Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ketchaval

How abstract can enemies be?

Recommended Posts

Ketchaval    186
How can we define an enemy creature? What properties do (potentially) antagonistic creatures / opponents need? Do they need to be able to attack you, or merely hinder your goals? (ie. by stealing the objects that your have to collect to win the game.) Is it necessary that they are killable, or just allow you to run away? How should we represent them? What do you do if you encounter a moving Triangle or a living octagon? How can you tell what it will do? Do we need to be able to instantly get an idea of what an enemy creature can do, or learn what they do through experience?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
GameCreator    997
How can we define an enemy creature?
You defined it as I would: a unit or object that hinders you attaining your goals.

What properties do (potentially) antagonistic creatures / opponents need?
For what? I would imagine that they just need to hinder your goals in interesting ways.

Do they need to be able to attack you, or merely hinder your goals?
Whatever makes it interesting and fun.

Is it necessary that they are killable, or just allow you to run away?
Neither is necessary but it depends on your game type.

How should we represent them?
I don't understand question.

What do you do if you encounter a moving Triangle or a living octagon? How can you tell what it will do? Do we need to be able to instantly get an idea of what an enemy creature can do, or learn what they do through experience?
Learning through experience is fun though often it's best to set it up somehow, even if it's vague, such as "There are some strange creatures in the forest to the North. No one knows what they are as everyone fears to get close. Be careful if you're heading that way."

In short, there are no strict definitions. There shouldn't be. And a lot of it depends on the game and how you choose to make it fun.

[edited by - GameCreator on May 28, 2003 2:41:14 PM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ketchaval    186
quote:
Original post by GameCreator

What properties do (potentially) antagonistic creatures / opponents need?
For what? I would imagine that they just need to hinder your goals in interesting ways.

Do they need to be able to attack you, or merely hinder your goals?
Whatever makes it interesting and fun.

In short, there are no strict definitions. There shouldn''t be. And a lot of it depends on the game and how you choose to make it fun.

[edited by - GameCreator on May 28, 2003 2:41:14 PM]


True.

More thoughts.
I said enemy ''creature'', but that is just one of the most common ''interesting obstacles'' that are used in games. I realised that we are comfortable with the idea of having lots of semi-intelligent ''organisms'' as characters. Because, this is easy to fight. What are the alternatives? How about collective intelligences. Or, forces of nature.. such as a flooding water (there was a game on the Archimedes where you had to try to control flooding water). How about fire? That could be interesting (even though I''d feel uncomfortable about making a game featuring it). Games with earthquakes could be interesting too.


How can we represent them?
This is mainly the question of how their appearances reflect their properties.. Ie. if they can fly .. the player can understand this more instantly if the creature has wings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites