Grid movement

[megamushroom]

ok, grid movement, something which I am undecided on. It is ok, but what do you like and dislike about it?
I like the order it brings, I think it looks professional, but I also do not like its lack of responsiveness. I think it is suited in games such as the ff series, but not in realtime games. Imagine running away while stuck to a grid?! ;D
Nowadays, the 3-d RPG's dont use grids, but some old school ones do.

anyway, what is your opinion and why?

IA: oinion?

[IsmAvatar]

I like grids, but not for the reason mentioned. I like them because they make gameplay much better. It prevents the character from getting stuck. It limits the character's freedom, so they can't find quite as many bugs. I like grids from the programmer's point of view.

From the player's point of view, I think some of the best RPG's come from grid movement (Pokemon, quite a popular one. FF is ever popular)

In Arthur, I plan on possibly making the battle system real time, but as mentioned, it might not be fun trying to run away or attack on a grid, so I may be stuck with turn based-ish (or a new system not exactly turn based, but the same idea, like how FF does it).

[megabrain]

Having grids easifies the professional lookings, but requires everything to be grided. If eg. your char is 24x32 the tiles should be 24x24. If not, the freedom is greatly decreased, hence making the game unprofessional.

Grid is more beutiful, but requires a lot of work with tiles and obstacles

Pixel by Pixel is a lot easier, but can cause the player to get stuck.

[Flashback]

Having grids limits the user too much, and can sometimes be very difficult to implement. I despise Grid movement...

[megamushroom]

haha, never known anyone to despise grid movement!

How do you mean it limits the user?

And I have implemented it into my game pretty easily, has any one else found it hard/easy?

[IsmAvatar]

It limits the user because it makes battle systems hard. You have to go 4 directions. You can't change direction until you are snapped to grid. Collision isn't quite as much "fun" as in not-grid, because you have to be lined up perfectly to collide, whereas in other systems there may be minor collision avoiding (move 4 pixels left and continue to move, like Harvest Moon), so there's no guessing, you're either aligned or not.

It's very limiting. That's why programmers prefer grid. Because it's fool-proof.

[Flashback]

as Ism said.


kindly stop laughing at peoples opinions. How would you like it if I did that to you (Now THAT's Cliched)?

[megamushroom]

wow, i wasn't being mean when i laughed, just thought you were funny

sorry if i offended you.

Anyway, back to the subject, I didn't realise grid movement was used in battle situations, to me that is wrong, as It would limit the player a lot!!

In my opinion, it should only be used when walking in towns etc, not for battling.

IA: a lot, two words, though not commonly known.

[dwmitch]

PlayStation ruined me for grid based movement. Of course, it generally annoyed me before I even played FFVII.

There are ways to get around collision problems non grid games, which I will post when I perfect (hint: location based masks).

[IsmAvatar]

yes, masks tend to be the best way, though yet again, it seems buggy, because although your body doesn't stick out that for, for some reason you have to be so far away, and stuff like that.

[IAmshad0wcantrememberpass]

It depends on the sprite sizes and view width.

It was good in pokemon and ff, because the sprites are tiny (16x16, and 16x24)- and also the amount of things visible on the screen is limited, as if you are flying in a helicopter, and closer to the ground.

It isn't good if you got 32x32 sprites and you can see a large portion of the map, cause then you feel so sluggish.

So to sum it up, crappy in games with a large field of view, good with games with a small field of view.