RE: [GD-Design] Action game and 'sandboxes'

[Tom F. <to...@mu...>]

Yes, just do a 2D top-down version of the game. If you really need 3D (e.g.
jumping puzzles, do an isometric version). Very quick, very simple.

Tom Forsyth - purely hypothetical Muckyfoot bloke.

This email is the product of your deranged imagination,
and does not in any way imply existence of the author.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Awen Limbourg [mailto:ali...@ed...]
> Sent: 13 March 2002 09:02
> To: 'Gamedevlists-Design@Lists. Sourceforge. Net'
> Subject: [GD-Design] Action game and 'sandboxes'
> 
> 
> Hello to you all out there,
> 
> It's a technician inquiry:
> 
> I'm presently working on a platform game, a-la-Jack&Dexter: 
> has any of you
> succeeded with quickly prototyping such a kind of concept and 
> game rules,
> without waiting for the loud technical artillery ?
> I remember a conference where Peter Molyneux explained that 
> he worked on a
> very old-almost-2D version of its (Populous ?) engine as a 
> sandbox to build
> 'Black&White'. The benefits and feasibility is ok for a Rts 
> game. It's more
> blurry with action game, where quick interactivity and 
> adrenalin punches
> seem to rule.
> Anyway, are you (designers) living well with untested unclear 
> unsure arcade
> game situations until 'it's done' in the game ('glp. ok, it 
> fells horrible
> to play, but i have many other marvelous idea, let's throw 
> this away & let's
> do it in another manner' -> hainous glance from technicians) ???
> Or do you force yourself to sandbox these marvelous ideas ? And How ?
> 
> Thank you for reading me,
> 
> Awen
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gamedevlists-design mailing list
> Gam...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/gamedevlists-design
> Archives:
> http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=556
>