QuizmasterBos Wrote:(about 'we must not try to compete)Might be true, but even IF we keep your scripts it would need at least some modification in most cases. The style of writing should be uniform and your way of writing is CLEARLY different from mine. And no, I don't dismiss anything if it's written by a certain person, it's just that I haven't felt a lot of cases where I really liked your script, that's all.
I know you are the scripter, you have control of that. And obviously I am not perfect (no one is). If people like your changes (phrase per phrase), let's change it. But if people prefer my text / another member text / a lurker text in some areas because of any plausible reason, let's retain it. You do know you also control the grammar revisions/changes, so you can alter ANY text if you feel a given phrase sounds better that way. But please dont try to refrain contributions in text area and please be more receptive about another person helping you. Let's say you revised a given text. Please accept improvements from any member that got 'the right feeling'. The problem is that you sometimes sound like you dont like ANY text and only you can create texts. And I am STILL upset because you called all my text contributions as 'placeholders'
![Image](http://www.aedler.com/forum/images/smilies/rage.gif)
QuizmasterBos Wrote:(about putting more outfits until 27 or maybe 28 total) Tigress outfit in Daisy scene? Can you remind me how this was decided? I've seen the scripts written for this character and there was NO mention of the Tigress outfit as far as I know. What am I missing?
For me, it would be nice to have a way to interact with Daisy using a Tigress outfit thats laying around, and Sigurd pic clearly shows a scene where she is laid in a bed and I also talked about this scene maybe in page 150. So, please,
You and MPLDAM need to talk about that. I wont waste time here. If YOU dont like the tigress idea, just say why. And lets listen to people. And remember the PLACEMENT of objects are easily changeable as a click. E.g. lets say I've put a tigress outfit in Daisy bed so Peach can have sex with her using her current powerup /outfit or the tigress. People dont like it. What do I do? I just remove it and put in a better place/scene. Simple, huh?
QuizmasterBos Wrote:Having 100 ideas doesn't mean we should put all of them in.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/new ... 1322693145QuizmasterBos Wrote:That's what sequels or remakes are for. We should put in a number of outfits that diverse, but also manageable. The focus shouldn't be on the outfits, but on the sex.
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/new ... 1322693145QuizmasterBos Wrote:Plus, this game needs to get done at some point. Remember.
Of course. But adding things in my leisure time , when I NEED TO REST from coding, won't use precious time, but rather INCLUDE even more features in the same time.
Thats because our minds work like this: we have 2 hour of a free time. We used 1 hour putting a playable Rosalina, then I am tired from working on her. But the other side of the brain could create a TODO feature. So I can either stop doing anything and do everything else (e.g. skating, study chemistry) or I can USE more of that free time to make another feature.
Crop Rotation does the same, to keep the land fertile (just change 'land' with 'mind').
Thats what I do almost every time. Its called 'recycling tasks'. If I didnt do that, we would be still making world 3 levels with old camera code while I would be requiring more holidays/vacations from the game. What do you think about this? Didnt you notice I haven't stopped programming since the beginning, except SOME days of june 2012, when I've travelled in order to treat myself (with a doctor?)
QuizmasterBos Wrote:(about preferring to use time ADDING features than cutting it down/removing) This seriously all depends on the subject matter. You cannot intend to use anything you put in, it'll most likely turn into a mess.
It depends. Again, not only me and you, but what matters is how PEOPLE react to the TODO items I put in the game. You talk (or it makes me conclude) that you are always right and the game must have things you organize. In the beginning of the game, I was 'just' making levels, levels, levels, and the way I did worked. Why It wouldnt work anymore? You can say 'because we have more rules now, we decided to have 8 worlds + special world, limited outfits, more central plots'. And I will say: you're so right.
But this DOESNT mean I am using anything I make, deliberately, like I am making a mess or putting non-Mario universe items in a awful way: e.g. adding LINK in Peach's bedroom.
If you check the forum, you will notice I talk before adding a given feature. I dont just 'add tons of new things out of a sudden' without some talk. But again, in the beginning, I was doing that, and in a faster way (because I didnt have many talkings), and it worked. I wont be reminding about this matter tons of times.
We include new things. In the vast majority of times (if not all) I mention my ideas here. Features whose people really dislike are changed/improved/removed and more reunion sessions with the team are set. I still dont know WHY are you so....critical those weeks (weeks, not just the last days!). Where is the ol' good Quiz? The man that was seeing the game like I always see it, as a peaceful game, a moment of creation, where we can enjoy Peach? Where is the Quiz who also sees the good sides? Like on page 108?
viewtopic.php?f=34&t=2265&hilit=toadella&start=2140#p187116No one here is making 'grossy messes' like putting an alien model with one leg, a huge eye and 101% bitmapped saying 'HO HI HO HI' all the time and trespassing all walls like a ghost. People are respecting how the game could behave, and we will have blueprints soon, as well as kissing feature, etc. All of these ARE awaited and are interesting.
QuizmasterBos Wrote:Sometimes you are better off cutting something than spending a lot of time coming up with a complex reason for this thing to exist. There are limitations, it's how videogames work.
If things become SO much complex and/or uninsteresting (e.g. making arousal diminish, adding too much penalties or making the game ugly), of course its better to remove it.
QuizmasterBos Wrote:Sure, for now we could put anything in we can, but I am not promising you that it's all going to stay in. At some point, late in development, we should talk about what to keep. We'll see how it goes.
I prefer to FINISH this game first (the same thing you talked a bit ago). For this, priorities WILL ALWAYS BE Levels, scenes and enemies. That's why we have 3 new scenes I made in the last days and Chompette is now made. I will ALWAYS remind you I am working on these three areas. And more paralel features will come (TODO features that could be made in my lounge intervals). Be sure of that. As to 'what to keep', I hope (I HOPE!) we can have nicer, interesting and a full of ideas/brainstorm reunions, in order to decide what to improve/what to add yet/ what to remove, and I will have the last word. WIth all possible explanations. LIke it always was. I DONT like removing things. Some will be removed, but I will try my most to remove only the really bad / non interesting things.
By the way, you were busy those last days (school duties), and you havent updated any script yet (neither levels). You were complaining so much (really). And dont try to say 'Ivan, I am like that'. If so, you should really start to improve your mood while communicating. Even if something is REALLY HARSHLY EXTREMELY bad to your side, you should see the good sides. Otherwise, its better not to post. I am saying that to myself too, as I also have those galactic bad mood sometimes (but I fix them by jogging, reading a book, listening to good music) All but talking so negatively with people I respect.
So I end this post saying that: PLEASE use your creative mind to focus on new things / improving things / levels (like you did with Lunar Magic), let's see the GOOD sides, then you can create a txt file of 'useless sides' and 'bad sides' to be discussed later. Some (or all of them) can also be voted on (in the polls).