Custom Content Package for Files I am about to purchase quite a few model packs from a website for prototyping my game. In the contract it states that I must protect them as to prevent the public from gaining access to them. I remember working with the Valve games, they used .gcf (game content file) that basically was an archive of all the content for each game. They packed in sound materials models maps etc. I figured it might not be a bad idea to develop something similar to this, and just write a small tool to let me add remove files from it. Problem is I really have no idea how to go about starting on something like this. I tried Google but I didn't even know what to search for. If anyone has any ideas, links that might be of use, or anything else I would greatly appreciate it.


Are games designed to be addictive? When I was younger I used to play games a lot for hours. I would say I got addicted to them. Now I'm a software developer and was wondering if games are explicitly designed to be addicting? Game developers are interested in keeping their users playing as long as possible. I've read about Operant Conditioning and Virtual Skinner Boxes. According to psychologists, most games use a fixed reward system to get the player hooked at first. For example, you can level up pretty fast in beginning. Then reward frequency gradually drops, but player keeps playing because they are hooked. In the end, you switch to variable reward frequency, which means rewards occur randomly and rarely. By this stage, the player might not even enjoy the game, but still play in order to get his reward fix and the resulting good feeling from it. This is very similar to how rats are conditioned in Skinner boxes. Rewards can be in the form of social status recognition in the game world, working hard for a virtual item therefore giving it great value when acquiring it, feeling in control and power that are not met in the real world, escaping to somewhere else, being able measure progress to some goal and getting instant feedback. If the player abstains from the game, a punishment is applied, i.e losing social status or items. After a while, the rewards will be associated with the game itself and therefore even the sight of the game can evoke craving, much like in case of Pavlov's dog In addition, there is another research which states that the immersive nature of video games, the rich visual stimulus from realistic graphics, the complex thinking required for playing, great autonomy and fast feedback loop can result in increased dopamine levels in the brain, and create a sense of flow. Combined with an effective rewarding system, games can stimulate the feel good centres of the brain. This means that after several sessions, the player needs to play longer in order to achieve the same dopamine levels as before. Some even experience euphoric feeling and relief from withdrawal when they play. They replace real world with game world and focus on in game motivations only. Players may stop showering for long time, have reduced hygiene, become socially isolated, drop out of school, become overweight, withdraw from their family, have dreams about the game, think and plan about the game while doing other activities, stop doing non game related activities, have trouble concentrating. References http www.cracked.com article 18461 5 creepy ways video games are trying to get you addicted.html http www.betabunny.com behaviorism Conditioning.htm http www.world science.net exclusives 081111 gaming.htm Can a game be simply too fun to resist?


How would you define this mechanic in narrative based games? I'm a researching a certain game mechanic that seems very commonplace in modern narrative based games. The mechanic is defined (by me) as a user action that the player can take while in a dialogue or a cutscene, which affects the course of the narrative (and sometimes has a long lasting impact on the game progression in general). The interaction can be of several types press a button click a character hit a sequence of keys button mashing. Here's an example from Game of Thrones https www.youtube.com watch?v ykq213pPD6Q amp feature youtu.be amp t 181 In Mass Effect it is referred to as an interrupt https www.youtube.com watch?v 9TgTLJXoD o Here's one from King's Quest https www.youtube.com watch?v KhOkqn6qE2g I'm looking for more info on this type of mechanic. Specifically Is there an accepted name for it? What other games have this mechanic, and use it in an interesting way? (I would appreciate links to videos demonstrating it) What types of interactions (such as the ones I've described) have you seen implemented in this mechanic? Thanks ) (BTW if you think this game design related question is more suitable for StackExchange's Arqade do let me know and I'll ask to move it there)


Optimizing the economy of a resource management game I am an amateur game designer. I am designing a resource management game involving real money. This is my first time designing such a game. I explain the design and mechanics below. I need feedback from experienced game designers regarding i) The sustainability of the core economic loop of this game, ii) Concrete suggestions to de risk or fine tune it (if you can think of any) My game is about digging up treasure. Treasure is real players can cash out. The objective of the game is to make as much money as possible. Players utilize digging machines (excavators) to unearth treasure. The attributes of these digging machines are Digging prowess Most machines are mediocre diggers. I.e. they unearth small treasure. A few rare machines can dig up really big treasure. And then there are other types in between these two extremes. Scarcity Only a finite number of machines are available in this game world. Transparency Machines' visual design varies in accordance to their digging prowess. I.e. players can easily spot which machine is better than the rest. Main mechanics When a new player joins this game, they utilize real to buy one or multiple such machines. Once bought, each machine can either be Stored away (unused), or Put to work. Note that when a machine accumulates 1 hour of digging time, it unearths treasure. The amount unearthed is always proportional to the machine's digging prowess. Putting machines to work has an upside and a downside Upside Machines that are put to work unearth treasure (actual players can claim). Downside Working machines can be forcefully bought by another player (for the machine's current value 5 profit). No permission is needed. This permanently increases the value of the machine. Which means, if you want to snatch it back, you pay a further 5 increment on top of everything. Storing machines away has an upside and a downside Upside Nobody can forcefully buy them from the player. Downside They don't help the player earn anything. How do we finance the treasure finds? There is a pool of money in the back end that finances each and every treasure finding. We finance this pool in two ways The first time a digging machine is bought, 90 of the proceeds are routed to this pool (10 are pocketed by the game developer). I earlier mentioned that whenever a machine is forcefully bought, a 5 profit is paid by the buyer to the unwitting seller. We route 10 of that profit to the treasure pool, 10 to the game developer, and 80 to the unwitting seller of the machine. It would be great to get feedback from experienced game designers regarding the economic viability of the game's core loop. How do we Make it sustainable? What are the economic risks? How can they be quantified? Are there any risk minimization tactics we can bake in?


Game Design vs Game Development What is the difference between a video game developer and a video game designer?


Why do games suggest you take a break? A lot of games will suggest you take breaks from them every 30 minutes or so, I think this is especially common in Nintendo games, but they aren't the only ones to do it. What is the advantage to this? Does this somehow help get you to play it more or does it help sell more copies?


As an indie game dev, what processes are the best for soliciting feedback on my design spec idea? Background I have worked in a professional environment where the process usually goes like the following Brain storm idea Solidify the game mechanics design Iterate on design idea to create a more solid experience Spec out the details of the design idea Build it Step 3. is generally done with the stakeholders of the game (developers, designers, investors, publishers, etc) to reach an 'agreement' which meets the goals of all involved. Due to this process involving a series of often opposing and unique view points, creative solutions can surface through discussion iteration. This is backed up by a process for collating the changes new ideas, as well as structured time for discussion. As a (now) indie developer, I have to play the role of all the stakeholders (developers, designers, investors, publishers, etc), and often find myself too close to the idea design to do more than minor changes, which I feel to be local maxima when it comes to the best result (I'm looking for the global maxima, of course). I have read that ideas game designs unique mechanics are merely multipliers of execution, and that keeping them secret is just silly. In sharing the idea with others outside the realm of my own thinking, I hope to replicate the influence other stakeholders have. I am struggling with the collation of changes new ideas, and any kind of structured method of receiving feedback. My question As an indie game developer, how and where can I share my ideas designs to receive meaningful constructive feedback? How can I successfully collate the feedback into a new iteration of the design? Are there any specialized websites, etc?


What makes a good tech tree? In strategy simulation games there are often tech research trees which allow players research new abilities options, improve existing options and decease negative effects. Some games seem to follow the abc approach of item 1 gt item 2 gt item 3 with minor stat changes while others make every unlocked option wildly change the way a game is played by throwing new units into the game which are able to change the balance of the game. Some make unlocking one branch block off another for the rest of the game while other will let you research everything. Some let you research multiple things while others will penalize you for switching research before it is complete. On that note tech trees can be progressive (with dedicated research over time unlocking an item) while some need you to collect enough money points in order to unlock instantly. What are some general guidelines for when to employ what strategy in a game? What games types of games would benefit more from one tech tree type over another and why? When should a linear tech tree be employed over a branching one? Edit For example a game where the main character has to build up an organisation and research technologies in secret while others are finding them and shut them down resulting in lost research laboratories, which reduce research output. The research output should increase somewhat exponentially as the game goes on as better technology is unlocked and research laboratories are upgraded. There would presumably be a very large tech tree to explore and the constant danger of losing facilities to other parties until you either unlock some endgame tech or lose everything. Why this isn't a duplicate Some people are marking this question as a duplicate because there is a related question about tech tree size. This question has to do more with the connections, cost and relationships between the technology options (of which size is a factor but not everything).


In terms of Game Design, is the definition more of designing the ENTIRE game, or can it be limited to contributing to the artwork? I am a person who desires a job in the artwork development of a video game, but the exact term for the general career often confuses me. What I want to do is Character Design, but what general career does it fall under in terms of video games? Is the overall concept Game Design, or is it just Illustration? I get confused that Game Design is just creating the ENTIRE game from the top of your head and not just a specific area of the development, like the art. Am I wrong? Does Game Design work for both the idea and the artwork, and can the term be separated between the two? A helpful answer would be much appreciated.


Pros and cons of randomised item stats? I'm working on an old style isometric RPG like the early Diablo or Fallout games. It has a central story with branching paths, and a lot of player freedom to explore the open world. The combat system is pretty integral to the game as well, considering the number of spells, attacks and enemies I'm hoping to add. Currently I'm wondering whether I should have fixed item stats, or have them randomised within a given range (say, 0 10 from a given value). But I can only see disadvantages with the randomised stats system. If the range is too large it'll become grindy, and if it's too small it'll become irrelevant. Could someone give me a list of the pros and cons for each approach?


What's the name of the "Candy Crush" style of game? I'm currently creating an engine trying to auto play games with a chess board, and I'm writing a report about it now. However, I found it hard to properly describe it for the games like Candy Crush, which has a game board, filled with "candies," and a few rules.. is there a formal classification for it? Is "board game" a proper name? What about "rectangle tile game", or "chessboard based game?"


Creating an illusion of stress and danger I'm currently experimenting with an adventure game setting where at some point the game is quite calm and the player has to solve puzzles and at some point there are enemies or environmental traps. I don't want to have any surprising danger events coming out of nowhere that would scare the player, so I would like to build up the players' tension before a section of the game starts which will contain multiple "player killing" obstacles (may they be enemies, or the ground falling apart..). My sound artist made some really good music and sound effects to slowly build up the tension, but game elements during this phase are missing. It's like the player is running from a puzzle zone to danger zone through a boring plain section. Beside sound, what are some generic ways to build up the players' tension? Can i aid with special Visuals, or do i have to improve the story or possibly invent some pre danger zone easy obstacles?


What is the term for the level progression paradigm in Bejeweled? Looking at the various level progression paradigms for my puzzle game, I decided to rule out the common ones such as 3 star per level, linear campaign like story, etc. I like the idea of Bejeweled's classic mode where the player simply keeps on going. What exactly is this paradigm called? I can't find any write ups on it so I can't quite tell what its structure is like. Is it infinite? Does the difficultly increase with each level in some shape, way or form (more likely to get "No moves")?


What are examples of games with "minimalist" models art assets When teaching game development, my student's obsess about building realistic or complex art models animation. And spending wayyy to much time trying to get accurate collision detection between two 3D models despite my best efforts However I would like them to spend more time thinking about developing the game mechanics, interaction and game play. I'm looking for some games where the visuals are simple but have good game play. Things I am thinking about are Cubes' vs Spheres or Impossible Game. What are more examples of visually simple (preferably 3D) games to help inspire my students?


How to develop multi player game without involving server side code? There have been lot of cloud based frameworks released in past few years. They provide real time communication among users but does not allow developers to write server side code. So, how can we use these frameworks to develop mulitplayer games. I want to know how we can deal with network latency and write prediction algorithm to recover network lag.


How can I discourage camping while still supporting a "sniper" style of play? I am trying to add features into a third person shooter that suit a sniper style of play, in addition to the current rush deathmatch style it was designed for. The current gameplay is similar in style to Gears of War and Battlefield, perhaps similar to Call of Duty in terms of combat ranges but a little slower paced. The levels are similar in size to large COD maps, or medium Battlefield maps. Two things which I was planning to add includes some long sight lines and also some "sniper nests". I am concerned though because these two features can open the door to a lot of camping. Sniping and camping are not the same things in my opinion, but it can be easy for campers to abuse such features for easy gain, when they were intended to promote tactical sniper use. That said, I don't believe in blaming the flaws of a game on a player's choice of play style. Sniper Uses long range rifles, may stay in a specific spot that is tactically advantageous at the time, but knows how to move to other locations good for sniping. Provides spotting and suppression for more offensive rush style team members. Camper May use any weapon, always stays in the one spot and waits for players to pass by, leading to easy low risk kills. Follows the same strategy regardless of what is happening in the game match. Is more focussed on own performance as opposed to supporting team members. So, I am trying to think of some ways in which to try to discourage camping while still allowing legitimate sniper play and preserving the original rush gameplay.


How to handle a player's level and its consequent privileges? I'm building a game similar to Mafia Wars where a player can do tasks for his gang and gain experience and thus advancing his level. The game is built using PHP and a Mysql database. In the game I want to limit the resources allowed to player based on his level. For example (Max gold) (Max army size) (Max moves) ... Level 1 1000 100 10 ... Level 2 1500 200 20 ... Level 3 3000 300 25 ... . . . In addition certain features of the game won't be allowed until a certain level is reached such as players under Level 10 can't trade in the game market, players under Level 20 can't create alliances,...etc. The way I have modeled it is by implementing a very loooong ACL (Access Control List) with about 100 entries (an entry for each level). However, I think there may be a simpler approach to this seeing that this feature have been implemented in many games before.


Calculation of a fight with many entities User A can have many entities A Entity is a object that has properties such as health, attack, defence, agility, stamina, etcetera. When User A want to attack User B with x entities I am looking for the algorithm equation to calculate the fight. I have brought some couple of ideas but they all have some pros and cons and I am not sure which one I would use or If I should use one of them at all? Model A The while loop Basically I would get all the entities that is suppose to fight in this battle, I would assign each of them (objects) in to an array (the User A array and the User B array). Now I would simply loop through until one of the array is empty. Inside the loop I would let one of the User attack first, calculate the result (If the Entity has 0 health, remove it) and then let the next User attack back, calculate the result (If the Entity has 0 health, remove it) And then continue. The Pros with Model A would be that every entity would be battling and instead of just do a calculation on all around there would be a justice fight. The Cons To loop through like 10 entities would be fine but what about 1000 2000 entities? And how about the different strength of each entity I mean how could I decide which entity should battle against what entity? This could be just an sorted array (weakest to strongest) But then I couldn't have like different types of entities is better against a different type of entity, meaning like a Gunner wouldn't mean anything If it met a Swordsman even though a Gunner would most likely win such in a real fight. Model B The idea of Model B is quite simple basically calculate all the attributes (properties) together and then If User A army has greater stats than User B army, User A army would win the fight. The Pros with this is it easy on the performance. The Cons are "Which entities would survive?" And it would basically be, the one with greatest army would win. You wouldn't even have a "chance" to win. Model B B Then I started to think what If I take the concept of Model B calculate the stat and then I have a battle between just those two single entities. This way User B actually would have a chance ( a small one but the possibility to win) even though the User A has greater army (better stats). The Cons are yet again, How would I know which entities that would survive on the winning team? The answer I am looking for to this question is what Model should I use? And how would I solve the cons in that particular Model. Or should I use some completely different model (idea) ? (If possible please provide some php pseudo code)


How to make 4 way walking animation in game maker studio 2? So I am trying to make a 4 way movement for my character, and I cant seem to get the walking animations to work for it. The character moves fine, but whenever he moves, the walking animation doesn't play. I figured it was because I made it so when the button was held down, it put it as the sprite for that direction constantly, so it could never get to the next frame. does anyone know how to bypass this? (btw I am using D amp D)


iPhone Game Sprites I have made games with cocos2d for the iphone however I am looking to move on from that, is there a good direction you could suggest? If not I was planning on using what the SDK gives me, and so for example to make a sprite, say the player on screen, rather than a CCSprite, what would be best to use? What do I need to go and learn? Thanks.


Designing score system Combos, chains, multipliers and bonuses I am making a breakout clone, I not want only want it to feel "arcade" for home users, but it will have a arcade version (although probably noone will buy, and I will only use the machine to amuse other people...), this make scoring, and high scores a important part of it, it has no multiplayer, with the community existing around how to score higher and higher scores. Being a breakout game, if the score is just linear, everyone that "finish" the game, will attain the same maximum score... Obviously this is undesirable, specially because the game DOES have a end, you cannot play it forever until you lose... So, how to design some decent score system? Currently I added a multiplier, and it increases when you kill several blocks fast, but this has the unintended side effect of creating absurdly high scores near the end of the game when you are highly powerful (yes, my game is not only about batting the ball P) and can clear a whole bunch of blocks at once... To make it more clear, you have 5 frames to kill another block and increase the multiplier, on the start of the game, only batting the ball, this only happen when you manage to get the ball stuck behind the wall (something that is desirable to reward... several players plainly have a CRAVING to attempt that), and if you are a MASTER breakout player, you can score on the first five levels something like 100k points... Yet, on one of the late levels, if you use in a mediocre way (not even good way) the powers, you can easily rack up 2 million points in a single level (and no, my game does not have points padded with 0! Some stuff DO reward you with 1 point, or 10... It is just the multiplier increase of 5 frame kill that skyrocket...) I want to add more mechanics, fix this one, and make lots of stuff rewardable, stuff that make the screen shine, blink, show pretty stuff and make the player go "WOW, DID YOU SEE THAT?" and tap his friend in the shoulder, and then when he make it on purpose he screams "HAHAAAA, I AM AWESOME AND YOU SUCK!!! DO IT TOO!! I DARE YOU!!!" Note Although the theme here is breakout, no problem in crossing genres, shmups are particularly good in this area, Radiant Silvergun for example was plainly great... But of course, it need to still be applicable on a breakout ) Meta question How I create tags? If I really can't, can a moderator put some decent tags for me? Like scoring, or chain system, or stuff like that? Otherwise we will end with thousands of stuff with the same tags design, writing and C ... or generic stuff like that.


What are the accessibility implications of requiring a button press or time out on a game over screen? For simple games, is there a de facto standard that game over screens time out after a few seconds before, or require some sort of input in order to, transition back to the main menu? Time out pros Accessibility. Mobility impaired users may have difficulty pushing the buttons so the game should advance for them. Time out cons Accessibility. Vision impaired users may have difficulty seeing any post game information displayed within the allotted time. Tweaking the time out so it's not too long as to be annoying if the user happens to game over a lot. Also quot Don't make QA mad quot Input pros Accessibility. Vision impaired users may take as long as needed to see any post game information displayed on screen. Makes time outs skippable. Input cons Accessibility. Motor impaired users may have difficulty pushing buttons. I remember reading a Microsoft article about certain best practice design decisions regarding accessibility a long time ago but can't recall the specifics.


What kinds of conflict resolution can be fun beyond combat in an RPG? As someone who grew up on the single digit Final Fantasy games and AD amp D, there are few ways of solving an rpg problem as fun as a fight. Different streams of accomplishment (object acquisition crafting, skill trees, puzzles, player strategies, team combination synergies, etc) all go into a few minutes of frenetic action, allowing for the feeling of accomplishment and progress via stat increases as the game progresses. That said, we tend to characterize rpg players as murderhobos for good reason. When you incentivize killing things, it's not long before all problems start looking like something to hit with your sword. And when you're able to steal anything not nailed down, why not do it? While other kinds of conflict resolution can be fun when in their element (farm Civ Sim games for the sense of building something, spy ninja assassin games for deftness and exploiting situations, social games for roleplaying a character or out thinking the other guy), they're often not fun outside their very narrow venue. And because we're limited to conversation with a computer (at least in single player games), social games can't even explore the whole of their venue. I'm racking my brain trying to figure out how to properly gamify the societal ideals of don't kill, don't steal in such a way that attacking or stealing becomes a conscious choice, not just a default means of action...but at the same time keep the same diversity of fun inputs that fighting stealing games have. Most games just code in consequences the town guards are sent after you and or some faction is less willing to deal with you. But this feels unnatural, and only invites further gaming of the system, producing better murderhobos at the end. My reason for doing so? The main theme of my game is a heavily philosophical one(think a halfway understandable Xenosaga) on how morality might play out in the post post apocalypse. While killing and stealing would be a part of that, I feel that our natural tendency as gamers wouldn't allow this question to play out 'fairly'. Any idea on how to put killing and stealing on a truly equal playing field with other forms of conflict resolution?


Tower Defence game scoring system I am in the process of developing my first game on android mobile platform, it s a tower defence game and I am currently busy designing the scoring system. At the end of the stage when the user has defeated all the waves of enemies I want to take his score and somehow calculate a rating out of 3 Stars. What will the best way be to calculate a score? When should I increment the score during gameplay for example when an enemy dies? And how do I calculate if the score is worth 1 3 Stars at the end of the stage? Basically I want help or any ideas on how the formula should look like and how to calculate if the user scored a 1.. 2... or 3 Stars. My variables in game Every enemy has a value Example 5 The stage has a number of life s before you are defeated Example 20 Each stage starts with money that you buy your towers with Example 120 Each towers costs money Example 30 A stage can consist of 1 or more waves of enemies. Any help or ideas would be appreciated as I am new to game development .


Keeping balance between widely different character classes So I've been theory crafting an idea for a game I think would be interesting, but I'm trying to work out the kinks in my idea. Here's my dilemma Let's say a player can choose between two classes, being a foot soldier or piloting a large vehicle like a tank. To keep gameplay diverse, there needs to be some players as foot soldiers and some as tanks. In games such as BF4, the individual soldier has so many anti vehicle weapons that vehicles are actually somewhat weak. Is there a good way to balance classes such that an endgame infantry unit is equal(not inferior or superior) to a vehicle such as a tank or ship? I was also thinking of an AI squad mechanic, where the player can command a small number of AI foot soldiers, so this might be worked into the balancing. I'm just trying to think of a way to have all classes be appealing to the player.


What category would this asynchronous production economy game fall under? I'm thinking of getting into game development and my friend and I have this idea for a game. We want to do some research on similar games, and I have noticed that games seem to fall under certain categories like "platformer", "shooter", "racing games" or similar. Our idea is a multiplayer, mobile game where you and around 4 5 other players are placed in a session. Every player is given a different role in a market (like a farmer to grow crops, miller to make flour out of crops, baker to bake bread, etc.). The players are supposed to sell goods to each other in order to earn money (or similar). The resources are produced generated over time, so it's like Travian and other city building games when it comes to stuff happening over time. You own a production facility (like a farm, mill, etc.) and if you have enough resources money it produces some good every 10 min (arbitrary time for the example). This happens even when the user is not playing. Then once in a while, you can check in, put some of your goods up for sale that others can purchase. So it's a passive loop that simply generates resources every x minutes, and in addition, the players can put up their goods for sale when they feel like it. But the game is not "infinite". When one of the players reaches a certain goal, the game session ends and the players are ranked (or something, it's still a rough idea). So in this regard, it's more like Wordfeud or Chess where your next move depends on what the other players do and there is a way to win the game (be it a winning condition or time running out). So the question is, does this kind of game fall under a specific category that we can research?


Dual Currency vs. One Currency in social games economics and monetization Not a programming question but game development related. I am creating an iPhone online game which I wish to be free to play where in app purchase is used for monetization. The important point is to make sure that this does not break the game play, my priority is gameplay first, monetization second. One popular way of monetizing the player base is to sell your in game currency, however there are 2 ways to go about this One Currency This currency can buy anything within the game, it can be earned through normal play at a limited rate. Players can, however, choose to buy this currency directly to speed up the acquisition of the currency. Dual Currency One currency can be earned through normal play and it can be used to buy a limited set of items that is required for normal enjoyment of the game. The second currency is 'premium' and must be purchased using real world money. This second currency can be used to purchase 'premium items' that gives extra abilities such as increase EXP gain, etc. The 2 currencies can be traded between players to give non paying players to exchange their time for the 'premium' currency. Both methods do not break gameplay and allows players who does not wish to pay enjoy the entire contents of the game if they put in enough time and effort. My question is, is there any reason why you would pick one over another? What are the pros and cons that I should pay attention to when implementing each alternative? Thank you.


Alternative ways to make a battle system in a mobile indie game more fun and engaging I'm developing an indie game for mobile platforms, and part of the game involves a PvP battle system (where the target player is passive). My vision is simple the active player can select a weapon item, then attack use, and display the calculated outcome. I have a concept for battle modifiers that affect stats to make it more interesting, but I'm not convinced this by itself will add enough of a fun factor. I've received some inspiration from the game engine that powers Modern War Kingdom Age Crime City, but I want more control to make it more fun. In those games, you don't have the option to select weapons or use items, and the "battling" screen is simply 3D eye candy. Since this will be an indie game, I won't be spending on a team of professional 3D artists animators, so my edge needs to be different. What are some alternatives to expensive eye candy that you or others have used to make a non 3D PvP game more fun and engaging? Did the alternative concepts survive the release?


Power, achievement and affiliation games for psychology research project For a psychology research project we're looking for short (ca. 5 minute) single player games to observe people's basic motivation. We would like to ask people to list games that provide the closest possible (even if not perfect) fit to each description. We need 2 3 promising candidates for each of the following 3 categories. We would be happy with anything we can use, build on, mod, change slightly etc. to fit our purposes. A) Game that taps into affiliation Affiliation involves being emotionally close to others and establishing new relationships. The game should revolve around meeting other characters. I.e. through simple means (clicking certain actions) one can explore possibilities to meet friends. Requests to establish relationships should be accepted in most cases, because the player is well liked. This liking not related to status or performance, but to the warm fuzzy feeling of friendliness. When getting to know each other, many commonalities between player and character emerge and are happily acknowledged. B) Game that taps into achievement Achievement involves mastering difficult goals. In achievement games you would solve several quests by using some ability (speed, spatial thinking, strategy use). It should adapt to the player's ability, so that it is always possible to solve 60 70 of the quests. Player's should be able to improve their abilities and results with some training. Results should always be related to the individual performance, so there is no high score ranking with others or some such.The goal of this game should simply be to remain focused on a task of moderate difficulty, trying to become better at it. C) Game that taps into power Power involves obtaining social status and influencing other people. A power game would involve influencing characters and yielding reactions. It should have a low difficulty and work without points (kind of like a cheat mode maybe). In other words Influencing other people should be easy, not dependent on achievement or liking. For example, the ability to change the lives of others could be due to insurmountable and unquestionable status differences between the person playing (e.g., a deity, a biologist) and the characters of the game (sticking to the example mortals, ants). Now, we hope to find resources we can re use for our games. We don't have the ambition to create new games and many games already suit our needs. We only need the game to have at least 10 events relevant to the motive and to log these events (so we can align it with the reactions of our participants). If we can change it to do that, that'd be cool too. Probably many quite simple games have been lost in the drawers of computer science students who made them as finger exercises and homework. We would only use these games in our research setting, so there is no commercial interest involved. Many thanks in advance and best wishes from the whole lab! we edited this in response to some comments


In tactical combat games, why does shooting end your turn? I was wondering about this particular game mechanic in tactical combat games, like XCOM2, where you have two actions, which may be move move reload move move reload move attack ...but not attack move, because when attacking, it ends your turn. If I compare this to tabletop D amp D 5e, with its move attack actions, it shouldn't be that different, but this restriction seems to make things completely different. What is the game design purpose for this kind of restriction?


Board Game Design in Cocos2d I am going to start a chess like board game. And for that I have reviewed a number of things available. One is http www.mapeditor.org , using which you can create a grid base games. Another option is geekgameboard for iphone available at http mooseyard.lighthouseapp.com projects 23201 geekgameboard Now I want your expert opinion on what would be better to make a game in cocos2d, using the first option or the second option? Both looks promising to me and give good control over board design. PS Sorry for duplicates, I found about the https gamedev.stackexchange.com lately after posting it on stackexchange. So I am just posting it here again as I feel this is a more relevant board.


Game Map Implementation I want to know how I can create a virtual town or city (like skyrim towns or gta4 liberty city) Should I create something on paper and copy coordinates? (Building1 floor corner coordinates are these, ceiling coordinates are these, 2nd floor coordinates are these etc, and then road1 coordinates are these...) And then apply texture on these things? Start with just 1 building and extend it in time? But this seems like a ton of work. For simplicity if we assume that there are 5 buildings on a road, this is like 90 vertices. And if I decide to make a house wider, then many things will be affected and I have to find new coordinates for every house corners. How did the developers of GTA 4 do it for example? I would like to know an appropiate method to create a static virtual map where the player can move into houses and interacts with objects in it. Please note that these buildings are not cosmetic only. I should be able to place objects in houses such as tables and the player should be able to jump on it etc. Thank you, I will vote when I have the reputation.


Continuous running vs timed tasks? I've started making a browser based game, as a hobby, where users log in via a website and can manage a soccer team. I need to have some sort of process running to handle player development, running matches, age players, generally progressing time.. I've never done anything like this before and therefore I'm putting this out there to get some feedback from other people. So, my idea was that I could have a continuously running application which can handle all the "off line" processing. But, that got me thinking that another approach could be to have, f.ex. a "PlayerTrainingTask" running daily, a "RunMatchesTask", running on a fixture based schedule, et.c. Which approach is most appropriate? or is there another option I haven't thought of? What are your thoughts?


The need your game fills. Establishing your "hook." I am a programmer and have worked on games although never attempted design myself. I am now attempting to design a game myself, working with a modest team of programmers and artists. Game designers have been telling me it is important to establish the need your game fills, in order to develop a more complete vision of the product. I think in terms of mechanics and gameplay and am having trouble finding a "hook," even in existing games. Any advice in identifying why a mechanic is fun, and what need a game fills, to help develop my own ideas is much appreciated.


Developing interesting game mechanics when not an avid gamer I've realized that though I like playing videogames, I find it much more entertaining to actually make them. This makes me wonder, if I'm planning to develop an X game, do I need to be an avid X gamer? How can I develop interesting mechanics if I play that genre sparingly? In order to get empirical answers, I'm more interested in listening to the opinion of those who have worked are working in the game industry. Are you and your co workers avid gameplayers or "casual" gamers? What about the Schafers, Carmacks, McGees and Gilberts of the industry (should anyone know any of them ) )? being X any game genre Platformer, RPG, RTS, FPS, etc. PS I'm trying to make this question as subjective less as possible, so feel free to point any improvements.


Adversarial Search AI having problems with too many choices I'm a game designer working with a set of coders trying to create a card game. Currently we're trying to implement a drawing mechanic in which you choose which card you draw, but the Adversarial Search AI can't keep up with that many choices and can only look two turns ahead without this new mechanic. I'm pretty set on finding a way to make this work, does anyone have and alternatives to fixing this problem? I've tried reducing the space down to having only a few choices out of the deck, but the problems comes from the AI having to see what the player is going to draw. I'm pulling my hair over this problem, any thoughts?


Techniques for building out a game idea and mechanics I've been finding that many of my projects fall into the abyss of my "game mechanic tests". That is, they aren't really "games", but rather sandboxes where I try out various things and find some mechanics that would be fun. Now, I'd like to actually create a game out of some these ideas. Since so many of my "games" end up turning into additional sandboxes when I get distracted by a new idea("whoa, that's cool", and suddenly the whole game completely changes.. twenty times.. sometimes back and forth between several competing ideas), I'd like to actually plan out the mechanics, how they will fit together, and altogether how the game will work as a whole, even though I know I still need to be semi flexible for when things play test differently than expected. This is compared to my usual strategy of, "Let's just get started and then I will build a game out of whatever I create" mindset. What techniques are used for planning out a game idea (even if just roughly), before actually just jumping in? Is there specific software which helps? How do I go about managing the planning phase in general and keeping things up to date if things start to change? See this great answer on a separate question for the type of actual design I would like to work on for my game, opposed to the programming focus I generally approach things with.


Scripting to block or not to block Context I'm making a little "program your robot army" sort of game in Java in which the player writes Lua scripts (which are then run by LuaJ) to program their robots to do stuff. So far there are two objectives Keep It Simple, Stupid, and React to the environment. To take a simple example of what I currently have, the player should be able to tell their robot to go to a particular location with something like robot goTo(5, 8) Like Colobot, the scripting engine effectively halts (blocks) at that instruction until the robot has reached its destination. I like this it's meets the first requirement nicely, in that you can't do anything until goTo decides to return. It's also simple on the Java side I can basically do while ( condition ) yield() and just resume the coroutine every tick (then maintaining state in local variables is trivial). But what if that resource at (5,8) disappears, or an enemy comes near, or energy runs low? There's no opportunity to bail the robot has to reach (5,8) before it can do anything else. The main other idea I can think of is to produce some sort of loop while not robot near(5,8) do if robot enemyNearby() then break and do some other stuff, presumably else robot moveTo(5,8) end end where moveTo this time sets the velocity acceleration and then immediately returns, without blocking until arrival. I could have robot goTo return the actual coroutine (either wrapped, so you just call it, or directly, which requires calling coroutine.resume and passing the coroutine), which might look something like this moveTask robot moveTo(5,8) while not robot near(5,8) do if robot enemyNearby() then break else moveTask() or perhaps coroutine.resume(moveTask) or some other syntactic sugar end end These last two approaches look pretty similar, but reusing a coroutine as in the second example makes managing state (e.g. a path) trivial, at the cost of exposing coroutines to the player. To reiterate, the goal is to allow for writing simple scripts, in which a set of actions are executed in series (sorta like queued actions in The Sims), while simultaneously allowing more complex scripts with actions that may be interrupted by arbitrary events (nearby enemy, target moved, stats dropping). Any tips or ideas would be much appreciated!


two part dice pool mechanic I'm working on a dice mechanic resolution system based on the Ghost Echo (hereafter shortened to G E) tabletop RPG. Specifically, since G E can be a little harsh dealing with consequences and failure, I was hoping to soften the system and add a little more player control, as well as offer the chance to evolve player characters into something unique, right from creation. So, here's the mechanic Players roll 2 separate d12 against each of the two statistics for their character (each is a number from 2 11, and may be rolled above or below depending on the nature of the action attempted, rolling your stat exactly always fails). Depending on the success for that roll, they add dice to the pool rolled for a modified G E style action. The acting player gets two dice anyhow, and I am debating offering a bonus die for each success, or a single bonus die for succeeding on both of the statistic compared rolls. Once the size of the dice pool is set, the entire pool is rolled, and the players are allowed to assign the rolled dice to a goal and a danger, one to each. Assigned results are judged as follows 1 4 means the attempted goal fails, or the danger comes true. 5 8 is a partial success at the goal, or partially avoiding the danger. 9 12 means the goal is achieved, or the danger avoided. My concerns are twofold Firstly, is the two stage action too complicated, with two rolls to judge separately before anything can happen? Secondly, are the statistics involved going too far in softening the game? I've run some basic simulations, and the approximate statistics follow 2 dice (up to) 3 dice (up to) 4 dice failure 33 25 20 partial 33 35 35 success 33 40 45 I'd appreciate any advice that addresses my concerns or offers to refine my simulation (right now the first roll is statistically modeled as sign(1d12 1d12), where 0 is a success).


As an indie game dev, what processes are the best for soliciting feedback on my design spec idea? Background I have worked in a professional environment where the process usually goes like the following Brain storm idea Solidify the game mechanics design Iterate on design idea to create a more solid experience Spec out the details of the design idea Build it Step 3. is generally done with the stakeholders of the game (developers, designers, investors, publishers, etc) to reach an 'agreement' which meets the goals of all involved. Due to this process involving a series of often opposing and unique view points, creative solutions can surface through discussion iteration. This is backed up by a process for collating the changes new ideas, as well as structured time for discussion. As a (now) indie developer, I have to play the role of all the stakeholders (developers, designers, investors, publishers, etc), and often find myself too close to the idea design to do more than minor changes, which I feel to be local maxima when it comes to the best result (I'm looking for the global maxima, of course). I have read that ideas game designs unique mechanics are merely multipliers of execution, and that keeping them secret is just silly. In sharing the idea with others outside the realm of my own thinking, I hope to replicate the influence other stakeholders have. I am struggling with the collation of changes new ideas, and any kind of structured method of receiving feedback. My question As an indie game developer, how and where can I share my ideas designs to receive meaningful constructive feedback? How can I successfully collate the feedback into a new iteration of the design? Are there any specialized websites, etc?


Optimal touch controls for a twin stick shoot 'em up? So we recently launched a shoot 'em up arcade type game (think Smash TV or I Made a Game with Zombies in It!). You can move in one direction and fire in another, so the ideal control scheme is probably two analog joysticks (like the Xbox 360 has). We support WASD to move and arrow keys to fire. The best way to control though is to move with WASD and aim with the mouse. We're getting a lot of people asking for mobile versions of the game (mostly for iPad and Android) and the problem is we just can't come up with a good way to translate the controls over to a touch device. Interestingly, someone actually hacked an early version of our game a while back to work on Android by overlaying D pads, and sure enough, it was almost impossible to control. The game gets really difficult later on, and the thought of releasing a game with a crappy control scheme that nobody could possibly ever use to beat the game does not sit well with me. So I was wondering if anyone has any previous experience or suggestions on how to approach this problem? Overlaying two D pads on the screen is clearly not the way to go and we're kind of at a loss for other ideas.


Resources for designing (not programming) 2D platformer mechanics I've been making a 2D platformer in Unity and it's been going great. I have the fundamentals down (and as an experienced programmer, I know how to get the results I want this is not a programming question.) I've been floundering, though, because I realize that I lack vision in terms of a game direction. I originally wanted to make a Metroidvania style game, but decided to scale back as I thought that would be too ambitious (and take too long) for my first game. As such, I've decided to create a platformer run and gun type game. I've played enough platformers to know and intrinsically understand basic mechanics, but I also realize that the best games have a core mechanic that defines the game. Megaman's core mechanic, for instance, is obtaining and using boss weapons and abilities boss battles and levels are built around this. Metal Slug revolves around weapon pickups and its tank gameplay. I guess I'm at the point where I have a code demo....but it's not a game it has no soul. I've basically just proven to myself that I can write a platformer game in Unity. I want to know of any good resources on aspects of video game mechanic design not centered around programming book recommendations would be amazing, but online resources or other types of resources would be great as well. (Worth noting that I'm not looking for guides on designing levels, but lower level mechanics, like jump height, hp limits, core mechanics to define a game, etc.)


Websocket Scalability w Player Skills About 8 months ago, I asked this question, and received a lot of valuable information from the community. I have switched to nodejs, since then, and am finishing up my game. I am deeply concerned about networking issues pertaining to the usage of WebSocket data being sent through my current architecture especially since my game uses an authoritarian server, and doesn't utilize peer to peer. My game is a Diablo 2 inspired action RPG. As we know, for action RPGs, players utilize a lot of skills, and if games are instanced based, all players in the game need to be notified. I am worried about scalability. Here is an example Shooting a fireball has a 0.5 second cool down. This is how the data is sent Client Skill id, Skill rotation Server Server Checks cooldown, notify's players skill is being used Client If fireball hits monster, send attack signal Server Server Checks cooldown, player's range to mob, calculates damage, etc amp spits out damage numbers to all players All this happens in less than 1 second. The WebSocket server is not even sending out the Monster AI update packets to do damage to the player, nor the monster's fireballs. So now, basically double the amount of data is being sent through the WebSocket and to all player's in a game. It gets worse imagine if 20 players are online attacking monsters. My nodejs server will be on fire. This method is not even 100 cheat proof, as I'm waiting for the fireball to hit the monster on the client side to send the attack signal, instead of doing all that on the server. The problem is, I would have to be running a physics engine on the server, which would bog down nodejs's event loop even more. I'm using the P2 Physics engine from Phaser, and not simple AABB otherwise, I could just check for collisions server side. To close, when a player moves around the map, the server notifys everyone else in the same game. The same goes for when a player drops an item, or when loot is generated from a monster. I just feel like I'm clogging my WebSocket server up, and am doing something wrong with all this data being sent across the pipe. So with all this said, Am I worrying too much about the amount of data being sent across WebSockets? Is this data being sent normal for a games that utilizes an authoritarian server? Would a Redis Pub Sub system be an ideal solution to my problems?


Regarding physics engines and the GPU The rigid body physics engines that use a "bounding box" for collision detection, I am aware of how they are created. What I want to know is, is there a physics engine that does not use "bounding box" but actually uses something like vertex data to do the physics calculations? What type of physics engine is this called, and does it use the GPU?


Alternatives to a leveling system I'm currently designing a rough prototype of a mecha fighting game. These are the basics I came up with Multiplayer (matchmaking for up to 10 people, for now) Browser based (HTML5) 2D ( lt canvas gt ) Persistent (as in, players have accounts and don't have to use a new mech each time they start a match) Players earn money upon destroying another mech, which is used to buy parts (guns, armor, boosters, etc) Simplicity (both of the game itself, and of the development of said game) No "leveling" (as in, players don't get awarded with XP) The last part is bothering me. At first, I wanted to have players gain experience points (XP) when destroying other mechs, but gaining two things at once (money and XP) seemed to be in conflict with my last point, which is simplicity. If I were to have a leveling system, that would require additional development. But, the biggest problem is that I simply couldn't fit it anywhere! Adding levels would require adding meaning to these levels, and most of the things that I hoped to achieve could already be achieved with the money mechanic I introduced. So I decided to drop leveling off completely. That, in turn, removed a fairly popular and robust mean of progression in games from my game (not that I would use it well anyway). Is there another way of progression in games, aside from leveling and XP points, that wouldn't get rendered redundant by my money mechanic, would be somehow meaningful (even on a symbolic level), and wouldn't be in conflict with my last point, which is simplicity?


What is the design rationale behind hard content that's limited to only a couple attempts per week? There is currently a lot of discussion in the World of Warcraft playerbase about a recently added feature Horrific Visions. Visions are personal areas you can enter alone or with a handful of players and have 5 objectives with increasing difficulty plus additional difficulty options. The details aren't that important, but the core is that these Visions require careful planning of resources and time if you want to progress the harder difficulties, both during the visions themselves and in how you earn the right to complete a Vision. In return for completing these Visions, you can earn increasingly better gear based on difficulty (though repeated gear rewards decline in quality) as well as upgrades for an item you need against the final bosses of the raid that came in the same patch. Now, usually in games that have really hard content you're supposed to defeat, there is no limit in how many attempts you can do, or the limit is sufficiently high that it makes no real difference. However, this isn't the case in Visions. Visions require you to buy an item to make an attempt, and this item is so costly that even if you log in every day and do all the content that rewards the items you need to buy this item, you can at most earn 4 copies of the item per week. There is also incentive to save these tokens for later weeks because later upgrades require you to complete increasingly more runs, which you can speed up by not using additional tokens in weeks where you don't need them. This is what many people see as the biggest problem with these Visions. They're hard content, but you have only a couple attempts per week and you need to make them count. So there isn't really a safe way to practise them so you can learn how they work and what the best way to do them is. If you mess up and you don't do enough to earn the upgrade token mentioned above, it's a huge potential loss and you fall behind other players who did manage to complete them. I'm trying to understand possible design rationale behind this. I don't usually come across this design element in games, and I can't even remember another game with similar design, especially for such a core feature of the content update. in other hard game content, Soulsborne games don't really restrict you in attempts, and Roguelikes actually are built around immediately starting anew when you fail, again without real limitations. AFAIK neither genre really limits you in how often you can try them. And it has been years since Blizzard last put a hard limit on how many attempts you were allowed for the hardest content, especially such a low amount. What can be potential design rationale behind putting hard content behind a restrictive attempt limit?


timebased scoring algorithm for game i am developing a game where user has to find target number using 5 given numbers and 4 operators. the score depends on the type of operators and number of operators used and time. score typeOperators noOfOperators timeScore where typeOperators is the sum of score for each type of operator, 1 pt for , 2 pt for , and 3 pt for . if all the three operators are used once, typeOperators will be 13. currently, i am thinking of timeScore max(0, x timespent) But, the game should avoid the situation where the user finding target number with worst solution but with minimum time gets higher scores. so the more weightage should be on the typeOperators rather than timeScore. can there be any better approach?


Is there a site where people discuss game concepts and questions in general? I like making game concepts for fun, as a hobby. I don't think that all my game concepts are amazingly awesome and have to be created and would revolutionize the industry. I just want some people to talk to that have the same hobbies as I do. To be able to discuss ideas and point out the pros and cons.


Which approach is better Frequent small updates, or occasional large ones? I recently released the first publicly available free Alpha for my top down shooter Dread I'm trying to decide whether a weekly bi weekly small update release schedule is better than the more traditional monthly (or longer) large updates. The more frequent schedule would mean that players would have a new build to play more often, but the new builds would likely only have a few bug fixes feature additions at a time. Would players grow tired of the constant updating, or would they feel more attachment as they are more involved in the development process? I'm thinking that, due to the somewhat experimental nature of my game, it might be a good thing for people to have the opportunity to suggest tweaks to the new features during their infant stages. But I don't want my desire for feedback to bias my decision. What are your thoughts experiences on the matter?


xna 2.5d gravity system i currently developing a game using the xna API. now the game i am developing is 2.5d. by 2.5d i mean the character or object can move left and right and a up and down(not just by jumping) that it would look like there is depth to the level. try to think something like little fighter 2 where you can also walk up and down. now i need to develop a gravity system,so far i used the idea that i draw a shadow on the ground of the level,and it follows the object or character and when the character jumps,he moves parabolic like in the real world(using very simple physics). the gravity system detects landing if the position of it's shadow is the position of the character( or the position of the character is below the position of the shadow). is there a better way to simulate gravity in this 2.5d approach?


What does a Game Designer do? what skills do they need? I know someone who is thinking about getting into game design, and I wondered, what does the job game designer entail? what tools do you have to learn how to use? what unique skills do you need? what exactly is it you'd do from day to day. I may be wording this a bit wrong because I'm not sure if the college program is become a game designer or learn game design. but I think the same questions apply either way.


How to determine what difficulty is right for the game? I am targeting mass casual audience as I am developing the hyper casual game. The problem is that I have played Helix Jump and Color Bump 3d and those games have a pretty big difference in difficulty level (well at least for me). They are both considered hyper casual, both target mass casual audience and both have market success. If two so similar games have such decent difference in difficulty how to determine that the difficulty of my game is just right? It's easy to say that it's subjective but when you invest so much time in your project you need to have at least some benchmark to work with. How to define this benchmark?


Necessary design skills to develop games using Unity, UDK, etc With my question I want to know if DESIGN 2D 3D skills are necessary in order to create a game using some engine like UDK or Unity. I have experience as a developer, and experience with openGL, I have also some experience with 3dMax, but Im NOT able to design something from scracth. I simply dont have the skills. In this kind of engines, is there a way to create and customize levels or characters for example? Thinking in something related, I will think in the character editor of games like World of Warcraft, etc. I would like to know if the creation of levels and characters would be like that.


Why do loot drops contain (mostly) useless items? I was thinking about this and couldn't figure this out. In Diablo you kill enemies and they drop random things. But usually the drops are worthless to you relative to what you already have equipped. Why bother building a drop system that gives you crappy drops? Maybe I'm not communicating my question well so I'll provide an alternative implementation Instead of frequently dropping crappy items and rarely dropping good items, why not only rarely drop good items? I guess that crappy items adds to the addictive ness somehow, but I don't understand why. Why is dropping crappy items part of the design? What does that add? Edit FWIW, I have been referring to Diablo 2 as my reference, not D3. But it's still interesting to see answers explaining why D2 was more addictive.


RPG combat and gold exp reward equations I have a game that I'm creating, but I'm running across issues in keeping the ratios between high and low level players similar in the battle and reward equations. Obviously a higher level player should receive less experience, but have the upper hand in battle when fighting lower level players and monsters. Here is how I'm calculating things currently Battle starts If player.dex enemy.dex Accuracy ((player.dex enemy.dex) 2) 20 If player.dex lt enemy.dex Accuracy ((enemy.dex player.dex) enemy.dex) player.dex Accuracy is a percentage tested against a roll of a 100 sided die. If accuracy roll Hit success If accuracy lt roll Hit fails If hit success All of the attacker's damaging items (spiked helms and shields, weapons, etc.) are added together and applied as such Damage (player.str item.damage) (enemy.dex enemy.armor) If the player is fighting a monster, I have a base amount of gold and experience which is modified according to the player Gold gained (enemy.gold rand(1,10)) player.level Exp gained (enemy.exp rand(1,3)) player.level If the player is fighting another player, then there will have to be a different equation for the rewards, but I'm not sure how to go about creating that one. As this is my first attempt at creating (though I'm an avid RPGer), I'm not sure if there is kind of an "industry standard" form of calculating these things or not. I'm also afraid that these equations won't hold up once the player reaches higher levels (say level 50 ).


Balancing a game about gladiatorial robot combat Suppose a player can construct a robot built from various parts and each part costs money. How would you balance the cost of a weapon against its capabilities? What about balancing weapons against other parts? The base case seems pretty easy imagine the player can only buy weapons and everything else on the robot is the same. A machine gun that fires 1 bullet per second costs 100. A super machine gun that fires twice as fast could cost twice as much. But what about an ultra machine gun that has four times the range? Now imagine the player can add other capabilities to the robot like better speed or armor. How do you relate the cost of a machine gun against the ability to move very quickly, or to be stealthed against radar? I understand that there's a later stage of experimentation where costs and capabilities are adjusted, but where do you start from?


How long to display each sentence? When creating a sequence where text advances automatically, is there a metric which will allow me to calculate a reasonable duration to display each "sentence"? My intuition tells me that because of the way we read, the number of words is probably more relevant than the number of characters, but I'm curious what people may have already figured out about this problem.


How do I model a gooey sprite? I happened to see this structure of a gooey player character made in flash. Can anybody suggest onto what computer science concept I should use to make a goo make it behave like a goo Thanking You, Vish


Method for creating a next gen MMORPG out of thin air? Update August 2012 thank you all for your answers. I started small as suggested, creating first a Facebook Game about it, the next step will be to port it later on PC for a 3D version, and much later as a MMORPG as I would have build credibility and funding. The upcoming FB game will be done by Blup Blup Game Studio (my studio). Thanks. Original Question Background I am documenting since a few months a game design document (GDD)(sci fi amp fantasy MMORPG) all by myself, without any real game design background (I am just a Chartered Accountant (CA and CISA)). For now, it looks more like a proposal document. The question If you would have a series of amazing ideas that would revolutionized MMORPGaming how would you create that company out of thin air? Focus on creating the initial core team that would create the mockup that would be present to capital venture companies for major financing. You may not be financial expert here but you did a massive amount of games in the past, of various types and platforms. With our different backgrounds we are complementary. Cheers, Raistx P. S. Edited for a leaner question. Removed elements linked to money as it's not the core question. I know how to get money and convince cap venture CIES, but I need a mockup high pitch to do so.


Tower Defence game scoring system I am in the process of developing my first game on android mobile platform, it s a tower defence game and I am currently busy designing the scoring system. At the end of the stage when the user has defeated all the waves of enemies I want to take his score and somehow calculate a rating out of 3 Stars. What will the best way be to calculate a score? When should I increment the score during gameplay for example when an enemy dies? And how do I calculate if the score is worth 1 3 Stars at the end of the stage? Basically I want help or any ideas on how the formula should look like and how to calculate if the user scored a 1.. 2... or 3 Stars. My variables in game Every enemy has a value Example 5 The stage has a number of life s before you are defeated Example 20 Each stage starts with money that you buy your towers with Example 120 Each towers costs money Example 30 A stage can consist of 1 or more waves of enemies. Any help or ideas would be appreciated as I am new to game development .


How can the lategame in a 4X game be made more exciting? I played a lot of different 4X games lately (eXplore, eXpand, eXploit, eXterminate, like the Civilization series, for example), and noticed that most of them suffer from the same problem As soon as one player got significantly more powerful than the others, that player gets almost unbeatable. The dominant player has access to vastly more resources than the others. Also, that player has a significant advantage in research, which means that the other factions will soon fall back in technology, giving the powerful player even more tools which the weaker factions can not counter, so it makes the game even easier for them. During this phase it is pretty clear that this player will inevitably win. However, the game usually does not stop here. It continues for hours while the dominant player steamrolls all the weaker players one after another. This poses no challenge to them, because they are so vastly more powerful. So this phase of the game becomes a dull and boring chore for everyone. The dominant player moves their units from one enemy base city planet to another knowing that nothing they could encounter there could stop them as long as they avoid some easily avoidable mistakes, while the other players watch helplessly in frustration without any way to prevent their demise. How could a 4X game be designed to avoid this boring and tedious endgame?


Calculating the output of two armies fighting I am programming a strategic game using Flash. The game works very similar to the famous game "Travian". My problem is as follows I am trying to make the calculation of the troops lost as a result of a fight between two armies. The two armies have different types of units. Some of them are stronger against some other units and weaker against other types. How can I put that effect of this differences in the equation of the fight? It seems to be easy if they only have att and def points only, but when it comse to the units type dependency, I am lost.


Designing score system Combos, chains, multipliers and bonuses I am making a breakout clone, I not want only want it to feel "arcade" for home users, but it will have a arcade version (although probably noone will buy, and I will only use the machine to amuse other people...), this make scoring, and high scores a important part of it, it has no multiplayer, with the community existing around how to score higher and higher scores. Being a breakout game, if the score is just linear, everyone that "finish" the game, will attain the same maximum score... Obviously this is undesirable, specially because the game DOES have a end, you cannot play it forever until you lose... So, how to design some decent score system? Currently I added a multiplier, and it increases when you kill several blocks fast, but this has the unintended side effect of creating absurdly high scores near the end of the game when you are highly powerful (yes, my game is not only about batting the ball P) and can clear a whole bunch of blocks at once... To make it more clear, you have 5 frames to kill another block and increase the multiplier, on the start of the game, only batting the ball, this only happen when you manage to get the ball stuck behind the wall (something that is desirable to reward... several players plainly have a CRAVING to attempt that), and if you are a MASTER breakout player, you can score on the first five levels something like 100k points... Yet, on one of the late levels, if you use in a mediocre way (not even good way) the powers, you can easily rack up 2 million points in a single level (and no, my game does not have points padded with 0! Some stuff DO reward you with 1 point, or 10... It is just the multiplier increase of 5 frame kill that skyrocket...) I want to add more mechanics, fix this one, and make lots of stuff rewardable, stuff that make the screen shine, blink, show pretty stuff and make the player go "WOW, DID YOU SEE THAT?" and tap his friend in the shoulder, and then when he make it on purpose he screams "HAHAAAA, I AM AWESOME AND YOU SUCK!!! DO IT TOO!! I DARE YOU!!!" Note Although the theme here is breakout, no problem in crossing genres, shmups are particularly good in this area, Radiant Silvergun for example was plainly great... But of course, it need to still be applicable on a breakout ) Meta question How I create tags? If I really can't, can a moderator put some decent tags for me? Like scoring, or chain system, or stuff like that? Otherwise we will end with thousands of stuff with the same tags design, writing and C ... or generic stuff like that.


What elements make a simple game addictive? Possible Duplicates What should a game have in order to keep humans playing it? How can I make my score based game addictive What makes puzzle games addictive? I am creating simple game for iPhone like quot Bubble Explode quot . Generally, what elements of game make it addictive and exciting for similar simple games.


Do open world games need less backstory? I've played a few open world games and really enjoyed them, though the ones I've really enjoyed have generally received complaints about how little story there is to them. The Saboteur is one example of this. Fully open world, good enough story (for me, anyway), engaging gameplay, and still has received complaints in reviews about not having enough story. Do open world games actually need a full, all encompassing story? Or can fun and engaging gameplay fill in the gap and let the designer get away with a slightly less complete story?


How to make a video game map that can be used by Android? I am interested in developing games for the Android OS. I have played Replica Island and I have browsed over the source. I found that the levels maps were in a .bin format. I could execute them because they were in an Android format. So how could I make a game map level that could be used in my game? What program would I use? How could I load the map in Java (for Android)?


Character Models Single Mesh vs. Individual Parts I was looking up 3D character models from various games (Battlefield 3 and DMC to be specific), just as research work and upon importing the model into Blender3D, I found that every part of the model was a separate mesh object (head, armor vest, legs, hands, etc.). This got me thinking Why didn't the artist model them as a single object? I think that would be better because You can save a few polygons in your model . Doesn't animating separate parts cause clipping issues as one mesh may not deform in sync with neighboring mesh? All parts were overlapping each other the armor vest was overlapping chest polygons, which were not visible and thus wasted. All polygons and edges connected to each other.


Game Programming Junior Demo Design Consider the following demo http www.ashereinhorn.com post 11140243390 short capture from the last xna version direct3d (It has now almost been converted to C and DirecX10, and so the code is not important here, it's the substance I'm interested in) Basically the little agents move around killing each other, their states are displayed in a corner and you can select one so as to see the items it can see, it's field of view and the things it is holding in memory. I showed it to someone that works in the industry and they said I should focus on tracking a single agent and make what's going on more clear so maybe animate each state with simple animations or model swapping to make it more obvious when they are searching in combat running away. The other thing they said I should change was the fact that the agents simply disappear when killed, and reappear when spawned because again, it's not clear what's happeneing. As a result I'm going to implement a simple particle system so that agents 'shatter' when killed and possibly reassemble when spawned. My question is, are there any really obvious changes that I should make to this demo with a view to getting my first game programming job? If you work or know about the industry, is there anything that jumps out at you that should be included? Or is bad? or good for that matter? Are there any things that would particularly impress or grab your attention in a game demo? Thank you very much for any help you can give! EDIT The walls are actually solid in the C version


What is the hardest thing in game development process? I am new to the game dev area, although I have professional experience in programming and some other qualities like making graphics in Photoshop or 3D modelling. Currently I am learning one widely used game engine connected with another free 3D modeling tool and my problem is that from my beginner's perspective, it all seems relatively easy and I know that this is not true. Right now It seems I can find all knowledge I need in some online tutorials, courses and if something is missing I can still ask a question on websites such as this one. I plan to do an FPS multiplayer game as my first game and I wonder what is the hardest (most time, energy or money consuming) stage of game development in 2020? I am asking because right now I think I can make 30 50 (prototype and some assets like 3d models) of the game myself in around year period of time and maybe later get more money to finish the project, but I know it is not true and this is only my beginner's unexperienced imagination, because similar games are usually being done by a team of experienced developers and their games still have bugs, glitches and other issues and I know some other similar but amateur projects that were started by one or two people and eventually were abandoned due to unknown reason (mostly lack of time I assume). So I am wondering what are the stages that cause most amateurs to fail and abandon their ideas, is it modeling, programing, networking, debugging?


Is this feature copyright infringment? Say there is a card game and they have a feature that allows setting join requirement when hosting a game. These are Only people I like, No one I Dislike, Invite Only, Everyone. If I created a card game and had a similar join requirement feature with similar features eg Only Buddies, No Enemies, Invitation, Everyone, is this copyright infringement or is it just an idea and not an expression of one? Thanks


Particle systems on multiplayer games I'm working on a 2D javascript Three.js multiplayer game, using web sockets and an authoritative server currently written in Python. The combat mechanic will be similar to Geometry Wars however i'm struggling to get my head around how to implement this in an efficient way. There are several drawbacks concerns I need to take into account Efficiency is key Three.js particle systems aren't mutable, you cannot add or remove particles once the system has been created, only move them off screen All calculations with respect to collision and damage must be done server side My game currently implements entity interpolation with fixed time step updates from the server Potentially several different weapons projectile types I can see several solutions Handle each 'bullet' particle individually Pros Most accurate way of doing thigs Cons Slow on server Lots of bandwidth Hard to batch draw objects, will have to draw each individually Use ray casting on server and have some form of network synced particle emitter Pros Much easier on the server and network Cons Network synching issues What happens when a bullet hits an object? Bullet will pass right through Use ray casting on server for collision damage and use raycasting on client for more accurate particles Pros Much easier on the server and network Will look more accurate Cons May still have some synching issues More work for the client Obviously the amount of players currently connected will have an impact on the implementation, I would ideally like to allow hundreds of players to share a game world but there may only ever by 20 or so on screen at once. The mutable particle system is an issue for all of these but I would still like to use it as it is more efficient that drawing each particle individually. In a test I could have over 10000 particles all moving and still get 60fps. Any help or comments on my though process would be greatly appreciated. Is there another approach that would be better?


What are the advantages and disadvantages of different grids in a turn based strategy game? The two most common types are using hexagons and squares. My question is rather concerned with game design. Why are specifically those two found so often? What are disadvantages that speak against using other polygons such as triangles, pentagons or octagons?


Character progression through leveling, skills or items? I'm working on a design for an RPG game, and I'm having some doubts about the skill and level system. I'm going for a more casual, explorative gaming experience and so thought about lowering the game complexity by simplifying character progression. But I'm having trouble deciding between the following Progression through leveling, no complex skill progression, leveling increases base stats. Progression through skills, no leveling or base stat changes, skills progress through usage. Progression through items, more focus on stat changing items, items confer skills, no leveling. However, I'm uncertain what the effects on gameplay might be in the end. So, my question is this What would be the effects of choosing one of the above alternatives over the others? (Particularly with regards to the style and feel of the gameplay) My take on it is that the first sacrifices more frequent rewards and customization in favor of a simpler gameplay the second sacrifices explicit customization and player control in favor of more frequent rewards and a somewhat simpler gameplay while the third sacrifices inventory simplicity and a player metric in favor of player control, customization and progression simplicity. Addendum I'm not really limiting myself to the above three, they are just the ones I liked most and am primarily interested in.


What is a game mechanic? I am trying to understand exactly what defines a game mechanic, and whether it is the same as a gameplay mechanic. There are many different sources online that try to define this but they appear to be quite inconsistent. Two that go into quite a bit of depth are below https en.wikipedia.org wiki Game mechanics (game context) https badgeville.com wiki Game Mechanics (gamification context) I understand the concepts of objectives, challenges and rules in a game, but exactly how do game mechanics tie into these? For example, are game mechanics simply abstract ways of motivating users (eg. points, achievements, discovery etc)? Or are they more practical aspects of a game such as a cover system, or how a character moves, jumps etc?


How can I design loot to be enjoyable to acquire and neither a chore nor frustrating? I am currently working on an ARPG and I am trying to figure out which elements of the game influence each other and one example is that endgame activities inherently influence loot drops handling and the other way round. The more classical loot systems we usually get in touch with are following Classic MMORPG loot where enemy bodies have to be clicked which open up a window which displays the loot that can be clicked one item at a time. Sometimes it is possible to enable auto loot in order to skip the clicking of each item. ARPG loot where slain enemies die in a explosion of loot which can occasionally get extreme up to a point where loot filters are necessary otherwise the screen will be cluttered. In this case players usually pick up uncapped currency like gold automatically while everything else from gear to crafting parts has to be looted manually if the player so desires. Diablo, Path of Exile and the likes to handle it with cliackable labels on screen while Borderlands for example spreads the loot all around the place and has visual light beams indicating rarities that allows players to filter quickly and go grab the items they might be interested in. "Loot chests" is what I call the system of Destiny. During a strike or adventure players do participate in combat and are not distracted by random loot on the ground which would require consideration as to whether picking it up is a good choice. After the event has ended, typically after defeating the final boss a chest appears that contains loot. "Vacuum loot" which was used for Guild Wars 2 and Wildstar where the loot physically drops on the ground and players can loot everything from currencies to gear with one click of a button. In an ARPG this would never work out since inventory space is even more restricted than anything else. My naive first thoughts are based on how the endgame of Diablo 3 is designed. In classic endgame rifts players can slay enemies and are usually busy picking up materials and some "useless" items that may be used to disassemble them for even more materials. Furthermore they are looking for chests and hoping for some random drops. In contrast to that game mode there are greater rifts which, similiar to Destiny, drop no loot at all except when you kill the final boss that appears after progressing far enough. In greater rifts there are no distractions just the challenge to finish those at higher difficulties and farming them with specific speed builds while on the other hand the classic rift slow down gameplay when you have to stop every few meters just to click and pick up those items. I have reached an impasse since I understand players might want to blaze through content and I don't want to make them slow down constantly (with a system like classic rifts in Diablo or Path of Exile in general) but when I stick to "loot chests" at the end of an activity it might happen that less loot drops in general and that there is less gratification when collecting things since the is nothing on the way. Take a long dungeon for example, a "loot chest" system might incentivize just skipping all enemies and do the bare minimum to tackle the final boss. In such a scenario I basically invalidated almost the entire content I am presenting! Comparing this to (current) legendary items in WoW if one legendary drops I might be relieved to finally get one (and be angry about it since it's a shitty one...) but I missed the reward stimulus up to the drop itself. Applied to my scenario, the player sees a dungeon as an annoying chore to finally get the chance of acquiring something. If the drops are not satisfying it could possibly be more demotivating thinking that that only chance to get something after such a chore was a waste of time. So my question is the following Even though loot explosions may be enojoyable at first they can degenerate into an annoyance (e.g. clicking a bazillion items on the floor). When thinking about making them less boring I end up with something that can be as frustrating in the end. How can I balance this?


How to avoid a boring late game in strategy games while still keeping victories satisfying? A common thing I've noticed in strategy games (of all types, 4X, RTS, MOBA, etc.) is that most games eventually get to a point where it is fairly clear who is going to win, and the rest of the game just becomes playing out the motions, and if the winning player team doesn't make a major misstep, they will win. This is just kind of the nature of strategy games. They inherently have a "snowball" effect. The gameplay is all about setting yourself up for success over your opponents in the future, and whoever does this better in the earlier stages of the game should win in the later stages. This happens in every strategy game to some extent, even the most classic. In Chess, it becomes increasingly harder to win if your opponent takes more and more of your pieces and forces your remaining pieces into tough situations. As I said, this is just a fundamental part of the genre, so I'd hesitate to call it a problem. However, on occasion, in these types of games, you have matches where no player team gains a significant advantage early, and the game comes down to the last turn. In my opinion, these are the most exciting and interesting matches you can have. Furthermore, when this doesn't happen, the late stages of the game can feel very boring for everyone involved, where the winning player is just awaiting their inevitable victory, and the losing player their inevitable demise (this can be especially unfun for the losing player, as they probably have very few options, and it is just really unlikely that they are having a good time). So it would be cool if we could design a strategy game that avoids consistently falling into this state, right? Well, I have seen a handful of games like this, where a losing player consistently has avenues to victory, no matter how far behind they are. The issue with this is that if an upset happens (say one player was dominating the whole game, and then a losing player makes one good play at the end of the game to win), that victory can feel very unsatisfying for the winning player, as they may feel they didn't deserve it. Similar, the player who was winning most of the game may be very unhappy, as they may feel like victory was robbed from them, and they didn't deserve to lose. So essentially, no one is happy with the result. This approach may also make the early game less fun, as players may feel like it just doesn't matter. So is it possible to design a strategy game that avoids both of these issues? A game where we don't consistently fall into a boring lategame with a forgone conclusion, and yet also keep victories feeling satisfying and deserved? Or are these issues far too fundamental to strategy gameplay to overcome? If this question is too vague on its own, then we can focus on 4X strategy games, as those are the games I have experience with, and that I am interested in designing.


How should I go about randomizing levels in a "runner" game? I'm working on a runner type of game (basically it's a never ending run through hordes of enemies and platforms and whatnot). 2d platformer view. Should I random a bit of map every now and then? Few screens or 30 screens? And what about platforms and ground to make the whole thing "doable". Can I find any resources on that subject?


Update function design patterns I started reading about game development design patterns and from my experience there are 2 options for update methods. The first one receive from the game loop and delta time of this update and multiple everything by it, for example position speed delta time. And this will happen in the game loop without delay. The second option is too set constant frame delay and use it. In the end of the loop function you use sleep(last frame time frame length current time). Does it matter what do I use? What's more common? I know unity use the delta time technique but it's the only one I saw that use it. I would like to hear your opinions on what to use for both options. Should I always use the first option? always the second? Thank you for your time.


What is the purpose of a "press start" screen? A lot of games start with their intros and vendor videos, and then show a "Press Start" screen before the actual main menu. I never quite figures out the purpose of this. Why not go to the main menu directly? The only possible explanation that made sense to me is that when multiple controllers are connected it allows to identify the one that the player wants to use.


Collision with User Input and Object I am curious on how to handle collision detection involving a moving target and user input. Basing myself in the mobile space, I get events from a set framework, but I do wonder about the amount of lag involved. Say the object moves faster and faster, then position of the input and the object is very important. What I want to know is what is the best design for handling user input and then also the best way to make sure to accurately work out when the input point collides with the object, keeping threads in mind?


Mathematics should I learn for 2D and 3D game programming development What mathematics should I learn to become game programer 2D and 3D. From the very basic for beginner until advance


Adding a new highscore before or after an equal score? I'm making a highscores list for my 2048 replica. An entry in the list consists of a name and a score (e.g. "John" and 2100.) When I add a new entry, the code runs through the list and inserts the new entry when the score for the new entry is greater than the currently indexed entry. So imagine this list Roman 17000 Sergei 12500 Dean 8000 Andrew 1400 If John was inserted into the list, the new list would look like Roman 17000 Sergei 12500 Dean 8000 John 2100 Andrew 1400 The question is, what do I do when inserting the entry for "Steve" whose score is 8000. Does he go before or after Dean? Is there a convention for this?


Why use random numbers when it comes to rewards and stats? Many games use random numbers for things like attack damage, gold loot, or monster type being spawned. It is obvious that random numbers allow you to generate content to make games more re playable, but I am talking about specific things. For example In DOTA, when you kill a monster you get a random amount of gold in between x and y where x and y never change. When you attack anything you have a chance to do damage within a range such as 52 60. How would making the gold drops static change the game? I feel like the random numbers enhance the game play, but I am having trouble understanding why. Does anyone know any reasons why random numbers can make game play better when used with things like damage or loot? I'm hoping for answers that don't attribute it to luck being a good thing.


MiniMax not working properly(for checkers game) I am creating a checkers game but My miniMax is not functioning properly,it is always switching between two positions for its move(index 20 and 17).Here is my code public double MiniMax(int board, int depth, int turn, int red best, int black best) int source int dest double MAX SCORE INFINITY,newScore int MAX DEPTH 3 int newBoard new int 32 generateMoves(board,turn) System.arraycopy(board, 0, newBoard, 0, 32) if(depth MAX DEPTH) return Evaluation(turn,board) for(int z 0 z lt possibleMoves.size() z 2) source Integer.parseInt(possibleMoves.elementAt(z).toString()) System.out.println("SOURCE " source) dest Integer.parseInt(possibleMoves.elementAt(z 1).toString()) (int )possibleMoves.elementAt(z 1) System.out.println("DEST " dest) applyMove(newBoard,source,dest) newScore MiniMax(newBoard,depth 1,opponent(turn),red best, black best) if(newScore gt MAX SCORE) MAX SCORE newScore maxSource source maxDest dest maxSource and maxDest will be used to perform the move. if (MAX SCORE gt black best) if (MAX SCORE gt red best) break alpha beta cutoff else black best (int) MAX SCORE the score if (MAX SCORE lt red best) if (MAX SCORE lt black best) break alpha beta cutoff else red best (int) MAX SCORE the score for ends return MAX SCORE end minimax I am unable to find out the logical mistake. Any idea what's going wrong?


Setting up CCMenu for Cocos2d I am very new to Cocos2d programming and was thinking to build up my first app. I learnt some basics related to CCMenu and CCMenuItems. But I was wondering whether I could provide animations in such a way that every CCMenuItem would animate first and then appear in the CCMenu. Will that be possible in Cocos2d? Can I get some tutorials or samples regarding this? Thanks.


Time based movement Vs Frame rate based movement? I'm new to Game programmming and SDL, and I have been following Lazyfoo's SDL tutorials. My question is related to time based motion and frame rate based motion, basically which is better or appropriate depending on situations?. Could you give me an example where each of these methods are used?. Another question I have is that, in lazyfoo's two Motion tutorials (FPS based and time based) The time based method showed a much smoother animation while the Frame rate based one was a little hiccupy, meaning you could clearly see the gap between the previous location of the dot and its current position when you compare the two programs. As beginner which method should I stick to?(all I want is smooth animations).