298 replies to this topic

[MarkyJoe1990]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yyMW2gSCcHU

The Goal:
Make a creative one-chapter hack that is both rage-inducingly hard, and funny.

Rules:
1. Custom events are required for your chapter. Custom maps on the other hand, are no longer required as of Ragefest 3.
2. If beating your chapter requires enormous amounts of luck, it will be disqualified.
3. Your chapter must include a walkthrough with it in case I get stuck. Although it's not required, I recommend that you include information on optional stuff I might miss.
4. Arenas are banned.
5. Fog of War with vision distance less than 3 requires an easy and early to obtain torch or unit with vision distance bonus (Thief vision).
6. Fire Emblem 5 styled Fog of War with vision distance less than 5 requires an easy and early to obtain torch or unit with vision distance bonus (Thief vision).
7. You may give the player three prompts to save state. If you do not use all of your prompts, point it out, either in the hack, or in a document included with the hack. Make sure to explain how many prompts you did not use. All unused prompts will serve as a "free save" for the player to use at any time s/he wishes.
8. FEXP submissions will be accepted.

Awards:
"Sadist" Award - Most Rage Inducing
"Jester" Award - Most Hilarious
"Strategist" Award - Most Genuinely Challenging
"Artist" - Best looking Map
"Writer" - Best Story
"Ragefest Winner" - Best submission overall

Deadline: 04/07/2012

Playlist:

http://markyjoe1990.herobo.com/videos/?page=rf3

Edited by MarkyJoe1990, 25 May 2012 - 07:04 PM.

[Burning Gravity]

Oh no, it's here.

What ever happened to ragefest 2?

In any case I'm sure this one will be much more active. Good luck to all the participates.

[s]*is prepared for a deadline extension to be announced sooner than later*

[MarkyJoe1990]

Oh no, it's here.

What ever happened to ragefest 2?

In any case I'm sure this one will be much more active. Good luck to all the participates.

[s]*is prepared for a deadline extension to be announced sooner than later*

Ragefest 2 is still going. I have one more submission to upload.

I'm starting Ragefest 3 since 1) It should have started already and 2) I want people to start working on their Ragefest 3 submissions.

Edited by MarkyJoe1990, 09 November 2011 - 09:54 PM.

[zahlman]

Having a ragefest constantly "in the pipeline" seems like a good idea to me. Love the promotional artwork too btw.

[MarkyJoe1990]

Gotta keep people in the FE community productive, y'know?

Also gotta keep them entertained. Helps keep people interested in Fire Emblem hacking and stuff.

Oh, and it gives me something to upload.

And thanks for the compliment. I made the artwork myself.

Edited by MarkyJoe1990, 10 November 2011 - 08:48 AM.

[47948201]

Instead of saying "permitted", I'd say that group work should be "recommended". Having a team should provide extra incentive to actually make and finish a project. Having 2-3 entries per contest is kinda disappointing =/

Also, I just thought. If FOW is considered "luck-based", then would ambush spawns also be disallowed?

[AstraLunaSol]

^I would assume it would have to depend on where they were spawned, as well as how powerful they are.

[47948201]

Hummm... I have mine planned so that if you play like you're supposed to, nobody dies. I mean, some of them will be kinda common-sensey, but either way, I don't really equate trial-and-error to being based on luck.

Also, Marc, you should totally make full custom events not required. Just have it so people need to playtest chapters with minimal or nonexistent custom events. That should increase the number of submissions by quite a bit. There are definitely creative ways you can move/alter/extend reinforcements, unit locations and classes, maps that can use the same events, etc. within certain chapters (for chapters besides Prologues, I'd say that a savestate of the start of the chapter should be a requirement)

[Ryrumeli]

- FEXP is permitted

If I am not asking too much could I ask the reasoning behind this clause. I do believe that anyone without ASM knowledge will find competing in gameplay elements with a FEXP game very complex. And the complexity to make a custom gameplay element in BWD's system is infinitely smaller than of a rom hack. Hence I wonder if this specific rule would be honestly just for all people in the contest.

At most I would find fair 2 different categories, one for FEXP and one for Rom Hack. Just curious on this honestly.


Also, this sounds promising. Due to being away when both started I could not join any of these. Maybe this time I may form a team to join. :)

Edited by Ryrumeli, 16 November 2011 - 01:26 PM.

[Furetchen]

FEXP could compete with regards to its frustrating lag?

[zahlman]

At most I would find fair 2 different categories, one for FEXP and one for Rom Hack.

I support this. As Furetchen implies, both ways of doing things have their own challenges, and I suspect they shouldn't be directly compared, as long as technical merits are being considered in judgment.

[Burning Gravity]

I think allowing FEXP was part of an attempt to get more submissions in.

I mean only 3 submissions last time was kind of disappointing, if I were Markyjoe I'd want as many submissions as I could get XD

[47948201]

So ROMhacking has its limitation, and so does FEXP, for sure.But having separate categories for each of them would defeat the purpose: to increase the number of entries like Blazer said. And why would them having their own challenges mean they should be compared separately? ._.

I mean, I'm not exactly going to fight for FEXP to not be counted with the ROMhacks(though I totally should after all the work I've put into my FEXP thingy), but I'm a tad unsure of you guys' reasoning.


..Though I'm not entirely sure on what Ryru means with his first paragraph.

[Ryrumeli]

Then I will gladly explain what I meant. :)


I just meant that it is simpler to use ruby(It was ruby that RPGMaker used to create custom scripts was it not?) that is a high level language than to use raw assembly or C and debug the game until you find a say 20 byte routine inside of a rom of 16 mbs and repoint it and recreate all related graphics in binary form and make the game which was not coded to run your command to do so. It is cleaner, smoother to make a hack in BWD's system than in a rom. Some hacks which sound simple in theory when reality strikes become really hard, due to the system never being created to think on a certain way. And if we judge on the final product instead of the changes from the original package, which is nothing but fair since this is a game design contest, then users of FEXP will have an advantage in technical terms.


In other words, technically-wise it is easier to introduce gameplay-altering elements in BWD's system. Specially graphical systems like custom menus and stuff. And it is also ready for things such as custom skills, which I had a week-worthy of programming to make happen for my rom hack. It doesn't require hacking in the sense of debugging because we have a source to work on. And I believe that the presence of a source makes all a bit smoother. To the point that many software companies in the world charge more than twice of the original price of a program if it includes it's source code. And companies pay for it.


I understand that he wants more entries in. But I don't know where creating multiple categories would affect that. I would even say, give a prize for best romhack, a prize for best FEXP game, and then a general prize, which is what this contest would have all along no? Just my reasoning, I really support this contest, albeit I just wonder if I will be able to join it due to time restrictions. ^_^'

[MarkyJoe1990]

- Changing Team work from "permitted" to "recommended"

- Fog of War is considered luck based only if you make it unfair, like giving the player little viewing range, with no torch or thief to make matters easier. As for ambush spawning, that's allowed, since that's a matter of trial & error than luck. Ambush spawning can also be made fair if you give prior warning, like what FE6 did.

- The whole "not requiring custom events thing" is a bit shaky with me. AFK's reasoning isn't bad, but I fear this will cause submissions of lesser quality to come in. I'd like to see if anyone else agrees with him first before I change the custom event requirement rule.

[47948201]

Okay, I see what you're getting at with how much harder it'd be to judge them together, and I actually like the idea of having three separate categories... Assuming we've got enough entries for that, that is...

[Klok]

If someone takes the time to code custom events with FEXP (I'm guessing you mean in Ruby, or else people are just throwing around the word "events" not knowing what it means, or maybe I'm missing the point) then I think it should be allowed. PK has a funny little code plugged in that gave me a damn good chuckle when I saw it, and it's not game breaking or anything.

And if someone actually knows how to code in ruby, maybe they'll finally finish work on FEXP so everyone else can use it. As for how FEXP has more allowance for custom code, I'd worry about that later lol. Right now it's a little bit behind Rom hacking in almost every way. Hell the only reasons I prefer it are easy mapping, more room for text (3 line default in dialogue instead of 2) and easier eventing on the map. Otherwise there's not much else redeeming it over romhacking right now. SO, in maybe a year or so if it ever gets updated or completed and a bit more mainstream, then you might worry about seperating romhacks from FEXP games during ragefest. Until then, let them be together.

[CT075]

FEXP is better than ROMhacking in two situations:

A) You know Ruby, or are somewhat good at blindly guessing what each code does by blindly guessing at this.
B) Someone decides to step up as a developer for FEXP.

As a (hobbyist) programmer myself, though, I'd have to say that programming is a lot easier than ROMhacking.

[Celice]

It depends. ROMhacking is often portrayed as more limited because... most of the enthusiasts are more interested in editing a game, rather than making their own homebrew. The 'brewers would say it's more free, just as you did, for the sole reason that you're only limited by your knowledge of the programming language (and its relative restrictions).

Many have said they preferred ROMhacking as the better because it can 'cause one to think more creatively about how to get something working in an already-existing project. It also has a bit more of a special flare for fans of a game to come back and play the game in a new way, rather than just play another fan-game programmed up. It's usually a matter of personal taste.

[Ryrumeli]

What Kam said is very well said. Adding up to what he said, though, the difference is not only that. But also the fact of how it works in practical terms.


It is easier to learn to "Open documents in notepad and reading the logic" and the language Ruby, which is a script-level language, than learning how to "Debug the game" and then learning Raw Assembly, and then abstracting all mathematical and binary operands in logic, and then editing it. And for example, not having to worry with the excessive details of Assembly like how every pointer should be aligned by 4, having to find out free space for every routine you need to expand, worrying about range limits for Bs and BLs, and even worrying about weather you use ARM or THUMB for hacking a specific routine... Languages like C were created so a programmer could worry less about details and more on logic, and script languages then were created so codes would be more powerful with even less worry on details.


And if you're thinking by now "Oh but he only means of his technical stuff, Assembly and all.", keep in mind you also have to find free space, repoint, turn into binaries, create palettes and stuffs for every single other detail you do, be it a new background, song, map, event, in a romhack. Save for Text and Mugs, and all FEditor does. Until NM3 it will be a deadly flaw of romhacks.


I do agree that right now FEXP is less advanced than FE is. But it is also easier to change. Not having to worry about free space, being able to fix glitches without demanding tons of debugging, having all the source open to you in every single change. If one considers just what is available right now FEXP loses easily. But if you consider that adding stuff for FEXP is easier, that many limits we learned how to live with in romhacking aren't that meaningful for FEXP, that you also have access to hundreds of Ruby codes created for generic RPG maker games which can be used as a base for new things for FEXP, comparing to the relative difficulty that is creating custom events, and that ruby is easier and more mainstream than raw assembly for sure, then I honestly can't see them competing equally for someone serious about what they are doing in the same span of time.



Then again, I never said they shouldn't compete. :) I honestly think that a romhack could stand up just fine to a FEXP game, don't get me wrong. I do believe my hack will. I just think that development is, indeed, easier. I think everyone that plans on using FEXP should keep on considering such, it is a great tool, and it doesn't replace nor obsoletes romhacking. But separating the thing into categories wouldn't hurt new entries, since the final prize will still be the same, will create more prizes, and more prizes are always great, and will be a bit more fair for those that put a huge amount of effort in their projects, be them FEXP or Romhacks. :) I would be in for more categories, like funniest and stuff, even if it wasn't just technical categories.





Tl;dr I still suggest 3 categories. I can understand if Marky doesn't want more categories for any reason of his own, but I still find it a better approach IMHO. This is just an exposition of my point of view, and nothing else. :) This contest rocks regardless.