[Flash]

you mean lead filings? you do, don't you??? Or perhaps floride??


(oh! god, I am so Nieve - however you spell it)

[FatSeagal]

Okay. It's release time.

There may still be some problems with it, and i've got no sound - but there's now definable controls and a proper end screen, win or lose!

Continue to leave feedback if you wish:
Is Leanroic clever enough?
Is it too hard/too easy?
Does it slow down too much?
Do certain spells not seem to work?
etc...

For now, get the 'final' version here:
http://willhostforfood.com/access.php?fileid=56483

[Tam Toucan]

Continue to leave feedback if you wish:

Thought I'd give this a go, don't know the original at all, but the game concept is one I like. Here's my experience.

Like the style and graphics, runs a bit too slow on my AMD 3000+ (Leanroic also seems to run faster than me), but the main problem is the gameplay is broken and I suspect the original was too. It plays like it should be arcadish, but maybe there's too much strategy needed for me; learning where the herbs are, knowing which spells to get in what order, how to change tactics depending on what Leanroic does.....but for a beginner like me the curve is too high and reward too low.

The whole process of trying to walk round to get the herbs to make a couple of uses of a spell that doesn't really do much just doesn't feel like fun. I hit Leonroic with my 3 fireballs, but there was no sense of achievement...nor did it do much compared to what he pelted me with (it does seem very hard).

I can see how I might have stuck with this and loved it back in the day (my favourite game of all time, Halls of the Things is very broken in lots of ways, but when your 13 and never seen, or got, another game you play it anyway), but I'm older and more picky now. I think there's a gem waiting to be polished, but it needs to decide what the game is. As an arcade game it doesn't really work with the very limited uses of spells, selection method constant grind of getting herbs, but as a strategy game it's too hard to work out the strategy and the fast real-time spoils it (distilling it down to a TBS might even work!).

So great job for what you've done. Like I said I love the look and feel and the mini map with the exploration works really well, but it looks to me like an original lovers only game.

[FatSeagal]

Thanks for the feedback, there are some interesting suggestions you've put forward, unfortunately, for me, these would no longer make the game Feud. I don't think this version will convert anyone who deosn't like the original concept. At least the game seems to run okay - my fear is that it may be too hard but, truth told, I was also worried it maybe too easy.

The damage caused by your opponents spells is the same as the damage caused by your spells. Perhaps the bastard healed himself after you'd inflicted some carnage?

[Sokurah]

What about having a healthbar above Leonroic's head - RTS style?
That might be a way to show the player how things are going.

[FatSeagal]

There's already a health bar at the top of the screen, not sure one over his head would be that much more useful.
I notice in the original game (at least for the speccy) that scrolling through your spell book 'pauses' the game. Do you think it would be better to to the spell book as a popup that pauses the game, allowing you to see what you've got, what you need and select spells without having to do it in real-time (kind of like the old Resident Evil games)?

[Ian]

Anything you can do to make the game more fun for the player (even if you make it piss-easy) should be done. Allow the player to start with all potions and plants if he so wishes. Sure you lose some aspect of the gameplay, but you also allow others to see and play part of the  game which they might normally never see. Show the player the effects of their actions. Allow them to make their own choices. Allow them to make the game THEIR game. Give them that option. Sure it might not be the same FEUD that you played all those years ago, but not everyone wants that same FEUD.

How many people actually saw FEUD all the way through? I know I can't remember doing so. I remember enjoying it at the time, but even though I try and tried to finish all of my games, I'm not sure I ever did finish it. Does it matter if they finish the game on EASY mode? Does it matter if you gave them assistance? If they enjoy the game, then they willplay. If you put them off in the first few minutes (I read that player interest can be lost within the first 30seconds of a game), they're not even going to bother coming back. Why spend hours coding a game that no-one will ever complete?

This is accessibility. Giving people the OPTION of choosing how they play their games. i've read countless times that you can never make a game too easy. And it's totally true. If a player wants to cheat, then let them. How many mags used to give out POKES and cheat modes/codes in the goode olde days? All of them. Why? Because people didn't always want to slog their way through games. They still wanted to see the end,or see what power-ups they would get, without putting in all of the effort. Also some puzzles are and were so obscure that only the developer would know the answer. Give people the answers if they ask for them.

OPen up your game and let everyone take a look inside.

[Tam Toucan]

Bah! Lost my big post because I never noticed it warning me there had been other posts. Here's a quick summary
Didn't expect you to make big changes of the kind I mentioned. You've create a warts and all remake of Feud which original players should like. To create a accessible to all "better" game you need to have that as a goal from the start (and is a lot more work).

For simpler changes I listed pretty much the same as Ian (less speed for the AI, more use for spells etc). However it comes down to the classic "why did you write it and for who?". If you're trying to reach as many people as possible adding all these options will help. Adding just one or two might be enough to help the players who already love Feud really love this one.

If you're happy having created it and want to move on then that's fine. There's a cost/reward for you as well for trying to add stuff to make it better for others.

[Ian]

To create a accessible to all "better" game you need to have that as a goal from the start (and is a lot more work).

No you don't and no it isn't. You can add accessibility to a game at ANY time. If your coding structure is good, it should be easy to slot new stuff in, no matter what it is.

A simple Options menu can make light work of many areas of accessibility. Say for instance you have an array saying what spells you have acquired in the game, then simply by selecting "All spells" in the Options menu can add "GOT" variables to the spells array. That can be done simply like this -

Pseudo-code

Code:

IF all_spells=TRUE
 For n=0 to number_of_spells
  spells_got[n]=TRUE
 Next
EndIf

How difficult is that to include?

[FatSeagal]

I certainly want to make changes/tweaks to improve the overall gameplay, but to improve upon the game of Feud - not to make it into something it isn't. Allowing all herbs to have been collected at the beginning of the game doesn't lose some aspect of the gameplay, it loses half the gameplay. The point of Feud was to rush and collect as fast as you could so you could take your brother down. The discovery and collection of herbs is half the game, whether you find it a chore or not is a personal decision.

At the end of the day this was created as a direct remake of Feud, but just jazzed up a bit and with some improved (i hope) AI. It's still supposed to be pretty much the same experience at the end of the day, and is made to appeal to fans of the original - i'm not looking to convert anyone here.

[Ian]

That was just an example, but you obviously missed the point.

The discovery and collection of herbs is half the game, whether you find it a chore or not is a personal decision.

Some people might indeed find it a chore, and they will turn off before they cast their first spell. Those people will not come back to or remember your game.

If you're only attempting to appeal to fans, then that is a real shame.

Just by adding the OPTION of playing in a different way doesn't prevent fans from playing the game they know and love (they don't have to use said options) - it just allows more people to play the game.

It's your game and it's entirely upto you what you do with it. I live by the RR motto though - Classic games for the next generation.

[FatSeagal]

It's certainly something to chew over.
Let's see what the next release version brings us....

[Tam Toucan]

No you don't and no it isn't. You can add accessibility to a game at ANY time. If your coding structure is good, it should be easy to slot new stuff in, no matter what it is.

I was referring more to how Bob is looking at Jetpac. I've never played the original Feud, but to me it seems broken at a basic level (for the type of game I would enjoy today). So when I say "better" game I mean extracting the game that you/I/us/them think it could be, that will likely be very different from the original e.g. a turn based strategy game, taking out/changing half the spells (I suspect that a winning strategy in the original doesn't require some of them) etc.

I agree putting in slowing down the AI, having more uses of certain spells, starting herbs etc is very easy to do and does make the game better and more accessible, but I fear it may still be broken (for me).

[FatSeagal]

Okay people.
Taking on some of the suggestions above, here is a new version that contains:
- An alternate spell selection method (coexisting with the current real-time method)
- Some customisable game options

For an explanation on the new features see the Updates section of the readme.txt

Get it here:
http://willhostforfood.com/access.php?fileid=56638

[RobF]

Attachments should work now, btw

[Lobo]

Ok, tried this new version and somehow encounter the weird bug with controls. After I've tried all the spells in the book, my character walks up all the time as if I'm holding the UP key (and I'm not). I can't seem to..make him stop. It just came suddenly so not so sure how or why.

Also, I've included these two images, no.15 png had a spelling mistake on 'declare' and 16 had magenta issues, so check it out.

As for the game itself, I think it should work for people who never played it, all they really have to do is give it time. Feud was quite a new approach to the (whatever the heck it is) genre back in the day and still is an interesting continuous action game with minimal 'mix the two things to make your own gun' strategy elements. Everyone should really read the readme, familiarize with the game as it was and what it does and definitely always check the spellbook to see which plant to look for next. I know that the original shipped with a little 'manual' with spells so you could kinda keep it next to you while battling the odds with rather ruthless AI. Making the game do everything for you right off the bat means that you're pretty much missing the whole game and go straight for the game over screen. So, just give it a try, I think I'll be actually able to finish this one compared to the original.

Also, seagal, if you want, I can get the 'you loose' screen as well because Learic obviously is in both loose/win conditions. Maybe separate screen with crazy Leanoric instead should do, let me know.

[Ian]

Making the game do everything for you right off the bat means that you're pretty much missing the whole game and go straight for the game over screen.

Another one that missed my point completely. :/

[Lobo]

Another one that missed my point completely. :/

<cough> and your 'point' was..?

[Ian]

Missed on you, obviously...

[Lobo]

Missed on you, obviously...

No, not really, but making a 'point' might be a chore for you.

[Ian]

And your point is? Anyway...

I had a similar bug to Lobo's, only with going down. After playing for about 5 minutes the down direction locked. I could go left and right, but it would move me down too (diagonal movement). It stopped when I collected a herb though.

[Lobo]

My 'point' is that you didn't differentiate 'making the point' from 'personal suggestion'. There is a vast difference between the two. What you did was to suggest the things, not making a point. What I did was to suggest against your suggestions because I don't find these valid as it's perfectly normal that we don't have to agree on things, whatsoever.

It's up to Seagal to do what he planned with the game, make it easier, dumb down the AI, listen to suggestions or not. We can only do that much, to suggest the improvements if we know how, without providing the 'points' that are not 'points' at all to start with.

That said, no other errors with game to report as yet.

[FatSeagal]

I think the whole issue with 'accessability' will always divide people. Whilst I can see Ian's view, I also don't 100% agree with it - to me making something more accessible in these ways can change your original vision for the game - and the point of making a game is to create your (or, in terms of remakes, someone elses) vision. Accessible or not, not everyone's going to like what you've done. Which is a good thing.
That said, however, I decided to put those 'customisable' options in as a way of at least allowing the game to be tailored slightly. I think those that want to play the game for what it originally was can by just ignoring these options.

As for that 'sticky' bug, i'll have to look into that.
And the end screen - Lobo, if you can do a slightly different one for the lose then that would be great. It's not a massive problem for me though, as the two are twins

[Ian]

Accessibility is NOT about reducing the enjoyment for yourself or your target audience. It's about opening it up to MORE than just your target audience. You don't have to compromise on your original idea(s) at all. And I also wasn't saying that you SHOULD or MUST add anything and certainly not to take anything away.

Your new additions may open the game up much further than it would under normal circumstances and allow players to play longer and further (and maybe enjoy the game more). I applaud you for adding them (and not for my personal benefit either). And they don't take away ANY enjoyment from the original game just by being there. Nobody has to use them, but they can if they wish, as you so rightly stated.

[RobF]

Access fight! Access fight! BULLLLDOOOOOOOG! *runs at high speed*

Sorry, couldn't resist.

The way I treated this stuff with SY!NSO! was to build the game I wanted to make first, test it/get it tested until the results are something as near as dammit to what was in my head then start adding switches for things.

Default to how I want you to see/play the game and set the thing up so that the average player can just turn the game on, hit fire, play and never have to even see the menu options.

Throw the menu options off to one side which are accessed with one key from the title screen (TAB in this case as it's designed for playing on arcade cabs) and let people customise their game in there, making sure all the settings get saved too. Most people generally won't even touch that menu and will play it how you want them to, those that want/need to change things can do.