam having results, will mostly always remind you that the idea wasn't "all that". making it easier to drop it.

In the event that the game does Really well in whatever Jam, at least you'd start with the feedback that it is perhaps worth continuing, but thats a big IF. (and not just a couple positive comments, like a genuine great reception).

Like it was said above, Discipline is very important, I feel jams really help it. Starting a prototype out of jam circumstances sounds like suicide to me. You will (probably) finish neither. New prototypes are always fun to make and stuff goes smoothly (for the most part) until they become a "large project". then fatigue comes in and you are right back to the start. Return to you first project (do you even remember it?), Continue the current one (but Fatigue!!!) or that awesome new prototype you just thought of?

Like everything, it depends on the person, but If I ever thought I was weak, this forum more than anything shows that this is probably the norm.

[Project Killer]

Project Killer
Working on opinion clash for my trial system! No this is not a politics game (thats all I see in this screenshot) its some kind of murder mystery game.

I guess its much better in motion (still taking the "screenshot" part of the title litterally) but I still need to add bells & whistles. or at least id like to

[-ENTRY 16-Weekly update]

-ENTRY 16-
Weekly update

Some slow progress, nothing worth showing so far.
-I did the weapon access although still early and subject to change.
-Decided I shouldn’t do the “Other” part yet. "other" elements just aren't there yet.
-Got the accusation functional, not pretty but functional.
So far it takes into consideration
Lie count, suspiciousness and the alibi (even though the alibi isn’t complete yet)
Relationship (trust) & weapon access are the other element I plan to add.

The way it goes for every member is they compare the “Accused person” to the “average of the group (lie count/ suspiciousness) ” to see if overall the accused is “suspicious or a liar” they also compare the accused to themselves those two comparaison add up points or take away points <-black box (sorry guys)
With alibi the kind of alibi itself add/removes points and at the end, depending on the score the person will decide whether the the accused is guilty (agree) or not (disagree).
The result of all of the above also adds "tags" to the reasoning behind the choice. Hopefully I can use those to form coherent small justifications.

Other than that I worked on the opinion clash, Its a lot bigger of an hassle than I expected. I did code some other parts (like the accusation!) having in mind to reuse portion in this mode, and while it does work, im not sure it was worth the hassle. Anyway, just like the accusation its functional but not pretty (nor complete), so I'm not showing it yet.

Id like to show it before the next update but im leaving on a little trip, I also expect a reduction of free time so im not sure how it will go.
Still stay posted! While still in the same "trial setting"... its a bit different so can't wait to have it as I envision it.

The trial's looking great! Opinion clash sounds really cool in theory but some more info on its implementation would be necessary for me to actually decide if it sounds good. You mention presenting all related evidence. Can you give an example of multiple pieces of evidence that would all support one idea? I guess it's a little hard for me to imagine exactly how this would work.

Really good reply, I do know my intentions a lot, planned the game for a long time before even starting so sometimes i'm sure I don't explain stuff well enough. You actually put me in doubt because suddenly I couldn't think up of a situation and realized maybe it didnt work afterall! thankfully that was only temporary.

Let's say the murder happened in (our favorite place) the kitchen. You took the time to move the weapon and clean up tool to the living room but the body was found in the kitchen while you were doing it.
Default reaction is thinking the scene of the crime is the kitchen, that is afterall where the body was found.

Still, the weapon is in the living room, bloody cloth is in the living room.
When asked if you agree that the "scene of crime" is the kitchen you could say no and claim its the living room.
Then you'd get a list of all evidence/facts you know.
Of them: weapon in living room, bloody item in living room both support it while only the body being in the kitchen goes against it (would have been blood too, but you cleaned it).
So 2 v 1 (but yes, the body alone should weight more than both of those weak arguments, ill consider it)
Add in a bit of relashionship & suspiciousness sway and the individuals will pick a side.


And yes, you could just go around, put blood in multiple rooms, drop some evidence in random rooms, and (attempt to) put the scene of the crime in any of those. Actual scene of crime would mostly be well "soiled" so time would need to be taken to tone it down or bring other rooms to its level. That would involve moving around a lot; number one way to get caught is moving around. You never know where others be at.

Hope this explains better and makes it clearer!

[-Entry 15-Weekly update -Return to the trial]

Ooooooooh am I hyped for this!
I actually tried to make a game like this once, but it was more like a roguelike and it got abandoned...
I'm so glad to see somebody have a proper attempt at this idea!!

Im honored to see my attempt be deemed proper Ill be sure to deliver on that!
I'm curious though what did you have in mind? (no need to go in too much detail)
And well, if theres anything you thought of that seems to be missing from what im doing, feel free to share it!

Just as I expected with ludum dare (my entry), not a very good week in terms of progress. I'll nontheless share what I did and take this opportunity to share some other things im planning.

-Entry 15-
Weekly update -Return to the trial

Having multiple “Main game element” is pretty sweet because you can just jump from one to another to avoid fatigue. The bad part is you actually need all of them to function to have the game work. (unlike building upon a base and expanding)

Anyway, This week I returned on working on the trial.
I failed to add all trial sections, but I did add the
Define location
Define Weapon.
with Define time & Debate alibi being already there, only Debate weapon access & debate other are missing.
I thought with the base system already being there (I had 2 sections already) It would be easy, but it's still challenging, different section use different info, use a different template so it didn't go as expected.

Heres a gif of overview + a run over define time; not perfect in terms of dialogue yet and still has some debug notes but getting better.

Yes, I know it makes no sense to discuss time of death when he was last seen and found dead in the same period but yeah...

I also started the Accusation
That essentially means the main gameplay of trial is nearly done.
Unfortunately this doesn’t mean the game is done at all… Maybe it reached 40% point.

I had mentioned there were other modes than the “Listening” I wanted to have and that I would expand on them later.

Now is the time. (concepts & subject to change)

Id like to implement at least 2 more “gameplay modes” in the trial.
Opinion clash: During the Define case sections, you are asked if you think the current consensus is wrong and would like to change it. If you do, you’d enter this mode where you’d go 1v1 against whoever proposed the current consensus (of the topic at hand).
You and your opponent will be free to select all the evidence that backs their idea. Then the rest of the crew will majority vote who to follow. Evidence count, suspiciousness and relations would of course be involved in the judgment. Hence you could just try again after making the opponent suspicious and win that second attempt. (but one does not “make the opponent  suspicious” easily)

The other mode is Meltdown.
Lets be honest, who get framed for something and doesn’t freak the hell up at one point?
This mode is a 1vs1 battle against the opponent that snapped. Its actually a very bad mode, one you’d want to avoid facing too much.
In that mode the opponent just throws facts and insults at you. And you have to properly respond to them in a very short time
You’ll have 3 answers: one good(hurts opponent), one neutral(nothing happens), one bad (hurts you)
But very little time to think, for the most part it should be easy. Thing is, you barely have anything to win (opponent is likely already very suspicious), but everything to lose (do bad and you can become quite suspicious yourself)
This mode would be triggered when you destroy someone too much (like really focus on one guy) or when you make the person reach a “breaking point”, It could also be used in an offensive if you yourself are very suspicious.

That's all this time, next week i'd like to complete all the trial sections and start working on the game modes I just described.
As always, feedback and suggestions are appreciated!