Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Lord_Mork

Pages: 1 [2] 3
Played some today. Because I'm so accustomed to using the keyboard, I found navigating with the mouse to be very cumbersome, but I can see how it would be helpful or more attractive to a newcomer.

Played R+ the other day and actually came to enjoy the mouse. Instead of resting one hand on the numpad like usual, I shifted three inches right and held the mouse, so it felt natural as well. My fingers are fortunately long enough that I can reach almost all of the keyboard functions with just my remaining left hand

So the mouse sped things up a great deal without detracting from gameplay very much. I think it's an awesome addition.

Programming / Re: DIY programming language
« on: July 27, 2016, 02:48:01 PM »
I'd recommend Common Lisp (of course)

I guess some of these days I should really try Common Lisp or another language that has ridiculous syntax. Just to see if it's actually possible to write any kind of program. At my age it's.. eh.. common to quit stuff if they look like there is some kind of learning curve or barrier to climb over.

I've written small things in Racket (or Scheme, I have some confusion about the difference), which, as far as I can tell, is a descendant of Lisp. All I can say is that it is a strange language. The syntax is all prefix and very uniform, every single procedure call is ([procedure name] [arguments]), which means that nested loops and conditionals cause crap like this : "))))))))))" to close. Annoying without a good IDE, but that shouldn't be a problem today.

For stranger syntax, assuming you haven't already, maybe look into Cat or Forth? I have heard/read that writing your own "forth style" language is fairly easy

Traditional Roguelikes (Turn Based) / Re: Javelin 1.6
« on: July 19, 2016, 03:02:24 AM »

Hello veterans and rookies! Today Javelin 1.6 is being released! It’s a big one so let’s get to it!

For those new to the game you can find out all about it here

You can download your copy of Javelin 1.6 right here

Well I'm on mobile right now, but this looks incredible. I can't believe I haven't heard of this one yet
I absolutely love d20 on the tabletop

I will play tomorrow and then edit this message.

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Rogue - let's beat it
« on: July 19, 2016, 02:51:25 AM »
So after I wrote that response...

Well I'm a few days late...

But that's awesome!

Now that you've beat Rogue, what will be the fate of this thread? Will you tackle a separate game like nethack or a rogue derivative like Hexrogue? Or something else?

Other Announcements / Re: 2016 Interview with Glenn Wichman
« on: July 08, 2016, 07:04:54 PM »
What do you guys think about the "distribution channel" discussions? Why is it that he says it is so difficult to gain recognition on an app store? I don't use the Apple app store, so I don't know.

Early Dev / Re: GwaRL
« on: July 03, 2016, 09:48:58 PM »
The sprites look great. Just curious: are you planning to add a hunger system to the game?

Classic Roguelikes / Re: Rogue - let's beat it
« on: July 03, 2016, 09:45:53 PM »
I wish I could find a community that was still actively discussing this game.  Thank you elwin for your web-based Rogue.

Well, it is very old. Most people would probably prefer to play nethack or one of the *bands over Rogue. In other words, the roguelike formula has been improved and strengthened a lot over the years, so I'm not surprised that much of the discussion is no longer centered on the 36-year-old original.

That said, the social media idea in elwin's post as well as a fancy website somewhat like this one: could help breathe life into the Rogue community. So much of modern-day video game attention is based purely on marketing and packaging or as it is called, 'hype'.

Classic Roguelikes / Re: TomeNet — MMORPG roguelike game
« on: June 26, 2016, 03:56:22 AM »
I like the Manowar lyrics that appear right before you enter the game in TomeNET:

Design / Re: Corridors considered harmful
« on: June 23, 2016, 04:48:53 AM »

That interpretation is too simplistic. It might work for Rogue or the first few Nethack levels, but more advanced terrain gen exists, you know.
If you'll read what I said again, I didn't say that corridors don't serve a useful purpose, I asked what purposes they serve. Here are two fairly obvious purposes that they serve.
1) They are the route through which players and monsters move from room to room within a dungeon level.
2) They demonstrate the geographic relation of the rooms within a dungeon level.

When you said "If the only thing they do is carry the player from one challenge to the next with there only choice being which door you kick open, that can be handled with a dialog box and an ASCII cut scene", I replied with the first sentence in my last post, implying that I believe this is a false sentiment. If that wasn't clear.

"What other purpose could they serve though?" was answered by the third sentence in my last post, which stated that corridors are tactical chokepoints and terrain features.

Here are uses of corridors that can't be replicated with a dialog & cutscene:

Code: [Select]
       + A +
       +   +
       +   +
       +   +
       +   +
       +   +
++++++++   +++++++++
A                  A
++++++++   +++++++++
       +   +
       +   +
       +   +
       +   +
       +   +
       + A+

You can have two, three, or four intersecting corridors which connect two, three, or four rooms. The effect? The corridor becomes a chokepoint at any of the points labelled 'A', but loses its value as you venture towards the intersection. A player standing at the intersection no longer has the advantage of fighting against a maximum of two enemies, he can now be surrounded and besieged as if the area were a wide open space.

In fact, at the intersection of two corridors, you can be attacked from four sides without the possibility to escape diagonally. This means that the center of this structure is actually more dangerous than an open space; the tight one-square corridors instantly reverse their advantages.

You can line corridors with traps, too. Any intersection can be given a higher percent chance to spawn with a bear trap or monster-spawning trap. Then you could also give the player an alternative route,perhaps an alternative wider corridor, to cause a decision to be made.

How about this:

Code: [Select]
        + A +
        +   +
        +   +
        +   +
        +   +
        +   +         +++++++++++++++++
++++++++   ++++++++++++               +++
A                 A               B      +
++++++++   ++++++++++++                  +
        +   +         +                   +
        +   +          +                   +
        +   +          +                    +
        +   +           +                  +
        +   +           +                 +
     ++++++   ++++++++++                 +
      +                                 +
      +                                +
      +                               +
      + C                            +

In this case, the corridor is more of a tactical decision. Say you are at point C, wanting to move towards point B. Do you take the open-space route where you can be attacked by monsters without a chokepoint, or do you drag monsters into the corridor, another potentially risky move? Maybe the monsters can push you back one tile, which in this case would shove you down the corridor into the intersection and possibly into any traps. In an open-space area, the push-back might be less dangerous.

Quote from: doulos05
Are there any other things they contribute? Because the only thing listed in this post that looks hard to implement using just rooms is exploration, and that's largely down to room design.

But the real question is: what is your definition of a corridor? How does one use "just rooms"? If you implement a chokepoint, at what point is it just a narrowing of the area, and at what point is it a separate concept?

Design / Re: Corridors considered harmful
« on: June 21, 2016, 10:48:01 PM »
I would play a roguelike where you tackled one room and then got whisked off to a new one, no corridors. It's all about what game mechanical action they serve. If the only thing they do is carry the player from one challenge to the next with there only choice being which door you kick open, that can be handled with a dialog box and an ASCII cut scene. What other purpose could they serve though? I'm not asking rhetorically, what are some purposes beyond "transition from room to room that demonstrates that these rooms stand in some relation to each other geographically"?

That interpretation is too simplistic. It might work for Rogue or the first few Nethack levels, but more advanced terrain gen exists, you know.

Rather, the challenges that you are whisked between are the floors, and room/corridor/cave/city/forest structure is just a terrain feature in that challenge.

That said, the main purpose of a corridor is generally a chokepoint area. Complicate gameplay by restricting space.

And mushroom patch's argument is that chokepoints help the player too much and force reliance on their presence in order to adequately deal with enemies.

Early Dev / Re: Souls Rescue
« on: June 20, 2016, 09:26:11 PM »
Well it certainly looks very nice

When you say
I work and we don't need more money to live. But if a day we can sell one or two copies to buy a pizza
does this mean that the final version will cost money, or that it won't?

Off-topic (Locked) / Re: Found a VERY weird game!
« on: June 19, 2016, 07:15:02 PM »
Tell us if it does anything particularly malignant to your computer.

Design / Re: Corridors considered harmful
« on: June 17, 2016, 10:43:46 PM »
This is a good question. Wider corridors are better, but unfortunately they are still bad.

Before I threw out the dungeon gen system on my project, I had corridors generate like long rectangular rooms.

What exactly is the reason not to have corridors?

Early Dev / Re: GwaRL
« on: June 16, 2016, 03:45:17 PM »
I've just been spending my time playing DCSS instead, and indeed, when that already exists, why would you ever play my roguelike?

This is funny. I am essentially in the same situation with DCSS and all.
But this is a good game. The aesthetics are very nice and I played the two different versions, seeing that the second, later one is far improved :-)

I don't have many negative comments. Obviously an ID system and character creation would be nice, but I recognize that maybe that is not the first priority right now.

 :) This looks really, really good. Definitely going on my "eventually purchase" list along with a few others.
I'm going to assume that the Vanilla Bagel is one type of comestible in the game?

Pages: 1 [2] 3