next »

[Eigen]

You just need more cheering man. Go go go go, game looks so good, keep up the good work

Also, do not dismiss animating. Even if you do a 2 frame animation for a given action, definitely go for it. Icons are pretty plain (although informative) while animations contribute a whole lot to making the game feel polished and giving it a stronger personality.

Can't wait for new build!

Thanks! Yeah you're right, and I'll get around to animating stuff eventually, but not at this moment. I only have the tree cutting action currently and that's not visible anyway.

There isn't anything wrong with you, we all go through this sort of funk. Unfortunately there isn't a magic fix to make this go away. Maybe try working on areas of your game where you don't feel so stuck?

Please stick with your project! You are getting to the good part, and I am very excited to see some real gameplay. 

No worries, I'm sticking with it! I've gotten some stuff done these past few evenings and I feel pretty motivated right now. I'll try to ride the wave for as long as possible


Last night I thought it'd be cool if there were some weather effects. So I implemented a simple snow and rain particles. You can't really see them in these screenshots, but it looks pretty sweet in motion (along with the soothing raining sound). At first I made the particles all over the screen but it looked funny over un-discovered tiles so I made them appear only over visible tiles. This way it's not as distracting.

Also, native's villages! No one lives there yet, though.

[Bandreus]

Good to hear you're up and rolling with the project as ever! Pioneers is promising and I've been loving what you've done so far.

I'm a bit torn about the specifics with the gameplay still. I do get you're trying to establish the main engine, systems and mechanics first, but I feel like it might be the time for you to set some generic direction for the real game, goals for the levels, something like that. Even if you end up changing stuff along the way.

Chances are you might have done this already but I missed it, apologizes if that's the case.

[Eigen]

Good to hear you're up and rolling with the project as ever! Pioneers is promising and I've been loving what you've done so far.

I'm a bit torn about the specifics with the gameplay still. I do get you're trying to establish the main engine, systems and mechanics first, but I feel like it might be the time for you to set some generic direction for the real game, goals for the levels, something like that. Even if you end up changing stuff along the way.

Chances are you might have done this already but I missed it, apologizes if that's the case.

Thanks for the support. I get what you mean and at times I'm a little worried myself too, because designing gameplay and such is not my strong suit, but compared to things I've made previously, I'm actually having fun playing around with it even in its current state (just going around the maps, seeing animals and whatnot). That's good, I think.

Here's something I did yesterday that should shed a little light what's the game all about:



Don't mind the things on the right side of the book above the close button, the labels are all wrong. These will actually be Desc., Obj., Rew.

[Bandreus]

Wow nice, it's amazing how quickly Pioneers is shaping up to be a better and better game.

So you're thinking about setting goals (like quests) for the islands in order to progress throughout the game?

[Quarry]

Good to hear you're up and rolling with the project as ever! Pioneers is promising and I've been loving what you've done so far.

I'm a bit torn about the specifics with the gameplay still. I do get you're trying to establish the main engine, systems and mechanics first, but I feel like it might be the time for you to set some generic direction for the real game, goals for the levels, something like that. Even if you end up changing stuff along the way.

Chances are you might have done this already but I missed it, apologizes if that's the case.

Thanks for the support. I get what you mean and at times I'm a little worried myself too, because designing gameplay and such is not my strong suit, but compared to things I've made previously, I'm actually having fun playing around with it even in its current state (just going around the maps, seeing animals and whatnot). That's good, I think.

Here's something I did yesterday that should shed a little light what's the game all about:



Don't mind the things on the right side of the book above the close button, the labels are all wrong. These will actually be Desc., Obj., Rew.

There are some errors on top of description (single pixel lines)

[DustyDrake]

I think that's rain.
It's in one of the other pictures too.

Could you put a white outline around the axe?
I almost didn't see it at first.

[eigenbom]

This is shaping up nicely!

[Laitch]

nice progress

I would love to see those weather effects in action... Maybe you could make a small gif animation? (or should I just wait for the next build?  )

[Eigen]

This is shaping up nicely!

Cheers, mate!

nice progress

I would love to see those weather effects in action... Maybe you could make a small gif animation? (or should I just wait for the next build? )

Thanks! I tried recording a video and turning that into a gif but the quality wasn't very good. I'm at work and the screen capture thingy in QuickTime player is all I could use. I'll try to make a new gameplay video soon. But if you want, you can take a look at the

. The rain is starts at 0:15:35 and the snow is at around 0:20:08. Pop out the player for larger image.


On development side of things: I'm thinking about / working on a simple combat system at the moment. It's way trickier than I expected. This system will not be the final thing but since I wanted combat in the new build and I don't want to take another month developing it, it's very basic. You click on an enemy to 'engage combat mode'. You can then perform an attack a certain number of times (based on the stamina attribute) before the counter reaches zero and the enemy strikes back. All combat is many-to-one. That is your character can only attack one enemy at a time but you can use several men to attack one enemy. For now at least. I'm still wondering if there should be a similar attack counter on enemies. I mean, if you fight a bear with three men and each have 3 shots but you only use 2 for all, the enemy does not get a change strike back. I think it'd be fair if after a certain number of attacks the bear strikes the nearest/weakest man. Otherwise you can easily overpower the enemy. Which is realistic of course, 3 vs. 1 would be quite a one-sided match in reality but that way things could be more interesting.

Aaah, I don't know! This system sucks ...

Any ideas, guys? Lose the 'engaged in combat' mode? Go for simple 'One man attacks with a sword' > 'enemy strikes back' > 'I fire a couple of arrows with another man futher away' > 'the enemy strikes the swordsman because he's the closest' > 'repeat' ? The upside is, the player could be attacked by two or more enemies at a time. You just click on the one you want to hit. I'm thinking the attack counter could work here as well, the only difference is you're not tied to just one enemy. But what if I can attack 2 times but hit just once and then walk away? Should that constitute as my second move to allow the enemy to attack me? And again, if you fight a bear with three men and each have 3 shots but you only use 2 for all, the enemy does not get a change strike back. One hit could solve this because the response is immediate but I really liked the idea that higher the stamina attribute, the more hits you could do. Otherwise I only have strength paramter to adjust the hit damage for melee weapons and perception for better aiming of ranged weapons. Of course you can fire several arrows before the enemy reaches you so that helps a little ... maybe that's it? Melee wepons do more damage but ranged weapons allow you to hit several times before getting hit back.

Sorry for rambling, I was just thinking out loud. All ideas are very much welcome.


This is the last hurdle before the release.

[Bandreus]

Given how you're willing to implement a very basic, not-set-in-stone combat system, why don't you go a step further and make it even simpler?

Simply put, you move a character, swing your weapon, the enemy has a chance to immediately strike back -> rinse and repeat.

Stamina would still act as a limit to "how many swings a character can strike per turn", and you can also implement something like that for enemies too (say, a bear can land 4 attacks a turn, a wild dog only 2 or whatever you see fit etc.).

You can even make it simpler (1 attack per character/enemy per turn). If you find yourself in doubt about how to implement stuff, just make it even simpler. You will be able to fix things up later ofc, but you'll have some solid feedback to think about cause of new build being out.

[tchassin]

If you're not sure about the combat system, keep it simple. I like the 1 guy = 1 attack idea. If you are not happy with this system, you can improve it later.

[Eigen]

If you're not sure about the combat system, keep it simple. I like the 1 guy = 1 attack idea. If you are not happy with this system, you can improve it later.

...
Stamina would still act as a limit to "how many swings a character can strike per turn", and you can also implement something like that for enemies too (say, a bear can land 4 attacks a turn, a wild dog only 2 or whatever you see fit etc.).
...

I'd like to keep combat and game turns separated since game turns advance time by one whole day. Currently what I have is when you attack, the enemy hits back. Then it's your turn again. But when you move or do anything else but attack then that also constitutes as your 'move', so the enemy gets to hit again. Tonight I also wrote simple projectiles for ranged weapons so you can actually see the arrow (more like a dot) flying. Tomorrow I'd like to complete the combat system and start wrapping things up and maybe be done with it on Sunday

[Bandreus]

I'd like to keep combat and game turns separated since game turns advance time by one whole day. Currently what I have is when you attack, the enemy hits back. Then it's your turn again. But when you move or do anything else but attack then that also constitutes as your 'move', so the enemy gets to hit again. Tonight I also wrote simple projectiles for ranged weapons so you can actually see the arrow (more like a dot) flying. Tomorrow I'd like to complete the combat system and start wrapping things up and maybe be done with it on Sunday

Looks to me you've a nice and simple system there man

[JobLeonard]

You might want to add some kind of disadvantage-vs-melee mechanic for ranged attacks.

[Eigen]

You might want to add some kind of disadvantage-vs-melee mechanic for ranged attacks.

Sure thing. Obviously, ranged weapons do less damage and there's a chance of missing the target altogether but they use up less energy than melee weapons, so it's balanced out.


Anyway, I got a new gameplay video uploaded. It's nothing special but shows the new developments. I hope you like it!

[Quarry]

It really feels like a game now

[Nu-Type]

This is coming along nicely!

[Franklin's Ghost]

That latest video is looking so polished. Really coming along well. The text you've written seems to also fit nicely. Great job  .

[Quarry]

1500 is pretty meh though, 1512 would be better

[nikolaus]

You might want to add some kind of disadvantage-vs-melee mechanic for ranged attacks.

Early gunpowder weapons also had a fair chance of blowing off their carriers hand instead of hitting the adversary.