What Should Be My First Project

[DannyBoy]

Hello there, I'm completely new to game development and ultimately hoping to create some narrative heavy games. The problem is, everyone tells you when you start game development (or any creative task) to start small. Usually, in game development, this means creating a simple platformer or a single level mobile game, and I don't personally have any interest in either type of game.

Is there another type of project that I can start out on that would perhaps be more interesting (my favorite games are RPGs, adventure games, and strategy games)?

 

[Ladi_Pix3l]

I 'm in the same boat as you actually. However, there is a learning curve you have to go through in order to pursue that prime game you're looking for. There are lots of helpful ppl here too to help you with any question you may have. Be aware of the salty sailors sir. Some of them don't like newbies who ask obvious questions. Not saying that'll be you but, just giving you the heads up.

In my opinion you should start with small projects that will get you used to the basics of Game Maker. 9 out of 10 ppl will tell you to practice with GML and I agree. The D&D will only get you so far.
Start with games that resemble...

• Asteroids
• Snake
• Mario

Just to get a feel for what is possible. Again this is just my opinion

 

[FrostyCat]

Hello there, I'm completely new to game development and ultimately hoping to create some narrative heavy games. The problem is, everyone tells you when you start game development (or any creative task) to start small. Usually, in game development, this means creating a simple platformer or a single level mobile game, and I don't personally have any interest in either type of game.

Is there another type of project that I can start out on that would perhaps be more interesting (my favorite games are RPGs, adventure games, and strategy games)?

I'm not sure you realize just how hypocritical you sound.

You said you want to start small and know only enough to start small, yet you aren't willing to work on anything that's not your favourite (all of which are fairly big-ticket). This is a case of "any colour so as long as it is black".

So why are you even asking?

 

[Kat Serapha]

I don't think the right word for that is hypocritical. I think they more want to know if anyone has any ideas for smaller projects that are along that line but aren't massive. It may not have a good answer, but it's not the worst question.

 

[RangerX]

Sadly the type of games that you like really aren't the types of game a beginner should make. That's reality. They aren't simple games to make and your learning curve is gonna be HUGE.
You can totally try, but its gonna be unnecessarily hard, long, and you'll have much more chances of giving up. Heck, most people trying to make games are giving up at simple games...

The simplest strategy games there is are games like Kairosoft are making. Pop up your Itune or Android store and go play "Game Dev Story" by Kairosoft. Not only its an amazing game but its also as simple as a strategy game can be.

 

[Tsa05]

Networked Multiplayer, best starting point.

Kiddddinnnnnggggg

Where you should start depends on where you'd like to go. Similarly, let's say you want to learn to run.
"Hi, I'd like to someday run a marathon" -- "Start slow with distance, 1-2 miles for a week, and then add a mile per week up to 12 or 13 miles"
"Hi, I'd like to someday run a sprint relay" -- "Start with core and upper body strength building/lifting, and quickness drills for your legs"

Both are running! How to get going depends a lot on the kind of running....

If you want to get into making games from the point of view of designing systems, logic, that kinda stuff... Making that simple platformer or Breakout game is a great way to start. You get to try out movement code and collision code and all of that jazz, and see how your expectations and GameMaker's implementations intersect. You work out all the bugs with something that has very few parts to it, then build up.

You can easily add stats to a platformer once you know how the mechanics of the platformer work. Too often, people start with a platform tutorial, already made, and then want to know "how do I double-jump? wall jump? add armor to my character?" And they haven't worked out how the existing game functions yet, so it *seems* challenging to expand the mechanics.

If you're interested more in designing experiences, visuals, and stories, then you can look towards point and click adventures or visual novels. GameMaker is set up in a way that makes it verrrry easy to drop some images into your game, and to make them appear and disappear. Actually, I showed a friend how to make a basic visual point and click adventure in less than 10 minutes yesterday with a single object and a couple of rooms. If you want to focus on story and atmosphere and not get deep into wrangling with mechanics, that sorta game might be a good intro to GameMaker...

 

[woodsmoke]

I read somewhere that it's a good idea to start with text adventures. You want to make "narrative heavy games", so there you go! Not sure if Game Maker is the best tool for this though (maybe try out TADS).

Anyways, my first game was a brick breaker made in Game Maker.

 

[HayManMarc]

If you don't like making simple games like asteroids, etc as mentioned above, you could experiment with making "game parts" for the style/genre you want. Make a menu screen (just the menu, not a game) that works when you make a selection. Make a movement mechanic. Make a dialog box. Think of other game mechanics you might want and try to work them out. Even though these aren't games, they will still help you learn and fill you with a sense of accomplishment when you get them working. Or they will give you insight on the complexity of what you want to do, and help you figure out what you need to learn. Then you can take what you've learned and start building your game idea.
Or you could do like me when I started this hobby way back when... Don't listen to anyone and just start making what you want, then realize you don't know near enough and abandon it to make platformer and asteroids games. I'm pretty good at making asteroids-style space movement, now! Lol!!
Good luck to ya. Keep at it and never stop learning!

 

[weiner]

I never started with small projects. Every my project is almost AAA game, but I never finished anything. I just have lots of unusable prototypes. Maybe it is because I am bad graphic and never had someone who would do graphic for me. If you want to finish something then do some small game first. Now I am making open world sci-fi GTA game, but it is what I want to do and it actually motivate me. But I am working in Game Maker for more than six years so I have experiences already. If I try to make this game before five years and I actually try it, It ended not in recycle bin, but in folder with unfinished projects with other projects.
Edit: As said HayManMarc, I never finished game, only small parts, but I learn something new every time.
And if you want really start with big rpg or adventure project, maybe strategy later then first do some decent Game design document. I started with programming and then I realize that I do not know what to do. What next.
Strategy game is actually the worst type game for beginner. If you want make strategy game you should start with city building game.

 

[FrostyCat]

I'm not sure why it's recently become like a sin around here to practice on things that aren't meant to be final products, such as proof-of-concepts and etudes. It's not.

Small practice pieces allow you much greater granularity in mastering core competencies, especially those that don't often show up together in the same project. With only full projects as practice, chances are you'll miss a whole slew of use cases that aren't specific to that one project but occur frequently elsewhere. Poor coverage of core competencies is an epidemic on GM user circles, and this steadfast refusal to do small, mundane practice pieces could be the reason why.

If you haven't drawn before, you might think that it's sexy to start by drawing pin-up girls, national park landscapes or bowls of fruit. A more reasonble guess might be hands, indoor scenes or random everyday objects, but even those are off the mark. Any professional artist knows it's straight lines, circles, solid/gradient fills and sense of proportion that you'll use time and time again.

You can't learn a new trade by insisting that everything about it be colourful and full-fledged. For someone the age of the original poster, surely there should have been something worthwhile thus far in his life so far that involved an unremarkable or unsavoury intermediate step.

 

[DannyBoy]

Alright, I guess that was a pretty stupid question, sorry guys.

I guess I can do some story stuff with a platformer, so i'll give that a try with my first project. Thanks everyone for your replies.

 

[Yal]

IMO you should make a scrolling shooter as your first project, it covers a lot of the basics (variables, views, powerups, automatic fire, designing levels) while keeping stuff like collisions and movement very basic (gravity makes those a lot harder). Platformers is a good second step (for things like those pesky collisions, especially things like moving platforms require a lot of practice to get right), a top-down twin-stick zombie shooter could be good as a third project to start experimenting with AI, upgrade/shop systems, and multiple control schemes.

Don't try to make these games good or even balanced, the important thing is to get the stuff WORKING... if you can do a badly balanced and/or unfun game, you have the skills to make a better version later by learning from mistakes and embracing your experience.

 

[Kat Serapha]

I'm not sure why it's recently become like a sin around here to practice on things that aren't meant to be final products, such as proof-of-concepts and etudes. It's not.

Small practice pieces allow you much greater granularity in mastering core competencies, especially those that don't often show up together in the same project. With only full projects as practice, chances are you'll miss a whole slew of use cases that aren't specific to that one project but occur frequently elsewhere. Poor coverage of core competencies is an epidemic on GM user circles, and this steadfast refusal to do small, mundane practice pieces could be the reason why.

If you haven't drawn before, you might think that it's sexy to start by drawing pin-up girls, national park landscapes or bowls of fruit. A more reasonble guess might be hands, indoor scenes or random everyday objects, but even those are off the mark. Any professional artist knows it's straight lines, circles, solid/gradient fills and sense of proportion that you'll use time and time again.

You can't learn a new trade by insisting that everything about it be colourful and full-fledged. For someone the age of the original poster, surely there should have been something worthwhile thus far in his life so far that involved an unremarkable or unsavoury intermediate step.

Actually, as a professional artist: nah. Barely anybody starts out drawing by drawing "circles" and "straight lines". Most people who get really into art started when they were young, which meant that they started out by drawing whatever they liked, whatever appealed to them, and whatever they were passionate about. Even adults who are learning to draw tend to spend a lot of their spare time drawing what they personally care about, whether that be animals or people or landscapes.

What IS right is that artists do need to learn how to break those things down into components. If you like to draw people and animals, you start with gesture drawing, where you use loose flowing lines to capture the basics of movements before you settle into establishing details. If you are learning landscape or interiors, you learn perspective.

Yet, I do think it's important for a person to learn doing something they can be passionate about. Even if they need to scale those preferences back to start, it doesn't mean they aren't entitled to find early projects that they are most enthusiastic about.

 

[hogwater]

I think a good idea would be to take your favorite kind of game and break it into a million smaller pieces. Then work on making each of those pieces individually.

An RPG is probably one of the most difficult kinds of games to finish, but you could definitely make a little dude that walks around a few screens.

 

[Genetix]

Always pong when I show people the process. It's very simple but has many elements: player control, enemy AI, ball physics, scoring/win/lose states.

From there you can branch out to Brick Breaker which is a bit more complex. Both can be done decently in an hour or so and have lots of potential to expand upon!

 

[IcyPenguin_]

If you want to make narrative-heavy games, learn all you can about good storytelling in existing games. Analyzing how games like Chrono Trigger and Metal Gear Solid tell their stories will help a ton. Make sure that your can bring your own story to life, though. If you don't want your project to be as basic as a one-room platformer, I would advise that you make your first game something with a slightly larger scope, but do it bit by bit. You could start programming a basic overworld and learn a few GML functions out of that, and then use what you've learned to make something else. That's how I approached my first game. I started with a basic platformer, and I kept adding and changing things until it became a project that resembled a full game.

 

[MishMash]

I haven't read the full thread so someone might have mentioned this, however, if you aren't satisfied by simple ideas, then an alternative approach is to take a look at something you find interesting and think of how you could get there.

For example, the basis of an RPG is going to be a character moving around a simple world, right? So, you can get started with thinking about how you would get a character moving around a simple world. Then you may ask, well, I want to make it so I have health, and if i hit things, I take damage. So you do some research, learn how to add health, and do that. You can then repeat this process for every aspect of a game.

The key thing to know here is that games are built up from a series of building blocks, and the things that you are essentially learning how to do and the things you are gaining experience with is the creation of these small parts that make up a larger game. The incorrect approach is to outline a complex idea, and try to work towards that. Even professionals break things down into their smallest workable parts before building them back up.

The only difference here is that it takes time to learn how to program, but more importantly, it takes time to learn how to learn. Most of what makes experienced programmers good isn't just a magical raw talent to bosh out code, but rather an ability to know how to learn and research a new problem when they are faced with it. This is something that you should look to achieve in your approach to solving small problems.

As an example, when i started with GM 11 years ago, I started by creating a simple Maze game. The first thing I added was movement, I then added a place you needed to touch to complete the level. After this, I added objects you had to collect in order to complete the level. Then I started adding moving enemies that would kill you on touch. All of this was because I started with a simple base and just kept adding content on top of it.

 

[crisiworks]

I think a nice simple platformer with just a jump mechanic or a top down walking around game can already carry the weight of awesome story telling. (Graphics and sound help more than mechanics from what i think you'd like to create) And both of those are really simple to learn - like really simple.

 

[Yal]

Most of what makes experienced programmers good isn't just a magical raw talent to bosh out code, but rather an ability to know how to learn and research a new problem when they are faced with it. This is something that you should look to achieve in your approach to solving small problems.

This. So much this. Especially a good mindset to have once you start writing code that's complex enough it can have bugs... if you can't independently look for information, formulate theories and test them, you won't get anywhere once you start running into debugging situations.

 

[Snayff]

Heartbeast has a tutorial series that includes how to create dialogue and is focused on making an ARPG. It runs about 15 hours but gives you lots of basics, maybe that would be a reasonable place to start and then you can expand?

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL9FzW-m48fn2ug_FSNnfozQs3qYlBNyTd