Defining Awesome
  • Status Updates

  • Written by . Posted at 2:44 pm on November 26th, 2009

    In a desperate attempt to fulfill his retro-needs, MM has created a 16 color shader.

    16bit

    Be Sociable, Share!

    19 comments.

    1. do you want to have this as an effect in the game?
      for like when you got hit by a nade or something
      cause it really looks nice. simple but nice.


    2. Maybe make a robot soldier see things with that shader enabled?


    3. Hmm

      When do you calculate the color palette?


    4. Man, I already love the possibilities this engine offers you! It’s not gonna be just an awesome game, it’s gonna be 1000++ awesome games!


    5. Oh, in other thoughts, how far do the character-looks editing options go in Linkdead? Same as Soldat or can you choose different faces or entire bodies?
      It’d be pretty cool to have a (procedural?) generator for bodies to choose from. Like, all looking kind of alike, but still a bit different in size/costumes. Of course you could also just randomly put different tops/belts/pants etc. together.


    6. that just LULZ


    7. I want more customization than in Soldat. I was thinking of procedurally generated armor. But I don’t have an idea for it at the moment.


    8. Soldat suffer a remastering technology with Link-Dead ?


    9. Armor generator : make different tiles ? randomize the Gostek files for the Armor ( make a seperate map for the armor pieces, would be awesome if they can be shot off )

      different map/files for the heavy or the recon, so that would mean different tiles for the armor. Tilesheets could be hand made by players in paint or whatever. add them to the folder, and the generator should find them automaticly.

      Tiles are loaded into generator, and processed. could work ­čśÉ ?


    10. predator is watching you D:


    11. If you modified that shader, it could work as thermal vision, or possibly the effects of being hit by an EMP. Also, can you tell us how modifiable your engine is? Can we add destructible walls? And what about my question about your cellular automaton, how much can we mod that?


    12. niko šveikovsky

      michal, please make sure that shader math is fully accessible to modders.

      i must be able to apply saturation adjustments (s_output=s_input*saturation) and contrast (rgb_output=(rgb_input-blacks)*contrast) to the screen.


    13. TLD: Shootable armor, that would be awesome.

      Makron666: heat vision can be done.
      I’m not planning destructible walls, that would mean the lighting engine would have to be dynamic. It is possible and I could do that in the future but at the moment LD doesn’t require it.
      The cellular automaton will be open for modders, haven’t decided yet in what form. Probably via scripting.

      niko šveikovsky: shaders are placed in the Shaders folder. You can do whatever you like. This example is a fullscreen shader.


    14. Oh, the map generator will also be exposed to modders. It works sort of like a pixel shader.


    15. No destructible walls, huh? Well that sucks :( . Can you at least program in a way so that the implementation of what will be possible in the future? LD DOES need that, simply because no game out there today satisfies the players enough in this manner. And yes, I said “satisfies” and I meant it.


    16. I don’t think destructible walls have gameplay value. It’s one of those things that players crave but then don’t use it. Example: static machineguns in Soldat.


    17. Yep, because you don’t teach them to use the new mechanics. In fact, the developers themselves fail to use the new mechanics when creating the rest of the game, sometimes limiting the use of the new feature to very artificial and stupid gameplay moments.

      Take a look at Half-Life 2. It had support for physics. But unlike the hundreds physics-enabled games before and after it, it actually used it. Physics weren’t just used to animate ragdolls and throw shit away using explosions. Physics were used in puzzles, as a weapon and so on.

      The same thing goes for destructible walls. A technical possibility of destroying walls isn’t enough. You need to design gameplay mechanics with wall destruction in mind. You need to show the stupid player moron what you can do with this kind of functionality. You need to have this particular functionality in mind when designing everything. Again in HL2 you could throw back grenades using the gravity gun, destroy choppers with their own mines, use big objects as shields.. All of that was designed WITH PHYSICS IN MIND. Physics weren’t added by the end of the game with “hey players wanted physics so let’s add it!” – that would make physics as redundant as your machineguns.

      So.. you can’t just plop in a feature on the last minute and then complain that players are stupid because they don’t use it. You need to have a clear vision and use of a particular gameplay element in mind when designing the rest of the game. Otherwise you get a feature that doesn’t really fit in.


    18. archont : good point


    19. Well, actually, the destruction itself would be fun enough for me. Tactical advantages are less important here. It’s about seeing a house brought down by your bazooka. If it can squash some enemies, even better!


    Post a comment.

    Links