The Next Evolution of Tetris

[Grave]

Grave:

I was thinking of a ladder-like system. I had an idea that could have a two-way system. You could have a place where you could level up, and everything is normal. Basically, what I posted in the Tetris RPG document.

And, you could have a rank system where there are no items, and both players are level 30. And then, both players can distribute their 30 stat points and skill points. And then they can fight.

Also, for Regeneration, you'd have to choose it to be one of your three skills in the match. But, since the Regeneration is passive, you don't have to "use" it; it'll always be on. Sorry for any confusion!

ah sweet thanks for the clarification
and I love the premade level 30 idea sounds AWESOME!

[caffeine]

This game isn't an RPG in the traditional sense that you have to put in a lot of time to be strong. The main point of Tetris RPG isn't really the leveling up. It's about customization towards your own unique play style through the use skills.

The levels aren't meant to make it so that a level 100 will always beat a level 50. There may be a significant difference between a level 10 and a level 40, but once you get to 40+, the playing field should even out. And in the game, you should be able to get to level 40 within a month if you play casually, or a week if you played hardcore.

One of the main reason why I have levels is just an added bonus. After a player has reached a temporary skill plateau, he can continue putting in hours without feeling like they're going to waste. If he levels up, he would have something to show for the hours he put in.

In other words, if I want full customization and every advantage as my potential opponent, I must put in X days of playing an incomplete game. In other implementations of Tetris, I already have complete access to the full game, so why is this an improvement? But, as you say, this will allow players who aren't improving to feel like they are improving. I'm trying to put this as delicately as possible... I just can't identify with this sentiment... at all. When I was a noob up until now, through all my years of improvement, I've always enjoyed multiplayer Tetris. It didn't matter if I hit a period of no improvement, because the game is fun regardless. I never felt like I needed to "show" anything for the hours I put in. Hey, I play the game cause those hours were spent having a great time! You're advocating giving players a fake sense of improvement. To me, that's just silly. You're just taking away from some kid's motivation to learn the skills that will actually improve his ability to win. Why should he learn those skills if he knows he can just play X number of hours and will "fake improve" anyway?

[Grave]

In other words, if I want full customization and every advantage as my potential opponent, I must put in X days of playing an incomplete game. In other implementations of Tetris, I already have complete access to the full game, so why is this an improvement? But, as you say, this will allow players who aren't improving to feel like they are improving. I'm trying to put this as delicately as possible... I just can't identify with this sentiment... at all. When I was a noob up until now, through all my years of improvement, I've always enjoyed multiplayer Tetris. It didn't matter if I hit a period of no improvement, because the game is fun regardless. I never felt like I needed to "show" anything for the hours I put in. Hey, I play the game cause those hours were spent having a great time! You're advocating giving players a fake sense of improvement. To me, that's just silly. You're just taking away from some kid's motivation to learn the skills that will actually improve his ability to win. Why should he learn those skills if he knows he can just play X number of hours and will "fake improve" anyway?

I think having to manage your health, mana, skills, and play tetris will be fun and challenging

[Anonymous]

In other words, if I want full customization and every advantage as my potential opponent, I must put in X days of playing an incomplete game. In other implementations of Tetris, I already have complete access to the full game, so why is this an improvement? But, as you say, this will allow players who aren't improving to feel like they are improving. I'm trying to put this as delicately as possible... I just can't identify with this sentiment... at all. When I was a noob up until now, through all my years of improvement, I've always enjoyed multiplayer Tetris. It didn't matter if I hit a period of no improvement, because the game is fun regardless. I never felt like I needed to "show" anything for the hours I put in. Hey, I play the game cause those hours were spent having a great time! You're advocating giving players a fake sense of improvement. To me, that's just silly. You're just taking away from some kid's motivation to learn the skills that will actually improve his ability to win. Why should he learn those skills if he knows he can just play X number of hours and will "fake improve" anyway?

In other games you have complete access??! Have you played Tetris Friends or TOJ? You need to buy upgrades just to play. You can't just "play" Tetris Friends and get all the DAS and upgrades. You have to do workarounds just to get rubies (sign up for frogger anyone?) so you can buy upgrades. Or you could just work to get the million or so tokens you need. Someone who just starts playing Tetris Friends is at a severe disadvanage to a player who has everything unlocked. In TOJ, you had to play maybe hundreds of hours just to get all the upgrades you wanted. In the last few months TOJ was up, you couldn't even earn TP anymore. The only way to get upgrades was to cheat or pay. If you want, we can add in an option to buy yourself to level 100.  

I don't want to seem like I'm attacking you, but out of all the people I thought would like my idea, you were one of the few who I really thought would like this. I know you don't like the idea, but please take the time to read the document. I think you'll find it's not as bad as you think it is (Green Eggs and Ham  ).

If you don't like a player having an advantage over another player, then you can play in the "ranked room" where everyone will be equal.

If you love the way the game is right now, then this game probably isn't for you. But, there are a lot of players who like Tetris, but are bored with the way it is. In the last few years, nothing new has really been added to Tetris.

The community is in a decline. A lot of people are bored with the way Tetris is right now. I think it's time for a change.

One of the main goals of modern Tetris is to build up a larger community. I really think this idea could help us succeed with this goal. A lot of times, you have players who will reach a peak, and then they'll quit the game because they don't think they'll get any better. They've discovered everything they can in the game. But, this system encourages them to keep playing so that maybe they will overcome the skill plateau. Caffeine, I have a lot of respect you for having the motivation to keep playing for all these years, but there are very few players who continue to stick around for years.

This is why you limit access to everything, and slowly give them more access. If you do this, then players will stick around longer trying to unlock everything. Tetris Friends and TOJ tried to do this by having you buy das and stuff, but they did it the wrong way. They shouldn't limit the players by limiting their playing ability. Instead, they should enhance playing ability. This is what I'm trying to do with Tetris RPG.

Limiting access has another benefit as well. If you were to give complete access to beginning players, they would be completely overwhelmed by all the options (e.g. nullpomino having like 30 different single player modes, and a hundred different settings to change).

And players who level up won't be getting "fake improvement". The more they play, the better they will become at Tetris. All of the skills you can use are based on how well you can play the game. Levels will have some correlation to their skill.

[Magnanimous]

I also don't inherently agree with the idea of making your "account" better (as opposed to personal skill), but if it's not too big of a factor in deciding wins then I like it as a gimmick. The fundamental gameplay should still be "how can I stack better to win", with a minor focus on "which skill should I use at which time".

Now I'm trying to think of skills/items that could make the game more entertaining without breaking gameplay...

[myndzi]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]The main thing I don't like about changing the field size is that if you change the width of the game, it really changes how you have to move the pieces. Right now, you can place any piece at any place within two side movements (i think). If you change the width, it'll make players more prone to misdrops, which I would consider as something that "affects a player's ability to play" c;.[/quote]

I meant as something the player could choose, not something that's imposed on them. There's really no disadvantage to allowing a player to choose something that "affects" them - that particular complaint was about things like items that mess up your rotation key bindings, for example.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]If there was a change in field size, I would only consider changing it vertically. However, I like the 10 x 20 dimension of Tetris games right now.[/quote]

Tetrinet players played with a 12-wide well, and while 8-wide isn't quite Big Mode, it definitely presents other stacking challenges. Whether you would prefer one over the other is a bit aside from the question of whether they would make an interesting dimension to the game. With an RPG bent, they make a nice "hard distinction" between different classes, but with your skill tree ideas, they could provide a different combinatorial element - narrower fields would perhaps suit some skills more than others, depending on implementation. They'd also let you stack faster but make it easier to die.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I watched a video online of how the gradius items worked but it was still a little confusing to me. This was a  little too long before my time, and I'm not a very smart man. But, if you explain it to me in simpleton language, maybe I'll understand it a little better.[/quote]

Say you have three items: 1 2 3
Get a powerup: (1) 2 3
Hit powerup key: 1 2 3 [executes item 1]
Get a powerup: (1) 2 3
Get a powerup: 1 (2) 3
Hit powerup key: 1 2 3 [executes item 2]

So, you'd need to trigger three "powerup actions" to get to the third item, but only one to get to the first item. With balanced items, the choice can be an interesting one as to how to arrange them, or you could just force them to be listed in order of power.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I like Mana though. It's an easy concept to understand since they are basically in every RPG game. And, I like the idea that you can "spell spike" your opponent. It is one of the many strategies players can choose from. And there are skills that can counter heavy Mana users. And if the spells are over powered, they can alwasy be nerfed   [/quote]
Too much spike will override the Tetris element entirely. Forcing people to select specific skills to avoid that reduces choice instead of adding to it. The best balance will be something that allows players to play with whatever they choose, while some choices might make it harder or easier, but not impossible or guaranteed. With *too* much access to items, you run the risk of leaving the range of balance.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Anyways, I think you might be confused though. In my game you pick the skills and level them up before the match, not while in the middle of battle.[/quote]

The progressive item meter wasn't about "levelling up skills", it was more about special selection and execution in a way that wouldn't be overbearing.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]I am unsure of how having them piece based would hold up. It would make it easier to balance, like if you only get to drop 20 pieces or so after the person is KOed before they respawn. However, I was afraid that if the player KOs the other player and knows that it's piece based, he might just try to set up complicated setups that send a lot of lines or wait to regenerate his Mana or something.[/quote]

...which he could do anyway, and more, with 15 seconds' worth of time.

Really, what you might do is simply clear a player's field after a KO. Not having any blocks to work with will set them off on the back foot, it will balance out people creating overwhelming setups that have high risk but are protected by the "ko timeout", and will serve the function of returning the player to a playable state.

In addition to that, if any extra time is added, not much is really needed. In fact, you should really just have a KO knock a bunch of HP off and then reset the game. That adds plenty of incentive to achieving KOs and avoiding them without creating any particular balance problems or respawn frustrations.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]Also, I'm not sure if you read the whole Tetris RPG document, but there is an attribute, endurance, you can increase that decreases the amount of time it takes for you to respawn after you get stunned. I think this could balance the system pretty well. You could make the endurance decrease the respawn time in a y = 1/x shape. That way, if two low level players are playing (assuming that they are bad), and one person gets stunned, then the other player would have a lot of time to deal damage to their stunned opponent.[/quote]

When you get into "upgrades" making you more competitive is when you start to lose me. This is in the same category as forcing people to level up DAS. There's no reason to play with a longer "endurance" - and depending on whatever actions are necessary to "level up", the fact of not having it to start with can make it harder to get.


(whoo boy, lots more thread to go, stay tuned...)


Anon: you might take a cue from something like Guild Wars here. I do agree with caffeine that grinding is not something that entices me to play some oddball Tetris variant.

I also wouldn't place this system in "The Tetris Community" - that is to say, attracting people to it isn't increasing "The Tetris Community" because it is too far away from standard play. It's increasing "The Tetris RPG" community. It remains to be seen if such a thing will attract a significant number of people.

[Paul676]

anon have you got any plans to make this? Or will it remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued, but never attained. Because currently, everywhere is war. Me say war.

[Anonymous]

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Tetrinet players played with a 12-wide well, and while 8-wide isn't quite Big Mode, it definitely presents other stacking challenges. Whether you would prefer one over the other is a bit aside from the question of whether they would make an interesting dimension to the game. With an RPG bent, they make a nice "hard distinction" between different classes, but with your skill tree ideas, they could provide a different combinatorial element - narrower fields would perhaps suit some skills more than others, depending on implementation. They'd also let you stack faster but make it easier to die.
[/quote]

I tried out Tnet or Tnet 2. I don’t remember which game, but I didn’t really like it. The game had a 12 wide well though. In the game, all the piece orientations start out random too, so it really screwed me up. I didn’t really enjoy the game because it was hard for me to play. I’m not sure whether it was because of the width of the well or the piece orientation (probably this) though. Anyways, I don’t know what the point of saying all this was, but if there was a way, I’d like to try out playing with different size wells and seeing how it is before I say anything, instead of just being ignorant.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Say you have three items: 1 2 3
Get a powerup: (1) 2 3
Hit powerup key: 1 2 3 [executes item 1]
Get a powerup: (1) 2 3
Get a powerup: 1 (2) 3
Hit powerup key: 1 2 3 [executes item 2]

So, you'd need to trigger three "powerup actions" to get to the third item, but only one to get to the first item. With balanced items, the choice can be an interesting one as to how to arrange them, or you could just force them to be listed in order of power.

Too much spike will override the Tetris element entirely. Forcing people to select specific skills to avoid that reduces choice instead of adding to it. The best balance will be something that allows players to play with whatever they choose, while some choices might make it harder or easier, but not impossible or guaranteed. With *too* much access to items, you run the risk of leaving the range of balance.
[/quote]

I don’t really like that system for this idea. It does seems like there could be some strategy, like deciding whether you want to keep your current skill, or if you want to go to another skill. Or, if you want to keep using your lower level skills or wait for higher level skills.

But, I definitely like the Mana based system more. It gives the player a lot more freedom. If the game played like Gradius’s system, I feel like players would be a lot more limited in their ability to use skills. In the Mana based system, I like that people can choose to do whatever skill they want, at any time (assuming they have the Mana).


Berserk : all HD canceling ignored. All player's attack go towards sending lines to other player and not towards blocking HD against them. Attacks can still be blocked by skills.
Constrictor: Slowly drain your own health, but during that time, all your attacks do double damage.
Meteor: All of the player’s attacks is saved up for 20 seconds, and unleashed at one time (you’re still canceling out all the attacks they send you).

For Mana spikes, I don’t think it’ll be too much of a problem. You don’t really have to “force” people to use a few specific spells to counter Mana spikes. In general, a lot of skills can counter this. For instance, if your opponent turns on Berserk, Constrictor, and Meteor, so that they do a huge amount of damage, you could counter him with:
Decrepify - by slowing your opponent down.
Confusion - his piece preview randomizer changes from bag to random, so he won’t necessarily get the pieces he needs.
Messy Garbage - he’ll have a much harder time sending lines if you send him messy garbage.
Mana Shield - his attacks will be absorbed by your Mana.
Scramble field - he’ll have to clear through his field before he can start adding. It can break up combos, or it can break up setups he’s made.
Iron Maiden - Damage you receive also gets reflected back at him (so you both take damage)

And other skills too.

There are a lot of ways you can negate his attacks. If your opponent is about to send you a large attack, you don’t have to counter it with just defensive skills. You can change your opponent’s field so that he can’t send you as many lines, you can give yourself lines (like a combo or straight lines) so that you can block his attacks. Your passive skills can help you block lines. Or, you can try to outmatch his attack, and you try to do a lot of damage to him.

Furthermore, the only way your opponent would be able to Mana spike you is if he has put in a lot of stat points into Mana. If he does this though, it means he doesn’t have a lot of endurance, so if he gets knocked out, he will lose a lot of health. And, it means he doesn’t have a lot of base health, so it’ll be easy to knock him out once he runs out of Mana.

The point of Mana isn’t to overpower gameplay; it’s to enhance and add variance to gameplay.

I was also planning on putting in a “cool down timer” for skills. This way, player’s can’t just constantly have skills activated. After their skill is over, they’d have to wait for a little bit before they could use their skills. This would probably prevent people from doing huge Mana spikes.

Although this would still allow them to do minor Mana spikes if they wanted to use all three of their skills at once. Of course, this would leave them in a very vulnerable state afterwards, especially if the opponent negates his Mana spike.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Really, what you might do is simply clear a player's field after a KO. Not having any blocks to work with will set them off on the back foot, it will balance out people creating overwhelming setups that have high risk but are protected by the "ko timeout", and will serve the function of returning the player to a playable state.

In addition to that, if any extra time is added, not much is really needed. In fact, you should really just have a KO knock a bunch of HP off and then reset the game. That adds plenty of incentive to achieving KOs and avoiding them without creating any particular balance problems or respawn frustrations.
[/quote]

I really like the idea that instead of “stunning” the other player after he gets topped out, it just knocks off a bunch of HP, and the opponent starts out with a clean empty field. That way, after the player gets topped out, he doesn’t have to wait to start playing again. And endurance could reduce the damage a player receives when he gets topped out.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
When you get into "upgrades" making you more competitive is when you start to lose me. This is in the same category as forcing people to level up DAS. There's no reason to play with a longer "endurance" - and depending on whatever actions are necessary to "level up", the fact of not having it to start with can make it harder to get.
[/quote]

The stat points aren’t meant to force people to do anything. I added them because it lets the players choose their playstyle more. If they want to be extremely offensive, he could just put a lot of points into Strength and Mana. If he wants to be defensive, maybe he’ll put in points in Health, Endurance, and Mana. If the player wants to use Mana to increase his number of line sends, he can just pump a lot of points into Mana and neglect other attributes. If your opponent is really good at downstacking, like apocalypse for example, then he might not plan on putting points into endurance, since he’ll rarely get topped out, and he’ll be able to focus.

It’s possible that the best decision is to distribute stat points evenly, making stat points null, but I think that adding them would allow players to tune their style more to their liking.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
Anon: you might take a cue from something like Guild Wars here. I do agree with caffeine that grinding is not something that entices me to play some oddball Tetris variant.
[/quote]

I hate grinding; I’m sure everyone hates it. Which is why there won’t be a need to grind excessively. Once you reach level 50, which won’t be too hard to attain, you’ll be on an almost even playing field with a level 70 or a level 100. Although they will have a slight advantage, leveling up is just a small bonus for playing. And if you don’t want to grind to get on an even level, you can just play in the “ranked mode” where everyone will be on an equal playing field.

You can think of this more like a “single player” game but instead of fighting just computers, the opponents are humans. It’s not meant to be completely competitive/fair in all aspects but a fun/different variation on tetris. Games don’t necessarily have to be “fair” to be fun. Sometimes it’s fun to overcome difficult challenges, and see the max potential of your ability. For instance, Blink will sometimes play against two people at once. The purpose of this game is not to replace TOJ, TF arena or any other tetris game.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
I also wouldn't place this system in "The Tetris Community" - that is to say, attracting people to it isn't increasing "The Tetris Community" because it is too far away from standard play. It's increasing "The Tetris RPG" community. It remains to be seen if such a thing will attract a significant number of people.
[/quote]

I wasn’t trying to imply that Tetris RPG would become the community. There will still be games like TF arena and stuff. But, players who want more variance and “kick” in the games we have right now would like this game. I think a game like this would have players playing a lot longer, since there are so many more strategies to learn, and this would cause there to be more players in the community, since the rate that people leave/quit would be lessened.

It’s like the ole case of the leaky barrel. There’s a barrel full of water which has a hole in the bottom, and you’re constantly filling it up. However, the barrel is leaking at the same rate that you’re filling it up. There are two ways you can increase the amount of water in the barrel. You can increase the amount of water you’re pouring into the barrel, or you could lessen the leak.

Every new Tetris game in recent history has just been replacing a leaky barrel with another leaky barrel hoping it won’t leak anymore. TF Arena is pretty much the same as TOJ. Nullpomino is almost the same as TOJ. Tetris Party Deluxe is almost the same as TOJ. Tetris DS is almost the same as TOJ. If you reskinned all the games, to look the same, pretty much every casual player would not be able to tell the difference. To me and probably most players, the gameplay feels the exact same, which is why the game has become more stale. Only the most hardcore Tetris players can tell the difference between all the games. Tetris RPG (TGM, and Blockbox c:) are much different than TOJ.

I’m not necessarily saying Tetris RPG will attract new people (although I hope it does), but I do think that it will decrease the number of people who will quit.

[!--quoteo--][div class=\\\'quotetop\\\']QUOTE[/div][div class=\\\'quotemain\\\'][!--quotec--]
anon have you got any plans to make this? Or will it remain but a fleeting illusion, to be pursued, but never attained. Because currently, everywhere is war. Me say war.
[/quote]

It’s going to remain a fleeting illusion... for now!

I don’t have anywhere near the skill required to create a game like this, but I’m hoping that if we can all generate enough positive SUPPORT towards the game, then maybe Beastin Shen, TTC, or the Nullpomino developers will try to make it. Which is why if you like the game, say you like it! All you have to say is “sounds like an awesome idea!” I’m talking to you, lurkers! Reading this and not saying nothin’! And if you don’t like a certain aspect, explain why, so I can improve upon it.

[Beastin_Shen]

Havent read through it all yet, but just want to throw out there im going to need a project to work on this fall, and id love to develop this for 360/PC. I would love to work on a tetris project considering my love for it, and well, grindless rpg battles (GW)

just saying, in case no one else has offered.

[Anonymous]

Also, just a side notes:

I think the commentary on this game would be a lot better. There can be a lot more analysis on players. Sometimes, when I would listen to people commentate on tournament matches, it's always like

"oh this dude got a T-spin!"
"wow, that dude got a T-spin too!"
"Oh, that dude is getting pretty high, he'd better start downstacking or he might lose!"
"Player two just did a TKI setup (or something like that)"
"that player is outta control!" (although I don't mind this one)

Pretty much, whenever you hear commentary, they say stuff that is really obvious, stuff that is irrelevant (like comments about the player’s lives), stuff that is too complicated for most Tetris players to comprehend (hell I don’t even know what a TKI setup is), or they don't say anything. It's just silence.

If someone were to commentate on any matches here, they’d have a whole array of subjects to talk about. For instance, the commentator could talk about the player’s build; whether player one is defensive, offensive, etc. He could talk about the player’s list of chosen skills. What they’re good for, what they’re not good against. The commentator could talk about different strategies for both players. He could compare playing ability (maybe the first player has better ability, but the second player’s set of skills counters the first player’s skill). There’s a lot more to talk about than just “wow, a T-spin!”

Sorry everyone for posting essays.

Also, thanks Beastin Shen. Sounds good!

[Chopin]

Wow, I liked Tetris because it was mindless >.>

[Radiance]

i think that this is an interesting idea that needs a ton of real playtesting in order to become something. i don't think it solves problems, and some of the problems with the guideline addressed in the original post aren't even necessarily...problems. i won't go into that at all, though, as this game's difference from the guideline has nothing to do with its viability as a stand-alone game. i think it would be a very deep alternative, but i believe it is too complex to be a replacement or solution to the guideline.

i've got nothing to say there.

does the game's flavour necessarily have to be fantasy RPG, though? i think tetris on its own is a very post-physical and abstract game that almost pushes a futuristic image. i think it would be neat if you were to use a more consistent set of terms that would work with the theme of the game. i mean, to me, "mana" is so overdone and doesn't really mesh well with the image of orthagonal interconnected blocks. it also sounds awkward when paired with such a technical, flavourless term such as "garbage damage".

i remember there was a game called "puzzle pirates", where the puzzles you'd do would actually line up with duties on a ship, which i thought was really cool. i have no real criticism until this game actually CAN be playtested, so here's my push to be a little more flavourful and imaginative when it comes to the game's image.

[DAS44]

I'd give it a whirl, it's intriguing but I have no idea if I'd like it or not!

[Raddakar]

I'm sorry, but I have to revive this thread. I say, we organize ourselves a little team, and we give this baby a shot.
Yesterday, upon reading this idea, I decided to flesh out what a Tetris RPG could actually look like. This is what I ended up with:

[!--ImageUrlBegin--][a href=\\\"http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/6329/fakescreenshot.png\\\" target=\\\"_new\\\"][!--ImageUrlEBegin--][img width=\\\"400\\\" class=\\\"attach\\\" src=\\\"http://img502.imageshack.us/img502/6329/fakescreenshot.png\\\" border=\\\'0\\\' alt=\\\"IPB Image\\\" /][!--ImageUrlEnd--][/a][!--ImageUrlEEnd--]



I immediately fell in love.

I've been thinking of making my own little Tetris game these days, as some of you might of noticed. This thread told me exactly WHAT I want to make, and that I don't want to make it alone

I'm calling Anonymous, because he's the one with the big idea. I'm calling myndzi, because he can most certainly program it with me. And I'm calling anyone else that has something, anything, to put into this awesome project. For the love of Tetris, let's do this


EDIT: No, that isn't an actual screenshot, it's just a little thing I made in Photoshop, to give me something to look forward to.

[Sisu]

Count me in if it has a class-based system.