[quote]Document the WHY not the HOW. Any programmer should be able to read the HOW in the code, but I need to know WHY this code was done this way. This goes double if you do something unusual. I can't count the times I've tried to figure out WHY a function is sending emails to Nigeria, only to have the original developer gone, and the documentation consists of //now we email Nigeria[/quote] ROFLMAO
[quote who="Zakath" reply="17" id="2322566"]Interesting post, but some of your practices would make me cry out in horror. For instance the much abused Hungarian notation, works fine as long as you don't change your type. But what happens when someone changes the type of lShipCount to unsigned long and forgets to update the variable name? Not terribly fond of the m_ prefix either, but that one doesn't have the same potential of producing Coding Horror. I saw some good points as to w
[quote who="ckessel" reply="8" id="2326201"]It's like Schrödinger's cat. As long as I haven't yet gotten home to check my email, I'm in a state where I'm both in the alpha and not in the alpha.[/quote] LOL!
I think randomness in techs--either in their actual cost to obtain, or in their results--should simply serve the purpose of preventing easy min-maxing. That is, the randomness shouldn't be chaotic, else luck trumps strategy, or at the very least the player feels they have no real control over outcomes. Which technologies one researches should absolutely have a profound, and relatively predictable, effect upon one's empire/kingdom and the success thereof, but I think it's okay to k
Good points SaberCherry. pigeonpigeon: while technology advanced quite rapidly over the past 300 years, look at the last 10,000. In fact, there have been serious periods of technological decline during several periods in history (albeit mostly localized to single continents) and several long periods of stagnation (generally due to wars, famine, ruling classes, etc.).
[quote who="ckessel" reply="5" id="2321753"]Good stuff. Well, aside from hungarian notation. Ack, eww, yuck. http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Wrong.html The whole article is about creating good code, but nearer the bottom Joel talks specifically about Hugarian notation, it's original intent versus how it typically ends up being used. The original intent looks pretty good. [/quote] Best line in here: "Don’t use macros to create your ow
If SD isn't under financial pressure, I think a longer beta and an "official" launch in August is probably better. It's late enough in the year to hit the Christmas wishlists, but early enough to have built some momentum, so sales might even be a bit better. Google had Gmail in "beta" for years, and it didn't seem to affect it's popularity. I say go for it.
A bit off-topic, but...what we really need is for some computer scientists out there to get languages beyond the never-fully-realized promise of SmallTalk and Lisp. Someday...
Rolemaster had a nice system for progressive skill development that never capped. First 10 ranks got you +5, next 10 got you +2, next 10 got you +1, everything after that got you +0.5. Ranks 31+ were always tempting, because you always wanted to improve certain skills, but the cost compared to improving other, possibly useful skills was equally tempting. In general, I like logarithmic curves (i.e. diminishing returns) for things with "infinite" in them.
For those curious about the originality--or lack thereof--of stories, go read Joseph Campbell. In brief, few if any stories are truly original at their core: they are all variations on common themes: the hero's journey; the return of rightful (just) rulership; the cyclical changing of the seasons; master and apprentice; etc. Tolkien's stories--indeed, his entire mythos--was very firmly grounded in these traditions (most especially the northern European take on them).&nb
FWIW, I'm really happy with the random techs (that is, some techs appear in some games but not others) and the possibility of infinite research. I think the slightly randomized research and techs was one of the things MOO3 did right, and helps distinguish strategy from bean-counting. Infinite research is cool because it frames the cost of research resources in terms of the effects of the research. In GalCiv2, for example, the long-term cost of research centers are basicall
I loved MW3, but thought MW4 dumbed it down to "point and shoot" way too much. Little details like missile swarms looked atrocious in MW4, but looked awesome in MW3. I seriously wish they'd taken MW3 and just used MW4's rendering engine.
Space Empires V had a great treaty and alliance structure, which unfortunately suffered from so many bugs as to make it far less useful than it could be. I think something with that number of options, or even a few more, would be great.
Luckmann - I think that's worth its own post. Very good idea.
Goodie Huts: For All Your Bear Cavalry Needs
BoogieBac - The art style is probably not what I would have picked: I tend to prefer "realistic" over the impressionistic-influenced style Elemental has taken. That said, I think it works very well for the genre, and if it makes it easier to scale across system specs, zoom levels, etc., I'm all for it. I have a decent laptop now (7900GTX Go, 2GB RAM), but when I first started playing GalCiv2 I was on an old desktop with integrated graphics. So, I can definitely appreciate St
Just curious: will recruitable units be able to be enhanced by the player? That is, can I take my Snow Yetis and give them swords and armor? Or, perhaps can only certain units be enhanced? Snow Yetis might be too stupid to use weapons, but Hill Trolls might be smart enough to use a warhammer when it's given to them.
Facing changes is an interesting idea, and one that could add it's own subtle balance. Certain units (light infantry, slingers, etc.) could change facing fairly easily. Pikemen....well, it takes some training to do it quickly. Cavalry takes a lot of training. That could be one of those somewhat-realistic features that "feels right". "An infantryman who is moving is attacking. An infantryman who is not moving is preparing to attack."
I think the teaser from the Demigod team showed the developer changing the detail view distance. GalCiv2 also has this feature.
The best thing about GalCiv2's AI in my opinion is that the different races act very differently, but generally effectively. All sides are not created equally--which I like--and the different AI strategies all work better or worse depending on the map size, map conditions, neighbors, the player, and a bit of luck. it makes every game a little bit different.
Just subscribe to the RSS feed. You can read the preview without going back to the original site.
Just to clarify for everyone: you don't need to join Twitter to subscribe to the TeamElemental feed . Just use an RSS reader to subscribe to it. I have a LiveBookmark in Firefox updating it, and it's working very nicely. I am not, nor am I likely to ever become, a Twit Tweet Twitterwhererer whatever.
Multi-day battles should get it's own thread in Elemental Ideas. I'll give pigeonpigeon first right of refusal.
No risqueness required or intended. :)
Funny this is coming up now: playing GalCiv2 zoomed out and playing by icon is something I actually do quite a bit. Every now and then I zoom in just to enjoy the eye candy, but i'll be honest: I'm probably looking at icons or detail screens at least 75% of the time. Diablo2 is still a lot of fun, too. Graphics enhance, but don't make, a good game. I'm really glad Stardock is willing to push the envelop in this regard. I have noticed that their UI design is e