Game Design, Programming and running a one-man games business…

We naturally prefer 2D (unlike alien fish)

Why do I make 2D games? Is it because its’s easier? or because it’s the best format for the games I make? It’s the latter and here is why.

For games that involve strategy, humans naturally think in 2D. We exist in a 3D world, but strategically, we operate in 2D. We think about our environment generally on a 2D plane.  We navigate from point to point using 2D maps. Computer operating systems work almost entirely using 2D metaphors (Have you EVER used the flip3D feature in windows vista?).

I don’t think this is surprising. We are descended from apes (creationists stop reading now), whose predators attacked us on land, not from below or above. We spend the vast majority of our time on the same level as those around us. Even if we work in multi-storey buildings, we think of each floor as a seperate 2D space. Unless you are a submarine captain or fighter pilot, your concept of 3D space is probably hugely limited. I’m sure alien worlds with super-intelligent fish and birds are natural 3D strategy gamers, but not us.

And yet some strategy games still try and force us to play them in 3D. Thankfully, most game designers have finally realised that *true* 3D is generally more trouble than it’s worth. For every gamer who embraced Descent or Homeworld as the greatest thing ever, there were hundreds who found it thoroughly confusing. It might make for great screenshots, but not for great gameplay, at least not for everyone.

Sins of a Solar Empire and Company of Heroes are great examples of games whose makers realise that 3D makes for great trailers and box shots, but lousy gaming. Company of Heroes actually restricts the camera into a pseudo-isometric fixed view, allowing you to zoom in for no adequately explored reason other than to take screenshots to show off your graphics card. Every single player of the game plays at maximum zoom, because thats the only way to have any concept of what is going on. Spinning the camera around 360 may make for great GDC trailers, but its entirely unsuitable for actually controlling an army. People lose orientation very easily. Being able to spin the world around you is great in theory. In practice, you just forget which direction is which. (If spinning the map made so much sense, army commanders would have had circular map tables :D)

3D isn’t new or exciting in 2009, It’s just another option in the toolkit. Game designers need to get over the 3D obsession and make more considered design decisions. Some genres work great in 3D, some don’t. Large scale battles work best in 2D and probably will right up until we are all commuting to work in flying cars.

Long live the future of 2D strategy games.

The New Game

So what is this space game all about then?

Well it’s basically a big space battle simulator. A top-down, 2D space battle strategy game with no resource management, empire building, exploration or diplomacy.  The game is influenced by a number of things, in visual terms, I’m inspired by the stupidly big battles at the end of star trek:ds9 and the start of revenge of the sith. In game terms, it’s inspired slightly by galactic civ II, and partly by an old pen and paper RPG called traveller.

 

One of the books of traveller was called ‘trillion credit squadron‘, and it was based around the players being given a trillion credits to design and build a big space fleet (with certain restrcitions) to fight other players. That’s the basis of the gameplay for this currently un-named game. There will not be a big story, it’s basically a case of build a big fleet, send it into battle and enjoy the fun. I’ll be trying to make the battles look as good as 2D battles can look.

There is a lot more to the game than this, but that will come later. All my art is placeholder right now, so obviously there will be original spaceship designs. I haven’t found my spaceship artist or backdrop artists yet. In fact I haven’t started looking yet. Even now, it looks pretty cool in a big 1900×1200 window with maybe 40-50 ships a side. I hope to scale it up way way beyond that.

Core Breach!

Still a work in progress…clearly. But getting better… Details of what the hell this game is will arrive eventually…

GUI Coding is slow and dull…

I still hand code my GUI stuff. TBH, although I know people talk about using GUI libraries, I can’t see how it can save them that much time. I have a library of stuff like button, and window classes. This isn’t the issue. The issue is coding all the stuff that says “this window has a button here, and when you click it, that scrolls through this list there”

GUI stuff takes ages. it’s also really boring to code, and there is a huge long list of features which are automatically assumed by gamers which you must have. All buttons need mouseover states and tooltips, and you need the idea of modal windows, draggable windows, windows that go to to the top when clicked, etc.

Add to all that, the nightmare of making a GUI that runs nicely in different resolutions. I know that stardock have some clever system for doing this, but they employ dozens of people and run their own GUI software business, so they can spend a lot more time on it than me.

This is why I’m not blogging about exciting enw stuff in ‘the game that has no name yet but will have a code-name soon’. I’m doing GUI stuff for one of the three big ‘management’ parts of the game, and it’s nothing exciting to talk about. Not compared to the lasers and explosions anyway.

Adding financial incentives to modding

Modding doesn’t seem to be living up to it’s full potential.

Developers and publishers make a game, and release an SDK and mod tools so that ordinary games players can come together and make changes and improvements to the game. This is awesome, and one of the best things about PC gaming, but there are two drawbacks.

1) Most mods are unfinished and suck

2) The publisher and developer are basically using modding as a marketing tool, and nothing more. they gain nothing from a virbrant mod scene and decent mods other than goodwill from gamers and an increased perceived worth of the game. (not to be sneezed at, but not massive either)

In other words, the incentive to encourage production of great mods is low. Modders do it for fun, and maybe for their CV if they are insane enough to want to get into games. Develoeprs support it as an afterthought if they have the time. Why can’t we go further and have a financial releationship as an option?

Idea:

Modders get the rights to release paid for mods to the game, with technical support and QA from the developer. The gamers buy this mod, and the money is split between the mod team and the developer.

Would this work? is it a good or bad idea? I’m not saying mods shouldn’t be free, just that with financial incentives, some mods could be much better. In principle, I’m in favour of people doing high quality mods for my games, and selling them for a profit split with me. Would this work? is it fair? is it evil?

Thoughts…?