Gaming World Forums
General Category => Entertainment and Media => Topic started by: evilwarrior on July 18, 2011, 06:13:38 am
-
Note: I'm Dufe, lol. It just turns out I registered here awhile back before I started using that nickname
Dufe's Dragonball Z Standard Development Kit
Game Maker Engine : Rpg Maker 2003
Description:
It's a Dragonball Z Standard Development kit which can be used to start off learning how to code an adventure battle system or to create games faster with the already coded engine so newbies can have a easier time making something decent to begin with in Rpg Maker 2003 for
Playable Characters:
- Goku
- Piccolo
- Gohan
- Krillin
- Vegeta
- Tien
- Chaotzu
- Yamcha
Feature:
8 Directional Walking System
Double Tap System
Attack Swap System
SSJ Transformation for goku (super saiyan 1 only though)
EXP and Level System
Critical Hit and Damage Number System
Youtube Videos:
Big Bang Attack:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_rjJ1W9fF0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_rjJ1W9fF0)
Other Random Video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IhKBcyz0so (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_IhKBcyz0so)
Mirrors for the current Version Available:
Dufe's Dragonball Z SDK 0.025 (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=4NZ4UCF7)
Dufe's Dragonball Z SDK 0.02 (http://www.megaupload.com/?d=3QOO3YGD)
Note: this is still in development.
-
Uh this seems to be the totally wrong section, SDK stands for software development kit, not standard development kit.
-
Actaully it can stand for both, and also Starter Development Kit, call it what you like lol. The only place I even abbreviated it was on the 1 video names and Download links lol.
This site section seemed like the most likely place for it too go, because it involves making games. If it isn't the right section, could a moderator please move it? thanks.
-
Actaully it can stand for both, and also Starter Development Kit, call it what you like lol. The only place I even abbreviated it was on the 1 video names and Download links lol.
Not to split hairs but I have literally never seen it stand for either of those things (just Software Development Kit) and I can't find any uses of it online.
-
If he calls it a standard development kit, then you tell me what three letters he's SUPPOSED to use to shorten it to?
I mean, just because someone already called a software development kit a SDK does that mean NOBODY can call ANYTHING a Slice of Delicious Kiwi? If I come across a slice of kiwi that was really delicious, am I at a total loss at what to call it because following an S word with a D word and a K word is forbidden due to the immutable law of "I call dibs on those three letters in that order"?
That would be madness! What if I happened across a sinister deadly killer? How can I call 911 if all the operator tells me is "Sorry, but SDK stands for 'Software Development Kit'. Please call back again when your emergency doesn't involve the letters S, D, and K in that order."
-
If he calls it a standard development kit, then you tell me what three letters he's SUPPOSED to use to shorten it to?
I mean, just because someone already called a software development kit a SDK does that mean NOBODY can call ANYTHING a Slice of Delicious Kiwi? If I come across a slice of kiwi that was really delicious, am I at a total loss at what to call it because following an S word with a D word and a K word is forbidden due to the immutable law of "I call dibs on those three letters in that order"?
That would be madness! What if I happened across a sinister deadly killer? How can I call 911 if all the operator tells me is "Sorry, but SDK stands for 'Software Development Kit'. Please call back again when your emergency doesn't involve the letters S, D, and K in that order."
Why do you always argue this way? You take some bizarre stance and start arguing it. It's obvious by the context that he meant SDK the way everyone else means SDK and got the acronym wrong. He even said himself "it can stand for both" which implies "both are common usages" when the one he's using is never used by anyone. Why do you take it in this bizarre other direction?
-
This topic really seems like it should go in Game Design, seeing as it's more of an engine for game design than an actual videogame in itself.
-
Why do you always argue this way? You take some bizarre stance and start arguing it. It's obvious by the context that he meant SDK the way everyone else means SDK and got the acronym wrong. He even said himself "it can stand for both" which implies "both are common usages" when the one he's using is never used by anyone. Why do you take it in this bizarre other direction?
Actaully to say "when the one he's using is never used by anyone" is false.
http://www.acronymfinder.com/Information-Technology/SDK.html (http://www.acronymfinder.com/Information-Technology/SDK.html) if you look you will even see it on the list.
I'm pretty much making this because the last dbz Standard development kit wasn't that good at all. (No offense felix if you see this message)
But that is besides the point, I'm more interested in getting comments about what you all thought about the 0.025 version lol.
If any of you even played it,
do you have any ideas or suggestions for improving the Action Battle System that has been made so far?
@hobomasterxxx (http://www.saltw.net/index.php?action=profile;u=58435) yeah, this probably would be more likely considered a game engine.
-
I'm pretty much making this because the last dbz Standard development kit wasn't that good at all. (No offense felix if you see this message)
Lol judging by your feature list this is a big ol' pile of garbage too. The only way an action system can be any good in rm2k3 is if you're one of those brilliant psychos that used to make pixel movement and collision systems in the engine. No offense but there is absolutely no need for a dragonball z SDK in rm2k3. Hell there's no need for a dragonball z sdk period. 99% of dbz fangames are terrible (as opposed to I guess 80% of official ones), and if a good one exists it sure as hell wasn't made in rm2k3, and for god damn sure wasn't made using some useless middleware for your middleware like this.
-
Also wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_development_kit) makes no mention of a "standard development kit" in common usage, and google (http://www.google.com/search?sclient=psy&hl=en&safe=off&source=hp&q=%22Standard+Development+Kit%22&pbx=1&oq=%22Standard+Development+Kit%22&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&gs_sm=e&gs_upl=3605l4363l0l4547l2l2l0l0l0l0l0l0ll0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.&biw=888&bih=456&emsg=NCSR&noj=1&ei=WBwoTqqKLYTVgAeXyslc) results show a link to said wikipedia page, the Java SDK Standard edition, one usage of it in reference to an electronics kit, a couple of non-english websites and a warez site. It's safe to say you're wrong and that "Standard Development Kit" is not in common usage. Just because it's been used before doesn't make it correct, and acronym websites often have acronyms that aren't in common usage, so using them as a source is useless.
Admit when you've made a mistake, don't try to justify.
-
also you stink like a butt
-
I cant help but wonder when I read through this topic, have we ran out off things to argue about?
-
I cant help but wonder when I read through this topic, have we ran out off things to argue about?
There will never be a point where you can run out of things to argue about.
Just like there will never be a point where you can get an acronym wrong.
Acronyms and initialisms are abbreviations formed from the initial components in a phrase or name. These components may be individual letters (as in CEO) or parts of words (as in Benelux and Ameslan). There is no universal agreement on the precise definition of the various terms (see nomenclature), nor on written usage (see orthographic styling). While popular in recent English, such abbreviations have historical use in English as well as other languages. As a type of word formation process, acronyms and initialisms are viewed as a subtype of blending.
-
lol nope. that means that there is no precise agreement on what distinguishes an acronym from an initialism, nor on whether to use .s or not
-
EDC why does every discussion you enter involve you arguing purely on abstract ideas about the meanings of words? It seems like everything you argue includes WORDS HAVE NO MEANING. It's such a useless line of argument and you do this in every thread I see you post in and alskdjfldkjfdklfj why do I even care at this point saltw is dying my posts are shit the atmosphere here is all wrong
-
EDC why does every discussion you enter involve you arguing purely on abstract ideas about the meanings of words? It seems like everything you argue includes WORDS HAVE NO MEANING. It's such a useless line of argument and you do this in every thread I see you post in and alskdjfldkjfdklfj why do I even care at this point saltw is dying my posts are shit the atmosphere here is all wrong
It wasn't my argument though.
I quoted that from Wikipedia. All I'm doing is the same thing you are doing.
Also, acronyms are not words. While I admit that I argue words being between 99 and 100% subjective way more often than I should (which is entirely different from claiming WORDS HAVE NO MEANING), in this particular case that argument does not apply.
I'd agree that words have only one meaning long before I'd ever agree that acronyms can only have one meaning.
And yeah, you do have a point with this place dieing off. If you are working this hard to argue such an insignificant point about acronyms, you must realize that you are in this in a bad way. (it's ok Vell, we both are. This place just does bad things to me psychologically I suppose.)
-
shame you misinterpreted the thing you were quoting
-
It's what I do best.
Quoting is a futile and pointless endeavor anyways. That was the only thing I was really trying to prove here today.
(Also, I admit that it is indeed possible to get an acronym wrong. If you say something like "DKP" is an acronym for the phrase"Software Development Kit", then that is a valid example of you getting an acronym genuinely wrong.)
-
There exists such a concept of standards and common usage though.
-
calling it a Software Development Kit is not any more correct, you guys, it's just wrong in a different way.
-
calling it a Software Development Kit is not any more correct, you guys, it's just wrong in a different way.
Ahaha touche.
-
Lol judging by your feature list this is a big ol' pile of garbage too. The only way an action system can be any good in rm2k3 is if you're one of those brilliant psychos that used to make pixel movement and collision systems in the engine. No offense but there is absolutely no need for a dragonball z SDK in rm2k3. Hell there's no need for a dragonball z sdk period. 99% of dbz fangames are terrible (as opposed to I guess 80% of official ones), and if a good one exists it sure as hell wasn't made in rm2k3, and for god damn sure wasn't made using some useless middleware for your middleware like this.
lol did you even try it?
For those of you that did, thank you for at least taking the time to test it. Even if you didn't leave any cnc.
@Vellfire - Hey no worries, I'm use to this atmosphere lol. I've been around GW since the beginning and I've pretty much watched this place destroy all DBZ fan games from existance that have been posted here haha. I gotta admit though, this place use to be really active.
-
lol did you even try it?
I don't have to. I am familiar with the rpg maker engine, and if it uses the default rpg maker movement and collision system, it is impossible for this to be any good. If it doesn't, I'll try it, and you should put that in the feature list.
calling it a Software Development Kit is not any more correct, you guys, it's just wrong in a different way.
Yeah I guess arguing semantics while ignoring the more glaring problem is misguided.
-
I don't have to. I am familiar with the rpg maker engine, and if it uses the default rpg maker movement and collision system, it is impossible for this to be any good. If it doesn't, I'll try it, and you should put that in the feature list.
Yeah it does, but that doesn't mean it can't be good. It just means it can't be as good as buus fury or legacy of goku 2.
-
No it means it can't be good, full stop. The default RPG Maker Movement and Collision systems are in no way conducive to action gameplay. It is fallback of the engine itself. Fuck it. I'll download it later just to prove you wrong.
-
good to hear that your thinking about trying it lol. If you find any bugs or have some suggestions to improve it in rpg maker let me know.
@ Those who tried it, You can open it in rpg maker and select other characters to choose instead of the character you start off with. Remember though some are still being worked on.
-
c'mon guys just help him with the SDK... :/
-
I don't have to. I am familiar with the rpg maker engine, and if it uses the default rpg maker movement and collision system, it is impossible for this to be any good.
Come on dude that's the most stupid thing you could say to someone who worked on something to help the noobs of rpgmaker. It was very arrogant of you. Now just because of that I have to download this to see its worth
-
No it means it can't be good, full stop. The default RPG Maker Movement and Collision systems are in no way conducive to action gameplay. It is fallback of the engine itself. Fuck it. I'll download it later just to prove you wrong.
Do you really need to assume that it must be action-based gameplay to begin with?
DBZ games can be just as fun when played entirely turn-based if you know how to design it. (In fact, if I were the one making a DBZ SDK, I would model it after the turn-based RPGs made by Nippon Ichi. The RPGs they make have stats and leveling systems that always reminded me of DBZ, along with everything out there that is similar to DBZ. With the DBZ SDK I designed, people would be able to replace the default DBZ graphics with ones from Bleach/Naruto or One Piece or whatever and nobody would be none the wiser.)
-
In fact, if I were the one making a DBZ SDK, I would model it after the turn-based RPGs made by Nippon Ichi. The RPGs they make have stats and leveling systems that always reminded me of DBZ
What, in the sense that 99% of it is monotonous time wasting? LOLLLL
-
What, in the sense that 99% of it is monotonous time wasting? LOLLLL
Well yes, pretty much that.
As opposed to what? The 1-1.5% of the games out there that actually involve some slightly smaller percentage of monotonous time wasting? All they do is exaggerate the process, the very same way that DBZ exaggerates everything and drags it out to 5x-15x the normal length of any sensible plot-line.
-
Come on dude that's the most stupid thing you could say to someone who worked on something to help the noobs of rpgmaker. It was very arrogant of you. Now just because of that I have to download this to see its worth
You know what doesn't help noobs? Giving them tools specifically designed for dragon ball z fangames.
Do you really need to assume that it must be action-based gameplay to begin with?
DBZ games can be just as fun when played entirely turn-based if you know how to design it. (In fact, if I were the one making a DBZ SDK, I would model it after the turn-based RPGs made by Nippon Ichi. The RPGs they make have stats and leveling systems that always reminded me of DBZ, along with everything out there that is similar to DBZ. With the DBZ SDK I designed, people would be able to replace the default DBZ graphics with ones from Bleach/Naruto or One Piece or whatever and nobody would be none the wiser.)
I disagree that that would be better, but this isn't relevant to whether an action based dragon ball z fangame template (which is what this is, it's not turn-based) can be anything but terrible.
EDIT:
Well yes, pretty much that.
As opposed to what? The 1-1.5% of the games out there that actually involve some slightly smaller percentage of monotonous time wasting? All they do is exaggerate the process, the very same way that DBZ exaggerates everything and drags it out to 5x-15x the normal length of any sensible plot-line.
If it's fun it's not monotonous. If it's monotonous it feels like work.
-
I was going to take issue with what you said Alec (especially about fun and monotony being mutually exclusive terms), but then I remembered what this topic actually is, and decided to be personally done with all of it. (If you are entirely convinced that such a thing can only be terrible, then why put so much attention towards convincing people of that fact? So the people that actually could be interested don't end up wasting more time than you did in trying to convince them such a thing can only be a major waste of time?)
Given that I could never imagine myself feeling the need to ever want a DBZ styled template for an action-based RPGMaker game, I've really talked in this topic a lot more than I ever should have to begin with.
EDIT: Although the idea of making toolkits specifically built for assisting RPGMaker noobs in making even worse RPGMaker games even faster has now got me genuinely inspired. Now I want to make modified template so that any RPGmaker noob who wishes to make an RPG that requires 100+ hours of monotonous grinding will be able to do so with very little modification of the template I would provide for them. (They'd assume I was helping make their game better because they are dumb noobs, but in truth I'd really be helping make it so that everyone in the world hates RPGmaker games that much more! And thus, get that much closer to ending RPGMaker games for good! Anyone who truly despises RPGMaker should wish to be so devoted to this cause.)
-
especially about fun and monotony being mutually exclusive terms
Lol.
If you are entirely convinced that such a thing can only be terrible, then why put so much attention towards convincing people of that fact? So the people that actually could be interested don't end up wasting more time than you did in trying to convince them such a thing can only be a major waste of time?
Funzies?
-
Well yes, I do agree that convincing people that this template is a terrible idea, is itself much more fun than playing any game that ever could be made by this template, but you do realize that that's not saying much. (Fun is pretty subjective anyhow, but I'm certain I wouldn't be the only one here who also finds long division and/or having a root canal to be more fun also.)
EDIT: You also must realize that there will never be a conclusive end to these types of things being listed in new topics, for which you can disagree with in principle and go endlessly on about how bad it is. If you really do keep finding this particular activity genuinely fun, then you yourself are all the proof I need that it is entirely possible to have fun while doing something that is also monotonous.
-
Well its fun enough for me considering how much time I spend in this topic (very little)