Game News DoubleBear Reveals Dead State GUI

[TwinkieGorilla]

The fuck is this? Goosebumps? This looks like something marketed toward elementary schoolchildren. Damn. Really disappointed with the art direction on this.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Game guis != your (hopefully) dynamic gui in e.g. browsers or desktop apps. Those dynamic guis have a shitload of specs & work behind them - while your average game gui lib hasn't.

I see what you mean. But I still would've thought every control in Torque would have a .Left .Right .Width .Height property? What else do you need to position the controls according to the screen resolution?

 

[FeelTheRads]

It was pretty obvious they don't have a decent 2D guy around when those vomitous first pieces of concept art appeared. If they had the balls to come out with those, not wonder the interface looks like this.
Also, the portraits are hideous.

 

[Vault Dweller]

A) it's not a tactical game like JA2, so the comparisons are pointless.

What is it then? There's turn-based combat, there's a similar view of the battlefield, there's a party, there are hit points, action points, an inventory, skills, stats, what could it possibly be if not a tactical game like JA2?

Are you under the impression that every TB game with stats, action points, hit points, and party is just like JA2? There is a reason why JA2 stands alone.

It was a tactical combat game first and foremost. No game that's not aiming to be a JA2 successor and has (a) different main feature(s) will ever come close to JA2's level of tactical goodness. Clearly, Dead State isn't about attacking zombies' positions, so...

Is it perhaps a tactical game like JA2, only worse?

Or perhaps it's not a JA2-like game at all. Just a thought.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Good, perhaps someone should make it clear what it is. At least until the funding begins. It should not the task of the backers to guess it. And I am getting constantly tired of devs who dither around and don't want to disclose what type of game they are making, while I have only 4 weeks to decide if I should join the project.

I had also initally thought that this was a tactical squad rpg similar to JA2, which explains my great enthusiasm until page 3 or so. I was promptly corrected it's more like Fallout.

Currently I'm assuming it is more like Fallout. But the thread is still young, and I'm not sure that's the end of it.

 

[chewie]

Game guis != your (hopefully) dynamic gui in e.g. browsers or desktop apps. Those dynamic guis have a shitload of specs & work behind them - while your average game gui lib hasn't.

I see what you mean. But I still would've thought every control in Torque would have a .Left .Right .Width .Height coordinates? What else do you need to position the controls according to the screen resolution?

Not sure about what you mean with .Left, .Right - typically you have widget.x, widget.y. And width / height is about the content of the widget - which changes e.g. if you let the user define a custom font size. So if you don't have a very sophisticated layout engine (think CSS) your work isn't done by just using relative coordinates for your main gui elements ("containers").

The thing is, once you go that route (dynamic gui) you just postpone the problem. Someday somebody will break even that one. Just use STRGousewheel to zooom in / out on your codex window to test it for yourself.

 

[Burning Bridges]

Game guis != your (hopefully) dynamic gui in e.g. browsers or desktop apps. Those dynamic guis have a shitload of specs & work behind them - while your average game gui lib hasn't.

I see what you mean. But I still would've thought every control in Torque would have a .Left .Right .Width .Height coordinates? What else do you need to position the controls according to the screen resolution?

Not sure about what you mean with .Left, .Right - typically you have widget.x, widget.y. And width / height is about the content of the widget

That is the same.

I just mean it is not exactly rocket science to scale UIs when the basic pseudocode is nothing more than:

foreach (control c in .controls)
{

c.x = resolution.width / c.relativePosX​

c.y = resolution.height / c.relativePosY​

c.width = resolution.width / c.relativeWidth​

c.height = resolution.height / c.relativeHeight​

}

I know you have to do a lot more to get it working in practice, but it's not like it is super hard to do.

 

[chewie]

I know you have to do a lot more to get it working in practice, but it's not like it is super hard to do.

I'd disagree on that one - because it is always about the details. A dynamic gui is a complex system on it's own and making that system work is doable, for sure. But if you have other complex systems to maintain (gameplay mechanics) especially indies have to prioritise. Even more if their toolkit doesn't support that out of the box. And having a generic toolkit that works for all applications involves a massive process (hence the CSS examples).

I'm a bit biased on this one though - because I know from experience there is no gui programmer solely devoted to making the gui work (again, indy dev scope) - merely THE (or ONE of the) programmer(s) who also makes the gui work.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Good, perhaps someone should make it clear what it is.

It's been crystal clear from day one. It's a zombie game focused on survival (not on combat) and dealing with other survivors.

 

[Tigranes]

I have to say the UI doesn't look great. The in-game UI looks serviceable, but the character screen - the hideous coloured tabs that look like post-it note pieces, portraits that fit neither the game, nor the interface style, nor look good in any way whatsoever; perk/stat/skill markers that again stick out like a sore thumb but it's not even easy to tell what they are at a quick glance. I won't argue about how 'clean' it looks, since I don't exactly think everything should have zombie feces on them, but there's really nothing appealing about these interfaces except for the fact that they show critical information and don't actively hinder player use.

If that's the best they could do with an artist, oh well - you can't have everything in an indie production, and at least it's useable.

 

[FeelTheRads]

except for the fact that they show critical information and don't actively hinder player use.

Yeah, at least it's not the Fallout 3/New Vegas interface (which looks even worse) and you don't have to go through 10 screens to get the same information you could get in 1.

 

[chewie]

What bugs me here is the time involved is not astronomical. It's not like people think you need to spend 2 years making amazing AI, it's a couple days making the interface based on what it should be instead of what's convenient at the moment.

As already said - looking at tasks that way won't help you here. Isolated systems are not hard to create. Making those systems work together is the hard part. Creating a 3D-model is not hard. Integrating it into your game, is. (as in: no button click & ready). Writing a theroetical AI system is "not hard" (though you need a lot of experience in that field!), combining your gameplay mechanics and other factors with the ai is. That iterates through the whole process of making a game. And we haven't even scratched topics like team dynamics etc.

So from an indy dev pov, whenever I read "this would be sooo easy if they just..." I can't help but think that claims like that are made without knowing the whole picture. Of course, from a customer pov this is mostly irrelevant stuff. Just trying to give some pointers for those who want to understand "this stuff" a bit better.

 

[Vault Dweller]

I have to say the UI doesn't look great. The in-game UI looks serviceable, but the character screen - the hideous coloured tabs that look like post-it note pieces, portraits that fit neither the game, nor the interface style, nor look good in any way whatsoever; perk/stat/skill markers that again stick out like a sore thumb but it's not even easy to tell what they are at a quick glance. I won't argue about how 'clean' it looks, since I don't exactly think everything should have zombie feces on them, but there's really nothing appealing about these interfaces except for the fact that they show critical information and don't actively hinder player use.

That I agree with.

 

[villain of the story]

A) it's not a tactical game like JA2, so the comparisons are pointless.

Then I guess it's pretty much settled that this will be a zombie mod for AoD. A visual novel with management aspects and a world to run around to justify it being a "3D game".

 

[villain of the story]

Game guis != your (hopefully) dynamic gui in e.g. browsers or desktop apps. Those dynamic guis have a shitload of specs & work behind them - while your average game gui lib hasn't.

So it's kind of funny to demand a full flexible gui from games that are made by small teams - as the gui system alone to provide such luxury would eat up most of the dev time those small teams can afford.

No, not really that funny. If you are programming such a fixed and constipated interface in the first place, you're doing something very very wrong. Giving the players the option to customise interface is one thing. It will involve a lot of extras like new functions and interfaces to adjust all of that stuff and to make it behave properly. Giving that option to the developers for the ability to do quick iterations is another. If that's as difficult as it's made out to be, then it's a case of poor programming.

Honestly? I never install widescreen "patches", I play the games in the resolutions they were designed for. Saves me at least the time to complain about tiny fonts - which I can then use to play & enjoy the game.

Truly spoken like someone who really hasn't played any of those widescreen mods. Brings a new dimension to "people talking about stuff they don't know about".

 

[Vault Dweller]

A) it's not a tactical game like JA2, so the comparisons are pointless.

Then I guess it's pretty much settled that this will be a zombie mod for AoD. A visual novel with management aspects and a world to run around to justify it being a "3D game".

So edgy you're practically round?

 

[villain of the story]

It's been crystal clear from day one. It's a zombie game focused on survival (not on combat) and dealing with other survivors.

There couldn't be vaguer statement. Some could argue that JA2 is a military survival game focused on surviving military conflicts and dealing with other military people. You start out with little. Death comes swiftly. Injuries take time to heal. Simply surviving can become a tough business. And you have to manage your finances, sectors you control and your equipment all the time. Definitely a military survival game.

 

[Vault Dweller]

It's been crystal clear from day one. It's a zombie game focused on survival (not on combat) and dealing with other survivors.

There couldn't be vaguer statement. Some could argue that JA2 is a military survival game focused on surviving military conflicts and dealing with other military people.

Sure. And some could argue that Doom is a military survival game focused on surviving the demonic hordes using the tactical arsenal at your disposal.

I'm sure you know what I meant, but if you want to pretend that you don't, go nuts.

 

[villain of the story]

So edgy you're practically round?

What? AoD IS a visual novel with optional combat. 3D gameworld is an extra and the game could exist perfectly fine without it since it's not a sandbox game the way Fallout is. If ZRPG will be the same, which is absolutely not clear whether it will be or not so I'm just being stingy to get an answer, then zombie mod for AoD is what it is going to be.

So touchy you're practically numb?

Unless you or Annie/Brian would like to clear some confusion and tell us how the game works instead of what the game is about. I personally can not tell and can only guess based on precedence.

 

[Oriebam]

It's more that everything about AoD is pretty much half assed anyway...

 

[Vault Dweller]

If ZRPG will be the same, which is absolutely not clear whether it will be or not so I'm just being stingy to get an answer, then zombie mod for AoD is what it is going to be.

It's a very different game with different goals and mechanics. Brian has posted a lot about the game, so if you're curious, visit the forums and read about it.

So touchy you're practically numb?

It's not my game.

 

[villain of the story]

It's been crystal clear from day one. It's a zombie game focused on survival (not on combat) and dealing with other survivors.

There couldn't be vaguer statement. Some could argue that JA2 is a military survival game focused on surviving military conflicts and dealing with other military people.

Sure. And some could argue that Doom is a military survival game focused on surviving the demonic hordes using the tactical arsenal at your disposal.

I'm sure you know what I meant, but if you want to pretend that you don't, go nuts.

Is it so hard to describe how the game will work? People, hear: ZRPG is a "Zombie game focused on survival".

So, once again, what does that mean? Tells me absolutely nothing about the game.

And while at it, let's also add the fact how a lot of people were surprised by what manner of game AoD is, what with everyone expecting a Fallouty game after so many years. Certainly, it couldn't be your fault now, could it?

 

[villain of the story]

It's a very different game with different goals and mechanics. Brian has posted a lot about the game, so if you're curious, visit the forums and read about it.

I have. Just as I have read about AoD through years. Like all the other people here. Who were all equally surprised by its nature. After year after year after year of reading about AoD.

Certainly, there needs to be some kind of lesson, a clue, to learn in there, instead of playing the quote game, no?

 

[villain of the story]

Well, do they know, either?

Iteration time is my new favorite buzzword, meaning how much time you have to play with things to see what changes are needed. Since it's still in mockup phase it's not anything like a playable game yet so how can you really be sure of your game mechanics?

That's the thing, if they don't know themselves, which I actually doubt, how could they possibly pitch the idea in the first place. Before they start asking for funds, I need to know whether it will be a visual novel or an actual game. Right now, it's impossible to tell.

 

[Vault Dweller]

And while at it, let's also add the fact how a lot of people were surprised by what manner of game AoD is, what with everyone expecting a Fallouty game after so many years. Certainly, it couldn't be your fault now, could it?

Certainly couldn't.

First, I've never said it's gonna be like Fallout. Second, I was very clear about the design process and various mechanics, including combat difficulty, checks, teleporting, no filler, and issues they've created. Anyone who's actually read my posts instead of imagining what the game must be like based on the facts that it had a Fallout-like gui and my nick is Vault Dweller (I mean, come ON, right?), shouldn't have been surprised by anything in the demo.