GML codin' drainin'

Rob

Member
@BattleRifle BR55
You are aware that @Misty is a Troll? You won't receive your answers, don't waste your time. @Misty has a licence for truth, just check all previews topics of his/her.

.
This is why I stopped reading the threads but I couldn't help myself right now lol... It's actually still worth reading because people still make good points, whether or not the OP gives a ....
 

Misty

Member
@BattleRifle BR55
You are aware that @Misty is a Troll? You won't receive your answers, don't waste your time. @Misty has a licence for truth, just check all previews topics of his/her.
I am beginning to suspect everyone but me is a troll. I come here posting rational evidence of my views of game design, and you make up stories about how you are Superman and shoot lasers from your eyes. And then there's battlerifleBR55: who continuously asks me to repetitively and exhaustively explain myself over and over, like I am a teacher tutoring the same things over and over to an ADHD student who sleeps in class. And then who, following the tutoring, makes fun of me to other students and complains about my teachings.

Mostly newspaper office...

With a help of a telephone booth I gain abilities to fly, see through walls, stop speeding trains, shoot lasers with my eyes end so on... nothing special.
And what do either grant you the ability to be an expert on game design?

Good to see you have some credentials, but your points counteract what you say about others that still just make you sound like you're the best because you claim to be. Why are you not one of those college "experts" making games with no soul, and why are high praises of your games from the public valid, but high praises of Mario Kart 8 are not?
I told you why already. I don't have the funding. And the public review of Mario Kart 8 was valid: The metascore was an 8. A bit on the high end but valid. If it was a 9 then yes the public would have been invalid.
And to further elaborate: You have a point. How do I know my game jam reviews were valid? Well the answer is law of averages. I have lost some game-jams unfairly to subpar games. Therefore, I am owed more victories than I have actually achieved. So it is only to be expected that I podiumed at least once. And the times I have lost do not confuse for jealous rage. It is objective and emotionally neutral. I am a good sport.

Here is proof that I am a good sport: That I would not mind losing a podium finish, to some of the games. I thought some of the games were good. The main problem I have? That I lost to games which I thought were terrible, and the games that I thought were good did not even get a podium finish. And this is when I start to view public opinions as unfair, not up to my reviewing standards.

How is this objective? Misu routinely wins best Reviewer. And it is no coincidence than him and I see eye to eye on many things.

It's still just you putting yourself on a pedestal when it works in your favour.
I did not put myself on a pedestal. The public put me on a literal virtual pedestal, the podium, by giving me a podium finish on one of my game jams.

Your situation is not unique. I'm not discrediting you, I'm just trying to get at the core of what makes you so different despite sharing the same history and attitude as many others. I mean, such a history of yours is similar to many people even in other fields of work.
I can assure you my history is not at all similar to any of these people. Now, if you have one of these people, to compare me to, I can point out all the ways that they aren't anything like me at all.

Nobody just climbs out of bed and gets hired for a random career, there's usually history, passion, and schooling behind them. My brother's a pilot, he grew up on flight simulators, did his research, went to college for it, put in the hours in cold, isolated airports, and now works for Air Canada and occasionally teaches other students, despite being way younger than most of his students. It's not as if he's the best pilot in the whole world because of that, though.
I have already put in my hours and paid my dues, like I said I have been doing this since age 12. Also did flight sims and went to college.

I have experience, I've been programming since I was 11, I have books on game design and have done research. I've released games publicly to general praise (though physically only), I like movies and games beyond mere consumption, and while I went to college for programming specifically, I had to take some game design courses as well, and I left college with some powerful letters of recommendation from several teachers. Could I say with 100% certainty that my FPS will change the world? I couldn't, because what I feel about myself and my game would not necessarily be shared by others.
Either the game is good or it isn't. Even if the whole world doesn't believe it is good, it should be good enough to at least get a cultish following.
It works like this.
Say you make a sports game. The people who are not into sports, will not play the game. Or they will play the demo and just not care. They will not usually take the time to make a negative review and downrate the game. Those games are just not their thing. Thus the audience will be those you can relate to, and review it according to their own tastes and standards, tastes you can probably relate to. So if your game is reviewed to be bad, most likely, it is really bad and not the result of bias (unless some shady EA ceo bribes review sites to downrate you in order to eliminate the competition.)

For example. Dark Souls. Many people hate it because, it is inferior to OOT. That is the crowd, the swordfighting crowd. And many of those just don't like Dark Souls. Some love Dark Souls some hate it. But OOT is universally rated a 10/10 game.

So if your game is good, you should at least get some cult following, as Dark Souls did. (Not saying Dark Souls is good, but some people think so.) If your game is universally bad, like APB reloaded, then it most likely is. Though there are some nutjobs out there who think APB is a great game.

Of course not. No one in their right mind would. The real question is, how do you know whether the game is a turd or not before you release it to the public? Again, it's just you saying your game is going to succeed because you say so, because you can recognize whether it's objectively good or complete garb. That's not an answer with any merit, it's being cocky.
I know a game that is a turd easily. I think your question seems to really be, why on earth did those developers not notice the turd themselves? Well with Yooka, it could be delusion, working on the game so long that they become ego attached to it, and fueled by their own narcissism of the product. A bit like a child draws some scribbles with crayons and then gets devastated when some guy criticizes it. Rose tinted glasses. Schizophrenia symptoms. Hallucinations of love. With Mighty No 9 I don't think it was that case. I think he knew how bad it was and just chuckling to himself at how much money he could suck out of the thing.

Finally, a valid answer to something. Also, which demo got the most views, if you don't mind me asking?
It was an old flight sim I made. I took it down so I can possibly release it on Steam in the future. It had the most views until someone made a clickbait title. Clickbait titles get all the views.

That doesn't answer the question, you're just going on about scores. All I'm asking is why your opinions are right and theirs are wrong. It's still just you making a claim without anything to back it up but unrelated stuff. You still haven't answered what gives you that power over the world.

...That's still a comparison to Mario Kart 8. I don't think you understand what a review is. "Better physics", for one, is not a review point because it doesn't mean anything on its own, and it means even less to someone who may not have played MK8. I even said that all I got out of the part on physics is that they're better, and your response to that was to just repeat that very thing that I said was unclear. I essentially only read "Double Dash is the best because I say so and because it's better than 8" which is still just the claim followed by unrelated support.
I gave you exhaustive and detailed reasons and now you want me to explain it all over again, because you haven't feel the need to have really been paying attention.

I explained how the physics were objectively better. I explain 8 has understeer. If you don't know what understeer is read a driver's manual or talk to an actual race car driver. Now understeer is generally viewed as a boring ride. But the understeer in MK8 is even more boring than typical understeer, if you can believe it, the car uses an on-rails, and on top of that, 2d, system, making the lowly physics of even MK64 come on top. I explained that people I know in real life often rage quit the game. I measured this in scientific terms: My dad will rarely offer to rage quit in Double Dash, but offers to rage quit nearly instantly in Mario Kart 8. A friend I know will not even bother to play the game. And all of this has reasons. Powerups which are objectively more OP than Double Dash. Less powerup strategy available in 8, because double dash has two extra slots. Better physics, which makes the game just feel more organic and natural. I also explained how 8 physics are objectively not real physics because they ignore Netwonian principles. And in racing games physics are very important to the success of the game. In official game reviews of such titles, a major portion of the review is devoted to judging the physics. Therefore, your attempt to minimize the importance of physics, is completely out of touch with the industry standard. And game reviewers do not usually demand absolutely realism from these games, but just intuitiveness and playability. The main importance is not that physics be absolutely indistinguishable from reality, but that they feel intuitive and not irritating. And 8's physics are not only unrealistic, but irritating. And yes, a certain amount of realism has to be adhered to, in order for the physics to feel intuitive instead of irritating.
 
Last edited:

Smiechu

Member
And what do either grant you the ability to be an expert on game design?
Man... I am the supermen, who if not superman would be more suitable for game design, I even don't have to look far for game assets, I simply take some fotos of myself.
But don't worry I understand you, I also come from noble famliy, It's quite hard living among all those silly humans.
 
D

Dragon Studios

Guest
Winning a game jam means nothing in the industry, hundreds of people have done it, and hundreds of people will do it. Getting 2nd place in a single game jam doesn't make you better than anyone who didn't win or make you qualified for the "humble" amount of one million dollars. It's highly unlikely for an indie dev (which is what you are, like it or not) to get such a large amount, so I'd recommend forgetting about it. Make whatever game you can today. If it sells enough units you'll be able to make another one. Seriously, this can't be understated, if you don't make the game you can today, you'll never be qualified to make that million dollar game.

Just take a look at EA, or Ubisoft or any other large company churning out one "turd" after another. Do you think they started with millions? No, they worked hard to get where they are today, and back in the day, they did make original stuff, so don't give me this crap about you being oh-so-different, you're never automatically "the best", you have to work hard to get to the top.
 

YanBG

Member
@Misty Kickstarter! Here is a plan: pay for art or spend couple of months making graphics for a small area, just enough for a trailer. Few props but with high quality then work on the funding campaign for a month, so it's well prepared. If you don't get a million you might still be able to pay more artists and advance in the project. I think there can be 2nd kickstarter for the same game if it wasn't enough.

Later contact publishers to secure even larger player base. It's all about building up a name.
 

Smiechu

Member
@Misty Kickstarter! Here is a plan: pay for art or spend couple of months making graphics for a small area, just enough for a trailer. Few props but with high quality then work on the funding campaign for a month, so it's well prepared. If you don't get a million you might still be able to pay more artists and advance in the project. I think there can be 2nd kickstarter for the same game if it wasn't enough.

Later contact publishers to secure even larger player base. It's all about building up a name.
No... not possible. If EA or somone else will get to know about the genius game ideas, they will steal them!
 
Top