Wow i havent been here in forever. So much has changed.

At 4/18/08 09:46 PM, KorteX wrote: Wow i havent been here in forever. So much has changed.

You are old and loved.

Just wondering if this will work:

<div id="embed_27366">.</div>
<script type="text/javascript">/* <![CDATA[ */ $('embed_27366').update(new FlashWriter('http://www.youtube.com/v/CH 2EjmF01Cw&hl=en', 425, 355).ToString()); /* ]]> */ </script>
</div>

At 4/19/08 12:09 AM, BoMToons wrote: Just wondering if this will work:

I think it didn't.......
....
...
...
...
..
....
...

Idea for a series of short games

Hey, I just wanna run an idea I had past you all.

I need to make a few games by the end of summer to raise funds for college, otherwise I'll have to get a real job (:P). What I was thinking was to make a few short-RPG type things (a bit of an oxymoron I know) featuring the same character and using the same basic engine, but obviously with major differences each game.

To give you an idea of this, if anyone's ever played WoW or a similar RPG I was thinking that each game could be like an instance - a unique dungeon where you have to fight your way through several bosses to get to the end. I was planning on having ten levels, since this shouldn't take too much of a player's time up - to beat the final boss easilly you'd need to be around level eight, and there'd be a secret boss for which you'd need to be at level ten to stand a chance against.

In addition, your character would have a different class in each installment - so in one he'd be like a ninja with stealth-like gameplay, and in another he'd be a glass-cannon and need to keep out of harm's way whilst firing ranged attacks, and in another he'd need to drain an enemy's health to keep his own up. I was thinking the battle-system could be a cross between turn-based and real-time - you'd be able to move around and use melee attacks in real-time, but you'd also have a timer bar which would need to fill up before you could use essential special commands or use items.

So, what do you guys reckon to this? Could it work?

At 4/19/08 08:19 AM, Paranoia wrote:

So, what do you guys reckon to this? Could it work?

It COULD work. Question is, do you have the patience to work with the same engine 10 times ? :O

At 4/19/08 09:11 AM, yhar wrote:

At 4/19/08 08:19 AM, Paranoia wrote: So, what do you guys reckon to this? Could it work?

James the zebra.

But not James The Beach Zebra that wasn't too great.

Paranoia, you need to sharpen a big metal hook and snag people on the first episode. If you hook them with plot and interesting characters you could easily make a nice splash in episodic gaming. Just keep up the quality, make it interesting, and leave the player craving more with a cliffhanger.

At 4/19/08 11:06 AM, jmtb02 wrote: Paranoia, you need to sharpen a big metal hook and snag people on the first episode. If you hook them with plot and interesting characters you could easily make a nice splash in episodic gaming. Just keep up the quality, make it interesting, and leave the player craving more with a cliffhanger.

Using the ball revamped 'series' for example? Its something that The-EXP kind of did with IndestructoTank as well. Although, in my personal opinion, they're overrated as they're all pretty damn similar yet get a massive score.

At 4/19/08 11:13 AM, UnknownFury wrote: Using the ball revamped 'series' for example?

No. What I meant is that people really hate jumping into a series mid way, especially if the game relies on previous information to make sense of what is happening. If you grab the audience by the first episode you will cause enough buzz to start a snowball effect. It's a lot easier to start high and make it then it is to start low and somehow redeem a series... people won't even want to look at a game if they know the first one was not their cuppatea.

At 4/19/08 11:21 AM, jmtb02 wrote:

At 4/19/08 11:13 AM, UnknownFury wrote: Using the ball revamped 'series' for example?

No.

Ohhh, I getcha. Didn't understand and first. Yeah, I agree.

Making a Site....Time to find a server...

I'm currently building a site in Dreamweaver, and I'm near the points of completion. I'm quite curious on the best server to use that is cheap and efficient.

Any ideas?

At 4/19/08 11:21 AM, jmtb02 wrote:

No. What I meant is that people really hate jumping into a series mid way, especially if the game relies on previous information to make sense of what is happening. If you grab the audience by the first episode you will cause enough buzz to start a snowball effect. It's a lot easier to start high and make it then it is to start low and somehow redeem a series... people won't even want to look at a game if they know the first one was not their cuppatea.

Man I love jmtb02's little insights of wisdom. It's simple and it makes sense. It's so simple that you never really think about it till now. =)

Only thing I'd like to point out is that James the Zebra wasn't the same engine over again, nor was it the same animations over again either. They were pretty different.

IndestructoTank though had pretty similar engines as did Ball Revamped, but all of them brought something fresh to the table, and so aren't really overrated as some would say.

At 4/19/08 03:52 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: IndestructoTank though had pretty similar engines as did Ball Revamped, but all of them brought something fresh to the table, and so aren't really overrated as some would say.

I wouldn't say Ball revamped was overrated. But I would say indestructotank was. I don't know why I think that though D:

At 4/19/08 11:06 AM, jmtb02 wrote: Paranoia, you need to sharpen a big metal hook and snag people on the first episode. If you hook them with plot and interesting characters you could easily make a nice splash in episodic gaming. Just keep up the quality, make it interesting, and leave the player craving more with a cliffhanger.

Well, I've got a project lined up for release pretty soon. It's a sequel to an old game, and I'm intending to reuse the main character. What I was thinking was that those small 'instances' could be like mini-adventures which happen at some point between the first and second game, and I'll do a proper long second sequel at some point when I've got more time on my hands.

I just found out that flash can only have up to 254 levels of recursion! And what makes me angrier is that it says it can go up to 256...which is also pretty low. D=

Pathfinding in flash will never be the same again =(

At 4/19/08 05:05 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: I just found out that flash can only have up to 254 levels of recursion! And what makes me angrier is that it says it can go up to 256...which is also pretty low. D=

Pathfinding in flash will never be the same again =(

Isn't there a setting for it, like with maximum execution time?

At 4/19/08 05:50 PM, Paranoia wrote:

Isn't there a setting for it, like with maximum execution time?

Not that I know of =(

At 4/19/08 05:05 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: I just found out that flash can only have up to 254 levels of recursion! And what makes me angrier is that it says it can go up to 256...which is also pretty low. D=

Pathfinding in flash will never be the same again =(

You probably have the recursive function nestled in an onEnterFrame or another shell function, which count for those first 2 levels of recursion you're missing.

At 4/19/08 06:09 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

You probably have the recursive function nestled in an onEnterFrame or another shell function, which count for those first 2 levels of recursion you're missing.

Hmm, never thought of an onEnterFrame as being a level of recursion. Even then, thats 255!!! :O

At 4/19/08 06:46 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: Hmm, never thought of an onEnterFrame as being a level of recursion. Even then, thats 255!!! :O

Yeah... 8 Bits of recursion. Because any more starts to get programs scared.
Recursing that much doesn't sound safe anyway... what are you doing here that can't be done with iterations instead?

At 4/19/08 07:03 PM, KaynSlamdyke wrote:

At 4/19/08 06:46 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: Hmm, never thought of an onEnterFrame as being a level of recursion. Even then, thats 255!!! :O

Yeah... 8 Bits of recursion. Because any more starts to get programs scared.
Recursing that much doesn't sound safe anyway... what are you doing here that can't be done with iterations instead?

Oh no, I'm just testing the Big-O of recursion in flash in the worst case scenario. Just seeing how much pathfinding flash can do using recursion. =)

At 4/19/08 05:50 PM, Paranoia wrote: Isn't there a setting for it, like with maximum execution time?

Yes there is.
It's in the Publish settings... It's kinda hard to miss...

New reply in "The Flash 'Reg' Lounge", you say?

Click these easy tools to automatically input certain HTML tags to emphasize parts of your post, or add links!
File must be a .gif or .jpg and no larger than 150k, and must not exceed 599px wide by 700px tall.

WHAT? That wasnt me. Any way. THis is awesome. 1,065 pages :P

At 4/19/08 07:05 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: Oh no, I'm just testing the Big-O of recursion in flash in the worst case scenario. Just seeing how much pathfinding flash can do using recursion. =)

You shouldn't use recursion for pathfinding....

At 4/19/08 07:42 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

You shouldn't use recursion for pathfinding....

But it's incredibly easy using it!

At 4/19/08 08:26 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote:

At 4/19/08 07:42 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

You shouldn't use recursion for pathfinding....

But it's incredibly easy using it!

Recursion should be only be used for depth-first searches, A* pathfinding is a breadth-first algorithm.

Meaning, you have all the nodes to be checked in an array, and continually push new nodes onto the end of the array as you cycle through it with a for loop.

No recursion, and a much more efficient algorithm than recursion.

At 4/19/08 09:27 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

Meaning, you have all the nodes to be checked in an array, and continually push new nodes onto the end of the array as you cycle through it with a for loop.

No recursion, and a much more efficient algorithm than recursion.

That's basically like stacking. Either way, I find that the code for recursion to use in pathfinding is much simpler (eg shorter), and also very efficient for finding the basic "is it possible?" and "shortest path?" answers.

At 4/19/08 09:50 PM, Coolio-Niato wrote: That's basically like stacking. Either way, I find that the code for recursion to use in pathfinding is much simpler (eg shorter), and also very efficient for finding the basic "is it possible?" and "shortest path?" answers.

How do you do breadth-first searches with recursion?

At 4/19/08 10:07 PM, Glaiel-Gamer wrote:

How do you do breadth-first searches with recursion?

I'm not entirely certain of the definition of that, so I can't really answer =(