Why would you do that? said:
Also, when you fall down while holding the direction button into a wall, gravity is lowered, like, you fall slower. I don't know if it was intentional, but it would make a great wall slide.
It is indeed intentional. I reuse a lot of gameplay mechanics of games like metroidvanias, and recent ones have introduced wall sliding. It's a bit less "hardcore" than older titles like Super Metroid, but it makes wall jumping easier. I'm still not sure that I'll be able to keep it, because it's causing me a headache graphic-wise, but I'll see.
As for the sticky walls, it's not surprising it's a bit strange currently, but I will need it (especially since I don't want the scrolling to reveal any secret area), so I wanted to make sure it would work. In intend to rely a lot on level design to hide most effects, though. Again, metroidvanias games use this a lot, even if it's for technical reasons (I think that they use this to hide palette swaps, they fade to black before the scrolling, and fade in after, so that you never see both sides at the same time).
Many thanks for your impressions, that's nice to hear that you had some fun visiting what is mostly a testing ground. I'm adding one gameplay element at a time (managed to program a working staircase wednesday evening, for example), but now, I'm mostly on the drawing board for the complete map layout.
Why would you do that? said:
Pertaining to my engine, I wasn't really thinking about Link to the Past... More like games like TMNT and other beat-em-ups. It's interesting how you connected it to my favorite game series...
That's because I was crazy with this effect in ALttP. In the first hours, I was doing it on purpose just because I liked the animation. I remember similar things on other, older games, but not as nice, and with 45° ledges.
Why would you do that? said:
About enemies... Yeah, enemies aren't very fun to code.
Well, at least not the easy ones. Bosses can be fun to code.
In fact, that's not really that I don't like coding them, but do a simple goomba, for example, and you'll need a way to know whether there's a hole in front of it, so that it can stop before falling, and it can be a nightmare to implement those tests.
Why would you do that? said:
but unfortunately, doing pixel art for an NES (which has very limited colors... 4 colors per 8x8 square, 32 total on screen, only 56 or so total to choose from) isn't as easy
Indeed. That's the reason I'm going 16bits, in fact, I don't want to be too limited by colors. I'll try to limit the number of colors I use as much as I can, but I won't spend time to count them for each screen. Besides, I don't want to spend half an hour thinking if I should trade a blue color in palette for a red one, and redo six hundred sprites to remove the blue in them.
I think music will come last, especially since I don't have much experience in mixing music and sound effects using SDL_Mixer. I can usually compose correctly, but I'm a bad arranger, and cheap tunes will be a challenge.
Why would you do that? said:
Learning 1 language a year is actually a really good idea. It isn't something I really enjoy doing, because 1, I love familiarity, 2, I am somewhat afraid to touch object oriented programming, and 3, I feel like I'd need to find a good graphics library in order to get anything out of it...
1) Me too, that's the reason why I'm reluctant to use anything else than C/C++ most of the time (I'm going more and more towards D, though, which I prefer), with some pieces of OCaml sometimes. Even if I can write programs in probably 50+languages now, and some of them being theorically better for some usages. Since I'm mostly coding for fun, now, I use what I prefer. I only try new languages as a challenge, but I don't use most of them on a regular basis.
2) It took me much time to go object oriented (I learn programming back in 85, when I was 7, and haven't had access to something else than basic/pascal/C/assembly for twelve years, so it's difficult to changes your habits), but I'm getting better at it, and it has its merits... you have to take the jump one day, but it's rewarding (I'm more at ease with languages that exhibits OO mechanisms, like C++, D, Objective Caml, Lua or Java, than pure OO-languages like Smalltalk or Ruby, though).
3) Again, since I usually don't conduct large projects in many languages, I don't really care for a graphical output. Should I decide to use another language for the logic (such as OCaml), I still use C/C++ for the graphical engine most of the time. The fact that you can mix languages in a program is truly useful. Besides, most of the time, I use for graphics either vanilla OpenGL (which has bindings for many things) or vanilla SDL (which also can be used with various languages, including Ada, C, C++, C#, D, Eiffel, Erlang, Haskell, Java, Lisp, Lua, Objective Caml, Objective C, Pascal, Perl, PHP, Python, Ruby, Smalltalk and others, which is far more than I need... I won't write a full-fledge game in Brainfuck, LT or Whitespace!). And FLTK as a toolkit for anything not game-related.
I have not experiment Game Maker yet, even if I've said for years now that I should at least look at it.