Bionite: Origins needs Support!

[General BlackDragon]

Nice photoshop

[DeusExCeteri]

I feel like, as far as layouts go, you're best bet will be to maximize space used in the corners of the screen, keeping the centre as free of UI elements as possible. On the one hand it is true that the player will have increased reaction time when all the information they need is in the same corner of the screen but the milliseconds gained will be nothing compared to the aesthetic of the UI and the potential issues with clutter. The two most important things to consider are maximizing the viewspace of the player while at the same time minimizing the time spent finding information.

As an example of a UI that I find particularly straight-forward and easy to use, Jak X's was very well laid-out: http://www.2play.ch/media/ps2games/jakx ... 899102.jpg

Health and defensive weapon on one side, fuel and offensive weapon on the other side, map top-left corner, and other relevant information (in this case enemy racers) in the top-right corner. The layout worked exceptionally, obstruction of the screen was kept to a minimum and at the same time the player didn't need to hunt for any information.

As an example of a UI that I find particularly dreadful, consider that of Supreme Commander:
http://i.ytimg.com/vi/LhXQ6qjysgE/maxresdefault.jpg

Icons are small and feel cramped, information is placed on what feels like the wrong side of the screen or is grouped together with unrelated things, huge amounts of space are wasted along the unit tab at the bottom and with the minimap enabled things are even more awkward (which is why most player don't use it).

Both these games are very different animals but both have components of BZ in them and by extension Bionite as well. Jak X is a fast-paced racing game with vehicular combat and various game modes, Supreme Commander is an epic-scale rts with unit counts often reaching the upper thousands, especially with a good PC and mods enabled. There is something to be learned about an effective UI from both of them, I'm sure, and I know some people will agree/disagree or have better examples, these were simply the ones that stood out the most in my mind.

Will either of these UIs work Bionite? probably not, there are more factors to consider and the style of gameplay, while combining elements of both, is very different. I will still strongly recommend that the information relevant to the unit piloted be placed far-right or far-left with the minimap in the opposite corner, and information regarding the player's resources and army be placed along the top. I also recommend to shy away from long, narrow bars with information on them if possible, items in a list will always fall more naturally in a top-to-bottom format than a left-to-right format and will be easier to read as well. Depending on the amount of info and size of the icons it will also save more space on the screen, though this should be balanced out with how much of the left-right viewspace the player needs in combat. I know that I'm not some UI guru but honestly, I would hold off on mucking with it too much until the Bionite forums are in working order and take a public vote on what it should look like.

I hope this comes across as more useful than just nitpicky. Tell your modeler/texturer nice moon, by the way, I envy their work.

[LtFEED]

Thanks for the feedback Deus

I sent a link to your post to the design team to look at also.

quick runthrough vid of latest strat build (bugs and all):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HuokQji ... e=youtu.be

[LtFEED]

Testing the build limit:

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4knU4 ... sp=sharing

Im setting up the resource managment code and we are testing how the engine can handle many vehs. I think in UDK we can have a larger number of pawns. Im wondering about the build limits for each veh type and the total number of vehicles that can be active in a game. Any suggestions?

[DeusExCeteri]

Im wondering about the build limits for each veh type and the total number of vehicles that can be active in a game. Any suggestions?

I'd suggest something similar to BZ1 where the player is limited to 1 squadron of like-units (and 10 units per squadron) but I would further divide up the "offensive" squadron into escort, combat, and assault (or light, medium, and heavy)

So the unit tabs would be something like Utility, Defense, Escort (light offense), Combat (medium offense), and Assault (heavy offense)

So the player wouldn't be able to spam dozens of the best units in the game but at the same time they aren't limited to just 10 attackers. 50 units plus the player and production units sounds fairly balanced to me and should certainly be manageable. That's half of what BZ2 can do but to be honest I've never used a full roster of 100 units unless I'm goofing around, armies that size just aren't necessary if you ask me.

[Ded10c]

At this point you need to consider the machine specification you're aiming for. It's perfectly possible to create something in Unreal that will bring even a high-end system to a crawl. Now you're on steam you can access the results of the hardware survey to get a statistical lie of the land. You should create your limits from that than try to force them around it.

[LtFEED]

Just got the final demo of the spawning sequence for the recyclers:

https://youtu.be/0ZOTgAmocN4

[LtFEED]

the Factory [Nostromo]:


New Venus Map 'Maze' [Hotshot]:


Production is still on schedule to release on Early Access in May, 2015.

[LtFEED]

Just re-read GSH's sticky about why a BZ3 title is unlikely.

In addition to having tremendous insight and a Nostradamus-like ability to predict the future, this rang particularly true to me:

There's just too much baggage, expectations, and emotional investment in the BZ name that it'd be harder to live up to. Due to copyrights and trademark law, other developers can't just take the Battlezone name and use it because they want to. They have to secure licensing.

Based on my experience, this statement is prophetic and true. This game has more baggage than any other I know of. I have had more than a few people refer to BZ as 'their' game, that had nothing to do with the games creation. I really think that these people feel they made/own/had anything to do with the BZ brand creation. I have had more than a few threatening emails from people telling me not to make Bionite.

It is really unfortunate because of what an awesome game BZ was/is. I have spent well over 8000 hours and 500,000$ to develop Bionite (100% inspired by BZ and BZ2, just sayin'). There was no way any publisher or venture capitalist would have put up that kind of money without some gaurantee of getting it back with a ROI. I have worked with venture capital people before and they end up owning 99% of the company and everyone just works for them.

I think the gameing industry has changed a tremendous amount since the emergence of MineCraft. That game in particular seems to be paving a way for some indie developers to have some opportunity in the gaming industry. In addition to Steam EA, there is a window of opportunity for an indie developer.

My opinion is that the crew that made BZ and BZ2 were not only making a fun game but they were pathfinders also. GSH's breif insight for us to see what they experienced in 1998/1999 is absolute gold, if you understand its value.

[DeusExCeteri]

As always, Nostromo's designs continue to amaze me, that is a beautiful factory. Never been a fan of stationary factories (feels like a bit of a downgrade, eh?) and a bit sad to see it's not spacious enough for any huge mecha. If those aren't the BO style though, that's cool, more than anything I'm excited to see how BO takes the BZ concept in directions it's never been before.

Still though, walkers and other mecha, I hope there's plans for them somewhere down the line. BZ's mechs have always been a bit of a letdown in both 1 and 2, aside from maybe the Golem. Seeing Nostromo's work with the other vehicles, I'd love to see his take on the classic two-legged death machines.

[Ded10c]

I should warn that, in gameplay terms, narrow canyons and corridors simply don't work well in a game like BZ. They restrict movement too much. The skill, chaos and pace that comes with manoeuvrability is lost and it just ends up a matter of who pulled their triggers first.

[LtFEED]

Still though, walkers and other mecha, I hope there's plans for them somewhere down the line. BZ's mechs have always been a bit of a letdown in both 1 and 2, aside from maybe the Golem. Seeing Nostromo's work with the other vehicles, I'd love to see his take on the classic two-legged death machines.

This is a good point. We do have plans and concepts for different types of vehicles. I would also like to see a mech-type vehicle in Bionite, mostly because Nos would do a kik ass job.

The only problem with using the different types of vehicle is the game balancing. I have met with Will Stahl and his primary advice to me was 'leave the non-hover vehs out". When he means to say is, according to Will; when perfecting the game balancing in BZ2, having the non-hover vehs made it difficult.

Based on Will's advice, we have stayed away from non-hover vehs. We do have wheeled vehs and were working on several tracked vehs, but these wont be integrated until after the release on Steam.

[LtFEED]

I should warn that, in gameplay terms, narrow canyons and corridors simply don't work well in a game like BZ. They restrict movement too much. The skill, chaos and pace that comes with manoeuvrability is lost and it just ends up a matter of who pulled their triggers first.

this is a very good point. We have finally reached the point in developement where we can actually consider game balancing. Hotshot and I are looking at various map designs to enhance gameplay, referring to the original BZ maps for inspiration. My opinion is that the map layout has a huge effect on gameplay. THe issue you mention Anthony is exactly what the design team has been considering. Hotshot started this map to encourage disscussion on map design.

I agree that the narrowness of the canyons is a problem, so were going to tweek it. We like the maze design because it creates a unique gameplay situation. THis map is a 5 x 5 map so it is the medium sized map. Hotshot is going to do a version of this map in a 7 x 7. I will suggest to him making the canyons wider for manuverability.

This brings up an interesting point. What do you guys think was the best BZ1 or BZ2 map design? Which map do you guys think applied itself best to manuvering large battle groups around, and yet still had an impact on game play?

[Red Spot]

As a single map it will be good. Look at the maps in vanilla BZ2. It also comes with a 'canyons' map, and the AI (the team) does remarkably well on that map, eventhough pathing is a bit less.
You do probably want some open terrain though, even if it is just so you can actually choose where to fight.

[MrTwosheds]

Different maps require different strategies. Just make sure the maps work ok and let the players work out the strategies.
Over here in bz2 land you will hear people say things like small maps with x number of pools and nothing to bump into are good... Well they only think that because they have the choice. (and Adhd )

The only problem with using the different types of vehicle is the game balancing. I have met with Will Stahl and his primary advice to me was 'leave the non-hover vehs out". When he means to say is, according to Will; when perfecting the game balancing in BZ2, having the non-hover vehs made it difficult.

Made it complicated...What makes a game like this such fun is the number of potential variables. Don't get too concerned about balance, just plan updates for dealing with serious issues.
Bz2 play strategy has never remained static, as soon as one approach becomes an entrenched play style, someone finds a way through it and it all changes again. Walkers rock, especially when your enemy is not expecting one.