S3XY's G4D Progress Log #4?!

Posted by S3xySeele on July 22, 2016, 5:37 p.m.

So even though I was able to create such an amazing masterpiece of a game in just a single day (if you haven't already had the pleasure of playing it, you can get it here: http://files.64digits.com/S3xySeele/Splendid%20Genesis%20Memorikan.zip), part of me wonders… how much more masterpiecy would it be if I actually utilized the entire allotted time of 28 days and took it seriously?

Plus, the game I ended up creating for the competition has some similar characteristics to a game I already wanted to make, and gave me a better understanding of how I want to go about making it. Zuurix's game also helped inspire me.

Since this isn't for an actual competition, I won't be strictly adhering to the 28-day guideline… I think I'll just generously round up to the end of August. Plus, even this isn't strictly a hard deadline for completion… rather, it's just a checkpoint to see how far I was able to get in that amount of time. I may still continue to develop the game beyond that point.

Anyway, the game's name will be Redvane… a name I previously mentioned February 2014, which was accompanied with a simple movement demo. (http://files.64digits.com/S3xySeele/Redvane_v0-01.zip)

Open world space exploration RPG. You can think of it as being something like Outlaw Star/Cowboy Bebop: The Game.


S3xySeele 7 years, 8 months ago

Alright, some rudimentary tech has been created, allowing me to have a 2D universe with the same diameter as the real observable universe.

I've settled on a scale of 8 pixels = 1 light-second, which means that the entire game universe is 23,462,784,000,000,000,000 pixels squared.

This does present a challenge though… how do I present the scale of stuff like your spaceship, the planets, etc when 1 pixel is 23,285 square miles and could fit about 9 Earths? There's really two practical options here… exaggerate the scale of these objects, or represent them as small as I possibly can (even if that means a single pixel).

I'm strongly leaning towards the former, since it's basically a JRPG overworld where having everything properly to scale doesn't really matter.

Zuurix 7 years, 8 months ago


Single pixel sounds like good option, it's kind of realistic.

I think I'm going to expand my competition game as well.

Maybe it will be my multiple year project like Sector Six, after I finish Sector Six.

S3xySeele 7 years, 8 months ago

The thing about taking the pixel route is that it makes something else more difficult… giving the player's ship a sense of motion.

With things not to scale, it's simply a matter of having a starry background that you can visibly see scrolling along. But I don't think a starry background would jive well with single-pixel celestial bodies…the real things would be too hard to see amongst the fake stars, I think.

Then again, the lack of a sense of motion could be an intentional design choice… Nothing but your HUD giving you your speed and distance readings for "nearby" objects to know you're actually moving through the void of space… Hmm. I kinda like it.

S3xySeele 7 years, 8 months ago

The stars will definitely be cut, just leaving them in for now while testing.

I think I'm going to increase the scale of everything by 10. 1 pixel = 2,328.5 sq miles, 80 px = 1 lightsecond… this way, celestial bodies have some sense of scale relative to the player's single-pixel ship (as well as other celestial bodies, instead of having all but the most massive planets being no more than aa pixel). Jupiter, for instance, will be 37x37 pixels with this scale.