Anyone read this yet? Just wondering if it’s worth the $20.
Let me sum up the entire book, just slug this in for any game.
Good points:
We tried to make something special.
Bad points:
We tried to do too much.
There you go, I just saved you $20 and some extra reading.
Chet
Chet, you going to submit that to the Book-a-minute people?
Hey, you’re forgetting
What went right:
We had a really sharp, experienced and creative team.
What went wrong:
We all hated each other. When we hit beta, I celebrated by crucifying the QA lead’s cat on his office door. But don’t tell him, he doesn’t know it was me.
Seriously, though, I really hate the what went right/what went wrong format of the GD postmortems. Most of what goes on in the course of making any game is more ambiguous than that.
Don’t forget about…
What went right:
-<X>.
What went wrong:
-Suprise! <X> was also something that went wrong.
Ironically, the author/editor’s sister makes mathematical artwork for a living that has been featured in at least one of the Final Fantasy games…
That’s not ironic. That’s coincidental.
-The Irony Police
Oooh. Tough crowd.
This is a nice summary of Tears of the Kingdom’s talk at GDC this year.
If I’m allowed to summarize, the solution to physics breaking the game was to cut out the special cases and objects not affected by physics and to make everything affected by physics.
Holy 2-decade necro, R8m!!!
Can drink beer in most countries.
Cross posting this here. Very interesting way to divide large teams into smaller teams to work on the game. And an effort to cross pollinate different disciplines to encourage new ideas.