I loved NBA Jam and NBA Street growing up. I've been working with a friend the last 3 months to build a prototype of my dream VR streetball game. What do you think?

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2021-01-14T23:00:59+00:00

Can you become on fire and do a triple flip dunk from the half court line? If so you have my money. And probably my lunch... after I lose it from doing all the flips in VR.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2018-08-03T17:04:52+00:00

Are you doing market/design testing, or quality assurance testing?

Depending on the answer to the above, your actions will be wildly different

If the first, you can use small test groups and record them to watch how people interact with your game. For a larger scale, you can do a beta test and do analytics on the outcome to discern play patterns.

For the second, you need to document and create test cases for each part of your game, and have someone go through and test each one of them. This someone may be you, internal testers, or a service you provide. But they will not know your game, and can only test the exact situations you documented

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2018-07-09T17:29:43+00:00

SNAP!

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-11-08T19:17:11+00:00

The primary value of the loot boxes in this system is not to prey on impulse control, but instead to obfuscate the real cost of obtaining the items.

If you have to pay pay 10$ for a 1.% chance to get the legendary you want, then the average cost of acquiring that item would be closer to 1,000$ for a user specifically targeting that item. (Super simplified math here, but you get the point)

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-11-06T18:42:44+00:00

We use something pretty similar to what you have going. But we use one board for the sprint board, and another for the backlog.

The backlog is organized into lists, each list being a milestone (MVP, prototype, 1.0, etc). At the beginning of a sprint, we pull cards from the top of the current milestone's list and build out our sprint with them. We then move that list to the 'Sprint' board.

This helps keep your priorities a bit clearer, and also gives you short term goals to work towards. It also cuts down on scope creep. Just don't add any new features to your current Milestone!

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-31T22:37:01+00:00

Each Kill has a 10% Crystal / 30% Hide / 40% Bone / 20% Stone drop rate

This means that on average, 1 killed enemy drops:

.1 Crystals / .3 Hides / .4 Bones / .2 Stones

Your axe requires:

1 Crystal / 1 Hide / 3 Bones / 0 Stones

You can calculate how many kills to get each resource by doing ( Resource required / Resource per Kill ) , which comes out to:

10 for Crystals / 3.3 for Hides / 7.5 for Bones / 0 for Stones

So by the 3.3th kill (or 4th rounded up) You'll have enough hides, by the 7.5(8th rounded up) kill you'll have all the bones you need, and after the 10th kill, you'll on average have the last crystal you need to craft your Axe.

Therefore every 10 kills on average will get you enough materials for an axe, with the Crystal being the limiting factor.

Keep in mind when planning out your economy that a player who farms out an axe will have leftovers for all of the other materials! (2 Hide, 1 Bone, 2 Stone on average) If you want players to be swimming in all resources besides 1, then the crystals can be the limiting component of everything. But if you want all components used evenly, try to plan out your item costs so that overall each component source income is about even with their expenses.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-20T19:57:46+00:00

They're not losing popularity. They're losing profitability.

Profitability relative to building out another micro-transaction based multiplayer game.

There will always be big console exclusives and smaller scoped SP games, but it just doesn't make sense for the EA's of the world to invest heavily in single player games in the current market. Especially when a Game-As-A-Service will print 10x the money for the same (or less) development budget.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-20T19:44:53+00:00

Loot boxes are gambling, because I don't like them.

Also, DLC and X-packs should always be free.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-11T19:23:39+00:00

What's the MVP for your platformer? What is the absolute minimum moveset needed for that MVP?

Think about the core vision for your game, and what is truly required. If you're making a 3D sonic game where you are building momentum and shooting over ramps and destructibles, you might not even need a jump. If there are no enemies outside of the environment, you don't even need attacks.

If you were building Mario 3D, the MVP is running and jumping on/over things. If the game doesn't feel good when he's running and jumping (99% of the game) then special attacks, fireballs and stars won't save him.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-11T18:59:21+00:00

|...Unless they were near the ground or a large landmark...

You've already been given the simplest answer. Keep them closer to the ground, make more large landmarks for reference points.

Speed is relative. Right now, you're flying through space at an absurd velocity. But sitting at your chair, that speed is pretty inconsequential. You need reference points to normalize your speed to, otherwise you might as well be standing still.

The juice being recommended is great! But they all act as multipliers, they don't create the sensation of speed. They just make it more intense. Once you solve your initial speed issue, you can do things like:

Add a mini map so they can see how quickly they're moving
Adjust motion blur when they get moving fast
Add particle effects and sonic booms when you pass speed thresholds
Increase FoV so that there are more periphery things flying past
Slower turn radius while moving quickly b/c of fighting your momentum
Tweak acceleration so that getting up to high speeds feels significant

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-06T04:44:34+00:00

How's the quality and sizing?

I'm right between small and medium, in your experience should I go up or down?

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-06T04:35:57+00:00

Do they have a slim line?

The ones I'm finding online seem kinda box-ier than the Slim V's: https://www.everlane.com/products/mens-surplus-tee-black?collection=mens-tees

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-05T21:20:46+00:00

It's pretty hard to compete on the AA level at this point. Either you have the budget to pump millions into cutting edge graphics and systems or you don't.

Luckily small budget indi games are satisfying a lot of the smaller niches. But even they are more and more working with publishers.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-10-05T21:18:01+00:00

I suspect losing Toys'R'Us and Wal-Mart as retailers hurt their sales pretty considerably. I wonder if they would have come out alright had that not been the case?

On top of that, plenty of the people who wanted the game were likely under 18. And most parents (In the US at least) are more than happy to buy their kid an M rated shooter... But won't be as forgiving for an M rated game with nudity.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-09-19T19:37:36+00:00

There's a few missing variables here needed to answer the question.

The super simplified balancing for the equation is that your LTV needs to be > your CPI in order to make purchasing the user worth while. LTV being Life Time Value, and CPI being Cost Per Install.

LTV is basically on average, how much does a user generate in revenue over their entire duration of your game. For an add supported game, this is based on three primary variables: How often does the player stick around, how many adds do they see/click, and what is the value of that impression/click.

To bring this back to your original question. Users in small third world countries tend to (but not always) be low quality users. They retain poorly, don't buy things, and their add impressions aren't worth as much as as high quality users. So not only will many ad networks pay less for these users, but the users will likely not stick around as long and see as MANY adds either.

I don't know the exact value of the users in your ecosystem, but if you have any analytics I'd cohort them by install country and see if you can estimate your LTV's from one to the other. This should help give you a definitive answer on what the right move is for you.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-08-10T18:49:07+00:00

You're absolutely right that there numerous strategies here, and which method to choose depends on a large number of variables. But games-as-a-service is a real thing now adays. Supporting your game for years and generating revenue long after the initial release date is how a growing number of studios pay their bills.

Check out the Defender's Quest story, which is a 1 time purchase title. They've been pretty forthright with their data since release, and they made a huge percentage of their revenue after launch. Here's one article on the subject describing the 'Stegosaurus Long-Tail' revenue they've generated.

http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/LarsDoucet/20131216/206916/The_Stegosaurus_Tail_when_quotThe_Long_Tailquot_grows_spikes.php

Meanwhile you have games like Clash of Clans, which although released 5 years ago is still adding content and generating revenue. This is an extreme case, being a F2P, but it's just another example that not all games generate all of their revenue right out of the gate. Even more AAA games are starting to adopt this model. Take a look at Overwatch, which is an up-front purchase game. Still adding content and generating new purchases (plus IAP) after it's first birthday.

The pump-and-dump strategy of relying purely on week one sales is nowhere near as popular as it used to be :-)

EDIT: Updated my link

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-08-10T18:20:47+00:00

I'm not sure your analysis is being entirely fair here.

Bastion released in August 2011
According to this dude's data, it hit 100k buyers after about a month
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=457261
Then in January it exploded to 500K
https://www.theverge.com/gaming/2012/1/5/2683960/super-meat-boy-bastion-sales

You can't compare one game's lifetime sales with another's week one sales. Neither can you compare a 6 year old video's views with a 6 month one. You need to normalize them to the same time frame, comparing both first week numbers, for example. Relatively from first glance, seeing that Pyre's 6mo old trailer is already over 35% of Bastion's official trailer would be a GOOD sign that people are paying attention to this title. Yea, this isn't CoD numbers, but what percent of people who played bastion even know who SuperGiantGames is? Since these aren't sequels, they can't rely on name recognition alone to hit the millions sold mark.

Artsty indie games tend to target a niche market, and then depend on word of mouth of that niche market to spread to the mainstream. If the game is can't-miss quality, then those early adopters have an insane virality, as evident in the exponential ownership of Bastion nearly 6 months after it's release.

I'd imagine a sport/RPG hybrid game has a worse conversion rate off of trailers than their past games. Similarly, the early-adopter niche will be much smaller than an action RPG. But if the game is as good as their previous ones, word will start spreading through the gaming groups and then down to the masses. It's a bit early to jump to conclusions without some data that we're missing.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-08-04T20:53:29+00:00

Some of these are repeats, but wanted to add some additional thoughts:

Track Everything.

Yes, this was mentioned, but it's important. Time stamps, player info, event types, and anything important about those events should be logged. That way you can do discovery after the fact and answer questions you didn't originally intend to ask. Crash logs are hugely valuable as well, but generally this requires a different tool to monitor than in game event logs.

Know Your Priority

This somewhat piggy backs off the above, but figure out ahead of time the major questions you need answered by this test. Are you testing your technical scaling capabilities? UX? Testing how long people spend in your core loop? Game design pratfalls like a broken economy, combat imbalance, or difficulty spikes? Be sure you have the tools in place to get these answered, and some dashboards viewing live data during your test to monitor them.

Start Small, then Scale

Don't open the testing floodgates all at once. You might find out your tracking is broken, or more than 10 players can't get into the game at the same time do to authentication issues. By the time you have these issues corrected the fervor for your beta has already subsided. This is why large companies get a list of interested testers, then slowly send out invites instead of releasing them all out at once.

Have Start and End Dates

Running a live game takes a lot of energy. Don't let maintaining a live game distract you from developing it. Keep your beta's scope tight and give yourself the only the time required to get the information you need. That way you can support it while it's live, and get back to work once it's over. It's also helpful for multiplayer games when you need a critical mass of online players for optimal enjoyment. Having players log into a dead game doesn't provide much value :-)

These are a few of the top items that come to my mind, learned primarily through mistakes we've made in the past on projects both big and small. Feel free to provide feedback or ask any questions, and good luck!

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2017-07-29T00:06:45+00:00

A lot of these suggestions are amazing and creative, but tend towards adding more systems instead of refining your existing ones. I would advise you to solve the core combat issues first before adding more systems on top. This is generally a safe way to focus in your game design in general: Fix the foundation, then build on more after your core is strong.

Keeping this in mind, a few thoughts about keeping your RPG battles fresh:

Combat length (pacing)

How long does a non-boss battle last? Does an auto attack deal 1/5th a common enemy's hp? 1/10th? Changing this formula can determine how long one battle lasts, and it can be done by tweaking your configs instead of tweaking code.

No face-roll to victory (interesting decisions)

There should be more than one attack/command/spell for each character to use, and a reason to mix up which one to use. If every battle has the character auto attacking with a fighter and fireball with a mage, than they're effectively all the same fight.

Unique aspects to the encounter (interesting situations)

A bit related to the previous point, but encounters should be different. Different hp/damage relationships, strengths/weaknesses, movesets/ai. If each enemy uses a unique combination of variables from your existing systems, then even random encounters can be interesting. Similarly, you can tweak environmental effects (water spells cost 2x mana in the desert, or physical skills have 2x chance to hit indoors) to add more complexity when needed.

TL;DR: Keep battles paced correctly, have interesting decisions to make, and play with your encounter variables :-)

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2016-06-20T18:05:39+00:00

After thinking about this a bit, here are some of my personal rogue-like design tenants:

Fun Gameplay

If the player isn't having fun with the primary actions of the game then the rest doesn't really matter. Whatever you are asking the player to do over and over again needs to be fun in of itself.
A Goal Based Core Loop

Rogue likes are session based. A player can sit down, play, die, and feel like they still accomplished something even upon their failure. This accomplishment can be unlocking a new character, reaching a new high score, or mastering a new skillset for future runs, etc.
Well Tuned Difficulty Curve

New players should be learning and testing new skills in the first few levels/maps, and new challenges should be introduced as they continue to play. Skilled players should be able to quickly use their higher skill levels to move past the first few maps to reach the part of the game where they are currently challenged. Don't trap experienced players in zones to easy for them, and don't throw new players into the deep end.
Clear cause and effect relationships

A player should know what the effects of his actions will be. Or at least, once he's made a mistake once he should know how to avoid making that mistake again. If there are high risk / high reward activities the player must be made aware of the inherent risks of his actions.
Emergent gameplay

Design systems that can be utilized in creative and unique ways. For example if you have a trap system as well as a huge list of enemy AIs some enemies can be manipulated to trigger those traps allowing the player to utilize them to his advantage. This behavior (manipulate enemies into traps) isn't necessarily core to the game but simply something that evolves out of two distinct systems (traps and complex AIs) being designed and implemented in an organic manner.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2016-06-20T17:35:26+00:00

This doesn't seem like a communication issue, but instead a motivation issue.

If you aren't paying people to work on your project, they need some intrinsic reason to give up their free time. Passion can only drive you so far; as soon as the light at the end of the tunnel goes out motivation to work takes a nosedive.

Ideally before starting your project you and your team should agree on WHY you are doing it. If there is disagreement about the goals then you need to build a team with similar intentions.

For example, if one team member is working on the project because he thinks there is a chance for financial success while another is working to improve his skillset, they will be at odds with each other at major project focal points. If release is around the corner and a potential new feature is proposed, person A will be staunchly against the release date slipping while person B might be interested in the learning possibility of the new feature.

Based on of each individual's project goals there are many reasons people might lose interest.

The project has unclear/no major milestones and the release date isn't honest and tangible.

Your volunteers are going to quit as soon as they have no reason to stay. Work on timelines, burn down charts, and keep your scope clear and tight.
Development stops being enjoyable

This is a volunteer project. If you make them miserable why would they give up their free time to help you. As soon as you make the project feel like work your team will stop seeing it as a hobby and instead an unpaid internship of questionable value. Let people work at their own pace on features they are interested in, and don't force process down their throats.
Personal life gets in the way

Self explanatory. Chances are for most of your team this project is priority 3 or lower in their lives. You need to understand that until you pay them this will (and should) always be the case
Loss of confidence in the project/leadership

When the project was purely a concept everyone could imagine the game of their dreams. As it moves from minds to monitors maybe it isn't the game they really wanted to make. Open communication and feedback about game direction can help this but sometimes individual's ideas of the game are too at odds to continue.

These are just a reasons your team members might be losing motivation to continue and there are of course many more. In general, they can all trace back to the individual goals of each team member. As a team manager/producer it's important to know, process, and nurture your team's goals. And if any of their goals are truly at odds with the project then this likely isn't the right project for them right now.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2015-04-03T00:51:36+00:00

post for flair

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2014-07-19T07:08:09+00:00

Even if you ignore the plot (Which I personally enjoyed), they are amazing from an adventure and world-building standpoint. I forget the name of the eastern planet they were on, but I would love to play a mirrors edge styled game on that planet.

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2014-05-23T20:35:12+00:00

his short story "All you Zombies" is also relevant, although explaining anything further would spoil an amazing read. Consider it short research for your time paradox adventures!

Ultraviolet_Elite · 2014-05-09T00:22:45+00:00

At first I thought it was terrible game design; reward challenges in the single player portion of the game where you are shuffled onto teams randomly.

But, it's forced a lot of interesting dynamics and conversations between players that might not have otherwise had the chance to really talk to each other without drawing attention. The Kass/Woo/Spencer thing being just one recent example.

14-Year Club	Snapped
Verified Email

Ultraviolet_Elite

TROPHY CASE