It's quite an interesting question and echoes with one I asked myself some days ago. But first, let me expose my vision of this "problem"
In many JRPG there is an evident break between the exploring phase and the fighting phase. Why? There is simply too many differences between these two phases.
1. In term of information. In fight you need informations you don't need in exploration (attack set, hp bar, mana, etc...) and vice versa. (who need a mini-map during a fight?)
2. And also in term of control, in fight you control the UI. In the exploration you control the character.
So the question seems to be : "How to make an RPG in which there is no break between fight and exploration?"
Possible answer 1 : Put the exploration and the fight on the same "Level"
Let's try to ask for one of the old RPG ancestors, I call Baldur's gate! Little summary of what Baldur's gate is. It's a RPG game developped by the well-known studio BioWare and published in 1998. They use the Dungeon and Dragons (the roleplaying game on paper) as a base rule. The opponent and all the characters are on the same map and you have to move all your 6 characters by cliking where you want them to go. When a fight occurs, the game pause itself and you can then give the orders (attack, move, cast a spell, etc...)
If you want more, you can check the other games from the same team : Knight of the old republic or the more recent Dragon Age series.
Most MMORPG use the same concept, the fight UI is the same as the exploration one, and that make the transition nearly non-existent.
Possible answer 2 : Smooth it all!
And then I remark the little "j" you put before RPGs
First thing wich comes to mind when speaking of Japan RPG? For me it's Final Fantasy. So let's talk about their solution by starting exposing the biggest problem of this transition : It breaks the immersion.
In order to smooth this break, Final Fantasy try to put the game in the same place as the game. For exemple, if you fight in a snowy moutain, you will have a snowy background in your fight. They make you feel that you fight in the same room you were exploring earlier.
The french T-MMORPGs Dofus and Wakfu use the same concept, the only difference between the exploration phase and the fighting phase are the grid that spawn during the fight. But this latest exemple is a double off-subject because not an RPG and not even japanese
And that's it for y contribution for this week's discussion. I hope I didn't went to far off the topic, and it was nice thinking about this subject.
NavezofMember Since 06 Aug 2013
Offline Last Active Today, 11:56 AM
- Group Members
- Active Posts 46
- Profile Views 794
- Submitted Links 0
- Member Title Member
- Age Age Unknown
- Birthday Birthday Unknown
Posted by Navezof on 22 November 2013 - 12:48 PM
It's quite an interesting question and echoes with one I asked myself some days ago. But first, let me expose my vision of this "problem"
Posted by Navezof on 05 November 2013 - 04:01 PM
Hello, some inputs,
I will assume that in your list each post is doing is only job (the concept artist doesn't model anything, the audio/sound artist doesn't implement the sound, etc...) In little studios, a person may have to works on many aspects on the games. (3d modeling and level designer and programming, etc...)
-The Level designer draws and models the levels
The level designer if he is only level designer, doesn't draws or model anything. He "just" use the models made by the artists (environnementals, characters, props) and the objects implementing the game mechanics (a door, some anchor to climb a wall) to put them in the level. In the case of UDK, thy may also use the matinee and kismet system.
Is there a specialty programmers who only program multiplayer games?
If you mean that is there programmer, whose work is only on working on the multiplayer aprt of your game, then I would say it depends on your organisation. In big studios with a lot of people yes, they can afford (and sometimes they must) have one programmer dedicated entirely on multiplayer programming. Not so much in little project
Will the programmers be able to work on a single project?
...I don't understand your question. I think it's more easy to works on a single project, than on multiple...
Does this project need to have a certain and single programming language?
Depends on the game engine you will chose. UDK uses either C++ or its own language, the unreal script. And flash for the UI. If you want to start your own engine, then most people will recommend you C++ (mother of all languages)
I think I can get your point. You want to know what is the workflow for making a game? You want to know how all the people in the project will interact wit each other?
If this is effectively your question, then there is a lot of way of doing it, and it's kind of complex.
The short version would be something like :
Game designer design the game.
Artists make the drawing, the models and all the ressources,
Programers Implement the mechanics.
Level designer create the levels by using the artists's ressources and programmer's mechanics
Game designer adjust the mechanics value.
Also, I don't know if you intended to make an exhaustive list of post needed in a video game project, but you are missing some posts. Lead programmer, Character designer, environmental artists, project leader, Q.A Tester, creative director, writers, and so on. But, as I said earlier, depending on the size of the project, there can be one person for multiple posts.
Posted by Navezof on 05 November 2013 - 03:07 PM
Your concept is very similar to the Japanese Visual Novel. It's a type of game very popular in Japan, even though many of them are either Dating-simulator or Erogame. (It means, a visual with some r-18 scene, the number of these scenes depend on the visual novel). The concept of these "games" is the same as you described, There is a lot of story, and at some point in the story the player as to make a choice, Depending on his choice, the story will have a different ending.
Many of these are the starting point for anime adaptation, the most known in europa may be the Fate/Stay franchise. (the anime adaptation is pretty good, btw)
But well, I could say a lot more, but I will stop here (google it if you want to know more ) . Maybe this can give you some ideas ;)
Posted by Navezof on 05 November 2013 - 06:27 AM
Your whole game doesn't need to be new. Even if it's only one part of your game which is new. For exemple, you have Limbo, it's just a basic platformer (you run, jump, resolve enigma, etc...) but the graphic tone, and atmoshpere are really unique.
I would associate innovative with Indie game dev, and old/refined with big production. But, there is the case of "Candy Crush", a game on mobile platform which is (oldyl) a very big success. But the concept is a very old and used one. (I even have the same type of game on my old phone which is something like 10 years old!)
But ot answer your question, I will say ; "both". Take some proven concept from there and there, mix, bring your own inspiration, mix again, and pray that this will become something cool ^^'
In short, don't just imitate, but absolutely be inspired!
Posted by Navezof on 02 November 2013 - 07:36 AM
What you asking for is vague .Basicaly you want to know RTS or tund-based strategy game in space. That's it?
A few example :
Star wars empire at war
Sin of a solar empire
Eve online (not really RTS, but it's in space, and it's great)
Posted by Navezof on 01 November 2013 - 07:19 AM
I also agree with Mippy. At start It's always nice to unlock new level easily, it encourage the player to continue playing, in order to get more rewards. If the reward are to slow to come at first, player will quicly give up because there is no immediate benefits
I think the achievment system on Steam is a good exemple.
Posted by Navezof on 29 October 2013 - 05:56 AM
To be totally frank and assuming you want to propose something new, your idea seems over-used and kind of boring. The only new thing I see in your description is the humanitarian effort, it can be a good idea, but it's still not enough to make me think this game can be good or new.
I'm sorry I can't really help you without more materials.
It's kind of a rude comment, but well, this is my opinion about your idea.
Posted by Navezof on 26 October 2013 - 12:33 PM
I will also add my own opinion. Your post is kind of messy. I didn't get what is your point.
Your definition of Game Design not really the one you can usually find on Internet, and you seems to be talking more about economic plan (what will/won't work). And I also disagree with the most part of your article.
The fact that it's your opinion and is different is good, but your justifications and explanation are too shallow, either there is not enough to debate, or it's not linked enough to Game Design. Particulary for the art and music section.
Music - Music is harder to make than art, in my opinion. You have to write the music, then compose the music. Those who don't write the notes out and play by ear instead seem to make mistakes in their music more often than those who don't.
You are talking about music in general, not especially in Game Design, so why is it here?
Also, you first compose the music and then you write it, not the other way. (except if for you, composing mean playing )
There is also the lack of formatting (no underline, no bold, no sub-title)
In conclusion, I will say nearly the same as the two answers above : Too confusing, not focused enough on Game design as the title says, too shallow. Sorry if my opinion seems a bit rude, but I hope it'll help you. (maybe)
Posted by Navezof on 26 October 2013 - 02:33 AM
Another "must absolutely do" in order to test that your game is teaching correctly the player : make a non-gamer test your game.
I made my father test a Fps I made.I put him in front of the game, and watch him play without saying anything. Apart from being funny watching him struggling with the most basic concept of an Fps it shown me a lot of details that I didn't see because I already know some basics about games. But, if even a person who never play manage to play your game, then your game is teaching correctly
Posted by Navezof on 25 October 2013 - 02:35 PM
Don't think of it as a "tutorial level".
Rather, you should review your learning curve.
Early levels should introduce few concepts and let you master them, and the game should evolve from there.
I agree with that. The player should learn how to play, by playing. I would recommend watching this video from Sequelitis, he explain how the first level of megaman X teach the player all he have to know about how to play.
And, as Orymus said, try to have a good learning curve.
For exemple :
Level 1 : A simple room with a door and an arrow pointing at the door. The player will learn how to control the character.
Level 2 : Same as earlier, but the door is locked, and there is a key in the room. The player will learn that some keys unlock the door. Don't forget to match the door with the key to make it easier for the player to associate the two.
Level 3 : Same as earlier, but the player can;t directly see the key, but he has a radar. The player learn that the radar can help find key,
The goal is to introduce new simple mechanics, then add some variation to these same mechanics and finally arrive to the final form of your mechanics.
Don't take the player for a fool, but don't take the player as a genius gamer, either.
Posted by Navezof on 22 October 2013 - 04:05 PM
FPS + Parkour + Dinausaur? + Zombie Apocalypse??. Well that is interesting, add some pirates and ninja and it will be perfect.
More seriously, I find the idea interesting. Kind of a competitive Mirror's edge. To make it more interesting I would let one team being the humans and the other the raptors. I don't know if it could stay attractive after playing on or two games.
Zombie + parkour was already made in Dying Light (from Techland, the same guy behind Dead Island) so go find some inspiration in these games. For games about parkour there is of course Mirror's edge, and in a competitive way there is Blink. Then, as you said, there is more and more FPS who uses parkour moves.
And now even more serious. Are you just proposing an idea (purely theoretical) without wanting to go further? (Which is, in my opinion perfectly fine and honorable.) Or do you really intend to develop it?
If your answer is the first, then I would recommend you to write a complete Game Design Document (http://www.runawaystudios.com/articles/chris_taylor_gdd.asp) It's a GDD template from the guy who made Total Annihilation. Try to imagine the whole game. I insist, the whole game, not just the start, not just the story. Try to think about how will be your game from the first button to the last. When you'll finish completing this document, you should realize that making a game can be very demanding and hard. (But you can always send me the completed document, I will gladly look at it)
If your answer is the second, then I have more question. Do you have some programming/team-managment abilities ( design/modelisation/texturing/animation/artistic/sound/cinema/writing/etc...) Did you estimate how long can it take to make a FPS? Even when using an engine like UDK, Unity, or else, it take a lot of effort and time to make a game. Did you try to make a simple FPS first? One, where you have to reach an exit before the time (or invisible raptor) eat you? Do you know how you plan to make the parkour movement? To make it realist using capture motion would be the best solution, but I guess not anyone has a capture motion (and actor) in his garage. If not, then you should have an army of modeler and animator to make your animation (and your raptor)
The issue is this: I have so many ideas.
Well, like 90% of the population -_-'
Anyway, to make it short, I hope you have a little more than what you just posted. Because your ambition doesn't seems to match your means ^^'
And before finishing my post, I want to clarify a few things.
1. I don't blame (just a little) nor want to break your motivation. I just want to make sure you are prepared.
2. I don't say it's impossible to do. But maybe not without the right experience, method, organisation and funding.
Other than that, good luck.
PS : On a side note, in my humble opinion, comic sans ms is like the less serious and worst police ever ^^'
Posted by Navezof on 18 October 2013 - 01:30 PM
Allowing the player to switch it on or off, is totally out of question. Either this feature is implemented, or not. It would be too unbalanced to have some characters with it and some other without.
Maybe I didn't explain it well. There, some added information.
- The recovery rate is sufficient to recover from a move and a simple action. (attack, use item) So, if a character is always doing basic action, he doesn't need to take care of his stamina. The amount of stamina should be enough to not run-out after only 2 turns. I think having the characters for the most time with around 60%-80% stamina in safe situation, and more around 30%-50 in dangerous situation.
- Some actions cost more stamina than other, if a character always use his most powerful spell, he will quickly ran out of stamina.
- It allows the player to make some mistake by giving him an extra-chance.
- It adds more fragility to the characters, thus encouraging player to play safe and in team (by covering exhausting character with "fresh" characters.)
- It also allow the player to make risky, extraordinary actions.
- It also penalize player who are rushing alone. (I remember final fantasy tactics, where I just had to place my main character with a counter attack on the middle of the map, and the enemie's unit where just killed one by one.)
To make it simpler, well, it's just like a mana (magic) bar, but which is influencing other characteristics and the result of actions.
Posted by Navezof on 18 October 2013 - 11:25 AM
For a Tactical - RPG game, I wanted to add a system using stamina. I would like to hear your opinion.
- Each character has a amount of stamina.
- At the beginning of his turn the character regain some of his stamina. The amount of stamina recovered depends on the previous situation the character is in. If he is surrounded by enemies, he will regain less Stamina, than a character who is safe.
- Each action cost a certain amount of stamina.
- The stamina is taken into account for most calculus. (for example : damage = Force * stamina)
- When a character take a hit and is about to die because of it, he has a chance to use a large amount of stamina to evade the attack or reduce the impact of the attack. If the evasion don't work, he die. If it work he is safe but exhausted.
- When a character is hit, he lose some hp and stamina.
- A character can burn more stamina to perform some action (a supplementary action, a special action)
- A character can burn its stamina max to be as effective as if he was at full stamina for one turn. Afterward, he will lose his stamina max, and lose a lot of stamina. (Something like, 1/10 stamina left, and stamina max = 5) It's only for the duration of the fight.
- Your maximum stamina depends on your health state. An injured character has only 60% of his stamina max.
And there is the analyse I made for this system.
The + of this system :
- No more over-powerful unit, if he is tired, he became as weak as anybody.
- You have to take care of your character, they are more fragile.
- More comeback possibilities. "Ok, I'm cornered, I will go all out and burn all of my characters stamina to perform a big offensive!"
The - of this system :
- Slower. They may be situation where you'd rather wait that all your characters have full stamina before moving.
- No more over-powerful unit. Even against weaker enemies, you can exhaust your more powerful character. And render him useless.
Thank you for reading.
Posted by Navezof on 18 October 2013 - 05:59 AM
I have some question/problems, assuming that all the storyline is in this post. (For exemple, the dragon is not a dragon of beauty)
I will start by saying that : If you want to make a simple game, with a simple story, it's cool.
But, if your ambition is to give a story a little more original and deep, you have to put more into it.
I guess this post is only a quick description and there is more that you didn't say here. But for the moment, it's kind of too shallow and overused, and boring. Once again, I know this is not the final scenario (I hope so), but with only this much information it's difficult to give good advices. What you wrote is really not sufficient for us (me at least) to help.
It's like there are some good guys who are good because they are the heroes, there is a bad guy because they are bad, there is a traitor because you need a twist, there are characters who are joining because you need more character. Etc... You have to give you character reasons, motivation for doing what they are doing. The other thing I want to note, is there are no links between the action of the character. Why are they goinf to Trenton? And not Fleury-bigoudi?
It can be from the simplest (Lucas join Sheila, because she is so beautiful, and he is so a knight, and duty and derp derp) to more complex (an oracle told him to go find his sister in this village, but by the time he arrives in this village she is dead (illness), but he happen to meet Sheila who looks like her sister, but Lucas was also an agent from a demon who sent him to bring back a random beautiful girl. If he does so, then the demon will grant him power. And he think that the oracle didn't want to show her his sister, but Sheila.)
But not just, he join her because he is part of the hero team.
So now I will start some questions :
Why is Sheila selected? It's random? She is the most beautiful of the clan?
Why Sheila would help a perfect stranger? We need to know more about her personality. Why is she necessary to drive of the ghost? As she predisposition to exorcism, which could explain why she is selected. Because the wise-women of her clan knew that, and she didn't want Sheila to take her place. Or, she love Sheila and knew that with her gift she could defeat the dragon. But as she can't go aganst their clan tradition, she was forced to emprison her, but she indirectly help Sheila to escape.
It's only my personal opinion, but the characters are an important part of the story. You have to tell us more about them! Even if it's just few lines, we have to know about their motivation.
Why Lucas will join her, ok, she helped him, but is this sufficient?
Why Gradly will join them? Imagine the dialog :
Sheila : "Hey, random old guy with an axe, join us in a quest to save my ass by risking yours! There is no reward except for my eternal gratitude!"
Who told them that the dragon can be slain if you break its four heart? It's a well known tradition? Written in book? One of the main character knows it? If the solution is known, why nobody didn't do anything? However, if the dragon is only attacking one remote village and kill one girl each month. Well, it's not so bad.
It could be more interesting if the player fight the dragon a first time, realize it can't be killed the normal way, try to run away. But by doing so Sheila fall into a ruin, and discover a pictures/book/text which tell the story of this dragon, and how to kill it. You could meet Misty who is there because he is in reality a Dragon Guardian whose mission is to protect the dragon. First he want to kill Sheila because she know how to kill the dragon and the location of the 4 hearths . But, as she is the only one to read the text/book or the text/book was destroyed just after Sheila read it. Misty want to know where are the other hearths so he decide to accompany her.
There, Misty could be an interesting character, so let me tell you more about his background. First, you have to know that the dragon, in order to be immortal gave his heart to 4 peopel/monster. And by doing so he gave them a part of his power. Long time ago, as Misty was a young adventurers, he stumble on one of these guardian, and manage to kill him. But he also chose to take the place of the fallen Guardian in order to gain more power. His ultimate goal is to reunite the 4 hearths to have the power of a dragon.
And I'm sorry but : "I join you because a bird told me to!" Is so... silly.
"Phileas, plops downs,", sorry I don't understand. I will assume that the dragon appear near the party.
So a dragon, which is I guess, pretty big, manage to sneak (fly, land(!) and walk) an adventurers party without waking them up? They are sleeping in the open, in an hostile land, and they are not taking turn watching the surrounding or at least be a little cautious? That's a ninja dragon for you.
So, the main point are :
- Add reason/motivation for the characters to do what they are doing. They will be more realistic and loveable by the player.
- Add reason/motivation for the characters to go where they are going. Not because this is the next town on your way.
I will finish my post by saying good luck, I hope all of this will help you a bit
Posted by Navezof on 18 October 2013 - 03:00 AM
Once again, if your goal is to make a game based on another, I will recommend to use the same character sheet, or just take the attribute that you find interesting.
Some remarks about your system :
- It's kind of basic. (But, once again, I prefer when their is a lot of attributes ^^ )
- Their is a lot of attribute you can add : Constitution, Wisdom, Charisma, Critics, Evasion, etc... As I said, look into already existing system
- Luck is only for evasion? I would use it as a "bonus" for all calcul (attack, defense, etc...) and have another attribute like Agility/Dexterity which is used for calculating the evasion.
- No weapon/armor affinity? A character can have a prefered weapon, and if he is equiped with it he has a bonus for the damage.
- Perks? Kind of like fallout, or the potential in Valkyria Chronicle II. It's something that is added at the start and give a bonus and malus. For exemple : Head-hunter, augment critic chance, but decrease precision. or something like that.
- Skills? Something giving you a bonus and can be gain through playing, for exemple : Fire affinity, after using too much fire spell, your fire spell will be more powerful.
And this is all I can think for now. I hope this can help you, or at least give you some ideas