Theyrin - an isometric indie RPG (WIP)

[bit_abuser]

Thanks for all the comments

Hm. So it's postapoc again? Nothing wrong with that, but I was hoping for somethink like UnrealWorld.

It really won't be your typical postapoc. No guns, no cars, no leather jackets

Will you be able to choose a race other than injun? Game looks promising, but I don't want to be saddled with a predisposition towards alcohol and an inability to rise out of the stone age.

He looks pretty white to me

Unfortunately I am not planning any customization of the character looks (apart from wearing different clothes etc.). It simply would be too time consuming and I'm doing this on my own. The possibility of playing as a female for example would mean I'd have to create a new set of animation in 8 directions, with different weapons and different clothes.

On the other hand I will have to do a lot of that for the NPC's anyway, so I should get better and faster at it, so I might try.

What technology do you use for the game?
I mean, in terms of engine, images, etc.

I'm creating the engine in GM8, coding in GML mostly. Might sound amateurish, but I am not a professional after all, and it's a solid tool. Apart from that so far I've used Poser, GIMP, Audacity, PAINT.net, nothing too fancy.

 

[thesheeep]

Ah, don't worry. Whatever you feel like.
Tools sound fine, too. GIMP rocks. By now I can handle almost every common programmer-art task (read: fixing the stuff artists come up with) far better with GIMP than I ever could with Photoshop.

I just wondered, as I did not think the game maker was capable of creating such a game. Then again, I never spent any time doing research on what exactly GM is capable of

 

[bit_abuser]

I just wondered, as I did not think the game maker was capable of creating such a game. Then again, I never spent any time doing research on what exactly GM is capable of

Most people make shitty platformers with it and you can't do much more without learning GML (game maker language). If you do learn it you can basically make any 2d game you wish (and some basic 3d ones too). I'm pretty sure you could remake Fallout or Arcanum in it for example and most people wouldn't guess it's not the real thing if you tried hard enough.

It also has a really nice pixel graphics editor built in.

I also prefer GIMP to Photoshop. It might be a bit less powerful and sometimes buggy, but I find the interface much more practical. And I had Photoshop classes in school. It also loads a lot faster which is a big deal for me.

[EDIT] I have started working on a new movement method with pathfinding today. There will be a grid after all

 

[Zed]

you can do pretty much any 2d game without programming in multimedia fusion. and even if you need programming there's support for that as well.

 

[bit_abuser]

I've never tried MF, but the few games I played that were made with it were buggy as hell.

I also feel GML is a good learning tool, simple enough to uderstand before trying more advanced languages.

 

[bit_abuser]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BDljcLvhA6I

 

[shihonage]

Lookin' good.

Since you have started making an animation system, make sure you don't create a mess from the start.

Consider setting "animaction" states for each actor. I use that particular term because you may have to tie specific frames of animation to calling up a real action in the game, such as during shooting, the muzzle flash frame has to call the routines that actually handle the firing.

Also, if you're not big on intricacies of OOP, consider making EVERYTHING into an actor. The same kind of actor.

Make everything into actors, including doors, chests, etc. This is because most of them will share commonalities that you don't want to code separately, such as exchange of inventory in various context, or being "picked".

Then set a series of flags forbidding doors from talking and being looted, critters from talking, chests from talking (they may share the "opening" functionality with doors), etc.

Humans may share the "being picked" functionality with chests and doors when you steal from them. It's just when you pick a chest, and FAIL, it has an owner that will come running, but with humans, the human would reference themselves as their own owner, and aggro you just the same.

This is just one approach, possibly not the most optimal one, but will avoid a lot of headache later.

 

[Jaesun]

Curious, why are you using GML? It seems like you are trying to do a similar "Fallout" like perspective and could just use the already made FIFE or Fallout Online one? Then you would just need to do some tweaking and a crap load of art assets.

Or is this more of a learning experience for yourself?

 

[bit_abuser]

shihonage: Wow, that's a lot of great advice, I'll take them into consideration, thanks a lot

Jaesun: Simply because I was already a bit familiar with GM and it's more satisfying to build something from ground up. I also have the flexibility to implement any strange mechanics I come up with, so if I wake up one day and have a silly idea to include some minigames for example (cards? some fancy lockpicking system?) I can easily do that. There will be a lot of close combat too and I need to be more interesting.

And the best thing about GM is the huge community, so a quick google search usually takes away my frustration when I'm stuck with something.

 

[GarfunkeL]

Looking good, keep it up!

 

[bit_abuser]

Random idea of the day:

This one is to try to make people who like party based games happy.

There will be companions and mercenaries you can hire. There won't be a set number you can have, since what mercenary cares about your charisma if he gets payed (this might prove problematic later on, so some other system might be put in place to limit the amount). You will have a "Tactics" skill, the higher it the more things you can do. For example if you put one point into it you will have the option to choose the weapons for your party members. Second point will let you control their AI ("stay close", "keep your distance"). Another point will let you control them directly.

I know this very advanced, when you look at the current state of the game, but I'm keeping a nice, big ideas.txt file and I'll try to implement as many of them as possible.

So... what do you think?

 

[thesheeep]

Well, the idea of having members that you do not control directly is a good idea, as always in such games.

But the idea to have the commands available restricted by some skill sounds rather random. Why should only a skilled tactician be able to yell "move there" in a battle? Doesn't really make sense. Same goes for giving weapons to them. No skill needed to put a weapon in somebody's hand
And both counts as a player decision for me, so shouldn't be influenced by character.

I don't think you should have any direct skill influence on those mercenaries except that their number and loyalty could be based on your charisma or something along those lines.
It may be different if you could talk to the people out of battle and tell them to use certain strategies. That could very well be dependant on something like tactics and/or charisma.

 

[bit_abuser]

What if I called it "Leadership" instead? The more you have it the more they respect you, trust that you know what you're doing and are willing to follow your commands instead of just being bodyguards that do their own thing. Putting a weapon in somebody's hand is not actually that easy if he's not a mannequin

Many people enjoy more direct control in combat and I feel like this would be a good way of giving them the option without forcing it. It's just an idea though

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

Random idea of the day:

This one is to try to make people who like party based games happy.

There will be companions and mercenaries you can hire. There won't be a set number you can have, since what mercenary cares about your charisma if he gets payed (this might prove problematic later on, so some other system might be put in place to limit the amount). You will have a "Tactics" skill, the higher it the more things you can do. For example if you put one point into it you will have the option to choose the weapons for your party members. Second point will let you control their AI ("stay close", "keep your distance"). Another point will let you control them directly.

I know this very advanced, when you look at the current state of the game, but I'm keeping a nice, big ideas.txt file and I'll try to implement as many of them as possible.

So... what do you think?

I liked how tactics skill worked in Buck Rogers games - there was a tactic's skill test and passing it allowed you to direct that character in a specific round.

 

[bit_abuser]

That sounds great actually, I might use that

 

[bit_abuser]

This probably won't be used, but I just wanted to say I highly recommend Sculptris

I'm very impressed with this software, it's ridiculously easy to create something and I will definitely use it for creating monsters and animals for Theyrin.

I made this little guy in about 20 minutes after downloading the program and I SUCK with 3d graphic software. The interface is just heaven.

 

[Freelance Henchman]

That actually looks pretty good. :D

 

[bit_abuser]

Isn't it a bit too ridiculous for a monster though?

 

[Freelance Henchman]

Make it a pet?

 

[torpid]

Prosper's gonna be jealous when he sees that critter

I'm not a fan of party members you can't control since their AI tends to be outrageously stupid, and you can't really draw up a plan beyond very basic stuff because they'll do their own thing, but I guess it's better than having a single character.

 

[Jaesun]

Why do people hate single character games? I love them.

 

[villain of the story]

Is this... Prosper after therapy?

 

[Shemar]

I don't like the party system that much personally, I hope to have some followers/mercenaries though.

AI controlled allies would make the combat system even worse, far worse, potentially deal breaker worse. Player controlled allies would be good, since that is pretty much what I meant with party, not the player actually pretending to be multiple characters at once.

Could you explain to me what is so good about a grid? Isn't more movement freedom better? I can still implement it.

A grid makes tactical positioning a factor in the combat system and gives the player much clearer options and control. It is hard to clearly identify advantages without any idea of how the combat system actually works, but suffice it to say, with no exception, all the games that I consider to have excellent combat systems had a grid (squares or hex). Of cource keep in mind that having nodes that are the centers of the squares/hexes a grid would have is effectively the same thing.

 

[villain of the story]

Free movement = player wasting time trying to adjust pixel accurate moves that might or might not give an advantage if it means anything at all. Watching and cursing at sprite animations. Hassle.

Grid = Clearly defined rules to *play*. Knowing exactly how to make any move, feedback before you even feed it. Gamey.

 

[Excidium]

Mutant meatballs! :D

Why do people hate single character games? I love them.

I love them too, but with a party you have more tactical options, makes combat more fun.