I saw something like this inside the data editor when messing with the unit/doodad's pathing, but never managed to get this working... D:
It's basically a window that shows a grid for setting up a pathing "layout" and allows multiple functions, heck, to even make a bridge!
This means you can modify the doodad so it can PROVIDE a pathing on top of it, so units crossing the area can walk on top of it...
Example: If you have a doodad with pathing on top of it, and you stick it on a cliff. The units will be able to walk into and on top of it, probably able to walk onto other nearby pathing if it works.
Heck, if you can get unit+pathing to work, you can create vehicles that allows it to attach itself to platform walls and allow units to climb up on it, perfect for warfare games where 1 team defends in a base and 1 teams attacks.
Doesn't most of the random dungeon generation in 2d games usually have a grid based function? Like a dungeon crawler.
This is the more preferred one because instead of only tunnels, there are Tunnels and Rooms.
The only issue is probably fog of war, and the object used for walls, but if proper texture is used, it'll look like a solid map.
Maybe using black fog of war is good, but leave the fog out of the minimap so players can "explore" and then retrace their steps when lost...
The other issue is minimap showing the "ground" and walls, when in dungeon crawlers you get only tunnels and rooms, with the rest of the area black...
2d dungeon crawlers are usually grid-like so every turn and position is designed to be proper. This random dungeon created weird walls and rooms that seems more like a maze than a dungeon lol... And yes there are differences, as mazes are design to be clausterphobic, while dungeons have multiple rooms and functions.
I played a few DS based dungeon crawlers and yes, you must separate certain levels in the dungeon to some limit...
Say [dungeon 1] is the easiest, so it has 1 floor and "dungeon complexity" would be low.
As for the minimap, you might need to make a button to "view entire map" or something, but I'm not sure how you'd do that... In dungeon crawlers, it's better off not giving players too much view on the area, and best for a 100% top down view so the angle doesn't let them see things they aren't suppose to see.
Just a thought, has anyone thought of giving pathing options to a unit, so it can "transport" any unit on top of it, or allows it to become a bridge between two unconnected spaces?
This kind of pathing is more of a "piece of floor" than a grid...
The idea is that if you can get air units to land and ascend, it could be possible to make big big units, but controlled as part of the map...
In a simpler term...
Imagine a giant ship for your map, now imagine units are able to move around in such ship, and now imagine you can control the giant ship itself!
Of course, there'll be camera issues so this idea would be limited to certain gamemodes where the camera is locked onto the unit (as unlocked free view camera would get left behind as the ship moves around).
It's like a giant version of the carrier, but you actually control units like the interceptor and can go in and out of the carrier to refuel etc.
Makes for great fleet wars in the future.
Now... My ideas are starting to expand.
To make a zoomed out view of the camera for giant units easier to manage, and to lower the lag, just make all the other units invisible but give them a simple label or icon, like supreme commander would do if you zoomed all the way out.
I wish a dungeons and dragon map will appear in the community with the full function of actually modifying the terrains to your whim as a dungeon master...
This map gave me an idea, what if you can do a Capture-The-Tiles combative game?
Basically you move horizontally and vertically from a top down perspective, but your unit is locked onto the grid.
You move and capture tiles by walking over them, you can shoot ahead to hurt your opponent.
Working with WASD keys can be effective since it's only movement and dodging, as destroying your opponent depends on strategy.
Maybe have a large grid full of neutral tiles (white) and there can be 2 teams (blue and red).
It can even work with a siege tank model...
Can have a workable UI to show the score of both teams.
Tanks have 2 hp and can only survive 2 hits. Shots flies in the air at a slow to moderate speed, making dodging a important factor to capture and stop the opponent from stealing your tiles...
Eventually, include power ups like Speed and Invincibility that works for a short time.
Losing profit, because they didn't sell it themselves is a little weird... I guess the USA should really revamp their laws... But so long as big businesses continue to control the market, I doubt the government want to lose any profit...
The sum of all evil... I hate you.
For those who doesn't know, sum of all evil = money.
Anyone who works with a UI should remember how the real UI in SC2 works, because there's a "Friend" bar to the top right of the command card.
You can possibly put dialogs and buttons on top of the portrait.
"If somebody is making a fan based game, then the original must have been worth it for somebody to use their free time to make it"
That's true, why else?
"If the fan game sucks, then the people who made it probably just weren't the best, I wouldn't look down upon the original game"
"I" wouldn't either, If there was a really bad FF7 remake I wouldn't not (even for a second) think Final Fantasy is crappy. The problem is the word, "I". Not every person who played the fan game would have had chance to played the original game (you would be "un"pleasantly surprised how many). If the fan game gave a bad impression, people who have not played the original will most likely not buy the original game which is loss of profit for the game company. That is to say the current fan base will likely to stay fervent but it will have significant impact on the growth of the fan base (growth of potential buyers). Another fact to consider is that fan games are giving players chance to play a game that is not free. If it's a complete remake, say Chrono Trigger in 3D (Google it) they will shut it down immediately since it gives the people to play Chrono Trigger for free. Yes, one could argue fan games could be a form of advertising, however advertising a company requires is a controlled format not a random one based on "a" fan's ability to create a good game.
"If it's good, it might hype me up a bit for the game, but I don't see that as a bad thing.If I buy it and am slightly disappointed, I wouldn't return it and they still get my money "
As I said previously the loss of profit comes from limiting potential buyers.
It all comes down to ownership. Who owns the fan game? The company owns the characters, plot, themes and everything else. You are "stealing" in the most literal form, you are taking these property without a license (permission).
If I take someone's book and write 5 pages after it and change the ending and write at the end "This is a fan book" the original work is by "blah", is that not stealing someone's work?
Or even rewrite the book differently based on the same characters and concept?
How does a book differ from a video game in this case? Who knows if this book gains popularity through the fan book with the alternative ending or the rewite, only vivid point here is that the person who wrote the fan book stole from the original author and the author has no controlled advertising (whether it will have a good or bad effect) from the fan books.
Why the fk do we even have such laws if they always twists and knots in places it shouldn't be?
I mean, plagiarism (stealing AND claiming ownership) is one thing but things like intellectual properties just makes it worser...
I mean, if someone gets a IP of water, air, or even gravity (laws like these weren't created in the past but be creative) it would have quite the bad repercussions.
Regardless, total balance in order and freedom has to be maintained, and in my opinion, the US government and the rest of the world isn't following such guideline, but falling high over heel in their greed. Note the imperialism from the existence of a powerful country, and the side effects of having a efficient technology. Nope, there doesn't seem to be any balance in the things to come... Unless you mean a ice age or something the planet is doing to "wipe" us off the earth that is (lol).
Oh yes, people who plays the fan based game first, NEVER plays the original unless decided to by intervention of another third party.
In fact, you wouldn't even bother to find fan based games unless you've used sources and stumble onto them, or have a friend tell you about it.
But really, this seems to be turning into some kind of debate, and unless your government (I'm canadian) tears it down and make a new one, there isn't much you can do about it. Being a Canadian, I've read that they are reconsidering fixing up the copyright law so it's more fair to all (since it's year and years old), and you don't see the stupid IP things, just plain and simple copyright that doesn't seem to state itself as biased.
Someone should make "Combos" that basically allows multiple inputs of spells and/or abilities and combines it to do a "special combo" attack.
Would be interesting too in the lines of games like FFXIII where combos can be used.
For example, if someone created a Spell Psi Storm that functions like a thunderstorm, rather than a AoE damaging area, this can happen:
Psi Storm = Generates a storm that does a lightning strike every 2 seconds on a random enemy.
So what if you combine this Psi Storm with 2 more?
Maybe in the lines of Final Fantasy, where Thunder x 3 = Thundaga:
Super Psi Storm = Generates a storm that does a lightning strike every 2 seconds on 2 random enemies and a 30% chance to cause "paralysis" (unable to move/attack at random intervals).
So in this case, maybe something like 3 units can combine 1 spell, and it causes a chain reaction and instead shoots a new spell.
0
I saw something like this inside the data editor when messing with the unit/doodad's pathing, but never managed to get this working... D: It's basically a window that shows a grid for setting up a pathing "layout" and allows multiple functions, heck, to even make a bridge!
This means you can modify the doodad so it can PROVIDE a pathing on top of it, so units crossing the area can walk on top of it...
Example: If you have a doodad with pathing on top of it, and you stick it on a cliff. The units will be able to walk into and on top of it, probably able to walk onto other nearby pathing if it works.
Heck, if you can get unit+pathing to work, you can create vehicles that allows it to attach itself to platform walls and allow units to climb up on it, perfect for warfare games where 1 team defends in a base and 1 teams attacks.
0
Doesn't most of the random dungeon generation in 2d games usually have a grid based function? Like a dungeon crawler. This is the more preferred one because instead of only tunnels, there are Tunnels and Rooms.
The only issue is probably fog of war, and the object used for walls, but if proper texture is used, it'll look like a solid map.
Maybe using black fog of war is good, but leave the fog out of the minimap so players can "explore" and then retrace their steps when lost...
The other issue is minimap showing the "ground" and walls, when in dungeon crawlers you get only tunnels and rooms, with the rest of the area black... 2d dungeon crawlers are usually grid-like so every turn and position is designed to be proper. This random dungeon created weird walls and rooms that seems more like a maze than a dungeon lol... And yes there are differences, as mazes are design to be clausterphobic, while dungeons have multiple rooms and functions.
I played a few DS based dungeon crawlers and yes, you must separate certain levels in the dungeon to some limit...
Say [dungeon 1] is the easiest, so it has 1 floor and "dungeon complexity" would be low. As for the minimap, you might need to make a button to "view entire map" or something, but I'm not sure how you'd do that... In dungeon crawlers, it's better off not giving players too much view on the area, and best for a 100% top down view so the angle doesn't let them see things they aren't suppose to see.
0
If it does, they might call it: Starcraft Commander (SCC)
0
Mods used names from real games, and you don't see ALL of them being wiped from existence? Mods are modification of games too but count as real games.
0
Just a thought, has anyone thought of giving pathing options to a unit, so it can "transport" any unit on top of it, or allows it to become a bridge between two unconnected spaces?
This kind of pathing is more of a "piece of floor" than a grid...
The idea is that if you can get air units to land and ascend, it could be possible to make big big units, but controlled as part of the map...
In a simpler term...
Imagine a giant ship for your map, now imagine units are able to move around in such ship, and now imagine you can control the giant ship itself! Of course, there'll be camera issues so this idea would be limited to certain gamemodes where the camera is locked onto the unit (as unlocked free view camera would get left behind as the ship moves around).
It's like a giant version of the carrier, but you actually control units like the interceptor and can go in and out of the carrier to refuel etc. Makes for great fleet wars in the future.
Now... My ideas are starting to expand. To make a zoomed out view of the camera for giant units easier to manage, and to lower the lag, just make all the other units invisible but give them a simple label or icon, like supreme commander would do if you zoomed all the way out.
0
I wish a dungeons and dragon map will appear in the community with the full function of actually modifying the terrains to your whim as a dungeon master...
0
Getting a working, grid based tank game would be nice, and this can also provide more insight on turn based grid games too.
0
This map gave me an idea, what if you can do a Capture-The-Tiles combative game? Basically you move horizontally and vertically from a top down perspective, but your unit is locked onto the grid. You move and capture tiles by walking over them, you can shoot ahead to hurt your opponent.
Working with WASD keys can be effective since it's only movement and dodging, as destroying your opponent depends on strategy.
Maybe have a large grid full of neutral tiles (white) and there can be 2 teams (blue and red).
It can even work with a siege tank model...
Can have a workable UI to show the score of both teams.
Tanks have 2 hp and can only survive 2 hits. Shots flies in the air at a slow to moderate speed, making dodging a important factor to capture and stop the opponent from stealing your tiles... Eventually, include power ups like Speed and Invincibility that works for a short time.
0
@SockWizard: Go
Advance Wars? I like. I posted a thread on it once, but I'm bad at SC2 triggers.
0
Still works if you planned ahead so you can place such dialog and make quick changes in case something does occurs.
0
Losing profit, because they didn't sell it themselves is a little weird... I guess the USA should really revamp their laws... But so long as big businesses continue to control the market, I doubt the government want to lose any profit...
The sum of all evil... I hate you.
For those who doesn't know, sum of all evil = money.
0
Anyone who works with a UI should remember how the real UI in SC2 works, because there's a "Friend" bar to the top right of the command card. You can possibly put dialogs and buttons on top of the portrait.
0
Questioning, only leads to problems... >_>
0
Why the fk do we even have such laws if they always twists and knots in places it shouldn't be?
I mean, plagiarism (stealing AND claiming ownership) is one thing but things like intellectual properties just makes it worser...
I mean, if someone gets a IP of water, air, or even gravity (laws like these weren't created in the past but be creative) it would have quite the bad repercussions.
Regardless, total balance in order and freedom has to be maintained, and in my opinion, the US government and the rest of the world isn't following such guideline, but falling high over heel in their greed. Note the imperialism from the existence of a powerful country, and the side effects of having a efficient technology. Nope, there doesn't seem to be any balance in the things to come... Unless you mean a ice age or something the planet is doing to "wipe" us off the earth that is (lol).
Oh yes, people who plays the fan based game first, NEVER plays the original unless decided to by intervention of another third party.
In fact, you wouldn't even bother to find fan based games unless you've used sources and stumble onto them, or have a friend tell you about it.
But really, this seems to be turning into some kind of debate, and unless your government (I'm canadian) tears it down and make a new one, there isn't much you can do about it. Being a Canadian, I've read that they are reconsidering fixing up the copyright law so it's more fair to all (since it's year and years old), and you don't see the stupid IP things, just plain and simple copyright that doesn't seem to state itself as biased.
0
Someone should make "Combos" that basically allows multiple inputs of spells and/or abilities and combines it to do a "special combo" attack.
Would be interesting too in the lines of games like FFXIII where combos can be used.
For example, if someone created a Spell Psi Storm that functions like a thunderstorm, rather than a AoE damaging area, this can happen:
Psi Storm = Generates a storm that does a lightning strike every 2 seconds on a random enemy.
So what if you combine this Psi Storm with 2 more?
Maybe in the lines of Final Fantasy, where Thunder x 3 = Thundaga:
Super Psi Storm = Generates a storm that does a lightning strike every 2 seconds on 2 random enemies and a 30% chance to cause "paralysis" (unable to move/attack at random intervals).
So in this case, maybe something like 3 units can combine 1 spell, and it causes a chain reaction and instead shoots a new spell.