|
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.
|
Will someone please explain to me the appeal of these games over say "traditional" shooters like Gradius or Ikaruga.
Thanks.
- 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.
Is that supposed to say "boids"?
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.