Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
HOPE1134

Petroglyph's 8-Bit Armies / 8-Bit Hordes/ 8-Bit Invaders

175 posts in this topic

Not really a fan of the Minecraftian craze to intentionally make game graphics look bad. Though I kind of like that their blocks are not rigidly constrained to the cubic framework, like the trees that sway, making the low-quality graphics more of a genuine artistic choice than lazy development disguised as an artistic choice.

 

Their nuclear missile just sucks though.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So they basicly remade TD with worse grafiks? Interesting choice, I wondern how it will work out for them...

Edited by Stygs
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Same as any other game they made after Forces of Corruption, I'd figure :P

 

Tanks crushing buildings raised my eyebrow.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks very cute! Also what's the talk about "bad" graphics? It's certainly better than this whole "realistic" blandness that seems to be the thing lately.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because the grafiks are, for a lack of a better word, bland.

Its just colored blocks, generic unit shapes and simple particle effects. It also seem to lack any light effects or shading (aside from basic shadows).

It feels like this grafik is worse than CnC Generals, maybe even worse than earlier CnC.

 

For me, it just lacks the charm most retro games have and comes across as trying to hard.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The graphics are fine. You're looking at the aesthetics of the game, which, in all honesty, work really well. Bright, punchy colors, everything is silly and over the top and nothing is really out of place. A more simplistic, macro-based RTS will be a refreshing change from the overly complicated nature of the RTS genre as of late. Looks like it could be a blast to play. Been looking for a decent RTS... hopefully this will fill the gap.

1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, not interested in old Minecraft graphics, even though I thought the old C&C95 could have deserved something like this.

 

Gee, I wonder if Frank Klepacki has composed 8-bit music for this. :D

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First Petro game I actually want to play. It's simple, and I like simple, and I'm not even talking about the graphics.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, didn't get hyped with it, but maybe it will attract different players to RTS. At least, I hope so.

 

If I could make a RTS in a fun way like that it would be called TOY FACTORY and the style would be something like "Toy Story invade Mattel" - it happens inside a factory and, instead of armies, you'd have toy gangs fighting to rule the scene. In a way, all units would be as diverse as a toy factory can be.

 

Also, no toys die. They get burned in explosions and shots that resemble Warner Bros cartoons and leave the scene crying or asking for a bath and such.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How can anyone say the graphics are fine if Petro is even unable to get seams for the road textures right, just as an example.

And trees look totally out of place because of blended vertices combined with gouraud shading instead of flat shading (which makes totally no sense to use for a game which tries to look 8-bit) which also causes mach bands on flat surfaces.

 

Also don't even get me started on the water and the 200 popcap (hail sc?).

Edited by Lauren
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also don't even get me started on the water and the 200 popcap (hail sc?).

 

200 is reasonable. An unchangable 50 like in Tiberian Twilight isn't.

Edited by Plokite_Wolf
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And trees look totally out of place because of blended vertices combined with gouraud shading instead of flat shading (which makes totally no sense to use for a game which tries to look 8-bit) which also causes mach bands on flat surfaces.

Actually I don't think that the game tries to look 8-bit. The original C&C has an 8-bit palette and it's not blocky or anything. I think 8-bit here is just used as a catchy moniker for "retro", possibly popularised by recent games like 8-bit Killer and the like. And "retro" itself is defined not as a copy of the mid-90s graphics but as some sort of unique style with blocky stuff.
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I have no problem with a low-poly art direction for a game of this genre, I am not sold on the execution of the art direction here.

 

The object scale, level of detail and colour range are way too different from object to object. Almost as if there are no guidelines put in place to ensure that the the art is consistent (this is important, and is evidently missing or ignored in certain areas).

Especially the cliffs and trees are over-simplified compared to the buildings and constructions. The water texture looks very out of place as well. These inconsistencies gives a cheap impression.

It is very easy to immediately assume that it is easy or less effort to go with a "simple" aesthetic, when in fact it is very difficult to do simple well.

 

These things can be worked on, and I am sure the game would look a lot better if these issues are addressed.

 

The game looks fun nonetheless! Looking forward to see how this game comes along. :):thumbsup:

Edited by Jehal
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oooo, this looks fun. It seems like this could achieve my boyhood desire of wanting to make Lego armies and destructible Lego environments! I look forward to seeing more on how the gameplay works but from just the trailer, if it's anywhere around $15, they got my order.

Regarding the population cap, looks like its gone, per popular demand:

ef6jn6N.png

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Excellent. That's good feedback right there.

 

If I ever start a gaming company, I'm going to announce a couple horrible features so when fans complain, I can give them a token victory and rake in the $$$.

2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If their engine could handle removing the population cap, the only reason to have it there in the first place would be spam control (or a devious scheme to throw fans a bone).

 

Spam control by population caps is a horribly unimaginative and overcompensating tactic that needs to go. Game devs who resort to it should receive 49 lashes and be forced to work for EA.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Age of Empires/Mythology, WarCraft and StarCraft worked nicely with caps. It's apparently something others can't do properly.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<Warning: Opinionated rant of a game developer to follow - proceed with caution>

 

In a game that has a population cap, I will always first assume that it was implemented due to engine limitations. Supreme Commander, for instance, experiences enormous slow down issues when its pop cap is approached. I read somewhere that Supreme Commander (the first one) had a conflict with the PC harware that made slow down unavoidable when a certain number of units was reached, no matter how powerful of a computer was running it. Generally, the maximum pop cap allowed never needed to be reached unless you were trying to out-spam the AI. With a higher than necessary pop cap, and an engine limitation, Supreme Commander wins a pass in my eyes.

 

I've only played Age of Empires once or possibly twice and never played Mythology, so I cannot comment on them. I have played WarCraft III and StarCraft II, and their pop caps were stupid. The maximum was ridiculously low in the beginning and you had to constantly be trying to increase it throughout the entire game. Since the caps were so low, I am fairly certain these mechanics were not due to engine limitations, and were probably for spam control. Spam control is never a good excuse for pop caps.

 

If you think these RTSs did it "properly" because you don't mind the pop cap, have you considered you make be looking at it from the wrong direction? Did you think it was acceptable when you first started playing the games, or did you just get used to the ball and chain around your ankle over time and allow yourself to submit to your bondage and develop Stockholm syndrome for your RTS oppressors?

 

Or, perhaps you think these RTSs did them "properly" because they are successful franchises. But no game is perfect, and on a list of faults these games have, can you tell me their pop caps are absent? Although C&C is infamous for being unit spammy (since the later games have virtually no spam control whatsoever), is not the lack of a pop cap one of the pluses C&C has over its rivals?

 

Pop caps for spam control are lazy (or perhaps more likely; time-pressed) developers grasping an easy out for the somewhat difficult problem of spam control. If they can make the rest of the game's mechanics great or their storyline engrossing enough, fans will overlook the issue. But if you have a game with boring mechanics and a terrible storyline... like... ahem... Tiberian Twilight... the pop cap issue is not overlooked and considered yet another component in the game's ultimate failure.

 

8-Bit Armies hasn't had the opportunity to prove its mechanics or storyline yet, but it also hasn't had the opportunity to demonstrate how its pop cap functions. So if nobody can say yet that they didn't do their pop cap "properly", why is it already being shot down? Because the majority already knows pop caps are stupid, people are just willing to overlook them if the rest of the game is good enough.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have played WarCraft III and StarCraft II, and their pop caps were stupid. The maximum was ridiculously low in the beginning and you had to constantly be trying to increase it throughout the entire game. Since the caps were so low, I am fairly certain these mechanics were not due to engine limitations, and were probably for spam control. Spam control is never a good excuse for pop caps.

 

I don't see how caps in general can spark that much of anger nowadays. It's unreal. C&C and very few other RTS games were uncapped, and the main tactic in most situations was to outspam your enemy, and late game battles could often be described as cluster****s (some Submarine Titans and Kane's Wrath memories are coming back...). With caps, you're kinda forced to make the most of your army, and luckily, most games that are capped actually have diverse and useful units that justify that, instead of "Tank", "Tank +1 Armour +1 Attack", "AA Tank", "Paper Plane" and "Paper Plane with Carpet Bombs", spammed to the nth power.

 

It seems to me that the main gameplay design is what decides whether units will have depth or will just be "Tanks & Sidekicks". C&C went the easy way, IMO, which allowed for nigh-complete expendability of basically every unit.

 

Also, I think the original StarCraft actually had a technical limitation on the number of sprites that could be drawn at the same time, and if the number was reached, missile-firing units like the Terran Valkyrie (from Brood War) would have their weapons unusable until something died to free the "slots". StarCraft II visibly took many things from both StarCraft I and WarCraft games as part of tradition, as players were used to that kind of gameplay, and would likely be aliened out if that was changed.

 

If you think these RTSs did it "properly" because you don't mind the pop cap, have you considered you make be looking at it from the wrong direction? Did you think it was acceptable when you first started playing the games, or did you just get used to the ball and chain around your ankle over time and allow yourself to submit to your bondage and develop Stockholm syndrome for your RTS oppressors?

 

When playing AoE/WC/SC games, I didn't have any problems with the caps neither 15 years ago nor now, except slightly in WarCraft III where it was easy to reach 90 (RoC)/100 (TFT) in the Castle stage. I will admit that WC3 has it a bit low, while others give enough freedom, at least comparatively.

 

Or, perhaps you think these RTSs did them "properly" because they are successful franchises.

 

I'm not one of those people who like Blizzard titles because they're hyped (in fact, I despise the current gaming culture for doing the same to whichever new game is spawned nowadays). I like them for the same reason I do C&C - because I do. I've played lots of games in the past decade and a half, many of which were RTSes, and I can detect a mediocre or bad game. I've had experience with both types of gameplay, and I'm not uncomfortable with either (except, as I mentioned, WarCraft III, but I mostly play the campaign on it).

 

Although C&C is infamous for being unit spammy (since the later games have virtually no spam control whatsoever), is not the lack of a pop cap one of the pluses C&C has over its rivals?

 

Yes and no. Battles get pretty intense in C&C, and I'm not against that at all. But, C&C's design almost completely ignores everything that isn't a planet-sized tank with an occasional bomber on the sides, which appears to be both the result and cause of uncapped tank rushes. It wasn't until RA3 that units got some more flavour and variety that other RTS games (WarCraft III, Company of Heroes...) had had for quite a while.

 

Pop caps for spam control are lazy (or perhaps more likely; time-pressed) developers grasping an easy out for the somewhat difficult problem of spam control. If they can make the rest of the game's mechanics great or their storyline engrossing enough, fans will overlook the issue. But if you have a game with boring mechanics and a terrible storyline... like... ahem... Tiberian Twilight... the pop cap issue is not overlooked and considered yet another component in the game's ultimate failure.

 

AFAIK, the caps were criminally low and unchangable in Tiberian Twilight. That's what was wrong with them most of all.

 

Time pressure doesn't seem to have been the case with Ensemble, Relic and Blizzard, IIRC.

 

8-Bit Armies hasn't had the opportunity to prove its mechanics or storyline yet, but it also hasn't had the opportunity to demonstrate how its pop cap functions. So if nobody can say yet that they didn't do their pop cap "properly", why is it already being shot down? Because the majority already knows pop caps are stupid, people are just willing to overlook them if the rest of the game is good enough.

 

We need to define the term "majority" here. I do not consider the common Facebook/YouTube Joe to belong in core communities and fandoms, as they're very fickle, naive and, more often than not, thick (I just happen to remember Blaze the Hedgehog from the screenshot on the previous page, the guy thinks as the wind blows). Also, there's a lot of people who hate on StarCraft and similar games just because they're popular, but have never played them, or have played them, but intentionally refused to like anything about them (happened to me with Heroes of Might and Magic IV until I started seeing some good points it had).

 

I don't know how the hell Petroglyph even exists still, but they're (understandably) quite desperate now, and will resort to anything, even listening to literally anyone who claims to be a fan, just to get those bills paid.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems apparent that our opinions will not converge and continuing on this train of thought would very quickly go off topic. We've each had our say, and I will leave it at that.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A population cap. WHAT A CRIME. Seriously, anyone bitching about it is butthurt because they can't spam tanks like retards and actually have to think about the composition of their attack forces. What a shame about that.

 

****in' kids these days.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point is rather that if you've got the resources you should also be able to spend them without any artificial limit. RA3 for example did it right in limiting the maximum amount of money gain to limit units on the field instead of using some other artificial limiter (I don't much agree on how it was implemented, that can surely be improved, but at least it did its job).

Still some people just want to kick back and relax and spam some units, which is why Redzone Spampage was popular. C&C can offer both by map design (RR played vastly different than any other maps), SC and the sorts cannot. I never liked RR much but it and Bordertown Beatdown were good maps to just have some mindless fun after a hard game.

Edited by Lauren
0

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0