[indent=1]I've been developing a game idea for the past month. It could be my first real game that I will build and pursue fundraising. I'm just looking for opinions for now.
The games a multiplayer fps similar to battlefield. With some RTS elements. The setting is in a steampunk world. The teams start off at a point on the map. With little or no base. The engineers can build structures such as barraks, vehicle factories, and facilities. The objective is to destroy the other teams means of production. So if there are no engineers left and there are no more spawn points they loose.
Resources are required to build structures. I've thought of a couple ways to do this.
1. warhouse structures. They generate resources overtime. So if theres a building being built and its nearby a warhouse, it uses up its resources.
2. Resource areas on the map that need to be gatherd. Just like a regular RTS game. Mining buildings can be built over the areas so they can be extracted.
If someone tries to build a structure that is not near a resource building, they need to bring the resources there with supply trucks. The supply truck can drop off resources and any buildings being built around it will be able to use the resources. I was thinking of an option for the player to set a route for the supply truck so they dont need to drive it. Creating a supply line that shows up on the map for friendly players. And other trucks can join the route.
Any player can get resources from resource buildings with supply trucks, if theres enough. I'm thinking this is a good way to segment out the resources so it doesnt just go to one big poll and everyone fights over it.
The maps will be fairly big. And vehicle driven. Theres going to be big airships roaming around so the map needs to be large enough. I would like there to be no fog so the map looks wide open. It may take a while to get from one end to the other, although the team who suceeds in getting a base up with a spawn point at the other side will be better off. The airships could also act as spawnpoints. I'm hoping the game will be able to run with at least 70 players or more on pc.
The game will be free to play. And people can purchase in game points in order to buy unit upgrades. If the first game is succesfull enough, I can make a 2nd one with whole new vehicles people earn with points.
Game Idea, FPS Steampunk multiplayer
Maybe make it so that anyone can build and shoot, but some people have spent their points to improve their engineering skills and others have spent them on fighting accessories and shootin skills. So if the engineers are missing, it woild still be possible to set up some barricades and basic building (just slower, less advanced and needs more resources?)
What about having to collect steam from buildings for certain things (for small stuff that cant produce the steam themselves or to pack larhe amounts of steam for storage) and maybe even having supply lines to bring steam tanks from factories to the huge doomsday weapon?
What about having to collect steam from buildings for certain things (for small stuff that cant produce the steam themselves or to pack larhe amounts of steam for storage) and maybe even having supply lines to bring steam tanks from factories to the huge doomsday weapon?
[indent=1]It could be my first real game that I will build and pursue fundraising. I'm just looking for opinions for now.
The games a multiplayer fps similar to battlefield.
If I am not wrong, there were 100+ people on Battlefield's development team. Might be better to strive for a design a lone inexperienced indie developer can complete.
Author
It might be a good idea for non engineers to be able to place sandbags, mines or trenches. But building construction I think should be all engineers work.
In the middle of development I plan to start a kickstarter fund that will hopefully bring in more people. Also battlefield had single player that included working with npc's and nav meshing which I dont plan to do. At least for the first game. It will all be online.
In the middle of development I plan to start a kickstarter fund that will hopefully bring in more people. Also battlefield had single player that included working with npc's and nav meshing which I dont plan to do. At least for the first game. It will all be online.
A thought on everyone being capable of doing each job: Why not have those skilled in the task able to do it a lot faster/more accurate?
I actually liked the idea, but graphics will be your flaw, how will you achieve this graphically?
Author
I have 5 years experience in 3d animation. So I ill be able to handle the modeling the best.
some of my work
http://www.lukes3d.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/MrSkywalker113/videos
some of my work
http://www.lukes3d.com/
http://www.youtube.com/user/MrSkywalker113/videos
Team Fortress 2 has fairly small maps and up to 32 players and one of the best development team on this planet and the game still lags sometimes. I hope you have a good plan how to outperform Valve
[indent=1]The maps will be fairly big. And vehicle driven. Theres going to be big airships roaming around so the map needs to be large enough. I would like there to be no fog so the map looks wide open. It may take a while to get from one end to the other, although the team who suceeds in getting a base up with a spawn point at the other side will be better off. The airships could also act as spawnpoints. I'm hoping the game will be able to run with at least 70 players or more on pc.
From programmer's point of view this idea looks like a nightmare.
BTW, I liked the zeppelin aircraft carrier sketch
Team Fortress 2 has fairly small maps and up to 32 players and one of the best development team on this planet and the game still lags sometimes. I hope you have a good plan how to outperform Valve
From programmer's point of view this idea looks like a nightmare.
Yep, Valve currently is at the forefront of multiplayer networking technologies.
Perhaps the OP could tone down his vision drastically, get a working demo out using something easy like Flash that has a tiny fraction of the features, and then work from there.
Too many people come here with zero game development experience and expect to match industry giants with their first attempt. To strike an analogy: if you have never cooked anything before, would it be realistic to expect your first dish to be as good as those from 3 michelin star gourmet restaurants? Chances are, it won't even be as good as cheap supermarket fare.
Please don't take this the wrong way, I am not being offensive. I think a lot of people would agree that you are producing good art/animation work, and we really don't want you to give up after getting stuck for 2-3 years.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
