Hi Everyone,

Many years ago, I tinkered around with FPSC, then backed Reloaded. I switched to Unity for a short time, when Reloaded ended. Then stopped altogether due to time constraints.

Now I'd like to take up the hobby again. I want to make an FPS with minor puzzle/adventure elements, like the old school original Half Life, FEAR, Timeshift etc games of the early 2000s. Not looking for open world or massive outdoor environments. What draws me to GG is that I don't have time to wade through code and integrate systems. I've checked out a few posts and demos on YouTube and I'd like to ask your advice:

- does GG sound like a suitable out-of-the-box engine for what I'm aiming to do?
- are existing scripts readily available for stuff like elevators, switches, basic character skill development, basic inventory (e.g. can carry health packs)?
- how problematic is it currently to import models and custom material?
- Given Reloaded, is GG a long term program that I can invest time in (i.e. will be supported for a good few years to come)?

Any thoughts would be much appreciated!

I'd say yes.

I am working on something with a similar scope. Previous test runs can be downloaded in the showcase but the actual project and how far it progressed can be browsed here.



Most of this has been done before (except for basic character skill development, but thats usually not in these types of FPS games.)
A lot of it is even available for free on the forums, you just gotta root around a bit. If not, there are commercial sets on the GCS Store.



I'd say among the easiest but I am also used to it. It depends on your workflow and the tools you use.
My first tipp would be to avoid the built in importer entirely and use this command line tool instead. LINK.
All you have to do when done is manually add this line to the generated fpe: "effectbank\reloaded\entity_basic.fx" (or whatever shader you want to use.) This whole process is pretty fast.

You want to stick with the .x file format for now, how easy it is to import into this slightly dated format depends once again on your software. Paint.net is a good tool to convert an image to .dds.
Just start to use .dds immediately instead of .tga or .png. It will make everything a whole lot easier.



As far as I know, yes, but I don't have any insider info regarding TGC's intentions.



-Wolf

Great, many thanks, Wolf. Just glancing at your project, it looks superb. I'll give it a closer look this evening.

I think the best idea is to play games in the showcase if you want to see how gameguru performs, and the scope/type of games and environments it is capable of.

*including the work in progress section, because most of the media in the showcase is rather dated by now. (after the x11 migration and all that)

right but with no x11 games fully released yet i'd say its about the best examples we have. gameguru's performance and capabilities have not seen a marked increase since then as evidenced by the fact we still aren't seeing these bigger-scope games running at high velociraptors

True that, we all need higher velociraptors!

@old timer: GG was origingally conceived as an FPS game package. Thus far, the FPS features are the most advanced. Just look at what Errant AI was able to achieve with his asset pack.

Thanks, folks.

@Wolf, the art for your Acythian project is, with no exaggeration, outstanding. IMO, something of that quality ought to be a flagship game for GG. There would be no better way to sell the product.

I also played the Redacted demo. Looks great, but the known issues (e.g. AI glitches) remind me of the things I was coming up against with FPSC a few years ago. The product needs to have better AI right out of the box, IMO. A generic script is never going to offer brilliant AI, but it needs to be functional and robust. I hope the future updates give your current game the platform it deserves.

It's not that bad!

For Game like FEAR, even FPSC was a proper choice back then, and so is GG today. Unreal with a proper framwork from the market place will give you better results, GameGuru will brign you to "something playable" quicker.

No worries and good luck with yours
We are always here to help with the GG side of things if you need it ..

A game like FEAR is totally possible in GG! Trust me

Just go about building your level and plotting your AI positions and paths and we can help you with the rest when you are stuck. For things like jump scares and etc. Its all entirely possible in this engine. FEAR is a game that would commonly use the same enemy NPCs in each level and in GG this is kind of something we are forced to do in order to keep within the memory limitations.

Best examples:

these are great games tbone but they are NOTHIHNG like fear

I remember a few years back (actually many years back) someone recreated a few levels of Fear 1 in FPSC and it wasnt much difference.

ooooh yeaaahh

This is an excellent example of how capable FPSC was, but this is not a gameguru game... (also it's 5 minutes and i never got sent the compiled .exe of this so as far as i'm concerned it doesnt exist in a complete form)

okay... now let's take a look at actual F.E.A.R, one of the smoothest, prettiest, most advanced games of its time



it worries me if we can't tell which one of these is clearly a more lucid, kinetic, presentable, and enjoyable experience. if you think something like that can be done in gameguru, you need to look again.

if anyone here thinks they can create something closely similar to this with gg; i challenge you to try. I don't just mean the semi generic square office room level design either, I mean the caliber of dynamic lighting, the fluidity, the attention to detail, the number of physics props, the AI, the particle effects, the decals, and the production values.

It's simply not something that GG is capable of handling, ESPECIALLY beyond a very short tech-demo type game. even then, those cracks begin to show.

let's also remember FEAR was 5 hours long.

so i might say a game inspired by/derivative of THE STYLE OF FEAR is possible in a VERY SMALL quantity with gameguru, but not a game "LIKE FEAR". Might just be my personal opinion here but I consider even crummy City Interactive games made in the jupiter EX engine to be more "like FEAR" than anything made in gameguru, because they "feel" similar when playing them. gameguru/FPSC games simply do not.

even on the original FPSC website it said "you won't be making the next halo or half life" as FPSC was not, and gameguru is not now a tool capable of producing such a work.

You'd see better results if you set your goals of what to create in gameguru based on something you've seen created in gameguru, or at least created by a small or one-man team.

I always felt that FEAR fan project was rather weak. There is nothing to it than flickering lights and blue toned hallways and those aren't particularly well designed. I see that I am in the minority with that opinion as Ertlov, T-Bone and Duchenkuke seem to like that thing.
FEAR was most notable for its Combat and its AI and that fan game has no gameplay whatsoever except for spawning an Alma look alike puppet for a second.







I also don't agree with this. Low framerate, HUD weapon remains pitch black despite often being in lit surroundings, Segment architecture often too narrow, terrible lighting and no shadows (another feature very well developed in FEAR was the dynamic lighting). Cold Contract is more like FEAR than that fan game, it has the answering machine gimmick, lighting and actual gameplay.

Honestly, if anyone can chime in to tell me what about that video is supposed to be good I'd really like to get your insight.



8 to 9. The addon extraction point was 5 hours long. The video is rushed.

On topic: I don't think old timer wanted to create a game exactly like FEAR but more in the likeness of early 2000s shooters and that is quite possible in game guru. With the lighting overhauls currently being worked on we might even have better use for dynamic objects to have even more interesting shootouts. We'll see.





-Wolf

Btw. you can buy the Fear bundle for less than 4 Euro on bundlestars (fanatical).
All 3 games + addons, great deal for the games.

Just picked them up myself yesterday. Cost less than my lunch

I couldn't get much lunch for £2.69 full stop

I's ideal for making a shooter or adventure type game. Just don't try to go too big.

I still not played Fear 3 yet... maybe a good time to buy it now.

No, the Fear fan project was never one of my favorites, and it wasnt exactly what I was referring to. My memory is a little bit hazy, but there were comparisons between some of the over-the-top FPSC games and some scenes in Fear where the BOTB didnt look bad.

I can agree, some of the media we use is nicer than that in fear, and also some of us have more of a flair for light colour grading than certain parts of FEAR did, but this does not really make them similar.

I would agree a game in the art/graphics style of early 2000s shooters would be highly possible in gameguru or FPSC, however a game similar in "length" or "enjoyment of basic gameplay" of the more famous of them, you would find nigh impossible to create

what do I mean when I say "fluidity"
check out this article to have my explaination. Big-time game engines are optimized in a way gameguru simply isn't, allowing them to create a more "fluid" experience for the player with less hiccups, at any frame rate. This becomes increasingly apparent when a level that is actually the size of a 2000s first person game is put in gameguru.

so this might sound pessimistic, definitely not optimistic, but i just want to be realistic.

You can, using GG, create a game that LOOKS like FEAR or another early 2000's shooter of a similar style
but:
the levels will be 1/3 as long
the game won't be 1/10th as long
the frame rate will be lower and less fluid
the AI will not be as good
it will take 4x as long to load
and it will simply lack a lot of the normal creature comforts we've come to expect from games that are part of the reasons why these games are considered so "good"

so old timer, i reiterate, i'd suggest setting your sights the first game you make at very least on something you've seen made and successfully built in game guru before. If you havent tried any gameguru games, you don't know if you are gonna enjoy the gameplay, so you might want to try them because more likely than not, that's what your game will "feel" most like.

you said you played redacted, I suggest playing Cold Contract, Kshatriya Wetwork, Redacted 2, and Resist Revolution. The gameplay similarities and idiosyncrasies that you find will likely be in your game too. If you're looking to make something longer or more fluid, you might consider looking elsewhere. If you're looking for something that isn't plagued with the exact same problems FPSC was, you might consider looking elsewhere.

"You can, using GG, create a game that LOOKS like FEAR or another early 2000's shooter of a similar style
but:"
But we should also keep in mind, this early 2000s shooter was created by an AAA development TEAM... not like us, the one person indie dev.
They used their inhouse state of the art engine. So I agree, we can develop nice looking 2000s shooters, but should not compare them with AAA games even from the 2000s.

In the early 2000s, most shooters were created by core teams of less than 10 people. Still more than the single-handed lonely indie dev, but not THAT far away.

Edit - fun fact:

The same month JoWooD greenlit the humble 40.000€ Budget for "Robert D. Anderson & The Legacy of Cthulhu" (our first own game, rolled out with FPSC VANILLA, later upgraded to 1.04 and finally 1.07), they also signed a 3rd party FP shooter for publishing. For 500.000 €, developed by basically 4 dudes.

Guess which game sold by far better

6 disorganised blokes made this shooter in an improperly licensed engine designed for seedy porn games. This was in the early 2000s.

This engine fetish that is a never ending droning discussion (I noticed mostly among people who have not yet any experience in actually making games) is quite annoying. I enjoy using the least favorable tools for my artwork which is why I also use the cheapest colours and second hand materials for my paintings. If you would rather use state of the art studio technology. You can. Its free... Game Guru is not that at all but it shows promise.

I think everyone should just pick a software package that suits their skills best and start to actually make something.

For me, I try to push some expectations what a GG game can be with my project. Too bad I seldomly get around to work on it.



-Wolf

It should be noted that some of the members of this community are actually from "AAA" development teams. So not everyone here is just a sole GG sandboxer.

I have friends over at Ubisoft here in Toronto and they, on their own time, work on independent personal indie projects with incredibly small teams. One notable example a friend of mine worked on (environmental design) for this game. I got to watch the development of most of the environments of which he worked on primarily right off his laptop during lunch breaks.

@TBone: Tell your friend, I, some random bloke on the internet said that his design skills are quite great!

what was the first shooter you linked? I wanna play it! what was the engine?

Well, you are right, but most of us with a main profession in AAA game dev work entirely different on our "own" projects than we do on the day job. So we can still be "sole GG sandboxer", technically speaking.

I abandoned that approach because I know I can`t do the scripting and 3D work in a reasonable time, and especially not in the quality I desire, so I hire better people for that.

Also I have friends who are professional voice actors, so I call them in, too.

I guess the more advanced you are then the more you can do with GG
Users like Preben, AmenMoses etc could probably create some incredible games if they didn't share and just did their own thing ( Thank god they do share though ) but you get my point .. Just look what they do with the engine its pretty impressive

Strange as it mays seem I have no drive to actually make games anymore, back when it was all 8-bit and making anything at all was an interesting challenge I was as keen as mustard but nowadays I'm more driven by individual programming challenges. To be fair I've found my home in GG as it is very challenging at times!

If I could see my 'solutions' to those challenges in a finished game made by someone else I would be happy as Larry.

I did wonder why you hadn't actually created a game … Although the space lander was pretty close ..
That could still make a cool little game

I start with a technical challenge, 'how can I do ...', and when I've solved it I sort of lose interest. For example, seeing as you mentioned it , I challenged myself to produce a demo which contained the following (which at the time a lot of people were claiming GG couldn't do):

1) A driveable/flyable vehiocle.
2) A dynamic HUD.
3) Player quests.
4) Non-video cut scenes.

When I'd basically knocked all these challenges out of the park I just lost all interest in it, I'd proved that they were all possible so why continue with it? (even though Lee himself wanted to see where it was headed )

That's just the way I operate, if I find something challenging enough I'm balls out going for it, but as soon as I have a solution that satisfies me I lose interest and am after the next challenge.

The way I look at it is once I've broken the ice and shown others the way through the North West passage I'll leave it to them to turn the route into a commercial enterprise.

I must admit I’m the same with modelling so I no what you mean

Dave

@AmenMoses, Granada

It's inspiring to hear you both specialising to that extent. Has there ever been a collaboration of specialists in the GG community to pull together a short 'flagship' game? There seems to be so much individual talent here that a small team could produce something terrific. IMO, it would bring in a lot of new interest.

i've always agreed with that, unfortunately team requests are generally disallowed around here.

i somehow think that due to gameguru's memory issues also have something to do with this. when more than one person works on a game, the scope of that game tends to get larger, and if a one person is already capable of making a game that "breaks" gameguru alone, then a team would almost certainly create something too grand in scope.