Comments on: Mr. McDougal’s Marvelous Upside-Down Electrotree Postmortem http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/ The Mad Ravings of Zorba Thu, 12 Jan 2012 00:07:41 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Zorba http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-20058 Zorba Sat, 20 Feb 2010 08:53:56 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-20058 I may end up porting it to iPhone in one form or another once I have my library working, though it'll take some recoding to do so. The big issue is just all the tweaks and quality-of-play changes that would need to be made. It would . . . add up. Still, we'll see. I have to figure out what's causing the 10.5 errors. This is made difficult by not owning a 10.5 box, but I need to look over it some. I probably won't go down to 10.4 though, and certainly won't bother going any further. Gotta figure out where to spend my time profitably. I may end up porting it to iPhone in one form or another once I have my library working, though it'll take some recoding to do so. The big issue is just all the tweaks and quality-of-play changes that would need to be made. It would . . . add up. Still, we'll see.

I have to figure out what's causing the 10.5 errors. This is made difficult by not owning a 10.5 box, but I need to look over it some. I probably won't go down to 10.4 though, and certainly won't bother going any further. Gotta figure out where to spend my time profitably.

]]> By: Stiltskin http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-20051 Stiltskin Sat, 20 Feb 2010 06:38:00 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-20051 Also, limiting yourself to 10.6 for Mac OS X is not a very good idea, as it blocks out a big chunk of the userbase that uses 10.5 or 10.4. Also, limiting yourself to 10.6 for Mac OS X is not a very good idea, as it blocks out a big chunk of the userbase that uses 10.5 or 10.4.

]]> By: IkaTaii http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-20023 IkaTaii Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:42:26 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-20023 I managed to get all of the achievements except "I don't even need that hand" which I am going to have to declare nigh-impossible save for longer fall time and / or exceptional luck. They seemed decent, and the "path 14 up and back" combined with "Spectacular" was perfect for cluing me in on how scoring worked (W*X*Y*Z, right?). I actually really, really like the game design on this one and would love to see it developed further. My biggest gripe with it is the insane falling times toward the end of the level. I'm pretty sure it's impossible to put a piece in the upper corners of the triangle, which just should not be. Decreasing the piece count on the same stage or adding a "fall zone" above would be good solutions, possibly with a limiter so if any piece gets set too high you lose, to prevent stacking all the useless pieces off to one side too egregiously. Other than the fall distance and the literally-impossible-and-totally-murders-your-score achievement, I'd say a bit of polish is all it needs to be worth of a commercial release (or at least a $5 iPod app). I managed to get all of the achievements except "I don't even need that hand" which I am going to have to declare nigh-impossible save for longer fall time and / or exceptional luck. They seemed decent, and the "path 14 up and back" combined with "Spectacular" was perfect for cluing me in on how scoring worked (W*X*Y*Z, right?).

I actually really, really like the game design on this one and would love to see it developed further. My biggest gripe with it is the insane falling times toward the end of the level. I'm pretty sure it's impossible to put a piece in the upper corners of the triangle, which just should not be. Decreasing the piece count on the same stage or adding a "fall zone" above would be good solutions, possibly with a limiter so if any piece gets set too high you lose, to prevent stacking all the useless pieces off to one side too egregiously. Other than the fall distance and the literally-impossible-and-totally-murders-your-score achievement, I'd say a bit of polish is all it needs to be worth of a commercial release (or at least a $5 iPod app).

]]> By: Eryx http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-19835 Eryx Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:44:05 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-19835 I cannot judge how good are the graphical effects you achieved, but they come with a cost: the game crashes for me after intro, and from the comments I see I am not the only one. I suppose this is because of this use of graphics hardware. So, you lose some players. (It is not the only game I have problems with, for example I was also unable to play one big commercial game I tried, and I suppose I would have more problems if I played more commercial games rather than indies, as indies usually do not use graphics card hardware that much. And I had problems both on my desktop computer (probably because it is very old) and my laptop.) And I don't agree that hexagons suck. They are cool. I have worked with them on several occassions and had no problems. I have once transformed my (not available) tactical game from a square grid to a hexagonal one - that turned out to be very easy to do (much easier than I suspected) and I could continue adding features while easily keeping both square and hex as options. My biggest problem was implementing honeycombs on a square grid. ;) Even creating mazes on a triangular grid (a big equilateral triangle subdivided into small ones) could be implemented without special cases for normal/reversed triangles (except drawing) when using a well designed coordinate system. I cannot judge how good are the graphical effects you achieved, but they come with a cost: the game crashes for me after intro, and from the comments I see I am not the only one. I suppose this is because of this use of graphics hardware. So, you lose some players. (It is not the only game I have problems with, for example I was also unable to play one big commercial game I tried, and I suppose I would have more problems if I played more commercial games rather than indies, as indies usually do not use graphics card hardware that much. And I had problems both on my desktop computer (probably because it is very old) and my laptop.)

And I don't agree that hexagons suck. They are cool. I have worked with them on several occassions and had no problems. I have once transformed my (not available) tactical game from a square grid to a hexagonal one – that turned out to be very easy to do (much easier than I suspected) and I could continue adding features while easily keeping both square and hex as options. My biggest problem was implementing honeycombs on a square grid. ;) Even creating mazes on a triangular grid (a big equilateral triangle subdivided into small ones) could be implemented without special cases for normal/reversed triangles (except drawing) when using a well designed coordinate system.

]]> By: Stiltskin http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-19833 Stiltskin Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:27:01 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-19833 The sound, what little there is, is good. But this game would benefit greatly from some music. Also, a failure screen popping up when you've blocked off all your electrical pathways would be a good idea. The sound, what little there is, is good. But this game would benefit greatly from some music. Also, a failure screen popping up when you've blocked off all your electrical pathways would be a good idea.

]]> By: Supersausagedog http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-19692 Supersausagedog Thu, 11 Feb 2010 22:03:33 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-19692 Ah just tried once more and got Shiny and Sparkly in one game. Spectacular sounds awfully hard though as predicting the flow of power in such short times would be difficult. I did notice a lot more straight connectors(as in just two connections on either side of the tile) on the final level as well as less bulbs, but I put this down to bad luck rather than deliberate design, so a mention of each levels properties would definitely have been good. Also, I neglected to mention about the actual game design in my previous post. It's definitely one of the more interesting falling tiles games out there, hexagons were pretty nice and worked well too. I did think the levels were a bit too long sometimes, an option for shorter games (less tiles) might've been nice. Also, where you mention adding the ability to edit board layout, I think that would've been cool and added a lot more depth to gameplay, all though double score, countodwns and touchscreens I don't think I would've liked. Ah just tried once more and got Shiny and Sparkly in one game. Spectacular sounds awfully hard though as predicting the flow of power in such short times would be difficult.
I did notice a lot more straight connectors(as in just two connections on either side of the tile) on the final level as well as less bulbs, but I put this down to bad luck rather than deliberate design, so a mention of each levels properties would definitely have been good.

Also, I neglected to mention about the actual game design in my previous post. It's definitely one of the more interesting falling tiles games out there, hexagons were pretty nice and worked well too. I did think the levels were a bit too long sometimes, an option for shorter games (less tiles) might've been nice.

Also, where you mention adding the ability to edit board layout, I think that would've been cool and added a lot more depth to gameplay, all though double score, countodwns and touchscreens I don't think I would've liked.

]]> By: Zorba http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-19691 Zorba Thu, 11 Feb 2010 20:06:01 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-19691 Yeah, I probably should have added an easier achievement or two. I'm new to the achievement thing :D I can guarantee that every achievement is possible with the exception of "light everything without rotating", which I sort of threw in there for comedy value. The three levels had a very different piece breakdown. I'm not really sure this came across in gameplay or not, I perhaps should have explicitly mentioned it. One of them was sort of a normal generic piece layout, one of them had very few branches and was all about making good use of the branches you have, one of them had tons of branches but huge numbers of ornaments and was about not getting yourself trapped. Light-all-bulbs is definitely possible on all three levels, just a little tricky :) Yeah, I probably should have added an easier achievement or two. I'm new to the achievement thing :D I can guarantee that every achievement is possible with the exception of "light everything without rotating", which I sort of threw in there for comedy value.

The three levels had a very different piece breakdown. I'm not really sure this came across in gameplay or not, I perhaps should have explicitly mentioned it. One of them was sort of a normal generic piece layout, one of them had very few branches and was all about making good use of the branches you have, one of them had tons of branches but huge numbers of ornaments and was about not getting yourself trapped.

Light-all-bulbs is definitely possible on all three levels, just a little tricky :)

]]> By: Supersausagedog http://www.mandible.net/2010/02/08/mr-mcdougal%e2%80%99s-marvelous-upside-down-electrotree-postmortem/comment-page-1/#comment-19689 Supersausagedog Thu, 11 Feb 2010 19:23:19 +0000 http://www.mandible.net/?p=218#comment-19689 The achivements were perhaps too hard. After one playthrough of the first level I didn't get any, but I got 2 when a came back a week or so later and won the other two levels. Most games seem to have at least one "free" achivement like play one level or light one light, that would make the player feel proud early on and perhaps play longer. Some parts of the gameplay seemed to make certain achivements impossible(The lack of thinking time due to the height near the end of rounds made lighting all bulbs pretty implausible). Also, was there any difference between the 3 levels or were they all identical? They did seem to serve the purpose of making me realise how my score was higher after each playthrough at least. The achivements were perhaps too hard. After one playthrough of the first level I didn't get any, but I got 2 when a came back a week or so later and won the other two levels. Most games seem to have at least one "free" achivement like play one level or light one light, that would make the player feel proud early on and perhaps play longer. Some parts of the gameplay seemed to make certain achivements impossible(The lack of thinking time due to the height near the end of rounds made lighting all bulbs pretty implausible).

Also, was there any difference between the 3 levels or were they all identical? They did seem to serve the purpose of making me realise how my score was higher after each playthrough at least.

]]>