[FVG]: Making the Final Decisions

[Mike Ciance]

we need to make all our final decisions if we are going to get production moving and get the final go-ahead from FIRST. here are some decisions i have made, post if you wish to debate them.

• controls
  • we will use the "voodoo" control method described in previous threads
  • any special features will be saved for last, or added post-release as expansions
• distribution
  • game will be free and downloadable
  • game will be hosted on sourceforge
• modes
  • single match
  • season
  • practice (drive alone on field)

we need to define our objectives, so here is a list for starters:

• creating an accurate representation of the FIRST competition
• increasing interest in robotics and FIRST
• bringing FIRST to a new medium

please give input on these

[Ryan M.]

Originally Posted by afflictionblade

• controls
  • we will use the "voodoo" control method described in previous threads

Debate... And my debate is: I just don't like it; it seems like it will be hard to control in game, and might potentially inaccurate. Feel free to ignore me.

Originally Posted by afflictionblade

• modes
  • single match
    
    • online
    • local (against AI)

I assume this is including the online play.

[Mike Ciance]

Originally Posted by Texan

Debate... And my debate is: I just don't like it; it seems like it will be hard to control in game, and might potentially inaccurate. Feel free to ignore me.

all the "voodoo" functions will also have corresponding key functions. this way, somebody can use only keyboard if they really wanted to. voodoo just allows for more natural and accurate movements for the more complex mechanisms. analog arms, expecially 2-jointed, would be the prime example of this feature's usefulness.

Originally Posted by Texan

I assume this is including the online play.

yes, that will include online play

[Ryan M.]

Originally Posted by afflictionblade

all the "voodoo" functions will also have corresponding key functions.

Oh, ok. Cool... I'd have to include a 'small' easter egg if not...

[mtrawls]

Originally Posted by afflictionblade

we need to define our objectives, so here is a list for starters:

• creating an accurate representation of the FIRST competition
• increasing interest in robotics and FIRST
• bringing FIRST to a new medium

please give input on these

Well, you asked for it! It seems to me that the first objective just might be in conflict with the second objective. Personally, I'd losen "an accurate representation" to "an exciting game based on FIRST". It wouldn't be too easy to create a situation where you had 5 minutes to do a major hardware repair while simutaneously trying to track down a difficult software issue -- but that would be an accurate representation of the FIRST competition. To make the game fun, and also "codeable", you'll have to depart from faithfulness to reality at certain points. So, while "accurate representation" might be nice, I wouldn't say it should be an objective, so much as on a list of "if we can do it, fine, but don't do it to the detriment of our objectives" (that being the verbose name of the list). But I do think that this a really important discussion that probably merits its own thread, just so it will receive more attention and not be distracted by the other discussion going on here. There are going to be tough decisions down the road, and if you don't have any guideing objectives, it will be that much harder to come to a decision -- that most everyone agrees to.

Debate... And my debate is: I just don't like it; it seems like it will be hard to control in game, and might potentially inaccurate. Feel free to ignore me

It seems to me that the use or the dis-use of these "vodoo" controls isn't something that needs to be "finalized". If you design a system that controls the robot based on input (e.g., Robot is passed the data packet), then how that input is gotten is a side issue, -- there could be several pluggable modules, which, while perhaps involved in coding those modules, wouldn't affect in any way the rest of the design. Discussing random elements (controls, AI algorithms, etc.) is nice and all, but without any unifying design decisions, it seems rather futile, especially since many of these decisions could be affected by the overall design. In summary: control can be changed easily without affecting other elements of game; also, I strongly suggest to come up with a good and detailed, yet general, outline of the structure of the game itself from a programming standpoint (ignoring irrelevent side issues like "ijkl" steering).

Well, I promise not to say all that again, ... I do sound like a broken record. So you can rest assured I won't mention it again. Unless I change my mind. I might do that.

[Mike Ciance]

Originally Posted by mtrawls

It seems to me that the use or the dis-use of these "vodoo" controls isn't something that needs to be "finalized". If you design a system that controls the robot based on input (e.g., Robot is passed the data packet), then how that input is gotten is a side issue, -- there could be several pluggable modules, which, while perhaps involved in coding those modules, wouldn't affect in any way the rest of the design. Discussing random elements (controls, AI algorithms, etc.) is nice and all, but without any unifying design decisions, it seems rather futile, especially since many of these decisions could be affected by the overall design. In summary: control can be changed easily without affecting other elements of game; also, I strongly suggest to come up with a good and detailed, yet general, outline of the structure of the game itself from a programming standpoint (ignoring irrelevent side issues like "ijkl" steering).

he's right, controls are not the main issue right now, so forget about me saying they were urgent.

however, the mission statement is something very important we need to work on. here is the new list:

• increasing interest in FIRST
• creating a fun, appealing representation of the FIRST Robotics Competition
• bringing FIRST to the medium of electronic gaming

[mtrawls]

Another suggestion I will make, is the creation of a "roadmap" consisting of what you plan to complete by when. It would only be very tentative, and have to be changed frequently as new decisions are made, ... but it is something that would be very useful. Consider,

Jul 23: Objectives defined
Jul 29: Very rough outline of game structure
Jul 30 - Aug 10: Debate
Aug 11: New outline

(Random dates used, just to drive the point home. Include more things you need to do, etc.) Also note that documentation like this, the eventual outline, etc., make the whole project look more official, which is good from the standpoint of getting FIRST to give permission to use their logo, or other outside contact (like Sourceforge).