The Ur-Quan Masters Discussion Forum

The Ur-Quan Masters Re-Release => Starbase Café => Topic started by: general_klefenz on December 02, 2008, 06:20:09 am



Title: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 02, 2008, 06:20:09 am
i know maybe i'm not the first to suggest this, but nowadays it isn't that hard to make a game, specially a 2D adventure game.
i've been working this afternoon and, in some hours, i imitated the inertial movment of the SC2 ships in a simple program, and then made this earthling cruiser sprite:
(http://img372.imageshack.us/img372/7900/earthlingcruisertt5.gif) (http://imageshack.us)
it's not much, but a good result for only an afternoon.
we can create a project and get a sequel out of it!, or just wait for someone in in a large company to take a forgotten old game back to life, wich isn't very likely to happen.
if you want to help me, mail me.
if you think i'm crazy, mail me too.
if there is already a sequel project in work, please mail me.
if nobody answers, i will supouse nobody readed this. thanks!


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 02, 2008, 10:14:30 am
Hello and welcome to the forums!

A few background facts/thoughts that might be helpful on your journey

- There is a previous fan-based effort to create a sequel, which is called TimeWarp (http://timewarp.sourceforge.net/). The project stalled years ago, but you might be able to scrounge up some helpers over on their forum (http://timewarp.sourceforge.net/forum/index.php), if there's still anyone left. Timewarp demonstrates some of the difficulties inherent in creating a sequel this way. They managed to get the melee off the ground, but the actual game mechanics and story dragged on for years and pretty much never amounted to anything. Different opinions on story and gameplay issues eventually led to the project splitting off into several directions, none of which amounted to more than several melee engines.

- There is also an addon for UQM being constructed, check this topic (http://forum.uqm.stack.nl/index.php?topic=4022.0) for some helpful hints. It demonstrates the difficulty encountered in even modding the code of the existing program, to say nothing of coding a new one from scratch.

- Finally, take into account that while you seem to be pretty good with sprites, you'll need a lot of coding skills as well. You need to figure out an engine, a story, dialogue, music and so forth if you want to do this sort of project. And if you recruit other people, you also have to be a diplomat, because people can be amazingly touchy.

All that said and done, any new SC project is always welcome. If you manage to get it off the ground yourself and can dangle some juicy screenshots/videos/demos in front of the userbase you'll probably get a lot of eager helpers. You might want to check in with Scott on PNF (http://starcontrol.classicgaming.gamespy.com/) once you get started, he'll probably give you some more exposure as well.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Megagun on December 02, 2008, 04:45:49 pm
- There is a previous fan-based effort to create a sequel, which is called TimeWarp (http://timewarp.sourceforge.net/). The project stalled years ago, but you might be able to scrounge up some helpers over on their forum (http://timewarp.sourceforge.net/forum/index.php), if there's still anyone left. Timewarp demonstrates some of the difficulties inherent in creating a sequel this way. They managed to get the melee off the ground, but the actual game mechanics and story dragged on for years and pretty much never amounted to anything. Different opinions on story and gameplay issues eventually led to the project splitting off into several directions, none of which amounted to more than several melee engines.

Though I haven't ever really followed TimeWarp, wasn't this mostly due to people coming up with their own brilliant ideas for aliens, and others saying that those ideas were crappy, causing debate and rockthrowing amongst some of the story developers? An 'easy fix' for that could be to NOT introduce any new aliens at all.

Also, I really like the cruiser general_klefenz posted! :)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 02, 2008, 07:40:41 pm
Though I haven't ever really followed TimeWarp, wasn't this mostly due to people coming up with their own brilliant ideas for aliens, and others saying that those ideas were crappy, causing debate and rockthrowing amongst some of the story developers? An 'easy fix' for that could be to NOT introduce any new aliens at all.

IIRC it wasn't just aliens but also the story in itself. The original Timewarp was divided into teams, and I think Team Beige was the story team. The group was pretty ripe with strife, I recall several members leaving because of fundamental disagreements regarding the story arc. I think the other teams, who focused on technical issues fared better.

The cruel truth is that a large(ish) group of people will probably never agree on a story, especially if they are amateur storytellers.  Unless someone is clearly in charge and everyone accepts it, this kind of cooperation will usually fail. I don't know if Team Beige had a boss, but the personalities involved were probably too wilful to accept much leadership.

Quote
Also, I really like the cruiser general_klefenz posted! :)

Yeah, it looks really good. Even if nothing else comes of his project, if he can redo all the ships like that and upload them to PNF or juicy, that would be great. They can always be used for something.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 02, 2008, 09:24:57 pm
If I were to start an SC project (or any project, for that matter), I would take full charge of the game, that is, I would make all of the decisions. This would prevent arguments from affecting game development, in theory at least.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Glory_device on December 02, 2008, 09:47:57 pm
That way jay...you will just never get anything done. You will learn over time that do that will only make your project an army of one. There is a slight balance in beetween dictatorship and open democracy


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 03, 2008, 05:38:04 am
i worked a bit more on this and got three more sprites
(http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/3290/arilouskifftl7.gif)
(http://img261.imageshack.us/img261/2038/shofixtiscoutfy0.gif)
(http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/3972/umghadronedg8.gif)
the umgha is a hard one, i think something is wrong with it, but i don't know how to model it, the close explanatory picture shows it as a cylinder, but in the game it looks different, i made this out of a cylinder and shaped it into a picture of the drone, i got problems with the side engines.

i figured out to program the earthling cruiser misiles, when i get a complete programmed ship and an IA i'll post the program


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: grayfox777 on December 03, 2008, 06:28:50 am
What we need is a game that uses procedural generation! Black Sky is going to use it, I think.  It's not a SC/UQM sequel though. They need another programmer unfortunately, so it might be a long while until the game is finished. Infinity is going to use it, but that might not be out for a while either, and the main version is an MMO (also not a Star Control game though). Someone on here made a game that seemed like it would be great. It was called  Aftermath. Unfortunately,  the project just kinda died off.  I think it was meant to be a Star Control-based game too.... possibly a sequel.  :(


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 03, 2008, 08:07:22 am
That way jay...you will just never get anything done. You will learn over time that do that will only make your project an army of one. There is a slight balance in beetween dictatorship and open democracy

On the other hand, if everyone gets a say nothing will get done either, because they are bound to have different opinions. In a project with voluntary contributors, new content can be very challenging to create/get accepted.

Quote
What we need is a game that uses procedural generation!

Er, I think that might be ever so slightly outside the realm of what a fan based initiative can produce.

General: Nice going.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: grayfox777 on December 03, 2008, 08:22:51 am
Er, I think that might be ever so slightly outside the realm of what a fan based initiative can produce.
Okay, yeah, I'll admit that I exaggerated a bit. (I suppose I was thinking more of professional game development teams.) But it's very possible to make a game with lots of places to explore without that too. That's what we need. Procedural generation isn't absolutely necessary, but it would be very interesting.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: meep-eep on December 03, 2008, 02:37:01 pm
What we need is a game that uses procedural generation!
Er, I think that might be ever so slightly outside the realm of what a fan based initiative can produce.
Procedural generation just means that content is created by the game, instead of in advance. UQM uses procedural generation for most of the star systems and planets. It's very simple, just using a (pseudo-)random value (based on a fix seed here) to determine how many and what kind of planets there are, what minerals to put there, and where, etc., but it's procedural generation.

And I don't see why a "fan-based initiative" couldn't do that. In fact, what a fan-based initiative usually lacks is time and people. Procedurally generating content could save on both.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 03, 2008, 09:10:31 pm
I think this is the first time I've seen Luke get owned. :P

So you could maybe change the races' homeworlds to make it more challenging, so you don't just know where to go?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: grayfox777 on December 03, 2008, 09:28:32 pm
How does UQM use it? Isn't everything always in the same place?   ???


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Megagun on December 03, 2008, 09:40:22 pm
UQM uses procedural generation.

Thing is, lots of people often associate procedural generation with randomization, yet forget that a true random function doesn't really exist in computers (even when you use the time as the seed of your randomize function, it's still predictable and not truly random, though random enough for most projects)..

You see, random functions use a so-called seed, from which random values are generated. If the seed is the same, I will get the exact same results out of my random function.

Thus, to generate a starfield that's always the same, I would set my seed to a specific value, then call a few random functions for each and every star I want to place on the map. Since the seed is constant, I will always get the exact same set of values out of my random function, and thus the starfield will be the same every time I run my starmap generating function.

There are many other ways of procedurally generating content, other than using a random function. Wikipedia has a little article about procedural generation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Procedural_generation


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: meep-eep on December 03, 2008, 10:45:12 pm
I think this is the first time I've seen Luke get owned. :P
He didn't get owned; he got corrected. :)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on December 03, 2008, 11:19:09 pm
I don't think Luki got "owned" or corrected . The procedural genertaion to be used in Black Sky and Infinity, which was what Fox was referring to, is FAR beyond what UQM uses and most likely outside the realm of the average hobbyist programmer.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 04, 2008, 02:30:19 am
OK, i`ll use procedural generation since i`m not going to draw hundreds of worlds manually, and i have some questions for the community:
-what about changes in ships sprites? not like making dreadnought look like a potatoe, but in 2D to 3D transitions some shapes would change, an example is the umgha drone i posted, i explained the problem with it and i`m gonna change that sprite, it may look different to the original.
-new races, i heard a whole project falled because of this issue, but nwe game without new thing isn't new at all, just another remake.
-boss ships, something i'm sure about is that i'm going to put some boss ships across the game, like the Sa-matra, but smaller.
-reviving the androsynth, they vanished, but, some may have been far away from their homeworld and when they discovered what happened, not what actually happened, but noone responded from home, and they hide for many years.
-Slaveshielded: the Ur-quan slaveshielded many worlds, and nobody knows who or what lives in them, however the allies would release them and may open a pandora box.
-the taalo: are they still alive? the orz call their home world the "taalo playground", so they knew'em and the orz are quite new, also the melnorme said the taalo were dissapeared from this region of the space, so they could be somewhere else, maybe in other dimension.

most of those questions are for the storyline aspect, but first tell me what are your oppinions about the sprites issue.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 04, 2008, 07:29:40 am
Procedural generation just means that content is created by the game, instead of in advance. UQM uses procedural generation for most of the star systems and planets. It's very simple, just using a (pseudo-)random value (based on a fix seed here) to determine how many and what kind of planets there are, what minerals to put there, and where, etc., but it's procedural generation.

And I don't see why a "fan-based initiative" couldn't do that. In fact, what a fan-based initiative usually lacks is time and people. Procedurally generating content could save on both.


Heh, fair enough. I guess I've seen the term associated with games like Spore and Black Sky so many times that I forgot that it's possible to do on a much more basic level as well, such as the one UQM uses. Still, the idea I got from Fox's post was to use procedural generation on the level in Spore, i.e. that users can create something and the game figures out how it works. This is far more complex than UQM fashion of saving the designers time that doesn't actually show anywhere in the game from a users perspective, and far harder (I assume) to implement codewise, especially for a fan based project without resources.


-what about changes in ships sprites? not like making dreadnought look like a potatoe, but in 2D to 3D transitions some shapes would change, an example is the umgha drone i posted, i explained the problem with it and i`m gonna change that sprite, it may look different to the original.

Doesn't 2D to 3D almost always cause changes in a model? There are quite a few 3D models floating around already, check PNF and maybe juicy to see how other people have solved this approach. Scott and Eth over on PNF have both done some modelling work, but not as much as Slylendro (if he is still around). There are others as well, but none come to mind right now.

Quote
-new races, i heard a whole project falled because of this issue, but nwe game without new thing isn't new at all, just another remake.

You could make a story with just what hapopens to the old races after sC2. Still I agree with you, new content would make it a lot better. You just have to think long and hard about to to generate a new story, how many people, what kind of secrecy, and so forth. In a voluntary project you'll have to listen to everyone from coders to musicians, but compromising too much to keep people happy will make sure no one is happy.

Quote
-boss ships, something i'm sure about is that i'm going to put some boss ships across the game, like the Sa-matra, but smaller.

This might work well or not. If there are superships camped out here and there, there has to be good story reasons for the enemy not just fielding them to destroy you straight away.

Quote
-reviving the androsynth, they vanished, but, some may have been far away from their homeworld and when they discovered what happened, not what actually happened, but noone responded from home, and they hide for many years.

Touching the Androsynth will be pretty tricky, because everyone has their own idea of where they are and what happened. They and the Orz are mysterious, and revealing that mystery will need one heck of a story.

Quote
-Slaveshielded: the Ur-quan slaveshielded many worlds, and nobody knows who or what lives in them, however the allies would release them and may open a pandora box.

This is a good idea IMO.

Quote
-the taalo: are they still alive? the orz call their home world the "taalo playground", so they knew'em and the orz are quite new, also the melnorme said the taalo were dissapeared from this region of the space, so they could be somewhere else, maybe in other dimension.

According to a chat with TFB, they are alive. Where, when and how is another matter.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: grayfox777 on December 05, 2008, 03:24:47 am
I have an explanation for "reviving" the Androsynth, kinda. A large Androsynth colony could be discovered somewhere. Maybe not many there though. The mystery of what happened to the rest could remain a mystery, probably even to them.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 05, 2008, 06:27:53 am
that's what i'm talking about, they were far, investigating something (they were always researching) and kinda they got stuck there


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 05, 2008, 10:37:14 am
that's what i'm talking about, they were far, investigating something (they were always researching) and kinda they got stuck there

The Orz didn't just snag the Androsynth on their homeworld (if that's what happened), they snagged all the Androsynth starships and colonies within their circle of influence. The story seems to indicate that once their *smell* was known/they were "seen" there were no more Androsynth. If you want to bring some sort of outlying colony back, you need to figure out what made them different enough to not be *smelt*/"seen". Extreme gentic modifcations maybe? But then they wouldn't really be Androsynth anymore...

Relevant snippet

Quote from: Arilou
The Androsynth showed themselves, and something noticed them.
There are no more Androsynth now. Only Orz.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on December 05, 2008, 03:32:55 pm
Perhaps whatever *smelled* the Androsynth decided to keep a few around for *happy games*...


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Draxas on December 05, 2008, 06:30:03 pm
But if you go that route, you are going to be required to delve into an explanation of what happened to the rest. Unfortunately, the way the Androsynth's story is written means that you can't both bring them back and keep their disappearance a mystery.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: SweetSassyMolassy on December 05, 2008, 08:25:12 pm
So, wait a minute. Being a dumbass when it comes to computers, I have a very limited knowledge about how things like procedural generation actually works. But from what I do know and what you're saying, in order to generate something like planets with a certain number and type of mineral/bio things on each, the program utilizes some type of randomly generated array (or something), then assigns the properties of the planet to the values in the array. How does this apply to Star Control? For one thing, the planets always have the same minerals and locations in all versions, so the "randomly generated" numbers are fixed. This seems to indicate that the data is stored in the program instead of being procedurally generated.

Also, planets are hot or cold or have a lot of weather depending on whether they're in a system with a hot star or a gas giant or something. Do you just assign these parameters to the system that's generating the planets?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 05, 2008, 08:52:42 pm
So, wait a minute. Being a dumbass when it comes to computers, I have a very limited knowledge about how things like procedural generation actually works. But from what I do know and what you're saying, in order to generate something like planets with a certain number and type of mineral/bio things on each, the program utilizes some type of randomly generated array (or something), then assigns the properties of the planet to the values in the array. How does this apply to Star Control? For one thing, the planets always have the same minerals and locations in all versions, so the "randomly generated" numbers are fixed. This seems to indicate that the data is stored in the program instead of being procedurally generated.

From what I understand it's like having some sort of giant equation (in a simplified manner, say x=2y + 3y^2). As long as the game feeds the same seed (y=6) into the system, you always get the same result/universe. (x=120). The game only has one seed, so every time you start the game it goes "y=6" and the game generates a universe "120". Then some other code comes in and writes over certain random systems to make homeworlds and other special places (Sol system). That's the trouble with modding the universe. If you change the seed to "y=3" you'll get another universe "x=16". But because the code that generates special system depends on the systems to be modified to be in the right place it crashes spectacularly when they no longer exist. Say the computer tries to modify a certain system to be Sol, but there is no system there.

So in essence the worlds aren't random, but the procedure that they are created with can creating infinite universes if you vary the seed. And it does this when you start the game, except for special systems those worlds weren't drawn up by the creators. But because the seed is always the same the universe is always the same.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: SweetSassyMolassy on December 06, 2008, 12:52:54 am
ah, I see, that makes sense. So for a game like Spore, or a game that has random backgrounds and events (like Elder Scrolls), then would the seed be generated randomly by the program?

I'm sure that one algorithm and seed input don't control the entire game, right? I'm sure there are certain events that are generated using a different set of equations, as you put it.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 06, 2008, 03:02:40 pm
ah, I see, that makes sense. So for a game like Spore, or a game that has random backgrounds and events (like Elder Scrolls), then would the seed be generated randomly by the program?

It is my understanding that in a game like spore, the algorithms are in place, but you construct the seed (creature). The program then take your seed/creature and runs it through its algorithms to figure out how it moves and stuff like that. this is the difference between UQM's way of using procedural generation it (one predetermined seed to save the creators some work) and new big flashy games like spore (user creates the seed and you can have virtually unlimited content as long as the procedural generation is advanced enough to figure your seed out).

Quote
I'm sure that one algorithm and seed input don't control the entire game, right? I'm sure there are certain events that are generated using a different set of equations, as you put it.

I've no idea how the actual code looks, but I'm sure meep will be happy to enlighten you.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 06, 2008, 07:12:39 pm
well, this is the first demo i can show of what i'm making.
it's really simple, just two earthling cruisers in battle for unknown reason, it has some bugs and the enemy cruiser is just unable to het out of the gravity well on it's own  , also there are many things that have to be implemented and corrected

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=GY7MGVHU

if something goes terribly wrong with this, tell me, but i'm sure it won't damage any computer ;D

the controls are:
arrows for moving
control for main weapon (MX missile)
shift for secundary weapon (SDI lasers)
spacebar for restarting


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: SweetSassyMolassy on December 06, 2008, 08:12:45 pm
The graphics look really nice. Is it me, or does the inertia not really work though? Also, the planet's gravity is too strong.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 06, 2008, 09:03:46 pm
IMO the inertia is fine, maybe it feels weird becouse the camera is static, and you're right about the gravity, already lowered it.
i have a big question now, does anybody know how does work the borders thing?

BTW yhis is a version with some minor fixes (including gravity)
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=NU6TYKP0


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Glory_device on December 07, 2008, 06:58:51 am
did you fix the point defense laser? it fire off even if nothing is in range 0_o!!!


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 07, 2008, 08:01:30 am
three versions on one day, i hope no more problematic bugs appear.

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=6IG9FRR0

i fixed the point laser and the enemy wrapping, i think it only needs calibration now.

one thing i noticed is that I can't hit my own AI! it blocks everything i throw
probably i'm not skilled enough, but it surely blocks more than the original.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 07, 2008, 09:50:50 pm
i made some more sprites:
(http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/3149/yehatterminatoriw0.gif)
(http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/1894/spathieluderwi0.gif)
(http://img522.imageshack.us/img522/8683/umghadroneqx7.gif)
(http://img376.imageshack.us/img376/8522/urquandreadnoughtuc7.gif)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: sirving on December 07, 2008, 10:43:17 pm
I just figured I'd stop by and let you know I'd posted this on PNF, as I said their I'm very impressed, keep up the good work General!


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 08, 2008, 04:45:05 am
I think my sphere of influence is expanding, thanks.

this is my fourth release of my demo, it now features zoom, and some minor fixes:
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=472OGTMM

plus i made this mysterious ship:
(http://img520.imageshack.us/img520/2813/mysteryvq6.gif)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 08, 2008, 04:52:49 am
I tried #3, and point defence wouldn't work. So I utterly lost. (What I mean is, it doesn't do anything to hold down Shift at all. It won't fire.)

one thing i noticed is that I can't hit my own AI! it blocks everything i throw
probably i'm not skilled enough, but it surely blocks more than the original.

Actually, if you play UQM Cruiser vs. Cruiser, it's the same result until you manage to trick the AI by hitting them right after they launch a missile. Cruiser vs. Cruiser is utterly a stalemate unless someone decides to be stupid.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Alvarin on December 08, 2008, 05:00:33 am
Quote
Cruiser vs. Cruiser is utterly a stalemate unless someone decides to be stupid.
Not really . I play this matchup against my friends alot and there are things to do , like getting point blank and when your opponent discharges his batteries over PDL , lob a nuke at him , or just PDL and run away :)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 08, 2008, 05:05:44 am
Interesting. I should try that against one of the melee experts, perhaps.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 08, 2008, 05:26:36 am
point defense works, though a bit diferent, it activates when you push the key, not when you hold it, I should fix that then.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Resh Aleph on December 08, 2008, 12:55:58 pm
Nice job! :)

Here are all the issues I found...

  • Ships can go through each other.
  • Missiles can go through the planet (PDL too?).
  • The sprites flash regularly.
  • Version 3: at one point I had a PDL fire across the entire screen (when I was in one edge of the screen and the target was in the other).
  • Version 3: I was able to fly into the sidebar. o_O And moving through edges was too snappy. Hard to test this with version 4.

Also, I'm not a fan of the completely continuous zoom, but I assume that's temporary. Same goes for the camera being locked after the battle ends (so the winner can go flying out of camera).


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 08, 2008, 05:23:15 pm
thanks for the bugs reports, some of those were already fixed in 0.0.4.
right now i'm going to make all sprites left and then make a real meele.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 08, 2008, 05:24:33 pm
thanks for the bugs reports, some of those were already fixed in 0.0.4.
right now i'm going to make all sprites left and then make a real meele.

While I haven't downloaded and tested your demo I'm seriously impressed. I don't think any project on these boards has gone this quickly from idea to demo before. With this speed you'll have the sequel done by next week.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Rider on December 10, 2008, 12:13:10 pm
...even though it's currently made with Game Maker...

Anywho, I found a serious issue with the latest release. The PDL seems to not work a lot. Holding down the secondary fire doesn't automatically uses it like it does in UQM (Which is a big loss IMO) and using it 'on the spot' seems to just... fail on occasion. Maybe the PDL range is limited making the time window you have to press the fire button too small or whatnot, in any case, it's aggravating.

Other then that, impressive stuff :)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 10, 2008, 06:58:10 pm
i fixed the PDL issue, just change event "press key" for "key down", but i didn't posted it jet, i'm working on the sprites right now, and then implement'em, so my next post would feature all the ships, i think a a week from now tops.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 10, 2008, 07:08:18 pm
...even though it's currently made with Game Maker...

Still, he is actually creating something, and with gusto. Not all of us can say the same.

Quote
i fixed the PDL issue, just change event "press key" for "key down", but i didn't posted it jet, i'm working on the sprites right now, and then implement'em, so my next post would feature all the ships, i think a a week from now tops.

I expect the full game somewhere around February.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 10, 2008, 09:22:09 pm
...even though it's currently made with Game Maker...

Still, he is actually creating something, and with gusto. Not all of us can say the same.

Quote
i fixed the PDL issue, just change event "press key" for "key down", but i didn't posted it jet, i'm working on the sprites right now, and then implement'em, so my next post would feature all the ships, i think a a week from now tops.

I expect the full game somewhere around February.

Let's not forget, Luke, Game Maker is designed to be easy to use, not to be good quality. That being said, I think you're over-reacting to the speed that this is being developed. I'd bet I could do the same thing just as fast or faster if I wanted to. The biggest part of making this game is the storyline, which he hasn't even touched on yet.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Elvish Pillager on December 10, 2008, 09:47:18 pm
...even though it's currently made with Game Maker...

Still, he is actually creating something, and with gusto. Not all of us can say the same.
*waves hand* :P


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 10, 2008, 10:03:32 pm
...even though it's currently made with Game Maker...

Still, he is actually creating something, and with gusto. Not all of us can say the same.
*waves hand* :P

Very true. EP has the only creative UQM mod in existence (that's actually playable).


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 11, 2008, 05:28:30 am
I've completed the sprite set, now is programming time. Here is a file with my full ship sprite set:

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P342KM37

The marauder seems to be too black, but that's just an optical illusion.

Quote
I'd bet I could do the same thing just as fast or faster if I wanted to.
then, why didn't you done it?

Quote
The biggest part of making this game is the storyline, which he hasn't even touched on yet.
that's right, i posted very little about storyline here, well, an idea came to me, earthlings get androsynth guardian blueprints and produce their ships, since earthlings have a different *smell*, there's no problem with the orz, I think that's a good way to put put the ship back in the main game without revealing what happened to them.
I won't post all my storyline sketches and ideas becouse I don't want to spoil the game for everybody who read this.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 11, 2008, 07:06:15 am
Let's not forget, Luke, Game Maker is designed to be easy to use, not to be good quality. That being said, I think you're over-reacting to the speed that this is being developed.

Am I? To be serious for a moment, I don't really expect this game to be completed that quickly, if ever. That's just hyperbole. I'm trying to show my appreciation for someone who is actually doing something, no matter what, that expands the SC universe. If all this ever amounts to is a melee or half a melee, that's still fine. If it was built with GameMaker that's fine too. But as far back as I can remember most people who come in talking about a sequel/mod of UQM only have story ideas and want someone to code for them, or seem more interested in debating how hard coding would be. To have someone put their money where their mouth is is quite uncommon. To have someone do it quickly is pretty unheard of. Sure, we already have melee. Buty maybe making that will inspire general_flefenz to step it up and create something else. Or maybe it'll inspire someone else. Only time will tell.

Quote
I'd bet I could do the same thing just as fast or faster if I wanted to. The biggest part of making this game is the storyline, which he hasn't even touched on yet.

Good for you, go for it. And if you don't want to make it quickly, then that's fine too. I hope your mod is finished and becomes a new addition to the very few functioning mods around. That way we all win.

Quote from: EP
*waves hand*   :P

Hey, it's one of the exceptions to the rule. Good man.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Shiver on December 11, 2008, 10:33:58 pm
But as far back as I can remember most people who come in talking about a sequel/mod of UQM only have story ideas and want someone to code for them...

I'm probably on my own on this one, but I would be in favor of giving full creative control of a Star Control fan game over to one particularly gifted writer that had no idea how to code. It might be difficult to find programmers that are willing to act as code monkeys for someone else, however.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on December 11, 2008, 11:01:36 pm
"Let's not forget, Luke, Game Maker is designed to be easy to use, not to be good quality."

Uhhhh... Care to elaborate on "good quality" ?? Quality is what one puts into somthing methinks.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 12, 2008, 12:44:00 am
Uhhhh... Care to elaborate on "good quality" ?? Quality is what one puts into somthing methinks.

Gameplay is the big one, but there's also:

1. Graphics
2. Music/sounds
3. Performance
4. Space
5. Number of different OS's it's available for

Those are the big five. The big thing that GM can't do is make a game that can run on multiple OS's, since it is limited by DirectX.

Space is also minutely affected since there are so many built-in variables and constants, most of which don't end up being used in any given game. Because of this, performance drops slightly.

More importantly, GM doesn't handle music very well. It only supports MIDI and WAV directly, which is yet another DirectX limitation. If you use MIDI, a bug in GM is noticed, freezing the game for for almost a half second before looping. If you use WAV, you take up massive amounts of space, lowering performance dramatically. Finally, if you choose to use the normal media player to use other types of music (i.e. mp3), you are unable to adjust the volume at all or use other controls, and you inevitably hear a break when the track loops, however small.

Graphics are only limited slightly: Since GM always treats transparent colors as white and instead treats the color in the bottom left corner as transparent (unadjustable), you are forced with certain sprites to add at least one more row or column to the sprite, increasing the amount of space each of these sprites takes.

Quote
Good for you, go for it

 ::)
Quote
I'd bet I could do the same thing just as fast or faster if I wanted to.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 12, 2008, 07:16:01 am
I'm probably on my own on this one, but I would be in favor of giving full creative control of a Star Control fan game over to one particularly gifted writer that had no idea how to code. It might be difficult to find programmers that are willing to act as code monkeys for someone else, however.

No, I agree. The story is integral to a good game. Give one person that authority, and possibly hook him up with a direct line to TFB for consultations/help/feedback/viewpoints. Then round up talented coders/artists/musician and have them realise it. But as you say, most voluntary coders/artists/musicians aren't going to want to be just "code monkeys", they'll want to have their say in the story as well.

Which is why we should choose the best storyteller (me) and donate an obscene amount of money to him (me). 1000€/person should be enough, sot he (I) can hire actual professionals (entertainers) to do the dirty (sexy) work. PM me for bank account number.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 12, 2008, 12:20:32 pm
I'm probably on my own on this one, but I would be in favor of giving full creative control of a Star Control fan game over to one particularly gifted writer that had no idea how to code. It might be difficult to find programmers that are willing to act as code monkeys for someone else, however.

No, I agree. The story is integral to a good game. Give one person that authority, and possibly hook him up with a direct line to TFB for consultations/help/feedback/viewpoints. Then round up talented coders/artists/musician and have them realise it. But as you say, most voluntary coders/artists/musicians aren't going to want to be just "code monkeys", they'll want to have their say in the story as well.

Which is why we should choose the best storyteller (me) and donate an obscene amount of money to him (me). 1000€/person should be enough, sot he (I) can hire actual professionals (entertainers) to do the dirty (sexy) work. PM me for bank account number.

Gee... 1000 Euro is like $1,328.54 (according to xe.com). I don't have that much money to waste. ;)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 13, 2008, 04:37:06 am
right now i'm programming the vux intruder, can someone tell me exactly how do the limpets work?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Elvish Pillager on December 13, 2008, 02:45:14 pm
right now i'm programming the vux intruder, can someone tell me exactly how do the limpets work?

When they hit a ship, they increase its turn wait and thrust wait by 1 frame each. That is, it takes one more frame between each time it turns 1/16 of a circle, and one more frame between each time you see a thruster trail. They also decrease its thrust increment (how much acceleration it gets for each ion-trail it spits out) and max speed, but their algorithm for doing that is:
1. complicated, and
2. really, really stupid. So you should make up your own.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 13, 2008, 05:01:35 pm
so, each limpet slows more and more the ship, i used to think only the first limpet did something and the others just, nothing, or should it be that way now?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Dragon on December 13, 2008, 08:58:45 pm
Quote from: general_klefenz
so, each limpet slows more and more the ship
Yup, that's it exactly.  It's devasting against a big slow ship like the Chenjesu.  If you can get a good number of limpets on it it becomes pretty pathetic (with addendums and caveats).

Quote from: general_klefenz
or should it be that way now?
I think it's best to allow multiple limpets but change the algorithm a bit.  A simple but effective way would be modify turning and acceleration exponentially by the number of limpets attached.

eg: No limpets turn speed modifier = 1 = (0.95^0)
1 limpet turn speed modifier = 0.95^1 = 0.95
2 limpets turn speed modifier = 0.95^2 = 0.9025
3 limpets turn speed modifier = 0.95^3 = 0.857375
 
Well, you get the picture, possibly a smaller number might be more like the original (0.9 or whatever).  The same could be done for the acceleration.

Looking good though :)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: grayfox777 on December 14, 2008, 12:52:28 am
How is Game Maker?  Does it give you control of just about everything? I was trying out  Multimedia Fusion Developer 2, but I decided to stop with that for now because there was some stuff that kinda annoyed me. Doesn't Game Maker have a built-in scripting language? I don't think MFD2 has something like that. Anyway,  I'm just trying to learn Python 3.0 now.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 14, 2008, 04:24:59 am
Game Maker is event driven, you drag and drop actions in the events.
And yes, it does have a scripting language, similar to C.
I already made the limpets work, now it's time for AI.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on December 14, 2008, 04:41:35 pm
Uhhhh... Care to elaborate on "good quality" ?? Quality is what one puts into somthing methinks.

Gameplay is the big one, but there's also:

1. Graphics
2. Music/sounds
3. Performance
4. Space
5. Number of different OS's it's available for

Those are the big five. The big thing that GM can't do is make a game that can run on multiple OS's, since it is limited by DirectX.

Space is also minutely affected since there are so many built-in variables and constants, most of which don't end up being used in any given game. Because of this, performance drops slightly.

More importantly, GM doesn't handle music very well. It only supports MIDI and WAV directly, which is yet another DirectX limitation. If you use MIDI, a bug in GM is noticed, freezing the game for for almost a half second before looping. If you use WAV, you take up massive amounts of space, lowering performance dramatically. Finally, if you choose to use the normal media player to use other types of music (i.e. mp3), you are unable to adjust the volume at all or use other controls, and you inevitably hear a break when the track loops, however small.

Graphics are only limited slightly: Since GM always treats transparent colors as white and instead treats the color in the bottom left corner as transparent (unadjustable), you are forced with certain sprites to add at least one more row or column to the sprite, increasing the amount of space each of these sprites takes.

Well you are describing limitations to the scripting program itself. I won't argue symantics, but "quality" to me means somthing completely different. There are "quality" games on an old 8 bit console just as there are on a more modern 32 or 64 bit system for example. Quality to me is somthing put into a product and there are definately some quality games posted over at Yoyo and various fan sites.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 15, 2008, 07:16:36 am
Well you are describing limitations to the scripting program itself. I won't argue symantics, but "quality" to me means somthing completely different. There are "quality" games on an old 8 bit console just as there are on a more modern 32 or 64 bit system for example. Quality to me is somthing put into a product and there are definately some quality games posted over at Yoyo and various fan sites.

I think the two of you are arguing about different qualities. jaychant is talking about the quality of programming, i.e how well written the code is and how well it conserves space/memory and so forth. You are talking about the actual quality of the game, which IMO isn't that closely correlated with the coding style. Yoyo games may not fulfill all of jaychants requirments for quality coding (although I've no idea if his list is something univeraslly recognized or a personal opinion), but that doesn't mean the quality of the games there are necessarily bad. A game can be quite brilliant even if it is coded in a sloppy and silly way, as long as it works.

Take EP:s example with the VUX limpet code. The code seems needlessly complicated and bothersome, and could have been written better. That doesn't mean that the game suffers, limpets still work just fine.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Shiver on December 15, 2008, 12:23:57 pm
Take EP:s example with the VUX limpet code. The code seems needlessly complicated and bothersome, and could have been written better. That doesn't mean that the game suffers, limpets still work just fine.

Maybe he'll rewrite it. If he's too not busy trying to make a planet lander boss with spacequakes, spacefires and spacelighting for his arcade game that uses UQM's engine.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 15, 2008, 12:32:19 pm
(although I've no idea if his list is something univeraslly recognized or a personal opinion)

personal opinion.

right now i'm programming the vux intruder, can someone tell me exactly how do the limpets work?

When they hit a ship, they increase its turn wait and thrust wait by 1 frame each. That is, it takes one more frame between each time it turns 1/16 of a circle, and one more frame between each time you see a thruster trail. They also decrease its thrust increment (how much acceleration it gets for each ion-trail it spits out) and max speed, but their algorithm for doing that is:
1. complicated, and
2. really, really stupid. So you should make up your own.

What is this algorithm that's complicated and  What makes it complicated (and stupid)? Just curious

Quote
jaychant is talking about the quality of programming, i.e how well written the code is and how well it conserves space/memory and so forth.

Right. GM doesn't give you as much control as say C++, so you are limited to what GM has. The biggest example is with DirectX, you:
1. Can only make games for Windows
2. Can only use MIDI and WAV sounds effectively (Actually, I think you can't even use vorbis music. The only alternative I have even been able to use is mp3.)

There is another game creation program that I have found called Game Editor. It offers a lot more control, allows you to compile the game for multiple platforms (i.e. Linux), and leaves most control to the user. It also supports more types of music. (For example, it supports vorbis (OGG) music, although not mp3.) The problem with Game Editor is that it is difficult to understand, which is why I use GM. If I understood it well enough, I would use GE.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 15, 2008, 02:03:24 pm
Maybe he'll rewrite it. If he's too not busy trying to make a planet lander boss with spacequakes, spacefires and spacelighting for his arcade game that uses UQM's engine.

This sounds hilariously awesome. When are you ready to give us a taste EP?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Megagun on December 15, 2008, 06:56:27 pm
Problem with tools such as GM is that whilst it is insanely easy to create something simple rather quickly, it can get messy and complicated rather quickly if you try to do anything more advanced, which results in extremely silly, sloppy code that most often patches some parts, yet leave many bugs open and has a few odd quirks as a result. Most likely, general_klefenz will have to rewrite a substantial amount of code if he ever wants a 'sequel' to be made. This is the reason why programmers usually design (think about) something before they start the actual coding, so that they would be able to 'get it right' the first time around. To a non-programmer, this might seem like slacking off or not actually doing anything, but the most vital parts of programming lie in the actual design behind the programming, not the actual programming (code) itself. This becomes more true the higher-level your programming language is. Cleverly designed programs can be expanded and changed quickly, poorly designed programs can't and will need a substantial amount of rewriting.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 15, 2008, 10:29:41 pm
Problem with tools such as GM is that whilst it is insanely easy to create something simple rather quickly, it can get messy and complicated rather quickly if you try to do anything more advanced, which results in extremely silly, sloppy code that most often patches some parts, yet leave many bugs open and has a few odd quirks as a result. Most likely, general_klefenz will have to rewrite a substantial amount of code if he ever wants a 'sequel' to be made. This is the reason why programmers usually design (think about) something before they start the actual coding, so that they would be able to 'get it right' the first time around. To a non-programmer, this might seem like slacking off or not actually doing anything, but the most vital parts of programming lie in the actual design behind the programming, not the actual programming (code) itself. This becomes more true the higher-level your programming language is. Cleverly designed programs can be expanded and changed quickly, poorly designed programs can't and will need a substantial amount of rewriting.

This happened with Bowser: The Betrayal. I was working WAY too fast, so I ended up having code that could be compared to Microsoft code. In short, it was/is a mess.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on December 15, 2008, 11:36:11 pm

Quote
Right. GM doesn't give you as much control as say C++, so you are limited to what GM has. The biggest example is with DirectX, you:
1. Can only make games for Windows
2. Can only use MIDI and WAV sounds effectively (Actually, I think you can't even use vorbis music. The only alternative I have even been able to use is mp3.)

There is another game creation program that I have found called Game Editor. It offers a lot more control, allows you to compile the game for multiple platforms (i.e. Linux), and leaves most control to the user. It also supports more types of music. (For example, it supports vorbis (OGG) music, although not mp3.) The problem with Game Editor is that it is difficult to understand, which is why I use GM. If I understood it well enough, I would use GE.

With the appropriate DLLs you can play OGGs etc. in GM. GM did at least allow the programmer to include DLLs which are pre compiled libraries written in C++, Visual Basic etc. But you are absolutely correct if I may surmise that you are saying GM isn't a professional game making platform. Twenty bucks buys a hobbyist's toy meant for free games to be played by anyone with a Windows PC and internet connection.

I'll have to try Game Editor.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on December 15, 2008, 11:44:13 pm
Problem with tools such as GM is that whilst it is insanely easy to create something simple rather quickly, it can get messy and complicated rather quickly if you try to do anything more advanced, which results in extremely silly, sloppy code that most often patches some parts, yet leave many bugs open and has a few odd quirks as a result. Most likely, general_klefenz will have to rewrite a substantial amount of code if he ever wants a 'sequel' to be made. This is the reason why programmers usually design (think about) something before they start the actual coding, so that they would be able to 'get it right' the first time around. To a non-programmer, this might seem like slacking off or not actually doing anything, but the most vital parts of programming lie in the actual design behind the programming, not the actual programming (code) itself. This becomes more true the higher-level your programming language is. Cleverly designed programs can be expanded and changed quickly, poorly designed programs can't and will need a substantial amount of rewriting.

We'll said dude! I couldn't agree more.

btw here's a first I believe.. First music video ever made using Game Maker? I think maybe.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6DTa31Qi2Co



Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 16, 2008, 01:44:07 am
well, i still have work to do, but here is an update of what am i doing

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=93B192TR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P1A17F0R

the second link is the source code


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on December 16, 2008, 01:58:00 am
well, i still have work to do, but here is an update of what am i doing

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=93B192TR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P1A17F0R

the second link is the source code

Just curious, why are you using "MegaUpload"? It is quite annoying to wait for 45 seconds before I can download (because I don't want to pay them <_<). I use RSU Upload (http://www.rocketsoft.gm-school.uni.cc/RSUpload.php). It doesn't have that crap, and it works well in my experience.

Also, why can't you just use a plain zip file instead of RAR files? (I also don't feel like buying Winzip, or downloading an alternative cluttered with Adware. <_<)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on December 16, 2008, 03:16:06 am
well, if you say RSU upload is better i take your word, also with the zip thing

oh, one thing i forgot to say, if you're gonna try the game remember that the only ships currently working are the cruiser and the intruder, the others sit there and do nothing


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on December 16, 2008, 06:19:57 am
Problem with tools such as GM is that whilst it is insanely easy to create something simple rather quickly, it can get messy and complicated rather quickly if you try to do anything more advanced, which results in extremely silly, sloppy code that most often patches some parts, yet leave many bugs open and has a few odd quirks as a result. Most likely, general_klefenz will have to rewrite a substantial amount of code if he ever wants a 'sequel' to be made.

I'm sure this is true, but since the Star Control universe is also lacking small simple games (barring Whack-aSpathi (http://www.ethanfleischer.com/games/spathi.html)) I still think this is a pretty nice idea. Sure, recreating an existing melee in GM may seem superflous to those who could do it in C/C++. But if nothing else it opens SC up to a wider audience, which can only be good.  And hopefully it might lead to some more small simple SC games that serve the same purpose.

Quote
This is the reason why programmers usually design (think about) something before they start the actual coding, so that they would be able to 'get it right' the first time around. To a non-programmer, this might seem like slacking off or not actually doing anything, but the most vital parts of programming lie in the actual design behind the programming, not the actual programming (code) itself. This becomes more true the higher-level your programming language is. Cleverly designed programs can be expanded and changed quickly, poorly designed programs can't and will need a substantial amount of rewriting.

You know it's great that the real programmers are taking time out of their thinking schedule to explain how one should program, but the fact  is that the SC universe doesn't have many fan based projects that have produced anything. If this guy manages to cobble together a melee, no matter how horrible the code, that still a pretty impressive achievement within this fan community. Hopefully he'll then go on to bigger things, but even if he doesn't he's still achieved something impressive to most of us. Maybe one day someone will surpise us with a sleek and well coded sequel, but I'm not really holding my breath.

Come to think of it, how many actual proper fan created programs are there in the SC fandom? On the mod side we have EP's mods of course, and Kohr-Ah Death's mods. The Cookie mod and Nicholai's mod are unfinished. And actual stand alone programs? I suppose Timewarp/TWX/TW-Lite all work on a melee basis. And Gob of course. Dragons SC1 remake that didn't make his deadline but will hopefully be finished. The above mentioned Whack a-a-Spathi. And this. I'm sure I'm missing something, but I can't put my finger on it.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Dragon on December 17, 2008, 11:57:24 am
Dragons SC1 remake that didn't make his deadline but will hopefully be finished.
Yeah it's taking an insane amount of time (mostly because of ... well.... insane design descisions).  I strongly suspect the generals will be completed before it.

I'll bump that thread 'soon as I have something pretty to show.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: grayfox777 on December 18, 2008, 03:48:45 am
well, i still have work to do, but here is an update of what am i doing

http://www.megaupload.com/?d=93B192TR
http://www.megaupload.com/?d=P1A17F0R

the second link is the source code

Just curious, why are you using "MegaUpload"? It is quite annoying to wait for 45 seconds before I can download (because I don't want to pay them <_<). I use RSU Upload (http://www.rocketsoft.gm-school.uni.cc/RSUpload.php). It doesn't have that crap, and it works well in my experience.

Also, why can't you just use a plain zip file instead of RAR files? (I also don't feel like buying Winzip, or downloading an alternative cluttered with Adware. <_<)

Megaupload offers happy hour from 9pm to 3am here. Unlimited downloads with no wait. They like you to install their toolbar though, but there are firefox extensions and such that bypass that. Your idea of using another site doesn't sound bad though either. Surprised there are still some that don't make you wait!


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: zarren3 on December 27, 2008, 04:16:48 pm
well, if you say RSU upload is better i take your word, also with the zip thing

oh, one thing i forgot to say, if you're gonna try the game remember that the only ships currently working are the cruiser and the intruder, the others sit there and do nothing

I could host your files if you want. I think that server I'm using is not fastest, but it wouldn't have 45 sec waiting time  :P
I have now about 1300Mb space

And by the way I'm making *juicy* (http://juicy.net63.net/) again! Happiness and jubilation!
Couple days ago I came here to read whats new here, and again I got inspiration to make *juicy*.
I could say (hoping that it doesnt happen to this project) that almost ALL sc-projects DIE during they're first year. Mine did too.
(yeah I know  that *juicy*s forum is dead also and I havent done nothing to get people there)

(http://juicy.net63.net/galleries/sc1_anims/Base-Destroyed-2x.gif) < some SC related project


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lachie Dazdarian on January 05, 2009, 11:24:35 pm
I never had faith in “democratic” game dev projects. Worked in several semi-team projects, and when one person (or maybe two thinking very similarly) doesn’t have the last word in creative aspect that is blindly obeyed (might sound drastic, but that’s how it has to be), it all falls apart.

What I would suggest to any SC sequel developer is to construct as much content possible, especially story wise, and then find people willing dedicate to that project with already laid out features. Of course it’s difficult, but there are people out there only interested in raw programming, music or graphics. Worked with two persons on my Barren project. Can’t explain how refreshing is to have people doing graphics and music for you without any interest to trample into your creative decisions. Not sure if there are writers out there willing to write dialogue for your creations in preset situations, but that’s the only way I can see it being done. A leader and a lot of grunts who love their role. Of course, your project must be well constructed and interesting for this to have a chance in the first place.

Let’s write a story for the new SC game together is a doomed idea.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on January 10, 2009, 08:02:48 am
ahh, coding is hard.
weeks have passed and i only coded half a guadian
but i'll go on.
here are some storyline ideas i made up:
-the androsynth, there will be an isolated outpost far from their homeworld, earthlings don't fly in guardians.
-the keel-verezy would be a race of pure energy beings that live in stars photosphere.
-after the lost of the sa-matra the ur-quan realized that they  should had never thrusted in alien technology, and that they still have a LOT of dreadnoughts and marauders to fight back the alliance.
-the spathi will be de-shielded by the ur-quan and recruited once again
-all other thralls except the yehat and androsynth will be recruited again
-the druuge will be recruited as well (they say that they are fighting under contract for the ur-quan)
-the player start in contact with the other species, but then they all get blocked by hierarchy  fleet, they divide the alliance so they can`t fight together. then you must break the blockages and free your allies. since you can't  kill such number of ship that surrounds them you have to find creative ways of doing it, like supernovas, or throwing a fleet pof something nasty to them (worse than illwrath)
-then when you get all your allies back you must coordinate a final all-or-nothing assault against he ur-quan!


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lachie Dazdarian on January 10, 2009, 03:50:23 pm
Bah! Star Control 2 Redux is all you came up with?

As much as I don't like SC3, making Ur-Quan your allies seemed like a very good idea.

Anyway, good luck with this. I definitely don't agree with the story from the get go.



Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on January 10, 2009, 05:27:10 pm
i don't know what is SC redux.
and the ur quan alies? IMO the worst idea ever. they are the bad guys. and then who or what would be the new enemy? something that destroyed thousands of galaxies through the universe and will be stopped in this particular one? that is the sort of enemy that is made without creativity, we have a good foe already.
and why should the ur quan ally? they hate everything thats not ur quan, AFS destroyed their  main battleship, and they are immune to reason. no matter if something is going to destroy the antire galaxy they wont ally.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lachie Dazdarian on January 10, 2009, 09:36:30 pm
I'm saying, you basically want SC 2 all over again, with some new events and races thrown in. We need a new approach for the start.

What's the point of playing a game that's basically repeats the story from SC 2?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on January 10, 2009, 09:59:36 pm
i don't know what is SC redux.
and the ur quan alies? IMO the worst idea ever. they are the bad guys. and then who or what would be the new enemy? something that destroyed thousands of galaxies through the universe and will be stopped in this particular one? that is the sort of enemy that is made without creativity, we have a good foe already.
and why should the ur quan ally? they hate everything thats not ur quan, AFS destroyed their  main battleship, and they are immune to reason. no matter if something is going to destroy the antire galaxy they wont ally.

Heh... I never played SC3, but it seems that it goes by the least evident details from SC2, like the Spathi's so-called "Ultimate Evil". SC3 = Worst sequel ever. ::)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Draxas on January 10, 2009, 10:09:27 pm
Impressive. Within the last half-dozen posts, you guys have perfectly illustrated why there will never be a fan sequel to SC2. Nobody can agree on what makes a worthy follow-up plot. I think this says more about the quality of TFB's storytelling than anything else; with any luck, Alex's map stunt has generated some attention.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: xenoclone on January 13, 2009, 12:28:57 am
Impressive. Within the last half-dozen posts, you guys have perfectly illustrated why there will never be a fan sequel to SC2. Nobody can agree on what makes a worthy follow-up plot. I think this says more about the quality of TFB's storytelling than anything else; with any luck, Alex's map stunt has generated some attention.

Haha. I suppose with the benefit of instant interest comes the liability of everyone having their own ideas. I suppose if I were to do a SC fan-game, I'd do something similar to how I'm implementing Xeno Versus. That is, a real short plot directly integrated into the melee game and no RPG adventure. Small side plots have less risk of upsetting people.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on January 13, 2009, 06:31:57 pm
well, since it looks like it's really imposible to make a sequel storyline without upsetting i'll follow xenoclone's advise and make a strategy game similar to SC1 and no plot, just freeplay war.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on January 13, 2009, 07:17:36 pm
Impressive. Within the last half-dozen posts, you guys have perfectly illustrated why there will never be a fan sequel to SC2. Nobody can agree on what makes a worthy follow-up plot. I think this says more about the quality of TFB's storytelling than anything else; with any luck, Alex's map stunt has generated some attention.

I think the really depressing part is how set everyone is in their ideas. I could easily play a well scripted game with Ur-Quans as main antagonists, allies or shattered fractions (i.e both). But  everyone seems to feel that theirs is the only possible way the game could be any good. I guess that is why Team Beige eventually fell apart.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: xenoclone on January 13, 2009, 08:32:57 pm
I think the really depressing part is how set everyone is in their ideas. I could easily play a well scripted game with Ur-Quans as main antagonists, allies or shattered fractions (i.e both). But  everyone seems to feel that theirs is the only possible way the game could be any good. I guess that is why Team Beige eventually fell apart.

I think this is why I like the "side plot" idea. You can avoid general trends (Ur-Quan as allies) and instead can do an isolated event. Rogue fleets that must join up to fight a common threat. Or a local wrong must be righted, etc. If a story was more on the scale of a "terrorist attack" instead of "Galactic War 3", then I'd presume *fewer* people would be offended.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Shiver on January 13, 2009, 09:00:49 pm
Quote from: Lukipela
I think the really depressing part is how set everyone is in their ideas. I could easily play a well scripted game with Ur-Quans as main antagonists, allies or shattered fractions (i.e both). But  everyone seems to feel that theirs is the only possible way the game could be any good. I guess that is why Team Beige eventually fell apart.

I would like to repeat my idea of using every able programmer who's willing to contribute as slave labor underneath one very talented writer that happens to like Star Control 2. Put up a "WE'RE LOOKING FOR WRITERS, CAN YOU WRITE?" sign on UQM's main page and I bet we'd catch one eventually.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on January 13, 2009, 09:21:22 pm
I would like to repeat my idea of using every able programmer who's willing to contribute as slave labor underneath one very talented writer that happens to like Star Control 2. Put up a "WE'RE LOOKING FOR WRITERS, CAN YOU WRITE?" sign on UQM's main page and I bet we'd catch one eventually.

You don't need to look, I'm right here. Fancy doing some coding, drone?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Elvish Pillager on January 13, 2009, 09:33:35 pm
*shoves Lukipela aside* He said a very talented writer. :P


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Shiver on January 13, 2009, 10:11:53 pm
You don't need to look, I'm right here. Fancy doing some coding, drone?

EP can attest that I make a terrible programmer.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Tim on January 14, 2009, 03:30:02 am
Well, I haven't posted on here since I was a small child. Haven't even been involved in the Star Control community, outside of ghosting it, for 11 years now? (I ran the original Star Control Online RPG.) Wow. Anyway, I was reading this topic, and it sort of inspired me to write this up.

Star Control is what inspired me to become a writer in the first place, and is the reason I have any short stories published, and any work published at all. So, I figured when I read this, I might as well throw my hat into the writer bidding war before it became too intense. :)


Backstory:
Immediately following the destruction of the Sa-Matra, the CHMMR systematically hunted down all the slave shielded planets and cracked them. The Syreen, Human, Spathi, CHMMR, and the Captain's homeworld were all freed. The CHMMR then turned their attention to the Ur-Quan and Kohr-Ah vessels. The AVATAR vessels proved more than a match for the Dreadnaught and Marauder designs. The Ur-Quan and Kohr-Ah even pushed against the CHMMR and their allies together in a push for their survival. But the Utwig, CHMMR, Yehat, and Pkunk fleets combined were too much for even the great Ur-Quan to compete with. The Ur-Quan and Kohr-Ah were scattered in the end, and their fleets torn to shreds. The Ur-Quan eventually surrendered, while the Kohr-Ah fought until their last ship in the quadrant.

The Quadrant was reborn with the New Alliance of the Free Stars, and the defeat of the Ur-Quan. With the threat neutralized, the question now became, "What do we do with them now that we have them by the tail?" The CHMMR suggested that we indoctrinate them into the New Alliance, while certain clans of the Yehat suggested the Ur-Quan be imprisoned as they had done to the Alliance. The Pkunk strongly opposed this, and suggested we free them entirely. The Syreen were apathetic to the plight of the Ur-Quan, as were the Orz. In the end, the choice fell upon the Human Captain and Humanity. (Leave this particular historical option open, for the player to decide. Whether the Captain obliterates, enslaves, or offers friendship to the Ur-Quan. Will only directly effect if the Ur-Quan are in the game and in what capacity.)

The Spathi were freed from their Slave Shield by the CHMMR, though on their request they were immediately put right back underneath of it. Several Spathi however did not wish to be encased underneath of the shield like the others. These Spathi were known as the Black Spathi Squadron, they would colonize a small planet some light years away from their homeworld, to watch over their brethren.

The Thraddash and Ilwrath were not completely annihilated by their war that the Captain set them on. Remnants remained of both, and while the Ilwrath would not submit to the Alliance or join them, the Thraddash recognized the power of the Alliance. The Ilwrath in the end destroyed themselves by throwing their troops against the Alliance. The Thraddash become members of the Alliance, some remembering that the teachings of the Captain had kept them alive, while others just wanted the chance to rebuild and avenge their defeat.

The Yehat and Pkunk cultures meshed to one with the Pkunk Queen. The breed of the Pkunk slowly faded away, while the Yehat became the predominant culture, as many had expected. However, the honor of the Yehat, and the peace and forgiveness of the Pkunk had produced a reborn Yehat. The new highly spiritual, honor bound, and slightly psychic Yehat become fantastic ambassadors for the Alliance, embodying all that is good about it.

The Utwig stayed with the Alliance, but have had no significant socio-political or weaponry advances since the wars ended. They have no interest in Alliance politics, and only concern themselves with their influence of space.

The Suppox were more than willing to stay with the Alliance after the defeat of the Ur-Quan. Having made many new allies in the Humans, CHMMR, Yehat, Pkunk, Zog-Fot-Pik, and the various other cultures that made up the Alliance, the Suppox set out to learn as much as they could from every culture and eventually create their own.

The Umgah became funny blobbies for the Alliance. Though what that means isn't really known. Contact with the Umgah is scarce at best, though the Umgah produce many biological fixes for many races in the Quadrant. Humanity in particular is able to live a significantly longer time. On occasion, someone gets some sort of 'joke' in their blood and explode.

The Syreen and Human cultures eventually intermingled with the union of Talana and the Captain. The physiological similarities made the breeding of the two cultures possible, and beneficial for the Syreen, which lacked males, in particular. Humanity eventually breeds out the Syreen culture, though Humanity reaps the benefits in absorbing the Syreen features into it's culture. Humanity advances its own development nearly two hundred years with this process, and their technology, culture, and general physical well being are increased almost ten fold.

The Shofixti culture left Delta Gorno, and set out on their way to find a new homeworld. The CHMMR suggested a planet not too far off from the Yehat sphere of influence. It turned out to be a perfect place, as the Shofixti quickly populated the planet and rebuild their star faring capabilities. Their culture has not changed much since the Yehat uplifted them, and many do not think they will.


The Slylandro while still unable to leave their star system, are visited regularly by Alliance fleets at the request of the Captain.

The Arilou once more disappear from known space, though they appear on occasion to speak with the Humans in the Sol system.

The Druuge continued to do business the way they always had, until the Alliance attempted to place restrictions on their slave trade. The Druuge took offense to this, and left the Quadrant of space. They haven't been heard from since.

The Melnorme still inhabit various Supernova stars in the Quadrant, and on occasion do business with the Alliance.

The Mycon were unable to find peaceful relations with the Alliance, due to their necessary destruction of a certain class of world, in order to rebirth their race. Their lack of any perceived notions of morality, and the lack of any understanding of what an Alliance means, caused the Alliance to have to eradicate the Mycon from the galaxy.

The VUX were unwilling to submit to the Alliance even after the defeat of the Ur-Quan and continued to fight on. The Yehat took it as their personal project to make the VUX submit. Eventually the VUX were defeated, and regulated to a small sector of space where they do not have to make any contact with other star faring races, and are allowed to live out the rest of their wretched existence.

The Zog-Fot-Pik exported Frungy to the Quadrant. That's really all they did.

The mystery of the Androsynth went unsolved for some time, and eventually the Orz completely disappeared from Alliance radars. No one is really sure what has become of them. Even after multiple searches and scans of the area, the Alliance is still not completely sure what happened to the Orz and the Androsynth.

If the Ur-Quan are destroyed, they are destroyed. If the Ur-Quan are put under a slave shield, they are underneath a slave shield where the Sa-Matra was. If the Ur-Quan are allied to the Alliance, they are regulated to just one planet, and are not allowed to build any ships unless specifically commissioned by the Alliance. They live out their lives on a single planet where their greatest defeat occurred.

 In the years after the Ur-Quan Hierarchy was humbled by the New Alliance of the Free Stars, the famous Captain that rebuilt the Alliance retired to obscurity on his homeworld. Some years after his retirement, he was asked to serve on the Council of the New Alliance of the Free Stars as the Admiral of the fleet. Though he initially denied the request, he would take them up on their offer and take up the head of the Alliance.

Fifty years pass, and the Alliance sufficiently builds up. Under the guidance of the Admiral, the Council mediates many successful peaceful talks. The Humans, CHMMR, Yehat, and Suppox all have high ranking positions on the Council. The Zog-Fot-Pik, Shofixti, Thraddash, and Utwig also have positions, but do not seem too interested in the political goings on.

After the Quadrant is built up sufficiently, the Alliance decides that it is time to clean up the mess that the Ur-Quan left throughout the Quadrant, and so the second great mission of the New Alliance of Free Stars begins. The mission to free the races that the Ur-Quan left enslaved in their wake before the battle against the original Alliance of Free Stars.

The Alliance decided that a small scouting force would be best for such a long expedition, since sending a large force would cost too many Resource Units, and be highly ineffective. An exemplary young Captain is given control of a prototypical human class Claymore vessel, and sent to begin the process.



Things that will occur in the story:
Introduction of 10 new Alien Races and 10 new Ships. Which will all be freed from the Ur-Quan slave shields.
   
Encounters with remnants of the Kohr-Ah fleet. (And the discovery of the new Doctrine.)   

Encounters with Druuge slave masters. (As they try to capture what you free.)
   
Encounters with Melnorme. (As well as the main hints of the game.
   
The Orz return and reveal the 'main bad guy of the story'. (The idea behind this isn't totally fleshed out, but the Orz are just fingers of a darker race that even the Arilou seem to fear. So, the main villain of the story would turn out to be the creatures that control the Orz. The story will explore the darker side of the fish people we all love.)


Gameplay things:
Upgrades possible for the Claymore Class, and certain escort vessels (namely Human cruisers.)

The ability to establish Star Bases in the Quadrant.

Meeting the goals of the Council of the New Alliance of Free Stars (similar to Star Control 3, except you're doing what they ask you to do.

Ability to request reinforcements from the Council, or just the ability to buy ship designs from the Council for your Star Bases.

*Traditional Star Control combat is a MUST HAVE.*


The actual details of the gameplay and story elements are kind of vague, being that I wrote this up in about 30 minutes after idea after idea just sort of struck me. I think this works for a proposal, and leaves a lot of space open, no?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Cedric6014 on January 14, 2009, 04:10:45 am
Holy crap, I spent he last 30 min composing this post, and then I see some guy called Tim has beaten me to it! Damn you Tim! Awesome ideas though. that is EXACTLY what I'm talking about

This is what I was going to say:



It’s been a while since I’ve been fired about anything Star-Control related. Last time was probably an abandoned melee league. Nothing like having people not show up to kill the fun there.

I think the UQM project has shown us that a bunch of fellows can get along and do the job. You just need the right bunch of fellows.

I’d be keen as the next person to play something, ANYthing in the Star Control universe. What Nicholai is (or was) doing was promising but I think he’s taken on too much himself and so it will take 10 years to complete.

As Shiver says, there needs to have a slave army of programmers and graphics artists subject to the whim of an all powerful creative director. With Nicholai’s project I believe it was mooted that different writers write different dialogue sets. This can work, although I suspect three are precious few of us who can write quality material. We’d all be expecting something as good as SC2.

A peer reviewed tender process would be the way to select the right people.

There are some good ideas out there for SC game plots. Invite submissions for game structure and plot. It can be anything from a re-hash of SC2 with the same old graphics and engine, to something very new and different. All it needs is buy-in from the people that are going to do the actual work.

The final selection can be a hybrid of ideas, as long as people are passionate enough to bring it to life.

Once an idea is chosen, one person is chosen to bring it to life. Possibly the originator of the idea but not necessarily. They’ll need game designing skills. Whoever is chosen is THE BOSS. The PR3 if you will. Ideally this person would write the completed plot and storyline, but not necessarily.

Next, dialogue writers tender for the privilege of being invobled in this master work. Perhaps these writers have ideas on new aliens to contribute to helf fuel their writing. Clearly this would influence the plot.

With any luck half a dozen excellent programmers, plus a couple of graphics artists are foolish enough to indenture themselves to THE BOSS for the duration. THE BOSS needs to have total creative control, even if a lot of a creative work is farmed out to writers.

I think I might open up a new thread for this, and kick it off with an idea of my own. We’ll see what comes of it (no intention of being THE BOSS though).


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Shiver on January 14, 2009, 05:24:57 am
Quote from: Cedric6014
Once an idea is chosen, one person is chosen to bring it to life. Possibly the originator of the idea but not necessarily. They’ll need game designing skills. Whoever is chosen is THE BOSS. The PR3 if you will. Ideally this person would write the completed plot and storyline, but not necessarily.

Why would this person need game design experience? I'd settle for a writer with none. I'm not sure if the plan I came up with could ever take off, but peer reviewing is something I can definitely do. The first test someone should have to pass IMO is to present us with a creative writing sample that has no connection to SC2. If they can't write a story of their own well, I don't want them writing Star Control's story.

Tim: I haven't seen any of your actual material, but your post in itself suggests that you aren't qualified to be in charge of the creation of a fan sequel. Random capitalization of words and excessive parenthesis use is not a good sign. Sorry. You are welcome to try and prove me wrong.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Tim on January 14, 2009, 06:04:07 am
Tim: I haven't seen any of your actual material, but your post in itself suggests that you aren't qualified to be in charge of the creation of a fan sequel. Random capitalization of words and excessive parenthesis use is not a good sign. Sorry. You are welcome to try and prove me wrong.
I wasn't looking to be in charge of anything, to be honest, I was just throwing out the idea. The writing was spur of the moment, so not everything was up to par on what it would be after I actually sat down to edit something. My creative processes are a little less than cognitive at times. I'm more than willing to go back and look it over, and properly edit everything into a cohesive idea - later.

I don't capitalize randomly, nor do I usually use parenthesis frequently. I capitalized where I thought a proper name should be used. I'm well aware of the fact that quadrant isn't a proper name, but it should be replaced by one. I do that while brainstorming on occasion, not uncommon for me. I added parenthesis where I was inputting a personal interjection so not to break from the line of thought completely.

e.g.: The Orz return and reveal the 'main bad guy of the story'. (The idea behind this isn't totally fleshed out, but the Orz are just fingers of a darker race that even the Arilou seem to fear. So, the main villain of the story would turn out to be the creatures that control the Orz. The story will explore the darker side of the fish people we all love.) <- This would be proper for what I was doing.

'Introduction of 10 new Alien Races and 10 new Ships. Which will all be freed from the Ur-Quan slave shields.' <- Ugly, no matter how I try to defend it. 'Star Bases' is also ugly.

The 'Things that will occur in the story:' and 'Gameplay ideas:' sections are full of ugly grammar, I know. As I said in the original post, it was just a rough idea I came up with after reading the entirety of the post. That's all, no offense taken. If anything, I'm embarrassed at how sloppy that turned out. I understand the concerns, and I don't want another Star Control 3 - nor do I want another TimeWarp.

If you're interested in seeing any of the writer's credentials for writing, in terms of actual story and depth and background, I'm more than willing to share a project that I've been working on for the past 6 years. It takes a long time for something to become in-depth and at times it can be frustrating if you're not capable of keeping that line of thought for a long time. I've changed around the exact details of this story so many times I can't count it, but everything has stayed together. It would just be the reference dictionary, and background time line that I created for myself, so that I don't stray too far away from my own canonical ideas.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on January 14, 2009, 06:35:46 am
EP can attest that I make a terrible programmer.

Then we'd make a terrific team. I can even do the gfx on the side if you do the music.

Regarding the game design experience thing, it might be handy for the writer to at least visualise the way his story is going to be presented (i.e a rough engine draft). But then we have another hard point where he turns over the story to someone else who designs an engine that works well with the story.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Cedric6014 on January 14, 2009, 08:42:05 am
I'm not sure I'd consider what Tim wrote an example of his writing, it was more a storyline or synopsis. The caps for chmmr and avatar arent necessay but who cares.

I'd encourage anyone to post their ideas so good onya Tim, I'd be keen to see an actual story of yours.

I think there are some good ideas in what you've posted.The one I most like are the black spathi squadron, and the orz menace as the new antagonist.   


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Dragon on January 14, 2009, 09:02:05 am
Just thought I'd second what Cedric said - nothing meaningful to add though.  This is quite interesting!


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Cedric6014 on January 14, 2009, 09:15:48 am
I've opened up a new thread in General Discussion:
http://forum.uqm.stack.nl/index.php?topic=4388.0 (http://forum.uqm.stack.nl/index.php?topic=4388.0)



Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on January 14, 2009, 12:22:11 pm
Quote
The Mycon were unable to find peaceful relations with the Alliance, due to their necessary destruction of a certain class of world, in order to rebirth their race. Their lack of any perceived notions of morality, and the lack of any understanding of what an Alliance means, caused the Alliance to have to eradicate the Mycon from the galaxy.

This is the one thing I don't like. From dialogue, it seems that the Mycon joined the Hierarchy because they knew they couldn't defeat them. So I would assume they would attempt to join the Alliance, as they cannot defeat them.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Tim on January 14, 2009, 01:18:31 pm
Quote
The Mycon were unable to find peaceful relations with the Alliance, due to their necessary destruction of a certain class of world, in order to rebirth their race. Their lack of any perceived notions of morality, and the lack of any understanding of what an Alliance means, caused the Alliance to have to eradicate the Mycon from the galaxy.

This is the one thing I don't like. From dialogue, it seems that the Mycon joined the Hierarchy because they knew they couldn't defeat them. So I would assume they would attempt to join the Alliance, as they cannot defeat them.
Maybe, I cleaned up the post in the post that Cedrick made. When I gave it a little thought, from the picture that I painted in the backstory, the Alliance wouldn't have eradicated the Mycon. Instead, I added that they would regulate them to a single planet like the VUX and Ur-Quan.

I also gave this a little thought last night, before I went to sleep. Every project that I've ever worked on, whether it be a short story, novel, article, technical writing, etc. I have always had creative input from someone else. One person should not be in control of a project like this, it should be a creative and community effort - that everyone decides on as a whole beforehand what the main objective of the project should be. People should be regulated to specific tasks that they want to be regulated to.

For example, there should be no less than two main writers. You need someone to bounce ideas off of when writing, no matter how good you are. No one is capable of thinking of everything, but two people are capable of thinking of a lot more together than they ever would be by themselves.

Two people should be in charge of writing, two people should be in charge of music, two people should be in charge of graphics, and two people should be in charge of coding - at least. No one's perfect, and someone that's just as enthusiastic about something as you are, can provide a lot more quality to the end that you're seeking.

In otherwords, no overlord, group effort. It turns out better. Just make sure everyone lays out deadlines with the group - realistic deadlines. I'm sure someone else can regulate things and explain how to regulate tasks much more clearly, but it's just something I was thinking about.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on January 14, 2009, 06:05:43 pm
*shoves Lukipela aside* He said a very talented writer. :P

Yeah, you're right. Clearly this is a job for Death_999. (http://forum.uqm.stack.nl/index.php?topic=4032.0)


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Cedric6014 on January 14, 2009, 08:10:13 pm

I also gave this a little thought last night, before I went to sleep. Every project that I've ever worked on, whether it be a short story, novel, article, technical writing, etc. I have always had creative input from someone else. One person should not be in control of a project like this, it should be a creative and community effort - that everyone decides on as a whole beforehand what the main objective of the project should be. People should be regulated to specific tasks that they want to be regulated to.

For example, there should be no less than two main writers. You need someone to bounce ideas off of when writing, no matter how good you are. No one is capable of thinking of everything, but two people are capable of thinking of a lot more together than they ever would be by themselves.

Two people should be in charge of writing, two people should be in charge of music, two people should be in charge of graphics, and two people should be in charge of coding - at least. No one's perfect, and someone that's just as enthusiastic about something as you are, can provide a lot more quality to the end that you're seeking.

In otherwords, no overlord, group effort. It turns out better. Just make sure everyone lays out deadlines with the group - realistic deadlines. I'm sure someone else can regulate things and explain how to regulate tasks much more clearly, but it's just something I was thinking about.

I always envisaged creative input from a  variety of sources, with some people taking responsibility for writing different parts, like dialogue for some alien races. I am worried about having too many chiefs though.

I agree that to be successful, this would need the passion of multiple creative people.But I think someone needs the authority to make the final call in a dispute. Unless the creative group votes on it - maybe thats the answer

Also, I'm now a bit uneasy about the thread I made over in General Discussion.  The whole point of this excercise is to provide new and exciting surprises ina  new game. Doesnt seem smart to meticulously plan every new and exciting surprise on a forum that almost any SC Fan who would play it is going to read.

Strikes me that we should just find the right people and entrust the story building to them. That way we get to play a new game and not know the plot in advance.

I might close down that thread


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Shiver on January 14, 2009, 11:29:40 pm
A community effort would turn out the way TimeWarp did. Find a project leader or end up with a mess.


Quote from: Lukipela
Yeah, you're right. Clearly this is a job for Death_999.

I'm sure he could give some valuable input on gameplay or story, but D9 doesn't qualify for project lead either IMO. I enjoy his fan fic, but his writing is nowhere near SC2 quality.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lachie Dazdarian on January 14, 2009, 11:54:07 pm
I actually like Tim's idea. It's similar to the path I have in mind. I'm deeply convinced that replaying SC 2 in any way is a very, very bad idea. We need a new main foe, not Ur-Quans all over again.

But I don't agree with your second post and I'm with Shiver on this. Democracy in ambitious game design projects DOES NOT WORK. Especially if this is a fan made project.

Once again, I think this will only work if someone (one, two persons) steps in with a notable amount of already done work, preferably completed melee engine and start of the actual game, interesting premise (that won't pull off the majority of fans) and some quality gfx. After that, if the project deserves it, interested parties will start to offer their work and will only feel a need to exercise their creative freedom in the preset framework. And this only works when someone comes in with a notable amount of work done and an attitude that he/she knows what he/she wants.

Anyway, I would like to see more people interested in making various smaller games in SC 2 universe. That can work.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Cedric6014 on January 15, 2009, 12:12:25 am
What's wrong with the melee engine?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Tim on January 15, 2009, 12:52:08 am
TimeWarp turned out like it did because too many people had too much input, and too many ideas. I wasn't suggesting a democracy, except between two creative minds in each section. The overall creative direction should be decided BEFORE the project even starts, and should stick to the basic design. I suppose it could be sized down to just two people behind the primary creative processes, but I don't believe that it can be successfully done as a fan project with just one person - unless that one person is doing the majority of the work. At least, I've never had any success with just one person in control.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on January 15, 2009, 03:00:12 pm
Hmm, if you want to keep the story fairly hush hush, how are you going to attarct willing coders/artists and so forth? And if one of these artists/coders/so forth doesn't like your story, how do you ensure that they don't blabber it all over the net? I seem to recall Team Beige having enormous problems with this, new team members would often spill story detauils, which would mean having to rewrite the story once more.

The idea of small sequels/prequels seems quite good. That's kind of how the current SC:BEL game is functioning, just enriching the universe by playing out stories that are only tangentially related to in-game events.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Elvish Pillager on January 16, 2009, 01:57:27 am
Yeah, you're right. Clearly this is a job for Death_999. (http://forum.uqm.stack.nl/index.php?topic=4032.0)
Naturally, I was implying that it was a job for me (http://eli.cedarswampstudios.org/stories).

Nah. I would probably make the story too serious. :-\

On the secrecy business, I'd say - who cares? The only people who are hurt by story details being spilled are the users, and if they don't want to hear, they don't have to listen.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Cedric6014 on January 17, 2009, 12:58:57 am
well, since it looks like it's really imposible to make a sequel storyline without upsetting i'll follow xenoclone's advise and make a strategy game similar to SC1 and no plot, just freeplay war.


An SC1 remake would be super-cool in it's own right but don't let the opinions of a few others put you off doing what you really want to do. The SC community has all the requisite talent and resource for creating a SC sequel. It's just a matter of organising it all somehow


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Lukipela on January 17, 2009, 08:43:58 pm
On the secrecy business, I'd say - who cares? The only people who are hurt by story details being spilled are the users, and if they don't want to hear, they don't have to listen.

It would seem Cedric does, since he is worried about it. I partly agree with you, but I can certainly see his point too. I suppose it all depends on how well constructed the game is otherwise.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on January 17, 2009, 10:26:17 pm
All right, i'm gonna make a strategy game like SC1. The battle engine is ready, now is time for the AI.
I´ve alredy posted a file with the GM source, so if you can code in that language (similar to basic) code the AIs.
There are 25 AI, and I just coded 2, the Earthling and the Vux.
The sprites are ready, I'm going to code a strategy star cluster.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on January 19, 2009, 03:28:54 am
...(similar to basic)...

Isn't GML a lot more like C than BASIC?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on January 20, 2009, 04:25:30 am
actually it has elements of both of them


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on January 20, 2009, 05:39:32 pm
actually it has elements of both of them

I haven't noticed any BASIC elements. What are they?


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: Mentalflows on January 26, 2009, 11:16:58 pm
Hello!

Well, i was at old team that released last official release :) ver. 0.5
In 2000 i left probject, because of diploma. And i didn't come back, due to the only reason - no project leader.
The story of project was simple: There was a lider and one of the founders - theFly. While he was near - project moved forward..slowly, but forward. After 0.5 version he left project "for some time" and never came back. That was real start of the end. Team Biege and etc - all these things were formed after that. After that project never had real project leader. There were few people that tried to work/mind together. Engine of 0.5 version of melee was enough to start work on full game. Basic AI was implemented, so the last task - bugs fixing. I'm sure that problem was - no real progress on game, but improvment / tuning / featuring of melee. It can be endless story actualy. But melee is only part of game.

BTW, at theFly times.....there was not democracy. And that's the only way to success. Democracy is the way to anarchy and chaos. Especially at IT projects. There must be person, who can finalize all thoughts and create the vision of next things. Or you will get few "almost imdependent" groups :)

If i would like to start from zero:
1) downloaded v0.5 of timewrap (or first unofficial update with basic AI), but not any other later releases - it was wrong way. it was way of Melee-Game, but not the game that has melee.

2) ported it to SDL (simple direct media), because allegro is "toy". Btw, there was a man who almost ported to SDL, "kboom", if i didn't miss something.

3) started to work on game part, because melee is enought.


Or as other variant - used graphics from TimeWrap. You will not be able to collect all 3D models, but all graphics - bitmaps with transparent mask. Quite easy task to convert for any favorite format. Of course with credits to TimeWarps and peoples who drew it - Tsing and others. Why that graphics? I think it's still good quality....for current days too.


- There is a previous fan-based effort to create a sequel, which is called TimeWarp (http://timewarp.sourceforge.net/). The project stalled years ago, but you might be able to scrounge up some helpers over on their forum (http://timewarp.sourceforge.net/forum/index.php), if there's still anyone left. Timewarp demonstrates some of the difficulties inherent in creating a sequel this way. They managed to get the melee off the ground, but the actual game mechanics and story dragged on for years and pretty much never amounted to anything. Different opinions on story and gameplay issues eventually led to the project splitting off into several directions, none of which amounted to more than several melee engines.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: RTyp06 on January 26, 2009, 11:24:54 pm
actually it has elements of both of them

I haven't noticed any BASIC elements. What are they?

No GML isn't like BASIC. It's syntax is more of a hybrid between Delphi and C++.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: jaychant on January 26, 2009, 11:50:59 pm
actually it has elements of both of them

I haven't noticed any BASIC elements. What are they?

No GML isn't like BASIC. It's syntax is more of a hybrid between Delphi and C++.

I didn't think so.


Title: Re: why don't we make it ourselves?
Post by: general_klefenz on January 29, 2009, 02:26:23 am
well whatever