true coco believer - Page 4

true coco believer

A dynamic game undergoing constant development and refinement, that attempts to balance playability with fresh and innovative features.

Moderator: Content Developer

luckywaldo7
Posts: 1397
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: true coco believer

Post by luckywaldo7 » 23 Feb 2012, 18:59

smoth wrote:Most commercial games don't have hundreds of people playing them over a span of 5-6 years, most commercial games have some suit going "MAKE IT LIKE THIS but THIS 2.0." Don't forget the players and devs who's feedback and time have made ZK what it is. Hobby projects have MUCH higher potential for gameplay due to the fact that people working on them are free from the constraints of working for someone else. Just my opinion but either Ivory was being very rude or very dismissive of the people out there actually developing. I don't mean to downplay anyone's role here just saying I don't think he is making a fair comparison either mocking or exalting google and sak.
smoth wrote:
Working to that kind of requirement and deadline is a part of what being a commercial development house is.
you need to work as a developer for a few years. The goals are never realistic, the timeline a pipedream, the deadline and features are seldom a fixed mark.

if by competent players you mean someone like godde maybe.
So basically, all commercial RTS developers are inherently bad at RTS design. True ambitious strategists will never let themselves be caught in such a development trap.

Disclaimer: This post for entertainment purposes, not serious.
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22295
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: true coco believer

Post by smoth » 23 Feb 2012, 19:29

yes, true strategists don't even bother with work and just stay at home playin' games to get the most out of their time.
0 x

dimm
Posts: 473
Joined: 01 Oct 2009, 23:03

Re: true coco believer

Post by dimm » 23 Feb 2012, 19:31

So LoL is ftp long running game that depends on players coming back regularly, wanting to play and pay but it still has poppy and sion. They do have draft mode though. Which is a quick solution to the whole problem. Let BA players remove units from their game 'draft mode' style and BA will be a whole better game.
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22295
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: true coco believer

Post by smoth » 23 Feb 2012, 19:33

wrong forum
0 x

luckywaldo7
Posts: 1397
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: true coco believer

Post by luckywaldo7 » 23 Feb 2012, 20:04

There are a lot of ways to be employed without being a game developer for a crummy company.

A good example of an RTS game with excellent design on a very limited budget is Achron. It's pretty obvious though from browsing the wiki and forums that Hazard loves time travel and RTS, and he combined those to make something very interesting and unique. He does a lot of interaction with the community, which is small but pretty passionate about it.

I mean seriously, if you decide to work for a large game company where you won't be allowed to make the kind of game you can love, are you really a good game developer? I can't begrudge anyone for trying to make a living, but I don't think commercial devs deserve any special praise for abilities they aren't using to their fullest, even if it is the fault of their employer.

Disclaimer 2: I don't work as a commercial game developer or as a hobby game developer (but I might know people who do)
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22295
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: true coco believer

Post by smoth » 23 Feb 2012, 20:07

Funny how I work as a developer doing web development because I refuse to be in the game development side of things. It is almost like I came to the same conclusion....

aka I agree completely. If you want to make a game you love, never get paid for it. I believe getting paid to develop a game is like whoring yourself, it takes all the joy out of the act and you are doing what others want you to do.
0 x

User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: true coco believer

Post by knorke » 23 Feb 2012, 20:24

Working to that kind of requirement and deadline is a part of what being a commercial development house is. You're forgetting that they have budgets for testers and a long Q&A cycle: A part of this budget should go on skilled players who will be able to break the game.
starcraft 2 had a mp beta for 3 months, during that time it probally clocked more player-hours than zK in its existence. [citition needed]
There were tourneys with skilled players and all that, and that is just the public testing.
Warcraft 3, Red Alert 3 etc had mp betas too.
A lot of the commercial RTS's that come out are broken by the players for online play within a few weeks
Same happend with zK.
At some time boost-building defenses in the enemy base pretty much ruined the game.
And with more players, even more glitches would be found.
All those things for ca/zk were patched quickly-ish but that created another problem:
Players got annoyed with having to update their game all the time. As a hobby project you can afford to have 5 patches a day, as a commercial game? Not so much.
0 x

User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: true coco believer

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng » 23 Feb 2012, 23:26

I cant think of more than a handful commercial RTS that have evolved significantly from the 1999 models. Supcom maybe, although I disliked mostly everything about the execution. Homeworld, AI War, Medieval maybe. any other contenders? starcraft 2 was basically a graphics patch.

The line-formation draw of spring is revolutionary. Is is used anywhere else? no. why? because commercial developers don't seem to know shit about what actually makes a good RTS. Powerful controls, NO pointless micromanagement and a massive variety of balanced strategies for starters.
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22295
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: true coco believer

Post by smoth » 23 Feb 2012, 23:28

battleforge was awesome but LOL microtransactions.
ai wars? sots?
0 x

User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: true coco believer

Post by knorke » 24 Feb 2012, 15:31

1v0ry_k1ng wrote:I cant think of more than a handful commercial RTS that have evolved significantly from the 1999 models.
In earth2150 you could dig tunnels. Metal Fatique had combat in 3 layers (underground, on ground, space) and huge ass-robots that could pick up parts from destroyed opponents. Dune:Emperor had sandworms eating units. Even the C&C series always has some original (unit) ideas.
Those are some of the most cliché RTS I could think off, not even starting about something like Perimeter or Settlers. Or games without harvesting like Ground Controll and Sudden Strike.
Some of those games sucked but it not was because of missing original ideas.
starcraft 2 was basically a graphics patch.
A graphic patch that raises resolution from 640x480 to > 9000. Much improved UI,pathing etc over SC:BW (trololo ui still not "as good" as spring) Quite cool mapeditor with much lolscripting too.
NO pointless micromanagement
There is endless pointless micromanaging in spring games.
Just one example:
Extra range by manually attacking the ground in front of units.
Image
It can be match deciding and every game has multiple units like that.
0 x

luckywaldo7
Posts: 1397
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: true coco believer

Post by luckywaldo7 » 24 Feb 2012, 15:46

Yeah, the laser overshoot sucks and it's been around forever. I think everyone considers that a bug rather than a feature though, so it isn't pointless micromanagement by design but by this-is-open-source-and-no-one-submitted-patch-yet.
knorke wrote:
starcraft 2 was basically a graphics patch.
A graphic patch that raises resolution from 640x480 to > 9000. Much improved UI,pathing etc over SC:BW (trololo ui still not "as good" as spring) Quite cool mapeditor with much lolscripting too.
Congratulations on countering IK's assertation that SC2 made no/minimal advances over 1999 gameplay by listing absolutely nothing that has to do with gameplay design.
0 x

Google_Frog
Moderator
Posts: 2434
Joined: 12 Oct 2007, 09:24

Re: true coco believer

Post by Google_Frog » 24 Feb 2012, 15:57

How do you do the laser thing? I cannot reproduce that at all and your described method does not work.
0 x

User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: true coco believer

Post by knorke » 24 Feb 2012, 16:10

Yeah, the laser overshoot sucks and it's been around forever. I think everyone considers that a bug rather than a feature though, so it isn't pointless micromanagement by design but by this-is-open-source-and-no-one-submitted-patch-yet.
If we are talking from a players point of view, the reason does not matter.
Congratulations on countering IK's assertation that SC2 made no/minimal advances over 1999 gameplay by listing absolutely nothing that has to do with gameplay design.
Could go on how ui and pathing have impact on gameplay but w/e. Editor makes towerdefense and stuff. Also half the units are different and there is stuff like vision granting towers, grass and golden minerals (<-zomg)
If you think "sc2 is just like sc1, except better graphics and minor changes" then the same could be said for TA and zK.
0 x

User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: true coco believer

Post by knorke » 24 Feb 2012, 16:22

Google_Frog wrote:How do you do the laser thing? I cannot reproduce that at all and your described method does not work.
see replay. With units that have some spray/aoe it is even easier. (eg the stardust (name? the gatling) turret can kill llt despite shorter range)
skip to 3:00 and watch at 5x speed or so, i was a bit slow with clicking.
zk 0.9.9.5
Attachments
zkrange20120224_161611_AlienDesert_85.sdf
(261.35 KiB) Downloaded 32 times
0 x

User avatar
Johannes
Posts: 1265
Joined: 17 Sep 2010, 15:49

Re: true coco believer

Post by Johannes » 24 Feb 2012, 16:48

knorke wrote:
NO pointless micromanagement
There is endless pointless micromanaging in spring games.
If something helps you win it's not pointless... Whether a kind of micro is fun or not, well, that's subjective.
0 x

luckywaldo7
Posts: 1397
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: true coco believer

Post by luckywaldo7 » 25 Feb 2012, 02:57

knorke wrote:
Congratulations on countering IK's assertation that SC2 made no/minimal advances over 1999 gameplay by listing absolutely nothing that has to do with gameplay design.
Could go on how ui and pathing have impact on gameplay but w/e. Editor makes towerdefense and stuff. Also half the units are different and there is stuff like vision granting towers, grass and golden minerals (<-zomg)
If you think "sc2 is just like sc1, except better graphics and minor changes" then the same could be said for TA and zK.
In my mind there is a hypothetical RTS interface where everything is seen inside your mind. Everything is controlled simply by your desire, and any game information likewise obtained by desire. (design info like unit stats, not play info about what is happening outside LOS)

Now when you design an interface, find the gaps between your actual interface and that theoretically perfect interface, and close as many gaps as possible. Basically you are looking to minimize the effects of the interface on gameplay. After all, you are looking to play the game, not play the interface. The interface's job is to let you do what you want and stay out of your way.

So in conclusion, if your reasons for your interface design involve wanting the game to be played a certain way, you are designing your interface wrong.
________________________________

As for the rest, have you played either of the Starcraft games or watched any casts? Watch-towers and grass sound good in theory but in practice they rarely have a meaningful impact, even (especially?) at the super-pro level. Destructable rocks have an impact but all the pro-players hate them because they are more of a nusance then additional game depth. And high-yield minerals screw up mineral/gas income ratios, and don't tend to be a serious point of conflict on lots of maps anyway. The major changes where improvements to the interface along the 'guidelines' I listed, just keeping it out of your way a little bit more more and preventing you from doing stuff less. Which is nice and an improvement, but not a gameplay change.

And your assertion to call Zero-K a graphical update from TA is just blind swinging. Remember how often CA was called a 'Tech Demo' or 'Developer Sandbox'? How everyone likes to complain about how the whole game has changed if they are away for a few months? If anything, it's suffered from too much changing and not enough polish on current features. I mean, if you want to lay some complaints about ZK, there are numerous possibilities. For crying out loud, dont chose one of the few things that happens to be one of its strengths.
0 x

User avatar
smoth
Posts: 22295
Joined: 13 Jan 2005, 00:46

Re: true coco believer

Post by smoth » 25 Feb 2012, 03:22

luckywaldo7 wrote:Watch-towers and grass sound good in theory but in practice they rarely have a meaningful impact, even (especially?) at the super-pro level. Destructable rocks have an impact but all the pro-players hate them because they are more of a nusance then additional game depth. And high-yield minerals screw up mineral/gas income ratios, and don't tend to be a serious point of conflict on lots of maps anyway.
It's like the spring community with features.. tossers
0 x

User avatar
1v0ry_k1ng
Posts: 4656
Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24

Re: true coco believer

Post by 1v0ry_k1ng » 25 Feb 2012, 15:23

lol, I'm not going to write an extensive counter-argument re: starcraft II because there is really no need (If you really want to argue SCII game-play significantly broke ground anywhere from its 1999 conception I'm going to go ahead and fling poo at you.) It gives lots of nostalgic people more of what they played 10 years before, and sure, alot of older gamers wanted just that. On the otherhand, lots of younger gamers have seen FPS progress from Doom to Crysis, and are sort of waiting for RTS to grow up too.

earth 2150 broke ground, but that game is OLD
sudden strike sort of broke a little ground, but that game is OLD
ground control ... ... OLD
etc
Sins was OK

to clarify, I am looking for games that were both good and an advance in gameplay and control .. that disqualifies perimeter cus that game sucked a big one multiplayer.

microfests are stupid, and reward practice more than intelligence. the future is in intelligent controls. Que a spotlight swinging back onto springs beautiful line formation draw. if someone else can point me to a comparable ease of control in another competitive RTS game, that could be ace.
0 x

User avatar
knorke
Posts: 7971
Joined: 22 Feb 2006, 01:02

Re: true coco believer

Post by knorke » 25 Feb 2012, 16:19

I do not even care that much about SC2.
I just find calling it simple "graphics patch" is a bit too much. Counterstrike Source was a "graphics patch" to Counterstrike. In SC2 half the units are different, that alone changes the game, despite it still being the same "acquireminerals, kill enemy" gameplay.
Though if you put it like that then zK is still "acquire metalspots, kill enemy", so yeah.

On pros not using all gameplay features:
200+ carefully balanced units, spam flash on completly flat maps like comet and red mars. :shock:
to call Zero-K a graphical update from TA is just blind swinging.
yea, some things actually look better in TA Image


Don't get me wrong: Whenever I play some non-spring rts I am like "gnaaah camera too close, shitty waypoints, no hotkeys, why cant i set this to hold fire, where is my iphone, why must i select units to see health, cant see weapon range."
But something like this is too general:
So in conclusion, if your reasons for your interface design involve wanting the game to be played a certain way, you are designing your interface wrong.
gameplay and UI are always interlinked: unless you allow every player to pause whenever he wants. (Otherwise you might still be limited by your clicking speed or overlook something)

In some FPS there is no display to tell you the amount of bullets left in the magazine. Sometimes even no healthbar. Flightsims do not tell you how much to lead your shooting, unless it is some fancy modern jet.
More informations allows you to play more efficient but that does not automatically mean more fun. It can be a design decision to leave out things, even in RTS UIs.
Sneaking units into a base withour your opponent noticing is fun.
With a perfect UI that would be impossible.
microfests are stupid, and reward practice more than intelligence.
But it feels fun in C&C generals to unload some jeeps into an enemy base, start to capture ALL the buildings and while he is busy running them down and disattracted, you kill his airfield or something.
When I want intelligence I play chess.

So, will someone already make the extra-llt-range-widget?
0 x

luckywaldo7
Posts: 1397
Joined: 17 Sep 2008, 04:36

Re: true coco believer

Post by luckywaldo7 » 25 Feb 2012, 17:26

knorke wrote:I do not even care that much about SC2.
I just find calling it simple "graphics patch" is a bit too much.
Calling it a 'graphics patch' is a bit of a hyperbole. Obviously things other than graphics changed, but at its core the gameplay was mostly untouched, economy being identical, new units only being a tweak or combination of old units, mostly identical tech-trees, etc. We exaggerate a little to try to make a point.
knorke wrote:gameplay and UI are always interlinked: unless you allow every player to pause whenever he wants. (Otherwise you might still be limited by your clicking speed or overlook something)
Think about the perfect interface more. Just because seeing and controlling is so easy, doesn't mean your multi-tasking ability is infinite. You are still limited to how much you can do, but your limitations are your own, not the interface's.

Which is the point of RTS. For unlimited attention to detail there are turn-based strategy games. You don't need to make a genre switch just because the perfect interface is impossible to achieve, you are just trying to get as close as possible.
knorke wrote:Sneaking units into a base withour your opponent noticing is fun.
With a perfect UI that would be impossible.
What do you think the minimap is for? Why do you think you get warnings when units are under attack? This is something thats already been standard in RTS interfaces, since 20 years ago.
knorke wrote:More informations allows you to play more efficient but that does not automatically mean more fun. It can be a design decision to leave out things, even in RTS UIs.
Like I said, it is the job of the interface to stay out of your way as much as possible. The correct reason to remove something is if the additonal clutter is not worth the advantage of having it. You should never be artificially inhibiting your player from getting to play the game.
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Zero-K”