Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

Expanding an outer space game


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
4 replies to this topic

#1 Shane C   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1276

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 03:36 PM

In my game, you are a ball of light created by an organization to destroy enemy ships, and you are assigned a pretty agent named Ariel to instruct you.

 

Under ordinary circumstances, as a ball of light, you are vulnerable. But pressing the A key brings a forcefield around yourself for a limited time.

While this forcefield is on, destroying over 1 enemy ship brings a 2x bonus to your score, destroying 3 brings a 3x bonus. When your forcefield ends and has to be "charged", the score multiplier resets to 1x.

 

Although you can kill enemy ships using your forcefield, something called shockwaves will kill you either way. Shockwaves are waves of energy which come from the side of the screen.

 

So after destroying 35 enemy ships, the game basically ends. You get a bonus level if you have gone beyond a certain score, which is a sidescrolling minigame where you avoid energy beams while moving.

 

I also have a couple of boss ships which have forcefields which go up and down, but the game still seems bland to me.

 

This is a futuristic space game.

 

My thoughts:

 

How should I expand on this game?
Is it possible to introduce currency? How would it be used?
Can I diverge from science fiction and give the game a horror-based storyline (say the pretty female dies, or turns out to be a demon)? Or would that just be too much? Would a scary story be a cheap way of spicing up this game?
Do you think I should add a 2-player mode with a Campaign which plays just like the 1-player mode but with two people on-screen, and a Deathmatch mode where two people try to destroy each other using their forcefields?


Edited by Shane C, 14 May 2014 - 03:40 PM.


Sponsor:

#2 Dodopod   Members   -  Reputation: 604

Like
2Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:18 PM

Why 35 ships? Why not let the player go until they die?



#3 Shane C   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1276

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 14 May 2014 - 04:25 PM

Why 35 ships? Why not let the player go until they die?

 

That's actually a good point to bring to my attention.

 

The game is internally crafted in "waves" of enemies which do different things each wave. I thought this sufficient but since I have decided to expand on the game, I can rotate the waves once they end back to the starting wave, increasing the speed (translating to more difficulty) of the enemies each time. Which would create a never-ending experience.



#4 powerneg   Members   -  Reputation: 1463

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 15 May 2014 - 06:06 AM

You only have one weapon(forcefield) why not add a second weapon that makes an expanding shockwave around(away from) the player's ship filling up ~1/3 of the screen ?



#5 Norman Barrows   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 2138

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 15 May 2014 - 10:12 AM

>> The game is internally crafted in "waves" of enemies which do different things each wave. 

 

>> So after destroying 35 enemy ships, the game basically ends. You get a bonus level if you have gone beyond a certain score, which is a sidescrolling minigame where you avoid energy beams while moving.

 

>> I also have a couple of boss ships which have forcefields which go up and down, but the game still seems bland to me.

 

sounds like a galaga type clone.

 

there are limits to what can be done with such a simple arcade mechanic. basically its about bashing buttons til you run out of quarters or your fingers hurt too much.  you can change up weapons and opponents, but in the end its all the same sort of thing. i had a buddy who could beat the the machine with just one quarter - every time. he'd play until the game finished and reset, then just walk away.

 

adding design features from other game types (IE commerce etc) smacks of "throwing code" or "throwing game features" at the problem.

 

what was the original game design, or did you start making something?

 

if you've implemented the original design and its lacking, your rapid prototyping has done its job, and its time to go back to the drawing board and come up with something cooler.

 

if you simply started making <whatever>, and the pile of game code on your PC is the result, then its time to set that learning experience aside, and see if you can take the skills learned and use them to build something that seems cool enough to be worth finishing. 

 

much depends on your goals: learning, money, or having some particular type of game to play.


Norm Barrows

Rockland Software Productions

"Building PC games since 1988"

 

rocklandsoftware.net

 





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS