Yeah, the AI definetly needs a revamp, do you have time, thats the ultimate question ??? Its the 6th now, 01:32, so you only got 22:28 hours to go dude! Well, good luck, wish ya all the best.
DP
Now we have a small website too 
http://grexengine.com/sections/games/survivor/
I’ll update that with instructions as/if/when we add new things / change old things.
Nice progress, a bit to dumb AI though as darkprophet already has stated. One more thing too, the powerups keeps coming after you have cleared a level.
Otherwise music and sound effects are the only major things I’m missing. A stressing sound track, gun sounds, death screams and such, I think, would dramaticaly raise the fun factor of the game.
runs well: 1.5GhzPPC/512MB/OSX/Radeon9700.
A few things - when it started the window was tiny, it took me a while to realise it was there at all.
I look forward to playing it when the enemy AI is a little smarter
Good luck,
Will.
Kev’s done another update:
-
new control-system added: now you can:
o re-assign keys
o use the mouse to aim/fire
…we need feedback on the new options: how well does this satisfy people who didn’t like the basic controls?
…personally, I found mouse control just isn’t fast enough ;). Just like Doom, quake etc - mouse-only players never win
-
sounds added
o …please ignore them for now, we’re just testing. Yes, we are having trouble finding decent sounds
So, now we have the age-old question: do we add RMB = move towards aiming-sight?
Pro:
[] When you start the game, it’s “obvious” how to play
[] Lots of people are used to RMB=move LMB = fire ever since Quake1
[*] People who wanted to “shoot in the direction you’re facing” finally have their wishes fulfilled
Con:
[] It’s much harder to play the game this way
[] You lose a lot of the fun playing this way - the whole point of the game is run in one direction whilst shooting in a different one
[] A lot of people will never get as far as tyring the dual-keyboard or even mouse + kb controls if they have this available
[] …which means they won’t “get” the point of the game
[*] …and probably won’t enjoy it that much
I, personally, spent the first one and a half minutes I played SmashTV curing the controls and yelling things like “This so STUPID!”, “God, this game is gay!” (I was only about 11 at the time), “What a load of crap!”.
It all goes a bit blurry then, but I do know that several hours later I was still playing ;). The effects of concentration and adrenaline on long-term memory!
I know this is a bit of an “issue”: Cas has argued in the past that all games should be simple for the user to pick up and play (he explained it well, I shan’t do him an injustice through paraphrase). Equally, in the last 5 years lots of games-reviewers have said things like “Game developers make games for themselves, not for the audience. These people are a dieing breed. In the modern world you have to make games for your audience” and generally been contemptuous, likening it to “programmers who try to do graphics”.
But there’s also a small backlash going on - the point of the game is to entertain, and if it is to be “original” then the audience are going to HAVE to learn new skills, and have their eyes opened, as a part of the process they are looking for. There are highly paid people at places like Sony - e.g. Raph Koster, lead developer for Everquest, StarWars: Galaxies etc - who actually BELIEVE that all their players are stupid and lazy and want “no challenge” and want “never to lose” and “always to win no matter how bad they are, so long as they spend enough time”.
I was outraged the first time I heard that line of reasoning, and I’m still heavily against it - IMHO the best and most enjoyable (and popular) games were those that were challenging. And usually had off-the-wall control systems that required practice to get good at - and rewarded the skilled and the diligent by being “difficult to master - but with huge rewards if you can” (i.e. they took some getting used to, but then if you could rack it up a level and become a master, then the rewards were great).
E.g. rocket-jumping and shooting backwards in Quake (one requires careful jump-timing so as not to kill yourself, the other requires extremely fast reflexes and precise mouse control: you run forwards, whip backwards and fire, whip forwards all without stopping. It looks to observers almost like you shot backwards. And is extremely powerful in a game where being shot in the back is the usual way of dieing ;))
“always to win no matter how bad they are, so long as they spend enough time”
Ye… well I think it’s overdone these days.
Back in the old days games were 1. hard and 2. unfair - that was of course a bad thing. Then games become 1. hard and 2. fair, wich was somewhat optimal. But then it went even further and there are nowadays alot of games wich are absolutely fair (good) and absolutely easy (hum).
In the first moments you might think that you actually became a better player, but that isn’t true at all - just play some older games and you’ll see that you actually lost alot of skill. Games like Super Mario for the SNES are actually harder than most first person shooters (duh).
I also think that quick load/save is a real killer. Were is the thrill if you can just undo each mistake? And the negative sideeffect there will be alot of unfair parts left in the final product, because you can just undo your mistakes they won’t make or break anything. So as a result you won’t be able to really enjoy it even if you restrict your load/save behaviour.
It’s all about balance. The first levels should be dead easy, but it should get harder. Collision detection should be either 100% accurate or in favour of the player. And so on…
I certainly hope you come up with a better solution to keep the player from not moving than killing him…that makes no sense at all >:(
Just played the latest version:
Left and right are the wrong way around (rebind menu)
And… performance went waaaaaay up. It runs now very well (60 to vsync)
[quote]I certainly hope you come up with a better solution to keep the player from not moving than killing him…that makes no sense at all >:(
[/quote]
I feel for you on this. I don’t like it either. But unless someone suggests a better solution, or Dave comes up with a new version of the AI that is fast…
OTOH, it’s starting to grow on me. The game shouldn’t be played standing still
Also, bear in mind that if/when we do get the flocking AI in, we’ll most likely have to make several similar major changes to balance that :). It’ll be a bit like wiping the slate clean and re-examining how the levels work - e.g. I can almost guarantee Temple won’t work properly with flocking :).
So…it’s maybe only a temporary measure.
I’ve been keeping up with the updates so far as they happen and I think it’s comming along really well. I’ve enjoyed playing it so keep up the good work!
now time for a bit of a thread jack I’m afraid. With regard to what oNyx was saying about gameplay, I agree with most of it.
However the not being allowed to save til you get to a particular point is one of my personal pet hates. I have two reasoons for this.
1 I gon’t get much time to play games so when I do I want to be able to start and stope it when I want with out loosing any thing.
2 I get really really frustrated having to replay the same bit of a agame over and over again just getting a bit further each time, because the designer as decided that I can only save in certain places. I really lose interest after a while and do somthing else. I guess I play games to have fun, not get myself frustrated and annoyed.
Ok sorry BlahBlahBlahh and Kev for having a rant on your thread. As I said I think Survivor is really shaping up to be a fun game.
Dan.
Ps I do find it really difficut to see the monsters and the lead character against some of the flooring textures.
[quote]I’ve been keeping up with the updates so far as they happen and I think it’s comming along really well. I’ve enjoyed playing it so keep up the good work!
[/quote]
Thanks, Dan :).
Well, it’s actually directly relevant to a certain extent - we are making a lot of decisions at the moment which are heavily influenced by this topic…
Really interested to know how you rate survivor in this respect. The current system is:
[*] Every time you complete a level, that fact is saved to disk in your home (user) directory; it’s not shared with any other users of the computer :). IIRC this happens as soon as the level is complete - so if it crashes later on in the game (or you switch off without quitting) then you don’t have to redo the level.
NOTE: although we’re only submitting one level to the competition, we have others. When we have them all enabled, you have to unlock the later levels by completing other levels first. So…your progress through the game itself is divided into levels, which (as noted) are automatically saved when you complete them. Also, you have free choice over what order you do levels - some particularly hard ones will unlock more than one level. Other particularly easy ones won’t unlock any, and you’ll have to do two or more of these to unlock a new level.
[] When you die, you restart in the room you were in, and ONLY that room is reset (all other rooms you’ve completed so far remain completed). But progress through rooms is NOT saved
[] …and levels are specifically designed with this in mind. There are several “routes” to the finish room in Temple (off the top of my head you could go 5 different ways), and this plays off the fact that if you fail to complete the level you start again - so you are encouraged to “explore” and find better routes. In fact, I’m really hoping that we’ll soon add destroyable walls and objects, and also “secret” or hidden doors. Then exploring for different routes will become even more interesting… (NB: no chance of this happening in time for the competition!)
[*] …also, each room is designed on the basis that you have to restart the room from scratch if you die. If you just respawned into the room straight away, e.g. with a 3 second invulnerability, the rooms would have to be redesigned to be a lot harder [emote]cackles evilly[/emote]
Yeah, when editing the level I forgot how the textures are stretched in some rooms, which makes it particularly bad. Also, I’m in the middle of making new textures for different mobs right now; if I manage to get it working today, we might have a wider variety of textures (and you finally will be able to tell which monster is from which mob!)
Oh, yeah, and I’m hoping to also give different mobs different hitpoints (cackles again) as soon as you can differentiate them visually - and know which ones to avoid!
nice try blah^3, but even with the new “move or die bitch” criteria, i still completed the game!, just wiggle left and right with one had, the other A/W!
Hehe, you’l never stop me, i am invincible! ;D
Damn you!
Could you let me know if completing the level actually works btw? I can’t do it, so I can’t tell ;0
Kev
i totally agree, its harder now than before, what ending? all I can see that it goes back the the menu, even tho I had full health or very nearly full health!
Let me try it again… Maybe the webstart thing didn’t update (see why I hate webstart ?? :P)
Na, thats it, the ending should return you back to the main menu. Actually, now it’ll take you back to the level select screen. In addition it should now make the level “Complete” meaning you can’t select it again. You might even get some credits.
Theres an option in the Setup menu to reset the level status.
Kev
…and I have a partially-updated level file which (correctly) uses Dome as the final room, not cloisters. At the moment, you just have to find a different route to Dome (one that doesn’t lead via Cloisters).
DP: yeah, I know - but it is a little trickier now, no? Also, I found that Weaponstore was pretty tough to wiggle through - but maybe that was just me.
yup that weaponstore was hard, i had very little health left, but I made it, it definitely is more challanging. Man, your making me feel all guilty now for ruining such hard work you guys did! :-[
Cheers,
This is going to sound like I’m contradicting myself a bit but in a game like Survivor to some extent its part of the challange of the game. It’s also slightly tempered by having lives and (i presume at some point) being able to pick up extra lives. Also the idea of finding different routes and and secrets (may be interactive terrain?) will help as well.
I’ve no problem with restarting in the previous room with the room you died in getting refilled. That again is challenging.
It’s mainlygames like Medal of Honour on the GameCube where I seem to get stuck in [loop]do a bit, get killed[/loop] and I do rememebr playing the same level on Giana sisters when I was young over and over again and dying in the same place
I think the key point it comes down to is level size/compexity. If you have a really big level and every five min you have to fight though all the easier (and hard) rooms to get to the point that your stuck on to then die and have to do it all again, it will get a bit tedious. If the levels are smaller (but lots of them) or may be in stages, then there is not as much to keep having to replay.
Maybe you could place save points or something or have a cost off your score to save at them? say it cost 500 pts or somthing? I don’t know if that would work.
I like the idea of ‘opening’ levels up based on the ones you compleated so far (will you be able to replay levels if you want to, say to show off to a friend. or will they be locked?) . Also are you thinking about the levels you open up being linked together in a theme? (I hesite to say plot) or just being more levels are available?.
so after all this rambling what I mean to say is I think that Survivor will be fine how your planning it 
Dan.
I think the key point it comes down to is level size/compexity.
Indeed. Savepoints work just fine if they aren’t too far away or too inregulary. If it’s designed with that in mind it usually works very well and the difficulty ramping gets magically way better, too. It’s of course a different thing if it’s some kind of last minute decision.
I think the auto-saving, bla³ mentioned will work pretty well.
Oh and it would be damn neat if I could use my dual stick joypad