Messages

Wow! Thank you, you rock.

This all started with this thread[url] by Edmundo. His design looked great, but I had this little bug nagging at me about not leaving 800x600 behind, but nothing to back it up.

I am actually surprised that we have users that use such large resolutions. Being pixel pushers I assumed that a majority of resolutions would float toward the 1024 area. I'm curious about what someone like Helm runs, and what his fellow pixel artists run.

As an adventure game developer I feel that creating a personal website above the 800x600 size is kind of wrong anyway. I am assuming that most folks who play these games may not have super fast computers, because why upgrade beyond a couple hundred MHZ and above a 14" monitor if you spend most of your time in 320x200 running a game that demands no more than a 486 Popular statistics aside, I consider us to be outside of popular statistics.

On the other side of the resolution issue is the guideline that says something like "easily readable". This is so wildly open to interpretation. However, if you are reading single lines of text all the way across a 1024 screen this will in fact make your eyes tired. Smaller reading width (but not too small) is easier to read. However, if you are operating at some crazy resolution then I could see this as a problem too.

I believe in making a website for the visually impaired no matter what you are doing. Even if your designing for the latest First Person Shooter that requires super fast reflexes and a uber resolution, there isn't anything that says a visually impaired person wouldn't be interested in learning about the game, maybe even enjoy observing matches, or playing the game and becoming better at it than everyone else. I just don't think anyone should be left out.

Anyway. I run at 1024x768 and usually have my browser maximized with nothing else open. I hope we get a lot of posts here. It would be really great to have these stats for the community.

later,
-junc

Mind if I hijack this thread for a second...

[hijack]
@Oneway

Designing for 1024x768 though is the standard nowadays

By chance do you have a reliable source for this? I'm a web developer at OSU and we are forced to keep our pages at a 800px width. I have yet to find a good reason that we do this. I thought it was part of accessibility standards but haven't been able to find any proof of that. As far as I can tell it's just the tech departments random or outdated decision. You seem to know what you're talking about from the post in this thread and in Rharpe's thread, so I believe you. I just need a good source to convince my boss!

[/hijack]

We now return to our regularly scheduled program...

thanks,
-junc

I think your parents should take an active role in your intrests and find out for themselves if the game is appropriate for you. It's not up to you to tell them that it is appropriate for you. I don't think that is a decision we should make or influence.

But, you asked...so:

I went to the website and the game is rated M for Mature, a 17+ rating. So, in short I would say the answer is no. However, as LGM said, if your parents are wackjobs enough to let you watch simulated murder rather than simulated sex.... Personally, I don't think you should be viewing either.

However, when you turn 18 and you're all screwed up like the rest of us, please come back and visit us and tell us about your girl troubles. I'm sure you will fit right in .

Another thing. Your parents should be very proud of you. That you would ask this question at all is a sign of maturity and respect for your parents. So, I'm sorry that we have kind of bashed them in this thread (well, just LGM and me). I think you need to sit down with them and have a long talk.

good luck,
-junc

I put up a second one, not sure if you saw that. heh...working while I post. If you need any more help feel free to contact me by PM or email if you like. Once you get more material for the project you should be able to go a lot further with it.

later,
-junc

Understood.

Could you still upload a scan of the business card? It will help with design ideas since he likes the way it looks there. Could be a reason it looks better that you aren't seeing that one of us may see.

Also, the resolution on the logo text is screwy. It needs to be anti-aliased really bad. When you resize it looks like crap. I'm not saying change the text, just make it not look pixelated. What is the exact font? Do you have access to the originals that were used to make the business card?

Anyway, here is my page:

http://www.juncmodule.com/pub/davehelp.htm

Actually, I'm messing around with a few different things for the page. Just look here:

http://www.juncmodule.com/pub/

Some magical mythical survey taken at some point says that people spend something like 3 seconds on most websites (on first visit). Because of this statistic splash pages are generally frowned upon.

You need to get information to your customers and get it to them fast. Pretty splash screens, fancy flash movies, and all of that crap have become pretty useless in the corporate world. Look at most of the flash you see around now, it is integrated into the site, it is functional, simple and familiar. Splash pages are amateur and very 1999.

Hopefully my little rant there will give you some ammunition to convince him to drop the splash page. However, if you are unable to convince him then please scan and upload the business card so we can see how he makes the graphic work there. Pretty much I would attempt to simulate the business card on the page.

later,
-junc

The graphics are beautiful. A few things though.

Frames are bad. You have done very good things with the frames, but in the end, it is still a big ugly frame. When I see frame I think Frontpage 1997.

If you are going to stick with the frame you need to optimize the site for at least 1024x768. Currently I still need to scroll down to see the scrolling frame.

The google map thing just doesn't work. It doesn't seem to fit with the other pages. I would either find a different service to use, different way to use that service, or just create a static image of a map. I'm honestly not sure about the point of the map really. Oh, and when I clicked on it I really expected to see a sitemap.

later,
-junc

They are totally wrong; in my opinion.

People so often overlook the "just want to have sex" factor. Especially men.  While most of my post was not meant to be serious I do think that Layabout does need to consider the idea that she is not interested in a relationship. Everything he mentioned in his post was very physical. Women are allowed to just want to have sex too. I think it is a little demeaning that men always assume the girl wants the relationship. I mean, look at Layabout, he's the one freaking out about the relationship aspect of things. Not the girl. That is why I advise the date thing, it puts things in the relationship zone and out of the physical zone.

I only bring up the "just want to have sex" factor due to personal experience. I have been in Layabout's position many times. The german always wins.

EDIT: just to clarify Gord10, I'm not disagreeing with your opinion. Just trying to explain my opinion.

later,
-junc

1. Men just want to have sex (zee germans!).

2. Women just want to have sex (so don't expect too much in relationship land).

3. You need to have the German taken care of (I am available next week, but not on Monday. If you can track down C.leks he has better availability, but he's messy as hell.)

4. Pub, Pub, and Pub. So far all you have said is that she likes to hump you in hallways of the pub. Get her out of that place. Ask her out on a proper date. Chicks dig that stuff.

5. Just be honest. Don't bullshit her. If that doesn't work none of it will. Try to be yourself. But take things slowly.

6. Make being bored with her a priority. If you find that you can be bored with a person you are set for life. It is the one trait in a budding relationship that so many people fail to search for. Learn how to be her friend.

7. Do the nasty as soon as possible. It may be all she wants and you might as well get it while you can.

8. Never take advice from adventure gamers.

later,
-junc

http://www.courier12point5.com/games/lbb/lbb.zip

later,
-junc

[SPOILERS:]

how much have you done? What would you like to know?

SPOILERS:

Spoiler

All you need to do is talk to all three people and then get their bags

First talk to everyone.
Goto the bathroom and pick up the thing on the floor.
Use the cockroach on the "Green" girl (Ilsa? I don't remember her name).
She will move so you can go through her bag, you find an earring.
Go sit next to the blue lady (the dame)
She will move. Go through her bag and get the dental floss.
Use Dental Floss on Earring.
Walk to the grey mans seat and use the fishing line on his briefcase. (you actually need to be kind of beside him)

The End.

[close]

I just ran the site through the W3C validation service.

Wow.

27 errors on "http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/ac.shtml"

Is there any reason the site is like this?

Anyway, I think that kind of says that it doesn't matter about the resolution. Since no one has complained about the current state of the site I doubt it is an issue.

As far as I know, 508 does not have any mention of screen resolutions

Yeah, I couldn't find any actual guidelines that said yay or nay to resolution. I work for OSU as a web developer and we have all of these funky guidelines set up by the Humanities department and we are supposed to adhere to 508 guidelines. However, all of that crap is so vague and tangled up in legal mumbo jumbo that I never really know what is part of which one. I just use W3C for everything.

Something of note. I guess people in the UK are getting sued for not complying with the new accessability laws. Since AGS is a UK based thing, Chris could run into some issues down the road if AGS gets super big and someone decides to be a jerk. Although I think this is mostly government and public services that are getting in trouble.

Perhaps we can get Chris to put a poll up requesting a AGS user system spec survey, kind of like the one that Valve puts out for Steam users:

http://www.steampowered.com/status/survey.html

later,
-junc

Exceeding 800x600 for a website width is generally considered to be unfriendly to the visually impaired (if you were following 508e guidelines I believe it is considered a violation). I recall only a few years ago a lot of complaints about AGS being a little demanding on some peoples machines. Some of those people indicated that they were running 500MHZ machines still. Basically, to run 1024x768 you need to have a 17" monitor. I'm just not sure if everyone in the AGS community is going to have a top of the line machine. If gaming isn't your thing and you play games from the 90's then upgrading just isn't a priority.

Why not redesign it for 800x600? Or perhaps the screenshot could be enlarged on mouseover via some fancy CSS and layers.

I agree that the design is more appealing. I just don't think we should overlook any of our users just because of an assumption about their resolution.

later,
-junc

I recommend you read through this thread a little:

http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=26676.0

If you are asking this to measure the community reaction to such a game that thread may give you some insight. However, if you are posting to see if people think it would work then I would say yes.

I agree with Scotch in that you run the risk of not making a game. I think that you will find that some puzzles will just kind of pop up naturally. Just don't force them. I've been toying with this idea myself, so I hope it will work out for you.

later,
-junc

I stumbled across THIS a while back. While it pushes his opinions a lot, it does have some good points and is presented in a pretty clear way. I think it could be used as a nice guideline in conjunction with Helm and MrC's ideas. Personally I think this is the best piece of advice:

For me, when making puzzles, if there is no reason for a puzzle to exist I don't let it exist.

As far as modern commercial adventure games are concerned I think they all tend to miss the mark. I have yet to play anything made in the past ten years that made me think I like modern commercial adventure games (AGS games on the other hand...). Then again, I haven't played many. I did read a rather nasty review of that Sherlock Holmes game recently though.

later,
-junc

I have looked into upgrading my PC a few times over that past year and it is just not worth it. You are already over $250 with no OS, power supply, processor fan, or case. You have onboard sound and video. By the time you are done you may very well have enough to buy a 360.

Basically, my advice is just to buy a crappity HP/Compaq or some locally built budget PC. Buying the parts alone just doesn't really pay off anymore, not if you are going the budget route anyway. Then again HP/Compaq is complete crap, but if you are concerned about money it is a better investment. Just make sure it has the slots you need for upgrading in the future.

good luck,
-junc

require_once 'textfile.txt';

will most likely solve your problem.

Include is the right idea but will actually include the contents of the text file I believe. I'm assuming that you have the actual content of the pages declared as variables within the text file. If this is the case then require_once should do the trick. I once had my website set up this way. There is one other alternative to require_once that will work, I can't remember what it is.

Hope that helps.

oh...I just looked it up and require and include are nearly the same, except in how they handle errors. Just ignore me.

later,
-junc

That's my fault. I keep on screwing around with my website and domain. I feel sorry for the poor sucker that keeps on updating the links. Whoever you are, thank you and I'm sorry  :

What are you looking for Radiant?

juncSource should always be here:

http://www.juncmodule.com/downloads/juncSourceCollection.zip

I'm using that domain for storage and the juncmodule.net for the pages which is a little backwards from the way I would like it. I need to talk to Darth Mandarb about that...

You can always PM or email me if you can't find something. I'm still around, just lurking  8) I'm not working on a game or anything... ¬_¬

later,
-junc

that can be considered 'landmarks' in the gaming industry

Right now it seems that in the main stream you have First Person Shooters and Massively Multiplayer Online Role Playing Games. Those two types of games dominate everything. I imagine that most would consider Everquest to be the godfather of all MMORPGs. Not the first, but certainly the first one to become massively popular. If you are interested in the development of game technology I suggest you check out Masters of Doom, it is a quick, interesting, and easy read. Gave me new found respect for the guy that said "Story in a game is like a story in a porn movie. It's expected to be there, but it's not that important."

Currently, as already mentioned, the Half Life 2 engine (Source Engine) and the new Unreal Engine 3.0 are dominating the headlines and will determine the graphics of what we will be playing over the next few years. On the good side of things games are evolving in some interesting directions with the big "next gen" cost of development problems. Developers are being forced to either purchase Source or Unreal Engines or actually make a game that is interesting.

One of my favorite genres is RTS games. Starcraft and Age of Empires set the standard for this format. Age of Empires III, in my opinion, kind of missed the boat. I understand that one of the Lord of the Rings RTS games really broke some ground. The upcoming sequel/follow up to Rise of Nations, Rise Of Legends looks promising. The graphics demands of RTS games are beginning to drive me away though.

I'm under the impression that fantasy games and gothic horror games still rule the gaming industry

I would say that it's more about military games. There are tons of WWII games. Battlefield 1942/Battlefield 2 being the best online and Call of Duty 1 and 2 being the best single player. If it isn't present day military then it is all about space marines/alien hunters. If you haven't played Halo, you should. It defined a whole slew of FPS games. Now they all feel exactly like Halo. It is a redundant game at times but extremely fun at others. Unfortunately all of the knockoffs just got the redundant part down (anyone ever play Unreal II?)

Finally there is The Sims...which I won't even bother talking about. But do keep an eye out on Will Wright's Spore game. It looks really interesting.

Most of what I've talked about are strictly PC games. Console games are a completely different animal. FPS games go over somewhat poorly on consoles (Halo being the exception to the rule). Racing/Sports, RPG, and tactical games (Splinter Cell) go over rather well.

If you want to see what is coming out as far as big and flashy graphics, look at what Unreal and Source licensees are doing with those engines. Also, check out the new CryEngine2, it looks rather promising. One final thing, check out the new Super Mario game, this sort of use of 3D could very easily redefine video games. Nintendo has been such a bizarre company over the last few years. Like some sort of loud embarrassing cousin that keeps on shouting out really strange things. I'm just waiting for the day that everyone stops to listen and realizes that he's right.

later,
-junc

I emailed you stuff. It has nothing to do with this song...