Helldivers 2 and Palworld devs wish players understood that 'easy' additions and updates are sometimes really hard: 'That's half a year's work. That takes six months'
-
This post did not contain any content.
I was once building a game where a dinky little neon space fighter zips around the field shooting down enemies that spawn in until the boss. Everything was going great, the engine was handling large number speeds, the parallax background I custom coded with an rng star map worked perfect, right up until I tried to implement enemy tracking of the player: that shit would not work no matter how hard I tried.
I was about to share the old demo for you dudes to try but looks like I've lost the .pck file associated with the Godot executable or the embedded pck is no longer recognized.
-
AAA gamedev here. I agree in principle with the gamefeel critiques, but I'd like to bring up that scale absolutely matters here. Every degree of complexity your codebase adds can cause cascading issues, which is one of the million reasons indie devs are told by everyone to keep their game scope small. Not saying these kinds of games shouldn't improve, but it's not as trivial as it might appearr.
Scale absolutely matters, but the scale of the new game screen is (or should be) very minor compared to the game itself. That one scene should only be setting the variables for new play, not interacting with anything outside of it.
And, to be clear, the main concern is simply the input handling in that scene. The UI itself doesn't really need to be changed, just which buttons change the highlight focus.
I can imagine it was likely thrown together quickly, perhaps with some unnecessary coupling, or maybe reading the inputs using action names that also relate to gameplay, so it becomes awkward changing it out.
I'm not so experienced with Unity, but in UE and Godot, adding and mapping inputs is fairly trivial - select the "up" button and map it to "ui_focus_up", etc. I can't see it being much more complex in Unity.
-
UI is incredibly complex under the hood. Cryengine is also difficult to work in. There are tons of reasons games with distinct outstanding features don't switch engines, though, and it's usually due to the specific features said engine provides, no matter how difficult it becomes to work with as a legacy system over the years.
wrote last edited by [email protected]There is NO reason for hunts UX to as fucking terrible as it is. They literally took it from bad to straight up awful. Believe me, I know how hard to design and implement a good UI can be, I'm a software engineer. I'm not just handwaving "make it better, duh". It's flawed from the user requirements up. It's like they never used their own ui before. It's stunning how thoroughly they don't comprehend how people have a terrible time navigating the game menus.
-
Yeah, you're probably right, the video game you personally made is probably better and we're just lazy. BTW I demand 20 hours of brand-new content to be released next week, and it better be cutting-edge, uniquely interesting and creative, bug-free and $4.99, or else you're a lazy dev, too.
It's genuinely funny watching these people learn absolutely nothing when slapped in the face with hard facts.
Lazy and salty hell of a combo
-
Lazy and salty hell of a combo
wrote last edited by [email protected]Dumb and annoying is worse.
I mean, some of the most experienced and successful devs in the world are telling you (some random guy) these things bluntly in the article, and you are proving their point for them by acting how you're acting.
Congrats on being a sentient stereotype with a keyboard and access to the internet, I guess?
