I've worked with BYOND enough to know it's graphical limitations. Recently, I've looked into various other 'game-creation languages', mostly of the 3D-type. I'm not going to mention them by name on these forums, but the ones which offer the most hope for someone like me are derivations of BASIC.
After working with these '3D Basic' languages, I really really miss BYOND (as a language). It is simply incredible! The ease and power are mind boggling.
However, BYOND's graphical limitations are crippling for someone not coding a text mud.
Don't get me wrong, graphics are not *everything*. Just last year I played the original Pool of Radiance again (for a while). There is much much more to a game than eye-candy.
but.. but, *fun* is part of every game (I hope!). Fun (in a CRPG) comes from a good story, great combat, interesting NPC/PC interaction, Graphics, Sound, etc.. basically: EVERYTHING in the game! When I went back to Pool of Radiance I had fun at first, but then I started thinking to myself: 'Boy, even if these battles had Baldurs Gate graphics, this'd be more fun.' and.. 'I'd definately finish this classic game again if my party was battling it out in 3D."
I know for many of you, you're first reaction to all this would be "Who needs graphics!?!" But, I truly believe they are an important part of any game. Would 'Alone in the Dark' have been successful with CGA graphics? No. That game's success was based almost entirely on its graphics and sound. I can't count the number of times I jumped out of my seat after opening a door and having a zombie pop out, groaning... I know CRPG's aren't 'based' on graphics, but they do make the game more *fun*.
Many of the 3D 'game-creation' languages out there are based on a simple concept: a base programming language with a separate 3D engine. The programming language can be used for anything (3D or 2D or text), but the language has 3D codes and functions and procedures as a part of the language. It is a really neat idea (just like BYOND), and it allows the 'casual programmer' to make games.
I guess the point I'm trying to make is this: BYOND's language is GREAT. It's simple, powerful, and neat. A marraige between BYOND's language and one of these 3D engines would be monumental. No limitations. The possibilities would be endless for us 'casual programmers', and maybe the software companies would quake in their boots just a little...
- matt
ID:193958
 Sep 12 2001, 9:04 am
|
|
Spuzzum wrote:
The more advanced you make graphics, the less game there is. This can be true, but don't dismiss people who like graphics as part of their games. It's as valid as anything, and not a reflection of intelligence as many believe. My very smart friends almost all love playing 3D immersive games...why? Because they are visually immersive, and for many, even hardcore readers like them, that brings something that a text game doesn't. That said, it is possible to do quite nice graphics in BYOND, but you have to be a guru to execute the code. Whenever I finish my multi-turf library maybe that will help...but probably not a whole lot, because there is still a lot of extra hoops you have to jump through. So for a guru the graphics are not a limitation...however, map limitations are a definite limitation. I always thought of Diablo as a boring hack-em-up game (at least, as far as I could tell from its demo) coated with icing in the form of pretty graphics. Sometime soon I'll write up some stuff on this...there's just so much that could be discussed that it's hard to know where to start. Anyway, the important point, because I see this thrown around a lot on these forums: Because you (editorial you) don't like a game doesn't mean it's a bad game. It just means you don't like it. Because someone else likes a game that you don't like doesn't make them an idiot. It makes them someone who likes a different game. We don't usually assume that someone who likes different books is an idiot, we usually treat them as a reader with different tastes, and sometimes tastes that we might learn from if we ask them questions about why they like something. Same goes for games. | |
Thanks for the kudos and constructive criticism, Matt.
I, too, feel that the graphic routines are the biggest-- or at least the most noticeable--limitation in BYOND. While many of the fine coders here have done some amazing things within the system, far beyond what I imagined it could handle, there's no denying that some things are just not possible in the current framework. These fall into two categories: computational limitations and design limitations. By "computational limitations", I mean things like the frame-rate, lack of full-color support, choppy movement, and so on. These are things that we will strive to improve as time goes on. I see no reason that BYOND games cannot perform as well as any tile-based systems out there, but we are not at that stage just yet. I consider this a pretty big priority, because a little improvement in the glitz will go a long way in making the games-- almost every game-- look better. Coupled with some better customization of the interface (skins, full-screen mode, etc), and I think that we'll have a pretty appealing package. The "design limitations" on the other hand, pose a far greater challenge. Even if we licensed a great 3D graphics engine, the BYOND language wouldn't be equipped to handle it. This is because the tile-based system is really at the core of the design. That's not saying that it can't be done, but it would really entail a separate product, one where the language is completely separated from the interface. It would be a far more powerful tool, but it would also, by virtue of this power, require more skill to use. Flexibility and usability are almost almost traded off in this fashion. And finally, as some of the others have noted, there are advantages in not having the "cutting edge" in graphics. Mainly, it means that you spend more time working on game design. If you look at popular game titles, typically the staff contains a few programmers and dozens of artists. Sometimes this even compromises the game play; I liken it to big-budget movies that sometimes forget to put the plot in. I can't deny that great graphics really add a lot to a game, but I don't think they should be the deciding factor. My favorite game of all-time is probably Wizardry, and that has pretty lousy graphics by today's standards. Of course, it may just be the case that my feeble mind isn't equipped to handle the complex controls needed to manuever through the today's games! --Tom | |
Tom wrote:
Thanks for the kudos and constructive criticism, Matt. I completely agree, although graphics are of course a big part of a game, sometimes it becomes too big. My favorite FF is prob 3 or 7, and I barely play anything after that even though the graphics in those are FAR more advanced than any of the previous ones. I was glued to the screen when playing FF7, and it can still get me playing for hours on end, whereas a game such as FF8 just has a plot worth nothing(Not saying it was very bad, but with a better plot it could have been a great game.) Which brings me to another point, that seems to have been left out. Music, is a GREAT part of a game, also one of the things that severely disappointed me in FF8/9. The music in the previous FF's was mostly great, it adds a LOT to a game. Im running into the problem if I have multiple people in a group casting spells, as far as I know(im not TOTALLY sure how its set up) you can never have more than 1 mid and 1 wav playing at a time. I use a different wav for each type of spell, and if 4 people cast a spell roughly at once, they will(well, should, untested) cut eachother off, and you will only hear the most recent cast. Although this is not a big problem, it would be very very nice to have multiple wav support(Up to a reasonable number, mind you.) Alathon | |
I don't understand why people complain about BYOND's graphics at all. The more advanced you make graphics, the less game there is. I always thought of Diablo as a boring hack-em-up game (at least, as far as I could tell from its demo) coated with icing in the form of pretty graphics.
Fallout, runner-up for a magazine's game of the year in '97 I believe, had a 640x480 resolution graphics engine, and was several years behind the rip-roaring three-dee engines that everyone was so addicted to, like Quake, which supported res' for the real powergamers, up to 1024x768.
Roguelike games are considered by many as the most fun pastime available -- by taking the focus from graphics, the only thing needed to be concentrated upon is the code itself. Original roguelike games were forced to use ASCII graphics. New roguelike games use ASCII because it allows a designer to take tons of additional code and turn it into something remarkable.
(With my current C++ skills, I could probably make a DOS Roguelike, given time and inclination. All I'd need to know is ANSI colour commands.)
With BYOND, the focus is not directed on graphics because BYOND is designed to give people a chance to actually design what they want to design into a computer game.
If you wanted to add 3D to a BYOND game, trust me, the entire system would have to be completely revamped to handle dozens of new things -- collision detection to name one of them.
And who's to say that you can't render some images externally and then import them into BYOND?: