I didn't want to get involved but:
No contest. Denton is a one dimentional straw puppet who relies on the player to bring any a sense of emotion, perhaps a deliberate hole but one that leaves him, as a stand alone character, vapid and empty. Cool like a vacuum. Gadgets cyborg additions? Pah they may be fun but they don't make the character. Brother is a rebel and they both work for anti terroist group. wow.
Snake: an angst ridden, genetic soldier whose father was a power hungry meglomaniac and whose twin brother is also his nemesis. Being a soldier is all he knows, the rules of the battlefield define him and estrange him from emotional attachment, yet they boil under the surface and make interaction with other characters strained but deliberate. Takes dimazepam to steady his nerves, has combat suit and tuxedo, befriends wolves by covering himself in urine, absails down tall buildings and outwits a psychic who can see his every move. Oh and his best friend is a cyborg ninja. Sorry, is there a bias coming across here?
And relax.
Solarjetman's Content
There have been 9 items by Solarjetman (Search limited from 29-April 23)
#2845 Who Do You Think Is Cooler?
Posted by
on 31 May 2005 - 06:54 PM
in
Forum Guidelines
#2313 The Amazing Little World Of Aureliano
Posted by
on 24 May 2005 - 01:36 PM
in
Forum Guidelines
The save dynamic sounds similar to viewtiful joe, although there was no reward for time, rather it was points that gave gameplay prizes and the plot was linear with respect to your choices (actually a perfect viewtiful performance on time, points and life allowed you to unlock viewtiful mode...). The mission system sounds like thief (again no time limit but you do discover stories arcs more money for equipment, etc) or golden eye (unlocking cheats/rewards/levels based on difficulty and time).
Hats off for the ambition, but I don't envy the juggling you will have to do with the gameplay to preserve the vast variation of plot. Not only will multiple story arcs be difficult to make compatable from one level to the next but each level must channel the plot to some extent so there will have to be either some linearity (I'm thinking of Deus Ex here) or plot specific levels - different for different arcs. While it is important to make the player feel free it can be daunting to know there are 50 different endings that require possibly 20 plays through to see and say 30 different levels of which only 20 are played through with each go. It can be done but perhaps it would be better to start simple and build up. I'm reminded of FF Endless Nova and how the creater is constantly updating the possible story arcs, adding love interests, new weapons, levels etc. If you can do it all at once Aureliano you're a better man than I.
I take what you mean about Soul Reaver, the only reward aside from new abilities was the plot and exploration. While the plot was a HUGE dissapointment i'm a bit of a graphics wh*re and liked just looking at the new areas (It was a major pull of beyond good and evil, pikmin1/2 and morrowind just to be in those beautifuly rendered enviroments). Of course soul reaver's graphics don't weigh up now but aesthetics does count for some things. In general the game was poor but its no death policy, no loading screens (all games should do this, after the initial load, adjacent areas are loaded while you explore, each area being big enough to load the others before you get to them. Think how great the tension in half life1/2 would be if the section loads were removed and you really did feel lost in a complex), and parallel dimentions (done better technically but not visually in zelda link to the past) were noteable achievements. SR was a fine experiment that turned out quite well, apart from its timewasting faults and dissapointments in plot. Oh and the combat was repetitive, pointless, unchallenging. But the scenery... sad I know but I'm a tourist as well as a gamer, searching for new ideas, experiences and knowledge and then taking them home. I remember first playing the demo of Soul Reaver, climbing and gliding up a cliff face, impailing enemies and sucking up their souls, reaching the top of the light house and thinking, when that lights up it's going to be great. Some games have an atmosphere and I remember most of SR well, the early parts at least.
But hey we can make better games right? keep us informed Aureliano
Hats off for the ambition, but I don't envy the juggling you will have to do with the gameplay to preserve the vast variation of plot. Not only will multiple story arcs be difficult to make compatable from one level to the next but each level must channel the plot to some extent so there will have to be either some linearity (I'm thinking of Deus Ex here) or plot specific levels - different for different arcs. While it is important to make the player feel free it can be daunting to know there are 50 different endings that require possibly 20 plays through to see and say 30 different levels of which only 20 are played through with each go. It can be done but perhaps it would be better to start simple and build up. I'm reminded of FF Endless Nova and how the creater is constantly updating the possible story arcs, adding love interests, new weapons, levels etc. If you can do it all at once Aureliano you're a better man than I.
I take what you mean about Soul Reaver, the only reward aside from new abilities was the plot and exploration. While the plot was a HUGE dissapointment i'm a bit of a graphics wh*re and liked just looking at the new areas (It was a major pull of beyond good and evil, pikmin1/2 and morrowind just to be in those beautifuly rendered enviroments). Of course soul reaver's graphics don't weigh up now but aesthetics does count for some things. In general the game was poor but its no death policy, no loading screens (all games should do this, after the initial load, adjacent areas are loaded while you explore, each area being big enough to load the others before you get to them. Think how great the tension in half life1/2 would be if the section loads were removed and you really did feel lost in a complex), and parallel dimentions (done better technically but not visually in zelda link to the past) were noteable achievements. SR was a fine experiment that turned out quite well, apart from its timewasting faults and dissapointments in plot. Oh and the combat was repetitive, pointless, unchallenging. But the scenery... sad I know but I'm a tourist as well as a gamer, searching for new ideas, experiences and knowledge and then taking them home. I remember first playing the demo of Soul Reaver, climbing and gliding up a cliff face, impailing enemies and sucking up their souls, reaching the top of the light house and thinking, when that lights up it's going to be great. Some games have an atmosphere and I remember most of SR well, the early parts at least.
But hey we can make better games right? keep us informed Aureliano
#2052 The Amazing Little World Of Aureliano
Posted by
on 17 May 2005 - 11:42 AM
in
Forum Guidelines
Well the threat of dying in soul reaver was the stalling of progress, much the same as dying in any game and reloading, except you are still in the game environment rather than the loading screen.
It is always a problem of how to balance the pain of dying (ie the need to retry or have your performance rating cut (points in shooters)) and the drive to keep the player coming back for more. What better way than make dying part of the game in some way. I admit the urgency wasn't there in soul reaver but the frustration of being in the wrong 'world' was there sometimes.
Perhaps a better disscussion is save points vs quick/instant saves. Save points act as a plot device, forcing you to segment your play into segements for areas or story arcs. However they are bloody annoying for casual play when you are forced to play for 40mins just so you can leave with a sense of achievement. Similarly earning saves like the ribbons in resident evil, etc. only makes sense if you can use them at any time. They become even more restrictive if you have to use a save point as well.
Quick saves eliminate this but they also destroy that sense of coherence in the plot. When you can reload a section to your hearts content the urgency you are striving for can be obliterated. Of course this is not a problem for puzzle games and some strategy games would suffer greatly if the quick save was not an option. When I think of quick saves spoiling I often think on thief, of how essential it was to explore and rely on the quick saves to prevent too much repition. But I couldn't help feeling that I was cheating the game, that as a thief if I should die in a trap or get caught that I should die. The immersion was not as complete as it could be.
I feel this is becoming a small essay. Sorry but I'd be interested to know your score on this. Although this could be a thread in itself but it's tied up with the game mechanics of dying. In fact I think I've almost answered my question. Perhaps if death is total then quick saves preserve the players precious time and protect wasted effort. However if death is an alteration of gameplay then there is a benefit from save points, perhaps with performance quota quick saves, to give definate areas of progress.
Well enough of that, tell us what you're thinking Aureliano
It is always a problem of how to balance the pain of dying (ie the need to retry or have your performance rating cut (points in shooters)) and the drive to keep the player coming back for more. What better way than make dying part of the game in some way. I admit the urgency wasn't there in soul reaver but the frustration of being in the wrong 'world' was there sometimes.
Perhaps a better disscussion is save points vs quick/instant saves. Save points act as a plot device, forcing you to segment your play into segements for areas or story arcs. However they are bloody annoying for casual play when you are forced to play for 40mins just so you can leave with a sense of achievement. Similarly earning saves like the ribbons in resident evil, etc. only makes sense if you can use them at any time. They become even more restrictive if you have to use a save point as well.
Quick saves eliminate this but they also destroy that sense of coherence in the plot. When you can reload a section to your hearts content the urgency you are striving for can be obliterated. Of course this is not a problem for puzzle games and some strategy games would suffer greatly if the quick save was not an option. When I think of quick saves spoiling I often think on thief, of how essential it was to explore and rely on the quick saves to prevent too much repition. But I couldn't help feeling that I was cheating the game, that as a thief if I should die in a trap or get caught that I should die. The immersion was not as complete as it could be.
I feel this is becoming a small essay. Sorry but I'd be interested to know your score on this. Although this could be a thread in itself but it's tied up with the game mechanics of dying. In fact I think I've almost answered my question. Perhaps if death is total then quick saves preserve the players precious time and protect wasted effort. However if death is an alteration of gameplay then there is a benefit from save points, perhaps with performance quota quick saves, to give definate areas of progress.
Well enough of that, tell us what you're thinking Aureliano
#2051 Doukutsu Monogatari - Cave Story
Posted by
on 17 May 2005 - 11:15 AM
in
Games on Reloaded
Hints for the hunterminator:
1. Avoid Dr. Booster
2. Seach the debris in the core before speaking to curly
The rest is more complicated but make sure you take a rest at the house halfway through the waterway....
1. Avoid Dr. Booster
2. Seach the debris in the core before speaking to curly
The rest is more complicated but make sure you take a rest at the house halfway through the waterway....
#1975 The Amazing Little World Of Aureliano
Posted by
on 16 May 2005 - 12:36 PM
in
Forum Guidelines
Further to the dying dilema:
Dying in games is an oft neglected. I felt Soul Reaver had a great spin on this. Dying was not only survivable but also crucial to the gameplay, the afterlife being a distorted version of the 'real' world that must be utilised in order to progress.
As to altering save files or deleting them you could put it in as a threat rather than a reality. There was a fine moment on Eternal Darkness as it deleted your file right in your face.
So many innovations to think about...
Dying in games is an oft neglected. I felt Soul Reaver had a great spin on this. Dying was not only survivable but also crucial to the gameplay, the afterlife being a distorted version of the 'real' world that must be utilised in order to progress.
As to altering save files or deleting them you could put it in as a threat rather than a reality. There was a fine moment on Eternal Darkness as it deleted your file right in your face.
So many innovations to think about...
#1974 Doukutsu Monogatari - Cave Story
Posted by
on 16 May 2005 - 12:24 PM
in
Games on Reloaded
Pixel has a few on his website but I haven't tried them
http://hp.vector.co....thors/VA022293/
just click on the links on the side for different ones.
http://hp.vector.co....thors/VA022293/
just click on the links on the side for different ones.
#1771 The Amazing Little World Of Aureliano
Posted by
on 13 May 2005 - 02:01 PM
in
Forum Guidelines
Progress! I must say Cave Story is an inspiration. I have a project in the works as well all thanks to Pixel's fine example. I read a review that said it took him 5 years to perfect. Gamemaker certainly helped you recreate the feel of the jumping, no idea how to stop the sticking. Can you round off the edges?
If you want a fine example of a similar game check out seilklus at
http://www.autofish..../games/seiklus/
Not as deep but smart none the less. (appologies if you already came across it)
If you want a fine example of a similar game check out seilklus at
http://www.autofish..../games/seiklus/
Not as deep but smart none the less. (appologies if you already came across it)
#1768 Doukutsu Monogatari - Cave Story
Posted by
on 13 May 2005 - 12:49 PM
in
Games on Reloaded
Aureliano, on May 10 2005, 07:41 PM, said:
Solarjetman, while it is true that exploring and backtracking is very important, I think your advice on item policy is misleading. What items you pick/don't pick doesn't really affect the ending, except for one particular which should not be picked (not the first time you get the chance at least).
Your weapon summary is generally fair, being down to personal choice. The sword is excellent for damage, the snake good for fire rate and coverage, machinine gun easy on the finger (and lets you explore easier), spur well rounded and dependable. My point about making the game harder is that if you want to find the spur you have to go through a good patch of the game with just the polar star (although curly has the machine gun at full experience if you don't take it from her. Helps a bit I suppose). This is also true in avoiding that other item we keep mentioning, eg making fights and exploration tougher.
Interested to hear opinions on the Bubble and the Nemesis.
Also, is the escape with Kazuma a bad ending? I thought it was quite nice, peaceful and removed. Of course you were not a hero, but for a coward you got off quite lightly.
PS: There is no reason not to pick up the sword as far as I've discovered, yet...
#1172 Doukutsu Monogatari - Cave Story
Posted by
on 10 May 2005 - 11:02 AM
in
Games on Reloaded
The beauty of the game is finding out the secrets the second time through, and the third, possibly even the fourth. The single save seems to be there for that very purpose, so you progress and don't reload the decisions that you make (of course you can get round this by installing it again in another directory 
).
Some useful hints to help you find all the secrets
1) Try and do as much as you can with as little as you can (you're on the right lines to find most of the secrets if you avoid picking up items you don't need, like the machine gun) Of course this makes the game that little bit harder but these are secrets right?
2) Explore everywhere. There is a need to backtrack for some of the secrets.
3) And this is to whet the appetite of those who saw the credits:
*SPOILERS BELOW*
1) Curly doesn't have to die. You need to work out how to do this to get the third ending. Search and explore... it's complex but work at it.
2) There is another place to go where you can find 'red deamons' AFTER you kill the 'final' boss.
3) The OUTER WALL people.
*SPOILERS END*
Enjoy the game it's fantastic. Oh, the max health I've got is 50, be interested to know if any of you have got some more. Email me if you want more hints but you really can't beat finding out yourself.
Those into Pixel's artwork should check this out, there seems to be a hint to another cave story... http://hp.vector.co....thors/VA022293/
).Some useful hints to help you find all the secrets
1) Try and do as much as you can with as little as you can (you're on the right lines to find most of the secrets if you avoid picking up items you don't need, like the machine gun) Of course this makes the game that little bit harder but these are secrets right?
2) Explore everywhere. There is a need to backtrack for some of the secrets.
3) And this is to whet the appetite of those who saw the credits:
*SPOILERS BELOW*
1) Curly doesn't have to die. You need to work out how to do this to get the third ending. Search and explore... it's complex but work at it.
2) There is another place to go where you can find 'red deamons' AFTER you kill the 'final' boss.
3) The OUTER WALL people.
*SPOILERS END*
Enjoy the game it's fantastic. Oh, the max health I've got is 50, be interested to know if any of you have got some more. Email me if you want more hints but you really can't beat finding out yourself.
Those into Pixel's artwork should check this out, there seems to be a hint to another cave story... http://hp.vector.co....thors/VA022293/
