How to get started

[destron]

I was just wondering, how would a person get started in the indie/game business. I love computer games (playing and designing), but where would I start if I had no programming language fluency AT ALL?

[z3lda]

If you got money I suggest you pay people to make your game designs. If not, start reading.

[destron]

I was also wondering,
Is it LEGAL to take snippets and lines of code from other people's projects?

[otaku]

If programming is not your forte then I'd recommend you get hold of Games Factory from Click Team and pick up a copy of "Awesome Game Creation : No Programming Required" from Charles River Media.

There is also "3D Game Creation : No Programming Required" that covers 3D games using Jamagic.

http://www.charlesriver.com/Books/BookDetail.aspx?productID=18866

[impossible]

I was also wondering,
Is it LEGAL to take snippets and lines of code from other people's projects?
That kind of depends on the license the code has. There is a lot of free code out there. There is also a lot of stuff that pretty much everyone does basically the same way, so if you see how to do it in a book or on a site you'll basically be taking it. Its not legal to take GPL code and dump it in your closed source project. Its also definitely illegal to take code from a company you work at, even code that you wrote, and use it in your own projects. Most code you see in tutorials, books, SDK samples or on sites like codeproject is meant to be used though, so I don't think you'll have a problem.

[svero]

Id say if you're really really interested in making games you have to learn technology. There are some great game makers that come from non technical pasts who managed to learn to program and make games. It's not easy though. Maybe you should consider looking to see if you area has any kind of technical school where you could take some basic programming lessons to get a feel for what's involved with a little direction. Then I'd suggest looking into blitzbasic or another higher level game making tool like multimedia fusion, or even shockwave.

- S

[destron]

What about the 3d game maker @ thegamecreators.com?
Is it any good?

[Nexic]

Its okay but you need programming knowlage. However if you are willing to put in that amount of programming I'd suggest using Blitz3D instead.

Your games will run faster, your game will actually work on most people's PCs, and you won't spend so many hours pulling your hair out over bugs in the interpreter.

[destron]

what the heck is blitz3d? (sorry, I have no knowledge of this sort of thing)

[Nexic]

Well if you've had a look at DarkBasic already then it's basically the same sort of thing.

Of course you may be thinking of another product they offer, the one that requires no programming?

Well I wouldn't recommend trying to make a commercial game with something like that, you at least need a system that *can* have some form of scripting or programming, otherwise you will be very limited in what you can make with it. But if you just want to learn a few things then it might be worth it. Though in the end you WILL need to learn some form of programming if you want to be sucessful.

Anyway, here is the blitz site:
www.blitzbasic.com

[whisperstorm]

Just to insert 2cents for the very nice and greatly improved GameMaker (http://www.gamemaker.nl) - the latest version has 3d support, and I've been very happy with the UI.

[Sybixsus]

What about the 3d game maker @ thegamecreators.com?
Is it any good?

No, it's very old and wasn't even good when it first came out. If you want a no-programming solution, 3d GameStudio from Conitec is a few steps up from this. It does require programming for a lot of things, but it would at least be possible to get a game going without any programming.

[mahlzeit]

Or, if you want to get started the indie business: buy the rights to someone else's game, (pay someone to) improve it whichever way you see fit, and start selling it.

[destron]

Or, if you want to get started the indie business: buy the rights to someone else's game, (pay someone to) improve it whichever way you see fit, and start selling it.
Yeah, but how would one go about buying someone elses game?
Do you just email them and say "Hey, I want to buy a license to your game!"?
And, what range of price would I be looking at?

[mahlzeit]

Yeah, but how would one go about buying someone elses game? Do you just email them and say "Hey, I want to buy a license to your game!"?
More or less. But you don't want to buy a license, you want to buy the intellectual property rights: the copyrights and possibly any trademarks.

As for the price range, I have no idea. Something like a year's worth of expected revenue for that game sounds about right. So if the game makes $500 a month now, the price would be about $6000. But that all depends on the seller and how well you haggle. :)

There are plenty of games out there with potential that just need a little more work that their authors are unwilling to put into it. Buy them, fix them up, and start selling. Easier than starting from scratch...

Wanna buy a word game? :)

[destron]

Not particularaly, when I design games, I veer toward the action/fps genre.

[HairyTroll]

Not particularaly, when I design games, I veer toward the action/fps genre.

How many indie fps games have you seen recently? This should give you an idea of the amount of time, resources and money needed to develop a viable product in this genre. I would suggest trying your hand at modding an exisiting fps like Unreal, or Quake.

[destron]

How many indie fps games have you seen recently? This should give you an idea of the amount of time, resources and money needed to develop a viable product in this genre. I would suggest trying your hand at modding an exisiting fps like Unreal, or Quake.

Yeah, I'm going to do that to learn (about textures, graphics, etc.), buy ya cant sell it or even let people download it for free, cuz basically every part of the quake or unreal engines are copyright and registered.

[Ryan Clark]

every part of the quake or unreal engines are copyright and registered.You can download the Quake II source code here:

ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/quake2.zip

It is GPL licensed, but you can still make a commercial game with it... you just have to release your source under the GPL too. However, your art, sound, and other assets need not be GPLed.

They've been talking about releasing the Quake 3 source, too.

[Sharpfish]

Yeah, I'm going to do that to learn (about textures, graphics, etc.), buy ya cant sell it or even let people download it for free, cuz basically every part of the quake or unreal engines are copyright and registered.

I "mapped" for Unreal (then ut/ut2k3/utk4) since 1998. Had a map or two featured on planet unreal etc... I will tell you to do a half decent map (such as mine) takes MONTHS. To do an amazing level takes twice as long (which is why I never did finish my most ambitious map yet). I am telling you this because, though they are good for learning about textures and abstracted shaders and even 3D modelling (In the case of ut2k3+) they are time sappingly addictive. Which is fine, if like me at the time, you were doing it for the love of the game and the community.

If you are serious about making your own games I wouldn't spend too long in UnrealEditor, hammer or Radiant. It will take as much time to make something worthwhile as it will to learn the basics of C++ and DirectX. If I had started in earnest in 1998 on what I am now doing I could have been set up by 2001/2002. I didn't, I was busy using my creative energy to provide FREE maps that all helped to keep someone elses game going.

It is great fun mapping and modding for the big retail games and if you are a complete beginner to "everything" then it will help if you study it for a few months and try and complete one half way decent level, just to get used to completing things. The last map I was(am) working on I started over a year and a half ago, after 6 months fairly solid work it was about 75% where I wanted it. I was also learning DirectX at this time and as soon as I could I jumped ship and started working on actual games of my own again. Yes, it is great fun but unless you want to work in the industry as a level designer it will only waste time for you where you could be learning more "important" things if you are serious about making/selling games.

One thing it will do is improve your 3D skills (level design, texture use etc) which is always handy.

I'm not saying you shouldn't mess around with them but don't let them consume you or distract you from your primary goal. ;)

[Travis Dorschel]

The Quake 3 source is out now too, you can get it a number of places by googling for it:

http://www.fileaholic.com/idgames.d/quake3/official/source/

Just thought I would mention that...

[Edit] Guess this is just the game source, my mistake...

[Linusson]

The Quake 3 source is out now too, you can get it a number of places by googling for it:

http://www.fileaholic.com/idgames.d/quake3/official/source/

Just thought I would mention that...
I think they meant the Quake 3 engine source, not the game source, the game source have been out for years.

[Jim Buck]

Yeah, the engine source was supposed to come out at the end of last year, but John Carmack made an announcment that a recent Quake3-based deal had recently gone through, so the release of Quake3 is delayed until some nondefinite future point in time.

Having said that, there are a few Quake2-based engines out there that have evolved to the point where they basically support almost everything that Quake3 does. Check out Qbism - it's pretty decent for what it is. From my limited experience with it, it does have some bugs (that I've come across just in some code inspection) and doesn't do many things so optimally, but it could be a good place to start for people looking to do Quake3-quality games.

[destron]

You can download the Quake II source code here:

ftp://ftp.idsoftware.com/idstuff/source/quake2.zip

It is GPL licensed, but you can still make a commercial game with it... you just have to release your source under the GPL too. However, your art, sound, and other assets need not be GPLed.

They've been talking about releasing the Quake 3 source, too.

yeah... but I have a really crummy computer (266 MHZ, 64 MB RAM, 8 MB graphics, Old SB card), so how would I compile it?

[EDIT] Don't worry, I'm going to buy a new computer by the end of the year.

[wazoo]

If you don't know much about games or programming them, then looking at source code (especially Id's) is only a lesson in wasting time.

IMHO you need to start at the 1000-mile high view and work your way downwards to the details of source codes and engines.

How does a computer game run? What is involved in a basic game? What is a game loop? etc..

Solve these "large" questions, then you can work your way down to the engines, then into 2D/3D API's (ie. OpenGL, Direct3D, DirectDraw, etc)...and then even further into different languages etc..

Of course, that's only if you learn things better that way. If you'd rather just learn from reading source code, then by all means, grab the Q2 stuff...and tylenol. :)

hth,

[robleong]

Well, destron, have you started trying out any of the packages mentioned above yet? Programming is about doing - start doing something, and see whether you like it. I would also recommend trying out the free demo version of Blitz.

[destron]

Good Idea!
Is the blitz demo a 30-day trial, or is it a cut down version of the original?

[Emmanuel]

Honestly, you should make a simple tetris game before you try to duplicate Quake II. Maybe you can, but you can learn a lot about your framework, package, how to work with artists, and yourself, by making a simple 2D game using proven gameplay.

Best regards;
Emmanuel

[wibble]

Destron,

If I remember correctly, the Blitz trial can only be started a certain number of times (30 or so, I think). And it can't compile EXEs - you just run projects through the IDE.

I can recommend BlitzPlus, which is the 2D version of Blitz3D and is slightly cheaper. There's nothing very complicated in there at all - no 3D stuff. just basic 2D commands, and it's all centred around the BASIC language (which is easy to pick up). It comes with examples of some very simple games. All in all, a great tool for beginners yet it can create professional 2D games. Registered users can chat on the forums too, which can save newbies a lot of time and effort.

My test PC is an old P500, and BlitzPlus works pretty quickly on it. The minimum spec for BlitzPlus is a really old version of Direct X, so it's compatible with most Windows PCs (old and new).

Just start off creating some simple games (Space Invaders, Pac-Man, that kinda thing) to learn the language and different techniques and then you'll be able to eventually progress to writing your own game.

[Sharpfish]

Blitz*max* demo is a 30 day trial (I have it at the moment - 27 days remaining to finish my game.. and it looks possible in this lol ;) *joke* - I don't know what kind of functionality blitzplus has compared to that (whether is can use OO, user defined types, member functions etc) but Bmax looks like you can do a lot with it at a lower level (if you choose to).

so maybe check that out too - It looks easy enough (if you steer clear of pointers etc) but reminds me of C++ in places, which for me is a good thing because it doesn't make me feel as restricted or boxed in as I might otherwise. It looks to all intents and purposes like a very well written abstracted framework on top of C++ that can be used in the same was as BASIC.

I would reccommend running in STRICT mode though (apart from for quick tests) there is lot to be said for doing things "the right way" 3 months down the line when bugs (that advanced languages were designed to rule out) otherwise may have started to creep in.

[destron]

Honestly, you should make a simple tetris game before you try to duplicate Quake II. Maybe you can, but you can learn a lot about your framework, package, how to work with artists, and yourself, by making a simple 2D game using proven gameplay.

Best regards;
Emmanuel

Oh, of course!
I agree! I've heard plenty of people say that you shouldn't try to make a Doom3 style game as a first. Not to mention that it would take at least 5 years for one person to make it.

[Jim Buck]

More than 5 years and more like 100 years..

[Sharpfish]

That's what I was thinking.. look at Halflife 2 - 6 years and a multiman team... and they still can't make it non-linear and last more than 10 hours ;)

[destron]

yeah, but it was one of those "new technology" games that take a really long time to make

[soniCron]

yeah, but it was one of those "new technology" games that take a really long time to make
That's no excuse. Frankly, in the world of computers, if something is taking too long, it's almost always possible to have the computer do some of the work for you. For example, it could have taken a lot less development time writing a utility to import images/textures of buildings, cut them up into wallface, window, door, etc, and construct randomly generated buildings (in 3D) based on that information. I promise it's a lot easier to click "No" "No" "No" "No" "Ok" "No" than design a building, have the art director say "nah, it's no good, make another one" and make another one. Placing those larger entities in the world would then become a separate process (which it should be) and not part of the level design. Background art (such as non-interactive buildings) are becoming the "draw every star by hand" bit, and it's unnecessary in this day and age.

[destron]

Yeah.. Thats true. I guess it takes a long time to make ANY game.

[Sharpfish]

yeah, but it was one of those "new technology" games that take a really long time to make

not really the point I was making.. more that if one man was making a game to rival the big retail efforts.. it would take an amazingly long time to get anywhere near a decent result..(ie - from scratch a lot more than 5 years not accounting for the resulting game being compromised in seperate areas of art, ai, physics, sound etc) mainly based on art assets and content rather than the core code (the physics for example which valve "borrowed" anyway) and other code which once done is reusable.. CONTENT production is the biggest and most labour intensive problem facing modern game creation.. because it is becomming more and more the only "Unique" thing about a game.. which is why UnrealEngine3 is doing so well, devs want the details taken care of so they can concentrate on the game and providing the masses of scripts, characters, models, textures and sounds.

I don't want to labour the point as I know your "5 years" comment was just a quip.. and I get your point :)

But.. put it this way.. as essentially a one man "team", I would never even attempt to make a Doom3 (from scratch - Total Conversion "mods" don't count) regardless of how many tetris clones I had got under my belt.. there is never a good time to set out making one without a team, and expect to get it done to a competitive standard before technology has moved on. And that's on top of probably not being able to sell it - as those gamers interested in those genres generally want the best looking and best tech.

<edit - should clarify I mean technology led content fest retail games here - not *all* retail games such as pirates, Tycoon games, GBA games etc /edit>

[Robert Cummings]

That's no excuse. Frankly, in the world of computers, if something is taking too long, it's almost always possible to have the computer do some of the work for you. For example, it could have taken a lot less development time writing a utility to import images/textures of buildings, cut them up into wallface, window, door, etc, and construct randomly generated buildings (in 3D) based on that information. I promise it's a lot easier to click "No" "No" "No" "No" "Ok" "No" than design a building, have the art director say "nah, it's no good, make another one" and make another one. Placing those larger entities in the world would then become a separate process (which it should be) and not part of the level design. Background art (such as non-interactive buildings) are becoming the "draw every star by hand" bit, and it's unnecessary in this day and age.

Thats insulting to me, and others who have slaved away in front of a monitor for hours for not a lot of money comparitively.

You don't seem to have a clue how much effort really goes into making model after model, and no you cannot automate this. Unless you imagine games use all the same models with randomly coloured textures? in fact your comments amaze me...

[soniCron]

Thats insulting to me, and others who have slaved away in front of a monitor for hours for not a lot of money comparitively.I appologize for insulting you and others whom you speak for.

You don't seem to have a clue how much effort really goes into making model after model...On the contrary. I'm well aware of how much effort it takes to make model after model. In fact, my post was about how that effort is unjustly duplicated as projects become more and more ambitious.

...and no you cannot automate this. Unless you imagine games use all the same models with randomly coloured textures?I am surprised at this question. Unless you imagine computers being limited to processing only textures and incapable of 3 dimensional manipulation and generation. I don't suggest a computer could design Frank Lloyd Wright architectures one after another. I do, however, know it's well within the capabilities of a computer to take the basic information about the construction of a building (walls, windows, doors, roof, etc) and construct it's own, using textures pulled from the array of building images.

Most of the buildings in Half-Life 2 didn't need an artists attention to every little detail. Only buildings that would come under close scrutiny would need that level of involvement.

While I'm sincerely appologetic for insulting you, I assume you don't write verticies by hand in a flatfile database for your models. That is because you use a tool (a 3D modeler) to assist you in that endeavor (I assume).

It follows the simple idea of the path of least resistance:
if (time to create something > time to create a tool to automatically build an equivalent resource) then CreateTool()

We could argue all day whether or not you think static buildings in the background are worth an artists time, but I'd rightly assume you'd rather be modeling something a little more creative.

[ggambett]

You don't seem to have a clue how much effort really goes into making model after model, and no you cannot automate this. Unless you imagine games use all the same models with randomly coloured textures? in fact your comments amaze me...
Hey, I think automating what can be automated is a pretty good idea!

[soniCron]

Hey, I think automating what can be automated is a pretty good idea!Actually, (and only Robert can correct me if I'm wrong), I believe he's upset because the automation would replace some of the "extra" modellers the industry currently uses."...slaved away in front of a monitor for hours for not a lot of money comparitively."Unfortunately, if this is the case, it's a bit of the migrant-worker-upset-because-the-farmer-started-using-a-thresher complaint. If not, I just came across as a huge ass. (And if so, I'm so sorry, Robert. I did not mean to offend you!)

[Robert Cummings]

No, I'm not highly-strung offended :) Just think that it's hard to say that you can automate this or that artistically... I only wish it were the case. For 3D, new tools are coming along all the time - way out of any sane budget though.

For 3D I think we're gonna see a lot prefab stuff taking place. Cars, street lamps, etc... it's like scouting for a place to shoot the next episode of xyz - they don't rebuild the sets each time.

Till that day, it's slave away in front of the monitor... don't understand the migrant thresher thing you're talking about. I do this for a living.

[HairyTroll]

I do, however, know it's well within the capabilities of a computer to take the basic information about the construction of a building (walls, windows, doors, roof, etc) and construct it's own, using textures pulled from the array of building images.

You've just identified your niche. If you think an application such as this is useful, then write it and sell as a plug-in to Max, or Lightwave.