BYOND Program:
Sample Code:
Obj
object = 'example.dmi'
object_state = "Example 1"
Density = 1
Monday, June 16, 2008
Construction
BYOND Program:
Sample Code:
Obj
object = 'example.dmi'
object_state = "Example 1"
Density = 1
Survey Results
Results
The results of the survey indicate a positive response to the game, with an average score of approximately 6.5 out of ten. Respondents appeared to enjoy the combat system but would liked to have seen more graphical and sound detail. However, this is not possible due to limitations of the gaming engine.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Controls (Revised)
Controls:
The control scheme for Willowbrook will incorporate both mouse and keyboard inputs to interact with your environment. Such a control scheme will be familiar to anyone who has experience with this system and benefits by being similar to other computer-based RPG games.
Foot:
This is the primary way in which the player will experience the gaming environment. Characters are controlled by the following keyboard commands.
Control Arrows – Move forward, backwards, etc.
Space Bar – Use item
Mouse – Pick up items, talk to nearby characters
Self-Evaluation
For senior year at the Marine Academy of Science and Technology, I, Joseph DiMarco chose to be in Systems Engineering II. Since this entails creating a “Senior Capstone Design Project”, I originally decided to participate in the ROV MATE projected at the insistence of one of my classmates. However, this didn’t pan out, and I instead committed myself to an alternate project.
My actual project would be to design and test a video game for entry into a competition for the Technology Students Association (TSA). The project would entail me acquiring rudimentary knowledge in computer programming, designing characters and settings, and finally combining it all into a working system. The project of course would have to be school-appropriate and confined to the time allotted and my skill level.
So this is what led to the conception of my final design. I chose to limit my game to two-dimensions, and build it as a side-scroller, reminiscent of Super Mario Brothers. The idea was based around a concept called Willowbrook. This was a town set in an alternate dimension, where the main character, Hal, must try and escape. You would have to solve puzzles, gather items, and fight enemies in order to complete you objectives. In this way, I set out to design an RPG. I originally intended for the game to be designed in C++, a common, easily accessible computer language, and consist of seven levels, each consisting of numerous scenes, items, and characters to interact with.
However, this idea would undergo several revisions. While the general concept would remain the same, the chosen language was impractical to learn. My mentor barely scratched the surface after an entire semester of college. This inspired me to move my coding onto the Adobe© Flash™ platform. Since this method is more visual-based, it seemed less involved, and would be easier to wrap my head around. Of course this wasn’t to be, and I again was unable to utilize this system. Finally, as per the request of a fellow student, who was himself well-versed in video game design, I was introduced to the language, Python, and that is what the game is currently built off of.
By being moved to this system, however, the scope of my project would have to be narrowed significantly. Much of my artwork and level design would have to be cut out. Instead, the final project is a simpler, less engaging game, a victim of major time constraints, and limited foresight. That seems to be a common theme that runs throughout my project. I feel like if I had just dedicated even minimal effort to the process, played the game, so to speak, I would have had a much more fulfilling experience with this project.
I’m not really sure what my problem is. It’s not like I don’t want to assert myself, I just find myself afraid to apply the effort, and instead slack off. I guess I simply don’t want to suffer the humiliation of applying myself and failing. Another thing I learned is that if I am to give any effort, I need some kind of support structure to actually apply myself. If I had actually decided to stick with the ROV project, I probably would have done significantly better. Since this was a group affair, and a pet project of the instructors, I would have felt extra pressure to actually shift my inert mass into gear and peel out to a successful year. Also, I think that since my project was a fairly new undertaking for the staff, they were just as unsure as me as to what I should have been doing, so I mistook that as a sign that I could get away with anything. Still, I know that at the end of the day, all of these shortcomings are my “own damn fault”, and I will ultimately have to pay the price. If not now, later on down the road, in the real world where no one gives a what you do and will show no remorse in seeking retribution for failure. If I took away anything from this project, it’s the sobering wake-up call that if I don’t shape up soon, I’m going to be flipping burgers for the rest of my life.
So that, in essence is a summary of my senior year. My project, while completed, is nowhere near the level it could have been on, and I have some serious “self-evaluation” to do before I can become a productive member of society. I can only hope that somewhere in all of this lies the key to this answer I seek.
My actual project would be to design and test a video game for entry into a competition for the Technology Students Association (TSA). The project would entail me acquiring rudimentary knowledge in computer programming, designing characters and settings, and finally combining it all into a working system. The project of course would have to be school-appropriate and confined to the time allotted and my skill level.
So this is what led to the conception of my final design. I chose to limit my game to two-dimensions, and build it as a side-scroller, reminiscent of Super Mario Brothers. The idea was based around a concept called Willowbrook. This was a town set in an alternate dimension, where the main character, Hal, must try and escape. You would have to solve puzzles, gather items, and fight enemies in order to complete you objectives. In this way, I set out to design an RPG. I originally intended for the game to be designed in C++, a common, easily accessible computer language, and consist of seven levels, each consisting of numerous scenes, items, and characters to interact with.
However, this idea would undergo several revisions. While the general concept would remain the same, the chosen language was impractical to learn. My mentor barely scratched the surface after an entire semester of college. This inspired me to move my coding onto the Adobe© Flash™ platform. Since this method is more visual-based, it seemed less involved, and would be easier to wrap my head around. Of course this wasn’t to be, and I again was unable to utilize this system. Finally, as per the request of a fellow student, who was himself well-versed in video game design, I was introduced to the language, Python, and that is what the game is currently built off of.
By being moved to this system, however, the scope of my project would have to be narrowed significantly. Much of my artwork and level design would have to be cut out. Instead, the final project is a simpler, less engaging game, a victim of major time constraints, and limited foresight. That seems to be a common theme that runs throughout my project. I feel like if I had just dedicated even minimal effort to the process, played the game, so to speak, I would have had a much more fulfilling experience with this project.
I’m not really sure what my problem is. It’s not like I don’t want to assert myself, I just find myself afraid to apply the effort, and instead slack off. I guess I simply don’t want to suffer the humiliation of applying myself and failing. Another thing I learned is that if I am to give any effort, I need some kind of support structure to actually apply myself. If I had actually decided to stick with the ROV project, I probably would have done significantly better. Since this was a group affair, and a pet project of the instructors, I would have felt extra pressure to actually shift my inert mass into gear and peel out to a successful year. Also, I think that since my project was a fairly new undertaking for the staff, they were just as unsure as me as to what I should have been doing, so I mistook that as a sign that I could get away with anything. Still, I know that at the end of the day, all of these shortcomings are my “own damn fault”, and I will ultimately have to pay the price. If not now, later on down the road, in the real world where no one gives a
So that, in essence is a summary of my senior year. My project, while completed, is nowhere near the level it could have been on, and I have some serious “self-evaluation” to do before I can become a productive member of society. I can only hope that somewhere in all of this lies the key to this answer I seek.
Final Product
The final product meets the requirements of my project. However, major changes have been made to create a viable game with my limited experience and time. Instead of using straight-C++ coding, I opted to use an emulator called BYOND, which allows for the creation of a game within the confines of a pre-made engine. For this reason, the graphics had to be simplified as well. Most of my original artwork and scenes had to be re-invisioned in order to conform to the "top-down" format of this engine.
See below for a current screen shot:
See below for a current screen shot:
Testing
Measuring Playability:
To measure the playability of the game one must first consider the following factors:
1. Age of participants
2. Difficulty of game
3. Aesthetics
4. Controls
Whereas the participants must fall within the Teen-Mature age bracket as defined by the *ESRB; the difficulty can neither be so low as to not be a challenge, nor to high as to become tedious; the game must appear pleasing to the eye and the scenes should be easy to interpret; the controls must be straight forward and easy to learn.
To determine playability, each participant will be issued a survey at the end of the testing period, where they will rate the program from 1 – 10 across these several factors through a series of 20 questions. A score of 1 indicates “poor”, where as a score of 10 shows the player found the game to be “excellent” in that specific area. Depending on the scores received, the game may need to be revised to better appeal to the audience, or left as tested if reviews are overwhelmingly positive.
Plan of Action:
1. Testing will performed by the second week of February 2008.
2. If necessary, the game will be revised and participants will again perform survey
3. Process will repeat until product receives overwhelmingly positive reviews
4. Game must be completed by March 15, 2008
Testing Procedure:
1. Prepare demo of game for testing specifications, i.e. ensure sound and video functions and control schemes are adequate, and it can be completed in two hours or less.
2. Submit game to fifteen subjects, each over seventeen years in age. The game will be on a CD Rom, along with a survey document to be completed upon finishing testing
3. Subjects will play game until completion, upon which they will fill out a survey describing their experience and recommending any changes.
4. Game will be revised according to specifications of original subjects
5. Process will repeat with new subjects until all parties are satisfied with the overall experience.
Expectations:
The game will most likely have to endure several rounds of testing before being submitted. However, any necessary revisions will not be major, and the process should run smoothly. Ultimately, the game should appeal to audiences due to its content and appropriateness and will be a prime candidate for submission into the TSA Competition.
Results:
The testing of Willowbrook went smoothly. Participants were chosen from online, as well as classmates, and other peers. They were all from a 15 – 25 age group, so their opinions reflect that. Each individual was instructed to fill out a short, five-question survey following their play-testing to evaluate their experience (See Figure 1-3). The majority of participants found the experience positive, and it is a viable game. However, the problems that did occur will not be rectifiable, due to the limited time following testing and the end of the school year.
Figure 1-3: Survey
Please indicate your response to the following by circling one of the corresponding numbers. One represents extremely poor, while ten indicates perfection.
1. How would you rate the game’s overall playability?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2. How effective where the graphics in conveying the overall theme of the game?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3. Rate how easy the story was to follow?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4. How enjoyable was the game overall?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Please indicate your answers to the following open-ended questions in the space allotted.
1. What was the most memorable/defining aspect of your gameplay?
2. What are some suggestions you would make to improve the overall experience?
To measure the playability of the game one must first consider the following factors:
1. Age of participants
2. Difficulty of game
3. Aesthetics
4. Controls
Whereas the participants must fall within the Teen-Mature age bracket as defined by the *ESRB; the difficulty can neither be so low as to not be a challenge, nor to high as to become tedious; the game must appear pleasing to the eye and the scenes should be easy to interpret; the controls must be straight forward and easy to learn.
To determine playability, each participant will be issued a survey at the end of the testing period, where they will rate the program from 1 – 10 across these several factors through a series of 20 questions. A score of 1 indicates “poor”, where as a score of 10 shows the player found the game to be “excellent” in that specific area. Depending on the scores received, the game may need to be revised to better appeal to the audience, or left as tested if reviews are overwhelmingly positive.
Plan of Action:
1. Testing will performed by the second week of February 2008.
2. If necessary, the game will be revised and participants will again perform survey
3. Process will repeat until product receives overwhelmingly positive reviews
4. Game must be completed by March 15, 2008
Testing Procedure:
1. Prepare demo of game for testing specifications, i.e. ensure sound and video functions and control schemes are adequate, and it can be completed in two hours or less.
2. Submit game to fifteen subjects, each over seventeen years in age. The game will be on a CD Rom, along with a survey document to be completed upon finishing testing
3. Subjects will play game until completion, upon which they will fill out a survey describing their experience and recommending any changes.
4. Game will be revised according to specifications of original subjects
5. Process will repeat with new subjects until all parties are satisfied with the overall experience.
Expectations:
The game will most likely have to endure several rounds of testing before being submitted. However, any necessary revisions will not be major, and the process should run smoothly. Ultimately, the game should appeal to audiences due to its content and appropriateness and will be a prime candidate for submission into the TSA Competition.
Results:
The testing of Willowbrook went smoothly. Participants were chosen from online, as well as classmates, and other peers. They were all from a 15 – 25 age group, so their opinions reflect that. Each individual was instructed to fill out a short, five-question survey following their play-testing to evaluate their experience (See Figure 1-3). The majority of participants found the experience positive, and it is a viable game. However, the problems that did occur will not be rectifiable, due to the limited time following testing and the end of the school year.
Figure 1-3: Survey
Please indicate your response to the following by circling one of the corresponding numbers. One represents extremely poor, while ten indicates perfection.
1. How would you rate the game’s overall playability?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
2. How effective where the graphics in conveying the overall theme of the game?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
3. Rate how easy the story was to follow?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
4. How enjoyable was the game overall?
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Please indicate your answers to the following open-ended questions in the space allotted.
1. What was the most memorable/defining aspect of your gameplay?
2. What are some suggestions you would make to improve the overall experience?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)