Astro garden game online

Info : Genre: Co Kumpulan Informasi - Foto foto artis korea tercantik - Kali ini blog Kumpulan Informasi mau share nih Foto foto artis korea terbaru yang Sinopsis The Walking Dead is centered on Rick Grimes, a small-town police officer from Cynthiana, Kentucky, his family, and a number of ot Trik Internet Gratis Telkomsel 3 September Recent Post.

Movie More on this category ». SN Windows More on this category ». Become My Friends. You will not get additional gifts by posting requests for them. Regular gifts are found in the gift tab. Collection items Of these you can recieve a total of 30 gifts a day. Collection items are found in the collection box.

Requestable gifts This type of gift you get by asking friends for it. The person you ask is not able to get rid of your request in any other way than by sending the item you need, so if you send a request for a gift to an active player, you are likely to get it.

Requests can only be sent when you need the item. The earliest example of this is Sour Cream. Gifts of this type are often required for quests. As a general rule, you can get them by requests or whenever you do work in your garden or at your neighbors. The nano-chest is an extra bonus you get on occasion when you visit neighbors. It can contain all sorts cool stuff like collections items, money, xp, and materials. Gold Actions Gold actions are extra energy, that you can spend at your neighbors.

You get the gold actions by turning in the hebarium collection, or you craft an aid-package in the workshop. These quests will often take days to complete without the gold actions. As most players at some point find themselves in dire need of metal, the gold actions could be handy to have around for smashing some extra rocks at neighbors.

It is very easy to spend the gold actions unintentionally — and you will not get any warning, when you are about to use them. So it might be wise to only turn in the herbarium when you need the gold actions. So what to do first? These initial quests will guide you to get some funds built and to get your first buildings and animals.

Follow the quests, and focus one the ones furthest down your to-do list. These are the first quests in line, and you will get the others done with greater ease, if the older are done first.

Should you get stuck on the old ones then start on on some of the others, but keep your focus at the bottom of the to-do list. Only when you get your greenhouse restored, you will be able to see which quests are the important ones. There will be different kind of markings on the quests that lead you further towards completing the achievements.

These quests are the ones to focus on from now on. Choose which line you want to follow first — and complete one quest before moving on to the next — or you will find yourself in a need of materials, that seems endless.

And still you should not forget to make money by raising your animals and harvesting extra crops. Energy — the most basic material of all. You need it to feed your animals, plant and harvest crops, cut down trees and rocks, build and repair — and to scare off the occasional monster. These are your main sources. Which one will give the most is individual, based on how much you play and how many neighbors you have. Another important thing happens after the wedding:You now have 2 characters to juggle.

How to let both of your avatars work for you at them same time: Start off the first one by clicking away on tasks. Change avatar by clicking the male or female sign.

Start off the second one by clicking away on other tasks. Equipment vehicles and ammunition Vehicles: When you start the game your avatar comes with a standard pair of trainers. Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Cost — Communication : As you add more people, their interdependence often increases the need to talk through design intent and issues. Hand-offs can be expensive or sources of blockage.

Cost — Risk of failure: No creative undertaking as a certain outcome. Risk is converted directly into a cost in the form of rework or needing to implement an alternative design. For any specific class of content, you might not pay the cost, but over time the project as a whole will pay a higher cost for higher risk content. What is higher risk content? Time and resources are two factors that have a giant impact. An experienced team will often know how much time and resources they need.

Note that there is both individual risk and team risk when talking about experience. If a task involves lots of people and they have not worked together before, they have a much higher risk of failure even if an individual contributor successfully worked on a similar project in the past.

One might think this sort of risk spectrum results in cookie cutter content. But that is not necessarily so, especially with smaller teams. A style of content produced by someone who has spent years working on an uncommon set of skills will often be lower risk than that same person trying to copy a popular style of content. Always consider the fit between creative skills and content, not just popularity or examples. Cost — Late Revision : Only at the end of the project does the team start getting high volumes of quality player feedback.

With live games, the bulk of the critical feedback will happen long after launch. Late revision is particularly problematic for games-as-a-service. If your initial launch is even slightly successful, the title will spend the majority of its life undergoing constant revision.

The rigidity that you bake into content becomes a major constraint on the cost of future updates and whether or not your team can sustain the project. You live with it forever. Teams who only know single player games struggle here and need to reevaluate most of their assumptions. Diagram 2: Design insights happen throughout the schedule not just at the beginning. Total marginal chunk cost : So there are lots of costs that go into making a chunk of content. Be sure to honestly measure and summarize these.

Blindly insisting on an optimistic fantasy helps no one. Effectiveness — Load bearing : We now can talk about the other side of the leverage equation.

A game has pillars made of key experiences that it needs to deliver in order for it to be successful. This is the heavy weight of player, publisher and market expectations. Various mechanical systems and content support those pillars. These are places where you can use lower cost content. You might reuse existing content or apply generic purchased assets.

Alternatively, you can use the fact that non-load bearing content is low risk in order to experiment and be playful. I often find some non-load bearing chunks like item descriptions and inject them with my quirkiest writing.

Or give authoring of this content to someone who is learning. Effectiveness — Optimal set size : No practical system is scale free. On one hand, you want this number to be as high as possible in order to maximize the prototyping investment.

However, standardized content chunks also fade in effectiveness over time as well. There is often less marginal utility to a player as they experience the th level compared to the 1st level. And if you are crazy enough to make a th level, the utility can turn negative. Some players start to see the patterns behind your standardization and will ignore or resent non-meaningful variation. Effectiveness — Resonance with real player motivation : This should fall out of the exercise of determining if content is loadbear, but it is worth treating as its own thing.

The best content helps players fulfill their deepest intrinsic motivations. When content and system support support the various factors of self-determination theory, we see increased retention, engagement and player satisfaction. Here are some techniques I think about when building high leverage content architectures. Take these with a grain of salt. I find that as a team gains experience in a domain, they develop new tools and vocabulary custom tailored to the tasks at hand.

Each of the following tools will likely take your team a full game or two to start to understand and master. Lego blocks : Embrace composition by building player facing experiences out of highly reusable standardized content chunks. Consider a non-lego block design like early graphical adventure games.

Every pixel on the screen was hand placed. Every interactive puzzle was hand-scripted. Deep in the code there were common structures, but there was very little modularity or reuse.

Consider a game like Super Mario Bros. The world is composed out of standard block types, standard enemy types and standard player moves. Tiles are placed on a grid so their relationship to one another is highly predictable. The cost to create a screen of a Mario game is much less than the cost to create a screen of an adventure game. Thankfully, no one measures gameplays by screen any longer! Modular blocks intended to be composed together are not limited to tiles.

In the puzzle game Road Not Taken, each object was built out of a stack of standardized behaviors. A block might have the ability to be pushed. Or it might have another ability to slide if pushed. Or it could break. Or duplicate itself. Or move on its own. And by mixing and matching a relatively small number of these lego-like behaviors, we built out dozens of distinct objects.

References : Lego blocks usually use referencing where this is a master object stored in some central location and then an instance of that content is used in the composition. You may store instance specific properties. In general you want to specify the minimum number of instanced properties as possible since global late revision that touch a instances are expensive. It is better to store the bulk of the behavior on the master so that if you can make a change in one central location, the change happens everywhere.

However, some instanced properties let you adapt the instance to the current context. Templates : As you compose structures using your reusable chunks, you discover that there are some patterns you repeat again and again. To minimize work use templates, reusable structures that have blanks the author can fill in details.

Consider rooms in a Diablo-like game. There was a set of templates that defined each room. During level generation instances of the rooms would be plunked down and connected with hallways. However, inside each room a subset of different objects or enemies might appear. So even though there were standardized, reusable templates, each instance of the room felt different. References are a form of dependency where instances depend on the existence of their master.

However there are many dependencies that increase both initial content creation cost and future iteration costs. For example, recently we built a quest that required you to purchase an ingredient onions! The contents of the store were defined in chunks of data. While the quest asking for store items was defined in a totally different chunk.

Which just so happened to break the entire game. Decoupling at the most basic level is the process of eliminating unnecessary problematic dependencies. Content pipelines: As you start to engage with both composition and decoupling, we start splitting complex content into stages of work.

Early stages of work, composed of templates and referenced masters feed into later stages of composed instances. Each stage has its own required tools, processes for ingesting data from previous stages and processes for exporting data to subsequence stages. A content pipeline might involve the following three sub-pipelines of character art, terrain art and behavior code feeding into a finished level.

Notice that various content chunks pass through multiple stages in a fixed order across many tools in order to create the final output. A content author can compose multiple layered compositions. And if late changes need to be made to ever base layers, it is less of an issue. Observation — Non-linear leverage appears in how you build the pipeline : What we are seeing here is a key truth.

Non-linear leverage in your content architecture rarely comes from how you structure your base chunks. Instead it appears in how you build the composition of those chunks. In my experience, the more you can move into hierarchies of composition, more leverage is available. Sadly, it is rare that we can apply automated composition to every composition process in the pipeline. Anywhere there is manual composition, the order that elements are created matters.

This presents some challenges:. Vertical Slice: Build out a representative segment of the final content at full fidelity, test it to verify validity. Then meticulously lock down standards for each pipeline stage. In production, build content to these standards and trust that the end result will deliver on the promise of the vertical slice. Issue — Slow iteration : However, building the vertical slice is expensive and leads to slow iterations.

Issue — Bureaucracy : Another issue with vertical slices is that it puts immense pressure on the standards. They must be perfect and they rarely are. The answer is often more documentation. This acts as an organizational tendency for large bureaucracies and large teams where waste is common. Due to rigidities in the system, change — when it does occur — is often a destructive coup or pogrom. Vertical slices are very common in AAA. Prototype them. Test them. Ensure they are fun. Polish them to a high degree of fidelity.

Now lock down that element of the design. Then move onto the next stage of the pipeline that builds on the locked down stage and repeat. For example, if you are building a platformer, build, polish and lock down the most perfect jumping you can create. Then build a small level with blocks based off jumping so your game grows like an onion from the innermost layers. Issue — Highly systemic games : An issue here is many games require multiple interlocking systems to be in place before you know the game is fun.

Consider a game like Animal Crossing. It certainly has central mechanics like chopping trees and running around. But having just worked on a game in this genre until economy, narrative, pacing, affordances, inventory, other minigames are all in place, the game is desperately unfun. Issue — Late stage changes : The other issue is again one of managing late stage changes.

If you discover that you screwed up an aspect of the core gameplay early on, it can be expensive to pay the cost of that change rippling out across all the dependent layers of the content pipeline. When community playtesting suggested they needed to speed these up, it was an expensive fix. The early assumptions baked into the content architecture bit them.

Placeholders : Build a vertical slice of your game, but fill it with low fidelity placeholder content. This lets you test the game quickly and identify issues. As you become more confident of the validity of the work, you start refining and polishing.

Placeholders can be used with either vertical slices or bottoms up design and they inherit most of the same issues. Vertical slices still result in a lot of throw away work, but since you are using placeholders, iteration is much less expensive. With this strategy, you create a full version of the game that is playable end-to-end as inexpensively as possible.

And then you perform subsequent polishing passes until the game reaches a shippable state. Thimbleweed Park was built using a similar technique with a full playable version of all game rooms complete and iterated on before final art was added. Issue — ignorant stakeholders : A common issue with placeholders is that stakeholders do not have the critical sophistication to understand what is placeholder and what is final.

Games have been canceled when an executive looked at a graybox level and wondered why this game they are spending millions on is so obviously ugly. Many teams end up with a secret rule to only show their publishers near final art and claim it is placeholder. The risk of getting that one ignorant person is too high for honesty. And education can be an impossible lift. Instead go for lower fidelity content that is still thematically and symbolically representative.

If you are supposed to be petting a dog, use a picture of a dog. Scaffolding systems via value anchors : The challenge of cheaply validating systemic designs is unsolved. It is common, even when using vertical slices or playable skeletons to spend months or years!

For example, in order to test a crafting system, you need to build the crafting system, a UI, add the crafting content, add sources for that content, balance the sources, balance the crafting costs and finally anchor the crafted items to a functional purpose within the broader game. Even if you build the base crafting functionality quickly, the other elements take a lot of time and effort to coalesce.

One approach is to stub in value anchors early in production. By building the anchor first, you have something to judge the activities against. Later you can still add secondary activities and more nuanced anchors.

They are about setting up systems of value and tie into deep player motivations. The reason upgrading the house in Animal Crossing is interesting is not because of the mechanics of upgrading!

It is because the house holds your decoration and items, which in turn act as a signal of identity, progress and status. There are also content architectures that open up when you enable automated composition. This is an exciting open area ripe for additional experimentation and research. But this field has problematic roots. Researchers and new proc gen developers look for magical algorithms that provide fountains of surprising new content.

Like old cranks searching for perpetual motion machines, they hope to one day crack the problem of an infinite experience generator. It is very much the perspective of an engineer who is not an artist but still wants to magically create without learning art. Though certain machine-learning efforts show promise, I personally have no interest in this particularly philosophical approach.

Instead, I look at procedural generation entirely as a tool for high leverage content. It is these last two area where procedural generation techniques shine. A good automated composition pipeline allows designers to make changes at most stages and have those changes flow through into the end experience with little to no manual rework. However, procedural generation has a very real upfront cost. You need to abstractly design about your content and how it is assembled.

And build all the tooling for those specialized chunks. And then build the automation that assembles them. This can cost many multiples of just building a single content chunk manually.

Long term, you accumulate benefits in terms of cheaper iterations, but it is rarely clear that the initial investment was worth it. Technique — Combinatorics : Do you need chunks of content in a set? If so, the cost of making that content is often high.

And the post-release cost of changing that set is likely high as well. One technique is to split your desired content into sub-chunks that are arranged in orthogonal sets.

And then use combinatorics to generate an expanded set of final content that covers a wider surface.

This also provides us with non-linear leverage where adding one new shell type adds 20 new shells to collect. Issue — Bowl of Oatmeal: Combinatorics make it trivial to create what Kate Compton calls Bowls of Oatmeal , vast amount of content that is neither perceptually unique or differentiated.

Players will tend to latch onto patterns shared across your spread of content and filter out non-meaningful variation. Technique — Chocolate Chips Cookies : Another composition pattern is to mix high fidelity setpieces in a low cost substrate. You can think of your templated setpieces as chocolate chips. Players love them, but if they repeat them too often, they burnout on consuming them.

So they must be used sparingly. And the substrate they are embedded in is the cookie dough. Pleasant, filling, endlessly edible. But not very unique or interesting. Individually, these two types of content have flaws. The dough is low cost, but also results in bland experiences. The chocolate chips are high cost and overly consumable. But they provide great peak moments. By creating a pacing structure so that just as players are getting bored of the dough, they encounter a chip, the value of both can be extended.

In rogue-likes, you author setpieces in the form of rooms and boss encounters. And then you embed those in levels composed of randomly generated hallways and generic rooms. Just when you are getting tired of slogging through endless corridors, you see a magical unique room that changes the rest of your run. You give up control and risk quality, but sometimes gain new sources of content far beyond the resources of your team.

Player sourced testing : If you have a strong pre-release community, you can ask them to test the game. This path also includes analytics. Player sourced game content : You can go further and source actual content chunks. The most common example of this is crowdsourced localization, but it can be extended to other types of content. In Realm of the Mad God, we crowdsourced much of the pixel art.

Some important lessons from this and crowdsourcing localization:. Mods : Post launch you can open your game up to mods.

It is quite common for long lived popular games to source entire expansion packs or members of the ongoing dev team from the mod community. It is a gift that keeps giving. In-game social content : You can also build tools inside of your game and incentivize players to create content for other players.

There are many variations of this, but the main thing to note is that good UGC systems require you to design your game around them.

Not a simple add-on, but something at the heart of the core loop. And for that you need great tools. The goal of tools : Tools multiply the efforts of content authors. They help create:. Unless you get into generative systems, they tend not to be used to create large quantities of new content from some base seeds.

All game tools are custom designed : The first and most critical lesson you should learn is there are no standard tools. Every tool needs to be custom tailored to best fit the following constraints. I have Maya! I have Unreal! Those are standard tools.

Modern commercial tools are powerful enough to do almost anything. Without identifying and serving the previous constraints, you will flail. There will always be a tool design process for each game, even if it is built on top of an existing tool chain. Mistake — Not basing the tool features off real content needs : The most common pitfall that plagues tool creation is that feedback and iteration steps 2, 3, 5 and 6 simply never happen. An engineer makes a tool. They or antsy producers declare the tool finished and the rest of the team is told to use it.

You just lose the engineering effort. In the worst case, content authors use the tool but they spend truly enormous amounts of wasted time jumping through avoidable hoops.

The result is typically bad, hacky content that was expensive to create. And often needs to be thrown away. Mistake — Delays building real content : The next most common pitfall is that there is a large time gap between the first version being built and an author uses it to create real content.

In addition to general problems of skipping iteration, waiting too long has the following negative effects. Tip — Shadowing: Content authors infest old tools like fungus in a moist fecund jungle. Strange content will seep out of every crevice in the toolchain.

Authors learn, adapt and push tools in ways many find horrifying. In the process, inefficiencies creep in as the tool ends up being used in ways it was never intended.

This is normal. And it is a good thing. The first step in supporting your fungal creators is to understand how the tool is used in the real world. Shadowing is when a toolmaker watches a content creator build something. It is like playtesting for your tools.

I hope you find enough here of interest to explore further. Observe your own projects with a critical eye, experiment when possible and share notes with others.

For deep skills that cross multiple disciplines, a document alone will never be enough. Be humble. Content architectures are not a magical silver bullet for making more meaningful content with less effort. They can be a huge pain in the ass that introduces immense complexity, costs and risk into your game.

Because of the effort it takes to build and tune them, they often delay your ability to start playing the game. Diagram 5: When each incremental chunk is expensive and you need a lot of them, a higher leverage content pipeline might be worth your time.

Learning curve : Any content architecture and toolset has a substantial learning cost. The specific team using the system needs to understand and practice building great content with the tools. A level designer who has been using Unreal for 3 years will generally be a lot more effective than one who has been using it for 6 months. A team that has been building content for a specific genre on a specific engine will be much the same. Just a series of chapters composed of a few hundred pages.

Authored using bog-standard text editors. Yet we give that to writers with years of experience under their belts and amazing work emerges. A lot of times, you can just throw talent at a problem. And if you need to scale up, throw more bodies into the pipeline. The final constraint: Hand-authoring is our ultimate pinch point. Humans can only work as fast as humans work. They need to dream, experiment, clumsily and slowly make mistakes.

Naturally, as beancounters and producers, we want to multiply those efforts. To stretch out that costly thing and increase efficiency. But this hand-authored content is also the soul of our games. Dilute it too much and you destroy the very thing that provides value.

Your content architecture is a delicate balance act. Where do you put all your limited, beautiful, messy, human effort in order to provide the highest quality experience for the player? A worthy design challeng e. For Project Horseshoe , an annual game designer think tank, our workgroup investigated how economics could help promote prosocial values. Many things, obviously. But the most daring thing is to create stable communities in which the terrible disease of loneliness can be cured.

This paper looks at how we might use economics, an often dehumanizing and antisocial discipline, to support prosocial design goals.

By designing poorly we can do great harm. The two most likely negative outcomes are loneliness and toxicity. Loneliness is a significantly studied phenomenon in medical and psychological literature. It is a kind of social pain that is known to have physical, emotional, and mental consequences under prolonged exposure.

Loneliness has been medically associated with all-cause mortality , depression , and more. In aggregate, chronic loneliness is estimated to shorten lifespan by an average of 15 years. Loneliness causes stress in humans broadly, relating to feelings of vulnerability, and can also provoke scarcity mindset, in which a host of negative outcomes occur.

There is some evidence that heavy game use is significantly positively correlated with loneliness in youth , though further study on this subject specifically is needed. Increasing research is also showing the connection between heavy smartphone use and loneliness and social isolation.

When we combine the known severity of the consequences of loneliness with the connections shown between games, technology, and loneliness, it becomes clear that this is a pressing issue worthy of careful consideration and problem solving. Further amplifying the urgency of this problem is that increasing life expectancy is exacerbating loneliness. In a dark reinforcing loop, advancing age makes us more likely to be lonely , while it is known that loneliness poses particular health risks to the elderly.

As the median age of the world population increases, so too will the seriousness of the loneliness epidemic. It is a truism that people are mean to one another on the internet. At the root of much toxicity is the misdirection of our human need to belong. When humans lack membership in healthy, eudaimonic organizations, they experience stress and seek to rapidly remedy the situation, often in long-term sub-optimal ways. They may fearfully lash out at others, imagining that putting others down helps them rise in status.

They join tribal groups who use their shared pain to wreak havoc in the world in an attempt to control their feelings of fear and loneliness. Being a troll can fill an absence of purpose as we will describe below, purpose is a core component of conquering loneliness and this feels better to many than the isolation of not belonging. Toxicity is a rational though naive and self-defeating short-term strategy that emerges in the face a lack of human connection.

We often think of toxicity as bad people taking advantage of a poorly hardened design. There is a small amount of truth to this theory; a tiny percentage of players are sociopaths. As a result, we attempt to treat the symptoms of trolling and griefing with ever-increasing moderation or community management.

However, we are learning that a badly designed social system actively generates toxicity, often at a rate that will inevitably overwhelm the human resources aimed at controlling it. The systems can inadvertently isolate people in closed-off loops where their fundamental social needs are ignored. In toxic systems every new user is potentially rewarded if they adopt toxic behaviors. The broad solution to the bulk of both of these issues is to design systems that build relationships between players: preventing fire, rather than creating fire which must then be fought.

These are organized into at least three major categories. This paper focuses on the final category: economic aspects of prosocial game design. When folks who have taken a course in micro or macro-economics think of economic design in a multiplayer game, they immediately imagine things like supply and demand, auction houses or player-to-player trade.

And these are indeed classic economic systems. Almost all game systems that manipulate player incentives, acquisition of resources, or use of those resources, can be examined with an economic lens. When we build a game, we create a cartoon world that players agree to mostly operate within. Nothing within the cartoon world is real but we can still build meaningful relationships between virtual objects that give players an interesting system to manipulate.

The economic operations involving the creation and manipulation of endogenous value in the cartoon world are known as the internal economy. For example:. We have a variety of economic elements within a game. Many of these come to us via computer science and systems theory , not directly from traditional economics. With this relatively simplistic set of building blocks, a designer can model most economic flows within a game.

This includes complex or emergent phenomena like various feedback loops, ownership just another property of a token , or trade. In additional to being the structural foundation that all systems design in a game rests upon, economics also impact player behavior via incentive structures.

This flow exemplifies classic metrics-based game balancing. And it is nearly impossible to do efficiently without spreadsheets and graphs tracking all the relationships of elements within the internal economy. Consider the following common game system through the lens of game economics:. Sadly, traditional real-world economics does not map perfectly to game economics. Economics is predominantly concerned with the central Economic Problem , namely. Economics is an ever-evolving discipline, but it has theoretical foundations that reach back to at least the s.

The influence of older ideas and models continues to this day. Interesting areas of investigation include behavioral economics, which is starting to grapple with a few of these issues using piecemeal experiments.

Modern economics study since the 90s has increasingly used computers to test more complex models. However, these build incrementally on early work that was limited by the data collection and computing capabilities of the time. Where game developers essentially have a panopticon that records every possible player interaction within our cartoon worlds, economists are usually desperately making do with any data at all. In games, metrics and processing complex models is relatively cheap.

We may gain more from studying game theory especially iterated computational simulations and some microeconomics. It is not currently obvious what macroeconomics offers beyond general rules of thumb. Economics embraces reductive utilitarianism and posits you can put a price on anything. Once you make this critical assumption, there are all sorts of wonderful things you can do with prices, buying, selling, etc.

However, simply putting public prices on relationship interactions breaks them. The practice of economics is as much historical mapmaking as it is a science. Economists are mostly poking at existing, highly complex socio-economic systems and attempting to accurately measure results. Interventions intended to bring about future results are as much guesswork as they are predictions of proven models. However, bringing scientific rigor to economics still appears to be a work in progress.

All this makes it a challenge to pull clear models out of economic literature and apply them directly to our game designs. At best, some microeconomic theories seem to be generally true within given contexts. But like many design tools, these are subtle instruments to be wielded to craft a desired outcome.

The practice of economics has increasingly become intertwined with the politics of governmental policy. Politics is as much a world of using the right rhetoric and building the right alliances, as it is about doing quality science with reproducible lessons.

Your typical theoretical economist will wait years, if not decades, before witnessing any policy changes that actively test their theories. And often the economists who are most successful are those that invest in the political relationships and rhetoric that makes their work palatable. This dynamic drives insidious corruption.

The political influence alone makes it incredibly difficult for those outside of economics to distinguish if shared lessons are reliable insights or heavily biased propaganda.