Words to live by...
http://www.wikihow.com/Resign-Ungracefully
-s
Friday, May 23, 2008
Monday, April 21, 2008
IndieCade Submission Update (0.Red.Purple)
We have until April 30th to make changes, but I think we're done at this point. The game has a few changes:
-s
- Countdown Timer replaced with Count-up Flask. We didn't want to make a bigger clock, and people have been complaining about the clock since the beginning.
- On the dark side, the flask is a mixed metaphor.
- On the bright side, it no longer seems like you're running out of time.
- Also good, the fill-mechanic has removed the 5-second period of celebration when you can't lose as the timer runs out - you actually have to play until the flask fills up.
- Point numbers now pop up when you make matches, so you can see how your powerup status changes points earned, as well as how larger matches give more points.
- ACHIEVEMENTS. Woo. Try and collect 'em all! It's easier than collecting all the points, at least. Some are obvious, some are secrets, some are inside jokes. Lots of possibility with achievements. We hope you like them.
- Some miscellaneous UI and content tweaks. Nothing major.
-s
Tuesday, April 15, 2008
All ColorDots Popup Messages
If you don't want to play to level 100 in the IndieCade submission version of colordots, then here's all the messages.
AM I NOT MERCIFUL???!!!
-s
P.S. We submitted to IndieCade 2008. I'd ask you to vote for us, but it's not that kind of competition.
AM I NOT MERCIFUL???!!!
-s
P.S. We submitted to IndieCade 2008. I'd ask you to vote for us, but it's not that kind of competition.
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Monday, April 7, 2008
Colordots v0.red.green
Haven't posted in awhile because colordots changes have been mostly incremental. However, I should let everyone know that we did a ton of awesome work today that is going to go into the new build next week that will be very, very noticeable. v0.red.blue for the win, in 6 days or so.
Green has a button that lets you skip to level 10, I just thought that'd be nice to put in there for everyone who has already played the game and doesn't want to wait around 10 minutes to get to the fun part (the powerups).
Also, we're going to be submitting the game to a competition this week - we'll get the info out to you as soon as it's available. So please support us!
thanks!
-s
Green has a button that lets you skip to level 10, I just thought that'd be nice to put in there for everyone who has already played the game and doesn't want to wait around 10 minutes to get to the fun part (the powerups).
Also, we're going to be submitting the game to a competition this week - we'll get the info out to you as soon as it's available. So please support us!
thanks!
-s
Monday, March 24, 2008
ColorDots Game Dev Blog - version 0.Red.Orange
ColorDots is ready for net distribution! (Hooray!)
We added some new terrible art for colorblind people, slowed the game down to start (and again when you lose), and started working on the game-around-the-game. You can't really see that part of it, but it took a long time so I figured I'd mention it.
Anyway, enjoy! And if you want to post it to your blog or website or anything, you now have my full approval and encouragement. Thanks for waiting. :)
http://morieris.zapto.org/colordots/ColorDots.html
-s
We added some new terrible art for colorblind people, slowed the game down to start (and again when you lose), and started working on the game-around-the-game. You can't really see that part of it, but it took a long time so I figured I'd mention it.
Anyway, enjoy! And if you want to post it to your blog or website or anything, you now have my full approval and encouragement. Thanks for waiting. :)
http://morieris.zapto.org/colordots/ColorDots.html
-s
Wednesday, March 19, 2008
Hey! First link!
Thanks to super-comedian Joe Donatelli of www.joedonatelli.com, ColorDots has gone interwebal. To express our happiness, let's make up some more words. Like spectrangulangular, gralulippy, and happilicious. That's how I feel right now. Happilicious.
-s
Sunday, March 16, 2008
ColorDots v0.Red.Red Released
Red dot Red! Woohoo!
So everything that was promised in Red.0 is actually in Red.Red, so please enjoy it.
There's a totally sweet level-end picture, there's a pause button, and when you lose it only drops you a few levels instead of half of them. In short, it is everything I have ever wanted in a game, except for possibly a high five.
We're at sort of a crossroads at this point. We can either go forward with this project and make it into a full game, or leave it as a decent web-toy and move onto the next project.
Full game means real art, story, more powerups, more powerdowns, easy-mode and hard-mode, and more game types. Something you might want to play a demo of, and then decide whether you want to see the full thing for $10 or something.
Any strong thoughts? Let us know: colordots.team@gmail.com
-s
So everything that was promised in Red.0 is actually in Red.Red, so please enjoy it.
There's a totally sweet level-end picture, there's a pause button, and when you lose it only drops you a few levels instead of half of them. In short, it is everything I have ever wanted in a game, except for possibly a high five.
We're at sort of a crossroads at this point. We can either go forward with this project and make it into a full game, or leave it as a decent web-toy and move onto the next project.
Full game means real art, story, more powerups, more powerdowns, easy-mode and hard-mode, and more game types. Something you might want to play a demo of, and then decide whether you want to see the full thing for $10 or something.
Any strong thoughts? Let us know: colordots.team@gmail.com
-s
Thursday, March 13, 2008
ColorDots in... 3D?
So I'm thinking out loud here (sorta like the poker thing), but I think we could do ColorDots in 3D.
No wailing and gnashing of teeth yet, people. We're not going to throw out what's working in 2D just to go chasing some potential 3D skirt. I'm just saying that pretty much everything we're doing now that applies to circles, we could probably apply to spheres as well.
So let's break it down into a list of what would break.
But, we have all of our problems, let's find some solutions.
Controls:
Since we're making the game world a sphere, I think we can probably make the mouse/camera track a sphere too. Move mouse/joystick left, revolve left around the sphere. Move mouse/joystick up, revolve up around the sphere. Move diagonally, revolve diagonally. The background is going to get upended pretty quickly, but we're in space! It's ok!
The dot that is currently being pointed at will light up, and clicking will draw it up to us. Clicking again will drop it back down wherever the reticle is on release. Maybe it'll shove it down, so that it doesn't sit on top, or potentially roll around. Maybe we just increase the friction on the dots to avoid the rolling thing instead? Something to look into.
The trouble? We won't be able to see the reverse side of the sphere, and maybe we want to. Well, maybe that's not too much trouble with a mouse, as you can move those pretty fast to get around the sphere. But it might make some trouble with a gamepad. Perhaps you'd want a "speedy" button, or use both sticks to make the revolution go faster. Then slow it down for the fine-motion-control.
Effects:
Whew. Ok. If we have a big explosion, we run the risk of blasting the entire sphere out of the area that we're looking at. That's less of a problem with a mouse in 2D because if you're quick you can just snag something in mid-flight. But in 3D, everything is going to move much more slowly because of the whole revolving controls thing. So, explosions that fling the world out of our camera angle are really bad.
We could probably fix this by having less powerful explosions, but come on, what's the point? Another option is to have the dots be a little more bouncy, so that when they pop, the majority of the dots are expelled outwards. Just having the explosion start deeper down and exploding outwards is another option, I guess.
But what I really think we need to do is to root the sphere at the center, so that it can't fall all apart like that. So what I'm thinking, and I'm not saying it would absolutely work, but I'm thinking that as the sphere starts to build up, only the top 2 layers should be manipulatable via effects, or available for matching. That seems fair to me because you're only really going to be able to see the top two layers anyway. The inside of the sphere will be largely invisible to you at any given time. So if it's 3 layers down, we enclose it in a spherical steel sheath, and make it completely invulnerable, as though it isn't even there.
It has a drawback. Besides some coding difficulty, it's not always easy to decide what the highest or lowest level is. If the outer sphere is mostly blown up, like down to 1 or 2 dots, does that count? How do you get rid of the sphere? How does it appear? Well, I'm going to say that the outer shell would no longer count as a shell if it were down to 2/5 of the maximum dot count of the shell. When a layer builds up to that point, the shell will sort of Stargate-helmet ensconce the layer two-below. When it drops below that point, the shell will retract. It'd need to have a buffer of some percentage to keep it from flitting back and forth, but that's no real trouble.
I like this because it has some side benefits. For one, we can root the steel sphere, so that explosions won't move it. First-and-a-half, a rooted sphere would work like a racquetball court wall: fast-moving dots like after explosions will bounce right off of it. Second, it removes any chance of inner-sphere invisible matches (Nice! I can skip the occlusion bullet!). Lastly, it makes the game play sort of like the current 2D ColorDots, except that there are now 2 levels to the playing field that interact with each other. Which brings us to the next point:
4-match * 8-colors = Fun:
Ok, here's a real problem. Matching 4 dots in the current game means looking for triples and then building quads. With two levels, however, the occurrence of triples would overlap with the occurrence of singles of the same color in the upper level. Same with doubles matching other doubles, and singles matching overhead triples. I'm just estimating here, but that probably makes quad matches about 5 times more likely by just adding another layer.
However, matching 5's doesn't really fix this problem, because quads are going to be as rare as accidental matches are now: not so infrequent, but not frequent enough to get you past level 6 without taking an active role in building them. It'll be hard, therefore, to find a quad, and even harder to find a triple that is touching a single below it. Matching quints is not such a good idea.
Increasing the number of colors, however, may be a worse idea. You might not have noticed because Joe and I are awesome, but we were already scraping the bottom of the effect idea barrel when we came up with the yellow and green effects. By the way, you know the designer is out of ideas when they make a yellow electric effect, a goo green effect, and a fire red effect. When someone suggests that, it is a bad day for everyone who isn't a pokemon trainer.
We can add colors, but in all likelihood, they won't be as cool as the effects we already have. And I don't think we can get away with more than 3 colors that just don't have effects (we already have black and off-white, we might be able to whiten the white and throw a real grey in there).
So we're kind of stuck on that point for now. Oh well. Fixable later. Feel free to comment if you have a solution! :) Then again, maybe 5's would just work. That'd be nice, right?
Dot Spawn:
Your blog post is getting too long if it takes awhile to scroll back up to your list.
Dot spawning is random in ColorDots. That's ok, really, because it's a pretty simple play space. But in 3D, depending on the size of the spawn circle, there's a lot of room to be random, and you'd have to drop a lot of dots to make it look like dots were falling. I don't think we can handle firepower of that magnitude, especially since a 3D version would be inherently more difficult.
So as for solutions, we'd probably want to drop dots in patterns. Have spawning spouts that move around the game space, and have them drop lines of dots at a time, then cool down for a bit. Instead of a steady stream of dots, then, we'd have spurts of dots followed by a bit of downtime. The amount of downtime, and so the dots per second, would be similar to what we have now. Hmm, actually, this isn't such a bad idea for the 2D game. I'll keep it in mind.
Loss Condition:
Does this really have to change? Should we only count dots inside the metal sphere? Dots outside the metal sphere? All the dots? All the dots you can see? A certain number of shells? Tough to say, I think, until there's a playable game to find out what is hard to maintain. We'd probably want to keep the grace period in, though.
Loss Warning:
Maybe that sphere thingy could glow? Maybe electricity would arc all around between the second level of dots? Maybe a sphere around the entire play field would glow brighter and brighter until KABOOM! ? Points to ponder, I guess.
Aaaaand, that's it - working game! (With just the one tiny major flaw :) Super long, right? Sorry about that. The last one was short, so this one had to be extra-long. Thanks all the more-so for reading!
Any suggestions, comments, concerns, or innuendo, feel free to drop me a line in the comments section, at my real address, or since it's colordots-related, at colordots.team@gmail.com.
-s
No wailing and gnashing of teeth yet, people. We're not going to throw out what's working in 2D just to go chasing some potential 3D skirt. I'm just saying that pretty much everything we're doing now that applies to circles, we could probably apply to spheres as well.
So let's break it down into a list of what would break.
- Controls - is there anything about 3D that wouldn't require a control overhaul?
- Effects - curved surface means all of our 2D effects would have to change, or at least work really differently.
- Occlusion - a sphere makes it possible to have accident-matches you can't even see.
- 4-matches * 8-colors = fun - if you can pack 6 circles around a circle, you can probably pack even more spheres around a sphere. Does 12 seem like too many? 14 even? Would that makes matches almost constant?
- Dot-spawn - if dots fall on the other side of a sphere, will anyone know they're there?
- Loss-condition - will we be able to maintain a dot-count that means anything to people?
- Loss-warning - holy crap, loss warning. Where would it go in 3D?
But, we have all of our problems, let's find some solutions.
Controls:
Since we're making the game world a sphere, I think we can probably make the mouse/camera track a sphere too. Move mouse/joystick left, revolve left around the sphere. Move mouse/joystick up, revolve up around the sphere. Move diagonally, revolve diagonally. The background is going to get upended pretty quickly, but we're in space! It's ok!
The dot that is currently being pointed at will light up, and clicking will draw it up to us. Clicking again will drop it back down wherever the reticle is on release. Maybe it'll shove it down, so that it doesn't sit on top, or potentially roll around. Maybe we just increase the friction on the dots to avoid the rolling thing instead? Something to look into.
The trouble? We won't be able to see the reverse side of the sphere, and maybe we want to. Well, maybe that's not too much trouble with a mouse, as you can move those pretty fast to get around the sphere. But it might make some trouble with a gamepad. Perhaps you'd want a "speedy" button, or use both sticks to make the revolution go faster. Then slow it down for the fine-motion-control.
Effects:
- General: effect zones will have to be spheres instead of circles.
- Red and Orange are ok once the above is satisfied, as they just rely on effect zones.
- Yellow is ok because it just zaps random dots in the field of play.
- Green and Blue need to deal with explosions. That's complicated, so let's tackle that in a subsection.
- Purple is probably mostly ok. We'll need to make the lasers rotate further to ensure that some of them hit the other dots. Maybe we constrain them to an angle a bit less than the current shell's tangent plane, so they still smash lots of dots, and flail about like pretty pinwheels. That'd be neat.
Whew. Ok. If we have a big explosion, we run the risk of blasting the entire sphere out of the area that we're looking at. That's less of a problem with a mouse in 2D because if you're quick you can just snag something in mid-flight. But in 3D, everything is going to move much more slowly because of the whole revolving controls thing. So, explosions that fling the world out of our camera angle are really bad.
We could probably fix this by having less powerful explosions, but come on, what's the point? Another option is to have the dots be a little more bouncy, so that when they pop, the majority of the dots are expelled outwards. Just having the explosion start deeper down and exploding outwards is another option, I guess.
But what I really think we need to do is to root the sphere at the center, so that it can't fall all apart like that. So what I'm thinking, and I'm not saying it would absolutely work, but I'm thinking that as the sphere starts to build up, only the top 2 layers should be manipulatable via effects, or available for matching. That seems fair to me because you're only really going to be able to see the top two layers anyway. The inside of the sphere will be largely invisible to you at any given time. So if it's 3 layers down, we enclose it in a spherical steel sheath, and make it completely invulnerable, as though it isn't even there.
It has a drawback. Besides some coding difficulty, it's not always easy to decide what the highest or lowest level is. If the outer sphere is mostly blown up, like down to 1 or 2 dots, does that count? How do you get rid of the sphere? How does it appear? Well, I'm going to say that the outer shell would no longer count as a shell if it were down to 2/5 of the maximum dot count of the shell. When a layer builds up to that point, the shell will sort of Stargate-helmet ensconce the layer two-below. When it drops below that point, the shell will retract. It'd need to have a buffer of some percentage to keep it from flitting back and forth, but that's no real trouble.
I like this because it has some side benefits. For one, we can root the steel sphere, so that explosions won't move it. First-and-a-half, a rooted sphere would work like a racquetball court wall: fast-moving dots like after explosions will bounce right off of it. Second, it removes any chance of inner-sphere invisible matches (Nice! I can skip the occlusion bullet!). Lastly, it makes the game play sort of like the current 2D ColorDots, except that there are now 2 levels to the playing field that interact with each other. Which brings us to the next point:
4-match * 8-colors = Fun:
Ok, here's a real problem. Matching 4 dots in the current game means looking for triples and then building quads. With two levels, however, the occurrence of triples would overlap with the occurrence of singles of the same color in the upper level. Same with doubles matching other doubles, and singles matching overhead triples. I'm just estimating here, but that probably makes quad matches about 5 times more likely by just adding another layer.
However, matching 5's doesn't really fix this problem, because quads are going to be as rare as accidental matches are now: not so infrequent, but not frequent enough to get you past level 6 without taking an active role in building them. It'll be hard, therefore, to find a quad, and even harder to find a triple that is touching a single below it. Matching quints is not such a good idea.
Increasing the number of colors, however, may be a worse idea. You might not have noticed because Joe and I are awesome, but we were already scraping the bottom of the effect idea barrel when we came up with the yellow and green effects. By the way, you know the designer is out of ideas when they make a yellow electric effect, a goo green effect, and a fire red effect. When someone suggests that, it is a bad day for everyone who isn't a pokemon trainer.
We can add colors, but in all likelihood, they won't be as cool as the effects we already have. And I don't think we can get away with more than 3 colors that just don't have effects (we already have black and off-white, we might be able to whiten the white and throw a real grey in there).
So we're kind of stuck on that point for now. Oh well. Fixable later. Feel free to comment if you have a solution! :) Then again, maybe 5's would just work. That'd be nice, right?
Dot Spawn:
Your blog post is getting too long if it takes awhile to scroll back up to your list.
Dot spawning is random in ColorDots. That's ok, really, because it's a pretty simple play space. But in 3D, depending on the size of the spawn circle, there's a lot of room to be random, and you'd have to drop a lot of dots to make it look like dots were falling. I don't think we can handle firepower of that magnitude, especially since a 3D version would be inherently more difficult.
So as for solutions, we'd probably want to drop dots in patterns. Have spawning spouts that move around the game space, and have them drop lines of dots at a time, then cool down for a bit. Instead of a steady stream of dots, then, we'd have spurts of dots followed by a bit of downtime. The amount of downtime, and so the dots per second, would be similar to what we have now. Hmm, actually, this isn't such a bad idea for the 2D game. I'll keep it in mind.
Loss Condition:
Does this really have to change? Should we only count dots inside the metal sphere? Dots outside the metal sphere? All the dots? All the dots you can see? A certain number of shells? Tough to say, I think, until there's a playable game to find out what is hard to maintain. We'd probably want to keep the grace period in, though.
Loss Warning:
Maybe that sphere thingy could glow? Maybe electricity would arc all around between the second level of dots? Maybe a sphere around the entire play field would glow brighter and brighter until KABOOM! ? Points to ponder, I guess.
Aaaaand, that's it - working game! (With just the one tiny major flaw :) Super long, right? Sorry about that. The last one was short, so this one had to be extra-long. Thanks all the more-so for reading!
Any suggestions, comments, concerns, or innuendo, feel free to drop me a line in the comments section, at my real address, or since it's colordots-related, at colordots.team@gmail.com.
-s
Wednesday, March 12, 2008
umm, venomous snakes?
The functional equivalent of venomous snakes happened, so we updated, and called it 0.Red.0, but it's not exactly ready for prime-time yet.
Sorry.
That said, it's really great now. We changed a lot of UI elements, the background color, made yellow more fair, changed the order of color introduction, added SOUND. (Woo!)
0.Red.0 is pretty great, if you ask me, it's just, you know, not as perfect as I'd like it to be.
Sooo.... next week, then? 0.Red.Red sounds nice too... :)
-s
Sorry.
That said, it's really great now. We changed a lot of UI elements, the background color, made yellow more fair, changed the order of color introduction, added SOUND. (Woo!)
0.Red.0 is pretty great, if you ask me, it's just, you know, not as perfect as I'd like it to be.
Sooo.... next week, then? 0.Red.Red sounds nice too... :)
-s
Friday, March 7, 2008
ColorDots: Poker Chip Style
A commenter wrote...
And here's the response...
This would totally be good for your website (or anyone's website!) And I do enjoy a good selling out. :)
Lessee, what's a good poker chip mechanic... Different point values for matching different chips? Collect all you can in a certain amount of time?
Probably want to change or remove almost all of the effects, un-sci-fi most of them. We'd probably take out the explodey mechanic completely, as that's more of a gamer mechanic. Anyway, effects would be secondary as keeping the board clear wouldn't be as important as just high-point-value combos.
Actually, that's not a bad idea - an older test version chained effects and instead of filling to overflow, maintained a constant supply of dots. That would probably do better for a time-bounded points-based game.
More colors would be good, because it would mean that finding matches at all is more important than being able to find matches quickly. It should also almost eliminate the accidental matches.
Powerdowns don't really make sense in a game like that (at least the ones we already have), so just powerups like 3 match or full-size chained effects. (Chained effects were smaller than normal ones, aside from just being bigger).
Chains... can't always propagate, so maybe higher point chip effects can propogate only to lower point chips, so protecting high-ticket chips would be a priority as their effect would make the whole screen explode. Also, we can add the chain multiplier back in, which is something I really miss from the old design :)
Effects... we should keep everything that doesn't move dots, so really only green and blue are out. The old yellow "disintegration circle" mechanic would be good to put on something, and it would still be fine to have black and white without effects. Maybe just white, as the lowest-denominator chip, and black would be out for some other color with a new effect of some sort.
Anyway, it would definitely work, maybe even being more mainstream than the current game, it would take very very little time to build because really we'd just be reverting code to the older version, and it wouldn't require too much art.
This could be adapted to a poker chip thing. That would be cool for our website.
And here's the response...
This would totally be good for your website (or anyone's website!) And I do enjoy a good selling out. :)
Lessee, what's a good poker chip mechanic... Different point values for matching different chips? Collect all you can in a certain amount of time?
Probably want to change or remove almost all of the effects, un-sci-fi most of them. We'd probably take out the explodey mechanic completely, as that's more of a gamer mechanic. Anyway, effects would be secondary as keeping the board clear wouldn't be as important as just high-point-value combos.
Actually, that's not a bad idea - an older test version chained effects and instead of filling to overflow, maintained a constant supply of dots. That would probably do better for a time-bounded points-based game.
More colors would be good, because it would mean that finding matches at all is more important than being able to find matches quickly. It should also almost eliminate the accidental matches.
Powerdowns don't really make sense in a game like that (at least the ones we already have), so just powerups like 3 match or full-size chained effects. (Chained effects were smaller than normal ones, aside from just being bigger).
Chains... can't always propagate, so maybe higher point chip effects can propogate only to lower point chips, so protecting high-ticket chips would be a priority as their effect would make the whole screen explode. Also, we can add the chain multiplier back in, which is something I really miss from the old design :)
Effects... we should keep everything that doesn't move dots, so really only green and blue are out. The old yellow "disintegration circle" mechanic would be good to put on something, and it would still be fine to have black and white without effects. Maybe just white, as the lowest-denominator chip, and black would be out for some other color with a new effect of some sort.
Anyway, it would definitely work, maybe even being more mainstream than the current game, it would take very very little time to build because really we'd just be reverting code to the older version, and it wouldn't require too much art.
Thursday, March 6, 2008
0.0.blue updated
Joe is super-fast, and there is now a yellow effect. It is wicked sweet - check it out!
-s
-s
Tuesday, March 4, 2008
ColorDots Game Dev Blog - version 0.0.blue
Until that time, please amuse yourselves with v0.0.blue, which has several neat new additions. (warning: you may have to force-refresh to see the new version)
First of all, we made the game harder in a lot of sneaky ways.
- The loss warning cools down now and half the speed that it heats up, so if you're in-and-out of the warning, you'll eventually lose.
- We took the explodey effect off of all of the effects except for blue, so it's harder to get out of the loss condition.
- We based the loss condition on time, not frames, so you have to actually move. We figure you have time for 2-3 matches plus any lucky-accident matches before your time runs out. Choose wisely! (or hit a powerup)
- White and Black just disappear now, no effect at all. We never liked white and black - they were just getting in the way. Now we've succeeded in passing that dislike along to you. Hooray!
Second, we made the game easier in a few sneaky ways.
- We took the explodey effect off of all of the effects except for blue, so a lot of people who aren't so good with the mouse can make matches easier, as things aren't moving around quite so much now.
- We added a green effect that explodes for 3 frames, and then roots, making it excellent for crowd control. Pretty goo icon too. :)
Some apologies should get me off of my laurels! We were hoping to get the yellow effect working, but the idea we had was too complicated for 20 minutes of coding. It's going to look and work great very soon, though. Promise! Also, we haven't balanced powerup spawning yet, or added sound or UI. Sorry. I guess that'll be next weekend.
Speaking of next weekend, this Sunday (3-9-2008), barring venomous snakes, is the day that we release 0.Red.0! Woohoo!
Here's the plan:
0.Red.0, or "Little Red" as I like to call him, will be the debut of the web-toy version of ColorDots, open to all the internets for their scorn and ridicule and maybe even a little love.
He'll have that spiffy yellow effect, some additional balancing in there, sound, UI, something besides stalling and waiting for a click between levels (as much as we all love that here at ColorDots HQ). Everything that makes a baby webgame the pride of the neighborhood.
Once Lil' Red is out the door, we'll be pretty much done with the mechanical aspects of the game, and will start focusing 80% time on a Beta version of the real game (with real art and a real story and some kind of candy-generating device). The other 20% will be spent tweaking Lil' Red to our users' satisfaction, the goal being to use web-user data to perfect the mechanics well before we show the game itself to anyone outside of the friends-and-family testing group.
That's all that I have, I think. Just a few more months, hopefully, before we can sell out to the man. God knows I've been trying long enough, but having "an amazing aptitude for sitting" hasn't exactly been in demand lately.
-s
Monday, February 25, 2008
ColorDots Game Dev Blog - version 0.0.green
Having skipped Orange and Yellow for being ugly, ugly colors, I present you with ColorDots pre-alpha version 0.0.green.
The best part about having a game that you work on every week is that you can put a new post on your blog every week and not feel like you're neglecting your loyal readership, which for me is I think 1-3 people, but I digress. The second best part is that you can change the difficulty at a whim, which for me was everyone saying they couldn't beat level 22, 16, 15, 11, 7, and 4. That last person must have had pretty bad luck.
The problem with the previous game was that it was hard. Really really hard. Which, after the beginning being really easy, kind of snuck up on people. The good news is that in the initial trial period, we got a great idea of exactly what was too hard, and realized that maybe our linear difficulty mechanic was a bit too demanding of the player. Here, we made a graph.
So it was clear that something had to change, and the first part was that we'd have to make it a little harder to lose. The mechanic as it stands is that, packed ideally, there are a certain number of dots that fit in the center circle. So, if it fills up to 90% of the maximum, you lose. It's like 51 dots. However, it turns out that Joe's physics code is too good (!), so ideal packing occurs really fast even in normal circumstances, and even faster when there are external dots that also want to be in the center.
In short, as soon as 60 dots were on the screen, 51 dots were in the center circle. So unless you could make pairs in less than 2 seconds, you would lose. As it turns out, only 2 people were able to do this, and even they couldn't sustain it for longer than 45 seconds, which was less than half of the original duration.
So we made it so that once you hit 51 dots, a 5-second timer would start, and dropping below, I think, 48 dots again would cancel the timer. Woo!
This... is probably overkill... by itself. But then we added powerups, which to be fair, we had planned on doing from the beginning before this whole "the warning makes everything too easy" issue came up. So to... even things out? I guess? There's a cycle to powerup introduction, adding a powerup then a powerdown, then a powerup, then a powerdown, so the new difficulty graph has a nice sine wave in it before sort of leveling off.
Almost everyone can make matches during the 5 second timer, so surviving isn't exactly a challenge anymore, and then you've got powerups that you can use if you get into even a slight jam. And we intend to add more powerups later, so we can expect this line to dip even further before it grows at all. With luck, it will fall below the graph, and become some sort of antigame, which I can't even define properly at the moment.
We did some initial playtesting, and were rewarded with a new line for our graph, which, rest assured, we are going to keep in mind for future builds.
So the current build, 0.0.green, is for everyone out there who loves games but really isn't very good at them. For those people who have seen a mouse, but are hesitant to actually use it. For anyone out there who wants to play a game not to accomplish something, but to really spend some time doing something. Anything. Preferably something colorful.
Oh, and in case powerdowns are too hard, you can throw them out of the outer ring to destroy them. That'll come in handy in 0.0.blue, which will probably overcompensate the other way again, making a game that is so hard that you will cry giant blue tears of sadness, fondly remembering the idle bygone days of green.
-s
The best part about having a game that you work on every week is that you can put a new post on your blog every week and not feel like you're neglecting your loyal readership, which for me is I think 1-3 people, but I digress. The second best part is that you can change the difficulty at a whim, which for me was everyone saying they couldn't beat level 22, 16, 15, 11, 7, and 4. That last person must have had pretty bad luck.
The problem with the previous game was that it was hard. Really really hard. Which, after the beginning being really easy, kind of snuck up on people. The good news is that in the initial trial period, we got a great idea of exactly what was too hard, and realized that maybe our linear difficulty mechanic was a bit too demanding of the player. Here, we made a graph.
So it was clear that something had to change, and the first part was that we'd have to make it a little harder to lose. The mechanic as it stands is that, packed ideally, there are a certain number of dots that fit in the center circle. So, if it fills up to 90% of the maximum, you lose. It's like 51 dots. However, it turns out that Joe's physics code is too good (!), so ideal packing occurs really fast even in normal circumstances, and even faster when there are external dots that also want to be in the center.
In short, as soon as 60 dots were on the screen, 51 dots were in the center circle. So unless you could make pairs in less than 2 seconds, you would lose. As it turns out, only 2 people were able to do this, and even they couldn't sustain it for longer than 45 seconds, which was less than half of the original duration.
So we made it so that once you hit 51 dots, a 5-second timer would start, and dropping below, I think, 48 dots again would cancel the timer. Woo!
This... is probably overkill... by itself. But then we added powerups, which to be fair, we had planned on doing from the beginning before this whole "the warning makes everything too easy" issue came up. So to... even things out? I guess? There's a cycle to powerup introduction, adding a powerup then a powerdown, then a powerup, then a powerdown, so the new difficulty graph has a nice sine wave in it before sort of leveling off.
Almost everyone can make matches during the 5 second timer, so surviving isn't exactly a challenge anymore, and then you've got powerups that you can use if you get into even a slight jam. And we intend to add more powerups later, so we can expect this line to dip even further before it grows at all. With luck, it will fall below the graph, and become some sort of antigame, which I can't even define properly at the moment.
We did some initial playtesting, and were rewarded with a new line for our graph, which, rest assured, we are going to keep in mind for future builds.
So the current build, 0.0.green, is for everyone out there who loves games but really isn't very good at them. For those people who have seen a mouse, but are hesitant to actually use it. For anyone out there who wants to play a game not to accomplish something, but to really spend some time doing something. Anything. Preferably something colorful.
Oh, and in case powerdowns are too hard, you can throw them out of the outer ring to destroy them. That'll come in handy in 0.0.blue, which will probably overcompensate the other way again, making a game that is so hard that you will cry giant blue tears of sadness, fondly remembering the idle bygone days of green.
-s
Thursday, February 21, 2008
ColorDots Game Dev Blog - build 01
Hi. In the absence of a real name for the game I mentioned in the previous post, which would allow me to start a new blog with the same title, I'm going to just use this space to accomplish the same goal: blogging about the game progress.
The hope, at this time, is to release a new build weekly, probably Sunday evenings, since that's the best time for Joe and I to get together to work on it. So, if you're looking, that's the time to look for it.
The game as of today at build 01, is only about 20% done. There's no UI, there's no art, the mechanics are only about half implemented, there's no story. Lots of stuff still sucks, specifically the fact that the instant that you go over the loss threshold, you lose. That's probably the first thing we're going to fix, because it's freakin' annoying. (But much better than last week's loss condition, which would cause you to just randomly lose every once in awhile.)
Second is level balance, which includes powerups, powerdowns, new effects, dot-spawn speed, and half a dozen other things that are being thrown around. There are a lot of people who don't play FPS games religiously, and don't have the level of mouse-eye coordination that the current incarnation requires. This can't be a game that most casual players get 3 minutes of frustration out of.
Worse, I haven't seen anyone get past level 16, which is... troubling, since that's about 10 and a half minutes of gameplay and then hitting a wall that perhaps no one will ever cross. Getting crazier is ok, but we need it to happen more gradually, and we need to add powerups and other benefits at a rate that allows the player to properly combat the unrelenting tide of dots.
Third, art, sound, and story. A fun game mechanic was enough 20 years ago, but it really isn't anymore. I was going about this on the assumption that the ideal game mechanic could replicate Tetris-style success. However, a friend informed me that one of the most important parts of a casual game was that it gave the player all the flashy lights right away, instead of making the player invest a lot of time and effort to gain them. I figure a 5 minute investment isn't so bad, but it's true, relying solely on the game being fun to click isn't going to be enough. It has to look fun too. /sigh
What's the plan for doing all this? Well, I'm writing a story, which at some point will get fixed by some real writers who are friends of mine. I have an artist lined up, but music/sound might be a problem.
For level balance, I have a few tricks up my sleeve that I'll talk about more when they're actually implemented. We'll probably do all the implementation of new features first, and then tweak them to be fair and then to change over time. Then, we start picking and choosing which effects or abilities are added at which time, and base that on how useful they are under different circumstances.
That's basically what we did last weekend, when it was tough to get past level 5, so we just divided all the numbers by 3. Now level 15 is hard, so we'll probably need a more complex solution. We've just started, though, so I'm not terribly worried yet.
That, I think, is everything at this time. I'll be back with more next week.
-s
The hope, at this time, is to release a new build weekly, probably Sunday evenings, since that's the best time for Joe and I to get together to work on it. So, if you're looking, that's the time to look for it.
The game as of today at build 01, is only about 20% done. There's no UI, there's no art, the mechanics are only about half implemented, there's no story. Lots of stuff still sucks, specifically the fact that the instant that you go over the loss threshold, you lose. That's probably the first thing we're going to fix, because it's freakin' annoying. (But much better than last week's loss condition, which would cause you to just randomly lose every once in awhile.)
Second is level balance, which includes powerups, powerdowns, new effects, dot-spawn speed, and half a dozen other things that are being thrown around. There are a lot of people who don't play FPS games religiously, and don't have the level of mouse-eye coordination that the current incarnation requires. This can't be a game that most casual players get 3 minutes of frustration out of.
Worse, I haven't seen anyone get past level 16, which is... troubling, since that's about 10 and a half minutes of gameplay and then hitting a wall that perhaps no one will ever cross. Getting crazier is ok, but we need it to happen more gradually, and we need to add powerups and other benefits at a rate that allows the player to properly combat the unrelenting tide of dots.
Third, art, sound, and story. A fun game mechanic was enough 20 years ago, but it really isn't anymore. I was going about this on the assumption that the ideal game mechanic could replicate Tetris-style success. However, a friend informed me that one of the most important parts of a casual game was that it gave the player all the flashy lights right away, instead of making the player invest a lot of time and effort to gain them. I figure a 5 minute investment isn't so bad, but it's true, relying solely on the game being fun to click isn't going to be enough. It has to look fun too. /sigh
What's the plan for doing all this? Well, I'm writing a story, which at some point will get fixed by some real writers who are friends of mine. I have an artist lined up, but music/sound might be a problem.
For level balance, I have a few tricks up my sleeve that I'll talk about more when they're actually implemented. We'll probably do all the implementation of new features first, and then tweak them to be fair and then to change over time. Then, we start picking and choosing which effects or abilities are added at which time, and base that on how useful they are under different circumstances.
That's basically what we did last weekend, when it was tough to get past level 5, so we just divided all the numbers by 3. Now level 15 is hard, so we'll probably need a more complex solution. We've just started, though, so I'm not terribly worried yet.
That, I think, is everything at this time. I'll be back with more next week.
-s
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Newest Game: ColorDots
A friend and I have been working on this on and off for awhile now, and I think the mechanics are starting to come together. At least enough that it is playable, and sort of fun.
I should warn you that it's extraordinarily pre-alpha right now, but feel free to give it a play and send any comments my way. I haven't seen anyone get past level 16, so good luck!
Click Here for The Game
Okay, the fun part is done, time to get to the grunt work. :)
-s
I should warn you that it's extraordinarily pre-alpha right now, but feel free to give it a play and send any comments my way. I haven't seen anyone get past level 16, so good luck!
Click Here for The Game
Okay, the fun part is done, time to get to the grunt work. :)
-s
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Quotable Quote
A while back I was doing some coding at work, and found out that the solution for a particular problem was really stupid. Like deleting all the files and copying them back into the project kind of stupid. It fixed the problem, but only after I'd tried everything else, wasting about a day and a half of work by trying to fix something retarded with elegant code. The good news is that it helped me come up with this axiom of programming:
-s
If a problem is exceedingly clever, then an equally clever solution is often required. But when the problem is dumb, then the solution must be equally dumb.I call it the Dumb Rule of Programming.
-s
Monday, February 11, 2008
Superfriends, sans Super Powers
The header of this blog used to say "philosophy, humor, and game design". Now it says "largely unedited" which is more accurate, but less ambitious. For months, all I had was a decent tongue-twister, which is more of a hard truth than a great truth. Time to step it up a bit.
-----
There's no use for anything but perfect friends on the internet. It's big enough that just happening upon another person means you share an interest, but it's hard to stay with anyone because there's no reason to put up with differences. Travel is cheap on the web, so the only people we have to tolerate are ourselves.
People are ending their searches, however, at social networking sites. Why? Because the result of social sites and networks then, whether they've intended it or not, is to consume all of your friends and spit out giant aggregate superfriends. Some facet of these things is always ready to support anything you say, agree that anyone on the planet is a jerk, and tell you you're the greatest/smartest/most attractive person in history. And they'll do it at any hour of the day.
It's all a pile of crap, though, because that kind of approval is useless, even detrimental. You stagnate, weighed down by all the appreciation. Appreciation of people who, when you're the discordant one, don't have to listen to you either. How do you learn when your mistakes are reinforced by a dozen voices and ignored by the rest? How do you debate with people who are only there to develop their own superfriends?
I don't know.
Probably by video-blogging. Comments on youtube are vicious.
-----
I should have just named this "I don't like social networking sites". Maybe I was subconsciously hoping for mis-clicks on google.
-----
There's no use for anything but perfect friends on the internet. It's big enough that just happening upon another person means you share an interest, but it's hard to stay with anyone because there's no reason to put up with differences. Travel is cheap on the web, so the only people we have to tolerate are ourselves.
People are ending their searches, however, at social networking sites. Why? Because the result of social sites and networks then, whether they've intended it or not, is to consume all of your friends and spit out giant aggregate superfriends. Some facet of these things is always ready to support anything you say, agree that anyone on the planet is a jerk, and tell you you're the greatest/smartest/most attractive person in history. And they'll do it at any hour of the day.
It's all a pile of crap, though, because that kind of approval is useless, even detrimental. You stagnate, weighed down by all the appreciation. Appreciation of people who, when you're the discordant one, don't have to listen to you either. How do you learn when your mistakes are reinforced by a dozen voices and ignored by the rest? How do you debate with people who are only there to develop their own superfriends?
I don't know.
Probably by video-blogging. Comments on youtube are vicious.
-----
I should have just named this "I don't like social networking sites". Maybe I was subconsciously hoping for mis-clicks on google.
Followup Post: Game Designs
Ok, time to put some meat on this blog - can't in good conscience just post youtube videos and say they're neat. Let's make games out of these.
First off: VR Window
The guy asked for them, so here's the game designs.
#1) 3D Pong
I think we've all played 3D Pong, and can agree that it is way too dang hard. I'm going to say that's because of a strange disassociation between the cursor and your face, and if the camera were moving along with how you faced the hither plane, it'd be a lot easier to play. Maybe even more fun.
Basically make this exact same game except for two changes. One, use the VR camera so that lining up the shot is essentially just standing in a position that makes the ball look like it's coming straight at you. Two, you've got both hands free, so manage the curving of the ball not by how fast your face is moving, but by how you're orienting a second controller in your hands. Bonus changes 3 and 4: it's 3D now, not flash, so throw in some particles to make it prettier, and make it multiplayer. Seriously.
Aaaandd everyone in this world is a clone. Just to spice things up a bit. Make it a bit less formulaic. A bit more... unreal.
#2) Ikaruga Clone (snicker)
I'm laughing because Ikaruga is a clone of R-Type maybe, which is a clone of 1942 I guess, which is a clone of something else which itself was based on centipede, probably. They're all the same game just with different color palettes and sprites. Anyway, with this head-tracking thing, I can't think of a good reason not to make it 3-D and have them coming down a big rectangular tube at you. Maybe because it's just too weird, and would probably give you vertigo. (But if we're worried about vertigo, we're probably not going to let you stare into a bottomless TV screen that follows you around.)
You can only shoot forwards, and you move on the x,y plane by moving your face around in a manner that is probably bad for your meninges. Different powerups change your attacks, making theme wider, conical, laser/long-range, explosive, slightly seeking, whatever. There. Easiest game design ever.
Also, you play a fighter-pilot who happens to be a racoon. Wait, no, that's been done, make him a skunk. A skunk who's really a good guy, but fell in with the wrong crowd.
#3) Operation
Can I get sued for this? I want to put the operation guy in the tv, put the TV on the ground, and play operation with little virtual tweezers that are controlled by... my face? No. Too vaguely cannibalistic. Maybe by a second wiimote that I point at the screen. Sure, why not. The face thing is
Just though of a way to make it more copyrightably-correct. Make it a rubber-looking doll with big black eyes and call it Alien Autopsy. Hmm, that's taken? Damn. I guess we'll have to go with Trying to Fix the Family Dog and call it a day. Too scary? Hey, it's not my fault all the wholesome ideas are copyrighted.
#4) Yoga Game
This one's a little off-topic, but you basically put flashlights on your head and hands, and you have to move the two that are turned on into the right place, 3-dimensionally speaking. The trick is that your eyes are closed, and you have to navigate by ear.
So the Wii lights up two of the lights, and then plays two discordant chords, based on how far away from the ideal positions you are. You figure out which lights are lit and then move the lights into the right spots until the chords are right, and then hold it as long as you can.
Awesome, right? Well the music builds as you get into position, and then holding it causes it to build even more, so even as you're getting completely tired and want to die, the sound is more beautiful and complex, to take your mind off of it.
Two weeks later, you have mastered yoga.
Next up: dolphin bubble games.
First off: VR Window
The guy asked for them, so here's the game designs.
#1) 3D Pong
I think we've all played 3D Pong, and can agree that it is way too dang hard. I'm going to say that's because of a strange disassociation between the cursor and your face, and if the camera were moving along with how you faced the hither plane, it'd be a lot easier to play. Maybe even more fun.
Basically make this exact same game except for two changes. One, use the VR camera so that lining up the shot is essentially just standing in a position that makes the ball look like it's coming straight at you. Two, you've got both hands free, so manage the curving of the ball not by how fast your face is moving, but by how you're orienting a second controller in your hands. Bonus changes 3 and 4: it's 3D now, not flash, so throw in some particles to make it prettier, and make it multiplayer. Seriously.
Aaaandd everyone in this world is a clone. Just to spice things up a bit. Make it a bit less formulaic. A bit more... unreal.
#2) Ikaruga Clone (snicker)
I'm laughing because Ikaruga is a clone of R-Type maybe, which is a clone of 1942 I guess, which is a clone of something else which itself was based on centipede, probably. They're all the same game just with different color palettes and sprites. Anyway, with this head-tracking thing, I can't think of a good reason not to make it 3-D and have them coming down a big rectangular tube at you. Maybe because it's just too weird, and would probably give you vertigo. (But if we're worried about vertigo, we're probably not going to let you stare into a bottomless TV screen that follows you around.)
You can only shoot forwards, and you move on the x,y plane by moving your face around in a manner that is probably bad for your meninges. Different powerups change your attacks, making theme wider, conical, laser/long-range, explosive, slightly seeking, whatever. There. Easiest game design ever.
Also, you play a fighter-pilot who happens to be a racoon. Wait, no, that's been done, make him a skunk. A skunk who's really a good guy, but fell in with the wrong crowd.
#3) Operation
Can I get sued for this? I want to put the operation guy in the tv, put the TV on the ground, and play operation with little virtual tweezers that are controlled by... my face? No. Too vaguely cannibalistic. Maybe by a second wiimote that I point at the screen. Sure, why not. The face thing is
Just though of a way to make it more copyrightably-correct. Make it a rubber-looking doll with big black eyes and call it Alien Autopsy. Hmm, that's taken? Damn. I guess we'll have to go with Trying to Fix the Family Dog and call it a day. Too scary? Hey, it's not my fault all the wholesome ideas are copyrighted.
#4) Yoga Game
This one's a little off-topic, but you basically put flashlights on your head and hands, and you have to move the two that are turned on into the right place, 3-dimensionally speaking. The trick is that your eyes are closed, and you have to navigate by ear.
So the Wii lights up two of the lights, and then plays two discordant chords, based on how far away from the ideal positions you are. You figure out which lights are lit and then move the lights into the right spots until the chords are right, and then hold it as long as you can.
Awesome, right? Well the music builds as you get into position, and then holding it causes it to build even more, so even as you're getting completely tired and want to die, the sound is more beautiful and complex, to take your mind off of it.
Two weeks later, you have mastered yoga.
Next up: dolphin bubble games.
Wednesday, January 23, 2008
VR window!
My intention isn't actually to just repost other people's blogs here, but this was too great. Thanks Penny Arcade.
Johnny Lee does a lot of other stuff with the Wii remotes, like a touchscreen without a toucher which was pretty neat, but this one is truly fantastic. Johnny Lee, you are a game UI innovation super hero. Or... GUISH for short.
-s
Johnny Lee does a lot of other stuff with the Wii remotes, like a touchscreen without a toucher which was pretty neat, but this one is truly fantastic. Johnny Lee, you are a game UI innovation super hero. Or... GUISH for short.
-s
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
Tuesday, January 8, 2008
The 50 Questions Responses
It's not 100% funny, but I think I managed more than 75% comedy here. Lemme know what you think.
-s
Do you have a personality? Let's find out. Fill out and pass along to your friends. Be HONEST!
1. First name?
Klunterfjeld of Gaul. It rarely fits on the SAT forms.
2. Where were you born?
Reykjavik, Ohio
3. Height?
6'3"
4. Would you punch a baby in the face – hard, but non-fatally – if it ensured ten straight years of peace on earth?
I would punch that baby twice.
5. Eye color?
Grey-blue, like the Sargasso Sea on a cold day, but with a corona of yellow, reminiscent of the halo over the head of God.
6. Single or married?
Ecclesiastically speaking, neither.
7. What is your job?
I wear many hats, ranging from the fur-lined cold-hazard mask of a licensed baby-seal clubber to the woven-straw variety typified by a no-ambition country bumpkin. Most of my time, however, is spent under a tri-cornered pirate hat, which I wear while on infiltration missions, as I am a ninja.
8. What's the most dangerous thing you've ever done on the toilet?
Murdered myself. Unless you mean dangerous for the most number of people, and then... no, it's the same.
9. College?
No thanks, I already have three, I don't know what I'd do with another.
10. High school?
I'd rather high five.
11. Coke or Pepsi?
Coke tastes like ginger to me, and I don't like ginger. To be fair, Pepsi tastes like syrup to me, and syrup isn't much better. I'll go with secret option C: Mountain Dew, which tastes like neither rocky outcroppings nor morning condensation, but somehow, it works.
12. If your worst enemy was on fire across the street, and you had a bucket of water, would you be like, "Is my worst enemy testing me with this scenario? He really should have thought this through, because my hobbies happen to include collecting buckets of water, and this one's a keeper."
Yes. How did you know? Although you'd have to replace "bucket of water" with "jar of formaldehyde", and "my worst enemy" with "this rampaging elephant", and "testing me" with "about to have the time of his life." Other than that, though, dead on. Spooky.
13. Vanilla or chocolate?
Whatever you have more of, I'm not picky. Unless this is asking how I prefer my men, and then I'm going to have to go with "mis-categorized, specifically regarding gender". I like women!
14. McDonald's or Burger King?
If we're talking Big Mac vs. Whopper, then I have to go Big Mac. If it's McFish vs. the now-retired BK Whaler, then I'm going to have to side with innocent political incorrectness and choose the Whaler. If we're talking about who I'd rather pay money to, then I have to root for the underdog: Burger King. And if we're talking chicken nuggets, then I choose McDonalds for the crispy golden fried shell as well as for the madly delicious sweet-and sour sauce. All this is assuming there's no Wendy's around.
15. Starbucks or Coffee Bean?
Ahh, the existential debate between the brand and the product. Without a coffee bean, could there be a starbucks at all? Without starbucks, would the bean enjoy its grand stature at the top of the morning elixir pyramid? Can we even pit one against the other, for there must undoubtedly be worse and better beans than those proffered at starbucks? It's a classic chicken and egg debate, for one without the other is, as Chaucer put it, hold on, lemme google it... Oh. There's actually a place called "The Coffee Bean." Huh. Nevermind, I guess. I don't really drink coffee anyway.
16. If a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, does that make tandem bicycles the homosexuals of pedal-powered transportation? It would explain the baskets and streamers, plus all of the gentrified city neighborhoods lined with tandem-bike bars and leather shops.
...Yes, technically.
17. First crush?
No thanks, I've already had mine.
18. First kiss?
Too late again! Wow, are you ever late to THIS party!
19. First BF or GF?
Ok Joe, you can be my first boyfriend. No hanky panky, though, I won't put out until we're married.
20. What's the biggest thing you've ever put in your mouth?
The state of Ohio.
21. Lefty or righty?
I'm fascinated that you put lefty first. Perhaps signalling some deeply-seated, perhaps frequently restrained tendency towards left-handedness. Maybe even a tendency towards sexual promiscuity, for as we all know, righty equals tighty, but lefty is loosey. On an unrelated note, righty.
22. Best physical feature?
The pyramids at Giza. Spectacular.
23. Best sport?
Musk Ox. Perhaps the most dangerous game of all.
24. Brain or jock?
Hard to pick, because they have to work to share the same blood supply, but I like to root for the brain because it has to fight gravity for its oxygen. Then again, they both tend to fight gravity.
25. Is George W. Bush a great man? Or a great president? Choose only one or two.
No. And no. And I'm going to go with #1: "What is your first name?" I like it better than #2: "Where were you born."
26. Favorite author?
I've never had a favorite author, but I have had several strong author-figures in my life. Jesus, for one. Mickey Mantle another. I'm not entirely sure either wrote any books, but it sure seems like they did, right?
27. Do you think we'd all like our feet so much if we called them by the function they perform – shoe rapists?
Aren't the feet just barely sentient, unwitting participants? Is it not NOT the feet, but our very selves who indulge in such monstrosities?
28. Favorite section of the bookstore?
The bathroom. I owe the bookstore bathroom much.
29. Favorite movie quote?
"Oh, it's you."
30. The 2011 Academy Award for Best Picture will go to a movie called what?
Man among Men: The Often-Told Story of Klunterfjeld
31. Coffee or tea?
Tea.
32: TV or online videos?
TV shows dedicated to showing online videos. I hate clicking.
33. Best use of absence? To make the heart grow fonder? Or to create attention-starved children who eventually seek personal validation via the entertainment industry and crack us up weekly on whip-smart sitcoms?
The latter, but only if they're the hot girls from friends.
34. Jamaica or Hawaii?
Is it just me, or do those words both have just an impossibly high ratio of vowels to work length? Is that how we determine the value of our island getaways? Would a place called Aaaeololeiiiaiae be the most popular tourist destination on Earth? Have I ever even been to either of these places? NO TO ALL QUESTIONS!
35. What are the odds that Google will be assassinated by an out-of-work reference librarian? I say 2-to-1.
I'll take those odds, assuming we're talking about the out-of-work reference librarian I think we're talking about, because she is currently being held hostage in my basement. The real puzzle? I DON'T HAVE A BASEMENT.
36. Bananas or non-bananas?
Actually, I'm going to have to go with Anti-bananas. Although, I once ate a banana and an anti-banana at the same time, in a poorly planned suicide attempt. Turns out I really do have intestines of steel, and it just made me have to go to the bathroom a few minutes later.
37. Hotel, motel or Holiday Inn? Say what?
Hotel. And I can't think of a good reason not to, so sure. "What?"
38. Best college mascot?
Grainy and Corny, the Ohio Agricultural College's twin mascots between the years 1804 and 1807. They were later accidentally threshed.
39. Favorite part of the world that ends in –potamia?
Hippopotamia.
40. Do you think anyone has ever said, "Carl, we will always have Canada." Then Carl says, "Damn you, Ellen, it wasn't Canada, it was us. We were alive, just for a moment of time, in Winnipeg."
I think it's probably inevitable by now. I can send this to someone named Carl. That could improve the odds.
41: Best qualification for a dog walker?
Not a cat, or quantitatively cat-like.
42: Fastest athlete on earth?
Flipper. Birds and sailfish don't count, right? 'Cause of the whole ganglia thing? Athlete is a strictly mammalian designation?
43: What is the best use of physics? To create modern conveniences? Or to explain the laws of the universe? There is no wrong answer, but there are three right answers, and one of them, when spoken aloud, opens a portal to a nether-dimension, but it's not much of a nether-dimension, it's kind of the Wheaton, Maryland of nether-dimensions. There's probably a Sbarro there, and not much else.
It's actually a Shakey's Pizza. Turns out they have pretty lax franchising requirements.
44: Favorite SNL sketch?
Cork-soakers.
45: Am I the only person in America who would watch a TV show called "My Husband, Wife and Kids"? Who else needs to see this happen? I see a John Laroquette-type as the Husband.
Wait, who is the "I" in that title? I'm afraid I'm going to need to see a pilot or script of some sort before I agree to anything.
46: Porno or overactive imagination? (Note: Your overactive imagination can include a wa-wa guitar.)
I have combined the two. It is... bliss...
47: Simpsons from the 1990s or South Park right now?
Simpsons. South Park can go to hell. For no good reason, I just felt like taking a stand on this one.
48: Laughter or the best medicine as prescribed by your medically-trained doctor?
As a doctor, I cannot in good conscience prescribe laughter for anything that isn't complete bullshit to begin with. Except, well, as it turns out, laughter clears up most cases of typhoid fever. I can't explain that one. Exception that proves the rule, I guess.
49: Do you like your politicians scandalous or foible-filled?
I was about to say "foible-filled" because we could say they're "foiblicious" but then I realized that "scandalicious" is actually way better, so now I'm undecided. Can we just get a few that are honest instead? Honestastic maybe?
50: What would make you happier? Knowing there is a heaven? Or knowing there is a fun slide that leads from your front door to an ice cream parlor. Now keep in mind, with the fun slide, you have to provide your own sliding sack. So there are some things to consider here.
I'm often told that in heaven, sliding sacks are provided free of charge, and that every road is in fact a fun slide to an ice cream parlor. So as long as I get to go there but Jimmy Lawrence from 4th grade, who was a complete douchebag, and yes, I'm still mad about that, Jimmy, does not, then I'll go with heaven.
Pants!
Congratulations! You have a personality. Copy, paste and pass along to friends!
-s
Do you have a personality? Let's find out. Fill out and pass along to your friends. Be HONEST!
1. First name?
Klunterfjeld of Gaul. It rarely fits on the SAT forms.
2. Where were you born?
Reykjavik, Ohio
3. Height?
6'3"
4. Would you punch a baby in the face – hard, but non-fatally – if it ensured ten straight years of peace on earth?
I would punch that baby twice.
5. Eye color?
Grey-blue, like the Sargasso Sea on a cold day, but with a corona of yellow, reminiscent of the halo over the head of God.
6. Single or married?
Ecclesiastically speaking, neither.
7. What is your job?
I wear many hats, ranging from the fur-lined cold-hazard mask of a licensed baby-seal clubber to the woven-straw variety typified by a no-ambition country bumpkin. Most of my time, however, is spent under a tri-cornered pirate hat, which I wear while on infiltration missions, as I am a ninja.
8. What's the most dangerous thing you've ever done on the toilet?
Murdered myself. Unless you mean dangerous for the most number of people, and then... no, it's the same.
9. College?
No thanks, I already have three, I don't know what I'd do with another.
10. High school?
I'd rather high five.
11. Coke or Pepsi?
Coke tastes like ginger to me, and I don't like ginger. To be fair, Pepsi tastes like syrup to me, and syrup isn't much better. I'll go with secret option C: Mountain Dew, which tastes like neither rocky outcroppings nor morning condensation, but somehow, it works.
12. If your worst enemy was on fire across the street, and you had a bucket of water, would you be like, "Is my worst enemy testing me with this scenario? He really should have thought this through, because my hobbies happen to include collecting buckets of water, and this one's a keeper."
Yes. How did you know? Although you'd have to replace "bucket of water" with "jar of formaldehyde", and "my worst enemy" with "this rampaging elephant", and "testing me" with "about to have the time of his life." Other than that, though, dead on. Spooky.
13. Vanilla or chocolate?
Whatever you have more of, I'm not picky. Unless this is asking how I prefer my men, and then I'm going to have to go with "mis-categorized, specifically regarding gender". I like women!
14. McDonald's or Burger King?
If we're talking Big Mac vs. Whopper, then I have to go Big Mac. If it's McFish vs. the now-retired BK Whaler, then I'm going to have to side with innocent political incorrectness and choose the Whaler. If we're talking about who I'd rather pay money to, then I have to root for the underdog: Burger King. And if we're talking chicken nuggets, then I choose McDonalds for the crispy golden fried shell as well as for the madly delicious sweet-and sour sauce. All this is assuming there's no Wendy's around.
15. Starbucks or Coffee Bean?
Ahh, the existential debate between the brand and the product. Without a coffee bean, could there be a starbucks at all? Without starbucks, would the bean enjoy its grand stature at the top of the morning elixir pyramid? Can we even pit one against the other, for there must undoubtedly be worse and better beans than those proffered at starbucks? It's a classic chicken and egg debate, for one without the other is, as Chaucer put it, hold on, lemme google it... Oh. There's actually a place called "The Coffee Bean." Huh. Nevermind, I guess. I don't really drink coffee anyway.
16. If a woman needs a man like a fish needs a bicycle, does that make tandem bicycles the homosexuals of pedal-powered transportation? It would explain the baskets and streamers, plus all of the gentrified city neighborhoods lined with tandem-bike bars and leather shops.
...Yes, technically.
17. First crush?
No thanks, I've already had mine.
18. First kiss?
Too late again! Wow, are you ever late to THIS party!
19. First BF or GF?
Ok Joe, you can be my first boyfriend. No hanky panky, though, I won't put out until we're married.
20. What's the biggest thing you've ever put in your mouth?
The state of Ohio.
21. Lefty or righty?
I'm fascinated that you put lefty first. Perhaps signalling some deeply-seated, perhaps frequently restrained tendency towards left-handedness. Maybe even a tendency towards sexual promiscuity, for as we all know, righty equals tighty, but lefty is loosey. On an unrelated note, righty.
22. Best physical feature?
The pyramids at Giza. Spectacular.
23. Best sport?
Musk Ox. Perhaps the most dangerous game of all.
24. Brain or jock?
Hard to pick, because they have to work to share the same blood supply, but I like to root for the brain because it has to fight gravity for its oxygen. Then again, they both tend to fight gravity.
25. Is George W. Bush a great man? Or a great president? Choose only one or two.
No. And no. And I'm going to go with #1: "What is your first name?" I like it better than #2: "Where were you born."
26. Favorite author?
I've never had a favorite author, but I have had several strong author-figures in my life. Jesus, for one. Mickey Mantle another. I'm not entirely sure either wrote any books, but it sure seems like they did, right?
27. Do you think we'd all like our feet so much if we called them by the function they perform – shoe rapists?
Aren't the feet just barely sentient, unwitting participants? Is it not NOT the feet, but our very selves who indulge in such monstrosities?
28. Favorite section of the bookstore?
The bathroom. I owe the bookstore bathroom much.
29. Favorite movie quote?
"Oh, it's you."
30. The 2011 Academy Award for Best Picture will go to a movie called what?
Man among Men: The Often-Told Story of Klunterfjeld
31. Coffee or tea?
Tea.
32: TV or online videos?
TV shows dedicated to showing online videos. I hate clicking.
33. Best use of absence? To make the heart grow fonder? Or to create attention-starved children who eventually seek personal validation via the entertainment industry and crack us up weekly on whip-smart sitcoms?
The latter, but only if they're the hot girls from friends.
34. Jamaica or Hawaii?
Is it just me, or do those words both have just an impossibly high ratio of vowels to work length? Is that how we determine the value of our island getaways? Would a place called Aaaeololeiiiaiae be the most popular tourist destination on Earth? Have I ever even been to either of these places? NO TO ALL QUESTIONS!
35. What are the odds that Google will be assassinated by an out-of-work reference librarian? I say 2-to-1.
I'll take those odds, assuming we're talking about the out-of-work reference librarian I think we're talking about, because she is currently being held hostage in my basement. The real puzzle? I DON'T HAVE A BASEMENT.
36. Bananas or non-bananas?
Actually, I'm going to have to go with Anti-bananas. Although, I once ate a banana and an anti-banana at the same time, in a poorly planned suicide attempt. Turns out I really do have intestines of steel, and it just made me have to go to the bathroom a few minutes later.
37. Hotel, motel or Holiday Inn? Say what?
Hotel. And I can't think of a good reason not to, so sure. "What?"
38. Best college mascot?
Grainy and Corny, the Ohio Agricultural College's twin mascots between the years 1804 and 1807. They were later accidentally threshed.
39. Favorite part of the world that ends in –potamia?
Hippopotamia.
40. Do you think anyone has ever said, "Carl, we will always have Canada." Then Carl says, "Damn you, Ellen, it wasn't Canada, it was us. We were alive, just for a moment of time, in Winnipeg."
I think it's probably inevitable by now. I can send this to someone named Carl. That could improve the odds.
41: Best qualification for a dog walker?
Not a cat, or quantitatively cat-like.
42: Fastest athlete on earth?
Flipper. Birds and sailfish don't count, right? 'Cause of the whole ganglia thing? Athlete is a strictly mammalian designation?
43: What is the best use of physics? To create modern conveniences? Or to explain the laws of the universe? There is no wrong answer, but there are three right answers, and one of them, when spoken aloud, opens a portal to a nether-dimension, but it's not much of a nether-dimension, it's kind of the Wheaton, Maryland of nether-dimensions. There's probably a Sbarro there, and not much else.
It's actually a Shakey's Pizza. Turns out they have pretty lax franchising requirements.
44: Favorite SNL sketch?
Cork-soakers.
45: Am I the only person in America who would watch a TV show called "My Husband, Wife and Kids"? Who else needs to see this happen? I see a John Laroquette-type as the Husband.
Wait, who is the "I" in that title? I'm afraid I'm going to need to see a pilot or script of some sort before I agree to anything.
46: Porno or overactive imagination? (Note: Your overactive imagination can include a wa-wa guitar.)
I have combined the two. It is... bliss...
47: Simpsons from the 1990s or South Park right now?
Simpsons. South Park can go to hell. For no good reason, I just felt like taking a stand on this one.
48: Laughter or the best medicine as prescribed by your medically-trained doctor?
As a doctor, I cannot in good conscience prescribe laughter for anything that isn't complete bullshit to begin with. Except, well, as it turns out, laughter clears up most cases of typhoid fever. I can't explain that one. Exception that proves the rule, I guess.
49: Do you like your politicians scandalous or foible-filled?
I was about to say "foible-filled" because we could say they're "foiblicious" but then I realized that "scandalicious" is actually way better, so now I'm undecided. Can we just get a few that are honest instead? Honestastic maybe?
50: What would make you happier? Knowing there is a heaven? Or knowing there is a fun slide that leads from your front door to an ice cream parlor. Now keep in mind, with the fun slide, you have to provide your own sliding sack. So there are some things to consider here.
I'm often told that in heaven, sliding sacks are provided free of charge, and that every road is in fact a fun slide to an ice cream parlor. So as long as I get to go there but Jimmy Lawrence from 4th grade, who was a complete douchebag, and yes, I'm still mad about that, Jimmy, does not, then I'll go with heaven.
Pants!
Congratulations! You have a personality. Copy, paste and pass along to friends!
This Year Is Going Great
Not amazing, but surprisingly well. Things are collapsing all around me, sure, but I was at the doctor's office, and he said I wasn't dying. Yippee!
Also, I wrote 2008 for all the dates on the forms. I usually make it to April without getting the year right. So... bonus.
Joe Donatelli is a friend of mine, and a super funny guy. He made a chain letter personality friends list, and posted it to his website joedonatelli.com. Fill it out and send it my way. I will not make fun of you. Hmm, maybe I should post mine. That'd be good for a blog entry, I guess...
-s
Also, I wrote 2008 for all the dates on the forms. I usually make it to April without getting the year right. So... bonus.
Joe Donatelli is a friend of mine, and a super funny guy. He made a chain letter personality friends list, and posted it to his website joedonatelli.com. Fill it out and send it my way. I will not make fun of you. Hmm, maybe I should post mine. That'd be good for a blog entry, I guess...
-s
Thursday, January 3, 2008
Metroid Prime 3 = Rockin'
I have a review for Metroid Prime 2 in my "incomplete posts" file here. I felt so bad about all the awful things I wanted to say about it. Metroid Prime was soo good. Sooo, even, maybe.
But MP2 was a pile of crap, breaking all the good things in its predecessor with poor poor design choices. Anyway, those days are gone now, because Metroid Prime 3 has come out, and everything is better.
It is great in all the ways that the first was great, it is great in all the ways that the second was bad, heck, it's great in all the ways Halo 3 was bad. It even made me feel better about my Wii purchase, which had not been touched since my grandmother beat me at Wii bowling. Luckily, this one makes her a little motion-sick. Thanks MP3!
Best of all, MP3 starts neat and gets neater all the way through. So, it gets a 5.5 out of 5 on the official Neat-o-Meter. (The extra one is for pretty much picking up where the first game left off. It's as if #2 never even happened! Sorta like Lord of the Rings! Whee!!!)
-s
But MP2 was a pile of crap, breaking all the good things in its predecessor with poor poor design choices. Anyway, those days are gone now, because Metroid Prime 3 has come out, and everything is better.
It is great in all the ways that the first was great, it is great in all the ways that the second was bad, heck, it's great in all the ways Halo 3 was bad. It even made me feel better about my Wii purchase, which had not been touched since my grandmother beat me at Wii bowling. Luckily, this one makes her a little motion-sick. Thanks MP3!
Best of all, MP3 starts neat and gets neater all the way through. So, it gets a 5.5 out of 5 on the official Neat-o-Meter. (The extra one is for pretty much picking up where the first game left off. It's as if #2 never even happened! Sorta like Lord of the Rings! Whee!!!)
-s
Buy this book
I was gifted this book by my lovely girlfriend, and after less than 6 pages I was hooked.
St. Lucy's Home for Girls Raised By Wolves
You will not regret it. It may be more sad than good, but it is very very good. Karen Russell gets 5.5 out of 5 high-fives. (She gets an extra one for being the same age as me.)
-s
St. Lucy's Home for Girls Raised By Wolves
You will not regret it. It may be more sad than good, but it is very very good. Karen Russell gets 5.5 out of 5 high-fives. (She gets an extra one for being the same age as me.)
-s
Happy New Year 2K8
So, umm, yes. New year. I may have put off blogging for... 4 months. That may have happened. And all of that despite some cool things happening. Most of which I don't intend to talk about.
What I will say is that I did national novel writing month. That was completely awesome, and I finished book 2 of the eventual 4 or 5 book series. Luckily, book 2 is about 80,000 times better than book 1 was, which makes the next few books much more likely. So woohoo!
New Year's Resolutions:
Blog more.
Write more.
Edit more.
Finish the flash game.
Make 2 million dollars somehow. Possibly through hugs.
-s
What I will say is that I did national novel writing month. That was completely awesome, and I finished book 2 of the eventual 4 or 5 book series. Luckily, book 2 is about 80,000 times better than book 1 was, which makes the next few books much more likely. So woohoo!
New Year's Resolutions:
Blog more.
Write more.
Edit more.
Finish the flash game.
Make 2 million dollars somehow. Possibly through hugs.
-s
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)