Murdoc

@Martin: > All this "games are not fun anymore" shit is funny. Games are fun, that's why people are buying it. When you actualy take a little bit of time to check it or think about it - those old "classics" cannot be even compared to present games. I hear people saying how awesome, sandbox and vast Daggerfall was… Daggerfall is pice of shit, I tried it recently and it's unpleyable. I hear how people diss Fallout 3 and say how awesome previous Fallouts were... but previous fallouts are pices of shit - I launched Fallout 2 recently and it was unpleyable... and I don't really want to imagine how the first one looked. > > As much as I loved to play CivilizationI when I was 6 years old - it's a pice of shit, as much as I loved Doom - I don't like it anymore. Saying that "oooh... I remember the days when games were fun..." is like to compare friggin PACMAN with Quake1 or Quake1 with MassEffect2\. Those oldies were awesome when they were the only thing you could play. Even KOTOR seems to archaic to me, I recently tried to launch it but gameplay wasn't what I remember and I couldn't play it for too long. How can you say that story was better in the 1990? TES before Morowind had shit story. Games were shit back then but people tend to remember only the pros, because a) they were young b) that was everything they could expect back then. Number of games that doesn't age is incredibly small. > > I dare you: > Play TES Oblivion for a week and then launch Daggerfall or Arena and tell me that Oblivion sucks. > Play Fallout 3 for a couple of days, then launch Fallout or Fallout 2 - and tell me that Fallout 3 suck ass compared to them. That's kinda where I was getting at. Of course games are still fun to play, unless you're boring as hell.

@silentdemonic: > Well to extend the sex metaphor I do not think it has anything to do with new things being attempted, I believe it is those in long term relationships having too limited a knowledge base to even KNOW what is out there to attempt. > > I have been gaming across all genres since the 80s, completed my first game when I was 4- was Rocky ^_^. There has been entertaining games from all genres but the problem is most who complain only access the Top 10 on some Chart made by some guy being paid to place said products there. > > The reason I make this assumption is because I know all to well how many people will avoid a game based on negative reviews. > Just recently a game called Alpha Protocol has been released by Sega, it has been panned by critics, developers of the game who left said it is bug ridden and yet I have not played such an amazing game this year it currently tops my others. > > Games like The Last Remnant, Deus Ex, FF Series, Alien Homid, Im not going to generate a list here, but my advice is - if you are not finding games entertaining you need to find a new genre or you need to stop reading the Top 10 charts to find games. You should do some cross internet research, check Forums and so on, even track Japanese releases that are bound for translations - those who seek are rewarded. Basically what you're saying (to extend the sex metaphor, EVEN MORE!) is that we should be refering to the karma sutra (of games) instead of the "sex for dummies". Thats what I got out of it anyway.

I didn't notice that it was bright, but my brightness is turned down way low to keep my eyes from hurting to begin with.

@Anna: > It should, because even fictional places have to seem believable (believable is not the same as realistic). > > Look at Middle-Earth. Those maps make sense, mountains form obvious continental spines, rivers flow down in elevations, there are divides, passes, flats, and different types of topography with appropriate settlements. Or the Dungeons & Dragons maps. It's not that hard to do if you just bother to think about it. Just another thing people cut corners with for their games. Ok show me the rule book on fantasy that says fictional places or things HAVE to be believable. A one-eyed, one-horned flyin purple people eater isnt very believable, but its fantasy/fiction.

I think this thread is fucked up. It's a relative viewpoint. I happen to find lots of games entertaining now, depending on how long i play them for (til i get bored). Some I dont find so entertaining. To make a general statement like : why arent games entertaining anymore…. is like saying "why isnt sex good anymore?" to which Id reply "well who you havin it with? better find yourself a hottie fast!" Not to mention, f just smoke some grass all games are more fun since you'll feel more like a kid again. Anyway, I give this thread an..... 

I like it. Simple yet happy. I give it a 8/10.

@Anna: > Horrible. What's the deal with people putting mountain ranges on far edges of everything? People don't understand basic geography and especially not topography. I don't think basic geography or topography applies to fictional places, unless you want it to. Heck there could be one mountain range made of marshmallows in the center, who gives a crap? :P

@[PIE: > renzozuken2002 link=topic=60939.msg644840#msg644840 date=1275686165] > the "muscles" on your sprite are too round and defined, makes them look like rolls of fat > the chest and back look fine to me, its just the arms and legs that look funny > > also, if your gonna have 8 Directional movement, are your sprites gonna have 8 directions too? You don't need to have 8 directions for the sprites. Take for example zelda for super nintendo, when you moved northeast it used the same graphic as going eastwards. Same for southeast. And when moving northwest or southwest the same graphics are used as westward. Yea the only problem with the sprite is that it has Popeye forearms. No biggie.

@Robin: > I just don't sugar coat my words. If something is done wrong, I'll point it out. > > Go look in a mirror then look at that sprite. If you look like that then you've got some serious problems. Robin doesn't sugar coat his words… He pisses on them then takes a crap on them. I don't really see what the prob is with that sprite. If I look in the mirror I notice I have muscles like this sprite, whereas Robin looks in the mirror and sees this: 

I've thought bout that many times… I guess its all space? Still hard to fathom, and is part of the reason why I believe in a God. Anyway, heres another one that i heard just late nite on a documentary of Stephen Hawking talking about time travel. This is a paradox: Suppose you are able to make a worm hole that allows you to go back in time just 1 minute. And let's suppose someone decides to shoot a bullet into the worm hole at the image of themselves. But before they even shoot the gun they collapse with a gun wound to the head. The question is: Who shot the gun first, the person back in time or in the present? Your mind is officially blown.

@Anna: > @Cheshire: > > > @Anna: > > > > > @Kinjiru: > > > > > > > Robin if you have completed the new mapping system could you please release a new version of Orgins so that those of us that will be using Orgins can start mapping for our game and we wont have to redo the maps. Then when new updates are release for orgins we can just transfer our stuff over instead of remapping the whole game. > > > > I want to use this engine for both of my games, and I want to start redoing maps as soon as possible > > > > > > Map your game. Then delete it all. Remap it again. You should do this atleast once if you really are serious about making a game. > > > > Seems like a waste of time to me, when you could just do the maps well the FIRST time; not to mention have more maps made in that time. If you are serious about making a game, get serious first not after. ;) > > _You **don't** do the maps well if you don't spend the time mapping beforehand!_ That is, mapping in the engine you're using and with the map editor; the engine may handle things differently and how it handles things might also change how you want to draw and craft your tilesets and maps. > > If you have the tilesets you like, map now, even if the map editor is not finalized. > > YOU CAN NEVER GET TOO MUCH MAPPING PRACTICE. Mapping practice sure! But if we werent playing around with an unfinished engine Id say do it right the first time and save precious time. And since the map editor and engine arent finished practicing map making with Origins might prove futile, for now.

@Anna: > @Kinjiru: > > > Robin if you have completed the new mapping system could you please release a new version of Orgins so that those of us that will be using Orgins can start mapping for our game and we wont have to redo the maps. Then when new updates are release for orgins we can just transfer our stuff over instead of remapping the whole game. > > I want to use this engine for both of my games, and I want to start redoing maps as soon as possible > > Map your game. Then delete it all. Remap it again. You should do this atleast once if you really are serious about making a game. Seems like a waste of time to me, when you could just do the maps well the FIRST time; not to mention have more maps made in that time. If you are serious about making a game, get serious first not after. ;)

@MrMiguuâ„¢: > Too, eh… midi-y. You need more variation. It's a good start, but you need more going on in the beginning and build up quicker (not with one instrument playing nonstop, but rather a chorus that loops back and builds casually to the main riff) What he said. You can also think of it like most pop songs are written. You have parts like verse, pre-chorus (build up), and chorus (the main catchy part) … I'll post up some of my own electronic pieces after work to show you what i mean. What program are you using btw?

@Robin: > Finished directional blocking. > > Big thanks to Fabio & Dugor for explaining bitwise operators to me. They're going to come in _very_ handy. > >  > > There's a new option box in the map. As well as 'Layers' and 'Attributes' you now have 'Directional Block'. When you're on this layer the map is covered in little arrows. Green means when you're stood on that tile, you can pass in that direction. Red means you can't. Click the arrows to switch between blocked and unblocked. > > This means you can have tiles next to each other that people can't pass between! Of course, the old block attribute can still be used. nice feature. reminds me of rpg maker 2000\.

not bad, but you need more notes from different synth or something instead of so much bass and high hats. know what i mean?

I'd be up for playing NeverWinternights.

@Robin: > There source is right over there pal, have fun programming it like that. Ok "pal". But don't forget that if you want more people to use your engine, maaybe you should aim at making it as "user-friendly" as possible. Not everyone can program, or want to. And besides this, I know you very well agree with what I said about rendering. But whatever will be.

@Robin: > That's not a bug, it's just how I programmed it. > > I can't possibly create a render order which meets everyone's requirements so I just added a basic render order which you'll need to tweak yourself to suit your own graphics. Yea, but when would anyone ever have the weapons show under the armor? the way eclipse stable or earlier renders paperdoll seems pretty generic, in that it makes sense most the time; the only problem being that the weapon is in the right hand except when you face left then it changes to left hand mysteriously. You should just use the usual rendering in earlier versions with a fix to that problem. In my humble opinion paperdoll use would most likely always be: legwear on 1st layer armor on second helmet on third shield on fourth (left hand) sword on fifth (right hand) And even if it wasn't, this would still be the most common rendering (or something very similiar).

@Rory: >  > > A newer draft of the main menu. IN the words of Borat: Very Niiice!!

I like your idea but you have to consider one thing. How many people will be playing at a time on average? 5-10-15? It's hard to say because you don't know how many people will be interested. With your current idea it might be not as fun IF not many people are online since youre aiming at mostly pvp for the fun factor (im assuming of course). With that in mind, why dont you revamp a little and make it so that all the classes are zombie types, and the guild clans are zombies, who live in groves or something and have the humans all in their cities etc and the goal is to do zombie quests to kill certain humans for bounty and items. This way even if not many people are online you can still enjoy the game without the pvp aspect. Any pvp would be zombie vs zombie. Anyway, that's what I think.

Neverwinter nights?

I get blank images when I use this thing. Tried both .png and .bmp and the right size rmxp images.

@Robin: > Anna summed it up there. > > Quick look at the new GUI style Rory and I are working on! > >  Looks bea-u-ti-ful. XD

@Robin: > Players don't have arrows yet, nevermind NPCs. xD > > It's not high on my mental list. First up I want to add NPC spell casting. > > And as Anna said, I'm concentrating on fixing up old systems before adding new ones. I'm re-designing the map editor, adding lots of new mapping systems and sorting out the combat formulae. I wasn't aware player arrows hadn't even been implemented yet. But anyway, I like the direction the engine has gone so far. If you DO decide to add npc arrows(bullets, lasers whatever) at some point I guarantee it will make your engine stand out more from the rest, along with all the other cool features youre implementing. That, and a quest editor would make this engine "Uber l33t" if I may say so. ;)

@Anna: > Well he's working on Combat and the Map Editor right now. So yes sometime down the line this issue will likely be addressed. Cool. The only reason I ask is because npc arrows would allow for cool games like spaceship battles, and army type games where the enemies actually use guns. Genesis 2d has it, but I find the engine relatively slow. If Robin decided to add this feature (albeit im sure its not easy) the possibilities for game making would expand quite a bit.