[After a brisk nap]

The game's still looking very nice, Josh. I'm not entirely convinced that "we're going with the standard Sierra interface, just like 90% of all AGS games" warrants its own article, though.

Oh, and GUI stands for "graphical user interface," not "general user interface."

[chapter11studios]

Originally Posted by Snarky

I'm not entirely convinced that "we're going with the standard Sierra interface, just like 90% of all AGS games" warrants its own article, though.

The point I was going for is that there are two standard GUI choices that come with AGS, and that there the tradeoffs are for each. I also wanted to illustrate how you can stick with the standard Sierra GUI and still make it unique to your particular game. I think it makes sense as an article because these are the choices that 90% of the people using AGS are going to have to face; the other 10% that create their own GUI are on their own.

[fov]

So you are using AGS? I thought the highest resolution it supported is 640x480.

(If this is covered in another article, feel free to pan me. )

[Wormsie]

Originally Posted by fov

So you are using AGS? I thought the highest resolution it supported is 640x480.

Definitely not. http://www.bigbluecup.com/acfeat.htm

[Candle]

Screen resolutions of 320x200, 320x240, 640x400, 640x480, and 800x600 are supported. Your game can be run full-screen or in a window.
I'm going with 640x480 on my game .

[eriq]

Originally Posted by chapter11studios

I've been playing around with black-and-white cursor icons of the same sort, too, because they stand out a little more against the colored screens

ugh. Please no.

The coloured icons you've illustrated are so gorgeous. In my opinion, they add to the whole "adventure-game" feel. They're really well drawn too. Don't make them black and white! While I completely understand the reasoning behind this (screens seem to pop more against the monochromatic interface), I think they add rather than distract because they're so in line with the look and feel of the game.

[fov]

Originally Posted by Candle

Screen resolutions of 320x200, 320x240, 640x400, 640x480, and 800x600 are supported. Your game can be run full-screen or in a window.
I'm going with 640x480 on my game .

Anyone know if the 800x600 support is new? (Guess not, if that's what Rise of the Hidden Sun is going to be...)

Weird. I can think of at least two developers using AGS who have said they're using 640x480 because of AGS limitations. (But I'm not going to name names because I could be mistaken. )

[Candle]

Originally Posted by fov

Anyone know if the 800x600 support is new? (Guess not, if that's what Rise of the Hidden Sun is going to be...)

Weird. I can think of at least two developers using AGS who have said they're using 640x480 because of AGS limitations. (But I'm not going to name names because I could be mistaken. )

You need a good computer when you get to the 800x600 is what I have heard .
So I think staying at the 640x480 is a good thing .
And the file gets way up there with 800x600 .

[After a brisk nap]

Originally Posted by chapter11studios

The point I was going for is that there are two standard GUI choices that come with AGS, and that there the tradeoffs are for each. I also wanted to illustrate how you can stick with the standard Sierra GUI and still make it unique to your particular game. I think it makes sense as an article because these are the choices that 90% of the people using AGS are going to have to face; the other 10% that create their own GUI are on their own.

OK, that's fair enough. Are you sure that the LucasArts-style option comes included with AGS, though? I'm pretty sure it's a separate template (developed by someone else on top of AGS), which requires quite a bit more work to use. There are also other standard interface templates you can use with probably no more work than a LucasArts one.

But since there's really nothing much wrong with the Sierra interface, I guess it's not necessary to go to that bit of extra trouble. (The only major weakness with the Sierra interface, I think, is the lack of any hotspot indication. If you can work that in, so maybe the cursor changes when you move it over something you can interact with, that would be great.)

[Wormsie]

Originally Posted by Candle

You need a good computer when you get to the 800x600 is what I have heard.

Nothing too extraordinary though. But it is true that AGS isn't optimized for speed, as the users want more features rather than speed optimization.

[chapter11studios]

Originally Posted by Wormsie

Nothing too extraordinary though. But it is true that AGS isn't optimized for speed, as the users want more features rather than speed optimization.

The game may be sluggish on some old computers, but even at 800x600 it should run okay on newish ones. FOV, the developers that limited themselves to 640x480 probably did so for file-size reasons rather than strictly technical limitations. Plus, 800x600 really exposes your graphics if they're not uber-smooth -- most games probably have very little reason to go for resolution that high.

[chapter11studios]

Originally Posted by Snarky

Are you sure that the LucasArts-style option comes included with AGS, though?

Well, I was sure... or at least I thought I was. Perhaps I was thinking of that add-on template instead. Either way, I think the point's still valid about the difference between Sierra and LucasArts from a developers POV, all things being equal. I've loved games that used each GUI template, so I'm ambivolent as a player, but biased as a developer.

[AGA]

Originally Posted by fov

Anyone know if the 800x600 support is new? (Guess not, if that's what Rise of the Hidden Sun is going to be...)

Weird. I can think of at least two developers using AGS who have said they're using 640x480 because of AGS limitations. (But I'm not going to name names because I could be mistaken. )

Within the last couple of years. Relatively recent.