Feedback

[DArtagnan]

From a graphical perspective, it looks like a game I would play. I've been gaming since the 80's, but these days I am quite a bit more picky about the graphical requirements of indie games. I think you are doing a good job so far.

Those are comforting words, thank you. It's incredibly hard for me to be objective about this sort of thing

 

[CrazyIrish]

Looks good. The only thing I might suggest are some shadows where the walls and floor /ceiling meet. I don't know if its possible to "bake" them in using your software, but that or an overlay of some sort might do it.

But yeah, looks very cool.

 

[DArtagnan]

Looks good. The only thing I might suggest are some shadows where the walls and floor /ceiling meet. I don't know if its possible to "bake" them in using your software, but that or an overlay of some sort might do it.

But yeah, looks very cool.

The shadow thing is probably a bit out of my league. The shadows visible in the images are because the wall textures are rendered with light throwing shadows. They appear in the engine without these shadows - but it's hard to tell the difference right now.

I'm probably going to do a simplistic lighting engine - with tiles having their own "light strength" - and possibly some tricksy placement of "light circles" where torches are lit. But I'm not quite sure if it's going to work yet.

But thanks for your input

 

[zzajin]

The art seems fine. The easiest crit I would give is add a small bevel to your beams so they aren't so sharp looking. To age them, you could also add a few loop cuts into the beams ( I assume they are basically cubes) and move the vertexes a bit so the profile isn't straight or put a small notch into them.

You could also try adding ambient occlusion to your renders.

You might consider taking what you have as a starting point and participating in the mini Ludum Dare compo next week. I find these are useful for focus, motivation, and learning. Even if you don't complete anything like me.

I've been working with Unity3D lately and plan on using the compo as an excuse to try and create some sort of dungeon crawler next week.

 

[DArtagnan]

The art seems fine. The easiest crit I would give is add a small bevel to your beams so they aren't so sharp looking. To age them, you could also add a few loop cuts into the beams ( I assume they are basically cubes) and move the vertexes a bit so the profile isn't straight or put a small notch into them.

Thank you for your thoughts

Sounds like good ideas. The vertical beams already have a bevel, actually - but the ceiling beams don't. That's because they're very long and I haven't been able to make a bevel that looks quite right. Should probably experiment more, though.

You could also try adding ambient occlusion to your renders.

How do you mean? Isn't that about shadows being applied in a more realistic way? Shadows won't be possible to render in the engine - and "pre-baked" shadows won't look right in my step-by-step engine. Well, it would certainly require a lot of fiddling that I probably won't want to do.

You might consider taking what you have as a starting point and participating in the mini Ludum Dare compo next week. I find these are useful for focus, motivation, and learning. Even if you don't complete anything like me.

Interesting suggestion, but I really have no desire to be competitive in that way. To me, the key is the game design and the mechanics, and I'll never be able to create anything even remotely like what I want in such a short time. I have zero interest in "small games" and making them in 48 hours seems like a meaningless investment of energy to me.

I consider coding and doing art a means to an end, and I don't have much passion in that way. I enjoy it because it will - hopefully - eventually lead me to my real passion, which is to design games.

I've been working with Unity3D lately and plan on using the compo as an excuse to try and create some sort of dungeon crawler next week.

Unity is supposed to be really good for this sort of thing. But I've invested too much time in XNA to abandon it for Unity. Pretty annoying, really, as Unity is great for porting to other platforms.

Then again, I have no intention of supporting anything but Windows at this stage. It's not a commercial project - but it's a nice thought to be able to stay afloat developing games like this. But it's far too early to really invest too much thought in such dreams

 

[zzajin]

How do you mean? Isn't that about shadows being applied in a more realistic way? Shadows won't be possible to render in the engine - and "pre-baked" shadows won't look right in my step-by-step engine. Well, it would certainly require a lot of fiddling that I probably won't want to do.

I mean this. And yes I'm not sure if it applies to your graphics creation.

Interesting suggestion, but I really have no desire to be competitive in that way. To me, the key is the game design and the mechanics, and I'll never be able to create anything even remotely like what I want in such a short time. I have zero interest in "small games" and making them in 48 hours seems like a meaningless investment of energy to me.

I consider coding and doing art a means to an end, and I don't have much passion in that way. I enjoy it because it will - hopefully - eventually lead me to my real passion, which is to design games.

It's not about competition really - except maybe for a few egomaniacs. It's about practicing game design: not coding and graphics. Designing games is a highly iterative process (hasn't Diablo 3 been designed and done over a year ago?) and practicing this is very beneficial. Notch - arguably a successful game designer who created Minecraft - participated in a Ludem Dare earlier this year. Amusingly, people complained that he should be working on Minecraft. Ludem Dare and other game creation competitions are popular because game designers - even successful ones - understand this practice holds a lot of value.

 

[DArtagnan]

I mean this. And yes I'm not sure if it applies to your graphics creation.

Unfortunately, I don't really think I can incorporate that kind of technology - except in a prerendered state that would make it look wrong in action.

It's not about competition really - except maybe for a few egomaniacs. It's about practicing game design: not coding and graphics. Designing games is a highly iterative process (hasn't Diablo 3 been designed and done over a year ago?) and practicing this is very beneficial. Notch - arguably a successful game designer who created Minecraft - participated in a Ludem Dare earlier this year. Amusingly, people complained that he should be working on Minecraft. Ludem Dare and other game creation competitions are popular because game designers - even successful ones - understand this practice holds a lot of value.

Well, I think it's great that people find something like that valuable. Personally, I'm conceited enough to think I don't need something like that to create a strong game design. But I'm also quite prepared for the nearly endless iterative process. I've spent years on it already

I'm not saying it doesn't hold value - just that I don't see the value for myself. It's not like I don't understand the challenge of creating a game - seeing as how I've spent sooooo much time trying to get started for real. I can't count how many times I've started on a design - only to give up due to various difficulties or real life obstacles.

Now I'm finally far enough along to believe I can really pull it off - but it'll take a LONG time and a LOT of work. No competition is going to change anything for me at this point. It would just distract me from what I'm trying to do, with the little free time I have available. I'm "practicing" almost daily - trying to get stuff done.

Such a competition is probably ideal for younger people who don't really understand the significant challenge of making even a small game alone. I think it's directed more at people trying to "break into the business" - which is somewhat different from what I'm trying to do. I'm more about the actual game, than having it sell or be successful. Even if I never finish it - it won't be such a big deal.

The scope of my own game is such that I have no need to be reminded of how much work is required

 

[zzajin]

Unfortunately, I don't really think I can incorporate that kind of technology - except in a prerendered state that would make it look wrong in action.

Yes, I meant in your prerendered images.

 

[Polarfox009]

Looking really promising. I think it looks pretty good already, much better then some other games I have played and enjoyed (like Sword and Sorcery: Underworld).

But there could of course be some improvements, the first thing I think about, is that it need some more dirt, mud, cracks, and other and other things to make it look more like an old dungeon. Some of the lines are too straight and "perfect", like those of the logs holding up the roof. The shield also looks to much like a perfect circle, some very subtle imperfections here and there could make it look more "alive".

From reading your posts I get the impression that you'r already aware of all of this, but I still wanted to give you some feedback.

Are you planning to make enemies that move around in the dungeon (dungeon master), or enemies that just appear out of nowhere (might and magic 2)? From making my mod, I have realized that making the same enemy from three different angles and one attack image, is more timeconsuming than making 4 different enemies from just one angle. Especially with enemies that are nonhuman, like spiders and wolves.

Even though I've had a lot of training in drawing the human body from different angles, I find it very difficult to make it look right. Maybe something to have in mind, if you want to limit the scope of the game.

 

[DArtagnan]

Looking really promising. I think it looks pretty good already, much better then some other games I have played and enjoyed (like Sword and Sorcery: Underworld).

But there could of course be some improvements, the first thing I think about, is that it need some more dirt, mud, cracks, and other and other things to make it look more like an old dungeon. Some of the lines are too straight and "perfect", like those of the logs holding up the roof. The shield also looks to much like a perfect circle, some very subtle imperfections here and there could make it look more "alive".

From reading your posts I get the impression that you'r already aware of all of this, but I still wanted to give you some feedback.

Are you planning to make enemies that move around in the dungeon (dungeon master), or enemies that just appear out of nowhere (might and magic 2)? From making my mod, I have realized that making the same enemy from three different angles and one attack image, is more timeconsuming than making 4 different enemies from just one angle. Especially with enemies that are nonhuman, like spiders and wolves.

Even though I've had a lot of training in drawing the human body from different angles, I find it very difficult to make it look right. Maybe something to have in mind, if you want to limit the scope of the game.

Thank you for your feedback

Yeah, I know there is much room for improvement - and I'm not completely happy with any of it at this point. I've tried messing a bit with the wooden beams - and I'm still improving those things at this time.

But I need to get back to coding soon - because otherwise I'll forget what I'm supposed to be doing - hehe.

For encounter-placement, my plan is to have a fully static level layout initially - for all levels. That means there will not be any spawning, at least not in the normal sense. I intend to render enemies from 4 sides - but I'm not going to do it manually in 2D. I'll try my hand at "simpler" enemies like a Beholder (a sphere with tubes and more spheres) - to see how I do. I'm starting to get better at Blender - so I should be able to make decent fleshy textures and stuff. I'm still considering hiring an amateur 3D artist - and paying him/her on a freelance basis. But it's MUCH too soon for me to decide any of that. I just don't believe I can make believable humanoids. They will be animated in a primitive way - probably not with more than 2-4 cells for each movement/attack. I can easily make them "slide" across the floor - but it might not look good. There's no way I can make them animate realistically - as that's beyond the scope of my talents.

I'm also wondering if I can incorporate a real human figure - like my own - into Photoshop from a high-resolution image with a white background. I could then potentially manipulate it from all angles and possibly add it to Blender for armor/clothing. But I really have no idea of the work involved.

Monsters/NPC visuals is the one area I'm not going to be able to do myself properly. At least, I very much doubt it. Everything else - I have a pretty good idea of how to do in my head.

 

[GothicGothicness]

Well, this is why I kept saying for gods sake if you are making a game use one of the excellent engines out there. For example if you used Unity it would make realistic efficient realtime shadows and lighting for you automatically.

You'll also find this out when you get a bit futher into the game and need to make for example a scripting tool, or action system, UI or a zillion of other things. It doesn't only increase the quality of your product it also saves 1000's of hours.

 

[DArtagnan]

Improved the floor/ceiling/beams a bit

That's probably it for now - and I need to go back and incorporate these improvements into the engine - and work on making interactive objects that the player can pick up and place in the inventory/on the floor.

It's not really where I want it in terms of visual appeal - but it's good enough for me to work with, and not constantly want to go and improve it. Once I'm through with the next few hurdles - I'll likely start adding more detail - specifically in the form of added objects, like torches/paintings/furniture/chests - etc.

 

[DArtagnan]

Well, this is why I kept saying for gods sake if you are making a game use one of the excellent engines out there. For example if you used Unity it would make realistic efficient realtime shadows and lighting for you automatically.

You'll also find this out when you get a bit futher into the game and need to make for example a scripting tool, or action system, UI or a zillion of other things. It doesn't only increase the quality of your product it also saves 1000's of hours.

You think I'm not aware of that?

I guess you think learning Unity is completely trivial and that it requires no effort. You sound like my brother

He's constantly talking about smarter ways of doing things, and yet he never gets anything done

I'd love to work with Unity - but I've invested so much time in XNA and my current project. I really don't feel like going to Unity to relearn everything.

My game is not about fancy 3D visuals - and I really like being in total control of my engine. I will set it at a level I'm comfortable with - which I find I can manage as it is.

Maybe when I'm done, I'll have a look at Unity and see if I can port my assets and rework the engine. But since I've no intention of porting it or using a real 3D engine - there's really not much point.

But you're right, it would have been a wiser beginning. But it didn't exist when I started on this.

 

[hishadow]

Well, this is why I kept saying for gods sake if you are making a game use one of the excellent engines out there. For example if you used Unity it would make realistic efficient realtime shadows and lighting for you automatically.

You'll also find this out when you get a bit futher into the game and need to make for example a scripting tool, or action system, UI or a zillion of other things. It doesn't only increase the quality of your product it also saves 1000's of hours.

I actually have to disagree with that. I think it's actually a good thing to make things from scratch the first couple of times. It will allow you to get acquainted with things bottom-up, rather than jumping straight at a large framework, which will have so many parts you'll probably end up getting confused/overwhelmed instead, but inevitably you should resist the urge to do everything yourself.

 

[DArtagnan]

It's not that I don't see the power of Unity or engines like it. It's just that it would mean starting over again, learning something new - and most likely changing a lot of things for the new way of handling things. I'm sure it's very easy if you start out with it, and there's probably a reason so many people are raving about it.

But I would feel constrained by having to adapt to something like that, and I don't really have any immediate obstacles in my way. Everything I want to achieve is possible with what I have - and I don't really mind the workload compared to actually learning new things all the time.

I find it much harder to sit down and learn new systems, than to work with something I'm reasonably comfortable with. Not because it's necessarily hard to learn, but because I hate NOT working. I lose motivation very quickly if I don't see results.

The orignal plan was to have my brother do the code legwork, and he's the sort of person who's always chasing the smartest approach and the newest approach. That's great, and he's given me some incredibly valuable tips along the way. But his problem is that he can't sit down and actually DO anything. I think he's afraid to fail or something. In any case, I don't want to risk giving up because I'm stuck learning the latest thing.

I've chosen these set of tools - and invested a lot in them. They'll serve my purpose

What about YOU GG? You're working with Unity?

 

[GothicGothicness]

No, Unity is not powerful enough for my game I will hopefully have a screen for you and you can guess which technology we're using. I've just been to darn busy to prepare a good enough one!

I actually have to disagree with that. I think it's actually a good thing to make things from scratch the first couple of times. It will allow you to get acquainted with things bottom-up, rather than jumping straight at a large framework, which will have so many parts you'll probably end up getting confused/overwhelmed instead, but inevitably you should resist the urge to do everything yourself.

Yes and no, if you are doing it for practice or for fun or for learning maybe. But the way things are now, I think the benefit of starting with an established engine and using there tutorials to learn the right way to make games will give more than experimenting yourself. I've built my own engine from scratch before, and that made me realize just what a big waste of time that was, even if I spend 1000's of hours it'll not come near what is available at the market today. There are also engines like OGRE which gives you freedom to create anything you want and just handle the graphics part of things.

As for XNA it actually have quite a few built in functions for games, so it is not a bad choice, at least for a simple game. I just think it is inferior and much more time consuming compared to the alternative, especially for someone who want to focus on game design rather than programming / technical.

 

[DArtagnan]

No, Unity is not powerful enough for my game I will hopefully have a screen for you and you can guess which technology we're using. I've just been to darn busy to prepare a good enough one!

Well well.... It had better be good

 

[ilm]

I'm sure GG has plenty of time to fill in the coding position of your project instead of your brother

Other than that: Please, please, use an engine, I beg you. No faster way for losing motivation than coding your own engine. With an decent engine and scene editor, you just create the world + the logic coding (which may even be in a scripting language).

I have this irrational preference for the Ogre engine. Aside from the nice OO framework, it has an Ogre as an mascot. Ideal for RPG's.

 

[DArtagnan]

Still, it's pretty cool to be able to say I've coded my own engine - if I ever get the game finished

 

[DeepO]

Looks good. I like the more "realistic" flair to the visuals.
Creating monsters which are artistically consistent with it will probably be a challenge.