I been wondering what would you people of the BYOND community like to see as a library/demo system. Like what systems are not availble that you feel would eliminate alot of common problems people need coders for?
I have to agree with Deathguard on this, but I do think that people could benefit from a RTS Framework, or at least a turn based RPG framework. A lot of people seem to struggle with turn based programming, and I'm not talking like trading card games either; there's stuff for that. I mean more like Pokemon, Final Fantasy, Fire Emblem, etc.
I know there are some things available for this, some of which was provided by I think... ACWrath? Even still, though; this is a popular topic lately. Maybe a library showing how to make the turn based system, and implement some basic Fire Emblem or Pokemon style AI would work. It would be especially awesome to see a framework for it that is on the scale of Forum_Accounts Action RPG Framework though. Just depends on what you can manage, and how much you want to put into it. Oh, and mind you this is just a quick suggestion. There really are a ton of options, and people usually need programmers because they don't know how to program at all or do not wish to learn, or are in a hurry and cannot learn fast enough to suit them; so it's hard to accurately reduce the need for programmers. | |
A cluster server library would be cool. Something that allows the game's map to be split up and hosted on multiple servers.
| |
Writing A New One wrote:
A cluster server library would be cool. Something that allows the game's map to be split up and hosted on multiple servers. Hi. I can see you're still working on the game, thats great :) I'll see if I can't take a look at some clustering stuff sometime within the next period of time (No promises on when, pretty busy these days!), since I know we discussed using what I had for BMUD way back when. | |
Thank you. :)
I have the documentation and code that Shadowdarke wrote a while back if you'd like me to email it to you. | |
Writing A New One wrote:
Thank you. :) No thanks ;) I'll try my hand at something with a fresh look on things. | |
I vote more frameworks and good quality frameworks. Ones that have online documentation for each an every function available. They all need login screens and saving functionality as well. Basically the dream maker lets you put you a player into a basic world easily but a framework should allow you to create a certain style of game easily.
Also.. I think each framework should come with a variety of free icon packs to get people started seeing as most people fail due to a lack of art content. | |
Red Hall Dev wrote:
login screens I hope you don't mean the typical BYOND rip login screens, because if so, then no. You will be hard-pressed to find a login screen that requires you to make it before anything else. They are almost always very simple and are one of the last things you really need to do. Also.. I think each framework should come with a variety of free icon packs to get people started seeing as most people fail due to a lack of art content. There are plenty of icon packs at your disposal in the Resources. If you can look for a framework, you can look for an icon pack just as easy. | |
Albro1 wrote:
I hope you don't mean the typical BYOND rip login screens, because if so, then no. You will be hard-pressed to find a login screen that requires you to make it before anything else. They are almost always very simple and are one of the last things you really need to do. I'm sorry but I fail to see any point you made at all. We're not talking about rips, we're talking about frameworks. I said frameworks should have a login screen and I don't see what random babble about rip screens has to do with the price of fish. As for saying I would be hard pressed to find a login screen that requires it to be made before anything else... Again what are you babbling about? I never said anything about it needing to be done before everything else, besides if it's so hard to find then why did I make my login screen before anything else? I always have one ready and waiting for me to attach any game I need to it. They're very very important because they standardise everything about player saving, you always know where something is going to be. Albro1 wrote: There are plenty of icon packs at your disposal in the Resources. If you can look for a framework, you can look for an icon pack just as easy. If you call amateur 'icon packs' like this good... Then maybe... But no, there are only perhaps 1 or 2 half decent icon packs under resources and even they aren't great:  | |
Also I would advise approaching situations in terms of "What can we do better?" instead of "What can we avoid doing? Ughhh" which seems to be what you've shown me you're about.
Just putting that out there as well. | |
More Frameworks is always good, and I do think they should be well documented; whether it be in source or online either one. As I somewhat said before, an RTS and/or TBS Framework would probably be the most useful right now. Something along the lines of Starcraft, Fire Emblem, and Final Fantasy; they're each well known and excellent examples.
Anyway. I mention that to stay on topic, but my main reason for replying is due to Red Hall. To be fair, I believe Albro1 meant those basic splash screens that every 'rip' worries about so much and such. What you seem to mean, however, is a detailed login/saving/loading/data clearing/setting choosing full on login system. Something like this is likely necessary for any framework, to an extent, but I wouldn't say its the first thing to work on. It may be important, but what's most important is the gameplay, and in the case of the frameworks how well it helps show you how to design the main, generic gameplay; that way you can focus on getting into good habits and more importantly working on what makes your game unique and/or fun. | |
I was working on a Fire Emblem-ish game that I was going to strip down, document, and release as a framework, but I lost motivation to keep working on it so it never really went anywhere.
By the time I stopped, I had a reasonably functional multiplayer that supported I believe up to 8 players. I had also finished the early portion of a single player campaign with competent AI and an event system that handled situational cutscenes(such as attacking a certain unit, killing an enemy, moving past a certain point, etc). | |
Sounds pretty awesome. It's very unfortunate that you lost motivation; perhaps you can find some again? I believe its very hard to stick with a game and get it all polished up an where it needs to be, but if nothing else turning old projects into frameworks does make the time previously spent on them more worth it.
At least when its a useful case like this. I actually think the AI would be one of the hardest parts of making a game like that, too. Another good thing is that with frameworks like that around, it could make it easier for other developers to avoid losing motivation and quitting before something worthwhile is released. Game design seems to be full of very strange, yet interesting cycles. | |
I do intend to finish it eventually, hopefully once I've dealt with my depression issues that have made it incredibly difficult to get motivated about anything. If nothing else I'll definitely be putting the framework out at some point, as one of the big reasons I gave up was my horrendously terrible storytelling skills.
Every time I sat down to try and write a scene or chapter for the campaign(most of the work was just content creation by this point) I found myself hating everything I wrote for one reason or another. It all felt disgustingly cheesy or just boring and I ended up rewriting the first 2 chapters around a dozen times, but I was never happy with any of it. The AI was actually surprisingly simple. You have them decide who is the highest threat within their range(or a bit out of their range if nothing is in range), which consists of weapon advantages, remaining health, class differences(I didn't want the enemies to seem like they knew your exact stats), and whether or not your units could attack back. After that, they just attack that thing. Some of my friends who tested it actually thought the AI was too hard to deal with in an equal battle, so I had to dumb it down a little bit. | |
Ah, that is a terribly difficult motivation killer to deal with. Very unpleasant to deal with in general actually. Best of luck to you in dealing with it, and also in finishing this.
I understand how you feel on the story, I am a writer myself, and I rarely get much done due to wanting to rewrite or feeling I can do better, etc etc. Unfortunately, you just have to run with the best you've got sometimes,or you may not get anywhere; story wise. Feedback can be damaging, but it usually helps a ton too. Hm, that is pretty funny actually.heh. Never would of struck me as being so simple, but that is pretty funny that you had to dumb it down. Makes it really sound like Fire Emblem. What with how that games AI kicks some major ass, even though it's probably pretty simple. Still very useful for when you turn it into a framework, though. | |
Thanks, we'll see how that goes soon enough I suppose.
I've never really been bothered by criticism, and I did have people look at it. I really am just a horrible storyteller, but I'm sure I'll end up getting something usable eventually. I thought it would be pretty difficult too going into it, but it's basically just counting points and attacking the one with the highest number. I ended up dumbing it down by adding a random number to the final count so they wouldn't always attack the best possible target, which worked pretty well. I imagine a hard mode would just be the game without that randomness added in, meaning they would always make the most mathematically ideal move. I never liked games where the "Hard" setting just gave everything higher stats. | |
Toddab503 wrote:
More Frameworks is always good Not necessarily. When someone uses a framework it doesn't matter how many other frameworks exist. The only thing that matters is how good that one framework is. Having a few good ones is a lot better than having a ton of bad ones. It'd be nice to have more people working on these kinds of projects but if everyone creates their own, it'll go the way everything else seems to go - we'll just end up with a large collection of bad libraries. and I do think they should be well documented; whether it be in source or online either one. As I somewhat said before, an RTS and/or TBS Framework would probably be the most useful right now. Something along the lines of Starcraft, Fire Emblem, and Final Fantasy; they're each well known and excellent examples. This sounds great but most people want to either wait for someone else to make them or make their own (as opposed to helping with someone else's framework). Most BYOND users aren't motivated by helping people, they're motivated by being able to say "look what I made". To make these frameworks we'll likely need people to work together but most users wouldn't see the appeal in making resources to support "someone else's" framework. I'm also not sure how well a framework for a game with turn-based combat would work. It's often the specifics of how combat works that makes the game interesting (do you input all attacks before a round of combat happens, or you do input commands as they're performed? etc.). Combat is something that people would want more control over than a framework can likely provide. You could make a framework that provides the non-combat parts of the game and have different demos to show how to plug in different types of combat. Albro1 wrote: There are plenty of icon packs at your disposal in the Resources. If you can look for a framework, you can look for an icon pack just as easy. You'd be able to make icon packs for specific frameworks. If an RTS framework automatically changes a building's icon_state as it takes damage, the icon pack would name the icon states to match what the framework would use. If you just needed to add a few lines of code to use the icon pack, you could download a framework, change the icon pack, and have a somewhat unique looking game in a short amount of time. | |
I may have been a bit too general with my comment. By more frameworks, I meant more types of frameworks such as the RTS one for example. You bring up a good point, though. People will need to work together to make resources as useful a possible if we want some real changes around here, and it also might be interesting to see a framework that can shift between a few types through including/excluding a few files or demos.
Icon packs for frameworks is an excellent idea as well, actually. I wouldn't mind making a pack or two someday,if it would help people. I think part of the hold back with things like this is that some people probably think it won't benefit them, but if it gets better games made around here it helps a bit, and in the case of things like icon packs people could probably use things like ad.fly or whatever for the download. If I recall correctly, things like that pay you a little in exchange for people viewing a quick ad before the download. I've seen it done with Minecraft a lot. A popular texture pack uses it, and I'm assuming that's what helps the artist to have the motivation to keep on updating the pack. Ah, but I think I'm getting a bit too off topic here... Maybe we need a framework discussing topic, or maybe this'll just be one off topic post, eh whichever. Just had to comment real quick. I do wonder where the OP is, though; I've yet to see a reply from them. | |
Another thing that we'll need is people to use the frameworks. A framework makes game development easier but BYOND doesn't have a lot of game developers - it has a lot of people who wish they were game developers. They don't have ideas for games, they have ideas for mob icons, title screens, and storylines. They don't need a framework to help them make mob icons.
The abundance of people like that tends to make the other people think more highly of themselves. If you know there's more to a game than a title screen, you're an expert! Most of these people think that frameworks are for the less experienced people and wouldn't bother to use them or take the time to create demos and tutorials about how to use them. Hopefully once people see what they can do with a framework (as compared to what they can do without one), they'll get the idea. Toddab503 wrote: it also might be interesting to see a framework that can shift between a few types through including/excluding a few files or demos. It depends on the genre. The Sidescroller library is pretty close to being an action/platform game framework by itself but you might want a few different libraries you could use to turn it into different kinds of platformers. An RTS framework would be pretty comprehensive. An RPG framework with turn-based combat might have different combat libraries you can include. | |
You can't really make a library that eliminates the need for someone to actually write code. Not least because they have to at least vaguely understand how to implement the library in order to use it in a project.