EffectHub is connecting the world's gaming artists! Sign Up
Search Authors
Popular Search
Works searching result of "Iti"
Hi
In addition to using Edge Animate I also have After Effects and the Adobe Media Encoder.
Does anyone know how to convert a .mp4 video that I created and exported from After Effects to the .ogv format?
Sadly, it looks like I need the .ogv format to get my Animate preso to play in Firefox. Videos embedded into Animate with .mp4 play great on everything except Firefox; Animate docs suggest generating a second HTML5 compliant video type and importing it into Edge Animate....
Thanks in advance,
Hello! I'm working on an old-school-inspired game in my free time. It is to be an HTML5 game with all the backend and graphics done by me. I have some decent experience with both sides, so getting a prototype going shouldn't be too difficult. That said, I've run into a bit of a dilemma.
My terrain is all procedurally generated tiles, and I would like to have elevation figure into things. Something simple, like a limited range of 8 possible heights, is what I'm looking for.
However, I also am trying to keep a very "old-school" style of graphics.
Ideally, I'd like for my game to look and feel similar to an old Zelda or Pokemon title. (3/4 view) But this creates a lot of problems. I can't seem to find a pre-made tileset online that even begins to look correct with terrain height applied. I know that usually this is done the same way as grass region meeting up with a sand region, wherein you have special "edge" tiles. But I can't seem to make that work with more than 2 distinct levels of terrain, plus it would be thousands and thousands of possible transition types (grass meets grass 1 level above, grass meets grass 2 levels above, grass meets sand 1 level above, etc etc etc). This is not to mention the further-along programmatic problems of occlusion and pathfinding and such. (Most of which I would solve by allowing 90 degree rotations of the world)
As a secondary option, I would consider what is commonly called an "isometric" perspective for my game. That has a lot of problems of its own though. I do not like the typical "iso terrain," many games have used. (Example: http://i.stack.imgur.com/rzqj8.jpg) It seems too programmatic in nature. And while the "minecraft-style" of depicting each tile as a block has an appeal, I'd need way more terrain levels and such to provide any fidelity. Also, this style is not my strong suit, drawing wise.
So with all of that in mind, I'm a little stuck. I'd really like to find a middle ground, somewhere between an "Isometric minecraft" and Zelda, where rock walls are basically just a tile type and do not actually indicate height. I'd also really like to keep my 3/4 perspective. Something like this imagehttp://www.fondusis.com/images/dev/FondusisFringe2.png. Though if you know Tiled or any such editor you will realize this is basically a grid of paint-by-numbers, i really need to be able to rotate, and view these hills from the other side. But when I set out to create art for this, it all goes to hell.
Any experiences dealing with art assets of this type, or anything related, will be helpful. Just trying to wrap my head around this problem! Thanks for your time!!
I'm working on a game aimed to be deployed on mobiles as "native" apps, and desktop web browsers.
Since working on several platforms, Flash and its embedded AIR seemed to be a pretty good solution. But uh-oh.
Working only for now with 4-keyframed movieclips (Adding them to stage, updating their position on every frame, and eventually removing them) makes the game to slow down when about 30 are displayed on desktop screen, about 20 when displayed on my Android (Samsung i9000 - 2.3.3). And I may need more.
So I tried blittering, by redrawing regions of my bitmap, and converting my MovieClips to bitmapDatas spritesheets, stored in my Flash library. Results on desktop are great, with perfect, smooth animations, even with hundreds of objects. But the result on mobile is terrible, FPS drops down to 15 even when only one object is displayed on screen, CPU or GPU rendered.
Because it would obviously be nice that my game works on 'old' devices, is working with Flash and AIR a bad idea at this time if I want to reach a framerate close to or above 50 ?
Is there any tips, or indispensable practices that needs to be used when developping a mobile game with flash ? Is there any common mistakes we have to avoid in these kinds of case ?
A little while ago, I was watching a Nuclear Throne stream on Twitch. Turns out, Vlambeer (producer of said game) was watching. Eventually, I got permission from Vlambeer to create a board game based off of Nuclear Throne (obviously non-profit... that'd be discussed if I ever intended to actually produce a game).
Even further back, I had posted on here an idea for a Nuclear Throne style game. Back then, I was struggling because I wanted to make it like a dungeon crawl, with tiles allowing for randomly generated huge maps, lots of monsters and enemies, etc. I was way over my head!
Since then, I've had time to reflect. What if my game wasn't Nuclear Throne, but Nuclear Arena? If you have heard of the board game Frag, you would have an idea. What I want to do is have 3 double sided boards with 6 different environments. Each side of the board would be a different map. Each of the maps would support a different mode: Wasteland Kings, Capture the Skull, King of the Throne, and Bounty Hunter. (Free-for-all, Capture the Flag, King of the Hill, and kill-a-player)
It would support up to 4 players, with each player picking a character to play. The most common and easy mode to play is Wasteland Kings (free-for-all). Each player grabs their character sheet, and then sets them up on a map. Gameplay is essentially an FPS, but fast paced and crazy fun! If you move over a red chest space, you get a card from the loot deck. The loot deck holds a bunch of random awesome weapons like Quadruple Machinegun, Flak Cannon, Toxic Bow, Nuke Launcher, Lightning Rifle, Screwdriver, etc. Move over a yellow chest space, and you get a pickup card, which have health, ammo, shields, and radiation. Killing an enemy causes them to drop their weapons on their death spot, and gives you a large amount of radiation. Once you gain enough radiation, you can trade it in for a mutation from the mutation deck, which has cards that give you cool perks and abilities.
One of the problems I felt Frag had was that it felt a little shallow after reading the rules. With this, each character has a passive and active ability, gameplay is more fast paced, you've got way more weapons, and mutations to gather. Plus, maps have interactive parts, like explosive barrels, acid, and turrets you can use. Plus there's the variety of modes to play!
Components wise, it wouldn't be too much either. You'd have 11 basic character models plus their sheet, a weapon deck, pickup deck, mutation deck, dice, tokens, and the boards.
I'm actually working on making a prototype right now!
I hope that this will be a fast paced fun arena-style game.
I'm open to feedback!
Been thinking about poker from a game design point of view, so this looked like a good place to post on it.
The structure of poker is pretty simple. You are given information, a baseline chance of winning. You bet based on that information, then you are given more information. Again your chance of winning. And you bet again. This maybe happens a few times or just twice. Then you show your cards and win or loose.
Your choices each time are extremely simple in comparison to most games. Bet, check or fold. Probably if you designed the game fresh today it would be ignored. So what is it that makes the game popular and robust?
Just a few thoughts.
1.The game rewards long shots. This is the same thing that keeps people playing slot machines. You don't remember all the times that you loose, but you remember the big time that you won. Poker provides lots of ways to lure you into pushing your luck to get the long shot. You keep on betting because you might make the flush. This is probably a good mechanic to slip into a game, in fact it is probably in many games but it is something to consider thinking about.
2.simple mechanics, with complex theory. There is almost no system in the game like we see in many board games. No programmed hoops to jump through to make the game do something, People like the tagline, a moment to learn a lifetime to master. And it applies to many of the great games, like go, chess, poker, backgammon, mancala. Designing a game like this would seem to be trouble though. As many of the people who enjoy this kind of game don't want to learn others. I play Go, I probably wouldn't go back to playing chess in any kind of serious way now. The other thing is that these public domain simple games are honed by essentially thousands of playtesters and they evolve slowly over time. You can see this in the rules of chess with the additions of the castling, and the two spaces on the first move pawn rules, and some piece changes.
3.Player interactions and hidden information. I think this is what makes poker viable for the tv audience and bar league poker tourneys. Open information games reward those that can eliminate possibilities the quickest and arrive at strong moves. Hidden information games remove this advantage from people with strong analysis abilities. This has the additional effect of eliminating analysis paralysis. Some of my favorite war games are the columbia block series because they feature hidden information. This helps both players speed up their turns while adding some tension. It forces you to play the player, or the odds rather than to consider the board positions, or card information. I think in general most people don't consider themselves to have the skills of analysis. While almost everyone thinks they are a good reader of people. That is a skill that most people have. At the same time the game presents itself as a game of skill, while adding a luck element. So the winning player can say, “I won with my superior skill” and the loosing player can still say, “those are the breaks I was lucky or unlucky” leaving everyone happy. Where if someone beats your ass in chess, you just have to admit they are a superior player.
4 many people say that poker wouldn't be a good game without money involved. I think that it is just traditionally played with money But it has several things going for that make it a good money game. Simple widely known rules mean you can find players fairly easy. But I think the real factor in it, is that a game of poker is really something like 50 mini games of poker played in rapid succession. You can win money, you can loose money. There are up and downs, again this applies to slot machines as well. While you can bet money on any game, I think that these minigames within a game lend themselves well to gambling.
5 Theme. Poker is at its face a themeless game. Just cards. But the game itself is the theme at this point. Just as smart people in movies are always seen playing chess. Pokers theme is of daring gamblers and the fish that got away stories, it is all cowboys, and friday night poker with the boys smoking stogies, and now pudgy guys wearing sunglasses playing for millions. It appeals the American ideals of being smarter, and riskier than the other guy and the rewards are big jackpots.
So what does this mean from a game design point of view? I'm not exactly sure.
A hidden information game should be simpler than an open information game. Imagine how boring poker would be played open handed, Notice how nobody plays chess with the doubleblind methods. I think the more interaction you have among discrete pieces or objects in a game the better off you are going with open information.
Coax players into actions with the promises of long shots? Somehow this seems more fitting in a card driven game rather than a dice driven one. A player knows there are 4's in the deck and may stick around to try to see it while the same player might not if it was rolling 8% or less on percentiles.
Just my ramblings as I procrastinate tonight. I would love to hear what you have to think about it.
can somebody give the link of that software??
i want a simple and easy to use...
i don't want virtualdub please give other software , any software that can add subtitles PERMANENTLY
please
So, I'm currently looking for an engine for 2D. I've tried Cocos2D but it's iOS only and I wouldn't like to rewrite everything into another language for Android (so, e.g. Java port of Cocos2d for Android is not an option). Instead, I want to write the code once and with least hassle deploy it on iOS, Android and possibly Windows Phone 7. I have both Mac and Windows.
Just to be more detailed, here are my requirements to the engine:
must be cross-platform
must be efficient
should be C++, Java, C# or Objective C since I'm comfortable with them and NOT Flash, Javascript, HTML5 since I am not a web developer
must have a large community, tutorials, additional libraries which cover most of the stuff you'd have when developing on iOS or Android directly (in-app billing, facebook etc.)
the final delivered package must be not too large
the engine can be free, but I also wouldn't mind paying a reasonable price
I've found the following engines:
Marmalade (and IwGame engine on top of it) - C++, found overall very positive reviews of Marmalade but not sure about IwGame. EDIT (March 2013): Looks like Marmalade SDK now includes Cocos2Dx and some in-built IDE which makes it much better (and costs $150 per year for indie dev which is ok with me).
Corona SDK - Lua (efficiency doubtful), also needs internet connection to compile code
Cocos2d-x - C++, received lots of reviews from developers, mostly positive and many think it's best for 2D
Particle code - Java+Eclipse, found no reviews or comments
Moai - Lua, coudn't find any reviews/opinions on it
Monkey engine - seems to have too few features
Haxenme - it's Flash, I've never used it and don't want to
use Unity3d but with 2D packages like 2D Toolkit
ports of SDL to Android (also here) and iOS - doesn't look to have much support or current development (?)
GLBasic - Basic language, I don't like it
playN - seems to be early in development (?)
Gamvas - HTML5, doesn't look like a mature engine to me
Ignifuga - Python, also doesn't look mature
ORX - not sure if it's still developed (?)
Construct 2 - reminds GameMaker, might be ok for rapid prototypes but definitely not for industry-level games
XNA and then port the game using ExEn (would need Mono Touch to port to iOS and Mono for Android to port to Android) - C#, and is probably more thought for folks coming from Microsoft products like xBox (I come from Android). Also, those Mono tools cost $800 in total for small developers
Impact - JavaScript, uses HTML5. I'm not much into JavaScript (e.g. preferred C# on Unity3d), also not sure about efficiency since it runs in the browser (?)
GameMaker - own scripting language GML and I actually remember this one as a tool for non-programmers. Has it actually grown into a real engine, I mean for serious development?
AppGameKit - C++, yet seems to be still pretty new. Haven't found any reviews on it
use Cocos2D and Objective C to develop for iOS only and then make an APK for Android out of it using Stella SDK. Has anyone done this? I'm pretty sure there will be limitations, and how about Google's in-app billing, AdMob and Facebook integration on Android?
Moscrif - JavaScript, looks like it's more for former web-developers
Starling - Flash 11, i'm not much into Flash
ND2D - not yet 1.0, does it have many features?
So, I'd be happy if you could comment from your experiences with the engines and suggest which one in the list (or anything else that I've missed) is the best for the described requirements. I also may be wrong with my first impressions about some of the engines.
I'm currently thinking of Marmalade+IwGame as the best option but since I don't have much info about Cocos2d-x and Particle code, I am not really sure about it.
Thank you!