grrrr
what to do?
i have a c# .net homework to create a console text-based Role-Playing Game [RPG] based from the "landing party" [LP] game.
unfortunately or fortunately, LP was not the RPG i thought an RPG should be. it has less features than what i had in mind. it's unfortunate that some features that i thought were cool got left out : stats for character attributes, a character-attribute-based combat system and 2-d world map movement (as compared to the 1-d movement of LP). hmm... i miss my old rpgs (baldur's gate and the ultima series).
on the other hand, this can be a good thing. less work = more time for me!
so the additional features or my kind of RPG has gotten me thinking. as i've seen in this class, doing more than what is expected can actually prove more a liability than an asset. while i can just do both to end this argument, i do not have enough time to do both.
john maxwell said, you should have a strong dedication to success. in other words, you have to give the customers what they actually want. stick to their measure of success, rather than create your own. otherwise, you'll be wasting your time and talents.
hmm... landing party sacksteady style, here we go!
i have a c# .net homework to create a console text-based Role-Playing Game [RPG] based from the "landing party" [LP] game.
unfortunately or fortunately, LP was not the RPG i thought an RPG should be. it has less features than what i had in mind. it's unfortunate that some features that i thought were cool got left out : stats for character attributes, a character-attribute-based combat system and 2-d world map movement (as compared to the 1-d movement of LP). hmm... i miss my old rpgs (baldur's gate and the ultima series).
on the other hand, this can be a good thing. less work = more time for me!
so the additional features or my kind of RPG has gotten me thinking. as i've seen in this class, doing more than what is expected can actually prove more a liability than an asset. while i can just do both to end this argument, i do not have enough time to do both.
john maxwell said, you should have a strong dedication to success. in other words, you have to give the customers what they actually want. stick to their measure of success, rather than create your own. otherwise, you'll be wasting your time and talents.
hmm... landing party sacksteady style, here we go!
posted by Pipboy at 9:57 PM
1 Comments:
although it would be nice to have more features than the rest, the first priority is to accomplish something in the first place. I think this is what sacksteady told me when I was suggesting a beefed software for the package creator. It's practical to do the minimum first, then build up on it. Besides, i'm sure you can introduce features in landing party that the original didn't have.
PS. mas gusto ko ang Baldur's Gate. Finished the whole thing even the expansions. I spam elemental summoning :)
Post a Comment
<< Home