Game Dev Thread. Post what you're working on. Ask questions. As a game dev myself, I will try to answer any question.
Is there an easier way to do 3D gui's than this:
Using another camera and having the actual 3d Objects floating in space off far away from where the player will ever go?
In general, what is a good way to do nice start menu's? Like, buttons that move around and look good? Right now, it seems like I just need to build the whole menu state machine from scratch, which is a bummer, because it seems like such a reasonable thing for a game-designing software like Unity to have built in.
Go to youtube and find a GUI tutorial for Unity. As with anything, once you've practiced more with menu design and the various functions GUI has, you will become more and more better at it.
You shouldn't need to use a second camera and 3d objects to make a GUI. All you need is an empty object as a controller. The GUI appears in-game, not in the 3d environment. Also, I recommend not using the buttons Unity gives you. Go into photoshop and design your own buttons, then apply them as GUI textures and put an invisible button over it. That should work. Pretty sure the GUI.skin function is what allows for importing custom-made buttons and other objects.
Ah, thanks for the advice! I'll try that.
As for the 3d D GUI, what I meant is in this video. I've made a 3d thumbstick on the screen for people with tablet devices.
Not really a question, more a request.
I was watching Konjak learns from Metroid Fusion and I'm not sure if it's just him instead of the topic and presentation that I liked, but I found myself really getting into the video more than other Metroid or video game analysis critiques and reviews usually grab my interest.
It's about 9 minutes and very casual yet manages to convey so much more with so little compared to 20 or 50 minute multi-part series normally do.
In fact I find myself listening to it quite often when I want to relax and think about video games from a different angle.
Anyway, what I'm saying is if any of you feel you have the chops I strongly implore making a similar series. I think it would be interesting to hear people interested in making games actually talk about the aspects they appreciate, admire, enjoy and so on that influenced them. Especially if we could get an enthusiast from each genre to say a few words.
Maybe get a vocaroo guy to read the scripts and someone for the video presentation to help use examples from footage to elaborate.
tl;dr I'm fiending for Konjak to talk about video games and need a substitute to take off the edge.
Just finished modeling out this room in my game. Time to start texturing this bitch.
Is Unity good for making a 2d platformer with smoothish gameplay? I wanna make something simple just to break myself into the field, and was thinking of a really simple platformer with simple combat mechanics.
Isometric RPG. Test bullshot from yesterday.
Since you have models, have you considered less-isometric camera angles, like in the Alone In The Dark or Resident Evil series?
Isometric RPG is a dime a dozen out there, and thanks to realtime 3D models you can instantly show any and all odd camera angles, unlike the above mentioned games. It would introduce a bit of variety, I think, and showcase the environments better as well.
I think I need to update something which is why it looks weird.
I'm making it in GML as i am still very amateur at coding, so far i can jump and climb walls and shit. Love the progress i've made.
I want to make a 2d sidescroller. With wall climbing like ninja gaiden and street fighter 2010 and some other aspects from megaman X. I want to make it about a robot who's looking for it's master in a twisted alienesque post apocalyptic wasteland. I want it to feel good, punching mutants in the face, splashing mutant blood everywhere, i want titanic, disgusting bosses, explosions and shit everywhere.
What kind of music do you guys think would fit? I want the player to FEEL the urge to punch monster in the dick and making them explode.
I thought about mixing the two. I actually like pre-rendered backgrounds, like the ones in RE1-3 and FF7-9, way more than the isometric look, but for the sake of grid-based combat, isometric is the way to go. I was thinking maybe having this room be pre-rendered (pic related) and dungeon areas like >>268103218 will remain isometric.
Only blender. I've used 3ds max in the past but since you need to pay a lot of money for it, I just switched to Blender.
Post pics. Also, Metal Gear Rising-like music.
All engines handle it differently
Some use Occulders to hide what isn't seen but the downside is they are placed manually
I know for Cryengine (And most likely Unity and UDK) have a system that automatically hides what isn't being rendered on camera
>for the sake of grid-based combat, isometric is the way to go
There's nothing to prevent you from indicating the grid on the ground from any camera angle
Why prerender at all? GPUs are powerful enough nowadays. Let it realtime render within a quarter of a second or so, when the screen changes. Opens up a shitload of camera angles, without blowing up the size of your game
Yet-to-be-determined-a-developer-or-not-fag here, looking for guidance.
What do you guys do to finally settle on what you want to make? Where do you start? Do you write it first or mess around with an engine to figure out where you want it to be?
I'm trying to find that start, myself, and I don't know where to begin.
Read up on portals in the Doom 3 engine. They're placed automatically and so densely, basically anything that has even a hint of a chance of not being seen, is culled before even hitting the remainder of the pipe
There are a lot of ways to do it. If you haven't done anything before, try and think of a simple fun game you could work on and go with that. Don't try and do anything incredible, if you can make something simple work you will feel great and get used to the basics of working with your language/engine of choice.
I started by just messing around with the engine (used cryengine) and made something simple
Start simple for your first project and don't worry too much about it, think of it as a giant learning course, spend a few months at it, maybe keep building on it, or work on something different with your newly learned skills
I currently am in the very early stages of developing a game, and I just thought of a concept and how the game should play and build from there, always thinking ahead so I don't have to redo things
Try to figure out what you want to make first, 2D, 3D, first person, third person, platformer. Then make some quality controls.
You can think of unique gameplay to add after you know you can make some proper stuff. Visuals come last, such as models and textures.
Make some stuff flying by the seat of your pants. Don't feel bad about making lots of shitty half-games as long as each one is teaching you something.
Eventually all the ideas from your shitty half-games will converge into one solid idea.
>Doing the Space Shooter unity tutorial
>Press fire doesn't shoot bullets
>Followed everything up to that point perfectly
As you can see there's not much to show. I want to make sure everything works (Wall climbing, dashing, attacking) before getting into the spritework. i was thinking about a robot with gorilla arms. Using [pic related] as a weapon.
and that's why tutorials suck. When people just copy them blindly, they get stuck. It's far more important to understand WHY you're doing something. That's crucial to be able to debug it, because then you know what you're looking for
>you used a comma someplace instead of a semicolon
I heard it isn't really taken seriously (for the engine, I mean), but I ended up getting GameMaker Professional while it was really cheap ($30) because I figured I wouldn't want anything that advanced for what I would need it for. A friend told me to mess around with UDK (not UE4) since it's free and go from there. I guess I'm just really trying to find the motivation.
Thanks! I'll give a look-see.
>Checking the 2D Sidescroller tutorial
>lel download all these scripts and paste all this weird code!
Been trying to make a metroidvania for the past 3 years but I just cannot get into coding, im thinking about doing a small "movie demo" to get the attention of a programmer and do the fucking thing, Im really good at art but I just struggle so fucking much with coding
As a person working on a fairly popular game with a pretty large and experienced team, AMA.
I'll try to answer everything that's asked but some things I simply can't answer because pic related.
Lots of projects NEED an art guy. You got all this crappy retro pixel junk in part because these games are written by coders that can't draw at all. Join existing projects, or collaborate with coders, you'll make some coders really happy that way
Well don't worry too much about the tools, they can make life easier but can make it difficult as well
I mean Hotline Miami was made in GameMaker, so if it gets the job done it doesn't matter
For motivation that can be tricky, when I started it was because I just wanted to make games and viewed any start will lead me down the right path. So really just any reason, even the reason of just doing it will lead to a more focused reason
Here is my first game
It's simple and not very impressive, but it was a start and had a good time making it
No one is perfect at everything, I work much more smoothly making art assets then coding but found "substitutes" for it
There will be someone who wants to make games too but can't into art, and that is the gap you can fill
>know basic programming logic
>know how to declare variables, call upon separate methods, do decision structures (if statements) and loops in Java and VB
How ready am I for game development/programming guys
It would be hard to exaggerate any horror stories about the QA/Testing process, especially with a team like ours. While we may be large (I think 30+ people, there's no definitive list that I know of), a lot of have never made a game 100% before, and the project we're doing is by no means small. So in a situation like ours, we're forced to take it slowly, and more often than not by the time we fix one bug, two new ones crop up somewhere else.
I've always wanted to learn how to make my own games, but I never stuck with it. I used to use Game Maker, then eventually I started learning C#/XNA. I was in a programming class at my
community college, but I dropped it because I kept sleeping in and missing it.
Pic related. I had my own Mega Man engine in Game Maker.
If you're just doing shit in Unity and don't want anything super complicated you can already start. If you want to be able to do interesting things or not use a restrictive engine then you're going to have to git gud. No need to do it immediately though, it might turn you off practicing coding without getting into making games.
make a game from scratch without frame works. Like very simple game space invaders or something. If you can do it and like it, then you are ready. Not everyone needs to be engine programmer tier.
Not a recommendation I'd second. Engines take out all the annoying grunt work, allowing you to focus on your game. The "from scratch" writing sounds like massive freedom, but it's not. You spend the majority of time writing chores like the game loop, input handling memory management, etc. It's not pretty.
>or not use a restrictive engine
Very few engines are restrictive nowadays. It might take a bit to get the concept of an engine, but then they, more often than not, become very valuable tools. Unity isn't a very restrictive engine. It gets a lot of shit from people, but it's pretty free in its application
>it happens when doing a project alone or in small groups
I suppose that's partly the problem. Nobody I knows is interested or cares about that stuff, so I never feel that motivated for it.
What a great video, I'm in CS right now and I fit into the "I'll make my dream game" category. I have trouble seeing myself hating my dream game if it ever gets realized although it's probably possible.
>work at a small company doing service
>get put into stage/level design for this MMORPG
>building levels in a 3D environment with our in-company tools, pretty fun
>want to use this experience to find a new job
Most level/stage design positions these days also include modeling, anyone have any tips for someone trying to get into 3D modeling but would already be familiar with working in 3D space? 3DS Max seems pretty familiar, but I suppose tips for a new 3D modeler at all would be nice.
How good is the engine optimized? Because i could run Dead Space and Resident Evil 5 meanwhile i had very low framerate and long loading times with Among The Sleep.
Was that game badly optimized or is the engine?
You can practice some of the basics, but you're going to need to know more than that to do anything too serious.
I remember making a basic turn based game pretty much as soon as I knew how to do text input and output and variables. I also did a little game where you move along a grid and dig to try and find buried treasure. When you'd find it you'd earn some money and the map would reset with a new treasure, and you could use the money for a few upgrades and shit. Nothing major but it will help you figure out how to better lay out the code to make things happen.
I'm developing a simple side runner game for PC and Android using Gamemaker Studio as a side-project to practice my programming, so far it's been pretty good, i've got the basics mechanics and physics ready, just need to finish drawing the sprites and creating the levels.
Now you see that's the issue for me. I'm not familiarized with optimizing, so i don't know what to do to make sure the sprites adapt to most common resolutions and don't get all low quality because of the stretching. I've hard that Vectorizing each sprite with an software like Illustrator does that, can anyone familiar with this stuff tell me more about it?
Also i'd like to ask your opinion on another big subject, which is the content of the levels. I innitially thought of making endless, randomly generated levels but i've been tinkering with actually just creating a really long level with 2 main paths, so the player could enjoy the game a bit more by having 2 different paths to choose every level. Which of these do you guys prefer? the gameplay consists of dodging obstacles with up and down dashes and breaking special objects by punching them. As the level progresses the player will always enter somekind of vehicle or suffer somekind of transformation, get sped up and at the very end there is a boss fight in which you must doge the Boss's attacks while shooting it, it's a mash-up of regular runners with space ship side-scrollers.
>How good is the engine optimized
Does not compute. The engine is a generic framework. A lot of the optimization is done by the developer. That said, modern hardware has plenty power that even Unity stuff written for clarity, instead of performance, should do just fine.
From what I gather the engine needs alot of attention during development to optimize it
Don't have a ton of personal experience with Unity but with how drastic optimization is from game to game I say it's in part a developer problem because of the engine.
>wind waker lite in space
>fly around in a ship
>explore galaxy, collect powerups by going into planet atmosphere
>by the end hopefully have 25-30 different "points of interest" in the galaxy
can't do art for shit so i've just stolen everything from open game art for the time being. what's working:
>basic exploration (ie a map with a bunch of planets on it)
>a few basic planet "surfaces" (aka levels), none finished yet
>a few different enemies
>find an artist
>fill out content (weapons, powerups, enemies)
>start scripting bosses
>create actual open-able map
>create the "radar gun" (just a ray that points in a direction and tells you when it comes into contact with something, for exploration)
i'd post webm but i'm on osx and don't know the first thing about screen recording on non-windows
So can a 3D model made in Blender be used in any game engine?
I've always been a traditional artist, but I'd like to start learning 3D to give myself something new to play with
Oh i see, i decided to avoid any games with that engine and considering /v/ general negative opinions about it i though the engine was the proble.
Thanks for the fast answer.
PS: Why does /v/ hate this engine by the way?
So what do you all think. I've been planning out a game I want to make for a good long while now. It'll be a side scrolling action game (I know, I know...). I have almost no experience programming in 3D but have done some simple games in 2D before in school. Would you guys recommend learning Unity to make the game 2.5D or should I just scrape together my own 2D engine and keep it sprite based? It's going to look like ass either way until I get someone to help with the art, but I just wonder what you all think about those two options.
Basically I'm trying to draw inspiration from metroidvanias, having a big map to explore and getting movement skills along the way. But the combat will be kind of inspired from muramasa and the final fantasy tactics samurai class - you'll find many different weapons (they will be common drops) and breaking them to use special moves.
Thats also a big problem
Ideas with no idea of workload, everyone is an "idea guy" but some know what it takes to get something in whereas others think it can happen "just like that" without a clue how it works
That is by far the biggest step forward for any developer, my starting idea was too big and as I learned how things are actually done it becomes clear what can be done and what can't in a sensible manner
I think it's a cross-opinion from /agdg/ on /vg/. they view anyone who doesn't use a custom made engine as casual/not a real developer, plus the fact EVERYONE uses fucking Unity or Game Maker to make their games now a days.
Depends on the Enigne, the big three of Unreal, Cryengine, and Unity support FBX imports so you can easily bring stuff in, but from working with Cryengine it still needs some work in comparison to it's competitors as it's still much easy to use the 3DS Max and Maya importers they supply
Because they don't know about what they are talking about.
You see the problem with so many shitty games with Unity it's because it's a relatively easy engine, and the amount of shit it lets you do. Many people that use the engine don't even know too much about optimization, memory usage, or even simple programming principles.
>Why does /v/ hate this engine by the way?
1) /v/ hates everything
2) some think it's uncool to use anything but their own handcoded engine. They're the ones that usually don't get beyond a prototype phase.
3) since it's a free and easily accessible engine, a lot of stuff made with it is ... insufficient. Stuck in an early development stage, crude physics, bad art, etc. Basically, make a tool available to the masses and most of the masses will do shit with it. It's like giving a chisel to a normal person. Most people will just cut a crude something out of a block of marble. But a skilled artist can and will use the same chisel to sculpt something crazy awesome. Same with unity. It's just a tool, and requires a skilled user
>the fact EVERYONE uses fucking Unity or Game Maker to make their games now a days.
It's almost as if the good tools dominate the scene, crazy.
the fact EVERYONE uses fucking four wheels on their car
the fact EVERYONE breathes fucking oxygen
the fact EVERYONE uses fucking money to pay for things
You get the idea
If anyone here is a drawing art concept guy I'd really like your help in creating a hand held sonar gun.
/v/ probably hates it due to the fact the many develpers make shit games with it and how even professional ones while not looking spectacular run horribly
It's a good start that would be interesting to build, I say give Unity a try since it's free and does the genre well, UDK could also do it pretty easily
An engine from scratch could easily be a ton of work compared to using per-made engines, but you would learn a lot about development from an engine standpoint
I say weight out the pros and cons and choose from that
We don't have a position that's just 'rigger' but we do have a need for some animators at the moment. I'm not going to link our website here directly because the moment I do that, people will start screaming 'viral'. But do look us up -- Tripmine Studios. Give our job descriptions a look-see and shoot us an E-mail if you're interested.
AS someone in level design let me say that randomly generated levels almost never fully worth the experience unless there are enough variable that change every game to make each game or play through different, like FTL.
Try to design levels yourself whenever possible in these types of games is my opinion.
Ever realized how it's not actually everyone using Unity but a vast majority of these projects?
Thanks for being contrarian shitheads instead of actually thinking for a moment. Stay angry, /v/
I've always loved Harvest Moon since the SNES and I've been itching to make my take on it. Only problem is I feel overwhelmed by the sort of features that would be necessary in a game like that.
I guess my question is how do you overcome the scope of your game before you even start?
establish them (game design document), break them down into modules, implement these modules.
What helps especially is to get a functioning prototype early on, then expand it. That way you can play-test early, see if your concepts work in reality
The simple answer that people don't want to hear is: Just make easier games first.
This is assuming you are talking about your first game endeavor, but if it seems daunting and huge then seriously tone it down. Put that great idea on the backburner, add to it time to time, and focus on a simpler idea to start, even if its not a game you'd be SUPER into, just try to come up with the simplest idea that still makes you excited.
It's not so much that you'll hate the game you make. It's just the fact that you, as the creator, necessarily cannot experience the game in the way you envision it.
A good analogy for this is making a film - you'll never be able to make, for example, a horror film and get scared by the jump scare, because you know it so intimately by the time you have put it together into a watchable state that you'll see it more as all the bits and pieces that came together.
So, you can watch your horror film, but you can't enjoy it the way a typical moviegoer enjoys a horror film, and you certainly can't ever "see it for the first time".
Although, that doesn't mean you can't enjoy it. It just means you're stuck with a slightly different experience.
On a tangent, that's also the reason why playtesting and shit is so incredibly important. Because by the time you've done the first level of your platformer 7000 times, or solved the same three puzzles of your puzzle game over and over for months, you'll be far removed from the experience that the player is going to have when trying to play that first level, or solve that first puzzle, and you will have trouble judging difficulty.
This also applies to varying degrees. I'm sure the developers who work on something like a fighting game or an arena shooter can still jump into the game and enjoy a multiplayer match, whereas someone developing a point-and-click adventure has nothing to explore and next to no emergent gameplay to discover.
So are the tools in Blender and 3DS / Maya similar?
Like if I fuck around and learn how to model well in Blender moving to one of the other platforms won't require me to learn everything all over again right?
He said everyone uses Unity or Game Maker
He said everyone uses four wheels on a car and uses money to pay for things and implied everyone breathes oxygen because it was the best thing to breath. We were belittling him, Like I'm doing to you now you stupid cunt.
For me I think simple and build from that, like what features are need to make the game work and expand on them
For a Harvest Moon style game would require quite the workload, I say start with the basic features and build it first on a smaller scope, then add features too it after the basics are in
This way you can view each new feature as a tiny project to your overall work, and just keep doing that until your get desirable game
They are similar in theory, but the fact that the UI is very different in some places, it wont be TOO quick and easy a transition.
Look at it this way: When most companies are hiring a 3D modeler, they usually don't require specific modeling with their program, they are usually good with any modeling experience that applies to the same type of work, a lot of them are interchangeable for the most part.
Especially shortcut keys, which are almost universal in every 3D interfacing program.
>On a tangent, that's also the reason why playtesting and shit is so incredibly important. Because by the time you've done the first level of your platformer 7000 times, or solved the same three puzzles of your puzzle game over and over for months, you'll be far removed from the experience that the player is going to have when trying to play that first level, or solve that first puzzle, and you will have trouble judging difficulty.
That's why you need good gameplay. A game with good gameplay can be replayed over 7000 times.
>It's not so much that you'll hate the game you make. It's just the fact that you, as the creator, necessarily cannot experience the game in the way you envision it.
What if it's a
I found Maya/Max have better user tools, working in blender feels weird to me, but you can do a lot of the same stuff just have to learn how to do in said tool
Obviously Maya/Max are more refined because most companies pay and use them, but with the right knowledge Blender can give great results
If you want to try the bigger tools you can download the student versions, sure you can't sell anything used with them but you can at least compare them through personal experience
that's some helpful advice, thanks, anons
>That's why you need good gameplay. A game with good gameplay can be replayed over 7000 times.
That's missing the point. When you played your particular level 7000 times, you may still enjoy it, but you're a veteran at the controls. If you were to design a level in that state, you'd cook up something that's easy and natural to you. Then you let someone inexperienced play it, and it ends up being hard as balls, simply because you didn't account for your experience.You need outside opinion occasionally to get a reference point for "inexperienced" player. Not casual, not retard, but inexperienced in your game.
>What if it's a multiplayer game?
Doesn't matter. You wrote it. You know the engine bugs, you know the implementation details, you'll be a bit like Neo "seeing" the Matrix
How many studentfags would be willing to work on a Hunger Games meets Chivalry game that is half way done with payouts paid by the milestone?
I'm needing to work with somebody while I handle the design/business/web dev/legal sides of things. I'm sick of paying people hourly and not getting anything done.
>What if it's a multiplayer game?
Like I said, it applies to varying degrees. Some games and styles lend themselves to being fun despite, or thanks to, deep and intricate knowledge of the software.
Studentfags love unpaid work for a stranger on the internet.
No, I'm serious, especially on the art side of things. Hell I'd help but I only know how to model in 3DS Max and I don't have a legal version except at my work.
> It's just the fact that you, as the creator, necessarily cannot experience the game in the way you envision it.
I think this is kind of the way it is for every single creative endeavor, hell even in Dungeons and Dragons the DM goes in understanding the "fun" and the world that his players are experiencing will be completely different to his.
Anyone interested in this little project I made? It's basically a fortune teller which gives you funny cards. There's some hidden stuff in there, like
nude modebut otherwise it's very basic.
I don't wanna go around spamming a link if people aint interested and I know how paranoid folks get when a .exe file is shared. So if anyone wants to try, I'll post a link
>That's missing the point. When you played your particular level 7000 times, you may still enjoy it, but you're a veteran at the controls. If you were to design a level in that state, you'd cook up something that's easy and natural to you. Then you let someone inexperienced play it, and it ends up being hard as balls, simply because you didn't account for your experience.You need outside opinion occasionally to get a reference point for "inexperienced" player. Not casual, not retard, but inexperienced in your game.
I read your earlier paragraph a bit too quickly. What I meant is that good gameplay can make repetitiveness bearable. Like you pointed out, a game focused on story loses its replayability. For difficulty, I guess that's why you hire alpha testers for having a fresh pair of eyes on your project.
That's exactly the "judging difficulty" aspect of it. Just look at a game with user-created maps to see this in action.
Take, for instance, Portal 2 - some maps are made by casuals, and consist of literally nothing more than placing a box on a button to "solve" the "puzzle", while other maps are made by people with a lot of experience in Portal and Source games, and might feature "puzzles" involving the use of bunny hopping mechanics, climbing walls by manipulating held objects, that sort of thing. And to an unfamiliar player, these things would simply be an impassable barrier to completing the level, whereas an experienced player might not even realise consciously that he is air strafing to gain extra distance across a gap, and so on. It's just in the way he plays.
Exactly. It's sometimes difficult to hear the "music" in a track you've participated in recording - especially with analog instruments, as you tend to hear the quirks of your performance, or get immersed in a scene of a film in which you are the actor. It's an odd sort of dissociation.
I'm making a video game about an amnesiac walking into a city in a distopian future, logging into a computer to enter his name and information, and then getting sucked into a virtual world where he is supposed to be doomed to stay forever. In order to leave, you must manage and solve relationship issues with other characters, and ultimately defeat the horrible super hacker, SSJMaster. The in-game game is based on the happenings within the community of MyAnimeList's forums, which regularly has a hacker named SSJMaster come in and screw up the site's database and post gore in the forums.
The game is being made using RPGMaker, and its still in its EXTREMELY early stages.
Here's a video of what currently exists of it:
its because of the webmcam program to lazy to make good webms. sorry but I did provide a link to play the game, just give it a sec to load since its not made originally for the web
>For difficulty, I guess that's why you hire alpha testers for having a fresh pair of eyes on your project.
Right, but it's not just the difficulty, it's every aspect. After a week of devving, the way your platformer guy is jumping becomes natural to you, and you won't be able to judge if it feels "too floaty" or something, until someone else plays it with a fresh pair of hands. The orange background in your level just starts to look like home, until someone else sees it and goes "holy shit, this is burning my eyes".
Thats it for me tonight. I'll probably work more seriously on the textures tomorrow. Does anyone have any good tips or tutorials for texturing? Shit's the hardest thing for me.
I actually remember a dev log for Stratosphere. The game had the unexpected problem that the controls were shit. The game had placeholder controls early on. The devs got used to them, kept them in. Playtesters approached and noticed that most of the controls were entirely backwards, awkward or needlessly convoluted. The devs didn't notice. They worked on this so long, all the obscure hotkeys were second nature to them.
I'm doing a dev. tycoon/gamersGOmakers clone.
I liked the concept of the game, but I think a lot of potential was not taken.
There were several things that I thought were poorly implemented. For example:
> To launch a game to a console, must be licensed.
all know that's bullshit. One of the main problems of gaming in the 80s was the oversaturation in the market for unlicensed games.
> Your game will be out for 90 days.
Physical copy (in stores): less than 6 months. It was quite likely to return unsold units.
It was also common to advertise your game magazines and send them by mail to those who requested it (as long as you had space in your home, there was not any kind of deadline). And things like that.
The good thing is that my native language is derived from Latin, so translate it to other Romance languages (French, Portuguese, Italian, Galician, etc.) will be a simple thing.
Indeed, you can get used to the strangest shit, if you just keep at it, and it turns into a habit.
Claw grip (for Monster Hunter, for instance) sounds like a completely fucking alien concept until you do it for 200 hours, and then you're not even aware that you're doing it.
Or pic related, which is apparently the way to hold the controller for some sort of complex Japanese mecha simulator.
Something I've been working on and off for a while. The basic gist is that I want to make a game where you play as monstergirls but I'm still not sure what direction to take this in. I'm debating whether I should go full blown B&K style adventure, a stealth game where you haunt houses and scare people, or some kind of hybrid between the two concepts.
Unity environment I worked earlier this year. No real game here, just walking around.
i'm making an FPS where you can activate npcs to initiate dialogue trees and activate objects to pick them up and activate containers to search them.
i'm just describing every piece of trash AAA game made in the last 10 years.
Eventually it'll come out
Unity, by the way.
when did i act biased against unity? i said the bar is set so low for the engine, and it is when graphically unimpressive games are shat out by people just wanted a quick scam
Thoughts on the mono-chromeness
I think it works, sets the tone
>i said the bar is set so low for the engine
How does it make sense to use the worst products created with something as a reference point? It implies that the engine's merely capable of shit, and anything standing out, even if shit compared to other products, is already a miracle. That's simple bias against the engine. Ask yourself, would you have said it "looks alright" if you didn't know the engine powering it?
Also dabbled in making a cell shader for a character I made. It can get pretty crazy, but they pay off in the end.
>How does it make sense to use the worst products created with something as a reference point?
you can use the best looking games on current unity for a reference point as well, the most graphically impressive games on the unity engine also look bad, unless you have something besides the newer versions
>Ask yourself, would you have said it "looks alright" if you didn't know the engine powering it?
yes, because it doesn't look great, it's just fine
>brother pirated Unreal 4
>obsessed with wanting to make a game
>learning all the tutorials and how the nodes work so he can make games in it
>has no idea where to start, keeps asking me to tell him what to do
>doesn't even know what game he wants to make, wants me to tell him the ideas and concepts
>I'm literally being asked to be an ideas guy
It's just not cost effective and it wastes everyone's time. Obviously over-use of repeating assets and such is a problem but if you are clever enough with those you made, then doing the opposite just seems pointlessly time restraining.
Of course I'm looking at this from a real business perspective as I work in the vidyas.
No related but Made me remember:
>the beginning of the game
>teleported to the lake with the monster for a moment
>progress to the canals
>reach the underwater barrels puzzle
>underwater visibility is zero.
>suddenly remember that part at the beginning of the game.
remember, underwater games are the most terrifying.
>I'm looking at this from a real business perspective as I work in the vidyas.
The old problem again. Video games treated purely as means to obtain a profit, instead of artistic labors of love, that happen to be profitable
Well, considering that I'm a hero prop artist/hobby environment artist I can tell you this. There are lots of ways to cover up repitition but the only true way to get good modular assets is to make a variety of each type of modular group. Commercial BuildingA Commercial BuildingB Commercial BuildingC all have different modular parts and you can combine and switch etc. But unique assets are good too, you just need to find balance. Sorry if I was harsh with you anon.
Not even programming language, they've practically moved everything over to a node based system, pretty much visual versions of the code. You basically just need to know animation, modelling and texture work if you want independent assets for your game.
reality heavily leans towards business. That's why we got this endless stream of lifeless "games" washing over us for the last couple years
Sounds like you're missing what I said. I'm not talking about high cultured pseudo-intellectual bullshit, just games being done for the sake of being good games. We've been there. Modern devs just like to think they "outgrew" it
working on background planet generation for some sort of space game, trying to decide whether to hand draw planet layout or to procedurally generate it, pic related is testing perlin noise.
We can agree there, I think as long as you are focusing on covering up repetition without also expecting the artists to remake every single similar looking area from scratch just to do so.
I would never advocate shit like making "block area" in a dungeon and then randomizing them to make "new dungeons" like the terrible "game" Dragon Age 2.
I use Blender for modeling and animation because I'm poor and I've gotten used to it by this point. There really isn't anything I can't do in 3DS or Maya that I can't already do in Blender unless it's something specialized like Zbrush.
Here's something that's low poly.
wellll im making a game like gone home but you play as a midget possesed by a demon who is trying to lure lolis to his basement. its a undermining to pro-feminist propoganda for the massess
What's the best way to have depth perception in a 2D isometric game? I'm currently just sorting all my graphics by their y-value so things with a higher y-value is drawn before things with a lower y-value (so the low y-value items are drown ontop and thus seem to be "in front of"). The sorting function that must run all the time however is quite demanding.
Any better ways?
Don't have any game to show yet since I've been focusing all my efforts on learning how to model and animate, and boy do they take time and still end up looking shitty.
At least I managed to get a free version of UE4 this week and started playing around with it. My only gripe is that this whole "blueprint just drag&drop!" system makes me feel kinda uncomfortable since I'm used to keeping everything game-related in code. Even if I start the project with nothing but C++ code, I still need to use the node system. Oh well, I'll probably get used to it sooner or later.
>The sorting function that must run all the time however is quite demanding.
Don't run the sorting function all the time. Maintain the order in some data structure.
>Any better ways?
Nowadays you can take advantage of 3D engines. Order the objects in virtual space, use a parallel projection camera and let the rasterizer take care of it. Anything drawn adds to the z-buffer. Stuff that would be behind other stuff will not even be sent to the rasterizer
There's no difference between 2D and 3D nowadays. To get 2D output you position the quads in 3D, bind the textures, then set the camera to parallel projection (as opposed to perspective projection). Depending on the coordinate system you want, you can, for example, set the camera at the origin and point towards Z. X and Y represent your screen coordinates, Z represents distance from the camera. The rest is done by the engine. In that case the Z coordinates of your quads automatically represent your ordered data structure as well
If you want to keep track of me you can check coropa.tumblr.com
I have a really bad habit about not publishing stuff that I make. I've never really taken modeling seriously until recently. I've always wanted to be a game designer and programmer but my lack of skill and connections within the video game industry pushed me to learn different things. I'm still not very good at making technically impressive models and sculpts but what I can do is do what I do often and every time try to improve a little more so I can get better.
Unless you fagets are capable write your own 3d engine, you worth shit. You don't have to use your own 3d engine, you must be capable of making one. Developing isn't about writing few lines of if-then-else code on some event or drag&dropping assets from one window to another.
>Spend a decade writting your own engine for one game.
>Spends millions of dollars and man hours only end up licensing somebody else's engine instead.
Make your own engine they said... Totally worth it they said...
Got it bookmarked, thanks. I see you're mostly doing characters, which is cool.
I got a real weakness for low polygon artwork though. You know what I'd love to see? If you (or anybody interested) would grab any current game that interests you, and then "re-model" the screen as a low polygon game. Especially if it's scenically complex games, like Skyrim or Crysis, or overly modern, like Elite:Dangerous. Am I making any sense? Like a "DS port", if you will, limiting yourself to a hard 4k ot 5k tris. Just a single scene, no animation or anything. Not a request, I'm just drooling out loud. Low polygon artwork is just so awesome
I never really cared for it until I saw that cute Elite Knight's outfit Dark Souls low-poly model, then I lost it.
Also low poly is great for cute "deformé" or chibi stuff like >>268116152
or for instance Bravely Default, which I fucking love love love the style for in so many ways.
>see your Roll model
>like it more than the official Might No9 models in general
Remaking an android math puzzle game I did in the past, but using Unity for the extra tools that I didn't have in the basic Android SDK.
...I mostly just don't want to work with the old tools.
a basic 3D engine isn't really a feat. Most student do that as a hobby during programming classes.
Most of it is about copy pasting direct X or Open GL tutorials together and give them a coherent interface and structure.
>I never really cared for it until I saw that cute Elite Knight's outfit Dark Souls low-poly model, then I lost it.
I firmly believe that we have not even fully explored the capabilities and beauty of low polygon artwork. Back when it was "necessary", on the PSX and the likes, we didn't have the tools, we didn't have the experience on how to effectively use the few polygons. We had a different kind of expectation for art. Now though, now that we have all these tools, knowledge and stuff, we don't "need" low polygon assets anymore. That's why I'd love so much to see modern low poly artwork. We entirely missed out the "we know what we're doing" phase of low poly 3D. I believe there's a lot of potential in it.
Pic related. That famous TF2 group image with each character being barely 500 tris and less than 256x256 in textures.
The entire group for about 5k tris, less than a single modern Lara Croft. That stuff is just incredible
I downloaded unity recently, looks fine and all, but... is there an actual tutorial for that thing that isn't fucking streamed lessons? I can't learn like that. I need text and pictures. Videos are horrible because I need to get back so often in my learning process.
Any book/pdf around?
I'm already competent in C# too, so the more code and less UI automated the better.
Well if Pixel art still has a place in this world, I really don't think low-poly 3D should be written off so easily either. They are honestly both the same thing at this point, since there is no real reason to use pixel art other than to emulate the style of the time, due to limitations.
I understand where you're comming from. There's a certain charm that low polygonal models have. I really love games like Vagrant Story that a have fully realized 3D worlds that use low poly. One of my most desired games to make is a fully fleshed out adventure game with a low poly aesthetic. If you enjoy that kind of stuff you might get a kick out of this.
How would you like to keep in touch? I know you can send messages on tumblr but the system isn't very well designed for conversations.
>to emulate the style of the time
Got no interest in that. It was a confusing experimental time with a lot of fail.
Now that's the key. I love subjecting myself to limitations. It's like an electronic musician making an unplugged album, a director directing a b/w silent movie, a writer writing poems (rigid structure) or a painter picking up pointilism. Limitation, to me, has a huge appeal
>there are people who actually believe this.
I don't even know if it's relevant to the topic, but yeah, kinda.
An RPG on fucking RPG maker that's supposed to parody RPG clicher and all that shit.
Well no need to nitpick the term, what you are talking about is basically the same idea. Honestly pixel art would have no point if there wasn't a time when we did it due to graphical constraints. That doesn't mean we can't take the idea now and expand upon it, but to deny that the large popularity and use of pixel art today is due to the popularity of the time would be silly.
The same applies to low-poly 3D art. You can focus on what about it you liked and improve thanks to the technologies of our time, but to deny the origin and the popularity being because of the origin is extremely odd.
There's something about the reduced amount of visual information that really tickles the brain - human brain is good at imagining things, filling in blanks, yadda yadda.
In other words, if you have less visual information, then the viewer can fill in the missing pieces with something nice, whereas if you supply all the details, they might not live up to the extent of a person's imagination, not look as good.
Pic related - I set Dark Souls to a tiny tiny resolution and took a screenshot, and the result looks vaguely reminiscent of something that could have been on PS1 or even a PSP. The lack of pixels doesn't seem to bother the (my) eye much.
>what you are talking about is basically the same idea
Sorry if I sound nitpicky, but I really do consider these entirely different things. I have NO interest to do NES style, SNES style, PSX style, or what ever. I have huge interest to limit myself to 4 colors per tile, 128 tiles per image, 5k tris per scene. If anything, the DS is a better example than the PSX. It's modern, but has this hard limit of tris per scene. That's appealing to me. It's not retro, it's limitation. I do consider this a massive difference. To stick with the examples I gave: a modern b/w movie is not trying to be retro, it's trying to be a modern movie using a limited aesthetic.
>but to deny that the large popularity and use of pixel art today is due to the popularity of the time would be silly.
Oh, there's the misunderstanding. A lot of people indeed DO pixel art for the retro reason, and try hard to look like NES, SNES or what ever. However they usually disregard actual limits. It's more a kind of artistic emulation, than a challenge. The emulation bores me. Yes, I implicitely called a lot of modern pixel art boring, because it missing, to me, anyway, that special something, the desire of the artist to do their best.
>You can focus on what about it you liked
LIKE, present, not past.
>deny the origin
Like, the DS? The "origin" is not necessarily nostalgia or age. It's the desire of artists to cope with limits.
Definitely. I'm not sure yet what to put in it, but I thought the long road seemed too bland myself. I'm just having a hard time determining what would fit the setting and mood with what assets I have and not be out of place in that location. I still have very limited assets. The whole reason the road is long in the first place is because I wanted to give some time for the music to kick in and help set the mood.
Triple AAAs don't, so why should you?
You know that picture reminds me of those old pre-rendered games that use sprites of 3D rendered models and the entire look has a very heavy pixelation. Another thing about old school 3D is the rendering. The most iconic thing for me about the Playstation was the way it rendered 3D graphics.
The tris of a model would always whobble because of the limited amount of positions a vertex could be placed in 3D space and distorted textures due to affine texture mapping. Just looking at gameplay of games with complete 3D environments like Tomb Raider and Soul Reaver bring brack a rush of nostalgia.
One bit I forgot: While I love low poly, for example, I'd not even hestitate to render it at 1080p or higher. I want to SEE all these polygons. If I were interested in some retro appeal of the PSX I'd limit myself in resolution to "hide" the polygons. It's an artform, a modern one, not necessarily rooted in old gaming.
Likewise I'd love to see pixel artists actually recreate modern environments or games while sticking to hard limits in terms of tile count (without tile limitations you can produce artwork like Commandos levels)
in most games you cheat. Like put a collision on that platform edge, then run a simple "new position = old position + impulsion force - gravity; impulsion force -= resistance" and tweak the values manually until it looks good instead of trying to imitate a reality that will always looks like shit.
As a game developer who produces game(s) on unity. What are your thoughts on the whole of Unity? Is it a good way to design vidya? Is preferrably used for less taxing grafic games? Or flash games.
The thing is your limits aren't arbitrary. They aren't random limits you pulled out of your head because they look the best or feel the best, they are limits that come based on what areas were popular and limited similarly.
You bring up the DS a lot, but that just further proves that you want a limit that is familiar and common to you: a limit you know and is famous. It's a limit we saw lots of games for and that's why there's a capacity to move towards it.
I'm saying there is an inherit connection to liking the style and the style being one that we were once forced with and was popular due to the fact we were stuck with it. There are a lot of pixel artists who were inspired by the retro SNES style and now work on pixel art because of liking stuff from that time but wanting to improve it or see what they can do with a similar aesthetic but with a little but also using today's technologies and such.
And honestly even if you still personally like low-poly only because of the limit and you don't care about any original style used at any of the time, you hated PS1, you hated DS, etc. etc. then you'd be in the minority.
What I'm saying is most people like a certain visual style of game that is severely limited because it was common to a lot of games at a time. The style they like isn't because they really arbitrarily enjoy this amount of polys or this amount of tris, but because it was something they knew and wanted to see what they could do with it to bring that "style" back but better.
At the very least if you disagree for yourself personally keep this in mind that everyone else is thinking like this if you ever want to market this style in a game.
It's alright, easy to get started and it allows porting to a lot of different devices.
Fairly excited about unity 5, when lighting, shaders and other things stop looking like shit.
>Is it a good way to design vidya?
Dunno, I tried it but this tool has shitty tutorial section so I gave up early. They clearly don't give a shit about beginners, it's made for professionals who already know the workflow of game making and know where to start and how to go to the end.
Flash is shit, but at least you can easily find tutorials that explain you programming from scratch without talking to you like a retard.
Games where graphics matter = Unreal Engine 4
Games where gameplay matter = Unity3D
Games where they never come out because the company can chose to revoke your license and leave you up shit creek without a paddle = Cryengine
It's really neat for less ambitious projects, pretty much perfect for those wanting to get into game development but have trouble starting off. Although if you're wanting to get on a more professional level you may want to think about specializing.
I'm not trying to make you sad, but don't you people realize you have approximately 0 chance of ever making a living -or even making money at all- with this stuff? I mean, you can't ignore that creating games is like being an actor, artist or pop-star: it's just ridiculously over-saturated with delusional people thinking they are the special ones who are going to make it. I just can't comprehend why anyone would want to put themselves through a situation that has a 99.9999% chance of failure. Everything out there says that all of you will fail. I'm not trying to be a dick. I don't feel superior to you. And I can totally understand why you love the craft. I just don't understand why you would put yourself through that pain.
>inb4 trying to achieve your dream is always better than not trying at all
Not with these chances. That's like jumping out of a plane hoping to softly land on a mountain of gold.
For the record here's what the DS could do.
You can survive a freefall from a plane if you know what to do. Terminal velocity is not enough to kill you if you know how to transfer the momentum out of your body upon landing.
Coming to this thread late:
>I am a graphic designer and illustrator
>Get commissioned by various people (always programmers leaving their previous jobs) to design their vision for some new indie vidya that they believe will take the world by storm (sometimes Unity, most often iOS mobile platforms).
>Usually do logo design, concept art, UI design type stuff
>They all plan on going through Kickstarter
>They all believe they are going to get $50 bajillion dollars like Star Citizen
>They all are programmers through-and-through with shitty creative ideas:
>Their game premise always lacks a truly unique angle, and always has hackneyed names/plots like "You are the last of humanity and must fight The Dark Others who came from space to destroy humanity, but they secretly are the Old Ones who are the ghosts of humans sent into space a billion years ago and you must fight them with your SpaceMarineSpartans!"
>I do my thing, the clients fail to get their millions of dollars or just never develop the game and disappear from the world
better? I tweaked some things. I think I want to replace the brown texture at some point, too.
>The thing is your limits aren't arbitrary
Oh, yes, they are. I could take 5k tris and no system out there would actually have these limits.
I could limit myself to 256 tiles of 16x16 each, with 64 total colors, and no system would have these limits.
>They aren't random limits you pulled out of your head because they look the best or feel the best
I picked limits because we have established that artwork around these limits is possible. Look at the TF2 example again, where the guy arbitrarily set a personal limit of 500 tris per character. No system enforces any such limit.
>You bring up the DS a lot, but that just further proves that you want a limit that is familiar and common to you: a limit you know and is famous.
I bring up the DS because it's barely managable in terms of polygon count. It's the right level of challenge to produce something good looking. I could as well say "nah, too easy, let's do 3k instead" and it would be just as fine.
>you hated PS1, you hated DS
Oh please, don't fucking go there. Fucking false dichotomies piss me off to no end. I have never had a PSX, never played one. I have a DS and enjoy it more than the 3DS could ever hope for. I love the low polygon limits. Of course that means I have a liking for systems that enforce them. It does not mean I want to emulate these systems.
>What I'm saying is most people like a certain visual style of game that is severely limited because it was common to a lot of games at a time
I don't give a damn for "the time". I care because I love the concept of expressing as much visual info as possible in a bare minimum of actual data. When simple 4x4 texel become complex "objects" just because they're drawn on the right polygon, THAT is what I love. Don't give a shit about old systems, at least in that regard. I play a lot of old games because they cope with these limits, while modern games look unappealing to me because it's all "too much", but that's a function of visual complexity, not age.
Have people managed to make a unity game for the wiiU.
I was surfing about Unity a few days ago and found some pages telling that it's apparently piss easy to make indie game for the console, and also cheap. Is it true or a scam? People tried it?
>At the very least if you disagree for yourself personally keep this in mind that everyone else is thinking like this if you ever want to market this style in a game.
I understand that people think like that, and it frustrates the hell out of me. Because whenever someone is actually interested in low poly artwork, they just want to re-do what's been done decades ago, going all "nostalgia" and getting glassy eyes. "Retro" is one of the most crippling aspects of modern pixel or low polygon art, because it keeps artists from thinking
>don't you people realize you have approximately 0 chance of ever making a living -or even making money at all- with this stuff?
We do, maybe more than you. Modern development tools enable us to do gaming development as a hobby, without relying on it for a living. We can actually experiment and create games we enjoy. Others may play baseball in their free time. Do you tell them to stop, because they'll never make it to the NLB?
>I just don't understand why you would put yourself through that pain.
It's not pain if you enjoy it. Do you understand why people practice for marathons? Go to one, watch them drool, shit themselves, puke at the finish line. You won't ever see happier people.
Why is it so hard to find 3D assets? 2D is OK, you can just google and copy pasta and that's ok (for an amateur game, not a commercial product, or course), but when you want to make a 3D game, it seems that nobody distributes good 3D models anywhere.
>They all believe they are going to get $50 bajillion dollars like Star Citizen
If they're in it to get rich, they deserve all the troubles they get. Game dev is hard and painful work. Got to love it, or else
>Not having a team with a producer, designer, artists and developers
I don't do it personally, I have a few brothers still in school who are into computer science and one of them's set on making games. It's just a passion you know you'd want to follow regardless of how comfortable you financial situation is because of it.
I applied to be a Nintendo Developer a while back and I'm still waitng on their response. As far as I know they give you Unity Pro for free and publish your game on the eShop if you apply as an indie you and you don't need to pay for a Wario World license.
I think it may be in part because 3D assets, like indie games, is something that people decided they could easily make and sell to become rich, whereas the 2D sprite era was perhaps a little before e-commerce and such.
Turbosquid, for one, has gorillions of assets in all sorts of formats and of all quality ranges, all the way from free to professional.
Yes, poorly. So, I'm pretty much done with it. Though it beats being paid poorly working at an ad agency designing informational brochures for cleaning chemicals.
They aren't doing it to get rich. They want the money so they can hire or better pay me (and some of the others they bring on). One game I've been working on for the greater part of the year actually has a full team, and all of us just have a royalties deal and actually stand to make more than the lead because he's gotta shoulder a lot of costs and stuff. But I'm ready to leave the project because my initial optimism has been in a steady decline.
I don't like 3dcg-arts as much because you can't look at the wireframes which is half of the when when looking at low poly models.
I'm not telling anyone to stop. And even if I did, nobody cares why I think.
I like the marathon analogy . I guess other people just don't constantly have the same pessimistic -although statistically accurate- thoughts in the back of their minds that I would have. Or if they do, they are overshadowed by the fun they're having with it. I guess I would constantly feel shitty knowing that it is very likely that almost nobody will ever play the game I'm making. Which would suck away the fun for me. But I realize that not all people think like me and it's probably in their advantage that they don't.
>It's just a passion you know you'd want to follow regardless of how comfortable you financial situation is because of it.
I guess that's hard for me to wrap my head around. I can understand people who are willing to sacrifice a better paying job for a job that they enjoy doing more that pays less, but I can't understand someone throwing themselves in a situation where they might not make enough money to survive, not make any money at all or even lose money. Again, that might say more about me than about other people, but that's how my brain works.
Anyway, thanks for answering. I do think can understand you a bit more now.
I'm okay with feeling the pain and the burden and possibility of failure.
But I have to try. I'm currently going to college for Computer Science, am learning Python and plan to learn C++, planning on taking some art classes, music classes, and taking a game design class, all just because I want to be able to make video games. I have to try anon. I'm already in too deep. There's no turning back. Its do or die.
>taking a game design class
Just do a Ludum Dare, asshole, don't waste your money on that garbage.
Game design goes beyond just cooking up a game. You learn something about flow, pacing, working with (or against) player expectations, difficulty curve, etc.
A lot of independent games lack in these things.
I made 1200$ over 3 months from a shitty android game I made in a couple of weeks.
If I could literally keep the same amount of income with a better game, I would be perfectly content with my life until old age. 400 bucks is plenty enough to use in a month.
The recipe for success these days isn't trying to make a block buster, but more like having 4-5 games at the same time. People are more willing to spend 3$ on a minigame than 30 on a full game.
I am in a game design class and I can confirm this.
Bonus for having a teacher that actually owns a dev team of his own and has made videogames.
You learn how to avoid beginners mistakes and teaches how to skip a lot of shit that bogs you down when making a game
Please teach me your secrets I've only made 45 cents off my app so far.
I don't think it's easy to live on 400 USD/month unless you live with your parents or something. That's like 300 EUR, I spend that per week on groceries alone. I don't think you can live from that especially if you have a family/pension-plan/house/.. And that's IF you keep selling as well as you did that time.
testing lego normal map, seems to work
thanks for the advice, gonna go to bed
>That's like 300 EUR, I spend that per week on groceries alone
The fuck? I buy the stuff for my family (dad, mom and two other brothers plus my sister with her son visiting every now and then) and it's usually around 120-150 euro per week.
I'm seeing what I can make before 7 a.m.
I downloading GameMaker and currently trying something.
I don't know what I'm doing, the sprite editor shat on me and I can't edit it even if I'm IN THE FUCKING SPRITE EDITOR WHICH IS IT'S PURPOSE
It can add up, though. If he can make like, one shitty app every month and each app makes 400$ per month for 3 month, it can be a worthwhile model. Especially since even after the big first income, an app might still gets you a dozen of extra $ per month for a year.
the more you spam cheap games, the more money you make.
Just make clones of what sells, and undercut them on the price.
I'm sharing a room with a friend, he works as a game tester for a big company, he also invited me to work there but I decided that I'd rather make my own games.
It's pretty good though, I only pay half the rent (100 bucks) so I get to spend 300 bucks on food and everything else I want, maybe subtract 50 for electricity and internet etc.
I live in east europe however, so the standards for living here are lower I guess(As are the prices, 1000mb internet goes for 17-20 bucks around here).
that's why the indie scene being an "oportunity for everyone" is a lie. If you don't live in the US or any other lower income countries, you just can't compete. there's no indie scene in europe because people must ask for way more money than the same product made in the USA just to pay the bills.
I can only draw and model low poly stuff
is my only hope at vidya a VN on renpy?
>low poly stuff
Post it we love that kind of stuff.
>rent is 250
Wher do you live that the rent is that low?
I used gamemaker for a "game design" class that was being offered that counted for my CS major, just use paint and import the images, less hassle.
Not that GM is "bad" but I hated all of its resource editors.
I'm mistaken. I didn't see the per week part.
I never said I was good
Yeah, that is what I am doing pretty much, but paint/gimp won't allow me to make the negative space transparent. I tried earlier and the erase tool does that in the sprite editor.
Okay and it's working again after I restarted it for the 3rd time.
It does exist, mainly because there's so much employee supply, but it is indeed smaller. It's also easier to get bailed out (to some extend) if your company fails, but you don't really get a clean-sheet second chance like you would in the US (if you have the money). So I guess it's easier to try, but also easier to fail.
also this and other stuff
in gimp you need to enable image or layer transparency before the eraser will actually erase. Yes, it's fucked, but that's gimp for you.
For sprites more relevant, in gimp you can set a color to be transparent (also in the layer/image menu), which is how old school sprites operate anyway
That's true about just about any public tool though. If someone doesn't really get programming, optimization, the importance of putting actual effort and quality, and just wants to use the fancy tool to make a game, it's going to be shit. It would still be shit if they didn't have that tool and were using things like C++ and basic to scrap together a game. Likewise someone capable could use Unity and make a great looking/functioning game because they were competent in the first place and just didn't feel the need to make a new engine for that game if something like Unity is already out.
That being said a few options like Unity attract more faggots than others.
Just something simple I suppose.
I based it off of the "Fancy Pants" flash game that I seen my little brother play the other day.
I had an internship at a company that made crappy android/ios games.
The work wasn't amazing, they try to release a game once every 10 weeks.
But we played smash at the end of the day, and actually finishing a game for once was pretty sweet.
Not when it takes over half my weekly money, not including power, internet, food, literally anything. Also I have to pay off debt that my previous flatmate left me with, as New Zealand courts are fucking retarded and won't do anything about it.
wow, churning through "games", that's a sad business model. Get away from there before you lose all love for gaming. Because they sure as hell have close to nothing to do with gaming.
seconded. In fact, using an engine allows you to get all the non-game-specific grunt work out of the way. The game loop's always the same, the way to pass the model data and program the shaders is always the same, a scene graph will always be the same. A physics engine is a standard task and so on.
With all that out of the way, you can focus on the stuff that actually makes up your game. You can create assets, but also develop the data structures, the AI, the particular details of your physics, script your story, events or what ever you need, etc. Re-using stuff someone else wrote before is the smart way to go about developing. That's why abstractions and stuff were developed to begin with, to faciliate reuse, freeing the programmer to create, instead of re-creating over and over again.
Sure, there are use cases for highly specialized engines, on all levels. Knowing when to, and especially when NOT to cook up your own stuff though, is part of what makes a developer smart
Anyone tried out the Mozilla Humble Bundle?
What did you think of that glorious WebGL via Unity 5?
I'm fucking pumped for it. I've been screwing around with GameMaker for ages now just to have some sort of IDE on top of WebGL, but I can't wait to switch to Unity.
10 weeks is rather long to make a small game. I used to work in a place where we only allowed 5 weeks to develop the game. plus 2 for debuging. It works and actually keeps people motivated, cause long projects will put people into routine that will disgust them forever.
>It promotes lazyness
Your programming skills are worth $x per hour. So you could cook up a bad imitation in y hours, or buy a module for less than x*y dollars. Modularization and outsourcing are not lazy but allow you to focus on the stuff you do that is actually different from all the other things out there, you can focus on creation.
Kind of wish I could get a group together to just make a stupid of android games for fun. Like I would make the code and they would make the art assets or vice versa, but none of my friends are into game development and I don't have any money to pay random strangers with.
Doing 5 "games" per year sounds like just plain churning through established patterns, cookie cutter assets and blocks of story or gameplay facets to rearrange. It's not so much about creating something entertaining, something new, and more about just providing an endless stream of entirely exchangable "content without any personality or attachment. Turning games into a "consumer" item is, in my opinion, a really bad thing. I'd probably rather do hobbyist game dev than end up in such a "game" factory
That's a dream, but it can only work if everyone is ready/willing/able to do work on similar levels of ability on the project(s), otherwise it all falls on a few individuals to do most of the work like some high school group project. Hell that was still happening in college.
>>Unlike Flash, you can't remove it from the browser.
All browsers currently supporting WebGL can disable it easily in their about:config screens.
NGUI is a interface framework. Shock horror, game devs use frameworks for these sorts of things.
- It doesn't do the work for you
- It doesn't magically generate GUI art assets out of thin air
It's simply a set of tools and classes on top of the default existing Unity ones (which might as well be the Apache Flex UI).
>can disable it easily in their about:config screens.
That's really helpful, especially when some other vector silenty re-enables it. The code's buried deep in the guts of the browser, and accesses unrestricted system functions. Just because it's behind a flimsy wooden door, doesn't mean someone with malicious intends won't smash that door
>I have no idea why I am even angry about anymore.
Seriously you think an addon suddenly make the whole game for 100$? that shit is empty of data. It still takes work to make it good. God I hate when uneducated faggots who clearly never programmed shit try to tell us how to work "better" just because they lurk some indi forum for weeks.
It's an issue if premade assets/functionality are all people use and they don't get how any of it works. That's why so many people get confused, like "I don't know why this wall is invisible" because it's a plane facing the other direction. At the same time if they know how everything works and all of the principles behind it (clean code, normals, whatever) they aren't lazy if they use the tools that take care of the busywork, especially if it's done better than they can. I wouldn't agree with just buying everything from the asset store for unity if it meant you never learn to do it yourself, but using unity at all is far from a lazy sin.
People can buy butter. They aren't some lazy casual because they didn't walk out of the city, trudge 50 miles to a farm, climb over the fence, milk the cow, run from the farmer, walk all the way back home with a bucket of milk, then churn some shit butter instead of buying it.
At the very least they would drive there.
>>when some other vector re-enables it
What are you even referring to? Gonna provide source for this bullshit?
You do understand how wrapper frameworks function, right?
WebGL is a wrapper around OpenGL. The wrapper is COMPLETELY DISABLED when you turn it off in about:config.
WebGL isn't magically still running in the background, even when you've turned it off.
Stop making shit up.
It's not, though. Once you have a decent game skeleton to use, you are free to make whatever you want. It's not about using premade assets and gameplay, it's about having a preset format of data, a standard UI and state machine and a standard navigation logic to reuse. this doesn't make the game at all, but once you have that, you can focus directly on the game play, skipping weeks of works every time. Your first 2-3 games will usually make you create tons of classes that you can reuses latter. Sprites, sounds, multi languages, and so on. that shit only need to be done once and upgrades later for your specific needs.
Even if there might be nothing there right now, there WILL be something there. In a week? A month? A year? Who knows. These are internet-facing programs. They're attack surfaces. You keep them as small as possible, because you can't protect it.
>The wrapper is COMPLETELY DISABLED when you turn it off in about:config
So all you do is add about:config as interims step to exploit the WebGL layer
>The browser completely removes access
The browser does not change code. The code's all there, and just because the browser will flip a switch because you tell it to, doesn't mean the browser won't flip the switch when someone malicious tells it to.
Yeah that's depressingly true. I want it to be pretty laid back, but the idea would lead to a lot of procrastination. It's hard to find good people who are dedicated nevermind doing it for free. I still like game development a lot it's something I do constantly I just wish it wasn't such a lonely affair.
Frameworks are fine, I'm not advocating to write stuff from scratch. With that churn rate though you need a very specific framework, to produce a very specific set of games, and what ever "games" you develop, they must rely on long established gameplay, as balancing is not really possible in such a short time period. They need to stick to a specific and very narrow form of writing, since actual authoring of a narrative beyond something episodic is not possible in such a short timeframe. What you can basically do in that short timeframe is re-colors (as in, swapping out assets) of story variations you did the last couple times, possibly recombining various standard gameplay modules
Not sure if that's a good thing or a bad thing
I forgot to add: at that churn rate creativity also suffers. A person can only "produce" so much before losing itself in generics and repetitions. I do not expect much quality from the creative aspects of games made from such an assembly line developer.
That's why I'm doing a solo game project at this point. "Officially" I have a group of friends all wanting to do development on a game, but things aren't getting done. Work, finances, family, etc, are all important and still happy to be friends, but the bottom line is that the work isn't getting done or is subpar thus far. Current (group) project is weeks behind schedule, and I've had to pick up a lot of the slack. Short of doing EVERYTHING in the game myself, which I will not do, I just have to wait for people to get it done. So in the meantime, solo development/work it is for me.
You're still flashing buzzwords around that don't in any way help your point.
Fun fact: If someones able to do something as malicious as modify your fucking about:config parameters, THATS THE ISSUE.
The issue has NOTHING to do with WebGL, you already have someone maliciously fucking with your web browser, why would it matter if they're specifically changing access to WebGL?
Heck, this argument could be applied to literally anything the browser has which is exploitable:
So I don't know why you think this is specifically relevant to WebGL, because it's not. If someone can fuck with your browser settings, it's already too late.
>If someones able to do something as malicious as modify your fucking about:config parameters, THATS THE ISSUE.
Which compromises that particular user config of that particular browser. It's still isolated to a program that can be deleted or its config purged. Then they use that to gain access to a system level API and use that for a priviledge escalation or worse. Now your entire system is fubard and nothing beyond a full wipe can save it.
A mistake as bad as WebGL
used to be a plugin, it's now yet another attack vector.
Yeah, none of these things belong in a browser.
>I don't know why you think this is specifically relevant to WebGL
Who said anything about "specifically" relevant? It's relevant because WebGL exposes attack surface. Plenty other plugins do too. Until recently WebGL did not exist though. I don't like the idea of devs repeating mistakes, like tightly integrating system functions into internet-exposed software. WebGL is in the terrible position (shared with Java and ActiveX) that it specifically gains access to system level APIs. That is always much worse. PDF used to be safe, but Adobe damaged the format to the point that it now also exposes so much of the system, it might as well be treated like a system level API.
if you ask what makes plugins so different: They can be removed entirely. Not disabled, removed. Even if someone were to compromise the browser's config, JS engine or whatever, there is nothing there from the plugin that could be exploited. Plugins are the preferred mechanism to expose bad code, because users can simply not install them, if they have no intentions to use that function and do not want to expose its vulnerabilities. Yes, it means I'd be "fine" with webgl being a plugin, and I'd remove it instantly. The plugin api though comes with a performance penalty. Anything beyond basic protection comes with a performance penalty, and lack of performance is toxic for stuff like webgl. So it is unlikely to ever find its way into a plugin. Of course there's also the aspect that for some reason browser devs think plugins are a bad thing to begin with, and instead try to create the all-in-one internet-facing vm. It's like we learnt nothing
I try to make a 4chan image downloader to see if my skill at programming is good enough to try to make a 2D game. I finally did the 4chan thread image downloader, so I'm happy my skill is not shit, at least.
I'm an illustrator and sometimes I feel like I'd want to make a game but every time I try I feel like the time I'm wasting becoming mediocre at programming I could be spending getting better at art.
As far as I know when (if) they contact me they will setup an appointment for a dev kit so I can develop and test on, and when I'm ready to publish I send them the final build and promotional materials for review for the Nintendo Seal of Something...
People will contest how MUCH you need to know thanks to the tools and assets provided, but yes you still generally need to know programming.
Unless you're making a 10/10 walking simulator using default resources.