Leftley's site

A Design Quandary

Sat, 24 Mar 2007 05:03:32 +0000

So, I've been brainstorming for Champions of Vargacet off and on for a couple months now and have a lot of good stuff planned out. But there's still one thing that bothers me.

For the uninitiated, Champions is a turn-based strategy battle game. You assemble a party of 4 characters using various combinations of classes, skills, and equipment, then issue challenges and go to town on each other. Given the fantasy theme you might expect that you get "XPs" for winning fights and get more and more powerful, except you don't, because really putting that sort of thing into a competitive strategy game is all sorts of retarded. What's the point of introducing strategic choices if battles are going to be largely decided by who's been playing longer and has more powerful, higher-level characters?

Still, the game was never wholly without a small element of stat-building. See, there's one thing that bothers me about simply giving players unfettered freedom to choose from anything, anytime, and change it all on a whim. Some strategies/combos tend to "beat" other strategies, natch. If you can rearrange your party whenever you like, it becomes tempting to custom-tailor your party to meet each encounter; you know (or at least can guess) what a familiar opponent is going to throw at you, so you can select all the appropriate countermeasures. They know what countermeasures they're likely to face, so they select counter-countermeasures, and so on. Eventually everything devolves into a big Rock-Paper-Scissors game: guess what your opponent is going to bring out, and bring out the appropriate specialized beat squad.

This may be all well and good for some people, but it's not really what I consider ideal. The whole idea behind the party building system is to be an exercise in inventory management (where the "inventory" extends to class and skill choices)--you have a limited number of skills and items your party can carry, and you have to try to pack enough into those limited slots to take on a wide variety of possible challenges. It's like The Oregon Trail, except you don't randomly die of dysentery (which is to say, it's not anything like The Oregon Trail).

My original solution to this problem was a gold-based shop system; you got so much gold for winning a fight (and about half as much for playing a fight through and losing), and you had to pay for each piece of equipment you bought. If you wanted to change from, say, an all-wizard party to an all-knight party (woo!) you would have to shell out for four full sets of wizard gear. This put a practical limit on your ability to make changes on the fly, since radical changes in your party roster would cost 5-6 fights' worth of winnings to reequip; it was more optimal to settle on a fairly steady configuration with all the "best" equipment and possibly make minor tweaks from battle to battle than to try to rearrange your entire party to match each opponent, since drastic changes would blow through your savings and leave you stuck with underequipped characters.

The system worked after a fashion, but unfortunately it proved to be annoyingly restrictive if you were just experimenting with different setups--a huge problem for new teams, which was a big part of why I didn't want to just have a leveling-up system in the first place. Also, although I had hoped it would be a sop to the inevitable "Why can't I just level up my guys so I can win more often without having to figure out how to play better?" crowd (I may be editorializing slightly here), I think mostly it just whet their appetites. (Looking back, it is somewhat embarassing how frequently I've made this exact mistake.)

So... the quandary. I want to implement some sort of system that would encourage players to try to stick with a broad-based team concept and refine it bit by bit rather than building teams for one specific battle at a time. At the same time I don't want to penalize new players or limit experimentation.

Any ideas on how this might be accomplished?

Two-Button Challenge Results (not at all late!)

Sat, 24 Mar 2007 02:56:26 +0000

Disclaimer: Due to the relatively small number of entries some leniency in the rules has been extended, simply because disqualifying every entry that fell short of the rules on a technicality would mean there wouldn't be enough participants to actually have a contest.

Runner-Up: Angry Animals by SSJ Crono and Darkdemonrad
	Our runner-up entry is a simple arcade-style minigame. In a plotline straight from a Fox special, bald-headed joggers are beset by an endless stream of flying fish and vicious hammerhead donkeys and must attempt to duck and jump their way through the hordes. It's not a bad little game, but it's somewhat lacking in polish. Timing and hit detection seem a little bit "off", which can throw you when you're starting out, but once you get the game's rhythm you can pretty much play it all day. The animals do eventually speed up but not soon enough to really make the game interesting.

Runner-Up: Angry Animals by SSJ Crono and Darkdemonrad

Our runner-up entry is a simple arcade-style minigame. In a plotline straight from a Fox special, bald-headed joggers are beset by an endless stream of flying fish and vicious hammerhead donkeys and must attempt to duck and jump their way through the hordes.

It's not a bad little game, but it's somewhat lacking in polish. Timing and hit detection seem a little bit "off", which can throw you when you're starting out, but once you get the game's rhythm you can pretty much play it all day. The animals do eventually speed up but not soon enough to really make the game interesting.

Presentation: 3/5

Creativity: 2/5

Depth: 1/5

Overall Fun: 2/5

Third Place (BYOND Membership): Fallout by ATP Development
	Third place goes to ATP Development, which came up with not one but THREE different entries. The best of the bunch is Fallout, a simple "dodge the obstacles" game at breakneck speed. A handful of powerups help spice the game up a bit, and let's face it: watching those poor suckers plummeting head-first at terminal velocity is just plain fun.

Presentation: 3/5

Creativity: 3/5

Depth: 2/5

Overall Fun: 3/5

What about those other ATP entries? Well, next we have Killcarts, a novel little shooter game. Players' carts ride around on rails with a cannon mounted on one side; the carts can fire off to the side or change their speed to dodge enemies' shots. It seems like a great idea and I was pretty excited when I started up, but unfortunately the game is disappointing in its implementation.

To start with, the joining mechanism is a bit clunky; rather than having a declared "ready" mechanism or a start button, once you join you're stuck waiting for a 30-second timer to run down before the game starts. The gameplay is uninspiring as well; chances are that upon starting your carts will simply collide head-first and stick together unmoving. Due to questionable hit detection you can still ocassionally get a bullet to hit the cart you're tangled with (in spite of the fact that your cannon supposedly shoots sideways), until one of you eventually destroys the other and the game is over. Whoopee.

Presentation: 3/5

Creativity: 4/5

Depth: 1/5

Overall Fun: 1/5

Lastly, we have Nok Hockey. This one plays a bit better than Killcarts but still doesn't quite live up to its full potential.

The game plays as more of a competitive miniature golf game than the table hockey game it's implied to be, which is fine by me since I like miniature golf type games. Players take turns "putting" the puck around the table, trying to get it into the opponent's goal. Shots are made with a "stop the meter" system, which is well suited to the contest's input restraints but unfortunately not very well suited to BYOND's framerate constraints. The game's physics leave a lot to be desired as well; the puck's movement is rather jerky and hit detection is very mediocre.

Presentation: 3/5

Creativity: 3/5

Depth: 2/5

Overall Fun: 2/5

Note that although the official third place prize is only a BYOND Membership, I am hereby awarding ATP an extra $5 prize since they managed to produce three entries which met the contest rules in every particular, whereas everyone elses' entries required a bit of rule-bending to squeak in.

Second Place (BYOND Membership + $5): Vault by DarkCampainger
	Another obstacle-course game not unlike Fallout, but more involved. The little veggie-headed guys running around with their capes billowing out reminded me vaguely of Mighty Bomb Jack, although the resemblance is largely superficial (Vault is much faster-paced and not nearly as nonsensical). The music here is a great touch and the graphics have a nice style to them. Controls are a bit touchy, but high responsiveness is better than low here. The pacing isn't quite as fast as Fallout but the obstacles are considerably more complex. Overall Vault is a fast, fun game, although it still has some room for improvement. Visually the playing courses work pretty well but it can be unclear at times which direction you're running when, and where switches in direction occur. Some more variety in obstacles would have been interesting too.

Second Place (BYOND Membership + $5): Vault by DarkCampainger

Another obstacle-course game not unlike Fallout, but more involved. The little veggie-headed guys running around with their capes billowing out reminded me vaguely of Mighty Bomb Jack, although the resemblance is largely superficial (Vault is much faster-paced and not nearly as nonsensical).

The music here is a great touch and the graphics have a nice style to them. Controls are a bit touchy, but high responsiveness is better than low here. The pacing isn't quite as fast as Fallout but the obstacles are considerably more complex.

Overall Vault is a fast, fun game, although it still has some room for improvement. Visually the playing courses work pretty well but it can be unclear at times which direction you're running when, and where switches in direction occur. Some more variety in obstacles would have been interesting too.

Presentation: 4/5

Creativity: 2/5

Depth: 3/5

Overall Fun: 3/5

First Place (BYOND Membership + $10): The Fungus Among Us by Gughunter
	From the maker of SpaceTug comes The Fungus Among Us, yet another horror movie turned multiplayer suspense game. Honestly I don't know what Gughunter is doing slumming with those DDT bums; the man has a God-given gift for doing quirky horror movie homages. Squandering such talent on anything else is frankly criminal. But I digress. When I loaded TFAU I was horrified to realize that the startup functions did not technically go through the A and B inputs and thus would not actually qualify. Then I realized that I would have to basically throw out most of Rule the Second anyhow in order to get enough qualifying entries, so I decided I could cut TFAU some slack too. Once that hurdle has been cleared, the game does just fine. The controls do take a bit of getting used to but are a pretty clever way of meeting the contest constraints. The squishy little thumbnail at left really can't do the game justice; not only does it actually look a lot better (click for the full-sized view to see for yourself), but ultimately the feeling of suspense which makes the game so fun doesn't have a lot to do with the view.

First Place (BYOND Membership + $10): The Fungus Among Us by Gughunter

From the maker of SpaceTug comes The Fungus Among Us, yet another horror movie turned multiplayer suspense game. Honestly I don't know what Gughunter is doing slumming with those DDT bums; the man has a God-given gift for doing quirky horror movie homages. Squandering such talent on anything else is frankly criminal.

But I digress. When I loaded TFAU I was horrified to realize that the startup functions did not technically go through the A and B inputs and thus would not actually qualify. Then I realized that I would have to basically throw out most of Rule the Second anyhow in order to get enough qualifying entries, so I decided I could cut TFAU some slack too.

Once that hurdle has been cleared, the game does just fine. The controls do take a bit of getting used to but are a pretty clever way of meeting the contest constraints. The squishy little thumbnail at left really can't do the game justice; not only does it actually look a lot better (click for the full-sized view to see for yourself), but ultimately the feeling of suspense which makes the game so fun doesn't have a lot to do with the view.

Presentation: 4/5

Creativity: 5/5

Depth: 4/5

Overall Fun: 4/5

And that's a wrap! Those who won prizes, please drop me a line at t_leftley@hotmail.com for what key you want the gift membership to go to and what address I should PayPal the cash prizes to.

Driver's Ed: Pop Quiz

Sat, 10 Mar 2007 19:02:10 +0000

1. You are driving on an interstate onramp approaching an oncoming merge lane. The positioning of the onramp gives you a sweeping view of the interstate below, allowing you to see from nearly a third of a mile prior to the merge zone. The lane you are to merge into contains a single car moving at approximately the same speed as you.

Upon reaching the merge area you find yourself exactly alongside this single car, having completely failed to adjust into the yawning spaces surrounding it. You should:

A) brake and merge safely and smoothly behind the vehicle in the next lane, since it delays you by less than 2 seconds and there is no traffic directly behind this car.
B) floor the accelerator and cut ahead of the car next to you, since there are no cops around and there is no traffic in front of this car.
C) immediately begin moving into the next lane on a collision course with the adjacent car, forcing the driver you just pulled alongside (who had already been planning to change lanes to accomodate your incompetence) to change their courtesy lane change into a desperate swerve to avoid you, barely getting the clearance they need in front of the car in the next lane beyond them and missing by inches a three-plus car pileup.
D) realize you are an utter failure as a human being and attempt to end your life with what little honor you can salvage by sending your car plunging off the road and down the embankment.

Answer "C" is a distressingly popular choice.

Two-Button Challenge extension

Wed, 28 Feb 2007 20:14:58 +0000

I've had a number of people express interest in the Two-Button Challenge, including several definite projects and a number of questions about the deadline (midnight tonight) and submitting. However, with the deadline just under twelve hours away I still don't have any entries in my inbox.

So, here's the deal: I'm pushing the deadline back by one week, to the end of March 7th. To be more precise, I am going to be taking submissions for exactly another 180 hours from the posting of this announcement (which makes the official deadline about 10:14 BST on March 7th).

If there is enough interest I may up that to two weeks, but I don't want to start a procrastination-fest here (and besides, 348 hours isn't nearly as round a number as 180); I would highly recommend anyone interested in the contest to submit before the extended deadline, so if there's a problem it can be corrected before the contest closes.

Astrobusy

Mon, 05 Feb 2007 19:08:08 +0000

Finally getting back to work on Astrobiz, as this "small project" nears its second full month of development (or rather, nears its 5th full week of non-development following roughly 3 weeks of development). My schedule only really allows for running games late at night--not quite in the ungodly hours, but pretty close. Look for a couple late night testing sessions this week.

Also possibly going to be working on Treasure Quest a bit. Nothing major there (custom stuff is still a long ways off), just want to smooth out a few minor bumps (after all the ragging I've given Unknown Person for having Ultimatum eliminate players on logout, I probably ought to fix Treasure Quest's similar behavior).

Design Contest: Two-Button Challenge (For Reals edition)

Tue, 23 Jan 2007 03:23:33 +0000

Some time ago I had a thought for an interesting little design contest: create a game that is played using only two buttons. Not two buttons + arrow keys, not two buttons + verbs, two buttons + mouse, or two buttons + context menu. Two keyboard buttons: that's it. Unfortunately the idea just kind of petered out and didn't go anywhere, so I'm kicking things off again. We're going to make it a bit simpler this time, so here's the rules:

Rule the First:

All entries must include a .dms script file with the following lines of code:

macro
    a return "buttonA"
    b return "buttonB"

Player mobs, of course, must include "buttonA" and "buttonB" verbs. The entire game must be playable using nothing except these two macros. You may include other forms of getting at these two commands if necessary--you could macro left arrow to buttonA and right arrow to buttonB, or create HUD buttons that call buttonA() and buttonB(), etc.--but games will be judged solely on their playability with the required a + b macros. Anything that can't be done in game with the a + b button doesn't count, so if the game's not playable with those two buttons, it's out.

Just to clarify: The player is not allowed to interact with or affect the game in any fashion save through inputs that go directly to buttonA() and buttonB(), neither of which can accept arguments or use input dialogs.

(Chat functions and commands of a purely administrative or social nature are the only exception to this rule, so long as they do not directly have any influence on gameplay and are not required to play the game as intended.)

Rule the Second:

Entries must feature some sort of multiplayer interaction. Multiple players playing separate games in parallel do not qualify--a player must be able to have some affect on other players, either directly or through a shared environment.

Rule the Belated Third:

Source code must be included for all entries to verify that the limits on input aren't being circumvented, but you don't have to distribute the source openly if you don't want to.

And... really, that's about it. All entries must be submitted to t_leftley@hotmail.com by February 28, 2007 (either mailing the game's source package or just sending a link to a hub entry or site where the source is available to download). Games will be judged in four categories:

-Presentation (general appearance and user-friendliness)
-Creativity (original and unique approaches to the design constraints)
-Depth (the game's variety and replay value)
-Overall Fun (general enjoyability and non-suckiness)

Assuming there are at least four participants (because it's not a real contest unless you can call someone the loser!): First place will win a BYOND membership for the recipient of their choice (include themselves) plus $10 Paypal, second place wins a BYOND membership plus $5, third place wins just a BYOND membership. Multiple entries per contestant are allowed, but only the best will qualify to place for a prize.

In addition to entries, if anyone wants to volunteer to help judge I'd be much obliged (theoretically, more judges means more of a commitment means less chance I'll get bored and wander off before the contest ends).

Announcing: An announcement

Mon, 22 Jan 2007 06:50:32 +0000

I was going to announce the re-launch of the Two-Button Challenge design contest today (technically yesterday) but I was too busy ~~slacking off playing Darke Dungeon and Ultimatum~~ attempting to develop a cure for AIDS using nothing but rubber bands and packets of sugar, and now I don't have time to get everything set up. So I'll be kicking things off tomorrow (technically later today) instead.

State of the Galaxy

Thu, 28 Dec 2006 06:58:15 +0000

I suppose it's apparent by now that Astrobiz isn't getting released on the 26th, seeing as it's now the 27th. Things are still on track for a release on, oh, say the 31st.

Things left to do:

Implement economic constraints on traffic totals (this will include making property ownership not suck so badly again)
Help files (maybe?)
A few more interface tweaks (including a real interface for host type stuff)
Random events
Slightly less random/more sane generation of initial spaceship stocks and slots owned
Smooth out generation, let the server wipe and restart without needing a reboot

AI is eventually planned, but I don't know if I'll have it implemented in time for the initial release.

Merry Christmas! Hope you like coal.

Sun, 24 Dec 2006 21:13:10 +0000

Since it's a smallish project, I had originally projected a release for Astrobiz by this weekend, seeing as it coincides with Christmas and everything.

Unfortunately, this also means I have less free time to work on and test the game this weekend, seeing as it coincides with Christmas and everything.

So, no release today or tomorrow. I'll possibly be able to get everything mostly done and ready for release by the 26th, so you might be getting a Boxing Day present. Otherwise, it will almost certainly be ready for release by New Year's.

Astrogone fishin'

Wed, 20 Dec 2006 02:58:59 +0000

In the middle of overhauling some rather central systems of Astrobiz. Unfortunately, I've been working some extra hours this week with semester break and all, which means that

1. I haven't had a lot of time to work on Astrobiz, and
2. I've been stuck in work hell for the better part of the day, so I'm not particularly up to working.

Astrobiz testing will be back ~~tomorrow~~ Thursday (development isn't going quite as smoothly as anticipated). Sorry for the delay.