Lux in tenebris
Auto-translated
SandroXXL, absolutely. It'll just end up being about 4 messages. I'll provide the link at the end of the last one. I'll put it in each one)
Interface Problems
The second major problem we encountered during the development of "Heroes" was the interfaces. The main difficulty lies in the fact that the interests of many parties collide within the interface—it is influenced by the publisher, the history of the game series, and ultimately, the desire to make it more user-friendly. Let's look at how the interface changed during development using the base interface—the adventure map—as an example.
This is one of the first versions, quickly put together in "Photoshop" (those in the know will see many familiar elements). Ideologically, this version is very close to previous games in the series, except the interface was moved from the right side to the bottom of the screen, which is simply necessary when transitioning from 2D to 3D. This version was rejected by the publisher as being too "heavy," meaning it occupied too large a portion of the screen.
The next option—much "lighter" and airier—was rejected as not intuitive enough, with overly complex elements.
The next option—much "lighter" and airier—was rejected as not intuitive enough, with overly complex elements.
This is exactly the version that made it into the FPP. The lightest and airiest, while still maintaining the functionality of most interfaces—"pop-up messages" were introduced instead of the heavy windows that previously appeared when collecting resources or visiting structures. It was rejected by the publisher as "too cartoonish"—too whimsical and not serious enough; consequently, along with the overhaul of the game's artistic component, the interface was also redesigned.
Essentially, these are all the various options that did not make it into the game for a variety of reasons. Gradually, we arrived at a single element that everyone liked—a set of grouped buttons in the bottom right corner. This element made it into the final interface.
In the end, there were 9 interface redesigns. Presented here is the last of them, which made it into the final version of the game. Some elements can be opened and closed to free up game space.
Actually, such a laborious history applied not only to the adventure map, but also to other interfaces; for example, here is the evolution of the city interface:
And now let's do the math. Initially, we counted around 70 interfaces in the game, but during production, it became clear that we had slightly miscalculated and there were around 120. And each one underwent a careful acceptance process by the publisher. 120 multiplied by 9—that's over 1000! You can imagine the scale of the catastrophe.
What follows from this?
* You need excellent tools for working with interfaces, for configuring, modifying, and implementing them into the game…
* You need to plan for several iterations immediately, at least 2-3 redesigns;
* You need to estimate immediately (and preferably correctly) how many interfaces will be in your game and how complex and comprehensive they will be;
* And, of course, you should not agree to redesign interfaces already approved by the publisher just because; these should be added as a contract supplement, and additional time and money should be negotiated.
Problems with introducing the third dimension into the game
The transition to 3D seems like one of the simplest changes. Many games have already done it successfully, and almost all have been praised for it—you don't notice any pitfalls right away. But they exist, and they affect almost every element of the game design, starting from the most obvious—map construction—and ending with interfaces and game mechanics.
Changes are happening on all fronts:
* In cities
* On the strategic map
* On the arenas
o Changes related to creature size
o Changes related to the grid (transition from hexes to squares)
o Changes to the size of the arenas themselves
From the very beginning, we conducted a series of experiments and decided that, unlike previous games in the series, the relative sizes of creatures would be more honest (and we also wanted to make truly large fantasy creatures in the game). This is mainly related to the transition to 3D imaging, in which such conventions look significantly worse than in 2D. That is, you cannot fit all creatures into one square; otherwise, the sizes would vary wildly, and a cavalryman sitting on a horse would end up much smaller than a standing peasant.
Friends, continuing... Reflections.
The continuation will follow once someone creates a message. Otherwise, they will be merged and exceed the allowed character limit.
Info from the site http://www.dtf.ru
Interface Problems
The second major problem we encountered during the development of "Heroes" was the interfaces. The main difficulty lies in the fact that the interests of many parties collide within the interface—it is influenced by the publisher, the history of the game series, and ultimately, the desire to make it more user-friendly. Let's look at how the interface changed during development using the base interface—the adventure map—as an example.
This is one of the first versions, quickly put together in "Photoshop" (those in the know will see many familiar elements). Ideologically, this version is very close to previous games in the series, except the interface was moved from the right side to the bottom of the screen, which is simply necessary when transitioning from 2D to 3D. This version was rejected by the publisher as being too "heavy," meaning it occupied too large a portion of the screen.
The next option—much "lighter" and airier—was rejected as not intuitive enough, with overly complex elements.
The next option—much "lighter" and airier—was rejected as not intuitive enough, with overly complex elements.
This is exactly the version that made it into the FPP. The lightest and airiest, while still maintaining the functionality of most interfaces—"pop-up messages" were introduced instead of the heavy windows that previously appeared when collecting resources or visiting structures. It was rejected by the publisher as "too cartoonish"—too whimsical and not serious enough; consequently, along with the overhaul of the game's artistic component, the interface was also redesigned.
Essentially, these are all the various options that did not make it into the game for a variety of reasons. Gradually, we arrived at a single element that everyone liked—a set of grouped buttons in the bottom right corner. This element made it into the final interface.
In the end, there were 9 interface redesigns. Presented here is the last of them, which made it into the final version of the game. Some elements can be opened and closed to free up game space.
Actually, such a laborious history applied not only to the adventure map, but also to other interfaces; for example, here is the evolution of the city interface:
And now let's do the math. Initially, we counted around 70 interfaces in the game, but during production, it became clear that we had slightly miscalculated and there were around 120. And each one underwent a careful acceptance process by the publisher. 120 multiplied by 9—that's over 1000! You can imagine the scale of the catastrophe.
What follows from this?
* You need excellent tools for working with interfaces, for configuring, modifying, and implementing them into the game…
* You need to plan for several iterations immediately, at least 2-3 redesigns;
* You need to estimate immediately (and preferably correctly) how many interfaces will be in your game and how complex and comprehensive they will be;
* And, of course, you should not agree to redesign interfaces already approved by the publisher just because; these should be added as a contract supplement, and additional time and money should be negotiated.
Problems with introducing the third dimension into the game
The transition to 3D seems like one of the simplest changes. Many games have already done it successfully, and almost all have been praised for it—you don't notice any pitfalls right away. But they exist, and they affect almost every element of the game design, starting from the most obvious—map construction—and ending with interfaces and game mechanics.
Changes are happening on all fronts:
* In cities
* On the strategic map
* On the arenas
o Changes related to creature size
o Changes related to the grid (transition from hexes to squares)
o Changes to the size of the arenas themselves
From the very beginning, we conducted a series of experiments and decided that, unlike previous games in the series, the relative sizes of creatures would be more honest (and we also wanted to make truly large fantasy creatures in the game). This is mainly related to the transition to 3D imaging, in which such conventions look significantly worse than in 2D. That is, you cannot fit all creatures into one square; otherwise, the sizes would vary wildly, and a cavalryman sitting on a horse would end up much smaller than a standing peasant.
Friends, continuing... Reflections.
The continuation will follow once someone creates a message. Otherwise, they will be merged and exceed the allowed character limit.
Info from the site http://www.dtf.ru
Евангелие от Иоанна, 1.5: Lux in tenebris lucet, et tenebrae eam non comprehenderunt. Свет во тьме светит, и тьма не объяла его.