itsamoose

I don't get the sense that people are looking to see a checklist fulfilled, but time and again this kind of design is what gets praised for it's inclusiveness. Mass Effect 2 has 1 black character, as does Dragon Age Inquisition, Mass Effect 3 has 1 Hispanic character, etc. Furthermore, it is rare where people of color hold positions of authority in games, and usually fit into well known archetypes. Now certainly some of this is doing what you know, but just like the lack of representation can be said to be demeaning to people of color, isn't slotting them into well defined roles just another version of this? When I hear people complain about some representational issue in games, I tend to see a hidden meaning there were they want them to be represented, but in a way that is palatable to them. It's OK or satisfactory to have the black police sergeant, but I've never heard any complaints about the lack of black monarchs. There are a number of examples of ancillary characters represented in this way, but almost always the main characters are not.

The representation issue is one I often get frustrated by, but not because of what is actually represented in the game. Naturally people tend to make things that reflect themselves, so to some degree I understand why mostly white game devs make mostly or all white characters. I can't quite decide if pointing this out is a desire for someone to say the game is bad as a result of it, or is simply a criticism/something to take into account. Then of course there are the various production concerns, which while certainly relevant, discussing them tends to basically put a dollar price on someone's identity which is unfair at best and depraved at worst. What really bothers me about this is that games which are praised for representation generally have 1, or in rare circumstances 2 characters of color. Personally I compare that with gender representation, which seems to have normalized somewhat in recent years where about half the major characters are female and the other male, and in this case less represented genders perhaps are represented by an ancillary character. So I guess my question here is what is the point of this objection? Is it to see a more equitable distribution of people represented, or does there just need to be one darker skinned character, a line of dialogue, or a scene and everything is OK? Does this need to just be mentioned somewhere in the game, or something more substantial? I'm sorry if this sounds condescending, but honestly I don't know how to ask these questions without sounding that way. It's one of those issues I bump up against every now and again, but it feels like each time I get nowhere. I'll be the first to admit I'm a pretty standard white guy, raised in suburbia, middle-class family, the whole nine yards. I really would like to make games where people other than myself are represented, but given how easy that is to fuck up I'll probably just end up sticking to what I know when the rubber hits the road. I remember a while back on the podcast something that really stuck out to me. Danielle complained about there not being a transgender writer on Dragon Age 3, which contains a transgender character. Not to call her out specifically, but it is this kind of complaint I just don't know how to process. There are myriad reasons why this might not be the case, and even then a transgender coder, artist, designer, etc could arguably have just as large an impact on the game as a writer. I like the fact that more people, myself included thanks to many of you, are thinking about this kind of thing but I get aggravated by the fact it seems to really just amount to finger pointing.

I wouldn't necessarily say that, after all the only way to bring those things into your comfort zone is to experiment with them. Collision and physics are pretty robust concepts, particularly in how they work in games. Like many things in programming it's one of those problems that seems simple at first but gets considerably more complicated when you try to do it practically. If I were you I'd go ahead and try implementing a basic collision system, say just rectangle-rectangle, then add in different elements and see how the code has to be adjusted as a result. The good news is there are a number of resources out there with code examples as well as those that go over the theory of how things work so it's actually a good learning project since you won't have to go it all alone. Also a personal note here, when you try to learn something new don't immediately try to think about a game that could use it. Just try to solve whatever problem you are trying to solve, and then, as hard as it may be, throw it all away. Programming and game development in general isn't a test of skill or knowledge, it's a test of endurance and problem solving.

This is a pretty good article about a problem I've long suspected when it comes to labor rights around the world. I can't quite tell if this article is just an ad for patagonia, but either way it illustrates the problem that virtually no single actor in the clothing industry has the ability to fix this problem on their own.

That's pretty good, though it could be simplified a bit by making the rectangle class a bit more robust. Basically you need to check that the bottom of one rectangle with the top of the other, the left of one rectangle with the right of the other and vice versa. public bool Intersects(Rect rectA, Rect rectB) { return rectA.Right >= rectB.Left || rectA.Left <= rectB.Right && rectA.Top >= rectB.Bottom || rectA.Bottom <= rectB.Top; } You should keep in mind however this only works for Axis Aligned (i.e. not rotated) rectangles. For a more robust system, you'll then have to consider collisions between each shape type (circle vs. circle, circle vs rectangle, rectangle vs polygon, etc). For a solution in C# you should check out the FlatRedBall engine. It uses XNA, though I believe all the collision code is engine agnostic and should work in Unity. Also it's worth considering scene size and object count, as any collision system must. If you want to implement your own checks and be efficient about it, you'll likely also want to implement Broad and Narrow Phase collision, A quad tree, collision layers, collision events that you'll want, and other considerations.

I can't say for certain how the return policy will affect sales numbers and the like, but I am primarily concerned about how it affects game design. Since Valve's return policy is only valid for 2 hours, are developers going to be pressured to make games where the first two hours is more filler than anything? I don't think it is going to ruin games as we know it, but it will become another bullshit metric that investors and like will start to want you to cater to specifically, which can be a problem. Then take episodic games for example. If a player plays episode 2, which only takes say an hour and a half and then returns it, should I then go in and retroactively adjust their save file so they couldn't then pick up episode 3 and continue on as if nothing happened? Again, not going to ruin games but I don't think this policy fixes a problem so much as it trades one problem for a host of others. Now let's say I want to release an expansion pack, the content of which can't be accessed until late/end game. What about releasing a weapon pack or something of that nature, how does the return policy factor in to that? What about packing in a game demo with another release, does time spent playing the demo count toward the return time? Do people get to keep the demo after returning the game? It isn't difficult to see the various situations where this return policy could be a problem, and to counter those problems developers will have to do some pretty anti-consumer or unpopular things as a result. I think ultimately what is going to happen is that developers for larger to mid size studios will start having online components to their games simply to account for this return policy, or institute other types of DRM. I mean I still think that steam should have a return policy, but to base that policy on the amount of time played/time of ownership only serves neither developer nor consumer, particularly considering how diverse games can be from one another. From my experience and those I have talked to, these kinds of problems will generally mean that new and experimental things just may no longer happen due to the extra work and concerns that result from it.

As a consumer the steam refund thing I like, but as a developer it's a little worrying. First off, I just don't see two hours of play as enough time, particularly in larger games where this might not even be enough time to get through the tutorial/opening section. I feel like this period should be set by the developers within some limits, or be related to progress in some way. Personally I would hate for someone to lose out on a refund for a game of mine that they decide they don't like after giving it a solid chance or being a slow player. Secondly I worry that this could have negative impacts on early access type games, episodic games, in game content, and it doesn't seem clear how the policy applies to expansions and the like (assuming I read it all correctly). I think ultimately time will tell on those counts, though it makes me a bit worried that those become trickier propositions. Personally I find the comparison to physical goods a bit off, mainly in that after returning something physical you can't use it anymore. To me the best solution to this problem so far is the free weekend thing some games have done, or implementing a rental service that, crucially, the cost of which can be deducted from a later purchase. I do like this idea, but I think it is only one element of a larger problem. Given the somewhat nebulous nature of digital/online content the real solution is to create a situation where there are multiple ways to buy a thing. I just hope the refund policy doesn't get in the way of devs experimenting with that kind of thing, or doesn't prevent certain types of games from being made altogether.

Yeah, it's certainly not a strong distinction and as you mentioned the two can exist at the same time. Certainly choice factors in as well, but I do generally see coercion as negative reinforcement and persuasion as positive reinforcement. I don't necessarily think one is bad and the other is good, just that coercion requires acceptance whereas in persuasion acceptance is a choice. I can think of a number of examples where both are at play, particularly when it comes to taxes and the like (compulsory payments vs. Write offs for example). I think coercion can be used in a way that is good, or used for good, it's just that coercion is far easier and more easily lends itself to bad things.

To me the difference between coercion and persuasion is trying to convince someone using conclusions vs reasons. For example if I were to convince you to believe in the Christian god, a coercive method would be telling you what is right and wrong, what is good or bad, etc. A persuasive means would be for me to make a moral argument that is reflective of the christian ideology (I.e. best of all possible worlds theory). Basically coercion is saying if you accept my conclusion my reasons will make sense, and persuasion is saying if you accept my reasons my conclusion make sense. I'm sure there are holes in that reasoning, but I think its helped guide my actions in such a way that I try not to in some way demand people agree with what I am saying. Edit: Just realized I basically revived an age old topic in this thread, sorry for the derailment if any.

Our game is finally in steam's greenlight, take a gander! http://steamcommunity.com/sharedfiles/filedetails/?id=446221242

I've never used it, so I don't know how fully featured or easy to use it is, but GameSalad is probably worth checking out.

I was only half serious with that comment, but damnit I really want that mosquito dead. From what little of gamergate's theses I've been exposed to, the formula seems to be just suggest something provocative, or speak in generally agreeable terms then say whatever the hell you want. Usually that means they end up saying something appalling, or just flat out wrong (GOP for example has been incredibly successful at pushing their agenda, just not at the federal level).I can't quite put my finger on what exactly could be done to connect with this mindset. I'm sure at some level people that write that kind of thing just refuse to accept they are wrong in any way. I just wonder what will be the thing that will finally make its supporters abandon the cause, or realize they've been duped into crusading for charlatons. I mean the sarkeesian effect people just basically describe themselves and their actions, and how shitty they are, then replace their names with Anita's.

We should put together a collection to pay for history and logic professors to grade these kinds of articles and post them on the author's blog, big red pen and all.

I probably should put more effort into my wardrobe, but to be honest fashion is the one thing I just can't bring myself to care about.

It seemed like the article was going over both points from my reading. Basically reinforcing the idea that you are free to wear what you want, until it stands out too much or puts someone off, then it's an issue. Also the PR guy's comment was probably motivated by good reasons. On my last game when we had a decision to make we would sometimes stop and say "so is this going to end up on an episode of feminist frequency?". We were really worried about accidentally doing something sexist, which I would guess was what the PR person wanted to avoid.

From my experience there is a dress code in the industry, but mainly it boils down to don't wear a suit and be clean. Personally I think the reason for all the similar dress is mainly that it's easy and up until reading that article I figured wouldn't put anyone off. This is one of those articles I read and ask, so what is to be done? I'm pretty much the guy she is describing in this article, and I only make those wardrobe choices because they are easy and comfortable, without making me looke like a slob.

This is something I've had a hard time getting a grasp on. If I were to simply avoid things with problematic elements, I don't think there is a single game, movie or book I've ever been exposed to that would stand up to that test. I agree that it's important to be aware of the problematic elements, but I have a really hard time writing something off because of a word or scene that didn't sit well with me. I think there has been a tendency in recent years to see one element of something you don't like and write it off completely, or in the opposite direction to see one thing you like and ignore all the problematic elements of it. I used to listen to a lot of rap, particularly eminem, where he would say something not because he believed it but to make a point. I've always found that valuable in the sense that it is sometimes necessary to involve specifics rather than just talk about how something is or is perceived generally. There is one song in particular called Fast Lane by Bad vs Evil which is horribly sexist and violent in it's lyrics, but I listened to it because I enjoy the cadence of the lyrics and beat.

I think Jon Stewart summed up the japan thing best. http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/qnk18t/we-may-have-problems--but-at-least-we-re-not-jailing-artists-for-3-d-printing-their-vaginas

The game I most recently worked on was made in Unity, and my boss mentioned he wanted to release the source of it. I'm not sure if he still plans to, since we'll need to remove all the PS4 related code since most of that is privileged. If he ends up deciding to release it, I'll make sure to drop a note about it here.

It's still readable, but requires a bit of assumption. They replace variable names with things like num1, num2, etc so you can get a sense of what is going on. If your willing to spring for the paid version of reflector I think you can see the original variable names if I remember correctly.

I'm not aware of any projects that have released their source, though you can get into any .NET assembly using .NET Reflector. When I first started learning C# I poured over the source of Bastion, which was quite helpful.

The problem I've always seen with modern liberalism is this tendency for people to have their egos tied up in their politics. I think for some it isn't enough to see change, they must also have the part they played in it recognized. Most often I see this as responding with quotes, as if associating oneself with a famous civil rights leader/respected figure somehow gives authority to your position. This is particularly troubling as of late, since it seems so easy to be plucked from obscurity to be a thought leader. Take Anita Sarkeesian for example. Most people see her as this johnny-come-lately feminist who made a couple videos and became famous, ignoring the years she spent earning advanced degrees on the subject. For some, across the entire spectrum, the promise of fame is the real motivator and they will say whatever they need to see that happen. Also, it's a little too much for me to see a publication like buzzfeed, who constantly perpetuates this kind of nonsense, to emerge as the voice of reason.

Most internet argumentation is basically just mad libs at this point. Honestly I don't think people value understanding so much as the appearance of it. Anyone with a dissenting opinion can claim to be an expert while being pretty sure no one is going to call them on their bullshit.

If those text objects are on the same material they should be all drawn together? Are you doing any kind of tinting/color mods to them? If so you may be generating hundreds of materials that need to be cleaned up manually

As far as steam is concerned, you'd basically be asking mod developers to go through a cert process that the people developing the game don't even have to. Honestly I don't see why this is such a bad idea, basically everything bad about it exists in every other online marketplace. For example I could write a custom Facebook app, which is really just a UI mod for Facebook. Same thing with custom web browsers, rootkits, PDF viewers, etc. I suppose the exact percentage is a point of contention, but in any circumstance where multiple parties are involved that number is going to be low. Even for regular game sales valve takes it's 30 percent, but it's not like the remaining 70% all goes to the developer. In fact, most of it probably goes to the publisher/funder if not all of it, which is then paid out to the devs based on whatever the contract states.Sure there are problems with the system, but I don't see those problems as being unique to the system. It's nice to talk about what should work in theory, but in practice there are often more things to consider.