My rant about game making software

look at it this way: game worlds are the modern version of the artist community, but most of the artists are locked out from it because they can't program. so massive amounts of imaginative game worlds, are stuck in a sort of creative prison in which the future is ruled by a teeny tiny hand full of artists with a teeny tiny bit of programmers, who are the only ones allowed to express themselves creatively in the art museum of the future. to enliven this, they steal other people's ideas (from their fans, their competitiors and the indie game making community, who come to them in hopes of having their ideas accepted and instead have them stolen)

a reply to: HomerinNC

oh and one more point. what is currently going on in the game making software community is the equivalent of photoshop telling you if you buy their product, you won't need any talent to create artworks - that all the art work is already done for you and all you have to do is make a few changes and wallah you're an artist. so your example doesn't work.

instead, the new trend is to sell game making software to new buyers with the promise that non-programmers can make games with it with ease, which is the opposite of what is happening. instead, modellers, artists, musicians and other creative individuals, are being ripped off with false hope.

a reply to: undo

i'm not an idiot.

Idiot proof is just a term we use in designing software. Its easy to build a program to get the job done but then to present it in a way that all users find it easy to use with a very small learning curve is super difficult. Constantly having to write in routines to make sure that someone who doesnt understand programming can produce a program that is stable is very very time consuming. programming a game is more complex than you realize, there is so much that can cause conflicts.

From what you say it seems you might have the intelligence to learn programing but just dont want to put in the work.

originally posted by: PhoenixOD
a reply to: undo

i'm not an idiot.

Idiot proof is just a term we use in designing software. Its easy to build a program to get the job done but then to present it in a way that all users find it easy to use with a very small learning curve is super difficult. Constantly having to write in routines to make sure that someone who doesnt understand programming can produce a program that is stable is very very time consuming.

From what you say it seems you might have the intelligence to learn program but just dont want to put in the work.

it's easy, every decision is a different interface page with as few buttons and sliders and menu options as possible. the problem is there are too many options that are reliant on understanding either scripting and/or programming and the way the software itself works (which requires knowledge of programming and/or scripting) and it's all written in programmer lingo. it's like a young person in junior high going to biology class and being expected to learn gray's anatomy as a prerequisite for passing the class. it would look insurmountable, so the person is set up to fail, the moment the software is opened. it's incredibly intimidating.

a reply to: undo

Yes it has to be that way to make things flexible> i was like you in the beginning and would always get stressed because i didn't understand all the lingo and the logic but in the end i gave in and learned it. After that i was able to make exactly what i wanted. In fact i found that entering the game from a design point of view and then learning programing and all the parts involved in getting it all to work i was able to do a lot better than people who just learned programming first and then went onto designing.

My advice is if you really want to produce something stop looking for shortcuts and learn the programing and the workflow. Its what everyone else has to do. But im sure thats not what you want to hear and i fully remember just how intimidating it was in the beginning.

a reply to: PhoenixOD

you apparently didn't read where i said i can't program because i have no advanced math skills --not for lack of trying, btw. it's some kind of mental block and since i'm nearly 60 years old, it's unlikely that will change. there are also other creative individuals out there who can't make it happen, either for the same reason, or because they are very smart artistically/creatively/musically/imaginatively, but not so smart in any other way. einstein was great with math, but not so smart in other areas. it's just a fact of nature. ignoring it because you don't have those limitations, is not helpful. realize, people are as different as grains of sand on a beach. they may look the same from a distance, but they are all quite different once you really look at them.

eventually the indie community is going to isolate down to only handful of people as well, as more and more artists, musicians and modellers, realize their abilities have become dinosaurs in a digital future. should everyone have both skills set in order to prove they are valuable human beings? maybe, but i'm guessing the future will get boring once the bulk of the creative people have given up trying.

here's my next point (lol i have more where those came from)

currently, there's a huge generation of people moving into or already in, retirement age. these people were the first D&D players, the first to play video games, the first to write modern fantasy and scifi novels, the first to move into the digital age, the age of the personal computer and the age of having to worry their social security investments have been stolen and may not be available to them when they do retire. a large percentage of them are looking for ways to subsidize what is sure to be an untenable income and is already quickly becoming untenable, yet they love video games, rpgs, mmos, multiplayers and are interested in game creation. it's like a huge market that's right here, right now, they just need someone willing to provide their programming skills

and these people are also currently supporting financially, the current generation of gamers who mostly still live at home with mom and dad. once they die or their money runs out, the current generation of gamers will not be buying or playing video games. they will be struggling to keep from starving to death.

ideas for potential add-ons

farming pack add-on
house/architecture building pack add-on
professions pack add-on

a reply to: undo

The person or company that makes what you are asking for will make billions, and we probably won't see your ideal for decades... the complexity of what we already have is staggering, and the checks and balances in making an engine so a child (which is how you're coming across) can wave their hand and create a virtual Narnia is a million-fold more complex.

Game engine developers aren't ripping people off, they're fostering a wide community of developers and content creators, which has made game creation accessible to millions, rather than a comparative handful of hardcore developers.

The ease of making a game today far outstrips what it took even 10 years ago... and the quality of what I can produce in an afternoon makes the original Super Mario Brothers (which took a very long development cycle, with a team of developers) look like child’s play.

Stop whining at programmers to make it effortless for you... any good creation will always take effort and knowledge. even if you're 60 you can still choose to learn new things to accommodate your desire to create.

Cheers

a reply to: puzzlesphere

nope, already tried. many times. i don't give up easy. think of something you don't have the skills to do, and that's what i'm experiencing. now imagine you purchased something that claimed that people don't need whatever that skill is you can't do, only to find out not only did you need it, you needed it alot, way before getting to the important parts. so i thought, well if they are insisting on selling false hope, maybe it's because they don't realize how simple it actually has to be for most people. so i made the video with ideas on what people who buy it think the game makers are saying, vs. what they get. these are actually 2 different things. and it happens alot.

the ones who try to make everything point and click, have the screen filled with sliders and buttons and there's so much data, it's overwhelming, and there's never a clear point on where to start. thus you end up with guys on youtube making tutorials, cause the potential customer base is not getting far enough along in the process to actually buy the professional license. they're getting stuck back in the easy steps in the demo/free version, that are actually only easy to programmers and scripters

a reply to: undo

What engine did you purchase?

Have started with making a very simple interactive concept? Such as press the space bar to make an asset move?

originally posted by: puzzlesphere
a reply to: undo

What engine did you purchase?

Have started with making a very simple interactive concept? Such as press the space bar to make an asset move?

i haven't, cause i never understand their demos/free versions. i thought for sure i'd manage to get some rudimentary rpg while following a tutorial for a popular game making software, but as i said earlier, the guy just dropped the ball one day, and never recovered it. only people who knew how to use the program, managed to follow him after that. the rest of the people asking him to clarify, were ignored. that was at video 12. he's currently on video 70 something i think. and it's really not his responsibility to help those who get left behind because he's doing all of the videos for free, out of his time and talent. it's actually the game making software company's responsibility.

i managed to create a name box, with an option to choose mage or warrior, to create the character with the name and class, with stats applied to the 2 classes, and the save script worked but the load script didn't. even had a simple state machine created. mind you, this was by copying his script as he explained it, video by video. had to pause it constantly and type it in to scripting software. it was all in c#. i know nothing about c# and even as i was starting to get familar with some of the language, i still didn't understand what it meant, why it did what it did, or how to write it myself.

since all the scripts worked up to that point, i knew it was because i was missing something. i looked at his index and he had 2 scenes in it that just appeared at video 8, with no explanation of how they got there (i know, i backtracked to see where he might've made it, thinking maybe i had missed it. nope). but he didn't use them till video 12. he just suddenly told us to make sure the scenes were in the build settings and then create a new character, turn off the game, turn it back on and press the load button, and it should load the character that was created, but for me, and several others it did not. in my case, it was because i was missing both scenes with no clue how to make them. i managed to get one scene created but the other one was a complete head scratcher. can't make a game the player can't load their saved character.

anyway, i tried contacting him 3 different ways, but he never responded and the rest of the people appear to have started his tutorials back when he first started making them, so i'm months behind the ones that actually do know what he was doing.

a reply to: undo

No it's not the game making software company's responsibility. All they have to do is release a piece of software... it's up to the individual or company if they then want to purchase the product based on the software and the available support.

It may be in their interest to, but by no means is it a responsibility. However, all game engines that I have used come with extensive documentation, help, forums, tutorials etc...

The reality is that engines are extraordinarily complex pieces of software, where the limit is really imagination combined with skillset... there are examples that may be close to what you want to achieve, but in the end, you're going to have to get creative with game mechanics, especially if you can't code, or at least work your way through the logic involved behind coding.

Can you use Photoshop?... Can you use Illustrator?... Do you understand the difference between raster and vector? Can you use 3D modelling software such as 3Ds Max?... Do you understand the notion of polygons, and further polygon limits?... Can you use sound editing software such as Encore?... Can you use video editing software such as After Effects?... Do you understand cinematics for camera control?... Do you understand the concept of UVW mapping, or mapping x,y,z onto a 2D graph?... Do you understand storyboarding and creating a narrative?... Do you understand the concept of "if" and "then" statements?, which leads into coding, which I won't even go near for this post... I could go on, and start to get into actual detail...

These are all vital concepts that are needed for game creation...

The reality is that the available AAA game engines are like all of the pieces of software and concepts I mentioned rolled into one package... and you need to at least have an understanding of all of these areas if you are going to try to make a game by yourself.

The reason there is no obvious starting point when making an RPG is that you can really stat from any one or a combination of these areas... they are all valid, it really depends on your strengths and what you want to achieve.

Maybe take a game development or multi-media course, where there is a teacher to guide you with a curriculum, and help begin on the path to environment creation.

a reply to: undo

It sounds like you made it quite far... I suggest trying something like UE4, where you can use visual scripting (blueprints... kind of like a flow chart) instead of having to code everything (some coding may still be required depending on what you want to acive).

Good Luck!

a reply to: puzzlesphere

photoshop-yes
raster and vector-yes
illustrator-had it, didn't like it. i realize it's awesome for what it does tho. i'm not a fan of vectors. i have a friend that works with it though and she's on the project.
3d modelling software-nope, i'm not a modeller. i planned on buying the models from an actual modeller
sound editing-nope. was saving that part till last anyway.
video editing software-yes, but i suck.
cinematics- nada because i suck at video editing. lol
storyboarding-yep
if and then-a little itty teeny tiny bit.

a reply to: puzzlesphere

No it's not the game making software company's responsibility. All they have to do is release a piece of software... it's up to the individual or company if they then want to purchase the product based on the software and the available support.

that's exactly what i'm talking about. if the product advertises as capable of making games without programming knowledge, but doesn't tell you you have to learning scripting language that is nearly as bad as programming (well at least you don't need calculus for most of it), and someone who hopes to make a game with it, buys it, they are going to be unpleasantly surprised, to the tune of 1k+.

granted, most people try the free version first, and find out they can't do it, unless some kind soul makes free video tutorials. that the gaming community has to do that because the company can't be bothered, is kinda shooting themselves in the foot. you'd think they would want game creators to be succesful so they would get more sales of their pro versions. this is when it dawned on me that they probably are just not aware of how simple it actually has to be in order for non-programmers to make working games with it.

1. no clutter/menu overload
2. one decision at a time
3. step by step, onscreen, process via nice, clean, uncomplicated interfaces with a next function.
4. they should never have to access the actual program other than to turn it on and turn it back off, when they're done. the interfaces should do all accessing of menus for them, in the backdrop, behind the scenes.
5. the buttons and sliders should have simple labels, like more or less, thicker or thinner and so on, rather than things like transform, occlusion culling, masks, clipping and so forth. i realize that people in the graphics community will most likely understand (and some not in the graphics community), but what about the musicians or people who have no art skills, who have never seen the inside of a graphics program? sure, it would be hard for them to make a game without art skills, unless they happen to know someone who can do the art for them. but that's not the point. maybe they do, or maybe they are like me and are willing to hire someone to do specific pieces of art.
6. do it in a logical progression. one layer at a time. first the introduction, then character creation and login, zones buildings and items, then the pets mounts and vehicles, then npcs, then sound fx, then the visual fx. then the end of the game with credits.

that's 7 steps (granted, each step contains many smaller steps but it's in a logical progression. like you don't need quests before you have npcs. and you don't need npcs before you have landscape. and so forth. i mean, it's all possible, but it doesn't make a logical progression and would confuse people to put things in, before they are actually needed)

a reply to: undo

You're describing a very specific game type there.

What about all the other genres? There's racing, puzzle, card, platform, etc... granted these can include RPG elements, but if it was a step through process like what you describe, all the program could do was make the same game again and again with slightly different packaging.

The beauty of game engines is that they're a blank slate of tools. Just as in Photoshop where you open a new file and get a white screen, so in a game engine you open a level and get an empty world, it's up to the user to "make" the experience.

Both Unity and UE4 have a similar subscription model... with UE4 you can pay $19- a month... Pay your $19 dollars, cancel your subscription, and you can continue using the release of the engine you downloaded indefinitely.

$19- is pretty good for unlimited use of ridiculously powerful engine!

You can play and learn for as long as you like...

a reply to: undo

1. Icons and menus give options... there's a lot of options to convey in a game engine... considering the depth of functionality, game engines are comparatively uncluttered.
2. What's the order of decisions? Different users and game types need different workflows.
3. Same as 2. Where would the creativity and point of difference be if every time you use the program it gives the exact same process/result.
4. Sounds more like you want a game generator than a game engine.
5. Thicker/thinner are arbitrary concepts, the names of tools and processes have developed over decades because they are the most accurate description of the tools. If reduced to broad terms like thicker/thinner or other broad generalities, there would be confusion over what function they are actually referring to. I can think of at least 7 different tools that may be referred to in terms of "making it thicker or thinner".
5b. Musicians and people with no art skill should stick to their specialty and can add their particular skill-set to a team... or if they want to go it alone, will have to learn at least the basics of a range of skills. If you're willing to hire someone to do the art, why don't you hire a programmer/coder, a modeller, a level developer, etc... they're all artists in their own right. Hire a team to do the work for you, and your more of the production manager, who can rarely build a game themselves... really then your managing from a top level.
6. It sounds like you just want a WoW rip-off generator.

There are many approaches to game development. One of my staff is making his own game and started with the characters, not the landscapes... he's developing how the character interacts with objects and other characters on a simple white plane... he'll add the landscape much later once he has much of the game mechanics bedded down.

What you're suggesting is extremely limiting and will have a very limited market, at a huge development cost. Completely nonviable.

Cheers