Re: [tuxracer-devel] Course precisions

[Steve B. <sjb...@ai...>]

Jules Bean wrote:

> As a (relevant) aside I don't think we should damage tux *too* much
> for hard landings --- I've landed (on skis) whilst moving pretty
> fast.

Yes - but you have to know how to land - in 1080 (the N64 snowboard game)
you have to bend you knees on impact with good timing or you'll wipe-out
on landing.

Obviously penguins don't do that - heck, it's not even clear that Tux
*has* knees  :-)

However we might decide that you need to paddle like mad just before
touchdown or something...to add more skill to those long leaps. Hence,
a beginner who can't get that timing right might have to take a jump
more slowly in order not to fly quite so high and hence risk damage.

BTW:  Now Tux slides on his ample belly, he could dig his toes into
the snow to slow down....

>  Rocks and trees, definitely.

When I said rocks, I didn't mean large boulders - I meant the existing
patches of rock-texture.  Sliding over that would be pretty uncomfortable!
 
> But, in the current version at least, you can shave seconds of your
> time by holding down the paddle key all time.  The idea was to give an
> incentive to doing the race 'pure'.  Maybe the incentive should be
> even bigger, given that on some tracks it might be *very* hard to beat
> par without paddling.

Paddling should slow you down if you do it beyond a certain speed...
a useful way to slow down - and a definite incentive not to do it when
you don't need to.
 
> > This may be controversial - but I would like to propose that
> > we aim for a common 'style' for such things between Tux Racer
> > and my Quest for Herring game. (And "Tux-Kart" which may be my
> > next effort).  It would help the world of Tux-based games to
> > establish a set of common themes like that.
> 
> I'd be very much in favour of that kind of consistency.  But care
> needs to be taken not to create an unofficial tux 'cartel' ;-)

Sure - that's why I said that it might be controversial.  I wouldn't
want to even try to impose 'design rules' on authors (as if you could!)
but I'd want to try to persuade authors to be consistant where it doesn't
impact the game much to do so.

One case where this fell down was in the case of 'Gown' - who the authors
of XTux decided was Tux's girlfriend.   I liked the idea - and I needed
a female character so you could play as either the boy hero rescuing the
girl - or the grrrl penguin rescuing the boy.  Unfortunately, the XTux
guys chose to make their 'Gown' be just a pink version of Tux.  That looked
OK-ish in 2D but in 3D it looked *terrible*.  I tried to reach agreement
with them on an alternative - but that never happened.  It's a shame that
the XTux 'Gown' looks nothing like the Tux_AQFH 'Gown' - I'd like little
kids to point at the screen of some new game and say "Oh! That's Gown!"
..that won't happen - but that's life.

(XTux sucks anyway - and I'd hope that *small* kids wouldn't be playing
it - so who cares!)
 
> We could even produce a semi-spoof semi-serious 'tux interface guidelines'!

Yes - that could be pretty funny!

Any takers?  I'd *love* to contribute to it.
 
> You're right.  I'm thinking of writing a net.essay on this very issue
> - 'satisfaction' in games.  Why do we go back to games, and what
> should a game designed do to make sure we do? Obviously it's actually
> much *easier* for competitive multiplayer games, since the incentive
> is 'this time I'm going to beat him...'.

Yes.  It's a subtle and important issue.
 
> Often I keep playing games because I want to see the cool
> graphics/effects.  Which is funny since I'm not really into graphics
> (my most-played game of all time is the text 'roguelike' angband).
> But when I kept coming back to the Loki Heroes of Might and Magic
> demo, it was because I wanted to see what a 'monk' looked like in
> battle, etc.

Certainly that's the number one motive for my 9yr old son...getting on
to the next level takes on 100% importance - and having to collect 'things'
to do that is the only reason to collect stuff at all.

The smash hit N64 game (Donkey Kong 64) has an insane number of things
to collect - at least five different items - some of which come in
six different colours - one for each of the characters you can play.
But in the end, the game isn't about collecting them for their own
value - each set of things is used to buy new powers, or new weapons
(or new musical instruments!) - OR to get you into new levels.

-- 
Steve Baker                  http://web2.airmail.net/sjbaker1
sjb...@ai... (home)  http://www.woodsoup.org/~sbaker
sj...@ht...      (work)