Jump to content
  • Advertisement

Archived

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

bishop_pass

Clean slate

This topic is 5360 days old which is more than the 365 day threshold we allow for new replies. Please post a new topic.

If you intended to correct an error in the post then please contact us.

Recommended Posts

Can you replace your idea of an RPG or an FPS or an RTS with a different way to vicariously experience a world populated by characters of the designers' imagination as well as the avatar of the player? As an exercise, and one of cooperation, rather than an isolated paragraphical presentation from each participant, try and evolve or revolutionize through discussion something better, or at least, as I have suggested, different. Please do not assume a scenario different from what one would expect within the realm of fiction. In other words, the fictionalized world should still be one of general fantasy, science ficiton, Old West, Roman, modern mainstream, etc. It should not be something that doesn't conform to such norms, such as gobbling food in a maze, fitting blocks in a puzzle, etc. The notion here is to evolve presentation and gameplay in a standardized ficitonal environment, not to evolve the environment or conjure up gameplay for the sake of gameplay without any underlying standardized fiction. EDIT: Also, connsider that vague ideas, half realized notions, and cloudy conceptualizations that are, intitially difficult to express because they are only partially formed within your mind are in fact the beginning foundations of something new, and it is better to try and articulated, if only vaguely, such things than to remain silent. [edited by - bishop_pass on October 10, 2003 12:26:02 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Advertisement
If I don''t get this or if anyone else doesn''t, could you maybe give us another example? or a deeper example?

Just to make sure (i think it''s cause i''m tired) but are you asking for something in the way we present our game either through marketing or presenting the storyline as the game progresses? Like for example. I use quake 2 code (licensed of course) and make another game but I put things in it to change the game. The after its all done I use teh game to present the story of it instead of how many new weapons i have or the types of multiplayer games i used. Maybe something like a Metal Gear Solid game (i''ve only watched a friend play the first game) but there was a lot of ingame videos. I don''t think the company advertised what the game could do but the story on which you go through.

If so then let me know and I''ll post something else. Otherwise you confused me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you're confused, perhaps that is good. It means you don't have a pat answer, and that is definitely necessary to start thinking about this.

First of all, all of the above has nothing to do with marketing or advertising. It has to do with gameplay. More specifically, it has to do with coming up with a different or better way for players to play games in which they vicariously play one or more characters. The idea is that 70% of what one does in today's games isn't that fun or impressive, and there could be a lot that players could do that would be fun, either competitively, visually, etc., that players aren't getting. This, however, is not a discussion about particular things such as shooting, fighting, playing poker, etc., but rather a discussion about how important such things are to general gameplay vs. other activities, how transitions work, how boring things are trimmed from a game, how cinematic elements are incorporated or removed or made an element of gameplay, how instant replay can be capitalized on, how details that are overlooked can become important, how micromanagement can be trimmed or added if it seems inviting, etc.

[edited by - bishop_pass on October 10, 2003 12:37:27 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
We can begin by eliminating some possibly false assumptions that are prevalant among designers. Let''s assume that we have an RPG game, and it is competitive and comparable to most games in the current market. Let''s assume that a lot of the things present in the game should be completely reconsidered.
  • The view we present to the player.
  • The things we ask the player to do to play.
  • The general feel of the game as the story progresses.
  • The overall transition or continuity as the player plays; i.e. is it necessary?
  • The lack of external playable features.
  • The similarity of one''s player''s experience to another.
  • The visual feel.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Cinematic elements only work for certain games. Too little would remind me of Quake 2, too much would make me want to just go and get the VHS version.... (depending of course).

Instant replay is a somewhat hard one to capitalize on. When I''m playing a game, I don''t want the game to suddenly break it''s fluidity to show me an instant replay. Although it all depends on the game. Worms was a perfect game for it. You do something amazing you get an instant replay. Maybe after the intense fight is over it will show an instant replay. I know I played a game recently that had a kind of instant replay. or rather it was slow motion. When you did someting cool, it would go into slow motion and perform what you just wanted to. Turn based games would be fine with instant replay (as long as it was like worms and not risk 2 where there is no action to replay). I do hope to put some kind of instant replay into a game i''m designing. *cough* MMO *cough* where one of the career''s is a news reporter an it''s their job to capture breaking news. Like say they just "happen" to be around when an assassination is taking place or to be up front in a war, to see the merge of 2 large companies. This capture would then broadcast to all who are watching the news.

I donno about micromanagement. I think it depends on the the player''s preference. I personnaly don''t like managing a bunch of idiots who need me to do EVERYthing for them. I''ld like to give orders and hope they follow them. It''s a tossup between micro and macro. It would be incredibly hard to do both but some like one or the other. Maybe a game that allowed for either or.

-----------

Well as far as what goes on in games today not being fun, I''ve also thought about this in the game i''m designing. (I really should come up with a shorter way to say that) Traditional RPG''s and especially MMO''s revolve around character building. Quite frankly it bores me to death. I don''t want to kill 232 orcs or space dragons to gain my next level then have to go on to kill more or mine dumb rocks. (like there''s smart rocks)... My game will focus more on what people would really do in a fantasy / sci-fi world. Engage in wars, conduct trade to please others, reveal secrets as a traitor, gain political power. In fantasy worlds I never saw an army which a vast range of skill levels.
Take lord of the rings. I don''t think the orcs at helm''s deep were too different from each other. One might be a little more powerful but it wasn''t overwhelming like the MMO''s you can get now. You log on and see FooNerBoy at level 992 while you''re a puny 4. No matter what you do you still can''t hurt him. Sure maybe a little training is needed but seriously, that much? in MMO''s or in just single player rpg''s, the focus should be on the storyline itself or contributing to it. Personally no matter how long I play... even if it''s for 20 years, I still shouldn''t be able to skill myself up so i can easily slap a blue dragon to death.


btw. I hope this was the kind of discussion you were hoping for.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by trapdoor
Cinematic elements only work for certain games.
Forgive me for not wanting to read the rest of your post after such a remark, but I will after expressing my indignation. To begin with, you've made three erroneous assumptions in one sentence. I'll enumerate them below:
  • You already know what a cinematic element is comprised of, which I believe is wrong. Cinematic refers to cinema, which refers to cinematography, movie making, films, etc. This is a lot, and what that means is, you can't compartmentalize the idea and write it off.
  • You assume a certain type of game, and assume that type of game is out of the scope of this topic. You shouldn't assume any type of game, since one hasn't really been defined yet - that is to say, gameplay, etc.
  • You assume that cinematic 'only' works for a certain type of game, which is erroneous, in my opinion.


Now, I'll read the rest of your post.



[edited by - bishop_pass on October 11, 2003 1:18:29 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
quote:
Original post by trapdoor
Instant replay is a somewhat hard one to capitalize on.
Again, you''ve done everyone a disservice by looking backwards instead of forwards. I don''t think what one has experienced in the past with regard to an idea has much relevance to what one can do in the future with an idea.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
trapdoor,
In response to the rest of your thoughts, I think you at least see what I'm driving at, but it seems you're still too mired in traditional thinking.

Take, for example, whatver idea you have for a game. Whatever moments in your game that you believe would be fun, how can you capitalize on that, and make transitions between the fun moments without introducing boredom between, and still maintain a continuity and an evolving story?

[edited by - bishop_pass on October 11, 2003 1:38:48 AM]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I''m assuming single player games for now.
quote:
The things we ask the player to do to play.

I think it''s very hard to find things for the player to do... which is why many give the option of mundain tasks. Either that or the main tasks must be drawn out to be real long. Otherwise if this doesn''t happen, we might be putting too much into the story and make it unbelieveable. And I mean unbelieveable in the sense that it''s too co-incidental. That the events could not have happened if i had picked them myself. Games that put things in such a way that you think to yourself "oh come on! you got to be kidding me!" I''ve played a few like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And also, for those fun moments, how could they be presented, either differently, or better, and what exactly constitutes gameplay for those moments? And on a further note, for the transitions between those fun moments or segments, what type of gameplay can be offered between - gameplay that is altogether different, focused on something different, presented differently, etc.?

Also, while the main thrust of competiveness or gameplay might be agianst the computer players, or for the purpose of unlocking new aspects of the game, what kind of sideline competiveness can be offered which doesn''t have to do with the story or characters at all, but altogether on a different level?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Advertisement
×

Important Information

By using GameDev.net, you agree to our community Guidelines, Terms of Use, and Privacy Policy.

Participate in the game development conversation and more when you create an account on GameDev.net!

Sign me up!