Phml
Senior Member
Posts: 1823
Registered: 06-09 |
Call me crazy, but I think there's some people here who don't like me and that maybe, just maybe, that influences their perception of the video.
All I know about you is you used to be the Skulltag man and that there's recently been a lot of drama around that. So I don't think personal matters go too much into play* when I say I agree with kristus saying "what I saw was entirely predictable enemies and run of the mill weapons and flat level design".
There's, frankly, nothing interesting about the game that video shows. If you feel it's because the game is at a point where videos can't do it justice, maybe it wasn't the time to release a video just yet. First impressions are everything, and my own first impression is we're seeing a generic budget FPS from a decade ago. I can't stress this enough : as it is right now there's nothing to make me want to play that game, and if the vision for this project is "old school but not quite, indie-made" with nothing to distinguish it from the hundreds of other FPS like that, I doubt it's going to stand out.
* As little as I know you, it still does. You've shown an unprofessionnal, some might even argue immature, attitude in some places, and that's going to stick if you keep ranting against publishers or declaring you're stopping everything only to restart weeks later. You just don't seem like the kind of guy who pushes through and delivers a finished product ; I'm not saying that's who you are, I'm saying that's how you come across to me and possibly other outsiders, and that's going to be counterproductive to your project.
Some of your comments in this thread also lead me to believe you may not have a good grasp of game design/balance, namely :
Doom [...] has a small handful of basic monster types (is there really much difference between an imp, a hell knight, and a baron?
Differences in attributes such as width, speed of projectiles, hit points and damage can make enemies completely different when it comes to gameplay.
I could see the argument made for barons and hell knights, and even then I'd argue the halved hit points can make for completely different encounters and monster usage ; but imps ? It just seems to me you're looking at the whole thing from a programmer point of view rather than a game designer.
I think it's tough to pick up on gameplay by watching something passively.
You're entitled to your opinion, but I don't think that's true. Sure, there's things you can't see, such as how smooth is the mouselook, how does movement feel, and so on, but as for everything else, you can plainly see it.
I think I'm demonstrating base gameplay of at *least* what Doom has.
Just comparing that video to E1M1, it's not even close - Doom has more. I'm not going to elaborate, you've been involved with Doom for a long time so if you feel that way I doubt a few words from me would change that.
multiple ammo types per-weapon (with each type having different situational uses)
Usually falls on the list of features that sound cool in theory but end up being repetitive and unfun.
a score system
Pretty much the same thing as achievements. Pointless in both cases for people like me, not as interesting as achievements for completionists.
bonuses for multi-kills and gibbing monsters
Not a big deal either way (could be gimmicky if implemented poorly, could be cool if implemented well) but seems a minimal thing not worth showing as a gameplay feature.
a lives system
Lives don't work well in the FPS genre, for reasons elaborated many times by many people much more competent than me.
a checkpoint system
Not really special, unless you choose to not allow saves. Forcing players to replay the same section over and over is bad design ; having checkpoints on top of the option of manually saving is a much better option, giving great freedom with difficulty (players can make the game as hard or easy as they want it to be by choosing to save or not).
All in all, it looks like you want to make an arcade first person shooter, without learning from the lessons we had in twenty years of gaming since "the golden days". That's fine, nostalgia is a powerful thing and I'm sure people would play and enjoy your game if it had everything you listed ; but I'm not sure they'd play it if it had that *and* the slow-paced gameplay we're seeing on that video. If you ask me, you're combining the worst part of arcade games (gimmicky gameplay that works against the player rather than for him, as the goal is to make people put coins into the machine ; that's not a sound business approach for a PC game !) and the worst part of modern first-person shooters (few enemies on screen, slow-paced gameplay, repetitive patterns, horizontal level design).
I'm not trying to be overly negative. All that stuff could be turned around if you wanted to, for starters. What's more important in my mind is whatever you want your game to be, you should make it clear to your target audience, ideally not with words but with videos showing better stuff. Hell, I'm not even sure who your target audience is so far - "looking for something different" doesn't cut it for something that looks so generic so far, "tired of modern shooters" doesn't mean much as there's so many modern shooters in so many genres. Left 4 Dead has nothing to do with Crysis which has nothing to do with Mirror's Edge which has nothing to do with Project Origin. The only thing you could possibly argue they have in common is great graphics, but even then they each have very different approaches, art direction and results. To lump all modern shooters in an hypothetical group of games playing the same way strikes me, again, as misunderstanding the important differences in gameplay between these games, and on a larger scale, not understanding game design in general.
You seem to be a programmer at heart, and a very talented one at that ; so far, the work shown casts doubt on your abilities to be a game designer as well. As frustrating as it might be, much like many things in life making great games is about compromises. If I were you, I'd really consider teaming up with someone who's a great level designer with a solid understanding of game design. It seems ridiculous to let your skills go to waste by making a poor game out of a good engine.
Regardless, good luck. As you say yourself, if you succeed in making a great game everyone wins.
|
02-10-10 17:20 
