>> More like talking tom cat.
ok, i took a look at a youtube video. this is pretty easy to do. its more or less an animated point and click game.
the game starts with some animation paying, such as the cat just standing there, or telling you to do something.
transitions from one animation to the next are based on time (stand for a while, then ask you to do something), what you click on, or where the mouse is on the screen (such as watching food approach the mouth). each sequence must be hand coded:
it starts with ani A and says text #1.
when the player clicks the button, it switches to animation B, and maybe draws something being held by the mouse too (like food).
when the mouse gets to the mouth, you stop drawing the food, and switch to animation C: eating (IE switch ani based on mouse location).
that kind of idea. all custom coding for each behavior and animation. and then its just a whole bunch of that - over and over again, until the game is long enough / big enough. obviously you have to try to make the gameplay interesting in the process, but that's the general approach as far as the coding goes.
>> but there's no way I'll get anywhere near the things I'm thinking anytime soon.
none of us ever will ! <g>
i have a saying: "put a CRAY super computer on every user's desk and i'll build you a REAL a game".
back in the early 90's i was already building games that could have used a high end PC as local server, plus one high end PC per player, plus one high end PC per 5 NPCs / targets active in the game. there's typically a gap of a decade or more between what we know how to do in software, and what we can do in a game on the average PC hardware. just look at real time raytracing. we've known how to do it forever, but still don't have the hardware on our desks that can do it.