Petscii Robots Gameplay Tutorial

[@TechieandrewB]

David, first off I want to say. Great game, amazing game for me. As someone in the same age group as you, this game just looks and feels "right" . I played the shareware version for about 5 or 6 hours before I beat the first level. I loved experimenting with everything that much. Who cares if I die a hundred times? The game is a blend of so many things, but it works. I just bought the full MS DOS version and now have it running on my "Win98 games PC" a P3 1000Mhz machine I picked up 2 years ago. Robots is now in my top 5 DOS/WIN9X games list for sure. Keep up the good work.

[@sanctanox]

I developed games in the 90s and even back then knew that people don't read manuals and a game (demo) had only 1-3 minutes in which the gamer would decide if she/he likes it or never touches it again so I put a lot of work to tell the gamer what she/he had to do (in a fun and enjoyable way). This was key to success - even 30 years ago.

[@Kefka.]

I will tell you why I would ignore the doors/buildings, as I often do this in games. To me, the building is clearly where I am meant to go, and thus also where the challenge might begin. You don't go into the building unprepared (for some reason I am thinking of the TNG episode "Descent part one" when Picard and team mindlessly go into the Power Ranger HQ's). I would think to search the area, as there might be hidden stuff that will make me more powerful and thus better prepared for whatever it is when I go into the building. Also, in many games you can only go forward in some circumstances, so if I go into the building I might never get to search the outside area again. Of course, this is if I go into a game blind.

[@Jammet]

Same deal. Enclosed areas, I explore systematically. I start of playing my games by trying to find the usual "end of the world". In an explorative, open game, I do that, anyway. So I basically map things out in my head. BUT - if I have a map in a game, I typically don't. Then I'll be much more selective about where I want to go.

[@The8BitGuy]

Well, that makes sense for you. But when I watch people at gaming conventions, they wander around the forest for a few minutes, then get bored and walk away. So I don't think they were saving the building for last.

[@CoreyStup]

Maybe the first level, the space ship lands in an area outside the building that is captive (a landing pad perhaps). You get your pistol and then can only go thru the pad doors. So you start them in a guided way and only once thru the first building are they in open space.

[@BL-ob9fn]

​@@The8BitGuy I haven't played the game yet, so I don't know how well this would work in practice, but what if the atmosphere is poisonous and will kill you unless you get inside a building quickly? Once inside you can find an oxygen tank that will let you spend more time outside.

[@mjdxp5688]

@@The8BitGuy Perhaps some kind of pointer or small in game tutorial message would help out with that, this definitely is the kind of game you want an instruction manual beside you for, but a few little pointers could be useful.

[@flightlesschicken7769]

They are exploring the map. You know all the maps because you made them, but these people may have no idea what this map looks like. And since they don't know what it is like, they look around for points of interest that they will come back to later after looking for more points of interest. It's a pretty common habit when exploring in a videogame

[@Martipar]

The doors signify the "right" way, going the "wrong" way in games often leads to secrets, hidden areas, loot etc. If i'm playing Fallout or Skyrim I will always see my optins and take the turn I think is least likely to be the most direct route towards the target.

[@timatkins4754]

The first point - why gamers would explore their surroundings instead of going straight into the building… made me think of Gauntlet. The first four levels “trained” the player. If on the first level you didn’t explore, you missed out on the short cuts to the next levels. Same with the first level of Doom - it encouraged you to explore the first room(s) to find armour, ammo, different weapon etc. if you took the time. Personally, I’d not search a ship for a weapon. I’ve just got out of it into a hostile environment; it would make sense to have it in my hand. However, if there was a game mechanic in the first map that suggested to look in the ship - like a message at the bottom of the screen where the ship’s computer warned the player to pick up their gun from the ship before leaving, that would encourage players to search and they’d learn that mechanic. Users/players never perform as expected. Speaking as a developer, you just have accept they aren’t going to watch a tutorial, read a manual or use software as you expect them to. Sometimes, you just have to let them work out where they are going wrong and figure it out for themselves. Some will turn this into a positive. “Hey, I found if you search the ship you get a weapon straight away! Cool!” Others… maybe not. Either way, I’d always treat this as a learning experience and took comfort in that there’s was a next time to try a new approach.

[@soviut303]

I think including some teaching moments early in the game would be good. Maybe have the lander site surrounded by barriers so players are encouraged to examine things, including your ship. Maybe have a destructible object you have to clear with the laser to get out. Or, if you're want the ability to do 100% pacifist runs, include a more complex way of getting out. It doesn't need to be a tutorial, just a way of demonstrating the game mechanics early on.

[@MatthewChaplain]

1:15 It's because the doors represent a two-way barrier to which you can return. So you see a door, think to yourself, "Ok, I can go in there later, but more importantly whatever is in there can't come out, so I'll go elsewhere and come back later when I've checked that everything else is safe."

[@Arcad3n]

I don’t know if this would work, but maybe just make the very first door permanently open to make sure people know they can go in? Have it be a “broken” door that’s stuck open. Oh and maybe make the door shut behind you so you have to actually open the door to get through, forcibly teaching the player that you can open doors!

[@CoreyStup]

Maybe make the trigger for the first doors much wider. As soon as they come into frame the door animation runs. That brings attention to it and sticks with the same mechanics as future doors.

[@SummonerArthur]

Yeah, make the player be stuck locked inside the landing thing and search for the pistol there AND have the player open a door to exit to the main map

[@joshuak2872]

That's a good idea, I've been gaming since NES when I saw the doors, my thought was, "I'm going to need to search for a key to open them" and my reasoning was they looked fine visually, they weren't broken as you mentioned. So based on experience when I see a door functioning I'm thinking I need to find a way to open it.

[@sokolum]

No! Just learn to play the old style

[@DaveChurchill]

Thanks for making a video showing the gameplay for those of us who don't own a copy. The game looks amazing for the technology that you've been able to put it on. However, I think that laughing at users for following their instincts when they first launch the game isn't productive, to me it's just an artifact of what may be poor game design, at least when it comes to new users. Half the fun to me of playing a new game that I would buy for older systems was trying to figure out the game WITHOUT reading the manual, even though the game designers assumed that you would. I realize that not all games should have hand-holding tutorials like modern games, but making the first enemy in the game be able to very easily kill the player and offer no advice on how to destroy it seems a little rough, and you can't really fault people for feeling that way. The absolute hardest part about gameplay design is putting yourself in the shoes of a new user who doesn't know how to play the game well. If you want them to read the manual, then you may want to put some text in the game that says that. Or something like "try searching the ship" if you initially get too far away without a weapon. Or maybe the first few things that you are 'supposed' to search have a flashing light, or other attention attractor. Or maybe put something that's more obviously searchable like a container next to the ship. Another example is that in the first level you could spawn them inside a tiny room where the only way out is to walk through a door, that way users know that doors open and they will be more likely to go through the door that you said they didn't seem to want to go through. Little things like this can work wonders for newer players. When we make games, we watch many new user playthroughs, and while it may be amusing to watch them make mistakes, or it may be easy to make fun of them, what you really need to do isn't to view them as bad players, but ask what about your design made them make that mistake and try to correct it. One of the biggest issues as you mentioned is that the game is a strategy game, not an action game. However if they first thing you do is give the user a gun and let them roam freely around the map, then this really does FEEL like an action game, so users will play it that way. It's a tough balance for sure

[@ZX3000GT1]

'making the first enemy in the game be able to very easily kill the player and offer no advice on how to destroy it seems a little rough' God forbid you tried Elden Ring, where the same time you went out of the tutorial area you'll actually find a mini-boss which can kill you in like 2 hits. And that's a new AAA game released this year, and is currently the contender for this year's GOTY awards.

[@DaveChurchill]

@@ZX3000GT1 Souls games are known exactly for that gameplay style of being very difficult, but having the controls and intuition to back up the style of play. I'm not saying that games shouldn't be difficult, but they should be a little intuitive as well. Immediately handing someone a gun and then having the first thing they shoot be extremely difficult to kill isn't exactly great design. Being difficult does not make a game good. Making a good game that is also difficult is a testament to masterful game design. Cherry picking the best possible examples of that in gaming history as a cop out for complaining about unintuitive difficulty is a lazy argument.

[@The8BitGuy]

I think pretty much any arcade game I've EVER played would fall under the category of first enemy you encounter killing you. Pac-Man, Q-Bert, Super Mario Bros, etc. That being said, I did have beta testers in the early days (I did a video on this) where I had people come in and play the game in front of me while I made notes. This had a drastic effect on some of the game-play as I made many changes to make it more user-friendly. But there's only so much you can do.

[@DaveChurchill]

@@The8BitGuy For sure, arcade-style games were pretty brutal as well, but they were usually action style games where the 'what I need to do' is pretty obvious to the user. Strategy games in an arcade setting can be very difficult to pull off. Also coin-op games were structured around people dying and ramping up difficulty so that people would pump more money into the machine :) Please don't take any of this as me saying the game is bad, far from it, it's really impressive. I was just commenting on the first couple of minutes where you seemed to be baffled at why people would behave a certain way.

[@mjdxp5688]

It's quite amazing such a game with deep mechanics and strategy works on the PET, which mostly only has simple arcade games.

[@Mark_LaCroix]

Right off the bat, David's frustration with players could be alleviated if the game told them what their goal was. Destroy the robots? Explore the map? Escape the planet? Find a macguffin? There are lots of things the game could be communicating to the player that it refuses to do. Players don't go in the building? Leave the door open to invite them in. Players don't search for their gun? Why is it in the lander in the first place? What tells the player what the lander even is? What encourages them to search it? Even players who read the manual should be given this communication.

[@randy7894]

Sorry I played it all wrong, Dave.

[@willallen7757]

@@randy7894 At least you tried .

[@TheCoolDave]

After this video, I kind of felt the same way. I see him killing robots but, is that the main goal ? What else NEEDs to be completed to exit map one (for example).

[@TheCoolDave]

Yea, I STILL not sure on the main goal here, is it to kill all robots, or find all items, or what ? Look interesting and fun but, not sure on the GOAL...

[@JesusisJesus]

It should have some goal such as finding fuel rods or repair parts and bringing them back to the lander so you can eventually leave the planet.

[@Geekzmo]

David, sorry in advance for the long post. it looks amazing but from a game dev perspective it lacks 1 main thing... purpose!. Every game has a writen tutorial or an "experimental" one. Take for example Monkey Island, the game opens with Guybrush saying "I am Guybrush and I want to be a pirate" so from the very start we know who you are and the supposed goal of the game. Then in the same 1st scene we have 1 more guy, so naturally you talk to him and he points to SCUMM bar. Here you are missing that, the player has no clue what to do but wandering around. Imagine you start and you get a sign or pad that tells you "Thanks for coming commander, we will need you to help us with the situation in the building" that will direct players to go thru the main doors. Then in the counter you can find another note left by some other human, telling you can use magnets to confuse robots and that you can move chairs to block them, but try not to attack them. Then while searching you find one that says that previous recruits used to hide bullets in their beds... so on and so forth. You will be guiding players on how to play. Hope it helps and that you can add objectives.

[@dominateeye]

I personally consider tutorials to be the modern equivalent of a game's manual, and if a game didn't have a tutorial, I would read the manual in an attempt to get the same information, so reading the manual would come quite naturally to me. But that may be because I grew up in the early 2000s, when physical game sales were still one of the main ways to buy a new game, and printed manuals usually came with those games. When I was looking for something to do on the car ride home, I'd crack open my new game box and start reading the manual, because it was the first thing I could do at that moment that was connected to enjoying my new game. This is all to say I don't think people are necessarily wrong for assuming they don't need to read the manual, and then when they can't easily figure the game out on their own, they decide it's not the kind of game they want to play. But I also don't think you're wrong for assuming people would read the manual before playing the game. I think it's just an unfortunate aspect of game design that references the past-- people don't think the same way anymore, and people who don't want to think that way or don't realize they can think that way won't play the game, but that doesn't diminish the worth of the game or the process of creation. Hopefully this video will help bridge that gap between modern design and retro design. And in response to the suggestions of how to include some kind of guidance for the player, well, this is that guidance. The game is already in production, and I would be surprised if David had the time, energy, or resources to make the kinds of changes to the game that people are suggesting at this point. This video IS the tutorial, and if you're so inclined, you can help people who want to enjoy the game but aren't really getting it by linking this video to them.

[@pelgervampireduck]

I never read the manuals even back in the 80s and 90s, I just pressed every key or button and tried everything too see what could be done, but I can understand why people could be confused. the first doors should be open. that's easiest way to tell players "you need to go in" without introducing tutorials or a big arrow.

[@KusanagiMotoko100]

I don't think it has to do with retro modern vs retro design, people never ever read the manuals, mostly in the NES era when most games you rented or borrowed them from a friend, you only went there or to magazines when you got hopelessly stuck, all good retro games were mostly self explanatory and taught the players how the mechanics work in the first level, another difference is that nowadays people won't get a single game and play it for 3 months straight cause you won't buy another one, games today have to hook you faster and be pretty self-explanatory cause you have so many options to play everywhere.

[@dominateeye]

@@pelgervampireduck As I said above, I think the problem with suggestions like this is that the game is already in production, and to change it now would mean there'd be a bunch of physical copies out there that didn't have that change, so the problem would still exist. It may have been better if the first doors were open, but that ship has sailed. This video is really the only viable solution now.

[@dominateeye]

@@KusanagiMotoko100 I really think this whole thing is subjective. Some people probably never read the manuals, some people probably always read the manuals. Some retro games made sure to demonstrate their mechanics at the start, some didn't. David's game design relies on people reading the manual, probably for a number of reasons, including space constraints and just what occurred to him naturally during the design process. I really don't think it's fair to describe the opening level of PETSCII Robots as "bad game design" as a lot of people are doing. It's not explicit design, and it won't be intuitive for some people, but that doesn't make it bad design. If you're looking for a game where you don't need to read the manual, and you're not willing to read the manual, this game probably isn't right for you. (that's the general "you", not you specifically)

[@willallen7757]

@@KusanagiMotoko100 I always feel kinda sad for someone that says ,"people never ever read manuals". What you mean is you and your friends don't read manuals, cuz manuals get read by intelligent people .

[@mashtonish]

yeah, a minute in and can already see how the game design is from a developer perspective (proactive in thinking "what's to come and what would be challenging") rather than a player perspective ("why am I here", "what am I doing", "I am placed into this environment... now what?")... even like "why would the guy leave his ship without his pistol... if he's going to need it?"... even if you wanted to encourage searching everything, the building seems like a progression trap, when there may be something hidden outside... heck, it's kind of like you've blended game styles here with what looks like an action game and a text adventure (i.e. a pistol for shooting, but a search mechanic for finding seemingly arbitrary things)... also, the game is called "attack of the petscii robots"... but the first ones you see aren't attacking? I think what would primarily help are some popup, middle of the screen text prompts, that basically explain the main character's motivation / inner dialogue, tutorializing searching / what to look for / what could be done / etc...

[@nemis123]

I so much agree with you. However, we need to remember, this is a programmer's hobby project 🙂

[@vorrnth8734]

@@nemis123 No its not. It is sold commercially.

[@nemis123]

@@vorrnth8734 yeah but not in the mainstream, it is rather for nerds and channel fans

[@vorrnth8734]

@@nemis123 that does not make it a hobby.

[@highpath4776]

@@nemis123 And given the testing and reviews of the game were about a year ago - many on YT, but indeed David does seem more interested in the Technical parts of game creation - which will reflect from his background as a tech support helpdesk operator, not as being part of a creative team as such. I think you have to take something that works ' good enough' - no bugs or technical crashes but note there may be better gameplay styling clues for anyone wanting to do a similar build. The name of the game of course comes from the pun of the character set, rather than the description of what the player has to battle against - and anyway Attack could take many forms - inviting an enemy to drain themselves of munitions and good health is quite a smart move one could argue, while you sit back and soak it up from your own inbuild defences.

[@ruipedroleite]

"Why did they not want to go into the building", well, Dave, I love your content and dedication, but let me be totally honest: if they don't go to where you want them to go it comes down to bad game design. You must hint the players (somehow and preferably with subtlety) where to go.

[@nickwallette6201]

Or just allow for people to solve problems on their own, at their own pace. I probably wouldn't have immediately entered either. Why? Because I can wander around outside. And if _can_ wander around outside, there must be a _reason_ I can wander around outside. If there's a reason, I should probably find out what that is. So... I wander around outside.

[@ILoveEvadingTax]

Or not, let them figure it out, but don't make a video complaining about that philosophy working as intended. Dave seems to want it to work both ways

[@nenharma82]

It’s really awesome what you managed to create here with all the ports and stuff. That being said, if people play your game wrong then that’s entirely the game’s fault. Games back then weren’t as polished compared to what people are expecting nowadays. Back then, games were scarce and you took your time figuring out the mechanics. Today, you expect the game to take you by the hand until you got the mechanics and the goals figured out. It’s probably still one of the best games for the machines it’s running on, though.

[@ericjohnson6634]

The answer to 0:57 is in the video itself at 12:33.

[@thorin1045]

doors to the building ignored for two reasons: 1. it is the obvious route, so i want to go elsewhere and find my little bonus for being oh so clever. 2. if it is not the obvious route, than it is the endgame, where the big scary stuff waits you to enter and die. so i want to go elsewhere to build up for the endgame. and both of these are ingrained into the players for several decades at this point.

[@thorin1045]

the combat is on you, if you give a player a gun and an obvious enemy, the player will shoot it, and the result is not clear, it is not impossible to kill the enemy, bu not easy too, so it looks like a way too hard game, instead of that is not the route, find other ways to kill the robots.

[@videooblivion]

It’s not a mistake, David. Well it is, but it’s yours in design. Never blame the player.

[@WeirdWizardDave]

Maybe not a full blown tutorial, but you could use that info box to give a few hints on the first level. "Search the landing pod" "Enter the building" "Plan your attack" etc. Still feel old school but would at least nudge people in the right direction to get them started.

[@txtworld]

Dave, that's an excellent idea

[@ironsides982]

The first thing you gave the player is a gun. Then you gave them something to shoot at. They're going to shoot at it, just sayin. I understand that there's an instruction manual, but maybe you could place a splash screen right before the first level with a few helpful hints about how to play. I don't know if an additional screen is feasible given the limitations of the hardware/software. There's only so much you can do to help new players of course. Some people only learn through trial and error. Game looks great, by the way!

[@emmettturner9452]

Game design suggestion: Make one door stuck open and the other opens when they approach the first. This will teach the player that closed doors can open in their own with nothing special too. I also feel that there should’ve been more aggressive enemies that take one bomb or explosion hit before escalating to the ones that take two. There should me a clear sign that it is damaged after the first hit so that the player doesn’t avoid trying it again with the assumption that it didn’t work. Maybe blinking/frozen for two seconds or a damage/reactivation sound on the systems that can do that. As long as the less aggressive bots play that same activation sound when you anger them and the same damage sound right before they die (there can/should still be a separate death/explosion sound).

[@therealherbzy]

Been playing this game for some time now. I honestly didn't know you could shoot over chairs like that. I usually just trap them then bomb them. Good to know!

[@demos456]

That right there is what I miss from interacting with other kids about classic games in the late 90s. Just talking about the game and having my mind blown by something they discovered which I hadn't was an awesome part of being a gamer :P

[@olinezra1506]

I just ordered the Evercade version of this - Specifically the Super Pocket. Thanks for making this game David. Happy to see it ported all over the place.

[@nemis123]

The game is awesome, although it has a steep learning curve. I would think of giving more hints, ie. for places where somewhere is. Wondering on the map before entering the main building is also natural way of trying to look if you can maybe prepare for the main mission. Ideally there would be a level like in Super Mario where you intuitively learn things.

[@highpath4776]

I think David was less trying to build a Game in the same way a Game company would - as the mass money is in the present day platforms - but to make it as a proof of concept that technically works on at first a few specific old technology platforms - and others have added functionality for other platforms over the past couple of years. There may be scope for a version 1.2 with the more step by step Gameplay route , which should not be too difficult to code as it would basically be more a cut down less things to do in early levels - but would enough people buy it - though it might be OK as a convention release only. Overall the project has been shared on YT etc with all the problems of concept to completion including packaging, music / sounds and so on, focusing on the specialities of the graphics restrictions of the processors . rom . ram , i/o . sound chips . monitors , and if one doesnt like the completed product, there are three answers - be happy with such original games as you can acquire, buy one of the other more recent games for the platform/s you have, or design and build your own game (using as many friends etc as needed for the special , or testing elements of build of such game.

[@Mrshoujo]

An Arcade version will need a scoring system, vanity board, and a way to progress through the levels, plus a bonus for starting at harder levels. I hope you've considered these changes.

[@The8BitGuy]

We've discussed possibly having it save level-completion time. So basically when somebody wins a level in 20 minutes, but it says the record is 12 minutes, that would give them something to strive for.

[@OtreblaMaslab]

Can we have the score on a 7 segment display like a pinball machine? 😂

[@Ljosi]

@@The8BitGuy So basically in the arcade version you would be trying to speed-run the game.. clever

[@nickwallette6201]

@@The8BitGuy Why not the good-old high score? Each item found gives you points. Each robot dispatched gives you points. Clever kills could trigger a bonus. When you complete the level, every second below par time is a few extra points. And I might suggest you rethink showing "Game Over" when you complete a level successfully. That threw me, and I thought -- "what he do wrong by going down that wall cabinet toilet thing?"

[@vertujoe2886]

I never thought someday we'll have a video tutorial for video game. Days rally changed man.

[@MatrixPrime]

I think you answered your own question about 'WHY' people wont want to walk through the doors. You went on to say they weren't locked, but typical game design would indicate that through some method, such as a red or green indicator on the door. Without a card key of some sort, I would automatically think I wouldn't be able to walk through the door since there is no visual indicator that its not locked.

[@radthadd]

I know why people wonder off, because Open World games have conditioned us to have a sense of exploration, rather than going by levels like back in the day, we just exlpore because buidings are seen as side dungeons. Thank Fallout and Minecraft, and GTA for that.

[@CraigRodmellMusic]

Wow - two 8-Bit Guy uploads in one day! Aren't we spoiled! Nice to see how the game really runs, as I don't have a vintage machine or anything else on which it will play (as far as I know). Very, very interesting. Thanks, David.

[@reddcube]

I like the visual cue that the crate has a lid until you search it. Maybe you should do the same thing with the first door. Leave that door open as a clue to the player that they can just walk in.

[@princess_daphie]

I was thinking of exactly the same thing. I think there should be an indicator that something has been searched on everything that CAN be searched, like desks, etc. Otherwise it can quickly become a mess to remember what has been searched or not!

[@The8BitGuy]

I actually wanted to do this on the original game. The trouble is, there weren't enough tiles left over since I could only have 256 tiles. Sure, on a 16-bit system I suppose you could do something like that, but we just never did.

[@apierror]

@@The8BitGuy I think the keypad/screen's color next to it could also mislead the player to think the door is locked, so some indication if it being open would be a great way to guide. (Unless they also do the same thing in the PET version, where this isn't an issue due to the monochrome color palette)

[@Zylph]

@@The8BitGuy what about adding the "?" character over items that have been searched? are the typeset characters still available? Edit: or a ✓ if that is an option in the character map. maybe a toggle option in settings to enable the completion mark.

[@petermuller608]

Without a mouse to hover, it's really not obvious that the lander is even searchable. The same goes for the paths leading through the forest. Why would there be a path if I'm not supposed to go there? This is not a criticism of the game and most likely period appropriate. However most current gamers are used to inline tutorials feeling like game play. e.g. don't explain a key, show a locked door Edit: too be more specific, I would lock the first door and show and internal dialog "maybe I have something in my lander to blast this open". Thus introducing both the concept of searching and shooting

[@stu729]

Haven't seen the Amiga graphics in depth yet. Evilbot TOTALLY shares design language with Maximillian from The Black Hole. Awesome reference!

[@DrZygote214]

I too would immediately start exploring the outside. I know the building is where you're supposed to go, but only cuz i've seen all ur vids on this game and know ur supposed to kill robots in there. I guess i'm just conditioned to be an explorer. I think it started way back in the PS2 game Baldur's Gate Dark Alliance. Most of those levels are mazes, and if you want do get everything in minimal time, then you want to go towards the "nearest dead-end first". Ofc u have to make a guess at which way is the nearest dead end... But with a map looking like that, it's obvious the outside is the first "dead-end" you want.

[@NicoDimov]

I played the game recently and loved it. The "ways" to interact with the environment, explore/search/test possible combinations and that "retro" no hands holding vibe I got from it but from I could tell that there are some things we apply on "modern" game design (cognitive psychology, biases, behavior patterns, etc) that are not taken into account sometimes and as such the game feels "harder" or unintuitive in some ways. This is not meant as a criticism is just to explain why those "mistakes" or behaviors are actually completely normal given the context. Example: If you put me in the middle of an open space, even if there is THE lander that I can interact with... waking is more intuitive and familiar in most games that "searching" so I'll walk away without even knowing that I could search the lander, then if I do search the lander and get a pistol and 10 seconds later you show me a robot... I'll use the pistol on the robot. After all It's just human nature, If you want people to think or learn "outside the box" ways to put a nail trough a board... don't give them a hammer. Maybe if the player starts on a enclosed environment that would force them to search the lander to get out, more people would be "forced" to use the mechanic and in doing so learn it. Then again if the player doesn't get a pistol for the first couple of robot encounters and is "forced" to think about another solution to deal with It, the player would learn other stuff.

[@Zerinsakech]

I like to explore first and soak in the map. Get a feel for the controls and env and game, like sample it before I start playing for reals. Now that we know where we HAVE to go, it's nice to know where ELSE I can go? if I guessed wrong i can always look around in my "mental map". I developed this thinking due to Pokemon. When you are about to enter the first grass area, town or gym, you are encouraged to look at every other thing and talk to everyone else before you start the action. Maybe a little scenery or distractions outside the first map to provide some "guidance" or just fun items that don't really add to the game, but make it feel bigger.

[@Killerspieler0815]

I like this "Doom 1" style health display

[@pelgervampireduck]

maybe leave the doors on the first building open all the time so people think "I can go in there". even if you think "I have to go in the building", there's the fear of missing out on sometihng. people like to explore. sometimes when you enter an area you can't go back out to explore, so you explore first to find everything, then you go in. I think the easiest way to communicate to the players "you need to go in the building" is leaving a door open. maybe the character can say something like "the radio message said the robots took over the building. I better not forget my gun!!". (edit: not that I think about it, the last part would make the player think it is an action game, so a better text could be "the radio message said robots took over the building!. I better do something about it!"). this will sound silly, but even the word "attack" in the name kinda implies it's an action game about shooting robots. I know it's impossible to change the name now, it is what it is, but the whole thing at first sight, at first impression, looks like "yeah, let's shoot some robots!" and like you already are "in the level", like "the robots will come any time soon" or "if I walk around I'll find the robots I need to shoot". it's not obvious you need to go in the building to properly start the game, and when you go in it's normal the first thing people think of is just shooting the robots. I thought the magnet was going to stop the robot, not mess with it and make it move erratically. it was a surprise, "oooh, it doesn't make them stop still??!". by the way, I never read manuals even in the 80s and 90s, I just pressed all keys or buttons or clicked on everything just to see what happened and figure out the games myself, but I can understand why some people could be confused. that doesn't mean "add a big arrow on screen pointing to the next objectve all the time", but the first screens should at least suggest things to the player. leaving at leats one door open would get lots of people to go in inmediately.

[@GregsGameRoom]

Thanks David. Just tried the Genesis version for a few moments and just experimented a bit. Surprised that people wouldn't try to open a door? That was the first thing I did. Anyway, I look forward to playing it more and getting the final cartridge! (It's gonna be a collector's item for sure!)

[@mattuw82]

I think it's funny that he gets frustrated with players for not playing the game the way it's intended, but there's literally nothing in the game to indicate how it's supposed to be played. Maybe the reason players are wandering through the forest is because they have no clue what to do and they're trying to figure out how to play the game? If you observe players wandering into the forest trying to figure out how to play the game, maybe put some weak enemies and items there to let them get familiar with the game mechanics and then goad them into the building. If I walked into the building and a robot immediately almost killed me, I'd think "oh crap I wasn't supposed to go in there yet. I must have to do something else first". Also, your items don't look like what their function is supposed to be. For example, that indestructible barricade doesn't look like it would serve that purpose. Maybe make it look like that, instead of generic scientific equipment. I don't mean these comments to sound critical, maybe they might be helpful. I personally hate games that require reading the manual to learn the basic gameplay mechanics.

[@michelealessandrini3421]

In old games, when I needed to learn how to play I used to look at the "configure keys" menu (whether I wanted to change the defaults or not), it just told you all the possible actions so that you knew what you could do, almost like having read a manual. I don't know if your games have such a configuration page.

[@gbclab]

Masterpiece! Cannot wait for the MSDOS version!

[@zippofcy]

This game reminds me of Lords of Chaos on Amiga. In 91-92 this would have been one of my favorite games. In the summer of 93 i got a 486DX so 3D games took over. I only played on my Amiga for 3 years but still its my favorite gaming platform. Maybe coz those were my high school days. Even tho in 1990 i played a lot of good games on my C64, including Street Rod, Pirates, Defender of the Crown and Laser Squad. The very last game i finished on my A500 was the Lost Vikings. And the very 1st one i finished on my brand new PC was Dune 2. (Or was it Star Control 2?) The strange thing is, everyone i knew who had an A500 remained a gamer for several years. Sadly, i lost all of em thru all these years. (They were married, moved to other countries or simply died.) Anyway, good game design, congrats!

[@nw4538]

Cool! Loved the development series

[@dream4playz]

Very interesting to see a gameplay video from The 8-Bit guy. I really enjoyed it. I like the other content just as much, but I appreciate the variety. 🙂

[@TMS9918A]

You know you're a good game designer when you have to make an 18 minute video explaining how to play your game...

[@zippofcy]

It was a common thing back then, especially in Eastern Europe where we pirated all of our games. I remember playing Oil Imperium german version, even tho i never spoke a single word in that language but somehow i figured it out. Same with Shoot em up Construction Kit on C64 (it wasnt german it was just complicated). Or Red Sector Demomaker on Amiga.

[@marine6680]

Something to keep in mind when it comes to not only game design, but things like communication and other things in life. Not everyone knows what you know… So what seems obvious to you will not be to others. In games, the first levels are prime examples. Assume the player is new and knows little. Game developers are intimately familiar with their games and the game mechanics. So they can forget that a new player will not have the same instinct to do something like search everything, and avoid direct combat, etc… A first level that slowly introduces gameplay elements, and forces you to use each element to progress further is a good idea.

[@calinculianu]

This was so enjoyable to watch. It's great watching you play a game. Do more of these.. even for your other games!

[@derekchristenson5711]

Thank you, sir! I did read the manual before playing, but I still appreciate the author's perspective on tactics. 🙂

[@TheRogueMaverick]

I just bought the PSP port today and am currently playing it after reading the manual first. My word, it doesn’t pull punches. I keep dying quickly… AND I LOVE THAT! I’m the kind of gamer that can enjoy a really difficult game IF the difficulty is fair and designed well, like Cuphead, SOME Metroid games (some are tougher than others) or Castlevania Rondo of Blood. I need more time and experience with the game, but I can tell it’s a project of love and passion!

[@notmuch_23]

I think a _lot_ of people are forgetting the original starting target system for this game is the Commodore PET. That system simply does not *HAVE* the resources for the tutorials or features other people are suggesting, hence the manual. RTFM...

[@stephenelliott7071]

Exactly! People are treating a retro game designed for old systems with minimal RAM to a modern system with massive amounts of memory in comparison. You simply *have* to read the manual because there is not enough memory to do this in-game! Try to work it out yourself, rather than rely on a game that holds your hand and is easy. And not even bothering to read the manual is just lazy.

[@nickwallette6201]

I totally agree with you guys here. EXCEPT, you can't hold it against players for not knowing what they're supposed to do. Nobody knew what they were doing first run through a new game back then. If you couldn't figure out how to make your guy jump or shoot or deal some cards or whatever, you just moved on to the next game. If he did something, you next puzzled out what doing that thing does, and whether that's good or bad. All well and good to expect a retro experience for a retro game. But, the developer should expect a retro _player_ experience as well -- namely "what is this place and why am I here and what do I do with this magnet?" EDIT: (Oh, and PS .. everybody knows manuals are only a place to store copy protection challenge responses anyway. You only need the manual if the copy you got hasn't been cracked yet.)

[@zfmag]

Key is visual clues. If you want someone to follow a path, gently 'nudge' them in that direction. Add some visual clue that people should search the space ship. Some animating arrows towards it, a spotlight on the ship. Make it stand out from the environment. Same goes for the doors. If you want them to go in there right away, give them a clue to do so. Shine a 'lamp' on the doors. Put a sign down with a direction. But don't make it obvious that you're telling them where to go. Modern games do this with lighting and coloring of certain areas that stand out from the rest of the environment. Regarding shooting the robot; If you want to give people a clue that shooting the robot is not the best way to go. Make sure they don't have a gun yet when they encounter their first one or two robots or that ammo is way more limited. You giving a gun filled with bullets right at the start, implies that shooting your way through the game is the recommended solution. Making a gun and ammo more 'scarce' at the start, will entice a playstyle of preservation of resources as people find it.

[@someman7]

Ooof, the UX isn't ideal, I have to tell you. * How do I know I need to search my own pod? Wouldn't I know what's in there and take the useful stuff before exiting? Hint that I should search * Instead it makes more sense for me to search the new environment for items before going into a place with robots that attack. If I shouldn't do that, don't let me * I would assume I was capable of defending myself with the gun. In games, the enemy is usually weaker than me and I can face it head on. If you gave me a sllingshot I would understand better. * I need to block the robot? Won't it change the course perhaps? I need to shoot the robot through the chair? But if it stopped the robot, wouldn't it stop the bullet too? You could teach me that bullets pass through chairs if there was a robot trapped behind them already perhaps. Gonna stop there. Tried to make it constructive criticism. Disclaimer: I'm not a gamedev, I just care about UX.

[@BustaHymen]

If this game had been released back in the day, across all different platforms. someone would have made millions. Such a great game, whish it'd been around when I was a kid in the 80's (then again, maybe not. Skipped school too much even without it).

[@TheOriginalNCDV]

Received my signed copy, thanks so much David! I'm playing the REU version on my TheC64, it's fantastic! Strangely I actually prefer the PETSCII graphics though, just looks cleaner. Have you considered licensing it for something like the Evercade? I think it would make a great addition on a C64 cart for that system.

[@MrBenMcLean]

In the early 2000s I was playing a QBASIC game called "ROBOT PLAGUE" which was almost exactly like this! This has more features but it has a very similar style and premise.

[@cftvdata]

Man, this looks like a lot of fun. The top-down tile graphics graphics and gameplay mechanics remind me of one of my favorite games as a kid: Cythera, by Ambrosia Software (the same developer that made Apeiron and Escape Velocity and countless other great classic Mac games). Great work!

[@Orpheusftw]

I got this on Evercade and didn't understand it at all. (Was definitely trying to "shoot everything.") Cooler game than I gave it credit for.

[@Merlyn4011]

Fantastic guide and showcasing of the game. I am thankful for the videos you have shared throughout the development process and the challenges of marketing, shipping etc. Again many thanks for sharing your adventures with us all. In the present state of the world its refreshing to focus on some positive content and learn so much in the process :)

[@dannittohell]

Love the strategy layers of this game! thanks for all your hard work

[@robertdanker6193]

Just purchased the PSP version! This game is alot of fun and the music is great! This tutorial is very helpful, appreciate the tips!👍👍

[@Retrogamingmaverick]

I've loved your vids since the beginning of the channel! Thanks for the tutorial

[@zedfragg4134]

And straight here after hearing that you were silently uploading this lol I'm actually trying to find a way to get some retro computers to show my kids what gaming used to be like (I grew up on the Amstrad CPC 464, they do not realise how different things are now lol). Love the content, if I can source a retro machine, I will absolutely purchase this.

[@johannesdolch]

This game is actually much cooler than i thought. Well done!

[@hellocollegejason198]

I don't own a copy but watching because 8bit guy is always entertaining

[@Xilefian]

Perhaps arrows on the floor pointing at the doors will get players into the building The pistol being in the spaceship is a bit tricky. I think for onboarding that if the player started in a locked area where they can ONLY search the spaceship then perhaps give them the pistol with a key card to get out of that limited area, so they are forced to learn about searching, not starting with the pistol, and key-cards For the robot/action/puzzle point, introducing the first robot in a safe area that kills the robot via environment (crusher?) then players will probably figure out that weapons aren't the only solution before they even use the pistol

[@sbmicro1896]

My all time favorite game on good old computers ! Many Thanks for your work ! 👏👏👏👏

[@mikem9186]

I suggest adding like a task list or objectives on every map. Also add tips section. This will great help also in the arcade version.

[@howiesfunware]

Watching your game development videos inspired my to get back to work on my game. Mine is a take on Defender and is played in a browser with WebGL and my own game engine.

[@zefrog7482]

Wow!😮 Been really enjoying your channel, yet never really felt compelled to go and buy any of these things, until now. Such a cool game really, this would have surely been a smash hit back in the day!🙂 Amazing what can be done on this old tech, super impressive.

[@corkbulb2895]

Oh boy. Ok, here goes. So, I'm sure people have already stated this by now, but the reason *I* wouldn't go in the building right away is because that is obviously the correct way to go. I would look outside for secrets or other areas of interest first. Perhaps spot something I might be able to get later. I would do the EXACT same thing. Approach the building and then back off. Standard video game exploration. Also, I know there is a search function in this game, so I am assuming there is a starting weapon/health/item in the lander. I think maybe you should just start players off with that item already in their inventory. Most people are NOT going to think about searching the lander right away, and the game is going to be much harder because of it. This is a problem with alpha testing. You think you have everything figured out and working right and the first outside project person to play your game/map/level gets stuck immediately or finds an exploit or glitch right away or completely breaks the game in a way you never thought of. Also, since you know the game inside and out, the game may be WAY to hard or confusing to new people. That's what public beta testing is for! Making a video game is hard. making a *good* video game is damn near impossible. Hence the video game crash of 1983 and why it takes entire teams of people to make a decent game. EDIT: Also, you give players a gun in a *robot killing* game and think they aren't going to IMMEDIATELY start shooting everything that moves? What do you think was gonna happen? Maybe give the gun later after players learn that shooting should be a last resort. How are people supposed to know the robots have so much health and deal so much damage? Give a way to kill a robot WITHOUT shooting first to get players accustomed to finding alternative means to destroy the robots.

[@The8BitGuy]

So.. to be fair here. There are multiple pistols all over the map. So even if they don't search the lander, they will still find one eventually if they search crates, etc. As for the desire to immediately start shooting, that is to be expected. But, what annoys me is when people try that and die, then immediately give up and say "the game is too hard." I mean, if you have ever played Doom, Duke3D, quake, etc... Would you give up in the same circumstance? If you grabbed the pistol and then thought you were going to win the game with your first weapon, you would not last very long. it seems like a double-standard.

[@tm0054]

This 100%, you always scour the area before progressing along the main map. I would def turn around at the doors too to make sure I didn't miss anything before continuing along. I think a lot of people are programmed to thoroughly search every area before moving along from years of gaming.

[@corkbulb2895]

@@The8BitGuy Hmmmm. Yeah I see your point. And I love your game! I actually am considering buying and playing it. Probably for DOS when it's finished. About the game though, how about some intro text to explain the game is more strategy based, with some lore and story would help? Could you add in-game notes as on-screen text to give hints? Like the trash compactor in level 1. I think that's a great idea, but not many people are going to figure that out on their own. I used to make maps for games years ago, and my friends never knew what to do and gave up. So I had to fence off useless areas and such. If you don't want people wandering around outside, maybe just fence it off. Games have been guiding player movement with lights, sounds and notes forever. And I find without any guidance, most players will never figure out what to do. I know it says a lot of this in the manual, but lets face it, who reads manuals these days? Games like Wolf 3D had in-game manuals, maybe you could do the same? I know you said it's basically set in stone, but maybe in some upcoming ports that aren't finished yet? Anyway, I hope my insight helps. Keep up the good work and good luck! EDIT: I know I know, people HATE it, but maybe a tutorial level? Optional from the level select screen? Better than nothing!

[@KusanagiMotoko100]

YES! that's why Ready Player One doesn't make any sense, gamers would go immediately in reverse in the first race to find clues instead of following the path of the race, the whole mistery of the virtual world would've been solved in 2 hours max.

[@killerhertzmercedes]

There needs to be some form of introduction when you start a new game. I don't mean a tutorials as such, what I mean is - look at level 1-1 of super Mario Bros. It starts with one enemy which you learn to jump over, then a pipe but you learn to jump over as well, followed by a bottomless pit. You subtly and subconsciously learn the games controls and boundaries. The first level on this starts expects you to know what you must do, thus avoiding any form of training or exploration. Of course everyone would shoot the very first robot in the game! It's a game! Did you not test the game with audiences/testers prior to release?

[@spookerd]

Weird that I only saw this on my recommended videos but it didn't show up on my subscription feed along with the mega update video.

[@darthbader6506]

Jeez there's a LOT of thought gone into this game, I'll be giving it a go soon!

[@Delekhan]

Thanks for the vid man. I love the game and I'm glad it is the way it is. Not sure if it was your intention (like a lot people think in the comments below) but it definitely IS like games from when I was growing up. Had to use my brain to figure them out. I look back on games I learned to play on the Apple II and wonder how the heck I figured them out! Anyway, thanks again and cheers! You programmed a heck of a game in my opinion!

[@Tall_Order]

Great tutorial. It should come in handy once I have my genesis copy. I'm paying off a vehicle, so I need to scrounge up the extra cash. :)

[@tsht]

Maybe just a very short intro in Arkanoid's style which would tell something like "You just landed on XXX and robots are mad, find a weapon or use any other mean to get rid of them" would have had the benefit to put you directly into the game

[@JanRademan]

A strange building on a strange planet, sure, let's go in. Nothing bad can be in there.

[@andresbravo2003]

Well, it’s quite a start!

[@someguystudios23]

This game is so much more interesting than I thought, I have to give it a try now.

[@caprev2322]

I got the game for my Sega, can't wait to play it

[@tm0054]

I'm looking forward to this, I think I will go with the Genesis cart after hearing the FM music in your other video today.

[@RNorthex]

For the start I think it could be good to have the starting area much less expansive with a keycard required to enter the door. That way a player doesn't have much to explore and comes quick to the conclusion that the thing they started next to might be the answer and in an attempt to interact with it, they learn how to search. As is, I'm not sure why the player wouldn't just start with the gun and many would assume the first time that since the building can be entered, a gun is to be found in the building. When it comes to fighting the robots, perhaps starting off with one where the only way to progress is to block one in and shoot it could also teach the player how to properly fight one and not think that direct confrontation is the intended method. It's unfair to judge a game without actually going through a tutorial, but I think there's a case to be made for more intuitive learning process as there will be a lot of players who will have the patience to try the game, but not to read into the manual [if the goal is to get more people interested of course]. If it's not for them, that's perfectly acceptable but what will happen once new people play it at the arcade?

[@TomHartley64]

Wonderful as usual. Can't wait to play it! 12:12 - To avoid confusion, it would be good if "YOU'RE TERMINATED!" were in quotation marks (as if the player said it to the robot), since all other usage of 'YOU' refers to the player (and being told by the console that you've been terminated sounds pretty-much like 'You died. Game over.').

[@TomHartley64]

Similarly, (16:34) it seems that when a mission is successfully completed, the player is told 'GAME OVER' (which is normally associated with a sad feeling of failure), but a positive message would feel more satisfying for the player, like 'MISSION COMPLETE', or 'MAP COMPLETE', or 'EXITING MAP' or 'BEAMING HOME...' or 'RETURNING TO MOTHERSHIP...' or 'LEAVING PLANET...' or similar. What do you think?

[@curtisscott9251]

Totally great to see a game of this nature in 2022! Very well thought out! But a few pop-up directive screens might be good help for the noobs.

[@kimcelarmycx229]

Action and strategy games do exist, Portal is one of them starts out as sort of a puzzle and strategy game but then turns into more of an action sci-fi horror type game where you're fighting a computer AI for survival using strategy skills you've learned earlier on. In Petscii robots none of this is really explained, I had thought it was just a game about fighting robots that took over some facility/area in a combat type fashion

[@Diego-oq3ih]

I got the PSP/Amiga version. The game is great, for a “single” person development is truly amazing, the musics, the graphic itself, the level design and the complexity overall. But one thing is missing to me is some sort of menu where you can see your progressions and your statistics for each map you’ve beaten. Once you beat one map it goes back to the main menu, that’s something that does not give me that progression feeling. That’s just my opinion.

[@The8BitGuy]

Actually, I had considered something like this all the way back to the original PET version. And I really can't remember why I didn't implement that, other than I knew it might be an issue with disks being write-protected and not being able to save the data.

[@Diego-oq3ih]

@@The8BitGuy that would definitely be a great feature but I get the hardware limitations. Basically most, if not every 8 bit game of the NES era are like this, no save feature, just start the game from the beginning to the end. You could have implemented some sort of “password” type save but that would’ve been useless given the fact all maps are selectable right off the first time you start the game (at least on the PSP/Amiga version).

[@maxxdahl6062]

@@The8BitGuy Hey David, not to bother you. But on your new pet board that you reviewed, you shown you printing out some key overlays as stickers for your keyboard. I want to do that for something else. Getting my DTV modded. (Yeah I'm aware of it's shortcomings, a friend is doing it for me for free, :) ), And since I'll be using a PC PS/2 keyboard. Wanted to know if I could find any resources, templates, etc to print out to overlay onto the PS/2 pc keys. Thank you.

[@mokopa]

David, you underestimate the extent to which modern gamers are spoon-fed and silver-plattered.

[@movietaste6215]

Reminds me of Christmas Eve in the 90s. Strategy games a 16 minute normal levels into 45mins 😂. Cheers

[@isnak907]

Drink every time he says “and uh” you will be having your stomach pumped in no time.

[@adamv242]

This is very helpful.. I just ordered the Atari 8-bit version and have been playing around with the digital download. Thanks!

[@lucetubegplusstillsux2678]

In a lot of games closed doors also means locked so they might figure a key is needed outside the map first.

[@martin1b]

Perhaps there should be an intro explaining the story. If the player doesn't know what the story is, they don't know where to go in the beginning or how to interact with the robots.

[@pelgervampireduck]

no intro, just a text saying "the radio message said robots took over the building! l better be careful!". the palyer will know the main gameplay is in the building.

[@carlinator92]

Cool game! Reminds me of the TeamRocket Dungeons in Pokémon on Gameboy..!

[@PostalHeathen]

I'm not sure if you've got the resources to spare, particularly on the lower end platforms like the PET or VIC-20, but I'd suggest including a tutorial map. Maybe themed as a training facility or something. I'd make it a bit more linear than the game's usual maps so you can introduce the game's various mechanics in a controlled way. You've also got three lines of text in the information pane at the bottom. You could use that to your advantage here by having tiles on the map that, when the player steps on them, displays some explanatory text. Ideally, by the time the player's done, they'll have all the knowledge they need to tackle the regular maps without necessarily needing to refer to the manual. It'd also give a nice, bite-size experience to players first experiencing this at a convention, when they haven't had the opportunity to read the manual first.

[@JavisoGaming]

Love this. Will you make a version of this for Windows or macOS?

[@thetruth-hl7ct]

I'd love to play this game when it comes out on a platform I can actually use.

[@thetruth-hl7ct]

Also, this video needs a spoiler alert. I stopped watching a few minutes in so I wouldn't ruin the puzzle solving aspect.

[@The8BitGuy]

I wouldn't worry too much about that. There are 14 levels. Most of them are much bigger than level 1. So, there's plenty left to explore.

[@brunomoreno3666]

Ill bet you can use an emulator bro.

[@thetruth-hl7ct]

@@brunomoreno3666 Kinda hard to cram a 5.25" floppy into a CD-rom drive.

[@nickwallette6201]

@@thetruth-hl7ct Shockingly easy, actually. Now once it's in there, I'm not sure what you're planning to do with it, but that's a different problem.

[@mcmahon31619]

this was a really fun video. I think there is potential for a new channel idea. 8-bit guy gaming, where you play and give commentary on 8-bit and 16-bit games

[@WilliamLDeRieuxIV]

0:55 **I don't understand why people walk towards a structure (like the doors) and decide not to proceed through them.** This is most likely a hold-over (or thinking) from RPGs where you have the ability to explore a certain area, but if you to leave or proceed with the story, then that area might be no longer accessible. I mean this happened to me quite often in games like Final Fantasy and the like .... I have a whole area to explore, but I made a mistake, entered a door, and could never go back.

[@mattfromeurope]

Seeing the gameplay of Petscii Robots one genre immediately comes to my mind: Roguelike.