Messages

As I understand it, you are talking about the original Sierra version of QFG1VGA, right? The game is made in Sierra's SCIV interpreter, which has no technical relation whatsoever to AGS (although they can produce similar looking games).

This sounds like a timing issue due to the speed of modern equipment, so I recommend that you try a CPU slowdown program like CPUKiller

Check these products:

http://www.cpukiller.com/products/cpukiller/index.html

http://www.the-underdogs.org/tools/turbo.zip

You might also want to read the guide to running old games on new equipment (XP in particular) at Home of the Underdogs: http://www.the-underdogs.org/guidewin.php and http://www.the-underdogs.org/guidedos.php#f

Edit: This specific speed issue in QFG1 is discussed at http://www.sierraplanet.com/~ugarte/Resources/Technical.htm#SpeedQfG1

For some reason I DID think about Aimee Mann when I heard the song, but I'm not all that familiar with her, so I couldn't tell if it actually was her. And although I've seen Magnolia I didn't recognize it.

I agree, it fit perfectly for the credits. I love it when games have real songs at the end, like in Tierra's KQ2VGA, Phantasmagoria and Alone in the Dark 3. It feels like an added bonus for finishing the game.
I hope I'll be able to get one at the end of my game-in-development, Shadowplay, without violating any copyrights. Maybe even something written especially for the game. Better start inquiring with acquaintances who play in bands.

This is probably the best use of alternate paths in any LucasArts game. As lucky said, only if you gave the  REAL grail diary to the colonel, you'll go to Berlin to retrieve it (and get a chance to meet Hitler). I hope you have a savegame.

Played it through last night and I LOVE it. This is certainly the best AGS game I've played in a long time. I hope it'll get some nominations - at least in the puzzle and possibly story category - for next year's awards.

At first I was a little put off by the graphics, but they really grow on you, and by the end I loved the style (for some reason the bar is my favorite). And that first puzzle nearly made me stop playing (it made little sense to use the bottle when you had the flagpole, I thought). But after that... wow, wow, WOW! It all seemed so professional, the way new locations and telephone numbers were added. The plot, which actually made sense in the end. Although...

Spoiler

... it must be hard for a crime syndicate to profit from a business that only pays in coins

[close]

The puzzles were excellent. Even when they were a bit too game-like (the vodka puzzle in particular) they were well integrated in the game world. My only real trouble were those puzzles that required repeated action, and it took me a while to figure out how to get past the job interview, but I laughed out loud when I did. (I was a little disappointed though that you never got around to read those chemistry books and mix some of that solidifying liquid).

All in all this was a great game. The characters were funny (I loved how they all gathered down at the bar), the story is good and the dialog is really well written. And I really appreciated the amount of animation.

What's that song at the credits?

Edit: Oh yes, maybe I should mention, it took me some time to realize that you could go behind the hotel. Maybe that should have been a bit more obvious (possibly even a small path going around, for the garbage men).

I've tried to keep out of the whole "was it offensive" discussion, so I didn't even comment on the game, but seeing as things have cooled down, here are my two cents:

I actually liked the puzzles. It took me a while to get out of the cell, but that was mostly an issue of pixel hunting (hadn't noticed the button on the drinks machine). That was the only time I got stuck.

Graphics were wonderful. The music fit the mood. I didn't really care for the humor, but I didn't actually find it offensive, just un-funny at times. I thought the only problem with the masturbation scene was that it wasn't really necessary. You ask the guy for a favor, he asks for something in return, you give it to him, and he fulfills his part of the deal. That's all you needed to know really. Now, if him masturbating had somehow ruined your plans, THAT would have made a difference (at first I thought it would mess things up when he fell, but it didn't as you've already picked up the plutonium). And seriously people, using other people's hands or eyes on scanners certainly isn't a new thing in movies or games. May I remind you that the hand isn't cut off before the guy dies when you try to sedate him (to steal his key card).

Good luck with the sequel!

Hey Yufster,

I'm glad there's more to the plot. Evil never worked all that well as motivation for anyone but purple tentacle, did it ? As you describe it, the story sounds really interesting. I hope that we'll somehow be able to free the nightmare creatures without contaminating the dream world. Seeing them banned to the Toxic Dump for eternity wouldn't be a very happy ending.

Good luck with the project!

P.S. I actually liked the intro screen

(I still have a little notebook full of Laura Bow 2 notes, and I still haven't beaten it. But, maybe someday...)

Oh my god, yes, THAT was one game that required notes. As I recall you had to scribble down a whole hieroglyphic alphabet to be able to answer a riddle in the end.

BTW, is making notes going to be useful in Shadowplay, if I may ask?

Hehe, you saw right through me, didn't you . Yes, that was one of my motives for bringing this up, actually. I'm still trying to determine HOW much to aid the player in keeping track on the research. I think Shadowplay is one game that SHOULD really be played with notes, because it adds so much to the feeling of being a detective yourself (the first Laura Bow game actually came with a notepad and pencil in the box!) But on the other hand I don't want to alienate players who doesn't keep notes by making it too information heavy.
Currently, the only player aid in Shadowplay is Dinah's personal planner/diary where she notes tasks and appointments for that specific day. It's more or less like those "mission goals" screens in games like Medal of Honor, only better integrated with the game world. I'm working on a system for storage of clues that are no longer relevant, and thus need not fill up the inventory, but which the player might want to review. Some kind of scrapbook or something similar. I've also developed a system where Dinah summarizes longer texts, bringing up the main clues, for those players who don't want to read everything.

You can use a name I once got from a random hero name generator: Tex Tungsten! How's that for memorable?

Some days ago, I opened my Indy 3 box and found, along with the disks and the manual, some folded paper sheets with my handdrawn maps of the catacombs. It was a very nostalgic experience. I remember, back in the day, when I made notes, drew maps and kept lists of locations with unsolved puzzles. Some of them still exist, like my maps of the QFG 1 and 4 forests and that nasty bamboo maze for LSL3, while others got lost somewhere along the way, such as my endless amount of Manhunter notes, all the names and clues I scribbled on the back of the photocopied manual pages (ah yes, the days of copy protection schemes ), or how about those licence plates and telephone numbers from PQ1 (did anyone actually use the in-game notepad?).

These days, when I play games, and somebody mentions a telephone number, a password or a name, I expect the game to record it for me. Not for a second do I consider writing it down. That's not how things are done anymore. (Of course, not recording an important phone number or password should never lead to walking deads. The player should be able to return to find the information - but isn't it more satisfying to actually make the connection yourself, than running around with the number on a piece of paper in your inventory?) Some games keep dialog transcripts, others use a journal to keep track of events (to be honest, I rarely use these features, as I complete most modern adventures in a couple of days, but they have become the standard). And this is a good thing, isn't it? Isn't it?

I started to think about why I am so disappointed with nearly every adventure game coming out these days. Either there is no challenge you just go through them in less than 10 hours, or you get frustrated with the absurd puzzles, download a walkthrough and go through the game in even less time (Syberia and Post Mortem are examples of these two experiences). Either it's a breeze or it's impossible. There's just no in-between.
Point-n-click may be to blame for some of the problem. Instead of finding out what to ask npcs about, you just click through the lists. My feeling is that you no longer pay attention to what's being said, because you're really just going through the options, hoping to trigger the next part of the game. Rather than actually observing and deducing, you stumble upon the solution by random. Is this why Myst style "logic"-puzzles have become so popular with game designers, because they are nearly impossible to solve unless you "get it"?

Has it become too easy to play games?

Should we, instead of simplifying interfaces and reducing the amount of work for the player, demand even more of an effort? To expand the process of playing outside the scope of the screen?

First of all, I'm still looking forward to Beyond Reality. But I must admit that I think you should have waited with the demo. It didn't make a very good impression on me. As others have said, the lack of hotspots is a problem, and there are SO many bugs (one not mentioned yet is that looking at the shoes triggers the same response as when using you-know-what with them).

But that said, the dialog was funny, the puzzles were ok (I won't comment too much on it since you said you've changed it for the demo, but I love competitions where you sabotage your opponents equipment - it reminded me of the diving contest in EMI) and the graphics were really nice. Very Lucas Art'ish (the entrance to the tent reminded me very much of the entrance to the circus in MI - or am I thinking of one of the tents in Loom? Not sure.) I loved the scene with the nightmare creatures. Especially when he answers the question about his robe, that made me laugh out loud. Except I think it went on a bit too far after you'd made your point. But maybe that's on purpose - part of the bad guy's personality? Nevertheless it really made me cringe when you had him actually say "beyond reality", but maybe that's you me. I can't stand it when a title is spoken as a phrase in a movie or a game.

Plotwise, I think it would be more interesting if the bad guys weren't JUST evil, but actually had some other motivation than wanting to rule the dreamworld. Remember in The Nightmare Before Christmas how the monsters of Halloween Land are actually TRYING to be good, but just don't understand the concept of Christmas, and end up scaring people instead?

Oh yes, I wondered why you didn't use the intro screen when it's actually in the demo (use debug mode at teleport to room 0)?

BOYD1981: Oh my god, I can't believe I didn't know about the effects functions (I always figured they were single frames effects like the ones in Paintshop, so I never even opened that menu). Some of the light effects are JUST what I needed for my game. Thank you so much for pointing this out.

MrColossal: I must admit that I haven't played the Urban Joe demo, but from the screenshots it looks quite cartoony. If you think that your technique would work for other styles as well, I'd love to hear about it.

What's the status on Byzantine? I just replayed the demo yesterday and was reminded of how much I'm looking forward to this game. I LOVE the atmosphere, the visuals, the music, and that strange but cool effect when looking at the papers on the desk. Judging from that and the intro, I could swear you've got some kind of Vanilla Sky/Abre los ojos-thing going on

Are there other any sources of information about the game than the short description at the Screen 7 site?

This has been bugging me for a long while: How do you draw "organic" animations like wavy water, rising smoke or fire so they'll loop smoothly (i.e. the last and first frames match up)? For example, how would you go about creating somthing like the rippling ocean at the Rubacava harbor  in Grim Fandango without a 3d program (or are there any freeware 3d programs that could do such animations to use as templates)?

I enjoyed the endings article, although it was very brief. Especially regarding multiple endings. Also, maybe you could have elaborated a bit on the examples - without giving away too much, which is always a problem. If people haven't played or just don't remember the games, the examples weren't much help.

I hope you'll write some more about endings. I think it's a topic which would make for a great design theory discussion.

Great issue Vel!

One little thing about the pdf version that annoys me is the "What should the ending be in an adventure game?"-heading. It appears isolated at the very bottom of page 8. It really ought to be moved down to the top of page 9.

Oh yeah, and "Shadowplay" is written in one word (I know, it really SHOULD be in two, but the title is one word). Nice to be mentioned though

Keep up the good work!

That last version is excellent. I think you should add a little more shadow to the face though, under her nose in particular. There's too little tonal difference (contrast) in the face compared to the dress.

Also, when looking at her arms I really can't see where the elbow is. The left arm (her right) works ok, but the right one (her left) looks weird. Too short. Maybe it's a perspective thing (is it bent slightly forward?) but it's oddly proportioned.

Otherwise you've found a great style. The evolution from the first version to the last is amazing!

Amazing post Goldmund! THAT's the way to do it. The only problem is that you've covered everything, and I have very little to add

A few small comments though:

Rebel Without a Clue brought up the concept of other people's reactions to the character. And I think this is a VERY interesting idea, especially in regards to establishing a player character unknown to the player but known to the NPCs.
Remember the beginning of Terminator 2 where we see everything from the Terminator's point of view, while he's searching for clothes? Imagine a first person adventure game where you never see the player character. But you could certainly tell the difference between Full Throttle's Ben and Bernard from Day of the Tentacle by the way the bartender in the biker bar treats them. Do others seem afraid of you? Are they being condescending? All these help to define your character and his place in the game world.

Another thing, somewhat related, is the QFG games. We knew next to nothing about the hero. He never even spoke. He had ONE SINGLE CHARACTER TRAIT: He wanted to be a hero! These games a very dependent on the perception of others and what you must do to gain their respect and admiration.

But even more interesting is the games' use of the character as a tabula rasa, an empty slate. It's the existentialist idea that a person is defined by his actions. Obviously this is somewhat the opposite of Goldmunds topic - he's talking about personality as a pre-defined quality to be revealed during gameplay. I think the QFG games mark an interesting borderline between "player as player character" and what I'd like to call "true roleplaying". In both cases it's actually the player who chooses the personality of the character, but while he in the first merely injects his own traits into the character, in the second he himself constructs an imaginary identity for the player character, as different from his own as a character written by others would be. You could call it an identity simulator. It's the idea of what-if: What would it be like to be this kind of person. The character is an unwritten, but in the player's mind well defined, role, and he performs this role in the game world by his choice of (inter-)action (I always found it a flaw that you had to CHOOSE your character class instead of becoming it through your actions.) This was the case with Blade Runner (and the action-adventure BioForge) as well. Your actions defined your true identity - a human or a replicant,

What does this have to do with anything? How could this be used by designers, if the player is actually writing his own part? Well, I think the solution might be in the idea of performance. That THE PLAYER'S INTERACTION WITH THE GAME  SHOULD BE THE NATURAL ACTING OUT OF THE ROLE WRITTEN FOR HIM BY THE DESIGNER.

As actions define personality, personality should define interaction. I think this is a point missing from Goldmunds post - the connection between personality and the player's options and limits for interaction.

Quoted from DGMacphee in the first GTD discussion: "As Tim Schafer once described in a magazine the difference between Bernard (DOTT) and Ben (FT) -- Bernard would have to unlock a door using a sandwich by taking apart the beard putting it under the door while using the toothpicks holding the sandwich together to push the key out onto the bread slice (like the old newspaper trick)."

Did you look at the ashtray on Peter's desk? Not sure if that makes any difference.

what i find funny is that at the same time this was said we were saying how stereotypes in games and in life are stupid and that people shouldn't do it

But it does show why games use stereotypes in the first place, as apparently it's VERY easy to connote gayness through small visual signifyers. Congrats on creating a non-stereotypical straight character!

A question about that style. Is it a GUI with pictures and that you change the pictures everytime a dialog comes, or is it a complete level for each conversation?

EDIT: Ok, I re-read your question and I realize that you're probably asking about how it's done technically in AGS? Is that it? I'm using Dorcan's excellent AGS version of the GK1 dialog system. which uses a separate room and switches the character sprites into dialog closeups whenever you enter conversation mode. See his tutorial at

http://membres.lycos.fr/digitalmindstudio/script.php?id=2&____ord____=1062411613

(I just wish he'd translate the last part of the tutorial too )


I'll keep what I first wrote in case somebody else wonders about the interface:

"I'm not sure what you're asking here. If you're familiar with GK1, this interface is very similar. Moving around and interacting with the environment is done through Sierra-style icons - they pop up in the top part of the screen when moving the cursor over it. Text appears in the black area below the main image, somewhat like subtitles on letterboxed movies.
Whenever you talk to someone, two things may happen: If it's a minor character, maybe a street vendor who you ask for directions, conversation takes place in a LucasArt style with dialog options appearing as text in the bottom part of the screen. When conducting more complex interviews with major characters however, the background is replaced by a black screen with portraits of Dinah and the NPC, and dialog topics appear as in a list in the middle of the screen, as seen in the picture on the left. QFG4 had a similar interface (except no hero portrait). Certain topics lead to a list of further sub-topics, but you can always return to the beginning by picking "Something else".

I hope this clarifies things, although I'm not even sure if it's what you were asking about."

I'm not the biggest fan of horror, actually I really hate the genre, (gives me the creeps, or is that normal??)

Isn't that what horror is supposed to do?
Shadowplay isn't "horror" in the popular meaning of the word. There are no vampires, werewolves or zombies. Not even a serial killer on the loose. It is much more of a psychological suspense story in the style of Nicholas Roeg's Don't Look Now and Polanski's Rosemary's Baby with just a dash of Thomas Pynchon for that paranoid feel. The first 40 minutes of Lost Highway - but not the rest! - should give you a good indication of the atmosphere and genre.