The only thing annoying me in the visuals is the lightning. and how it seems to change based on what you were looking at before. HDR Rendering, is it? I'd get rid of that.

Yeah, it's the auto-exposure. Eventually it'll be configurable so that it doesn't have to be quite as dramatic. I think it looks decent in videos, but not great to play with.

You won't really know until you produce an actual level or sections of levels which are indicative of how the finished levels are going to look.

High Quality Geometry.Lighting.Textures. Even a proper level design with spaces between rooms for lighting/fall off will give you a luxury you don't really have yet.

In short, you're trying to conduct an experiment with dirty utensils.

The only positive thing is the wireframe stuff which you've done well, but even that has problems because when you're far away from it (which will be the case for most of the time) it looks like like a blur of colour.

If you want that wireframe look you might get more success with it glitching from time to time instead of a constant, or if you're as smart as I am you would apply some kind of frustum based culling to the item which only renders visible faces/edges from player POV which will allow you to maintain the wireframe look you're going for at a greater distance from the asset as its the geometric complexity which is killing it, ASWELL s the distance, my idea will allow it to keep its structure at longer distances, but only so far. Consider going further by changing wireframe colour/transparency based on distance.

That stuff is hard to get right, even with my suggestion, you might find using custom textures is your best bet, or simply using it to less effect or not at all, if you can;t do something right, its best not to do it.

Art direction is a serious thing. you either nail it and do something unique, or you fail, or you produce a game that looks like every thing else.

Thanks for the suggestions.

Personally, I quite like the wireframe look (the blurred glowy look from a distance). To avoid it, I could just set a static exposure setting, or bias the exposure to darker, or simply turn down the emissiveness of the wireframe texture. Or base the emissiveness on your distance so it still looks how it should from close up. I might give it a try to see how it looks but it's currently my favourite aspect of the visuals (the glow / lens flare from the wireframes at a distance).

I'd like to have proper level design and models / lighting, but for now it's only me working on the project (coding/mapping/etc) until I get it to a decent enough stage where I can attract more experienced people to help out in the various areas. That might be around the time of launching a kickstarter campaign. For now I just want to show the general vision of how it should look so people get an idea of it, and maybe could help point me in the right direction even though it's only a prototype.

UPDATE

You should have posted your original trailer, I think that gives a much better example of it in action than that bit you posted. Which like I said, would come when you have a more traditional level design, or section of level than a big open room.



Just knock up a proper level, the style your going for means it does not have to be that advanced in terms of geometry, its more about creating a nice space and making the wireframe work which IMO is done much better in the original trailer.

the maker should do a tron 2.0 sequel

The visual style is partly influenced by Tron (the movie and its concept art). This is even more apparent in the latest visual style demo: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMiAvFB_OJI

Tldr;)

what is "chams" supposed to mean?

It's named after a visual effect used in the game:

http://www.cheat-project.com/cheatscreenshot....fullsize=1

Where people are coloured differently depending on if they are behind a wall or not. It was originally short for 'chameleon' because the colour adapts, I believe.

I'm not sure if it's a placeholder name or not yet, it's grown on me.

I don't think it's a good name

about the concept, it is indeed unique.

wish you the best

bright high contrast graphics like this looks fucking awful in dynamic

Could you show me an example of a colour scheme / graphical style that you think would work well for a fast paced shooter? Preferably one that looks modern and could compete with current games graphically, as opposed to older games. I'm still trying to figure out the style to aim for and any input will help.

Google "Quake Live picmip 10" and look at the images. That's what the majority of ESR will see as a visual style perfect for any type of fast paced shooter.

Having great and appealing graphics is important, its important for the new players, its important for sponsors if he ever wants the game to be a part of a big sponsored tournament and at least my self wants frag movies to look good when i watch them.
He has 0% chance with this game if he should cater to what ESR wants (which is just an other Q3 clone with lego graphics that no one will play anyway)

Well then asking the ESR population about what a new fast phaced shooter should look like is clearly a good idea!

It was you who said "majority of ESR" wants picmic 10 as highest possible graphics but so far it seems to be only you who doesn't understand that graphics sells :)
I think even though we don't want to play with ultra settings, most the ESR users wants new shooters it to look good and understands why its important.

Customization will allow this style. I think if the game was like that by default people would think it wasn't a serious / modern game. It wouldn't look too good to spectate, or for new players to pick up.

Although the game is aimed towards being a competitive shooter, I want it to be able to attract people new to arena FPSs. Everything is simplified as much as possible in the game (limited number of weapons, enemy colours displaying their health, simple to understand item pickups) so that people who would not normally play quake games could also pick it up. And won't be put off by multiple ammo types, different coloured armours, player classes, and other complexities.

And to attract that type of gamer, it needs to look somewhat decent / original. The more serious players will be able to customise it to suit their needs, but the default should look decent for people who wont bother to or know how to customise the game.

No, I totally agree with you here, I was just trying to point out that if you ask ESR users about how the perfect fast paced shooter would look like in their eyes the majority would point you to either QW, Q3A or QL thus making this question kind of useles.

I think there could be a good balance. People would still probably prefer playing on a decent looking game if it didn't hinder visibility - which is my goal.

Also, people here could give input on if the look of the game is suitable; even if they would personally customise it differently or want it to look more simple, they would understand that the default setting needs to be good for gameplay for the newer players who aren't interested in picmip 10 style.

I realy like the movement. speed looks ok, side/walljump is realy nice - I like view angle change, then you jump from wall.

Out of interest, how is the game movement based? Like, the ultimate objective is relating to movement rather than combat - how is that achieved? I'm interested :p

The next video will demonstrate this in more detail, but to answer it quickly:

The objectives will still be like other arena games (1v1, CTF, 5v5, etc), the reason this game is largely about the movement system is due to sound:

Any time a sound is emitted by the player (running, landing from jumps uncrouched, shooting, taking damage), they become visible throughout the map through all walls.

To prevent giving away your position (which makes you very easy to pre-fire / pre-rocket etc) you can use more advanced movement techniques.

So while you have the option to just run and jump around like quake (each step will highlight you through walls), you will benefit from using the crouch & walk based movements. For example, wallsliding, to a wall jump, to a crouch slide, to a wallslide, then walking, etc.. Would all keep you silent and un-seen through walls.

This means that players who can perform more advanced / complex movement combinations and tricks will have the advantage when moving around the maps. Not just in terms of reaching areas / items quicker, but also by not giving away their position.

Unlike other games which utilize more complex movements, I think each movement technique is useful and not simply a "gimmick", as in, they are critical to the core gameplay and not just thrown in for extra features.


Like I said, I'll be making a video to demonstrate this better some time in the next few days.

very interesting concept. Good luck with it, I'm intrigued to see this in practice :)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f5dqjoDvGmo

Here's a video I just uploaded demonstrating the concept. It'll become more obvious when I start posting duels / gameplay footage but for now its just a quick example.

Sounds refreshing in a creative way.

Just a friendly advice: don't focus on the visuals this early, especially if you are not an artist. Make sure the game plays and feels good, that's what matters, we have plenty of "good looking" games already.

edit: if the idea is that there are platforms dedicated to each team (red vs blue or winner vs loser), that can be interesting.

I like this idea.

Interesting idea.

Silent movement looked pretty fast in the video. Seems to me like the advantages of loud movement will have to be fairly big for it to be worth using while showing your position across the map

yeah if you look at the timestamps, silent and loud are both 4.5~ seconds. loud needs to be faster or silent slower or both

In the small area shown (walls close together, a few platforms to jump between) the time was roughly even. The larger the distance, the faster the "loud" movement method becomes in comparison. With running and bunnyhopping you can always make a direct path from A->B, with the silent methods you will often need an indirect route (following walls / platforms / floors).

Awesome Idea! i love how its revolving around movement skill. if only there was a way have an incentive for more dynamic combat movement aswell instead of the standard strafe right <-> left.

The main incentive would be that in general, the higher player has the advantage (able to take cover using the platform they're standing on, able to shoot rockets at the floor, etc.) which means that players would benefit from using movement skills to reach higher areas during combat.

Also, (as will be shown in future videos), all of the weapons have the possibility of an indirect attack. Meaning the player does not need to be in direct line of sight of the enemy to hit them. Each weapon has its own unique method of this, so players will choose to avoid 1v1 strafe battles and opt for more complex movements to gain a better position relevant to their weapon(s).

The most basic example of this would be; the 'lightening gun' alternate fire is a projectile which passes through surfaces. So a player with LG ammo would benefit from taking cover and shooting through walls (wallbanging) rather than being in a direct line of sight with the enemy. All weapons have this aspect of indirect attacks, but their positional advantages vary.

Question is, are you going to implement teleporters and jumppads?
If so, how are you going to silent move on a jumppad or through a teleporter.

I'll be including teleporters and jumppads (and probably portals; teleporters that you can 'see' through and retain your angle when you go through them, which you can shoot through etc. I contemplated adding a portal gun too for an extra game mode but that wouldn't be part of the main game just a fun extra)

In a practical sense it will work fine:

There's no "jump" sound (only landing sounds) so it would make sense that jump pads do not make the player make noise, and just gives them an upwards velocity.

With teleporters players would be able to crouch slide through them, or jump and land crouched / walking on the other side, or exit the teleporter and jump onto walls etc.


The question is whether or not these things *should* be silent. I think that can only be figured out by playtesting. There's also item pickups to consider, whether or not they should be silent. My current thinking is that all of the above should have the possibility of being silent, but like I said, it wont be definite until playtesting.

Do you need a playtester? I'd be glad to help you out with that

Soon I will do, but its not quite at a properly playable stage yet, still very early in dev but I'm getting through a lot so it shouldn't take long.

Very interesting concept. It's relaxing to play without the sound cranked up as high as possible.

Plus all deaf people would play that.

Yeah, I'm trying to apply the same concept to vision too; letting people customize the game however they want to look (with the one exception of not allowing transparent textures), so that there's no difficulty seeing anything and you don't need to be really focused to have a chance, which I find to be a fault of modern shooters.

the main feature is that we can see enemies through the walls ?
mr developer please kill yourself

It seems most people are liking the idea / willing to give it a try. If it's too different from what you're used to, there'll always be some version of quake or a quake clone you can play. Let me know if you have any game ideas of your own I could use then I might not have to kill myself.

Burn in hell!

no, you get the statistic only from people who writing to you. but most people dont even know about you.
and yeah i have an idea for you. so if you like to made things like quad and so, so you can make them work in your style. Quad for example will give you 30 second aimbot instead of 3x damage and maybe he will shot even through the walls but with less damage to balance that shit.
seriously i cant stop laughing

I'm making the game out of my own interest and to do something a bit different. I've no motivation to remake existing games or re-use other peoples concepts; there's plenty of larger development teams (more than 1 person) who will have a much better chance of doing that.

Maybe the concept will suck, maybe it wont. I'd rather attempt to make something and have it fail than sit around complaining that there aren't any original arena shooters.

How dare you develop a video game which doesn't fit his tastes?

Have you read this thread or did you ctrl+f walls?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ci4HLz8m1k

A visual test where I fully textured everything, looks a bit more polished and like the final style I have in mind than previous clips. Not quite there yet in terms of lighting but hopefully will show the kind of style I'm aiming for.

tron y0

looks awesome

how does/will the game run performance wise? what about input?

It's using Unreal Engine 4, which is quite scalable (things can even be built for mobile). I haven't spent much time testing scalability / quality settings yet, I have a solution in mind in case the engine isn't capable of running at 60+fps for anyone. Something I've tested but only a proof of concept for now which might be good for people on lower end systems.

Updated the video I posted above; https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMiAvFB_OJI and added a basic list of the overall features (some of which are a while off being implemented, such as the matchmaking / anticheat features which I will likely need help on, probably post-kickstarter stuff).

It's hard to believe you are making an anti-cheat that hasn't been done before unless things like the maps are server sided?

I wouldn't say "hasn't been done before" but I'll be combining a few 'experimental' ideas or things that have been done in some form but not really popularized or brought together.

And yes, partly. Due to the style of the game (simplicity with visibility etc.) a server-side antiwallhack could work better than in most modern shooters.

The fallback in most games is that the server would need to perform complex visibility tests to decide what the player can and can't see. Due to the simple nature of the game (considering drawing bounding boxes around all players for the sake of visibility for example) the number of visibility tests that need to be performed is far less. And the map / model complexity is reduced compared to most modern games.

An old work around for serverside antiwallhacks was to use a sound hook which told cheaters the location of any step sounds and gun shots being made (the server needed to send this info regardless). Luckily that's the actual concept of this game so it would give no advantage as a work-around for cheaters.

I have a few ideas I've tested (in other games) for triggerbot detection and aimbot detection which are a little more experimental and are certainly bypassable if you know what's being looked for. I've seen similar things crop up and it's nothing particularly new, but I've got a few things planned to catch people out.

Then there's the stuff Valve do for their server based anticheat on CSGO (checking for obvious / drastic angle changes, weird inputs, etc) which I'd also be including.

As the main anticheat I'd still want to rely on something like EAC (or others) for the more technical / process-scanning side of things.

I'm aware eventually cheaters will catch up to most of this (except server-side anti wh which is basically foolproof) but I have a few ideas for the in-built anticheat that will trip them up along the way. I know it's hugely important so I'd at least like to be as secure as most other games, if not more so.

Will there be items and if so what kind of?

- Weapon pickups: These will effectively be 'ammo' pickups with the player already holding all weapons. Weapons/ammo will be one thing, you won't be able to collect ammo without the weapon to go with it. Currently 3 weapons (with alt fires) and 2 "tool" style weapons.

- Health pickups: The mapper will choose the values (the colours are automatically set based on the value, similar to how the default player colours represent their health). But probably: 200hp, 100hp, 50hp and some smaller ones. Max health is 300, starting health is 100.

- Powerups / map specific pickups: The usual extra damage stuff. Probably a silent movement pickup so you can move at full speed without becoming visible through walls. Got a number of ideas that will work well with the specific weapons but nothing implemented yet.

Trying to keep it simple with just the above. You'll notice there's no armour. I'm not absolutely certain about this but I think health can function pretty much the same as extra armour. Some slight differences if they're on low health etc but I think it can work, for the sake of simplicity I'd like to just have one value of 'health' so that it can be represented by the players model colour.