====================================================================== SUGGESTION FOR ENEMIES ====================================================================== Looks and enemy design might not be the key to creating good enemies. The real issue is the lack of "depth." What I recommend is adding some narrative or story to your characters. Here’s an idea loosely inspired by Vector to make them more engaging. The character-let's call him Joe. He's an office worker who’s either burnt out from his repetitive job or caught doing something "wrong" (like playing some of your older games). Each enemy could represent different office archetypes, tied to the workplace theme. Let’s explore some examples: ====================================================================== YOUR ENEMY IDEAS ====================================================================== >> THE DASHING SQUARE - Role: Manager or Admin. - Behavior: Patrols the office, enraged by Joe slacking off. - Attack Animation: Displays "YOU ARE..." during the charge-up, followed by "FIRED!" when attacking. - Effect: Instant Game Over. (Being fired means out of the job!) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> THE SHOOTING SQUARE - Role: Colleague or Coworker. - Behavior: Shoots complaint letters (paper projectiles) at Joe. - Effect: Each hit reduces HP. If HP = 0, Joe gets fired. - Dialogue: "I’m filing a formal complaint!" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> THE EVOKER-ESQUE NPC - Role: HR or Team Leader. - Behavior: Summons falling cabinets (representing paperwork). - Effect: Cabinets reduce HP or slow Joe temporarily. - Dialogue: "We need this by EOD!" ====================================================================== MY ADDITIONAL NPC IDEAS ====================================================================== >> THE GOSSIP CIRCLE - Role: Chatty coworkers near the water cooler. - Behavior: Slows Joe down with distracting chatter. - Effect: If Joe lingers, gossip alerts higher-level enemies. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> THE PRINTER BOSS - Role: Malfunctioning office printer. - Behavior: Shoots defective printouts and ink cartridges. - Effect: Ink splatter reduces visibility or slows movement. - Dialogue: "Paper jam detected. Please restart." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE STICKY NOTES - Role: Sentient sticky notes lurking in the office. - Behavior: Attach to Joe if he gets too close. - Effect: Reduce stamina/HP; must shake off via mini-game. - Dialogue (on notes): "This isn’t your lunch, Karen." ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> THE POWERPOINT PRESENTERS - Role: Obsessed with presentations. - Behavior: Fire blinding PowerPoint slides (charts, graphs, etc.). - Effect: Reduce HP and impair vision temporarily. - Dialogue: "This is a 72-slide presentation!" ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> THE BREAKROOM BANDIT - Role: Snack thief stealing food/coffee in the breakroom. - Behavior: Runs around, depriving Joe of healing opportunities. - Dialogue: "This is mine now. Better luck next time!" Note: Dialogue means the charge up clue
The useful thing about using the squares to make the enemies is that by the time you realize your idea is bad you wasted less time because you didn't spend a lot of time working on art, and you don't have a lot of art go to waste
While I do agree with this point and its a fairly common perspective. I do feel everyone tends to just forget we all have the ability to repurpose things. The art being bad and the enemy being bad are not related at all, thats defo a great takeaway from a video like this. So chances are the art you made doesn't have to go to waste because u can just keep trying new ideas with that same art until something sticks. A lot of the time, a bad mechanic is just 1 step away from being a great mechanic. The difficultly is in realizing what that step is. For certain game genres, working without art can actually harm your perspective on the design.
@@zekenebel The issue with trying new ideas with the same art is that the art itself will affect what kind of things you'll try. In most games, especially a game like death inc, you should really be designing for fun gameplay first over visuals.
I think a good middle ground is developer art it won't look good but you at least have an idea of what you're working with, anthropomorphizing is a main parameter that let's an enemy feel alive
@@nintySW Yeah i do see your point completely, I could see how an animation or something could indeed affect how u might design the character the second time around. I guess by repurpose I meant more salvage. But I could never agree with the waste of time mindset. A good example would be developing the art style of the game. When you really think about it. No amount of art u did is a waste as it still helped develop your decision making process with the art for the next character. I guess my argument is just that its more nuanced and there is no real 1 size fits all approach.
@@zekenebelMaybe it’s not a complete waste of time but it is suboptimal. imo trying to develop an art style and make good enemies at the same time is just going to end up being more frustrating than if you focused on each part separately.
There is a thing called BoxCast, that allows you to check if enemy has a direct line of sight to the player with all of the hitbox, so you can use that instead of a lot of lines
btw, remember that using a story as reference for enemy behaviour can lead to more creative ideas. building a story around a more basic behavour like dashing or throwing an object obviously leads to more basic enemy behaviour. however a creative story like an office worker who has viruses on his phone can lead to a creative behaviour like spawning viruses that attack the player.
creativity is not the problem with this developer ... it's scope creep and general organisation. Deynum Studio jumps deep into the weeds at the first given chance.
Yeah. Neither is right or wrong, just different. Both can lead to compelling gameplay. It's just one can lead to a game that's a little hollow, the other can lead to a game with no actual backbone or depth.
I think the dash enemy was more interesting when it was colliding, it's more unique and gives the other enemies more interesting movement depending on what others are around them. Alot of games have enemies that drag you towards them (ie pudge from Dota) but I cant think of any that pull the hoard towards you.
I think this is very similar to an interaction in clash royale with the skeleton barrel and the balloon where if you quickly place a balloon then a skeleton barrel afterwards, the skeleton barrel speeds up the balloon.
Maybe that could be its own type of enemy. Like, an enemy that likes to shove other enemies towards you. So if the Shover has other Shovers around it, they all start shoving their way towards you. And if there are big, slow bruiser type characters, they all of a sudden get a bit faster because of the Shover. So that way the Dasher and the Shover can both exist, and under the hood they're both just "speed boost towards the player" but one wants open space, the other wants a body between them.
@@sadtwolvesfan I believe there are enemies that push/throw other enemies at you And all of them are fairly hard to deal with, since most of the time you gotta fight through the entire wave first before even reaching them
Alright. I've been thinking about this overnight, and I've come to a realization. You are so close with the player verbs, but you're going about it completely wrong. You need to consider the player's decision making, and right now all of your enemies are handled the same monotonous way. It's no wonder you aren't having fun when all you do is walk backwards in a circle and shoot. You need to create more involved scenarios. Enter the Gungeon works on having enemies that pursue, turrets you need to engage on their own terms, guys who warp around, etc. If every enemy does basically the same thing, the player also always does basically the se thing, and unlike in some genres I don't think many twin sticks have managed the Miyamoto ideal of having just moving the player around being fun on its own. Create challenges for players' prioritization, positioning and evasion. Make enemies that can reflect shots. Have dudes you need to find openings to take on, like spanners, buffers, guys with windows of opportunity and risk, etc. Look at the player verbs and consider how to make the player see them as in-the-moment decisions, and you'll be designing better enemies AND have a strong entry point for implementing your eventual skill curve.
This hits the nail on the head. I've watched every devlog and Deynum is consistently much too worried about perfecting individual systems one at a time and neglects to consider the most important aspects of the game's design: The overall design principles, gameplay hook, loop, size and scope of the project. At no point has he said anything about these things and I could go on. This is supposed to be constructive criticism on the game btw, I'm still loving the videos.
Tip: When you get to the art, try to add variety to the designs that is more than just "this one is fatter." Different hair, ties, shirts, etc will really help with enemy recognition.
I like the idea of different ties. Different shirts seems unfitting to the strict office setting. And different hair and skin tones might make things a little complicated, because you don’t really wanna say “all these guys are the ones who shoot things at you” do you? And randomising skin tones and hair colour to avoid that issue would lead to confusion for both players and developers. I usually agree but in this specific setting it’s just easier to simplify basic enemy designs until the end product where you can upgrade the designs. This is still a work in progress.
@laraschroeder5195 Yeah, probably right about the skin tone part. I didn't even mention skin because that could be racist. The hair part could still be done, like the buff guy having some shorter or wavier hair, or a full on greaser cut. Ties would probably be the best bet.
@ ohhhh yeah that’s a great idea. It’s a little hard with pixels but I didn’t even think about textures and length, only things like black hair, brown hair, blond hair. You’re so right.
I think on the "evoker" enemy it could be more fun if the cabinets stay a bit longer and allowed multiple rows of cabinets to coexist, splitting up the room a bit and making the enemy harder
In Enter The Gungeon most enemies are pretty simple. It’s the emergent properties of them interacting together that makes for more interesting gameplay.
@@Deynum You could have 2 different types, one that is fast but has lower health and the cabinets disapate faster and another one that could have high health but be slow and has the cabinets stay a bit longer, maybe having 2-3 rows at once.
@@DeynumI vote for a variant able to curve the line towards you. not only is it trying to predict where you’ll be, but also able to home. This could make it so you need to dodge twice.
26 днів тому+53
Enemies bumping into and hurting each other would lead to emergent dynamics! Especially if there's a way for the player to combine mechanics from multiple types of enemies (e.g. a dash into an exploding enemy, starting a chain reaction).
I'm extremely passionate about game design- I don't know if I'm certified to give you advice, since I haven't really made a full game yet, but I have PLAYED a lot of video games, and this is what I've observed. Your ground attack, projectile, and dash enemies all basically achieve the same effect with different skins on. They make a linear attack that the player has to dash in order to dodge. If you want to make better enemies, you should make it so that the player has to adapt their strategy accordingly to what enemies they're facing. And the enemies should synergize with one another. Maybe you could make an enemy that summons a zone that damages the player if they enter it, and that enemy will maintain that zone until the player attacks it and breaks it's focus. Or an enemy that runs away from the player and heals other enemies, making it difficult for the player to make any progress until they deliberately attack that enemy. Or an enemy that fights like a duelist, getting close to the player and circling around them, occasionally lunging forward to attack them, and attempting to dodge the player's attacks itself. The idea is that each enemy should pose a *unique* threat and cause a unique problem that requires a unique solution. And, when you combine lots of enemies together that each cause their own unique problem- suddenly the player has to struggle to get creative. I never get to talk about game design until I'm telling my boyfriend how I think we should design our (skeletons of, frankly) games. So, I kind of saw an opportunity here and took it. I really appreciate someone putting the time and effort into game design- since it's so important to make a fun game. Also, I disagree with one thing you said. I don't think game feel is just about looks- I think it's also about your actions and the enemy's actions having weight and momentum. So that when you hit something, you can *feel* it, and it is relatively easy to achieve that effect, so long as that enemy is not specifically designed to avoid your attacks in that particular situation. (CircletoonsHD called this "Agency". His video on videogame combat is really good.) If you wanna take my advice, here's my enemy designing process. I think of the setting first. Are we in a crypt? So, let's make a skeleton. The skeleton also needs a method to survive (not raw health). So, the skeleton's method of survivability is that they come in large numbers and revive themselves after they die, so a player has to clear them out quickly and move on. Then it needs a method of harming the player. It's a simple enemy, so it will simply walk towards the player and try to stab them to death. Now that enemy is done. But you also have to make more enemies- which will synergize with the skeleton. Like a necromancer that makes the skeletons take less damage and slows down the player- keeping its distance. This can work well with the skeleton because it's sort of forcing the player into a battle of attrition, which gives the skeletons an advantage. Then you can add more enemy types, like a skeleton with a shield that blocks M1 attacks, or an archer which fires arrows at the player to create more complicated zoning. And, of course, make sure the player has a unique solution or two to each problem that each enemy creates. But that's my two cents. You probably won't even see this comment, but it was fun to write...
@@DynamicMagi Well, if you're planning on using this advice, there's one more thing I wanna say; Think of how players and the enemies work, both in tandem with one another. Not just how the enemies work on their own. If a player has 32 different buttons they can press, there should be a specific enemy designed to make 3-5 of those buttons ineffective or dangerous to use. My skeleton examples were bad, because none of those enemies really have threatening attacks... The biggest thing I wish I said in that comment was; make sure your player can't beat a group of enemies just by circling around them. Leading shots helps with that, but can only do so much...
@@BX--nq6gfjust adding on, 2 fun things i've found are enemies that deflect your bullets back at you if you hit them in the wrong spot, and melee/shotgun where neither of you can really take damage until you get really close. basic risk/reward
@BX--nq6gf I had the idea of a miniboss duo that got harder when they were seperate, because they have negative synergy. One was aggressive and dashed, but the other setup walls. This means the aggressive one will get stunned ramming into walls and maybe even stun the other if it hits it. I also thought of a set of boars where one is a charger, and one is a shielder. The shielder makes a protection field around it when it has allies nearby. This means there could be 1 shield boar with 2-3 Charger boars that dash out of the protection zone one at a time. Really appreciated the CircleToonsHD video as well thanks.
1:28 I always saw these enemies as if they were carrying a desk behind their back and slamming it into the ground. Just a tip for when you will make animations in the futute, that feels like a fun concept.
The way you show your debugging is golden! I always try to show how to debug in my tutorial videos because it is so important yet no one really talks about it
a tip i think is that enemy's need weaknesses, like a enemy wich dashes very fast but gets stunned for a second after hitting something? when you find these things, and hit them it feels really good and fun. also whats that post it website?
Imagine if there was an enemy that had an arch/ricochet attack that specifically bounced off other enemies. The more enemies you have, the more dangerous it is.
If you don't mind me butting in, I think what you're missing is context. Right now, you're building these enemies in a vacuum, as if they could exist in any old game and you just happened to put them in this one; what you need to consider is what role you need the enemies to play, specifically what they will do to affect the player experience. In other words, these enemies shouldn't be thought of as independent creatures, but as tools to guide the player's experience. Start with considering what tool you need; do you need an enemy that can pincer the player? an enemy that forces the player to leave cover? an enemy that cuts off parts of the play-space from the player? an enemy that challenges skill with a specific weapon? Start with the problem the enemy needs to solve, and design the enemy to solve it.
hey i'm the game design student from last video, and I have a bit more advices, because tbh this is worse than I though. Alright so first, the reason you struggle finding ideas for mechanic is because you have no game, and I mean that litterally. You don't have any direction, any intend, any 'feelings' that you want to convey to your player. Let's do an exercice : Describe me your game without mentionning any characters or mechanics, what do you have ? A rogue-like with the theme of office ? That's weak. i'll be fully honest with you in my school, any of my first year junior would make a better concept in a few hours. I mean you do have an unique theme, but anyone can have that and it's not that unique too. The problem that I'm getting at is that you didn't structure anything at all, you just went with it and thought it would be fine, but now you have a game that isn't unique in any way and because of that you can't think of any mechanics for your enemies outside of extremely basic ones. My advice is : Go back to the moodbord, hell don't even think about opening unity again before you made an actual concept, and to do that just imagine yourself playing your game years into the future ,when its completed, and ask yourself "What do I want to play" and it's not about themes, story or such, it's about feelings, what feelings do you want us, players, to feel when we play your game. If you manage to anwser this question then the next one should be "What do I need to do in order to FEEL that" that's your dynamics, in order to feel the feeling you want your player to feel, what do they have to do ? Second : I aldreay mentionned it but always start with the gameplay, I see that you made effort to avoid art this time, which is good, but instead of actually devlopping gameplay you just focused on programming instead. Look you litterally just said you didn't care about visuals anymore then you spend days making a whole new code to make your enemies movement look more realistic, and then you make a mechanic but instead of just making more and seeing if it's fun you bother resolving a pointless bug. STOP IT, make sloppy design, make sloppy codes, and just try stuff and don't try to make everything "smooth" until you actually have a fun game. I feel like you're still trying to impress, but by doing so you're litterally going nowhere. Again I know I sound mean here, but know that it's purely to help.
i was about to comment how in my game it was much easier to design enemies, and, yeah, now that i think about it, it is probably because my own game has a much more defined set of mechanics.
I don't think this is going to be a useful tip at all. Clearly he already knows what he wants, and has done thinking and can't find inspiration. If you're stuck like that, just sitting there trying to think harder isn't going to work. For a game design student that is a sign to throw it out because you're being trained to work on a commercial product for a company. For someone who wants to make this, it's going to take making so much that one thing just *clicks* and everything else gets reworked to fit the new inspo
dont copy the movement code, use inheritance. its very important for making future enemies as it means you can refer to a generic enemy in a much easier way in the future (polymorphism) this is one of the important OOP constructs
The movement code was not coppied, just the "behaviour" code. But that was mostly so I could get the enemies working asap, and not intended to be the final implementation.
Don't do polymorphism and especially not OOP. This whole line of thinking not only leads to slow code, it also breaks completely when you want to create enemies that only conform to subsets of what a generic enemy is, but each enemy conforms to a different subsets. Code quickly becomes very, very complicated.
Ive just started studying Game Design at a university after working on my own stuff for about 5 years. The most important part I've learned is to ALWAYS let others test your stuff cuz you will always be blinded by the thing you make. It's like cooking, if you made something, it will always taste better to you. We playtest our games with eachother every single Monday no matter how little progress we've made and it makes everything so much easier.
The dashing enemies dashing into walls could give them a crazed personality. It also means the player could exploit it if you add environmental hazards. That could be fun.
Interesting game dev advice I heard from Pirate Software: enemies should all have exactly two of these characteristics: taking long to kill, moving quickly, and dealing lots of damage. Even bosses merely rotate between combinations of which characteristics are fulfilled.
I think square enemies are great. They represent how the company metaphorically put its employees into boxes, striping them of their humanity. -some philosopher
Take this with a grain of salt because I am not a game designer, just a player, but perhaps consider how enemies and their attacks would impact the environment, other enemies, and the player. And vice versa. I personally think inter-connectivity is a key part of engagement
Another thing to consider when making enemies is not just how they interact with the player, but also how they interact with the world around them. Part of why that last enemy you made feels so good is the fact that the cabinets coming out of the ground from his attack makes him actually influence the environment and not just the player. You could do something similarly interesting with your initial dashing enemy. Maybe the player can trick him into hitting tables and flipping them by crashing into them, or maybe he can bust through stuff. When the enemies can influence their environment it multiplies the creative anv interesting level design you can make with them.
The pathfinding problem you describe at about 5 minutes is actually used a lot in old comedy gags and IRL what really tends to happen because humans have both momentum and front facing eyes. This prevents us from immediately switching direction if we're moving with any degree of speed and makes it to where we might not actually notice if somebody ends up behind us. If anything, that was a nice element of realism.
@clyd3n_012-f1d not just line of sight but also physical momentum and limitation of awareness. We don't know our target has changed direction until we see that they have changed direction or some level of physical exhaustion sets in and we start to slow.
The drag-based pathfinding will get you the result you want if you just pump up the walking force and the drag. It's only sliding because low drag allows building up more momentum than you'd like. Your direction-based implementation makes it so that if a character has to start going backwards it would have to make a U turn, which feels more like a car's movement than a person's. What you'd expect is a slowdown, brief full stop, and then acceleration backwards. The orientation of the sprite can then follow suit. This is exactly what the force-based implementation does - and it's because real movement is built by forces. If you still want finer control on the speed the character is moving, you can always normalize the speed vector if it gets too big.
A few comments have already given you very helpful criticism, so I will try to avoid repeating what they said. As a fellow game developer who will be releasing their first game on Steam in less than a month, my biggest advice to you is that you NEED to test and prototype more. Your enemies didn't suck because they lacked juice, and adding juice only served to distract you from that. You need to think about what you want the player to do, design to make them do that thing, and then TEST to make sure that thing happens. I cannot stress this enough, TEST EARLY AND TEST OFTEN. If you want a quick suggestion from what I can see, your enemies are so boring because all they do is run at you. You have this pathfinding script and all you do with it is make them go towards the player. Consider flank enemies, or even enemies that can switch between flanking and not flanking. Enemies that build cover for other enemies. Enemies that interact with other enemies in interesting ways. But, to be honest, none of that really matters, because instead of testing these enemies in the context of actual gameplay, you tested them in an empty room with a singular table. You can't design interesting enemies because you don't have an interesting game to put them in. Stop being afraid of making things that aren't juicy or might not totally work, because you're going to find that your juicy bugless game is a boring mess when you're all said and done, and it'll be a lot more than 2 months down the drain. Don't worry about your game being in a presentable state until you actually have a game.
A fairy flew by and dropped you an advice from an experienced gamedesigner (17+ years). You basically say that whatever you're trying to do, you can't find an essence of the game. You say: here, I add enemies, I add decorations, I add movements and bullets, but I don't really feel like playing it, my character and story are not alive. The reason is that you focus on icing before baking the cake. The second reason is that you're letting the genre dictate your vision, whereas it should be the other way around. Instead of turning the enemies into squares, forget about the enemies at all for some time. If you remove all the enemies from Half-Life, you will still see a coherent image: an atmospheric “simulator” of a horror sci-fi movie, with a hero that has to reach the safety from the deeps of an alien-infested facility. Instead of shooting enemies it could have employed puzzles, or something else. If instead of this vision they've started with “first person shooter” genre tag that dictated them all the rest, it wouldn't be the same game, and most likely not such a legendary hit. So, fighting enemies is not a bad thing per se, but it's a sauce, a filler, not a real heart of the game. If we are talking about roguelikes, you would first learn to generate labyrinth of a floor, then spawn templates of rooms, then items, skills, interactions... and only then fill it with different enemies, bullets and so on. And zero element in this is a vision, of course. In your case, notice the fact that your videos are more interesting than your game prototype, even for yourself. Why? Because you do it better, and because for the office setting, it's fitting to have a story, to place some words on a screen like you do in videos, to have something surreal and out-of-the-box, for example like gizmos that you show in this video, but being a part of an actual gameplay. Basically it could have been something like Stanley Parable, but in 2d and with action. “And this... this is Greg. He is a good guy, but whatever he does I swear I can always see a straight line drawn in front of him. Oh, that bold and infuriatingly straight line of his! And sometimes it just happens to cross my own... let's say, zone.” We can discuss it more in details if you want, drop me an email.
7:43 you can use a single boxcast instead of 4 raycasts. Then very small objects(maybe something like a trsh bin) still get detected which would otherwise possibly be missed by the raycasts
I just watched your previous video and i came up with a few suggestions to improve the gameplay aspect of the game. 1° For the pickups, make it so you need to break the objects before picking up the materials for crafting. (It's rly weird to pickup an entire table and it's going to be very satisfiying to explode desks with a purpose) 2° Give a second utility for most, if not every, stationary object! Descs are great cover and could be required for the crafting, printers could explode with ink and do AOE damage, pushing chairs could block paths for the enemies while not beeing good cover for bullets, coolers could wet the floor and make it slipery or put out fires... There is a lot you can do, and adding extra functionality for every furniture piece will make it so the player needs to aways keep in mind what they want to destroy and what they shouldn't. 3° Why not use the crafting materials themselvs as the ammo for the weapons? If you breack a printer you get metal bits, ink and paper, and then you'll need the be strategic about how you shoot as to not waste those valueable components! The small printer consumes paper, the pencil consumes wood, the the pen uses ink, etc... With these additions, every move the player does will need to be thoughtfull. If you break every table for wood, then you can't use them as cover or craft new weapons. If you have a gun that consumes paper, then the player will need to focus on finding paper to use and conserve their shots if there isn't any left. The guns themselves turn into liabilities depending on what they consume, making some easier to use than others just from the diferent availability of resorces! Sudenly, melee weapons become a viable option, not because they are better than ranged weapons, but because they allow the player to hoard resorces more easily by not consuming ammo, even though they expose the player to more danger! Even AOE weapons can be a poor choice now, depending if you want to just breack everything in a room or not.
have you watched the belko experiment? one thing I thought at the end, there's things you can consider for the underground attack enemy: There's three-four types of them you can find in a level, one that sends the row where you're going, one that spawns it right below where you are, one that that hits the floor multiple times, sending a few rows after you and one that sends them in a ^V or *, and rather than aim at you, it just wants to be disruptive when theres a lot on the screen you make the player used to these types, and then at the end of the level the boss uses all these styles in its moveset, with varying speeds and ranges
12:31 please do not create a new instance of the bulled every time it needs to shoot, its a EXTREMELY expensive operation, that will chug performance like santa on chirsmas morning, insted instanciate the bullets when the enemy is created and have them be disabled until the enemy shoots, upon which you enable the bullets and apply the desired transformation and movement, and inted of destroying after a while, make then return to their disabled state until the enmy shoots again, that qway you are not creating objects just to destroy them seconds later.
@@BryanLu0 it relly isnt optimization its good pratice, just by having multiple enemies in a room it will alredy become a problem, and worse of all its a EXPONENTIAL waste of resources, any behaviour or complexity added to projectiles will make performance worse and worse, sticking with such a terrible way of making projectiles will inevitely require a giant refactor later in the line if this isnt done early enough.
@@BryanLu0 a good point but honestly, the creator seems beginner enough to just use the prototype code with some fixes until 8 months later he ends up making a video titled "how bullets ruined my game's performance" or something. Personally i prefer spending a little bit more time on prototypes than i have to in order to get them to at least be technically sound, so i wont have to completely rewrite it later, and also partially because i enjoy writing well built code and systems, and hacky hasty solutions take some of the passion out of it for me, plus I'll probably end up a worse coder in the long run if i keep practicing bad habits 😂
I LOVE THIS SERIES i think it’s AWESOME that you’re figuring out ways to fix the problems that you had with your game and it’s SUPER fun to watch!!!!!!! Great video it’s awesome i love devlogs
for big engines best technique i found is "manually draw a thing on paper and use it as a texture". Don’t polish molten metal-cast it first. Focus on making it fun. Same applies to board games development i guess
Quick tip for you: it may benefit you if you seek out other indie game devs for their feedback on your game (or what you have of it so far) drawing on their experience could prove very helpful in figuring out what you're doing wrong or right, and what you still need to do. Overall, it looks like things are going good! Looking forward for more!
3:02 for future reference never ever have the perfect gliding pathfinding for anything; unless it's a game like that one idler vampire game, you want movement and is good for the enemy.
Imo it would have been nice to see the dash enemy get stunned for a few seconds if it dashes into a solid object that’s not the player. That way the player can do some matador type stuff
Fantastic to see all the steps you went through for this enemy. It looks miles better and I hope you're able to make your entire enemy roster as cool as this.
I have a few ideas for enemies. Since you’ve decided on your last video that the game is about combining stuff, why not have the enemies do the same. Such as combining attacks or changing their behavior depending on the allies they have. For example: The under ground attack enemy, say there are two on the field. One is in range of the player and the other is not. When the one in range attacks the player, the out of range one can enhance his allies attack making it branch off at the end towards the player. Like a lightning bolt redirecting, and the more underground attack enemies that are on the board the more redirections it gets. Or after a certain point, say three redirections the attack ends with like a small explosion or something. Or alternatively to the cap on the redirections. Once there’s like three to four underground attack enemies on the board one of them will attack the player while the rest will intentionally hang back and enhance that one underground enemy’s attacks while avoiding the player. Making it to where if there’s enough of them it’s essentially a mini boss. And the underground attack enemy has a different behavior depending on the allies it has on the field. Like if the underground attack enemy is paired up with an enemy similar to the dashing enemy you were working on in this video. The under ground attack enemy would change its behavior from trying to attack the player to trying to restrict his/her movement by using his walls to block the player. Making it easier for the dashing like enemy to hit the player. An enemy type I thought of is one that grabs the player and throws them to an inconvenient location. Doesn’t hurt just grabs and… [YEETS] them. Like if the grabber enemy is paired up with a melee range enemy the grabber will chuck the player right in front of Mr Melee range. Or if they are pared up with a long range enemy type he’ll throw the player into a corner where the player will have a more limited range of movement to avoid projectiles. Or alternatively to throwing the player into a corner he could hold the player still so the ranged enemy has an easy shot. The player then has to break from the grabber’s grasp by wiggling out or stunning the grabber enemy.
As a gamedev who hasn't made games as complex or massive as yours, I learned a lot from this video, and it gave me insights I didn't know I needed. Keep up the good work, Deynum. I hope I can make an awesome game like yours in the future.
You are doing a great job 👍 carry on with this approach because you're doing great! Game design is so hard and I'm still trying and your concept has great promise. Don't worry about having to push out a video take your time and be very selective. I know you're probably already trying this but mixing the action cards you made will be great. Like that desk enemy you made adding a dash would add more interedting complexity. Keep going we believe in you!!
Once you find time to I would recommend adding screen shake to the final enemy’s attack to give it the feeling of a strong attack even if you don’t like it you learn how you want it to feel and have screen shake ready if you need it (plus it content for a video)
you will probaly not see this but it would be cool to see the cabinet spawning enemy have its cabinets stay up as a wall for a bit and would fall down after a little while, also the player could shoot and break the cabinents to get through the wall.
Really happy you're getting progress on this Makes me want to get progress on all the stuff ive been procrastinating on as well As a fellow person with too much perfectionism that it stops me from doing projects Thank you 🎉
Lot of good stuff in this video, I especially appreciate the problem solving as well as laying out the issues and investigations of those issues. I’m a very visual person so this is definitely something I’m going to need to unlearn when it comes to game design.
I'm really enjoying your logs so far; it's great to see you learn from previous issues and then present your learnings so well. It's nice to see someone breaking down their process as abstract player or enemy verbs instead of going straight for story-theme. My feedback on the project is... two things you're probably not going to like, but could be important in the long run. I think your game look pretty, and I particularly like the bodily animations, but I think the lack of faces is holding it back. I appreciate its a stylistic decision which probably comes from a place of saving time, but it adds up to missed opportunities for emotion and differentiation. Because your enemies are all variations of Some Guy, with similar sillhoutes, the face is a big piece of real estate which is currently wasted. I also feel that in terms of general creative direction, I want to feel like there is a reason why this office is becoming so violent. I don't think it needs to be present at the start of the game, but it could be something revealed as you progress through the Roguelike. Kind of like how the Oldest House in Control starts off looking like a normal environment, and then we get sort of Twin Peaks magical realism/surrealism, and then full blown cosmic weirdness. Whether your office guys are possessed, aliens, terminators or whatever, if you had some sort of supernatural or sci-fi backdrop to things, you could gradually transition to that from what you have - which IS funny, but it's also a joke which might outlive its uses when you want to upgrade your enemies and differentiate your environment more to make players feel like they're progressing. I appreciate this is one of those annoying "make a different game entirely" type comments, but I'm just thinking of the ingredients which roguelikes usually need for players to feel progress.
i think the dash enemy should change its path mid-dash so it can dash around tables and stuff, and it should also use the enemy ai as a guide to round the dash, i think that would be cool.
I didn't think the enemys were boring, they just needed to do something unique and diferent to other similar types of enemys you find in other games. For example for the dashing enemy it would be cool to keep that bug of it bumping into other enemies and improving on it. It could turn into a sort of suport for other enemies and push them towards the player or something similar.
Enjoyable videos:) my 2 cents on cabinets is make the first one big that Enemy could smash down, then floor ripples, then full cabinet like he sent it your way. Another advantage of not using full cabinets the whole way would be they block less of the screen. Could also use 1/2 cabinets on the way to player. Excited to see all improvements and your detailed explanation. I, for one, enjoy the problem solving.
when i was watching the first square ennemies, i was loosing my mind behind the screen because of how much the ennemies sucked. but this final ennemy looks good ! and btw, i think you should chose multiple actions for ennemy. for example, make a dash ennemy, and when that ennemy is near the player it explodes. or make an ennemy that "blindly rushes" (saw that in your notes) and he teleports right before doing it. make an ennemy throw coffee on the ground (which hurts you if you get hit by it) and then he uses it to slide towards you really fast ! so you get it : give your ennemies multiple actions. (great video btw)
I personally would have fixed the looping around the table thing by making the direction turn 180 degrees if the difference between the path and current direction (absolute with mod 360 of course) was more than 90, as that means the path is already past going to their sides. But I can see how yours is more efficient.
Get NordVPN (70% off a 2 year plan): nordvpn.com/deynumstudio
adCURSION
as in recursion
inception means creation
referring to the creation of the idea that the movie is about
or goo goo gaga zygotery
You should make it is an enemy dashes into a obstical the obstical flys that way
finaly someone talking about something different in north vpn, now im actually intrested! M a e r k e d i n g
======================================================================
SUGGESTION FOR ENEMIES
======================================================================
Looks and enemy design might not be the key to creating good enemies.
The real issue is the lack of "depth." What I recommend is adding some
narrative or story to your characters. Here’s an idea loosely inspired
by Vector to make them more engaging.
The character-let's call him Joe.
He's an office worker who’s either burnt out from his repetitive job or
caught doing something "wrong" (like playing some of your older games).
Each enemy could represent different office archetypes, tied to the workplace
theme. Let’s explore some examples:
======================================================================
YOUR ENEMY IDEAS
======================================================================
>> THE DASHING SQUARE
- Role: Manager or Admin.
- Behavior: Patrols the office, enraged by Joe slacking off.
- Attack Animation: Displays "YOU ARE..." during the charge-up,
followed by "FIRED!" when attacking.
- Effect: Instant Game Over. (Being fired means out of the job!)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> THE SHOOTING SQUARE
- Role: Colleague or Coworker.
- Behavior: Shoots complaint letters (paper projectiles) at Joe.
- Effect: Each hit reduces HP. If HP = 0, Joe gets fired.
- Dialogue: "I’m filing a formal complaint!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> THE EVOKER-ESQUE NPC
- Role: HR or Team Leader.
- Behavior: Summons falling cabinets (representing paperwork).
- Effect: Cabinets reduce HP or slow Joe temporarily.
- Dialogue: "We need this by EOD!"
======================================================================
MY ADDITIONAL NPC IDEAS
======================================================================
>> THE GOSSIP CIRCLE
- Role: Chatty coworkers near the water cooler.
- Behavior: Slows Joe down with distracting chatter.
- Effect: If Joe lingers, gossip alerts higher-level enemies.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> THE PRINTER BOSS
- Role: Malfunctioning office printer.
- Behavior: Shoots defective printouts and ink cartridges.
- Effect: Ink splatter reduces visibility or slows movement.
- Dialogue: "Paper jam detected. Please restart."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> PASSIVE-AGGRESSIVE STICKY NOTES
- Role: Sentient sticky notes lurking in the office.
- Behavior: Attach to Joe if he gets too close.
- Effect: Reduce stamina/HP; must shake off via mini-game.
- Dialogue (on notes): "This isn’t your lunch, Karen."
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> THE POWERPOINT PRESENTERS
- Role: Obsessed with presentations.
- Behavior: Fire blinding PowerPoint slides (charts, graphs, etc.).
- Effect: Reduce HP and impair vision temporarily.
- Dialogue: "This is a 72-slide presentation!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
>> THE BREAKROOM BANDIT
- Role: Snack thief stealing food/coffee in the breakroom.
- Behavior: Runs around, depriving Joe of healing opportunities.
- Dialogue: "This is mine now. Better luck next time!"
Note: Dialogue means the charge up clue
The useful thing about using the squares to make the enemies is that by the time you realize your idea is bad you wasted less time because you didn't spend a lot of time working on art, and you don't have a lot of art go to waste
While I do agree with this point and its a fairly common perspective. I do feel everyone tends to just forget we all have the ability to repurpose things. The art being bad and the enemy being bad are not related at all, thats defo a great takeaway from a video like this. So chances are the art you made doesn't have to go to waste because u can just keep trying new ideas with that same art until something sticks. A lot of the time, a bad mechanic is just 1 step away from being a great mechanic. The difficultly is in realizing what that step is. For certain game genres, working without art can actually harm your perspective on the design.
@@zekenebel The issue with trying new ideas with the same art is that the art itself will affect what kind of things you'll try. In most games, especially a game like death inc, you should really be designing for fun gameplay first over visuals.
I think a good middle ground is developer art it won't look good but you at least have an idea of what you're working with, anthropomorphizing is a main parameter that let's an enemy feel alive
@@nintySW Yeah i do see your point completely, I could see how an animation or something could indeed affect how u might design the character the second time around. I guess by repurpose I meant more salvage. But I could never agree with the waste of time mindset. A good example would be developing the art style of the game. When you really think about it. No amount of art u did is a waste as it still helped develop your decision making process with the art for the next character. I guess my argument is just that its more nuanced and there is no real 1 size fits all approach.
@@zekenebelMaybe it’s not a complete waste of time but it is suboptimal. imo trying to develop an art style and make good enemies at the same time is just going to end up being more frustrating than if you focused on each part separately.
There is a thing called BoxCast, that allows you to check if enemy has a direct line of sight to the player with all of the hitbox, so you can use that instead of a lot of lines
Really? That's way better indeed.
I tried finding something like that, but I apparently missed it
???
what does this have to do with the music video
It's not a music video? @orangRB
@orangRB you probably had a bug where the comment section from the last video you watched got put onto the next video.
?? @orangRB
btw, remember that using a story as reference for enemy behaviour can lead to more creative ideas. building a story around a more basic behavour like dashing or throwing an object obviously leads to more basic enemy behaviour. however a creative story like an office worker who has viruses on his phone can lead to a creative behaviour like spawning viruses that attack the player.
And people LOVE creative enemies
I guess, that is again an example of, combining middle ground is best.
creativity is not the problem with this developer ... it's scope creep and general organisation. Deynum Studio jumps deep into the weeds at the first given chance.
@@Culpride yeah it's weird how they've spent almost 3 years designing the fundamentals of a game that isn't properly playable yet
Yeah. Neither is right or wrong, just different. Both can lead to compelling gameplay. It's just one can lead to a game that's a little hollow, the other can lead to a game with no actual backbone or depth.
I think the dash enemy was more interesting when it was colliding, it's more unique and gives the other enemies more interesting movement depending on what others are around them. Alot of games have enemies that drag you towards them (ie pudge from Dota) but I cant think of any that pull the hoard towards you.
I think this is very similar to an interaction in clash royale with the skeleton barrel and the balloon where if you quickly place a balloon then a skeleton barrel afterwards, the skeleton barrel speeds up the balloon.
Maybe that could be its own type of enemy.
Like, an enemy that likes to shove other enemies towards you. So if the Shover has other Shovers around it, they all start shoving their way towards you.
And if there are big, slow bruiser type characters, they all of a sudden get a bit faster because of the Shover.
So that way the Dasher and the Shover can both exist, and under the hood they're both just "speed boost towards the player" but one wants open space, the other wants a body between them.
@@sadtwolvesfan I believe there are enemies that push/throw other enemies at you
And all of them are fairly hard to deal with, since most of the time you gotta fight through the entire wave first before even reaching them
Please don't copy all of the movement code into every new enemy. Look up polymorphism, it'll save you so much heartache later.
don't listen to this person, please keep copying the movement code, gamedev youtubers being bad at coding makes me feel better about my own code
Wait don't to that! just have... I don't know eat lunch, it's tasty.
You just taught me something, thank you 😂
@@classicmax794lol
Yeah that huuurt
Alright. I've been thinking about this overnight, and I've come to a realization.
You are so close with the player verbs, but you're going about it completely wrong. You need to consider the player's decision making, and right now all of your enemies are handled the same monotonous way. It's no wonder you aren't having fun when all you do is walk backwards in a circle and shoot.
You need to create more involved scenarios. Enter the Gungeon works on having enemies that pursue, turrets you need to engage on their own terms, guys who warp around, etc. If every enemy does basically the same thing, the player also always does basically the se thing, and unlike in some genres I don't think many twin sticks have managed the Miyamoto ideal of having just moving the player around being fun on its own. Create challenges for players' prioritization, positioning and evasion. Make enemies that can reflect shots. Have dudes you need to find openings to take on, like spanners, buffers, guys with windows of opportunity and risk, etc. Look at the player verbs and consider how to make the player see them as in-the-moment decisions, and you'll be designing better enemies AND have a strong entry point for implementing your eventual skill curve.
This hits the nail on the head. I've watched every devlog and Deynum is consistently much too worried about perfecting individual systems one at a time and neglects to consider the most important aspects of the game's design: The overall design principles, gameplay hook, loop, size and scope of the project. At no point has he said anything about these things and I could go on. This is supposed to be constructive criticism on the game btw, I'm still loving the videos.
Tip: When you get to the art, try to add variety to the designs that is more than just "this one is fatter." Different hair, ties, shirts, etc will really help with enemy recognition.
skin colors too
I like the idea of different ties. Different shirts seems unfitting to the strict office setting. And different hair and skin tones might make things a little complicated, because you don’t really wanna say “all these guys are the ones who shoot things at you” do you? And randomising skin tones and hair colour to avoid that issue would lead to confusion for both players and developers. I usually agree but in this specific setting it’s just easier to simplify basic enemy designs until the end product where you can upgrade the designs. This is still a work in progress.
@laraschroeder5195 Yeah, probably right about the skin tone part. I didn't even mention skin because that could be racist. The hair part could still be done, like the buff guy having some shorter or wavier hair, or a full on greaser cut. Ties would probably be the best bet.
@ ohhhh yeah that’s a great idea. It’s a little hard with pixels but I didn’t even think about textures and length, only things like black hair, brown hair, blond hair. You’re so right.
Revenge of the post-it notes
Domain Expansion: Infinite Papercuts
AHAHAH
The post-it notes will give you a sticky situation.
I think on the "evoker" enemy it could be more fun if the cabinets stay a bit longer and allowed multiple rows of cabinets to coexist, splitting up the room a bit and making the enemy harder
There could definitely be a version of the enemy (or maybe a boss) that could do that
In Enter The Gungeon most enemies are pretty simple. It’s the emergent properties of them interacting together that makes for more interesting gameplay.
So the geomancer from Minecraft dungeons lol
Gotta add the exploding cabinet too
@@Deynum You could have 2 different types, one that is fast but has lower health and the cabinets disapate faster and another one that could have high health but be slow and has the cabinets stay a bit longer, maybe having 2-3 rows at once.
@@DeynumI vote for a variant able to curve the line towards you. not only is it trying to predict where you’ll be, but also able to home. This could make it so you need to dodge twice.
Enemies bumping into and hurting each other would lead to emergent dynamics! Especially if there's a way for the player to combine mechanics from multiple types of enemies (e.g. a dash into an exploding enemy, starting a chain reaction).
Yes! maybe make a alternate version like a "rage version" that just always blasts forward at you, knocking the other enemys around like crazy.
I'm extremely passionate about game design- I don't know if I'm certified to give you advice, since I haven't really made a full game yet, but I have PLAYED a lot of video games, and this is what I've observed.
Your ground attack, projectile, and dash enemies all basically achieve the same effect with different skins on. They make a linear attack that the player has to dash in order to dodge.
If you want to make better enemies, you should make it so that the player has to adapt their strategy accordingly to what enemies they're facing.
And the enemies should synergize with one another. Maybe you could make an enemy that summons a zone that damages the player if they enter it, and that enemy will maintain that zone until the player attacks it and breaks it's focus.
Or an enemy that runs away from the player and heals other enemies, making it difficult for the player to make any progress until they deliberately attack that enemy.
Or an enemy that fights like a duelist, getting close to the player and circling around them, occasionally lunging forward to attack them, and attempting to dodge the player's attacks itself.
The idea is that each enemy should pose a *unique* threat and cause a unique problem that requires a unique solution. And, when you combine lots of enemies together that each cause their own unique problem- suddenly the player has to struggle to get creative.
I never get to talk about game design until I'm telling my boyfriend how I think we should design our (skeletons of, frankly) games. So, I kind of saw an opportunity here and took it. I really appreciate someone putting the time and effort into game design- since it's so important to make a fun game.
Also, I disagree with one thing you said. I don't think game feel is just about looks- I think it's also about your actions and the enemy's actions having weight and momentum. So that when you hit something, you can *feel* it, and it is relatively easy to achieve that effect, so long as that enemy is not specifically designed to avoid your attacks in that particular situation. (CircletoonsHD called this "Agency". His video on videogame combat is really good.)
If you wanna take my advice, here's my enemy designing process. I think of the setting first. Are we in a crypt? So, let's make a skeleton. The skeleton also needs a method to survive (not raw health). So, the skeleton's method of survivability is that they come in large numbers and revive themselves after they die, so a player has to clear them out quickly and move on. Then it needs a method of harming the player. It's a simple enemy, so it will simply walk towards the player and try to stab them to death. Now that enemy is done. But you also have to make more enemies- which will synergize with the skeleton. Like a necromancer that makes the skeletons take less damage and slows down the player- keeping its distance. This can work well with the skeleton because it's sort of forcing the player into a battle of attrition, which gives the skeletons an advantage. Then you can add more enemy types, like a skeleton with a shield that blocks M1 attacks, or an archer which fires arrows at the player to create more complicated zoning. And, of course, make sure the player has a unique solution or two to each problem that each enemy creates.
But that's my two cents. You probably won't even see this comment, but it was fun to write...
Well I saw it!
Making enemies that depend on each other is great, I feel they're not even close to used enough. Thanks for the tips!
@@DynamicMagi Well, if you're planning on using this advice, there's one more thing I wanna say;
Think of how players and the enemies work, both in tandem with one another. Not just how the enemies work on their own. If a player has 32 different buttons they can press, there should be a specific enemy designed to make 3-5 of those buttons ineffective or dangerous to use.
My skeleton examples were bad, because none of those enemies really have threatening attacks...
The biggest thing I wish I said in that comment was; make sure your player can't beat a group of enemies just by circling around them. Leading shots helps with that, but can only do so much...
@@BX--nq6gfjust adding on, 2 fun things i've found are enemies that deflect your bullets back at you if you hit them in the wrong spot, and melee/shotgun where neither of you can really take damage until you get really close. basic risk/reward
@BX--nq6gf I had the idea of a miniboss duo that got harder when they were seperate, because they have negative synergy. One was aggressive and dashed, but the other setup walls. This means the aggressive one will get stunned ramming into walls and maybe even stun the other if it hits it.
I also thought of a set of boars where one is a charger, and one is a shielder. The shielder makes a protection field around it when it has allies nearby. This means there could be 1 shield boar with 2-3 Charger boars that dash out of the protection zone one at a time.
Really appreciated the CircleToonsHD video as well thanks.
1:28 I always saw these enemies as if they were carrying a desk behind their back and slamming it into the ground. Just a tip for when you will make animations in the futute, that feels like a fun concept.
That would be a cool idea
The way you show your debugging is golden! I always try to show how to debug in my tutorial videos because it is so important yet no one really talks about it
a tip i think is that enemy's need weaknesses, like a enemy wich dashes very fast but gets stunned for a second after hitting something?
when you find these things, and hit them it feels really good and fun.
also whats that post it website?
Milanote, I think
yeah I mean the enemies he is making work, but they seem so boring and generic so this would be a good first step
Imagine if there was an enemy that had an arch/ricochet attack that specifically bounced off other enemies. The more enemies you have, the more dangerous it is.
If you don't mind me butting in, I think what you're missing is context. Right now, you're building these enemies in a vacuum, as if they could exist in any old game and you just happened to put them in this one; what you need to consider is what role you need the enemies to play, specifically what they will do to affect the player experience. In other words, these enemies shouldn't be thought of as independent creatures, but as tools to guide the player's experience. Start with considering what tool you need; do you need an enemy that can pincer the player? an enemy that forces the player to leave cover? an enemy that cuts off parts of the play-space from the player? an enemy that challenges skill with a specific weapon? Start with the problem the enemy needs to solve, and design the enemy to solve it.
hey i'm the game design student from last video, and I have a bit more advices, because tbh this is worse than I though.
Alright so first, the reason you struggle finding ideas for mechanic is because you have no game, and I mean that litterally. You don't have any direction, any intend, any 'feelings' that you want to convey to your player. Let's do an exercice : Describe me your game without mentionning any characters or mechanics, what do you have ? A rogue-like with the theme of office ? That's weak. i'll be fully honest with you in my school, any of my first year junior would make a better concept in a few hours. I mean you do have an unique theme, but anyone can have that and it's not that unique too. The problem that I'm getting at is that you didn't structure anything at all, you just went with it and thought it would be fine, but now you have a game that isn't unique in any way and because of that you can't think of any mechanics for your enemies outside of extremely basic ones. My advice is : Go back to the moodbord, hell don't even think about opening unity again before you made an actual concept, and to do that just imagine yourself playing your game years into the future ,when its completed, and ask yourself "What do I want to play" and it's not about themes, story or such, it's about feelings, what feelings do you want us, players, to feel when we play your game. If you manage to anwser this question then the next one should be "What do I need to do in order to FEEL that" that's your dynamics, in order to feel the feeling you want your player to feel, what do they have to do ?
Second : I aldreay mentionned it but always start with the gameplay, I see that you made effort to avoid art this time, which is good, but instead of actually devlopping gameplay you just focused on programming instead. Look you litterally just said you didn't care about visuals anymore then you spend days making a whole new code to make your enemies movement look more realistic, and then you make a mechanic but instead of just making more and seeing if it's fun you bother resolving a pointless bug. STOP IT, make sloppy design, make sloppy codes, and just try stuff and don't try to make everything "smooth" until you actually have a fun game. I feel like you're still trying to impress, but by doing so you're litterally going nowhere.
Again I know I sound mean here, but know that it's purely to help.
Upvote
this is a very good tip, even if i thought I'm a very good game designer, the "What do I need to do in order to FEEL that" line made me feel otherwise
Just to add, the concept can be as simple as "powerful" it just has to inform gameplay decisions
i was about to comment how in my game it was much easier to design enemies, and, yeah, now that i think about it, it is probably because my own game has a much more defined set of mechanics.
I don't think this is going to be a useful tip at all. Clearly he already knows what he wants, and has done thinking and can't find inspiration. If you're stuck like that, just sitting there trying to think harder isn't going to work. For a game design student that is a sign to throw it out because you're being trained to work on a commercial product for a company. For someone who wants to make this, it's going to take making so much that one thing just *clicks* and everything else gets reworked to fit the new inspo
It’s great to see that the game is moving in a positive direction and I can’t wait to see where it goes next and what enemies get added later on!!!!
I clicked this video to figure out how to get people to hate me, and thus how to get people to not hate me, but this works too, arguably better
i don't even know what i clicked for. i thought he was gonna convince me that i should somehow turn my enemies into squares.
@Paradoxcity10 for that you should use the dehydration gun
dont copy the movement code, use inheritance. its very important for making future enemies as it means you can refer to a generic enemy in a much easier way in the future (polymorphism) this is one of the important OOP constructs
The movement code was not coppied, just the "behaviour" code. But that was mostly so I could get the enemies working asap, and not intended to be the final implementation.
@Deynum ah, good to see. looking forward to what this game comes to be
Don't do polymorphism and especially not OOP. This whole line of thinking not only leads to slow code, it also breaks completely when you want to create enemies that only conform to subsets of what a generic enemy is, but each enemy conforms to a different subsets. Code quickly becomes very, very complicated.
Ive just started studying Game Design at a university after working on my own stuff for about 5 years. The most important part I've learned is to ALWAYS let others test your stuff cuz you will always be blinded by the thing you make. It's like cooking, if you made something, it will always taste better to you. We playtest our games with eachother every single Monday no matter how little progress we've made and it makes everything so much easier.
This is a great. I'm glad that you can take your time, see the problem and take a new approach. This game will be great.
The dashing enemies dashing into walls could give them a crazed personality. It also means the player could exploit it if you add environmental hazards. That could be fun.
Interesting game dev advice I heard from Pirate Software: enemies should all have exactly two of these characteristics: taking long to kill, moving quickly, and dealing lots of damage. Even bosses merely rotate between combinations of which characteristics are fulfilled.
I think square enemies are great. They represent how the company metaphorically put its employees into boxes, striping them of their humanity.
-some philosopher
2 months for 1 actually good enemy. Worth it in my eyes
Take this with a grain of salt because I am not a game designer, just a player, but perhaps consider how enemies and their attacks would impact the environment, other enemies, and the player. And vice versa. I personally think inter-connectivity is a key part of engagement
the editing in this video was really good! the audio too.
You don't know how much I appreciate that!
*cries about 2 weeks spend editing*
@@Deynum don't cry because it's over
smile because it happened
:)
@@Deynum two weeks well spent
Watching that final enemy at the end genuinely gave me a dopamine hit
I think you might be cooking with this one
You recreated the Goomba pathing bug mario 64, lol. Gotta love it.
Another thing to consider when making enemies is not just how they interact with the player, but also how they interact with the world around them.
Part of why that last enemy you made feels so good is the fact that the cabinets coming out of the ground from his attack makes him actually influence the environment and not just the player.
You could do something similarly interesting with your initial dashing enemy. Maybe the player can trick him into hitting tables and flipping them by crashing into them, or maybe he can bust through stuff. When the enemies can influence their environment it multiplies the creative anv interesting level design you can make with them.
The pathfinding problem you describe at about 5 minutes is actually used a lot in old comedy gags and IRL what really tends to happen because humans have both momentum and front facing eyes. This prevents us from immediately switching direction if we're moving with any degree of speed and makes it to where we might not actually notice if somebody ends up behind us. If anything, that was a nice element of realism.
line of sight, basically
@clyd3n_012-f1d not just line of sight but also physical momentum and limitation of awareness. We don't know our target has changed direction until we see that they have changed direction or some level of physical exhaustion sets in and we start to slow.
The drag-based pathfinding will get you the result you want if you just pump up the walking force and the drag. It's only sliding because low drag allows building up more momentum than you'd like.
Your direction-based implementation makes it so that if a character has to start going backwards it would have to make a U turn, which feels more like a car's movement than a person's. What you'd expect is a slowdown, brief full stop, and then acceleration backwards. The orientation of the sprite can then follow suit. This is exactly what the force-based implementation does - and it's because real movement is built by forces.
If you still want finer control on the speed the character is moving, you can always normalize the speed vector if it gets too big.
A few comments have already given you very helpful criticism, so I will try to avoid repeating what they said. As a fellow game developer who will be releasing their first game on Steam in less than a month, my biggest advice to you is that you NEED to test and prototype more. Your enemies didn't suck because they lacked juice, and adding juice only served to distract you from that. You need to think about what you want the player to do, design to make them do that thing, and then TEST to make sure that thing happens. I cannot stress this enough, TEST EARLY AND TEST OFTEN. If you want a quick suggestion from what I can see, your enemies are so boring because all they do is run at you. You have this pathfinding script and all you do with it is make them go towards the player. Consider flank enemies, or even enemies that can switch between flanking and not flanking. Enemies that build cover for other enemies. Enemies that interact with other enemies in interesting ways.
But, to be honest, none of that really matters, because instead of testing these enemies in the context of actual gameplay, you tested them in an empty room with a singular table. You can't design interesting enemies because you don't have an interesting game to put them in. Stop being afraid of making things that aren't juicy or might not totally work, because you're going to find that your juicy bugless game is a boring mess when you're all said and done, and it'll be a lot more than 2 months down the drain.
Don't worry about your game being in a presentable state until you actually have a game.
making the enemy "slide" a little bit seems a lot more realistic, considering you cant just go from running to still by will
Do the walls have collision yet? (I love all your devlogs, and I hope you take your time making this game well)
Uh... well, no, but in my defense there aren't walls yet
@@Deynum LMAO
the in depth talks about bugs and certain concepts are very interesting-. Keep up the good work!
A fairy flew by and dropped you an advice from an experienced gamedesigner (17+ years). You basically say that whatever you're trying to do, you can't find an essence of the game. You say: here, I add enemies, I add decorations, I add movements and bullets, but I don't really feel like playing it, my character and story are not alive. The reason is that you focus on icing before baking the cake. The second reason is that you're letting the genre dictate your vision, whereas it should be the other way around.
Instead of turning the enemies into squares, forget about the enemies at all for some time. If you remove all the enemies from Half-Life, you will still see a coherent image: an atmospheric “simulator” of a horror sci-fi movie, with a hero that has to reach the safety from the deeps of an alien-infested facility. Instead of shooting enemies it could have employed puzzles, or something else. If instead of this vision they've started with “first person shooter” genre tag that dictated them all the rest, it wouldn't be the same game, and most likely not such a legendary hit.
So, fighting enemies is not a bad thing per se, but it's a sauce, a filler, not a real heart of the game. If we are talking about roguelikes, you would first learn to generate labyrinth of a floor, then spawn templates of rooms, then items, skills, interactions... and only then fill it with different enemies, bullets and so on. And zero element in this is a vision, of course.
In your case, notice the fact that your videos are more interesting than your game prototype, even for yourself. Why? Because you do it better, and because for the office setting, it's fitting to have a story, to place some words on a screen like you do in videos, to have something surreal and out-of-the-box, for example like gizmos that you show in this video, but being a part of an actual gameplay. Basically it could have been something like Stanley Parable, but in 2d and with action.
“And this... this is Greg. He is a good guy, but whatever he does I swear I can always see a straight line drawn in front of him. Oh, that bold and infuriatingly straight line of his! And sometimes it just happens to cross my own... let's say, zone.”
We can discuss it more in details if you want, drop me an email.
These videos are always so sweet, it’s really fun watching you self-critique in a way that brings out the best in your game
7:43 you can use a single boxcast instead of 4 raycasts. Then very small objects(maybe something like a trsh bin) still get detected which would otherwise possibly be missed by the raycasts
7:15 I actually kind of like the idea of enemies _slamming_ into objects if you're cunning enough to move in front of them fast enough!
joe hawleys attack
I just watched your previous video and i came up with a few suggestions to improve the gameplay aspect of the game.
1° For the pickups, make it so you need to break the objects before picking up the materials for crafting. (It's rly weird to pickup an entire table and it's going to be very satisfiying to explode desks with a purpose)
2° Give a second utility for most, if not every, stationary object! Descs are great cover and could be required for the crafting, printers could explode with ink and do AOE damage, pushing chairs could block paths for the enemies while not beeing good cover for bullets, coolers could wet the floor and make it slipery or put out fires... There is a lot you can do, and adding extra functionality for every furniture piece will make it so the player needs to aways keep in mind what they want to destroy and what they shouldn't.
3° Why not use the crafting materials themselvs as the ammo for the weapons? If you breack a printer you get metal bits, ink and paper, and then you'll need the be strategic about how you shoot as to not waste those valueable components! The small printer consumes paper, the pencil consumes wood, the the pen uses ink, etc...
With these additions, every move the player does will need to be thoughtfull. If you break every table for wood, then you can't use them as cover or craft new weapons. If you have a gun that consumes paper, then the player will need to focus on finding paper to use and conserve their shots if there isn't any left. The guns themselves turn into liabilities depending on what they consume, making some easier to use than others just from the diferent availability of resorces! Sudenly, melee weapons become a viable option, not because they are better than ranged weapons, but because they allow the player to hoard resorces more easily by not consuming ammo, even though they expose the player to more danger! Even AOE weapons can be a poor choice now, depending if you want to just breack everything in a room or not.
I think enemies having more than one attribute/attack/action could add more variation to how each engages
dawg the dude with the red tie is joe hawley
My thoughts exactly
who?
@@Grayson-tk5hn look up “Joe Hawley from Tally Hall” online.
Damnit. Beat me to it.
@@Grayson-tk5hn band member from tally hall
have you watched the belko experiment?
one thing I thought at the end, there's things you can consider for the underground attack enemy:
There's three-four types of them you can find in a level, one that sends the row where you're going, one that spawns it right below where you are, one that that hits the floor multiple times, sending a few rows after you and one that sends them in a ^V or *, and rather than aim at you, it just wants to be disruptive when theres a lot on the screen
you make the player used to these types, and then at the end of the level the boss uses all these styles in its moveset, with varying speeds and ranges
12:31 please do not create a new instance of the bulled every time it needs to shoot, its a EXTREMELY expensive operation, that will chug performance like santa on chirsmas morning, insted instanciate the bullets when the enemy is created and have them be disabled until the enemy shoots, upon which you enable the bullets and apply the desired transformation and movement, and inted of destroying after a while, make then return to their disabled state until the enmy shoots again, that qway you are not creating objects just to destroy them seconds later.
You shouldn't optimize early. First figure out the gameplay, and everything else comes later
@@BryanLu0 it relly isnt optimization its good pratice, just by having multiple enemies in a room it will alredy become a problem, and worse of all its a EXPONENTIAL waste of resources, any behaviour or complexity added to projectiles will make performance worse and worse, sticking with such a terrible way of making projectiles will inevitely require a giant refactor later in the line if this isnt done early enough.
@ethanbuttazzi2602 The point of prototyping is just to figure out how the game will feel. You don't need to keep anything you write in this stage
@@BryanLu0 a good point but honestly, the creator seems beginner enough to just use the prototype code with some fixes until 8 months later he ends up making a video titled "how bullets ruined my game's performance" or something. Personally i prefer spending a little bit more time on prototypes than i have to in order to get them to at least be technically sound, so i wont have to completely rewrite it later, and also partially because i enjoy writing well built code and systems, and hacky hasty solutions take some of the passion out of it for me, plus I'll probably end up a worse coder in the long run if i keep practicing bad habits 😂
santa doesn't chug on christmas morning you dunce, he comes at night
hope this game comes out in my lifespan, i'll defo pay for it 🙃
I hope it'll come out in your lifespan as well
(I also hope you're not like 90 years old...)
@@Deynum you never know 👴
I LOVE THIS SERIES i think it’s AWESOME that you’re figuring out ways to fix the problems that you had with your game and it’s SUPER fun to watch!!!!!!! Great video it’s awesome i love devlogs
I guess I've been making enemies the wrong way this whole time.. I've got so many enemies now 😅
Oh shoot, the person I stole the title from found the video!
@Deynum lmaoooo no way 🤣🤣🤣🤣
@Deynum I demand a 60% cut of your sponsor
for big engines best technique i found is "manually draw a thing on paper and use it as a texture". Don’t polish molten metal-cast it first. Focus on making it fun. Same applies to board games development i guess
0:35 that pattern kinda looks like a certain geometry dash meme
NOTTT THE SAWWWSSSSS
Devil vortex
i hate u
Quick tip for you: it may benefit you if you seek out other indie game devs for their feedback on your game (or what you have of it so far) drawing on their experience could prove very helpful in figuring out what you're doing wrong or right, and what you still need to do.
Overall, it looks like things are going good! Looking forward for more!
3:02 for future reference never ever have the perfect gliding pathfinding for anything; unless it's a game like that one idler vampire game, you want movement and is good for the enemy.
So hyped you back to uploading we’ve missed you the past year
Imo it would have been nice to see the dash enemy get stunned for a few seconds if it dashes into a solid object that’s not the player. That way the player can do some matador type stuff
Fantastic to see all the steps you went through for this enemy. It looks miles better and I hope you're able to make your entire enemy roster as cool as this.
Tables, colored squares? Ooh. WAIT NEW DEVLOG?
I have a few ideas for enemies. Since you’ve decided on your last video that the game is about combining stuff, why not have the enemies do the same. Such as combining attacks or changing their behavior depending on the allies they have.
For example: The under ground attack enemy, say there are two on the field. One is in range of the player and the other is not. When the one in range attacks the player, the out of range one can enhance his allies attack making it branch off at the end towards the player. Like a lightning bolt redirecting, and the more underground attack enemies that are on the board the more redirections it gets. Or after a certain point, say three redirections the attack ends with like a small explosion or something.
Or alternatively to the cap on the redirections. Once there’s like three to four underground attack enemies on the board one of them will attack the player while the rest will intentionally hang back and enhance that one underground enemy’s attacks while avoiding the player. Making it to where if there’s enough of them it’s essentially a mini boss.
And the underground attack enemy has a different behavior depending on the allies it has on the field. Like if the underground attack enemy is paired up with an enemy similar to the dashing enemy you were working on in this video. The under ground attack enemy would change its behavior from trying to attack the player to trying to restrict his/her movement by using his walls to block the player. Making it easier for the dashing like enemy to hit the player.
An enemy type I thought of is one that grabs the player and throws them to an inconvenient location. Doesn’t hurt just grabs and… [YEETS] them.
Like if the grabber enemy is paired up with a melee range enemy the grabber will chuck the player right in front of Mr Melee range. Or if they are pared up with a long range enemy type he’ll throw the player into a corner where the player will have a more limited range of movement to avoid projectiles.
Or alternatively to throwing the player into a corner he could hold the player still so the ranged enemy has an easy shot. The player then has to break from the grabber’s grasp by wiggling out or stunning the grabber enemy.
"When Joe Hawley attacks... No one. Gets out. Alive."
As a gamedev who hasn't made games as complex or massive as yours, I learned a lot from this video, and it gave me insights I didn't know I needed. Keep up the good work, Deynum. I hope I can make an awesome game like yours in the future.
When Joe hawley attacks, no one comes out alive.
They all fall into holes they couldn't see
You are doing a great job 👍 carry on with this approach because you're doing great! Game design is so hard and I'm still trying and your concept has great promise. Don't worry about having to push out a video take your time and be very selective. I know you're probably already trying this but mixing the action cards you made will be great. Like that desk enemy you made adding a dash would add more interedting complexity. Keep going we believe in you!!
the enemies all look like joe hawley
Your videos get better every time! I like these post-it thing you did.
Thanks! and I really like it as well :)
use more than one ability idea! (for example: an enemy that dashes and shoots multiple bullets)
Oh yeah, for sure! I just didn't want to get too complicated with them in this video
I like enemies that have similliar abilities to you
Once you find time to I would recommend adding screen shake to the final enemy’s attack to give it the feeling of a strong attack even if you don’t like it you learn how you want it to feel and have screen shake ready if you need it (plus it content for a video)
6:31 btw what like website or whatev is this, cuz i need something like that😭 honest question
Probaply Milanote
Another commenter said Milanote. If it isn’t then it’s very similar
@@nestch yes, this is milanote
it was milanote yoy (:
you will probaly not see this but it would be cool to see the cabinet spawning enemy have its cabinets stay up as a wall for a bit and would fall down after a little while, also the player could shoot and break the cabinents to get through the wall.
Joe Hawley attacks
Really happy you're getting progress on this
Makes me want to get progress on all the stuff ive been procrastinating on as well
As a fellow person with too much perfectionism that it stops me from doing projects
Thank you 🎉
the joe hawleys
As someone who has tried to make games and quit on them, it is good to see you keep going.
…Where previously there was always some sort of gameplay and now there’s just a table😂😂😂
14:37 nico's nextbots would have to disagree there
Joe hawley being the enemy is oddly funny to me.
tallyhalllll
Lot of good stuff in this video, I especially appreciate the problem solving as well as laying out the issues and investigations of those issues. I’m a very visual person so this is definitely something I’m going to need to unlearn when it comes to game design.
Oh someone in my subscriptions just posted a new vi- dEATH INC DEVLOGGG!!!!!
I'm really enjoying your logs so far; it's great to see you learn from previous issues and then present your learnings so well. It's nice to see someone breaking down their process as abstract player or enemy verbs instead of going straight for story-theme.
My feedback on the project is... two things you're probably not going to like, but could be important in the long run.
I think your game look pretty, and I particularly like the bodily animations, but I think the lack of faces is holding it back. I appreciate its a stylistic decision which probably comes from a place of saving time, but it adds up to missed opportunities for emotion and differentiation. Because your enemies are all variations of Some Guy, with similar sillhoutes, the face is a big piece of real estate which is currently wasted.
I also feel that in terms of general creative direction, I want to feel like there is a reason why this office is becoming so violent. I don't think it needs to be present at the start of the game, but it could be something revealed as you progress through the Roguelike. Kind of like how the Oldest House in Control starts off looking like a normal environment, and then we get sort of Twin Peaks magical realism/surrealism, and then full blown cosmic weirdness. Whether your office guys are possessed, aliens, terminators or whatever, if you had some sort of supernatural or sci-fi backdrop to things, you could gradually transition to that from what you have - which IS funny, but it's also a joke which might outlive its uses when you want to upgrade your enemies and differentiate your environment more to make players feel like they're progressing.
I appreciate this is one of those annoying "make a different game entirely" type comments, but I'm just thinking of the ingredients which roguelikes usually need for players to feel progress.
Love how you remove fun from the game the second you accidentally add it. Like dashing enemies slamming into desks and each other, keep it up
i think the dash enemy should change its path mid-dash so it can dash around tables and stuff, and it should also use the enemy ai as a guide to round the dash, i think that would be cool.
BREAKING NEWS: Deynum's existential crisis over art continues, more at 3
I didn't think the enemys were boring, they just needed to do something unique and diferent to other similar types of enemys you find in other games.
For example for the dashing enemy it would be cool to keep that bug of it bumping into other enemies and improving on it. It could turn into a sort of suport for other enemies and push them towards the player or something similar.
2:00 Just like NextBots)
Enjoyable videos:) my 2 cents on cabinets is make the first one big that Enemy could smash down, then floor ripples, then full cabinet like he sent it your way. Another advantage of not using full cabinets the whole way would be they block less of the screen. Could also use 1/2 cabinets on the way to player. Excited to see all improvements and your detailed explanation. I, for one, enjoy the problem solving.
when i was watching the first square ennemies, i was loosing my mind behind the screen because of how much the ennemies sucked. but this final ennemy looks good ! and btw, i think you should chose multiple actions for ennemy. for example, make a dash ennemy, and when that ennemy is near the player it explodes. or make an ennemy that "blindly rushes" (saw that in your notes) and he teleports right before doing it. make an ennemy throw coffee on the ground (which hurts you if you get hit by it) and then he uses it to slide towards you really fast ! so you get it : give your ennemies multiple actions. (great video btw)
You did a great job illustating everything you discussed making it very understandable. Great video!
is that Joe Hawley?
wait you're actually so underrated you're one of the only gamedev channels i've enjoyed since dani and brackeys quit
also please don't touch kids /hj
joe hawley from tally hall
joseph robert hawley of the hit band tally hall started in ann arbor michigan circa december 2002
I personally would have fixed the looping around the table thing by making the direction turn 180 degrees if the difference between the path and current direction (absolute with mod 360 of course) was more than 90, as that means the path is already past going to their sides.
But I can see how yours is more efficient.
Cool, love this series ❤
Im glad to see that you actually like the game you are making now
What is Joe Hawley doing in the thumbnail?
You rock! I love seeing your progress and learning from your reflections.
tf Joe Hawley be doing there?
As an aspiring game designer, I find this quite inspiring.
This game is NEVER getting finished if you keep remaking everything all the time like this
When i first saw the title, i did not realize this was about game dev, and thought it would be a VERY different type of video