Commercial AGS Boot Camp - 5 common issues

[Radiant]

An issue is that if I release a game as a zip, Enhanced Saved Games won't work (unless there's a way to do the windows registry operation from within the game somehow).

[Monsieur OUXX]

An issue is that if I release a game as a zip, Enhanced Saved Games won't work (unless there's a way to do the windows registry operation from within the game somehow).

You could make that Registry edit happen in a .bat file (e.g. "finish install.bat"):
- the installer runs it automatically
OR
- the player who just unzipped the game must run that batch file manually.

Maybe you could find a way to check from within the game if the player ran the .bat file, and if not, to display a message saying to do it.

[Radiant]

Maybe you could find a way to check from within the game if the player ran the .bat file, and if not, to display a message saying to do it.

Interesting. Is that possible?

[m0ds]

Dave is definitely a pioneer.

New Lessons Learned: How to break BMT Micro.

http://www.reddoorbluekey.com/features/interviews/hackers-stole-30000-blackwell-deception-steam-keys-dave-gilbert-responds/

[Dave Gilbert]

Also known as: how NOT to do a free giveaway.

[Fitz]

Just to take your mind off the heavy topic -- and pester you about another annoying topic - I have a question to you, Dave: I'm playing Resonance right now, and the resolution in it is 640x480 (and so was Primordia, if I'm not mistaken). Have people reported any problems there? I remember you recommending wide-screen to avoid trouble with 4:3 ratios being displayed incorrectly on laptops, etc. The reason I'm asking is I'd love to make something BIG (and possibly commercial) in  hi-res, and 800x600 is the closest to what I'd be willing to settle for. Alas, there is no wide-screen alternative. So... should I reconsider? I've already made one game in 800x600 and got no complaints so far -- but I have no idea whether it's because no one had any or no one bothered. Thoughts?

[Dave Gilbert]

Resonance was 320x240 scaled up to 640x480. Primordia was 320x200 scaled up to 640x400. There weren't many major complaints, but they have been vocal. The most annoying issue that it's hard to know how a monitor will react to it - sometimes it will stretch the image to fit the widescreen format. It's not a deal breaker by any means, but it definitely does look... odd in this day and age.

It's a shame that AGS doesn't support high-resolution widescreen resolutions yet. Is that in the works with the new update?

[Igor Hardy]

It's a shame that AGS doesn't support high-resolution widescreen resolutions yet. Is that in the works with the new update?

There's a perfectly working HD version of the newest AGS beta. I tested it for my 720p game I started on an older custom build done by Skygoblin. I also got to scale the game screen to different sizes (so that it could fit on the image from an 1024x768 projector for instance) and so far runs flawlessly.

[Fitz]

Just downloaded and tested the 3.3.0 beta (that's the one you're talking about, right?) and the only new available resolution is the 1024 x 768 you mentioned -- which is still 4:3, not widescreen.

Dave, was there a particular brand/model of laptops that had this issue, or was it the graphic card (hi-end vs. integrated)OR system issue (Vista vs. Win 7)? I think I could try asking people (here or GameJolt), whether anyone had these issues with Monty. Also, in case I ever go commercial, the most fair thing to do, I think, would be to release a demo of the game -- which would allow the potential player/buyer to test whether it works on their system, OR whether they can handle the weird display.

[Dave Gilbert]

Sadly, I don't know! As with the DirectDraw issue, the results vary from computer to computer and I don't really have the time or resources to troubleshoot them all (my method of dealing with it now is to avoid the problem in the first place!) But like I said, it's not a deal breaker. It didn't stop Resonance from being one of our best-sellers in 2012, but I think it got a lot of leeway because of how old-school it looked. For a game as high-res as you want to go, people might not be as forgiving.

[Snarky]

Just downloaded and tested the 3.3.0 beta (that's the one you're talking about, right?) and the only new available resolution is the 1024 x 768 you mentioned -- which is still 4:3, not widescreen.

He's talking about this build: http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/forums/index.php?topic=49014.0

[Fitz]

For a game as high-res as you want to go, people might not be as forgiving.

Yeah, people get MAD when things don't work right. I remember Bulletstorm getting a whole load of 1's on Amazon for using the wretched GFWL -- which admittedly sucks, and I myself almost gave up on the game trying to get GFWL to basically work, but the game itself was a blast, actually. Same thing happens on GameJolt -- where games are free, so there's no reason to get this mad. The problem is you can't expect all people to tinker with some settings in some file in some folder somewhere like back in the days when you had to set up your sound card in every game, know your IRQ, DMA and whatnot, and know your way around autoexec and config.sys. Hell, I wouldn't count on everyone to notice the suggestion to play the demo first -- because there have been times when I myself have clicked my way blindly through some forms, only to notice I bought the wrong thing and it said it right there on top, in caps.

So yeah, best to make the experience as smooth as possible for the user. I'll try the link that Snarky posted, see how that works Thanks!

[StillInThe90s]

Resonance was 320x240 scaled up to 640x480. Primordia was 320x200 scaled up to 640x400.

Possibly stupid question (it's pretty late over here), but why upscale? What are the benefits?

[Armageddon]

Resonance was 320x240 scaled up to 640x480. Primordia was 320x200 scaled up to 640x400.

Possibly stupid question (it's pretty late over here), but why upscale? What are the benefits?

Retro pixel boners.

Also it would be so small you'd never be able to click on anything and everything would be a pixel hunt and the text would be hard to read.

[Snarky]

Two ways to understand the question, Armageddon:

Q1) If you run the game fullscreen (as most games are set to by default), it fills the screen regardless, so why upscale?
A) Not all computers/screens can set 320x200/240 resolutions, and even if they do the results aren't always great (the graphics either appear blurry or just in a small part of the screen). By turning on one of the upscaling filters in AGS, you get better compatibility. (3x and 4x might look even better depending on your screen.)

Q2) Why does Wadjet Eye do that thing (in some of the Blackwell games, at least) where the graphics are pre-scaled, so the game is actually running in a higher resolution than it looks even without an upscaling filter?
A) Mainly to be able to display text in higher resolution, I believe. Plus, the oldest Blackwell game(s) are from before AGS supported filters. I agree that it's an odd choice. (Interestingly, the beta version of Resonance did the same thing, but not the final version.)

[EliasFrost]

I upscale my game only because the mouse sensetivity is based per pixel and not resolution, so for a 320x200 game the sense is very choppy while a 640x400 is a lot less choppy. It's also so that I can fit more text on the screen on 640x400 than on 320x200.

[Trapezoid]

If you don't like low-res text and mouse movement, don't make a low-res game.

Also, I've said it before, AGS needs to abolish fullscreen mode and just upscale the game image to the user's current screen resolution. Most screens these days are designed to look good at one specific resolution and nothing else.

[EliasFrost]

It's a lot harder for one person to develop high-res games than it is to use low-res pixel art upscaled. Technically it's higher resolution since the assets are upscaled to a higher resolution.

[donkeymilk]

For a game as high-res as you want to go, people might not be as forgiving.

Yeah, people get MAD when things don't work right. I remember Bulletstorm getting a whole load of 1's on Amazon for using the wretched GFWL -- which admittedly sucks, and I myself almost gave up on the game trying to get GFWL to basically work, but the game itself was a blast, actually. Same thing happens on GameJolt -- where games are free, so there's no reason to get this mad. The problem is you can't expect all people to tinker with some settings in some file in some folder somewhere like back in the days when you had to set up your sound card in every game, know your IRQ, DMA and whatnot, and know your way around autoexec and config.sys. Hell, I wouldn't count on everyone to notice the suggestion to play the demo first -- because there have been times when I myself have clicked my way blindly through some forms, only to notice I bought the wrong thing and it said it right there on top, in caps.

So yeah, best to make the experience as smooth as possible for the user. I'll try the link that Snarky posted, see how that works Thanks!

I reckon it's an extremely important thing to get right ,as there is a huge amount of games released regularly and your casual user would quickly move on to something that doesn't give them any issues.
If u want to sell your game commercially and be successful,it's those casual users you need to satisfy.
The majority of people here ,probably don't mind too much if a game requires a bit of fiddling with to get working.

[donkeymilk]

Quite a dilemma. I suppose some kind of ideal solution would be an installer that is also recognized by archivers as a self-extracting archive so you can just open it with them and extract stuff wherever you want. Then you can just add a note that points that fact out so experienced users can take advantage of that fact if they wish.
Or am I just being a perfectionist and overcomplicating everything again?

Problem solved!!