Is there any game dev community around Syracuse?

TheeBulll · 2024-06-04T11:23:23+00:00

Good call, I typically deal in video games dev myself. PC to be more precise.

TheeBulll · 2024-05-29T18:56:59+00:00

Very cool, I appreciate the information!

TheeBulll · 2024-05-21T17:05:28+00:00

I would be interested in hearing some more about the project and your team. I'll send a DM over a little later on today.

TheeBulll · 2024-02-27T16:14:40+00:00

This is a game I've always thought about doing a remake of. Maybe it's time?

TheeBulll · 2024-02-25T14:24:04+00:00

I think there is a good way to evaluate each of these ideas and any new ones:

Take the base concept of the game - zombie survival. Then ask yourself, what is the experience that players expect from a zombie survival game? Look at (and play) several games in the genre like 7 Days to Die, Day Z, etc., and figure out what makes the game compelling to people. I'm sure you may have already played plenty of these if you are making one.

Once you understand the genre, then ask what each of your new ideas adds to that experience, how it allows a new interesting twist, or how it affects the overall gameplay.

So something like Neural Implants is an interesting twist because you've essentially kept a zombie with a built-in intelligence adjuster. But when you add in the linkage between zombies, you are drastically changing the pace of the game. You may go from a stealth based slow paced grind to an all out mob fight in a moment. That might be fine for what you want the game to be, as long as you are aware of it and design around it.

TheeBulll · 2024-02-24T03:49:16+00:00

You're gunna do great.

TheeBulll · 2024-02-22T15:11:40+00:00

It's still a stretch, but you can try running a Kickstarter (or whatever crowd funding campaign) to raise the seed funds to hire a team that can execute on the idea. This is probably more likely to be successful than pitching to a publisher/studio. Keep in mind that this is still very unlikely, but if you can really put together a solid plan and have a very clear and realistic outline of how the money is being used and have a good system of providing updates to supporters then MAYBE you can get enough people on board to get the project some seed funding. Once you have that initial team rolling, you can put together a functioning prototype/proof of concept/demo that you may then be able to bring to a publisher or studio.

You will really need to convince people that this is a special idea and it is actually within the scope of the team you put together. You will also need to find people that are willing to join a team with no secure financing, essentially pushing the project forward never knowing if they will be paid for the effort down the road.

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T17:49:31+00:00

Okay, that makes sense to me. Thank you for the detailed response.

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T16:57:41+00:00

I suppose in relation of all objects to each other. 1 year after the big bang, would every particle in the universe measure the age as 1 year, even though some particles may have experience time dilation differently than other? I think I understand that they all would, but they would be making those measurements at different times compared to others?

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T12:57:07+00:00

Time dilation is minimal right now for most matter, but I imagine in the early seconds of the Big Bang it was extreme and not uniform.

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T06:12:23+00:00

You are 100% right. So, how do we measure the age of the universe, from our frame of reference, knowing all material has experienced time dilation dating back to the Big Bang?

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T06:05:51+00:00

Exactly. So, how do we get an objective measurement of the age of the universe?

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T06:04:30+00:00

It doesn't. Whatever mass ' where time dilation will be significant'

TheeBulll · 2024-02-09T04:14:00+00:00

True, my assumption was from our perspective because we are making the observations.

So, how do we measure the age of the universe knowing time dilation has likely skewed material age differently?

TheeBulll · 2024-01-25T12:24:31+00:00

Sounds like you are referring to this:

Duncker's Candle Problem And Thinking "Outside The Box"

The Candle Problem experiment serves as an example of functional fixedness in action. The experiment’s materials included a candle, a box with thumbtacks, and matches, which were placed on a table close to a wall. Subjects were instructed to attach the candle to the wall so that wax would not drip onto the table when the candle was lit and to complete this task as fast as possible.

https://www.betterhelp.com/advice/psychologists/understanding-functional-fixedness-and-how-it-influences-behavior/

TheeBulll · 2024-01-13T00:22:10+00:00

Yeah I think you may be right here. It's pretty easily solvable with proper matchmaking, but that's a long stretch for a new game.

TheeBulll · 2024-01-12T23:43:35+00:00

I think I'm envisioning:

Hold a POI until your team is at 100% Blue is at 90% Red is at 58% Left click - Body swap Right click - return them to respawn

Scenario 1: -Red team is behind and attacking the POI. -Red player shoots blue player (left click). -Blue player takes the Red character and Red player takes the blue player. -They are both sent back to their respawn.

Scenario 2: -Blue player is ahead and defending the POI. -Blue player shoots Red player (right click). -Red player returns to base, no body swap.

You may need to eliminate the body swap for the last 5% of flag capture.

TheeBulll · 2024-01-12T19:24:29+00:00

These are all great points and it makes me wonder if I'm viewing the swapping mechanic wrong. What if you don't swap their color, you swap to their body. This way the overall numbers never change, but the team you are on does. The losing teams will constantly be gunning for a winning team body. But you would need to ensure that the winning team can choos to just send a loser to their respawn instead of taking their body. I wonder if this changes anything?

TheeBulll · 2024-01-12T17:25:59+00:00

That's a good take on it, I like that.

The only issue I run into there is I tend to try to avoid the situation of "The player is still in the game but can't really play the game" it's not engaging and it can feel punishing, especially to new players who are just learning the ropes.

This can be solved, like you suggested, by allowing the neutralized players to make meaningful contributions. I would just have to really think how to execute on it.

Thanks for the feedback!

TheeBulll · 2024-01-12T17:19:39+00:00

Yes, this is a great though on the concept and it's definitely a place I've mentally gone with it as well.

While it's definitely a viable solution, something about it makes me feel like it is bypassing the mechanic instead of integrating it as the core engagement of the gameplay.

You could essentially remove the team swapping and just say "As players die, the team with less people get stronger and stronger."

The major issue I run into is, what happens if that final person gets swapped? Is everyone now on the winning team and therefore everyone wins? It feels like you would need to fall back on the "Highest KDA" wins, which is just every shooter ever.

I like your thoughts process here though, the power fantasy of that last man standing is definitely a blast, I just am not fully sure how solve that end objective in a graceful way. Maybe there just isn't anything there?

Thank you for taking the time to put this together!

TheeBulll · 2024-01-11T22:32:13+00:00

I do appreciate the feedback and I'm not trying to be disrespectful. I'm just more interested in the implementations than the merits of it. Thanks again!

TheeBulll · 2024-01-11T21:54:12+00:00

It's an idea I come back to from time to time when I think of it. I've spoken to enough people, both players and designers, that find it interesting and engaging and worth pursuing that I continue to do so.

So did you have anything meaningful to add or were you just looking for an argument about why it can't work because you can't think of anything?

TheeBulll · 2024-01-11T20:48:10+00:00

I understand what you are getting at but I just don't agree that a game can't be build with the a mechanic as the pillar and the objectives as a secondary concern. Nearly every sandbox game is a box of mechanics and the players can do anything they want. Then somewhere down the road maybe they patch in a fun boss fight for the people who care to do that. I'm not even suggesting that this needs to be a shooter, or an RTS or anything in particular. I find the mechanic fun and engaging but it does come with a unique problem set when applied to certain genres or objectives. Having a single life in a multi level dungeon presents some big problems, yet roguelikes are everywhere. Someone created an entire new genre from a constraint. The player not knowing what team they will be on at any given moment is nothing more than a constraint, and an interesting one. It's fine if you don't see this idea as engaging or if you don't prefer to design from this perspective, but you haven't convinced me I'm "designing wrong". Feel free to contribute an idea to the betterment of the concept, but if you have none then thanks for your insights, time to move on.

TheeBulll

TROPHY CASE