Reply With QuoteEnjoyed a bit of a blast with that.
Quite quickly mastered the controls.
Like the sound effects except for the tinny hit sound, before the enemy explodes.
I shall be playing some more.
I hope Eddie won't mind this cheeky shameless self promotion, but it's not commercial and if I've I've overstepped the mark I'm sorry: delete this and give me a slap.
I'm an obsessive compute programmer and I've just managed to get my first tablet game published to both the App Store and Google Play. It's an homage to Asteroids but with added physics goodness.
For the geeks - here's a link to my blog post. If you're not geeky, just scroll to the bottom where there are links to both stores. I'd welcome any feedback and if I make millions, I'll be treating everybody to Pateks and Milles as thanks!
http://flexmonkey.blogspot.co.uk/201...e-air-one.html
Cheers all,
Simon
Enjoyed a bit of a blast with that.
Quite quickly mastered the controls.
Like the sound effects except for the tinny hit sound, before the enemy explodes.
I shall be playing some more.
great fun, didn't you have a game out for pc a few years ago?
I had an early version of a physics based asteroids a few years ago and before that - in 2007 ! - did a watch face building application:Originally Posted by chrisb
http://www.flexmonkey.co.uk/WatchFac...ceBuilder.html
Looks a bit rubbish seven years on :)
Simon
Just a heads up, when searching for it in app store it doesnt come up :(
Thanks for searching :)
It's only for tablet - so it may not search on an iPhone. I'm able to search on killerspaceworms and killer space worms and get results for both.
Simon
Very good, but you might need to revisit your pricing policy if you wish to make the millions. And can I have a shield button?
Nice one! I too am somewhat of a game-coding and retro-gaming geek, so it's always good to see someone finish something like this, knowing how hard it can be. I left my full-time job last year to focus more on my own stuff, plus some consultancy, and have been messing around with UDK and Unity while sketching out some game designs. I still have a lot of work ahead though.
Fwiw, I quite like the metallic clunk, so there! In fact in general, and indie game does not need AAA graphics and sound, so much as it needs character. This has that.
It plays quite well for this kind of game. The only thing I'm not a fan of (generally) is this kind of control system on touch screens. The lack of tactile feedback makes it much harder to control than a physical stick or keyboard. Plus, your hands are always blocking large parts of the screen. For that reason, I think it's better to design mobile games with touch or tilt-specific mechanics (like Angry Birds, Fruit Ninja or Temple Run) or a simple one-button UI in mind (like Flappy Bird or Tiny Wings). It would be interesting to see if you could keep essentially the same game mechanics, but come up with a more unique control system.
For instance, the first thing that springs to mind is this: first, imagine a circle around the ship about three finger-widths in radius. Tapping in that area does not cause thrust, but does cause you to fire. Tapping outside that ring causes thrust in that direction as well as firing. The amount of thrust increases logarithmically with distance. Would need play-testing, but I imagine that would be more intuitive. I realise I've changed the mechanics here, but with any unlimited-ammo shooter, it's always worth asking yourself if a fire button is really necessary. If the player might as well hold it down constantly, it adds nothing to the game so you might as well drop it and have auto-fire. Most modern shooters do this and focus more on other aspects of the gameplay like evasion, or throw in special weapons one-use like super-bombs.
That'll cost 69p
:)
Simon
Wow! Thanks for the comprehensive reply! I like the metallic clunk too :)
I'm actually working on using the gyroscope for control - a 90 degree turn clockwise might rotate the ship 180 degrees or something along those lines. I can't code this directly inside my code, I have to use an external extension. Hence, the slightly tricky 'control wheel' malarkey. When (if) I can get that working, I thought a touch on the left might thrust and on the right might fire - much simpler and easier input and no worries about losing the hot spot.
I've got a whole host of extras in my notebook and a few people have mentioned continual thrust, so continual fire makes sense too. Although I might add an overheating laser cannon :)
Thanks again to everybody who has had a play. We'll all be millionaires by Christmas!
Cheers,
Simon
I know you were joking but you may as well do that. It's how people make the most money these days.That'll cost 69p
Here's an idea for shield mechanics: two fingers gives you a shield, but no firing at the same time. Each impact depletes your shield energy ~10% and takes ~2 seconds to recharge (so 20 seconds from 0 to 100). Your gun uses the same power source, so if your shield hits 50%, your firing rate is cut in half, at 10% it's firing an one tenth the usual rate. Lost your shield entirely? Then you've got no guns either and better get out of the way!
In fact, you could make matters worse by losing energy exponentially with each hit. E.g., 5%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 35%. So that last hit takes much longer to recover from than the first one. 7 seconds with no weapons might be a bit harsh though. The only way to tweak something like that is to try playing a few different variations and see how it works out.
I would also accept a smart bomb to clear the screen. Just saying.
One of the ideas I'm working on relies partially on gyroscopy, but I think you have to be very careful with it. It suffers from a similar problem to the "hands covering the screen" issue, which is that if you need to move the screen around as a controller, it can be disorienting to keep track of whatever is on the screen at the same time. I think Temple Run walks a very fine line in that regard: it's popular, but I personally find it slightly too awkward to want to play it repeatedly; I've seen other (less popular) games that are even more heavy-handed with it and those were just no fun to play.
I like for example the idea that if you rotate the screen everything stays in the same relative position in space (like a sort of AR viewport) - you could perhaps do that, with only your ship turning relative to everything else (albeit I haven't done much experimentation with it yet, but I understand the gyroscopes & accelerometers are not that accurate, so anything that must be perfect won't work). However, keep in mind that some people will hold the screen flat and others will hold it up vertically, while the majority will be somewhere in between. What works well for one style of player may not work for another. That's why my own intention is to use it in the subtlest way possible and not as the primary method of controlling the game.
For another example, there are also lots of "roll the ball around the maze" type games and those suffer from the same problem that the orientation of the screen is important, so even if they try to correct for the initial angle of the device, the gameplay isn't intuitive unless the device is lying flat. That's not convenient for the way people play most mobile games: while on the bus/train or, ahem, doing a number two. Such games make an interesting novelty, but they don't have much longevity.
Cheers - another weekend of recreational coding for me, Mrs Simon will *not* be pleased :)
Simon
Everyone loves a smart bomb :-)
Just to say, I'm playing it on a 5.3" phone. There's not a lot of manoeuvring room and I've only managed 3500 pts but it is still playable. I suspect if I was twenty instead of sixty, my score would be much higher already.
Wow - you must have tiny fingers! I'm amazed at the processing power in these little devices, running all that physics in real time on a handheld device is crazy. When I first started doing CGI in the 90's that sort of thing took minutes to calculate and render.
simon
Posting Permissions