Wow. Rock on dude. This is quickly becoming one of the best 2D art pieces on this site.
I have found myself in dire need of some kind of dirt path to guide players with. I have been recolouring the sand paths to more of a brownish colour, which sort of works.
The buildings look similar to some that I have been working on.
I have basically took http://opengameart.org/content/isometric-medieval-city-sim-assets and tried to make them orthogonal. Looks ok I guess, though I have some alignment isues, and I need to give them some shading. I might do the rest of the original set and put them on OGA.
My game characters are kind of wide so I had to make the door wider.
Not doubting the abilities or dedication of your team, but there have been 100s of small projects just like this that have been mothballed in the past. Your environments and characters seem to be of a good standard, but if the programming is where you are needing help then the potential of the game becomes at lot more limited.
Great work on v1.2. The whole thing looks more polished and easy to use. I could just drag and drop it into Tiled and it all worked perfectly.
Get known for making things as good as this and you will start attracting real job offers I'm sure.
I don't know when it has been updated, so I check this page regularly. Making a quick 'Updated!' post in the comments would send an email to everyone who has comment follow-up notification e-mails enabled (I think it is by default), and put you back into the active forum topics section.
I don't know if this practice is frowned upon here, but this stuff is too good not to.
Some of the new tiles have allignment issues, but nothing that can't be worked around.
The new modular objects are by far better. So useful to be able to mix and merge/overlay different object combinations. Relaly helps break up that strict 'grid' feeling that tile based games have.
I would even recommend removing the rocks in water tiles as the same effect can be achieved with the new componential rocks, and there are is more variety.
The fence sections could benefit from have the backgrounds remove too. Can't use on sand ATM.
The earlier you learn the basics of programming the better. The better I got, the more I realised I could do.
It was this strange feeling of empowerment, almost godlike, that kept me opening up my IDE and smashing away at my keyboard, knowing that in my own little virtual world, anything was possible.
The only one of those mentioned that I have used is Game Maker, but after a quick look at the basic features of each one, my opinions are as follows:
RPGToolKit: Looks a bit meh. The crappy looking graphics on a lot of the games will just be down to whoever has created them. The renderer shouldn't care what colour pixels are used on each image.
Big downside is it only works (officially) on Windows PCs. It wouldn't be worth trying to 'port' it to other platforms.
Game Maker: We have this at college, and I don't like it. I guess that is just me being used to doing everything myself and not having stuff hidden from me behind a GUI. Some people have made some cool stuff with it, and the GML language that it comes with is easy enough to use. Might end up being your best bet for now.
Engine001: Never heard of this one before. Looks OK, I guess. The scripting system works similar to Kismet used in UDK, intuitive and easy to use. Though your game will probably feel quite similar to most of the other games made with it.
If you do decide to concede to the inevitable, then JavaScript is what I recommend you learn. Most of what you learn from it can be transferred over to some other language very easily once you understand the core concepts.
"We have a completely original game idea, now we just need people to make it for us."
The programmers are going to be by far the hardest for you to get hold of. There is a shortage of engineering-minded people in the mainstream games industry ATM, which means that established companies are paying good money to get their hands on them.
A full GDD is a must for me before I think about joining any project.
You will need to learn some programming if you want to make anything, even if using an engine.
It's just an unavoidable truth I'm affraid.
No game 'engine' will have all of the features that you will require for your specific game. No game engine is going to make the game for you.
An engine is just meant to do the 'heavy lifting' stuff (rendering, collision detection, device recognition, posibly networking). You will need to create the actual gameplay logic yourself.
I was going to recommend trying to find the source code for an older game that already has the features that you want and change it to taste, but even that will require programming knowledge.
I've been doing programming for a little while, I come from C++, working with SFML, but am now doing JavaScript with Phaser for web based games.
I was hesitant at first to learn how to program. This was the sentiment I had at the time:
"It looks too complicated!" "It will take years to learn!" "What if I am no good at it? Q_Q"
But I just sat my ass down and trudged through it. There were bits I hated, times where I thought I should just give up, that the end goal of making my super awesome game was just too unrealistic.
It all depends on how much you really want to make whatever game I guess.
If you are just getting started with the idea of making a game, then be warned, you have a mountain to climb.
Also, the 'quality' of the graphics as I think you mean it doesn't really make a difference speed-wise. You are still going to be drawing the same amount of pixels onto the screen, regardless of whether your assets look 8-bit or photorealistic. Unless you actually intend on making the display area of the game smaller...
The tall grass would make sense as a tile, but the boulder should be independant, like the tree.
I think some of the other things should be separated into their own objects too, like the small rocks in the ground, tree stump, flowers, etc. ATM they are a part of the 'center' grass tile, and look odd if used on a border. See attached image.
Being able to mix and match different objects with different background tiles makes each one a lot more versatile.
Modularity = Reusability.
Ideally the tree should also be broken up into separate tiles with 1px spacing for consistency with the rest of the tileset.
Cool stuff. I like how you are using only native web technologies.
There seems to be many web developers, and many game developers, but so few web game developers that are using modern stuff (sorry Flash).
Have you tried Phaser for making games?
Wow. Rock on dude. This is quickly becoming one of the best 2D art pieces on this site.
I have found myself in dire need of some kind of dirt path to guide players with. I have been recolouring the sand paths to more of a brownish colour, which sort of works.
The buildings look similar to some that I have been working on.
I have basically took http://opengameart.org/content/isometric-medieval-city-sim-assets and tried to make them orthogonal. Looks ok I guess, though I have some alignment isues, and I need to give them some shading. I might do the rest of the original set and put them on OGA.
My game characters are kind of wide so I had to make the door wider.
Good piece. Really grabs the attention straight away. Sounds very Hans Zimmerish.
The default volume is way to loud for me though. I crapped myself when I put it on with my normal monitor volume.
Humm... Good question.
I just created a random collection to see what you mean. There is no obvious way to delete collections. Wierd.
Wow, a zombie FPS.
How original...
Not doubting the abilities or dedication of your team, but there have been 100s of small projects just like this that have been mothballed in the past. Your environments and characters seem to be of a good standard, but if the programming is where you are needing help then the potential of the game becomes at lot more limited.
The screenshots here are way too big.
Great work on v1.2. The whole thing looks more polished and easy to use. I could just drag and drop it into Tiled and it all worked perfectly.
Get known for making things as good as this and you will start attracting real job offers I'm sure.
I don't know when it has been updated, so I check this page regularly. Making a quick 'Updated!' post in the comments would send an email to everyone who has comment follow-up notification e-mails enabled (I think it is by default), and put you back into the active forum topics section.
I don't know if this practice is frowned upon here, but this stuff is too good not to.
Some of the new tiles have allignment issues, but nothing that can't be worked around.
The new modular objects are by far better. So useful to be able to mix and merge/overlay different object combinations. Relaly helps break up that strict 'grid' feeling that tile based games have.
I would even recommend removing the rocks in water tiles as the same effect can be achieved with the new componential rocks, and there are is more variety.
The fence sections could benefit from have the backgrounds remove too. Can't use on sand ATM.
The earlier you learn the basics of programming the better. The better I got, the more I realised I could do.
It was this strange feeling of empowerment, almost godlike, that kept me opening up my IDE and smashing away at my keyboard, knowing that in my own little virtual world, anything was possible.
The only one of those mentioned that I have used is Game Maker, but after a quick look at the basic features of each one, my opinions are as follows:
RPGToolKit: Looks a bit meh. The crappy looking graphics on a lot of the games will just be down to whoever has created them. The renderer shouldn't care what colour pixels are used on each image.
Big downside is it only works (officially) on Windows PCs. It wouldn't be worth trying to 'port' it to other platforms.
Game Maker: We have this at college, and I don't like it. I guess that is just me being used to doing everything myself and not having stuff hidden from me behind a GUI. Some people have made some cool stuff with it, and the GML language that it comes with is easy enough to use. Might end up being your best bet for now.
Engine001: Never heard of this one before. Looks OK, I guess. The scripting system works similar to Kismet used in UDK, intuitive and easy to use. Though your game will probably feel quite similar to most of the other games made with it.
If you do decide to concede to the inevitable, then JavaScript is what I recommend you learn. Most of what you learn from it can be transferred over to some other language very easily once you understand the core concepts.
Basically what I read here was:
"We have a completely original game idea, now we just need people to make it for us."
The programmers are going to be by far the hardest for you to get hold of. There is a shortage of engineering-minded people in the mainstream games industry ATM, which means that established companies are paying good money to get their hands on them.
A full GDD is a must for me before I think about joining any project.
You will need to learn some programming if you want to make anything, even if using an engine.
It's just an unavoidable truth I'm affraid.
No game 'engine' will have all of the features that you will require for your specific game. No game engine is going to make the game for you.
An engine is just meant to do the 'heavy lifting' stuff (rendering, collision detection, device recognition, posibly networking). You will need to create the actual gameplay logic yourself.
I was going to recommend trying to find the source code for an older game that already has the features that you want and change it to taste, but even that will require programming knowledge.
I've been doing programming for a little while, I come from C++, working with SFML, but am now doing JavaScript with Phaser for web based games.
I was hesitant at first to learn how to program. This was the sentiment I had at the time:
"It looks too complicated!" "It will take years to learn!" "What if I am no good at it? Q_Q"
But I just sat my ass down and trudged through it. There were bits I hated, times where I thought I should just give up, that the end goal of making my super awesome game was just too unrealistic.
It all depends on how much you really want to make whatever game I guess.
If you are just getting started with the idea of making a game, then be warned, you have a mountain to climb.
Also, the 'quality' of the graphics as I think you mean it doesn't really make a difference speed-wise. You are still going to be drawing the same amount of pixels onto the screen, regardless of whether your assets look 8-bit or photorealistic. Unless you actually intend on making the display area of the game smaller...
The tall grass would make sense as a tile, but the boulder should be independant, like the tree.
I think some of the other things should be separated into their own objects too, like the small rocks in the ground, tree stump, flowers, etc. ATM they are a part of the 'center' grass tile, and look odd if used on a border. See attached image.
Being able to mix and match different objects with different background tiles makes each one a lot more versatile.
Modularity = Reusability.
Ideally the tree should also be broken up into separate tiles with 1px spacing for consistency with the rest of the tileset.
EDIT: NVM I didn't realise it has been updated.
Pages