design versus coding

[moomin]

Re: demo version versus commercial version

Originally posted by GP
-Seems like many bystanders, and Vel and other designers are more interested in discussing the commercial version than the demo version. Is this good? Or should everybody be worrying about the demo version?

I dunno. If the demo, or rather the free version, is already cast in stone feature-wise, there really isn't much to say 'bout it here beyond "we're on track for delivery" or "we're experiencing some small difficulties that will be addressed shortly".

I sure would like to see a design document for the free version, comparable to the detailed and exating stuff they've been doing for the commerical release here.

-how much of the demo code and work will be useable for the commercial version?

I personally think it won't be to much, unfortunately, since a lot of new design seems to have happened between the two verisons. The basic framework for stuff like network connectivity, storage and background stuff like that should be fairly easy to leverage if they write it well from scratch, though.

-how good (in terms of player fun) does the demo version need to be to accompolish it's advertising opbjectives.

A very valid and interesting question. A design doc for the free version should be able to answer some of that. But remeber that they've already played and enjoyd CB the boardgame - the dynamics may be wastly different, but the proof of concept is there. Execution can still derail it, of course.

[TCO]

Second "Voluntary Homework Assignment"

Ok...here's the task. Read really fun and interesting articels on how developers develop games and on how the the economics of the whole industry work. Then come back and comment on how some of thius stuff relates to Team Candy

Here's the link: http://www.avault.com/developer/

(If you've all already read these cool articles...just squash me!)

[FrustratedPoet]

Most of the stuff for the free version has been decided upon .. 'set in stone' is perhaps the wrong phrase for it because the game will be coming together over the course of several patches over an extended period of time and so there is plenty of time to add tweaks to any particular model before coding on it begins.
We'll know much more about what needs to be changed, and it what ways to change it, once playtesting begins (especially Beta testing).

We're doing that right now in regard to the Fate Card Engine ... the rules Vel wrote in the explanation of the board game version were fine and there is no reason why we can't implement those in the free version ... it'd be pretty easy to do ... however, we think we can get the system a little closer to how we want it in the commercial version without too much difficulty, so we're gonna give it a go.

There should be a thread started on the Fate Engine on this forum in the near future because we'd like everyone's input on the subject once we have a design document for the model to work from.

But ... yeah ... the free version will still be clearly recognisable as being descended from the board game version.
The commercial version (as you've noticed) is gonna be very different, but that's a long way ahead at the moment...

[Velociryx]

Hey guys....just taking another "Save Vel's Eyeballs" break...had some Photoshop ideas I was 'sperimenting with...fun stuff!

Anyway, Stoo's right on the money re: his comments about the differences between the free and commercial versions of the game. I just figured since I had a minute, I'd hop into the discussion and do some posting, cos...well, I'm addicted to it...LOL

On the question of time spent discussing the Commercial version vs. the Freebie:

Yes and no. On the one hand, as others beat me to saying, a lot of what we want to see in the free version is already pretty much decided on...'s just a matter of implementation. On the other, much of what will GO into the free version is a scaled down version of what'll be in the commercial release (example, only one "church" and religious influence in the free release, vs. a fleshed out magic system based around an entire pantheon in the commercial release, three tech trees with ten levels of research in each in the free version, a much bigger tech tree in the commercial release (exact size to be determined as we get closer), 3 provincial builds per province in the demo, 10 in the commercial release, 250 Fate Events (or thereabouts) in the demo, 500+ in the commercial release...so, in large part, the mechanics that make the game tick won't change all that much, they will simply be vastly expanded upon.

However, having said that, there ARE some things (tactical combat resolution, to use but one example) that were discussed here for the commercial release, but which REALLY add something to the game. If possible, that's something I'd like to see added into the free release, at least in some form, and I'll approach the code and art groups to see what all that will entail (shouldn't be tooooo bad, and the original combat resolution we discussed WAS tactical in its nature, and later changed to strategic, but given it's popularity, I'm pretty solidly sold on switching back to our original vision...)...so, all that to say that having now taken the game out of the environment where it was just a smallish group kicking ideas around and putting it under the close scrutinty of a much larger group has led to discussions and ideas and branches that we hadn't thought of...some of those branches might find their way into the free release, and if even ONE of them does, then our discussions about what would be cool to see in a game like this (even if we're couching that thinking in terms of a commercial release) will have yielded a good crop, IMO.

As to the question re: coding....hopefully a respectable amount. We designed the game with scalability in mind from day one, cos we knew we were shooting for a simplified version of the game initially, to be fleshed out later (as we gained experience). The hope is that what we design now will bear the weight of that fleshing out when we're ready to proceed in that direction, and I'm thinking it will. So essentially, the game mechanics will all be the same, tech implementation will be the same, just expanded, religious effects will be handled in more or less the same way, there'll just be more options....so yeah, I have high hopes that we'll find a goodish sum of the code base re-usable....don't know tho...as a non-programmer, that may be wishful thinking on my part.

As to how good the demo has to be....depends on what part of the equation you're looking at. If you compare the CB project to similar Sourceforge projects, if we get our game running AT ALL, in any form, and if the graphics are on par with, say, "Pac-Man," we'll be right up there with a lot of peer projects on Source Forge. What we're trying to do is simply beyond the scope of anything else currently out there (or at least of the 485 similar projects I researched).

For me personally, the goal is to create a free version with enough depth and quality to do two things:

1) To wow the folks at Slashdot, Sourceforge, and Apolyton by creating an MP game that proves to be addicting in that "just one more turn" kinna way

and

2) To demonstrate the concept of Candle'Bre adequately, showcase our design, artistic, and programming talents, and give some indication of where we're heading for the commercial release.

Those two things being said, the free version is going to have at least a few coats of spit and polish on it. Not AAA (to borrow the rating system from one of the excellent articles GP pointed out), but heads and shoulders above what most folks have come to expect from Indie groups in general.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Excellent articles, and many with lessons we can use. Too much to comment adequately in a single posting (I read all the articles back to back), but I'll mull it over and see if I can distill something that doesn't sound like maniacal ramblings...

-=Vel=-

[TCO]

understood. There are a host of positive and negative lessons in there.

One positive thing that was interesting was to hear that even "big budget" games don't always have that big of a crew on them. Another was that they favor self-publishing until you get a name.

For you in particular, the article on how to be a designer is relavent. Several positive items there (they mention that being a creative writer helps make a better designer). some cautiuons too (how to keep yourself busy once the fun brainstorming part of the project is done.)

[TCO]

If the "free game" is good enough, you might just think about using it as your beta for pitching to a real publisher. (Just an option as things develop...)

[TCO]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Hey guys....just taking another "Save Vel's Eyeballs" break...had some

Did ma homewook assignmunt hut yo koot liddle eye-balls?

[moomin]

Originally posted by GP
If the "free game" is good enough, you might just think about using it as your beta for pitching to a real publisher. (Just an option as things develop...)

Now, GP, who in their right mind wouldn't?

[moomin]

GP, I took a look at the designer article and found it pretty... stupid. No, that's not the right word. Geared toward an twelve year old geek audience, perhaps.

I can't imagine people who are doing this for real need to have all that "designing is work too, not only cool fun!" pointed out to them. So listening to others on the team is a good thing? I'll be damned. The author skips on all the interesting pieces (yeah, being a good manager is, well, good. Tips 'bout what a good manager actually is and does would've been better though.)

I was really unimpressed by that article. Perhaps the other are better, I didn't check up on them.

[TCO]

Right...I just also meant not distribute it for free...too. Just an option in case the thing is really goooood.

No need to decide now...

[TCO]

It was pretty funny when he said for people to go look at management books in the bookstore!

Yeah...some of that stuff is pretty obvious. But I think an article written for wantabe hoobyists would be different than for people already in the trade. I think that people vary in their amount of "savvy". Some of the stuff on economics of game publilshing is interesting. He's got some actual numbers in some of them. Are they the best articles ever? No. Do they shed some knowledge/offer an intersting point of view for Vel? Yes.

Umm...I thought the stuff where he talked about the actual tasks of a designer (big emphasis on writing, for instance) and the phasing of the project (research and creative design lasting only for a month, for instance) were illumintating. I didn't know that stuff...

Do you have some better articles. Would love to see stuff that was even a step up...

[TCO]

Some other interesting points in his articles:

-has figures (based on his own experience) on downloads versus sales
-has insights on why you might want to design for low-end systems
-some good insights on how to package a submission for a publisher

[xRamsesx]

Interesting articles GP. I read a couple of them and thought that they had some good info in them, particularly the one about prepping a demo for a publisher.

For those of you interested I find that some of the gamasutra articles have valuable info in them. I usually read postmortems or design related articles, but they have articles covering a wide range of game-making related topics.

http://www.gamasutra.com/php-bin/article_display.php

[tniem]

Vel,

Just one quick question about your plan. You said that by being open source you can use source code and tools from certain places. Than once you have used that stuff and had the publicity from Open Source that you would close it up and make it a commercial viable product. Wouldn't closing the game up violate the licenses from the open source products and code that you used to get to the version that you are at when it is time for the open source version?