GAME JOBS
Contents
The Indie Shooter Roundtable: Mak, Cho, And Omega Fire At Will
 
 
Printer-Friendly VersionPrinter-Friendly Version
 
Latest Jobs
spacer View All     Post a Job     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Sledgehammer Games / Activision
Level Designer (Temporary)
 
High Moon / Activision
Senior Environment Artist
 
LeapFrog
Associate Producer
 
EA - Austin
Producer
 
Zindagi Games
Senior/Lead Online Multiplayer
 
Off Base Productions
Senior Front End Software Engineer
spacer
Latest Blogs
spacer View All     Post     RSS spacer
 
June 7, 2013
 
Tenets of Videodreams, Part 3: Musicality
 
Post Mortem: Minecraft Oakland
 
Free to Play: A Call for Games Lacking Challenge [1]
 
Cracking the Touchscreen Code [3]
 
10 Business Law and Tax Law Steps to Improve the Chance of Crowdfunding Success
spacer
About
spacer Editor-In-Chief:
Kris Graft
Blog Director:
Christian Nutt
Senior Contributing Editor:
Brandon Sheffield
News Editors:
Mike Rose, Kris Ligman
Editors-At-Large:
Leigh Alexander, Chris Morris
Advertising:
Jennifer Sulik
Recruitment:
Gina Gross
Education:
Gillian Crowley
 
Contact Gamasutra
 
Report a Problem
 
Submit News
 
Comment Guidelines
 
Blogging Guidelines
Sponsor
Features
  The Indie Shooter Roundtable: Mak, Cho, And Omega Fire At Will
by Brandon Sheffield [Design, Interview, Indie]
8 comments Share on Twitter Share on Facebook RSS
 
 
July 28, 2008 Article Start Previous Page 2 of 4 Next
 

How long does it take you to make each game?

KC: It depends on the size of the game, but most of the games take six months. The first three months is spent playing many, many prototypes, destroying all of them, and another three months is making one game into a full game that can be released to the public.



JM: And you have a day job too, right?

KC: Yeah, I have a day job. So after, I need to work mainly on the weekend.

JM: Oh, okay. Not a lot of time.

KC: (laughs).

How many hours would you say, for one game?

KC: Umm... I don't know (laughs).

How long did it take to develop the original PC Every Extend?

Omega: Three months.

KC: It's hard to tell in terms of time.

O: (laughs) The first month, because it was my first DirectX project, using a Windows program that we used to draw 3D polygons and exercising model techniques.

The next month involved making the prototypes and playing them with friends. The last month was used creating finishing parts, making the boss and two levels and many other things.

This game started as a contest entry, right? You made it for a contest.

O: That's right.

You went to college at the time, right? So you went to college and made games...

O: I had to do them at the same time (laughs). I didn't go to campus much.

KC: (laughs)

O: Every day I played and made games.

I want to ask everyone - how do you design bullet patterns?

KC: Hmm... bullet patterns...

JM: I look at Kenta Cho's games.

(Everyone laughs)

KC: You're stealing!

JM: Sorry.

O: Yes, yes, yes.

You too?

O: Yes. I play lots of games and I copy the bullet patterns that I think are good. (laughs)

For example?

O: Umm... Cave games and the Touhou series... what else? Yeah, the Raiden series.

KC: When I thought about designing my language, BulletML, that describes bullet patterns, I wanted to make bullet patterns like the ones in the Cave shooter called Progear. It has very unique bullet patterns.

The bullets fire other bullets and the firing direction changes dynamically. So I want to model that kind of movement of each bullet, and figure out how to write down these patterns in XML.

So that's why you created [special bullet-specific scripting language] BulletML?

KC: Yeah.

Do you use BulletML?

JM: No. Actually there's not a lot of bullets in my games.

That's true, just enemies.

JM: Just mostly formations. I couldn't tell you how I create...

KC: Yeah, I know. BulletML is too complicated for most games.

JM: Yeah, I like simple, simple enemies with simple predictable behavior. Then it's easy to...

KC: Yeah, yeah, yeah...

O: You don't have to create a game that actively uses BulletML. When you try to make an easy game, it takes too much time to introduce BulletML.

KC: I had some difficulty writing the parser to BulletML that drives the complicated pattern of the bullets. Many people don't have to write such uncontrollable, complicated bullet turns.

JM: One time I tried doing, instead of BulletML, I used Perlin noise. Do you know Perlin noise?

KC: Perlin noise?

JM: A noise function. Sort of like random but not... So on one axis is parameters, and then apply the noise function on that and that creates the bullet pattern, but it's fifty-fifty. Sometimes really good, sometimes fairly bad, so...

KC: (laughs) It's very difficult to control good bullet patterns or bad, terrible ones.

JM: I like, what I like to do is - each thing in the game has its own code that runs it. So instead of bullets, because bullets are very simple behavior. It's still simple, but you can get more complex behavior if you hard-code the enemy behavior. So like on the fourth level there are birds that come at you, when you shoot them they fly away, so that's how I do it.

 
Article Start Previous Page 2 of 4 Next
 
Top Stories

image
Gearbox's Randy Pitchford on games and gun violence
image
How Kinect's brute force strategy could make Xbox One a success
image
Microsoft's official stance on used games for Xbox One
image
Keeping the simulation dream alive
Comments

Arthur Times
profile image
As someone who's not trying to flame but is being genuinely curious, just what is the appeal to these types of shooters? Everyone is going gaga over them but all I see is a triangle shooting a square.



Will someone please explain to me the appeal of these games over say "traditional" shooters like Gradius or Ikaruga.



Thanks.

Anonymous
profile image
Abstract visuals have their own appeal when they are well designed, but the keys are:



- they are not expensive to make, in terms of time or money (to hire a real artist).

- they can be made to work in ways that would hardly make sense with 'real' graphics, and they encourage experimental gameplay designs. Tumiki is a good example of that.

- They can use more extreme palettes rather than bland ones (which is a common criticism to the recent 1942 in XBLA), and in general they are much more clean and clear. Then everything gets obscured by pyrotechnics and bullets, but that's part of the design, not imposed by aesthetics.



But it's not an either-or proposition: I expect that in general the same people would love both types of shooters. I know I do.

Arthur Times
profile image
Thank you. That does help.

B N
profile image
Well when I made one of my first games it was a shooter with shape type enemies like a lot of these, and at that time I did it because I'm not an artist so it was really the only type of enemies I could make that would look half decent.

Jimmy Andrews
profile image
"I have interest in writing some kind of AI that controls enemies, that are called voids, that control bullets."



Is that supposed to say "boids"?

Simon Carless
profile image
I do believe you are right, Jimmy - it's fixed.

Richard James
profile image
When you just have a triangle shooting a square you have eliminated all the fluff and have the raw game. If your game is not fun in that state you are probably doing something wrong.



Having said that I don't find Kenta Cho's work graphically minimal. I find that you need to play the games to understand the graphics. Some of his games I don't like but some of them I love to play e.g. Gunroar and Mu-Cade.

Anonymous
profile image
Gunroar is an absolute masterpiece.


none
 
Comment:
 




UBM Tech