Sorry your browser is not supported!

You are using an outdated browser that does not support modern web technologies, in order to use this site please update to a new browser.

Browsers supported include Chrome, FireFox, Safari, Opera, Internet Explorer 10+ or Microsoft Edge.

Geek Culture / Rubbish 3D but awesome gameplay ...

Author
Message
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 15:26 Edited at: 4th Aug 2011 15:27
Here's Bob. Bob weighs in at 146 triangles and thinks Superman t-shirts are cool (he's wrong). In the second picture, we see a scene with 29 Bobs, coming in at 4,200 odd polys. Bob has no skeleton or joints, and Bob actually exists as separate models for each limb.



With Bob in this form, I don't have to perform any mesh based animation, manipulating specific vertices in one mesh. I just rotate and position objects. I'm also able to detach and attach limbs easily, and control them easily. I've tested that my HTC Desire Z (only 600mhz) can render 12000 polys in OpenGL ES 2, and still keep at 40fps-50fps. This means I can render about 50 bobs and have plenty of CPU spare for the world and processing.

However, Bob looks rubbish.

So basically, how do people feel about poor visuals when they're poor because something amazingly cool requires them to be poor? In this case, Bob would be used in an isometic type zombie survival game, were upto 50 Bobs will be on screen at once, smashing in your reinforced pad. Similar to Project Zomboid, as that seems to be the game of the moment.

I'm concerned about committing effort to something people might write off as crap just because the visuals are sub par, even if that's a necessity to achieve cool gameplay on limited hardware. Any thoughts?

Attachments

Login to view attachments
Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 15:42
Lugaro, enough said: Crappy graphics but the gameplay is worth gold.

No i dont mind bad graphics if the gameplay is really outstanding ^^

and for the record, I am a man.

Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 15:44
Personally I'd rather have smooth gameplay than better visuals. For the resolution of most mobile devices, I think he should be fine - any more detail would probably be wasted, especially on 480x320 displays. If anyone complains, just tell them that Bob's still twice the polygon count of the Minecraft zombs!.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
SpyDaniel
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 16:03
I'm more about constant action than visuals. If the game has me killing enemies non-stop then I will play it. I love wave based games and just mindless killing for a goal, like experience increase or weapon unlocks to be able to kill more, faster



Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 16:27
SpyDaniel: KillingFloor is basicly exactly what you just described x)

and for the record, I am a man.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 16:46
Cool. This is what I was hoping. Thanks chaps.

I am exactly the same. I want to see the best visuals that can be done with what is on offer, but gameplay trumps that massively. I've been thinking about this game for many years, and one of the most important things is the volume of zombies. The only true way to give that post-apocalyptic feel is to see the screen filled to the brim with the walking dead. That's why Bob has to be ugly.

Interestingly, there are loads of cool benefits to having Bob like this. Firstly, I can have a pool of limbs and create zombies from them dynamically, so there can be a large array of clothing to construct them from, and parts. Plus zombies can miss whichever limbs I choose, so they can dynamically miss a forearm, or whole arm, or leg, or all limbs etc!

They can also lose limbs easily, so I can do a walking and crawling animation. Blowing off a leg is as simple as not positioning it using the animation code, and instead positioning it using a simple physics movement system instead, at which point the zombie drops to the ground and performs the crawling animation.

The is all possible with a solid mesh model, but its much easier and faster with ugly bob. Ugly bob isn't really a character, he's more of a collection of body parts that can be manipulated in loads of different ways. I reckon that makes up for him being ugly.

Van B
Moderator
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 8th Oct 2002
Location: Sunnyvale
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 17:04
Quote: "I reckon that makes up for him being ugly."


Yup, reckon so .

Sounds like an interesting project. I'm kinda sick of looking at zombie games for my iPod touch - they are always pretty moronic, some zombie survival with proper tactics would be great.

Health, Ammo, and bacon and eggs!
SpyDaniel
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 4th Feb 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 17:04
I'd love to see a survival zombie game done right, barricading, resource scavenging, land ownership etc. FPS a must, third person just doesn't do it. So long as the game play is addictive, graphics don't matter.

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 17:11
Quote: "I'd love to see a survival zombie game done right, barricading, resource scavenging, land ownership etc. FPS a must, third person just doesn't do it. So long as the game play is addictive, graphics don't matter.
"


third person is fine AS LONG AS WE GET THE WHOLE SURVIVAL ASPECT OF IT >__<'

and for the record, I am a man.

swissolo
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Jan 2010
Location:
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 17:44 Edited at: 4th Aug 2011 17:45
I agree with the rest of the forumsers, but I figuired I'd pitch in my idea I used before. I don't mind if you steal it.(I doubt it's original at all) Anyways, in third person you reach a dilema... You can easily see zombies coming... No fun... Therefore this clearly has to be adapted for a bit more of excitement. Simply showing the area of view a FPS would doesn't quite cut it, but usually providing a lit view 360 around the character would suffice. So zombies still frighteningly pop around corners when you least expect, but you can still plan for them. This base idea has to be adapted a lot. Can you see through zombies? Will there be other ways of seeing zombies (such as being able to place cameras in certain places to be able to always view a spot) But anyways, this could be a bit of a complex idea on a mobile device, and it's important you keep it simple, and of course rendering WHAT you can see wastes your not that plentiful calculations, but it's an idea I wanted to throw out here. Practical? Who knows depends on the person. But hopefully it will help.

swis
No, it's not pokemon.
Joined: Tues Dec 16th 2008
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 18:43 Edited at: 4th Aug 2011 18:43
Quote: "I'm kinda sick of looking at zombie games for my iPod touch - they are always pretty moronic, some zombie survival with proper tactics would be great."


You're so right. Zombie games are synonymous with rubbish. We all know it's a cop out for bad AI and mindless shooting. This has made a lot of people dislike the zombie genre, and I don't blame them. But there is an awesome game to be had with proper survival tactics, and that's what I want to make.

Quote: "FPS a must, third person just doesn't do it."


I'd like to make an FPS, but it's not feasible. Not just because I'm making this for Android, but because people demand more visually from an FPS. You have to write a killer engine to render all your environments with a good drawing distance and variety, plus you have to put far more work into animations and model quality. From a third person, isometric perspective, a car can be 100 polys and take you an hour to make. For an FPS, it'll take days to get it just right.

FPSs of a good quality just aren't feasible for small dev teams, in my opinion, unless you're happy for a project to drag on for years, or you keep the concept very simple. So this is gonna be 3rd person, from above, isometric kinda view.

Quote: "third person is fine AS LONG AS WE GET THE WHOLE SURVIVAL ASPECT OF IT"


With you 100%. I make my games hardcore! I won't even allow you to be immune to the virus (that old cliche!). I've not got all the game mechanics I want in stone yet, and I have to choose which ones are feasible in the time I want to spend making this, but suffice to say, survival will be key.

@Swissolo

Yeah, how you see the zombies is important for tension. I would use a line of sight algorithm from your player, so you can only see what he sees. As you turn around, the zombies behind you would be revealed, plus he wouldn't be able to see through walls and doors. However, I think he WOULD be able to see through other zombies, otherwise you'd lose the fear of that huge pack approaching. Besides, in real life if a line of 10 people walk towards you, you can normally glimpse the people towards the back of the line as they move.

Lighting is important too, but also a big technical challenge. I'll probably stick with vertex lighting, and attempt to create mood and dark places for zombies to hide that way.


Hmmm ... sounds like this is fast becoming my next official project then.

swissolo
15
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Jan 2010
Location:
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 19:34
Quote: "line of sight algorithm from your player"

Alright, but if you do, make sure it is still easy to turn and see everything, as mobile controls are really awkward, and I'm worried someone may just spend all there time failing to look back and forth to get a glimpse of what's going on. Anyways, good luck.

swis
No, it's not pokemon.
Joined: Tues Dec 16th 2008
Libervurto
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 22:21
I say make the graphics as bad as possible! You will never be able to compete with commercial titles people are used to, so realism goes out of the window. Unique graphics are great but crappy graphics are even better, because then your game will earn cult status when people realise its awesomeness.

lazerus
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Apr 2008
Location:
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 22:42 Edited at: 4th Aug 2011 22:45
Check here for what you can do with a little hand-painted textures.



I suggest just skipping through but theres some stupidly handy tecniques in there for low poly budgets.

Whats you tri cap per model ?

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 23:04
@OBese87 I'm going to aim for the best graphics I can do, but don't worry, with my 3D skills, crappiness will be inadvertently achieved.

Quote: "Whats you tri cap per model ?"

For Bob, I made him as low as I could. If I made a cap at 300, for example, I'd be halving the number of characters I could render. So really it's just as low as I can possibly get them, without looking like utter garbage.

Kevin Picone
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 27th Aug 2002
Location: Australia
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 23:13
Is there any reason why you're using not using LOD ?

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 4th Aug 2011 23:33
It'll be a third person isometric perspective where everything will be pretty much the same distance from the camera. Otherwise LOD would definitely be a good shout.

Insert Name Here
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2007
Location: Worcester, England
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 02:30
I reckon Bob wouldn't look as bad as he does if he looked a bit more stylised

Oolite
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2005
Location: Middle of the West
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 03:07
I know you're probably not gonna want any help but feel free to drop me a line if you do need some.

On the graphics side of things, I love games with simple graphics, I find you can only truly appreciate the gameplay when all the fuss and flare is gone.
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 10:04
Quote: "I reckon Bob wouldn't look as bad as he does if he looked a bit more stylised"


I think you're right. It's hard to squeeze style out of half a polygon though! I'm going to work on the rendering engine today and see what I can do about poly caps.

Quote: "I know you're probably not gonna want any help but feel free to drop me a line if you do need some."


Will do. Cheers. Since this project will probably consist mostly of tile sets (textured planes) and 1 god awful character mesh with different low poly textures, it probably won't benefit from having someone who can actually model properly on board. But really, I'd much MUCH rather be making this on the PC, perhaps even in DBP ... then 3D help would be really useful. It's the route to market that stops me though. Selling on 'Droid is so much easier.

PAGAN_old
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Jan 2006
Location: Capital of the Evil Empire
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 13:15
I LOVE THESE GRAPHICS! brings back the old days Jedi knight dark forces 2 and stuff

dont hate people who rip you off,cheat and get away with it, learn from them
Insert Name Here
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 20th Mar 2007
Location: Worcester, England
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 14:55 Edited at: 5th Aug 2011 14:57
Quote: "I think you're right. It's hard to squeeze style out of half a polygon though! I'm going to work on the rendering engine today and see what I can do about poly caps."


Forgive me for lack of knowledge, but how much extra space does it take up when you increase the texture size? I'm assuming that, for example, doubling the texture image has less of an effect than doubling the number of polys.

EDIT: D'oh, just seen you're doing it for mobile games. Disregard that Perhaps less detail and a more cartoony style? I think it's the shading letting you down, the shadows in between each limb are kinda off-putting.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 15:32
I kind of figured what you meant by stylized was some sort of style to the mesh, like big bold Popeye limbs, or a crazy hair cut, or huge hobnail boots etc. I couldn't achieve any of those things without adding more detail to the mesh. I can change the texture though, so I'll have a bash and seeing what I can do with better texture work.

Oolite
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2005
Location: Middle of the West
Posted: 5th Aug 2011 23:11
Quote: " Will do. Cheers. Since this project will probably consist mostly of tile sets (textured planes) and 1 god awful character mesh with different low poly textures, it probably won't benefit from having someone who can actually model properly on board. But really, I'd much MUCH rather be making this on the PC, perhaps even in DBP ... then 3D help would be really useful. It's the route to market that stops me though. Selling on 'Droid is so much easier. "

No problem, the reason I offered is because I've just gotten into the whole flash game thing. I'm also making the jump to Droid and later on, iOs but I'm going the flex/AIR route rather than the pure java/objective C route. Coupled with the fact I'm trying to delve into C# for my final project at uni so I don't feel like piling java on top of all of that. Anyway I could do with some tips on Droid development. Sales figures seem relatively poor on the market and I don't want a massive chunk of my time being wasted on fruitless endeavours. I'm thinking that ingame adverts would be the best thing.
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 10:23
The Droid market is tough. It appears there are only two routes to success. One is to spend a lot of time and money on marketing and promotion of your app. How many independents (especially guys at uni) can afford to do that? Or secondly, get featured .... and you have absolutely no real control over getting featured in the market. Some Google->Developer relations employees 'find' your app, and if they like it, they contact you, tell you if anything needs tweaking, then recommend you into a feature pool.

I was dubious about the possibility to approach the same guy who contacted me about Space Squadron and ask if Fat Ball could get featured too. I figured it would be some sort of faux pas, because you're essentially asking someone to give you a leg up for fee, forsaking all others, and offering nothing in return. However, as tentatively as I felt, I did get a positive response (after a week or so), so hopefully Fat Ball will get featured. In which case, building a relationship with one of these Google chappies seems to be the way forward, but I would imagine they'd have to find each product you show them great. They won't be doing you any favours. If you knock on their door trying to sell them crap, I am pretty sure they'll soon tire of you and blank you completely.

If featuring happens, your product suddenly goes mental, with several hundred purchases per day. The first day Space Squadron was featured, I made £200. It was priced at 50p, so I only get 35p of that after Google's cut. So it sold over 500 copies on the first day. This continues, in an ever decreasing amount as interest drops off, until eventually you drop off the feature list. Somehow (I have no idea how), Space Squadron remained featured for almost a full month, although by the end of that month £14 was about all it made per day.

After that, it drops back into the normal sea of apps, but having received loads of downloads and votes, it remains fairly high in the charts, and can be found. It dropped down to about 150th in the Brain/Strategy app category, where it can be found by scrolling about 10 pages worth of apps downwards. It makes between £2 and £12 / day.

Pricing is so important though. If you overprice, you will fail. Just take a look around. There are full on 3D game apps, priced at £1.50. By that logic, I don't think a new 2D app can justify being priced at more than £1. People just won't buy it. Apps are a low value commodity, and you have to work on a large volume sales principle.

Having said that, pricing Space Squadron at 50p (the minimum possible amount you can sell an app for) to make it throw away money, was a massive mistake. The amount of kids who bought it without playing the demo because it was cheap, then hated it because it was hard and slow paced, and marked it down with 1 star reviews, was massive. I did irrepairable damage to it's reputation by pricing it that way. All I got were 1 star and 5 star reviews. It's a true Marmite game.

When I repriced it at £1 after it dropped off the feature list, more and more people tried the demo first. The haters rate the demo down and avoid the full version, and the people at love it buy the full version and give it 5 stars. Slowly the ratings for it are climbing again, but there are a lot of 1 star reviews from kids that need to be diluted.

So that's the crux of selling. Make the best app game you can. An average one will never make it. If it's genuinely good, you may get noticed and featured eventually. Otherwise, you'll have to work hard to promote. I have no idea how to succeed this way, though watching the trend with Fat Ball, I would guess it's possible to climb the charts to a reasonable position in about a year, if you keep at it.

As for ads, I have an ad campaign running in Fat Ball Lite, and I find it quite disappointing at the moment. Fat Ball Lite has been on for about 3 weeks and has just under 5000 installs. It's worth noting, it hasn't been featured and the Space Squadron Demo has 28000 installs and has been featured and online for MUCH longer. Fat Ball will obviously overtake it in the coming months. Why? I can only guess it's either to do with the game image, or most likely, the category it's in. Fat Ball is in the Action/Arcade category, which I believe gets many many more viewers. Worth noting.

As for advertisement revenue, Fat Ball Lite makes me $0.20 to $1.00 per day, with 2000 active players. Now, that's obviously rubbish. So to make a nice $10/day, I obviously need at least 40,000 players of the demo. So to get those figures, you have to really be featured, or again, work very hard on marketing. Alternatively, let the app climb in popularity, and continually update it so original players/users don't tire of it and continue using it, thus viewing the ads. It's worth mentioning, I don't use any click fraud techniques though, so the ad isn't easily pressed accidentally, which is frowned upon and can get you kicked out of admob/adsense programme.

So in summary ... phew ... ... to succeed, you need a great app, you need to make it as robust as possible, you need to put a lot of time into it, and you need some luck and patience to get featured. I am still well away from making a good wage. Yes, I had a nice bonus when Space Squadron was featured, but now it's back down to less than £10/day, you can't live off that. So there's obviously a lot of work to do build up a portfolio of apps, and hitting other platforms would be a very good idea too.

It's a tough career path. The only way to make big bucks is to get to the top of the charts, like that Robo Defense game, and that's been there for years. I dread to think how much cash that dude has made. For the rest of us, our only hope is to spend several years building a portfolio of high quality original apps, dip your fingers into as many pies as possible (demos with ads, full paid versions, many different categories, and as many OSs as possible), and then have many small revenue streams from different locations.

If you're really lucky, you might hit on that killer formula and make another Angry Birds. We can all hope ...

Hope that insight helps a bit mate. I was considering writing some article on it at some point, but wanted to wait to see what happens with Fat Ball. I think financial figures are important, and I'm not afraid to discuss them. If I get filthy stinking rich I may become reluctant, but right now while I'm so poor I eat worms out of the garden and cloth myself in old hessian sacks, I will remain open financially.

Jimpo
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 9th Apr 2005
Location:
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 11:39
That was a great post! Love to read about all the financial details. I have an Android game almost finished, so I found all that info fascinating. I'm at this point where I'm wondering if I should start trying to make money of this hobby or just keep releasing stuff for free.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 12:08
It depends what you want to get out of it. If you just want to get people playing your games for the enjoyment of feedback/praise/ego stroking/community building/experience etc. and making some money isn't that important, then keep them free. Fat Ball Lite, almost 5000 downloads in 3 or 4 weeks. The paid version, 26 purchases. Stick a price tag on it, and you'll massively reduce your coverage. You can still monetize that free app with ads though, but it does annoy quite a lot of people, and you have to have a massive circulation to make much money out of ads.

I'd say, if you can take a step back and objectively, and without bias, look at your app and say to yourself "That's worth money. It's as good, or better, than those other apps in the charts", then try and sell it. You believe it worth money, so other people will too (eventually). If you've made a novelty app, which compared to the others on sale doesn't really compete, do not try and sell it. Instead, release it for free and see if you can get some small income from non-intrusive ads.

That would be my suggestion anyway!

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 12:17
Quote: "but it does annoy quite a lot of people, and you have to have a massive circulation to make much money out of ads."


ads have gotten a lot more pleasant nowadays though

and for the record, I am a man.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 13:15
People do seem to accept them more too, especially on the mobile, but when I put ads into the Space Squadron demo, it only took a few days to get the comment "Add Banner went from a five star app to a 1 star app with one simple word: ad." and a 1 star review.

Gotta love how some people expect devs to spend months creating games for them, and then thank them profusely for being so gracious as to download our work. How we could even think of selling them to make money is criminal! Even $0.20 per day ad revenue in down right evil.

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 13:18
Quote: " "Add Banner went from a five star app to a 1 star app with one simple word: ad." and a 1 star review. "


first of all: those people are not real reviewers, second of all i would like to consider that trolling since you do simply not drop the score to 1 because of ads, thats rubbish =P secondly, is that game space sqadron for android? :3

and for the record, I am a man.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 13:40
Yep, it's another droid game! That's another issue with the Google Market. There is nothing you can do about reviews. People can drop trolling reviews and you can't contact them or get them removed. So if someone says "Game crashes my phone. Rubbish. 1 star" you can't contact them to try and fix their issue. It's impossible to find out who they are. Or if they drop an unfair review like "Ship does not turn. Doesn't work." as I've had before, you can't respond to it with a "Yes it does. Follow the tutorial.", for example. You really have to learn to be thick skinned and just swallow all the crap you get given by reviewers.

It's worth mentioning though, for every fool there are people who give genuinely nice feedback which makes up for it. Recently I've had a few really nice comments like "Thoughtful tactical space battles Game-play is slow paced and death is hardcore, but the game provides great tactical space battles for someone who wants a mental challenge. One of my favourite mobile games."

One last thing, if someone gives you a 1 star review and complains like a girl, then asks you for their money back, and you refund them, (a) they keep the game on their system and (b) the review stays as it is. So I never refund someone who has complained with a 1 star, because they NEVER change it back to something fair or remove their review.

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 14:44
was about to download that space squadron demo, but why is the full internet access req?

and for the record, I am a man.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 14:50 Edited at: 6th Aug 2011 14:51
For the ad banner! I wish they would have a stripped down internet access permission specifically for ads, to make it obvious you're not killing data quotas, but that's all it's used for. A couple of kb each time you start up to load a banner.

Edit: I may update app description now to mention that.

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 15:30
Quote: "For the ad banner! I wish they would have a stripped down internet access permission specifically for ads, to make it obvious you're not killing data quotas, but that's all it's used for. A couple of kb each time you start up to load a banner. "


ah, alright, i noticed there was a comment on it too, so i thought i would mention it here.. i normally wouldnt even have noticed lol... well downloading it now ^^

and for the record, I am a man.

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 15:44
The demo is very basic. Two bog standard missions. The full version is much more engaging. The tutorial is an after thought too, but worth following. It's not as polished as Fat Ball, but it was my first droid game and a learning experience, but hopefully you'll enjoy it. Oh, and it's very hard at first, but you'll pick it up!

Ocho Geek
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Aug 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 18:29
I was going to argue that bad graphics are just calming you're nostalgia, and in fact things like high-res 2d platformers and stylised 3d games (eg TF2) would be a more sensible direction to go in than the constant modern game muddy filter they add to whatever passes as "Realistic" Graphics at the current moment

but then, I read a user review on Metacritic for Half-Life

I have subsequently lost all faith in my species, and as a side product agree with you entirely.

I'm off the play half-life:source, because it's the one which came with my half-life 2 copy, and no I'm not going to pay for another copy of a game I lost/broke/erased from time about 5 years ago


Not Spanish, Not Eight, Just Ocho

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 18:34
Quote: "I have subsequently lost all faith in my species, and as a side product agree with you entirely. "

Trololol its a trololol
anyway: I would agree that HL is NOT the best game ever, by far... but thats entirely opinion based

as for the graphics: i find the textures rather charming :3

and for the record, I am a man.

Ocho Geek
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Aug 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 18:41
probably, but even the concept of trolling has a similar affect on how proud I am to be in this species.

I'm off to befriend dolphins and merge into there society


Not Spanish, Not Eight, Just Ocho

Quik
16
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 3rd Jul 2008
Location: Equestria!
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 18:42
hahaha xD I dont mind it, in fact: on the internet, i consider trolling fun.

but thats me x)

and for the record, I am a man.

Ocho Geek
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Aug 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 18:51


enough of that I think
My point still stands, I think games with good graphics are good, as long as they avoid the generic "realism" look. High-Res 2D games (such as braid and limno) or Stylised 3d games (such as TF2) are an interesting way to have good graphics without having to stare at low-res stuff


Not Spanish, Not Eight, Just Ocho

Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 18:53
Just take solace in the fact that trolls work in MacDonalds and have no real friends.

Airslide
20
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 18th Oct 2004
Location: California
Posted: 6th Aug 2011 19:58
They probably aren't even old enough to work, actually.

I remember getting a lot of negative comments on a YouTube video showing off a post apocalyptic gamemode for Garry's Mod, mostly because it "looked nothing like Fallout 3".

Also, I'm all for gameplay over graphics, especially on mobile. I like games that are responsive, and with a touch screen you really have to be.

And since we're talking about Droid development here, I figured I'd mention I'm posting on mine. Terrible idea.
Libervurto
18
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 30th Jun 2006
Location: On Toast
Posted: 7th Aug 2011 01:05
Quote: "I'm off to befriend dolphins and merge into there society "

Let's hope they aren't too picky about grammar, or you'll have to buddy up with the penguins.

Ocho Geek
17
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 16th Aug 2007
Location: Manchester, UK
Posted: 7th Aug 2011 01:31 Edited at: 7th Aug 2011 01:31
luckily I'm also easily impressed by the word penguin, so I think I can settle for them either way

PS.In my serious voice, shame on me


Not Spanish, Not Eight, Just Ocho

Oolite
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2005
Location: Middle of the West
Posted: 7th Aug 2011 05:06
That was quite the essay Fallout! Thanks for the advice anyway.
I can't really afford to put as much time and effort into something that has such small short term rewards. I think i'll use my droid development time as a little break between the as3 and C# development. I'm mainly using uni as an excuse to learn c# in the hopes of maybe getting my final project up on steam. If I did well on steam then I'd consider myself 'made'.

I do feel quite disappointed in myself that I didn't jump all over the appstore/market when they were new. Both of them are so oversaturated with crap now that I don't think having an amazing game is enough to get you in the top 10, like you mentioned, its all about marketing and creating a franchise.
Fallout
22
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 1st Sep 2002
Location: Basingstoke, England
Posted: 7th Aug 2011 09:21 Edited at: 7th Aug 2011 09:36
Quote: "That was quite the essay Fallout"


I think it was half essay, half rant.

The good thing about C# is it's very similar to Java. I did both in parallel in the same class at uni (we had Java and C# modules and I picked both), and found that ok. I prefer Visual Studio to Eclipse though. It feels slicker.

Quote: "Both of them are so oversaturated with crap now that I don't think having an amazing game is enough to get you in the top 10, like you mentioned, its all about marketing and creating a franchise."


You'll never get to the top 10 unless you make another Angry Birds, but although we've missed the start of the race, there are half a million new devices signing up every day. So the market is set to weaken if not destroy other OSs and is growing faster each day. So while most of the money will always go to the top apps, our share lower down the charts will also increase too. So there is definitely money to be made on Droid and it will only increase.

Oolite
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 28th Sep 2005
Location: Middle of the West
Posted: 7th Aug 2011 21:20
Quote: "The good thing about C# is it's very similar to Java. I did both in parallel in the same class at uni (we had Java and C# modules and I picked both), and found that ok. I prefer Visual Studio to Eclipse though. It feels slicker."

Yeah I have noticed the big similarities between the both, there are quite a few similarities between as3 and Java as well. Whilst I'm sure it will be an easy enough jump to Java, I just don't need it on my plate right now. I have my android developers license sitting there gathering dust and I feel I need to use it.

Quote: "You'll never get to the top 10 unless you make another Angry Birds"

I have one idea that I believe has the potential to be very popular, its accessible to most age groups but challenging enough to appeal to hardcore gamers. Though it's all well and good me saying this because the community will decide. I still think a fair amount of luck is involved. That or a ton of money to spend on advertising.
Quote: "our share lower down the charts will also increase too. So there is definitely money to be made on Droid and it will only increase."

I suppose it can't hurt to jump into the market as soon as possible, my only problem is time and the fact I have a viable income from flash games.
DevilLiger
21
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 21st Nov 2003
Location: Fresno,CA,USA
Posted: 7th Aug 2011 22:46
i'd rather have both, but if i can only have one i'd choose gameplay.

Uncle Sam
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 23rd Jul 2005
Location: West Coast, USA
Posted: 9th Aug 2011 08:40
It's funny how everyone's talking about a zombie survival game. I was actually thinking the same thing. In fact, I have already started one a week ago. Don't know whether I could compete with Fallout though.

Diggsey
19
Years of Service
User Offline
Joined: 24th Apr 2006
Location: On this web page.
Posted: 9th Aug 2011 18:22 Edited at: 9th Aug 2011 18:23
BaboViolent 2 is a good example of good gameplay over good graphics. (Although saying that they have some cool effects, it's just that everyone is a sphere and walls are all cubes)

[b]

Login to post a reply

Server time is: 2025-05-20 23:42:11
Your offset time is: 2025-05-20 23:42:11