Thank you so so much for the shout-out, Sean. A lot of former and potential new RGM devs have downloaded my guide so far, so it seems to have made a difference in the community. Something that niche really needed a centralized source of info. So I felt like I had an opportunity to help the community, even though I'm still working on what might be my only game with the RGM engine.
Absolutely! It's awesome when people such as yourself do things like this. Hoping that someone does something similar for eFPSe (I get a lot of requests to help out people on that, but I just never find the time).
@@SeanNoonan I also see a lot more collaboration in these types of jams. Like, people feel a lot more open brainstorming together, because who cares if you have the same idea as someone else
Seems like a good idea to expand on games originally started off as jam games. Since most of the time, they exist to help a dev push their skills, even if I've never did one myself.
You had me at soon as I saw The Crazies clips start flashing up. Original is definitely better, but the remake has some gem moments. The reveal of the crashed plane, the house fire sequence + aftermath at the start, the truck stop reveal etc. All very well done IMO.
Looks really cool and I loved the original game, so I was intrigued to hear that you're actually remaking it on a proper engine. Been following you ever since. What's funny though is that a few months ago I started remaking my own entry, Operation Lockdown, on a different engine, too. Though I'm using GZDoom and pretty much just reimagining the entire thing from the ground up. Anyway, looking forward to more devlogs from you!
I am sure GZDoom is a far more appropriate engine for these games - I just have more experience in Unreal so that's the reason I went in that direction. More devlogs soon!
I voted in the gamejam and gave yours the highest score and thought the win was completely justified. One thing I hope you can change in the updated version is to make it not look like you're cutting people with the blunt side of the knife lol.
Great to see that you're still working on this. Unfortunately I don't think I got to finish the jam version back then Butt I've been convinced to do that now. Awesome vid
looks sweet, reminds me of the gloom games on amiga :) i did some sequels to them so I can pretty much imagine the work involved. Nice pixel art though, better than what I did and these were "commercial" :)
I'd say Doom also has many sections where you're on the backfoot, especially on Ultra-Violence, and the game is at its best there too. Sure, it is pretty fast-paced, but it's also got a lot of dungeon crawler spirit, which explains Wolf 3D's level design, albeit they weren't good dungeon crawler levels as some of Doom's levels are. Also, when it comes to survival horror, I'd say it is for the best of the game design space that one limits usage of the term to "classic" survival horror; Interconnected level design where the player isn't necessarily meant to kill all enemies and with an emphasis on exploration and progression through both backtracking and puzzle-solving, and where resource and inventory management is a prominent aspect. I think spreading this should make it easier to describe that style of game, as it was coined through RE, a game which follows these conventions. Your game is more so action-horror, where you are incentivized to kill every enemy like one would in an action game, but horror is imbued into its design through resource and inventory management, highly lethal enemies and limited mobility. It's an action game, just one with a heavy dose of horror in its direct design. I think using these terms instead would make things much easier for everyone, which is why I suggest it.
Yeah, I'm going the interconnected level design route, quite similar to Dino Crisis (I’ll be talking about that in the next video - I couldn’t fit it into this one!). However, I don’t agree that survival horror specifically requires the possibility of passive play (i.e., ignoring every enemy). It’s about resource management, vulnerability, and tension. I don’t like to spend much time debating genre, but to me, survival horror is defined by tone and tension rather than a specific set of mechanics. Resident Evil and Silent Hill are very different mechanically, for example: Silent Hill has no meaningful inventory management and forces you into combat scenarios. I know there’s been a surge in genre gatekeeping lately (especially on TH-cam), but I tend not to give that much attention.
@@SeanNoonan (1/2) I'm sorry for the long comment in advance, but I felt like I needed to make my point clear so that you could see where I was coming from. I do find this important so I took the time to talk about it. This will be a long essay on my thoughts on gaming's artistic progression and how genre matters in that regard. This will eventually turn emotional, as I want to make my point of view clear. Also, this response will take multiple comments. I've been sitting on this for a while so I'll just make it public, hope you can see through some of the emotions shown and get through to the main point I make. I'll post it into two parts. Onto the reply. Silent Hill was inspired by Resident Evil, and the original Silent Hill was pitched as a RE clone. The two series have a lot in common with each other, even if they have differing interpretations of the genre they are a part of. I'll slowly try to make my point clear on this front. In my personal experience, Silent Hill often encourages knowing when to fight, and encourages passiveness in various situations. It encourages fighting more than Resident Evil did, with more situations where it is necessary and more options in terms of resource conservation (such as melee weapons), though even classic Resident Evil had its fair share of situations where it expected the player to fight. I do agree that passive play isn't overtly necessary, but it should be a factor. I like to see that as more of a spectrum, and even the survival horror titles that encourage passive play the most still have situations where fights are expected to happen, as said before. Perhaps the term I should have used is "knowing when to fight". Silent Hill and Resident Evil offer different takes on the genre, but I still see them as offering a style that, when both are taken into consideration and seen for their similarities and common language, does form a coherent genre. They are different interpretations of the genre, focusing on different aspects of the gameplay experience. Silent Hill 3 does offer tougher resource management and encouragement to conserve resources than the original Resident Evil 2 to me, as did Silent Hill 1. Though it is true that inventory management is not really a factor in them aside from 4, I don't think that disqualifies it from the genre. If it did, then it'd be too strict. I still need to replay 2 and 4 but I recall 2 and 4 also having many scenarios where knowing when to fight and when not to being a factor in their experience, particularly with 4. Passiveness to one extent or another is a part of the genre's DNA. It should be noted that I don't think genres should be overly strict. There has to be a certain level of openness to allow for there to be experimentation and differing interpretations. If it's too strict, then games like Amnesia The Bunker and Silent Hill wouldn't be counted as part of the same genre, though I think they should be as there is a strong appeal to their experiences that fans of the core tenants of the genre - Resource management, choosing when to fight, interconnected level design, progression through backtracking and puzzle-solving, and restrictive but not clunky fighting ability - Would enjoy them and these games would all scratch that itch. There is a clear style of game that should be defined and named for ease of designer creation and ease of player discovery. The reason I think it's worth highlighting a distinction between different approaches and using the correct terminology is because I believe genres in video-games should be defined by design language, just as many film genres are defined by their filmmaking language, though the difference there is that emotion matters more as film because film is a storytelling language, while games offer something much wider, experiences beyond overt storytelling. I think it'll prove ultimately helpful to the game design space that we eliminate genres based entirely on feeling and instead create semi-open definitions based on direct design language. I think it causes too much confusion to define survival horror as ranging from Outlast to Five Nights at Freddy's to Silent Hill 3 to Resident Evil 4; They're too different in their design language to truly fit as part of the same genre, and as long as we keep things that way, the more confusion as to what game design language actually entails there will be. Resident Evil 4 is designed as an action game first and foremost, with horror as part of its design. Silent Hill 3 is designed as a horror game first and foremost, and combines it with adventure game design. That creates 'survival horror' as I described it previously. No other medium has this much of a problem in defining genre through the direct language of its creation as much as gaming has and I think that's deeply harmful, as a game dev myself. It also hurts the process of finding games in a given style. Due to my niche and specific tastes, this lack of genre terminology and acceptance often hurts my desire to find games in specific styles, such as immersive sims, Diablo-likes, true variations and iterations of the adventure game genre, and yes, classic survival horror. It also hurt my process in understanding design language intimately. One of those troubles is finding lists that place games of completely different styles together as though they'll all scratch the same gameplay itch.
@@SeanNoonan (2/2) I think you can see my point of view; It's more so in creating consistent language that allows the easier discovery of different styles of game as well as the easier It's less so gatekeeping as much as creating consistency, easing the process of new game designers, and allowing niche styles of game to be easily found and understood. If it's defined solely by tension and tone, then all of those games are the same genre, and their gameplay is described the same way at short hand. This creates confusion and miscommunication. Gaming might be the only medium in which a disregard for the language of its identity is common. The closest thing to it is music, how a lot of bands dislike specific genre terms to describe their music, but they tend to more so just abstain from speaking about genre and use more general terms instead. Genre is not all-important, of course. Some games can't and shouldn't be defined by genre. There is such a thing as the term 'genre-blur', where something combines so many different genres and ideas that it can't be easily defined as any one thing. An easy example of this would be Killer7. There is such a thing as more generalized genre terms, though even they tend to have design language tied to them. RPG. Action. Shooter. Puzzle. Platformer. Each have clear design language tied to define them, but are extremely open to interpretation and the design language featured in them is itself very open. But it's still there. I don't think survival horror should be as open as these are, but if it is to be as open as you say it is, then there should still be some connective design language to define it as a general term. Some core concept from a design perspective. Even then I don't think it could connect all the games it is tied to. If we want gaming to progress as a medium to be as well respected and studied as others, then we need to accept that genre terminology is important, as it is a part of language and communication itself. And that it has to be based on what defines that medium. If not genre terminology specifically, then artistic movements, which often end up creating their own styles and genres, particularly with books and music. Books and music have genres and artistic movements that are defined by the 'design' specifics of the works in question. Literary genres can be defined by their length, literary technique and organization. Music can be defined by the combinations of sounds, instruments and how they're organized. Why should we shield gaming from this same fate? Perhaps survival horror is not the best term to describe that style of game, but I do know that the current situation with this genre is dire and has cost me confusion in many a personal situations and has cost me time in learning the intricacies of game design philosophy. I think it gets in the way of detailed knowledge of this medium truly getting somewhere, and of art itself as well, because we have a truly unique medium with many facets to it, from its unique storytelling opportunities to its complex entertainment and escapist intent. I believe gaming should have the same level of detailed study and plain knowledge about its design theory as films and books do. We are denying an essential part of gaming's artistic integrity through the denial of genre studies, and the denial of the advancement of genre studies themselves by incorporating the addition of complex design study in a way that goes beyond storytelling, as aside from paintings, almost all study in artistic mediums is about its storytelling and narrative themes. Games, however, exceed that. I don't mean to apply 'tyranny of genre'. I just mean to say, genre, whether we like it or not, is an important thing to define in detail that is coherent to what is unique about this medium; Its design mechanics. It will help art itself, and it will help gaming in all facets to acknowledge this and have greater consistency in defining what game genre means. It's clearly a very unique type of genre compared to most other mediums due to the complexity of games themselves, but by allowing things like 'survival horror' to completely disregard that, we're ignoring all of that. There is a common movement in games, not just in the term 'survival horror', to say that genre doesn't matter and it's just semantics. There is a certain truth to that, but the people who say that don't mean that specific truth. They mean to spit in the face of artistic study itself and to spit in the face of the intent of language and communication itself. My final point is through an example I'll give of a moment of confusion regarding horror as a game genre. I once had an argument with someone about FEAR 1. I was introduced to FEAR 1 as a child and didn't like it. I wanted a horror game, whether it be classic survival horror or action-horror. FEAR 1 is not a horror game. It is horror-themed, but its gameplay is that of a pure action game, a pure FPS, in which horror plays no role. Then I grew older and revisited FEAR 1 for what it was; A pure FPS. And I fell in love with it. I argued with someone from that point of view and how horror in games should be defined by design language and not just basic themes and tone, as it can cause experiences like mine. Expecting one thing, not getting it, then leaving. They couldn't comprehend it and it ended with "agree to disagree". Let's hope this doesn't end the same way.
@@theblobconsumes4859 I see where you're coming from, but I believe survival horror is best defined by a mix of mood and a selection of associated mechanics, rather than strict rules. It's about crafting an experience that feels tense and resource-limited without needing a rigid formula (hence the namesake).
Hey, quick question here. Ppl tend to say "make short game to be able to finish in one month", what if sometimes I don't have the time or strength to develop my game in some days? Is it wrong to make small game longer than expected?
Making a short game is good advice, but really it's up to you! Personally I don't have a lot of time, and I'm doing this for fun, so I don't really mind too much how long it takes. Everyone's situation is different. Always assume your stuff will take 3 or 4 times longer than you expect (heck, maybe more)! So then you need to decide if running longer is for you, or you should scope down even further to account for the days you feel you are lacking. Good luck with your project, and thanks for stopping by :)
I think you mean on your X, not twitter xD. Seriously though, looks good, and i knew unreal would be the way to go.... Also, this may be a stupid idea... and a bit too much work... but im just wondering what co-op would look like hah. Finally, what mic do you use? Sounds pretty clean.
I refuse to call it X! I use the same mic I always have! The old AT-2020 USB. It's a bit of a pain to setup (even in this video I'm pitched up a little higher than usual), but it's quite good once you've configured it to your room.
Maybe you could look into trying RGM out? Even if it's limited, it might get you started to try something larger afterwards! There's also eFPSe, which is another basic FPS engine I've used in the past: th-cam.com/play/PLewv7LqmicX4S1reY5XfzYuVs-liBYNLg.html
Join the Discord! discord.com/invite/rSyQths
Don't drink the water. They put something in there. To make you forget
Thank you so so much for the shout-out, Sean. A lot of former and potential new RGM devs have downloaded my guide so far, so it seems to have made a difference in the community. Something that niche really needed a centralized source of info. So I felt like I had an opportunity to help the community, even though I'm still working on what might be my only game with the RGM engine.
Absolutely! It's awesome when people such as yourself do things like this. Hoping that someone does something similar for eFPSe (I get a lot of requests to help out people on that, but I just never find the time).
dude i love this visual style
Thanks! Glad you like it :)
I appreciate the nice transition at 3:56 .
Someone noticed! :D
Ive seen small communities do game jams that dont have a winner, and honestly, theyre a good time.
Yeah, it's the best way to go; it removes the element of selfishness that surrounds jams.
@@SeanNoonan I also see a lot more collaboration in these types of jams. Like, people feel a lot more open brainstorming together, because who cares if you have the same idea as someone else
Seems like a good idea to expand on games originally started off as jam games.
Since most of the time, they exist to help a dev push their skills, even if I've never did one myself.
Great take on game jams these days. Awesome game and devlog video 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
Cant wait for the next devlog! That was a great watch!
Thnaks for watching :)
Looks good!
3:56 smooth
😎
Cracking devlog - well done. Colour me interested for the next part!
Thanks! Started working on the next one already :)
looks interesting, i´m very excited 🔥
Thanks for stopping by ☕
You had me at soon as I saw The Crazies clips start flashing up. Original is definitely better, but the remake has some gem moments. The reveal of the crashed plane, the house fire sequence + aftermath at the start, the truck stop reveal etc. All very well done IMO.
Yeah, I feel like the remake got unfairly compared to the remake a couple of years before, but in a way it is a similar approach to a remake.
Looks really cool and I loved the original game, so I was intrigued to hear that you're actually remaking it on a proper engine. Been following you ever since. What's funny though is that a few months ago I started remaking my own entry, Operation Lockdown, on a different engine, too. Though I'm using GZDoom and pretty much just reimagining the entire thing from the ground up. Anyway, looking forward to more devlogs from you!
I am sure GZDoom is a far more appropriate engine for these games - I just have more experience in Unreal so that's the reason I went in that direction. More devlogs soon!
I voted in the gamejam and gave yours the highest score and thought the win was completely justified. One thing I hope you can change in the updated version is to make it not look like you're cutting people with the blunt side of the knife lol.
Haha, yeah the boxcutter is controversial 😅
Looking forward for the updates, keep up the good work! :D
Great devlog video, I genuinely enjoyed that and a good-looking project.
Thanks!
how fun, love the movie inspo too.
I hope you manage to make time to write write and write
Me too! I'll be telling story mostly via notes and environmental storytelling, so there's going to be room for me to practice :)
Nice vid keep it up!
Thanks! I'll do my best :)
Great to see that you're still working on this. Unfortunately I don't think I got to finish the jam version back then
Butt
I've been convinced to do that now. Awesome vid
The old engine is pretty rough. I had a slight desire to include a 1-1 remake of the original when I'm done 😂
it’s nice to see a great devlog on the survival horror genre
keep up the good work!
🙏
you gotta give yourself more credit for that pixel art. Nice work, dude
Thanks! Love your videos by the way. I got a giggle when two of the games I've worked on in the past were the butt of your jokes XD
what happened to this game it looks amazingg. so sad to see there isn't a part 2 😭
Working on it!
Amazing! Turning our Game Jam Game Black Matter into a Steam Release currently. Ill be watchin!
Nice, I'll keep an eye out for it!
the "og" rgm version has a style unmatched by any modern engine. Tho im curious for next updates on the unreal version, great work!
Ooo I’m gonna watch this when my shifts over
one of the best rgm games ever, look forward to play without the rgm jank!
i know you will make something great :)
amazing
Thanks!
looks sweet, reminds me of the gloom games on amiga :) i did some sequels to them so I can pretty much imagine the work involved. Nice pixel art though, better than what I did and these were "commercial" :)
Oh, there's someone (@EvilReFlex) currently remaking Gloom in Unreal! Check out their stuff too!
@@SeanNoonanwtf i will check!! thanks bud, all the best on your game, im a subber now :)
damn ur right and so smooth, thanks
I'd say Doom also has many sections where you're on the backfoot, especially on Ultra-Violence, and the game is at its best there too. Sure, it is pretty fast-paced, but it's also got a lot of dungeon crawler spirit, which explains Wolf 3D's level design, albeit they weren't good dungeon crawler levels as some of Doom's levels are.
Also, when it comes to survival horror, I'd say it is for the best of the game design space that one limits usage of the term to "classic" survival horror; Interconnected level design where the player isn't necessarily meant to kill all enemies and with an emphasis on exploration and progression through both backtracking and puzzle-solving, and where resource and inventory management is a prominent aspect. I think spreading this should make it easier to describe that style of game, as it was coined through RE, a game which follows these conventions.
Your game is more so action-horror, where you are incentivized to kill every enemy like one would in an action game, but horror is imbued into its design through resource and inventory management, highly lethal enemies and limited mobility. It's an action game, just one with a heavy dose of horror in its direct design.
I think using these terms instead would make things much easier for everyone, which is why I suggest it.
Yeah, I'm going the interconnected level design route, quite similar to Dino Crisis (I’ll be talking about that in the next video - I couldn’t fit it into this one!). However, I don’t agree that survival horror specifically requires the possibility of passive play (i.e., ignoring every enemy). It’s about resource management, vulnerability, and tension. I don’t like to spend much time debating genre, but to me, survival horror is defined by tone and tension rather than a specific set of mechanics.
Resident Evil and Silent Hill are very different mechanically, for example: Silent Hill has no meaningful inventory management and forces you into combat scenarios. I know there’s been a surge in genre gatekeeping lately (especially on TH-cam), but I tend not to give that much attention.
@@SeanNoonan (1/2)
I'm sorry for the long comment in advance, but I felt like I needed to make my point clear so that you could see where I was coming from. I do find this important so I took the time to talk about it. This will be a long essay on my thoughts on gaming's artistic progression and how genre matters in that regard. This will eventually turn emotional, as I want to make my point of view clear. Also, this response will take multiple comments.
I've been sitting on this for a while so I'll just make it public, hope you can see through some of the emotions shown and get through to the main point I make.
I'll post it into two parts.
Onto the reply.
Silent Hill was inspired by Resident Evil, and the original Silent Hill was pitched as a RE clone. The two series have a lot in common with each other, even if they have differing interpretations of the genre they are a part of. I'll slowly try to make my point clear on this front.
In my personal experience, Silent Hill often encourages knowing when to fight, and encourages passiveness in various situations. It encourages fighting more than Resident Evil did, with more situations where it is necessary and more options in terms of resource conservation (such as melee weapons), though even classic Resident Evil had its fair share of situations where it expected the player to fight.
I do agree that passive play isn't overtly necessary, but it should be a factor. I like to see that as more of a spectrum, and even the survival horror titles that encourage passive play the most still have situations where fights are expected to happen, as said before. Perhaps the term I should have used is "knowing when to fight".
Silent Hill and Resident Evil offer different takes on the genre, but I still see them as offering a style that, when both are taken into consideration and seen for their similarities and common language, does form a coherent genre. They are different interpretations of the genre, focusing on different aspects of the gameplay experience.
Silent Hill 3 does offer tougher resource management and encouragement to conserve resources than the original Resident Evil 2 to me, as did Silent Hill 1. Though it is true that inventory management is not really a factor in them aside from 4, I don't think that disqualifies it from the genre. If it did, then it'd be too strict.
I still need to replay 2 and 4 but I recall 2 and 4 also having many scenarios where knowing when to fight and when not to being a factor in their experience, particularly with 4. Passiveness to one extent or another is a part of the genre's DNA.
It should be noted that I don't think genres should be overly strict. There has to be a certain level of openness to allow for there to be experimentation and differing interpretations. If it's too strict, then games like Amnesia The Bunker and Silent Hill wouldn't be counted as part of the same genre, though I think they should be as there is a strong appeal to their experiences that fans of the core tenants of the genre - Resource management, choosing when to fight, interconnected level design, progression through backtracking and puzzle-solving, and restrictive but not clunky fighting ability - Would enjoy them and these games would all scratch that itch. There is a clear style of game that should be defined and named for ease of designer creation and ease of player discovery.
The reason I think it's worth highlighting a distinction between different approaches and using the correct terminology is because I believe genres in video-games should be defined by design language, just as many film genres are defined by their filmmaking language, though the difference there is that emotion matters more as film because film is a storytelling language, while games offer something much wider, experiences beyond overt storytelling.
I think it'll prove ultimately helpful to the game design space that we eliminate genres based entirely on feeling and instead create semi-open definitions based on direct design language.
I think it causes too much confusion to define survival horror as ranging from Outlast to Five Nights at Freddy's to Silent Hill 3 to Resident Evil 4; They're too different in their design language to truly fit as part of the same genre, and as long as we keep things that way, the more confusion as to what game design language actually entails there will be. Resident Evil 4 is designed as an action game first and foremost, with horror as part of its design.
Silent Hill 3 is designed as a horror game first and foremost, and combines it with adventure game design. That creates 'survival horror' as I described it previously.
No other medium has this much of a problem in defining genre through the direct language of its creation as much as gaming has and I think that's deeply harmful, as a game dev myself. It also hurts the process of finding games in a given style. Due to my niche and specific tastes, this lack of genre terminology and acceptance often hurts my desire to find games in specific styles, such as immersive sims, Diablo-likes, true variations and iterations of the adventure game genre, and yes, classic survival horror. It also hurt my process in understanding design language intimately. One of those troubles is finding lists that place games of completely different styles together as though they'll all scratch the same gameplay itch.
@@SeanNoonan (2/2)
I think you can see my point of view; It's more so in creating consistent language that allows the easier discovery of different styles of game as well as the easier
It's less so gatekeeping as much as creating consistency, easing the process of new game designers, and allowing niche styles of game to be easily found and understood.
If it's defined solely by tension and tone, then all of those games are the same genre, and their gameplay is described the same way at short hand. This creates confusion and miscommunication.
Gaming might be the only medium in which a disregard for the language of its identity is common. The closest thing to it is music, how a lot of bands dislike specific genre terms to describe their music, but they tend to more so just abstain from speaking about genre and use more general terms instead.
Genre is not all-important, of course. Some games can't and shouldn't be defined by genre. There is such a thing as the term 'genre-blur', where something combines so many different genres and ideas that it can't be easily defined as any one thing. An easy example of this would be Killer7.
There is such a thing as more generalized genre terms, though even they tend to have design language tied to them. RPG. Action. Shooter. Puzzle. Platformer.
Each have clear design language tied to define them, but are extremely open to interpretation and the design language featured in them is itself very open. But it's still there.
I don't think survival horror should be as open as these are, but if it is to be as open as you say it is, then there should still be some connective design language to define it as a general term. Some core concept from a design perspective. Even then I don't think it could connect all the games it is tied to.
If we want gaming to progress as a medium to be as well respected and studied as others, then we need to accept that genre terminology is important, as it is a part of language and communication itself. And that it has to be based on what defines that medium. If not genre terminology specifically, then artistic movements, which often end up creating their own styles and genres, particularly with books and music. Books and music have genres and artistic movements that are defined by the 'design' specifics of the works in question. Literary genres can be defined by their length, literary technique and organization. Music can be defined by the combinations of sounds, instruments and how they're organized. Why should we shield gaming from this same fate?
Perhaps survival horror is not the best term to describe that style of game, but I do know that the current situation with this genre is dire and has cost me confusion in many a personal situations and has cost me time in learning the intricacies of game design philosophy.
I think it gets in the way of detailed knowledge of this medium truly getting somewhere, and of art itself as well, because we have a truly unique medium with many facets to it, from its unique storytelling opportunities to its complex entertainment and escapist intent. I believe gaming should have the same level of detailed study and plain knowledge about its design theory as films and books do. We are denying an essential part of gaming's artistic integrity through the denial of genre studies, and the denial of the advancement of genre studies themselves by incorporating the addition of complex design study in a way that goes beyond storytelling, as aside from paintings, almost all study in artistic mediums is about its storytelling and narrative themes. Games, however, exceed that.
I don't mean to apply 'tyranny of genre'. I just mean to say, genre, whether we like it or not, is an important thing to define in detail that is coherent to what is unique about this medium; Its design mechanics. It will help art itself, and it will help gaming in all facets to acknowledge this and have greater consistency in defining what game genre means. It's clearly a very unique type of genre compared to most other mediums due to the complexity of games themselves, but by allowing things like 'survival horror' to completely disregard that, we're ignoring all of that. There is a common movement in games, not just in the term 'survival horror', to say that genre doesn't matter and it's just semantics. There is a certain truth to that, but the people who say that don't mean that specific truth. They mean to spit in the face of artistic study itself and to spit in the face of the intent of language and communication itself.
My final point is through an example I'll give of a moment of confusion regarding horror as a game genre.
I once had an argument with someone about FEAR 1. I was introduced to FEAR 1 as a child and didn't like it. I wanted a horror game, whether it be classic survival horror or action-horror. FEAR 1 is not a horror game. It is horror-themed, but its gameplay is that of a pure action game, a pure FPS, in which horror plays no role.
Then I grew older and revisited FEAR 1 for what it was; A pure FPS. And I fell in love with it.
I argued with someone from that point of view and how horror in games should be defined by design language and not just basic themes and tone, as it can cause experiences like mine. Expecting one thing, not getting it, then leaving. They couldn't comprehend it and it ended with "agree to disagree". Let's hope this doesn't end the same way.
@@theblobconsumes4859 I see where you're coming from, but I believe survival horror is best defined by a mix of mood and a selection of associated mechanics, rather than strict rules. It's about crafting an experience that feels tense and resource-limited without needing a rigid formula (hence the namesake).
Holy 💩 June 5th is my birthday. Lol
You are doing a great job. This should be a legit remastered. Or you should call it Something in the Water HD :D
4:35 Wow, how did you make tiles in PS update in realtime??
just saw your portfolio and dang u level designed with some big games. watch dogs, far cry. goddayum
😬
Hey, quick question here.
Ppl tend to say "make short game to be able to finish in one month", what if sometimes I don't have the time or strength to develop my game in some days? Is it wrong to make small game longer than expected?
Making a short game is good advice, but really it's up to you! Personally I don't have a lot of time, and I'm doing this for fun, so I don't really mind too much how long it takes. Everyone's situation is different. Always assume your stuff will take 3 or 4 times longer than you expect (heck, maybe more)! So then you need to decide if running longer is for you, or you should scope down even further to account for the days you feel you are lacking.
Good luck with your project, and thanks for stopping by :)
yes
I think you mean on your X, not twitter xD. Seriously though, looks good, and i knew unreal would be the way to go.... Also, this may be a stupid idea... and a bit too much work... but im just wondering what co-op would look like hah. Finally, what mic do you use? Sounds pretty clean.
I refuse to call it X!
I use the same mic I always have! The old AT-2020 USB. It's a bit of a pain to setup (even in this video I'm pitched up a little higher than usual), but it's quite good once you've configured it to your room.
Oh and as for co op? Definitely out of scope for me 😅
@@SeanNoonan I wasn't entirely serious about co-op, but as you have always said to me... all it takes is time...
Hi. Looks very nice. I want try to create game with my arts. But I don’t understand anything about coding and engines.
Maybe you could look into trying RGM out? Even if it's limited, it might get you started to try something larger afterwards! There's also eFPSe, which is another basic FPS engine I've used in the past: th-cam.com/play/PLewv7LqmicX4S1reY5XfzYuVs-liBYNLg.html
There's an unofficial newer version of RGM without all the bugs called Easy FPS Editor Clark Edition 1.10.5
Oh I'll have to check that out... you sure they're related though? Easy FPS Editor is a different engine (the same one I used for The Interval)!
Bruh......June 5th is my birthday!!!!! lol
Maybe stick to bottled water that week... but it's okay, that was in the 90's! 😅
@@SeanNoonan funny enough I did go to a hospital for a broken arm at that time…but it’s all coicidence
@@TheLuisberg 👀
@@SeanNoonan 🤷♂️