iax

Ok I think this might be one of the best game-related podcast episodes I've listened to. I didn't actually play the game yet but it definitely sounds like one of the "unfamiliar feeling, experimental in a good way, little bit flawed" nineties game e.g. Bullfrog had been making. It's not very common for PC or console games to feel that way today, even the original or the fresh ones are built using established practices in areas like the controls, the interface, various genre expectations, the art pipeline and graphic algorithms used etc. I also think there are two spaces where at least the unfamiliar and experimental parts of the feeling can be found more often, namely handheld and mobile games, probably because they don't share the "know-how history" with the larger platforms and many (now) traditional techniques just don't work there. Of course it doesn't guarantee the "experimental in a good way" part of my description...

If you're really interested how the Split method is implemented you can dive into Mono sources, you can even browse them on github, the string implementation is here https://github.com/mono/mono/blob/master/mcs/class/corlib/System/String.cs There are several Split methods but they all seem to call SplitByCharacters at some point which is the method implementing the core algorithm. I didn't study it in detail but it seems it scans the input string for separators and stores their positions in an array. When the position array is full, it calls Array.Resize on it, which doubles its size. After this process is finished it's clear how many substrings the output should have so the output array is created and filled with strings using the split position array. Note this is a System library code so it's written with performance in mind, hence the unsafe code, the use of array instead of list etc. If I had to write similar function myself and I wasn't terribly concerned about the maximum performance possible I would probably use the List + ToArray approach monkehhh mentioned.

I always had a problem with real-time systems with pause, especially with the standard version found e.g. in Infinity Engine games. These systems often feel inelegant to me, especially when a game simulates real-time reality on a scale people tend to operate on in their everyday lives, e.g. controlling a group of characters. There is something uncanny about observing fluid real-life-like action being paused and resumed repeatedly (Try doing that when watching a video. Sure, not the same situation, but I believe it's relevant.). These systems also require players to rapidly change the way they interact with the game. It's a constant back and forth between "Hm, let's take a sip of hot beverage of my choice and carefuly think about what actions should I take here." and "Everything is happening so much! The goblin missed, should I do something (or pause) now? What about now? Maybe now?" Both extremes are valid gameplay approaches in separation or even when they alternate slowly (e.g. different tactical and strategic phases), but pausing systems tend to change them very rapidly and make the changes hard to anticipate. I personally find it exhausting. I like how Transistor deals with these two problems (read SecretAsianMan's post if you're not familiar with the mechanics). The first "uncanny simulation pausing" problem is solved by the fact the planning phase is clearly presented as a separate gameplay phase both visually and aurally. This prevents my brain from thinking "oh god, time has stopped, reality is breaking". The planning phase is also much more powerful than and qualitatively different to the real time phase which also helps with the paused reality feeling. The second "brain mode oscillation" problem is solved by planning phase having a cooldown, the changes are not that often and it's clear to see/anticipate the right moment to switch. I would also mention Frozen Synapse as an interesting plan-and-observe system superficially similar to Flotilla and Combat Mission. The action itself plays in real time but the players plan moves of their squads by 5-second chunks. The combat is fast and brutal (basically 1 shot = 1 kill) but the plans can be very elaborate and the planning phase is extremely sophisticated including an option to try what-if scenarios programming both the player's and the opponent's squads. The game is about micro-managing the soldiers and predicting the opponent's moves realizing they are doing the same so it leads to balancing between being optimal and unpredictable.

I strongly believe Neumond Recording Company link should be included in this thread http://www.wolfenstein.com/en-gb/site

There is one interesting/weird feeling I have every time I play this game: I feel like I can almost sense the intense joy of level designers finally being able to create unconstrained 3D spaces in this type of game, especially in the first episode. There is a lot of verticality, crazy underwater paths etc but what stands out to me is the way areas are reused in the flow of the levels. When progressing through a level you very often revisit the same spaces and see them in different contexts as various paths intersect there. There's something extremely satisfying about this type of gameworld traversal, it works as an unintrusive progress indicator and I feel it's something many action games lack today, you either don't ever revisit anything or you do but the space is used in pretty much the same way as before except maybe throwing a new wave of enemies at you.

Hm, might have been, but I remember the strange maneuver mechanic and I didn't see anything like that when reading / watching / searching for Fury3 or Hellbender. I definitely played TV before that and I think it was a little bit different kind of a game, more sim-like, e.g. I think you could go into 3rd person mode and rotate the camera (especially during the maneuvers, I think the game switched to 3rd person so you could watch the useless maneuvers in all their glory), not sure it's possible in these games. Also I feel like it had better graphics but I think it's common to misremember the old graphics as better than they really were... God, I'm afraid this may not be a very good "wtcwtgca" question, my memory may be deformed too much to recognize the game even when presented with the actual answer.

Speaking of obscure challenges... I think I've played this game in cca 2000. It was a sci-fi action flight sim somewhat similar to Terminal Velocity, I think it was set on some kind of a desert planet and you could fly both in the open and inside some structures. The weird thing I remember about this game is the fact that you could press the F-keys on your keyboard in order for your ship to execute a corresponding manouver. Each manouver was basically a predefined set of motions the ship would perform. In my mind I even hear a generic sc-fi female voice saying "somethingsomething manouver" after pressing one of the keys. I've checked a few sci-fi flight sim lists on the Internet but nothing matched the image in my mind. Either the game was very obscure or my memories are so twisted I can't recognize it. I think the latter is more likely to be the case. Also I have some personal story involving this mysterious game (it is probably the only reason I remember it existing). I played games on some crappy 14" 60Hz CRT at the time which often resulted in eyestrain and flushing after some time. I remember my grandmother came to my room when I was playing this game and said "the screen is full of color... and so is your face" which is probably the most vivid memory of her from the late 90s / early 00s era I have for some reason. Brains are indeed weird.

Hey everybody! I started listening to Idle Thumbs right after the Kickstarter campaign, lurked here a little bit and the recent high level of awesomeness happening here made me join. Cheers!