i''ve been thinking about making a system similar to this, with the slow motion melee combat. here are some of my ideas (from an rpg/adventure game in the works):

- have a ''combat mode'' (different from a normal explore/walk around/adventure mode), which might just be the player drawing their weapon. once this mode is entered, the slow motion kicks in.

- time is ''slowed down'' in proportion to the distance between the player and the nearest enemy, and also relative to the player''s drawn weapon, plus the player''s skills in relevant areas (speed, intelligence, agility, et cetera). if they are using a long bow it may begin to slow down at twenty or thirty yards; with a dagger it may be twenty or thirty inches.

- as in max payne the player is still able to move the mouse and use the keyboard in real time (giving them a reaction time advantage). The skill in combat comes in timing attacks, and using the best attack in the best situation. Lets say your opponent makes a left to right swipe with their two handed axe. You might imagine there would be five rough ''time-points'' to react: too early, a little early, perfect, a little late, too late. if the player decided to dodge, but reacted in the ''too early'' time slot, the enemy could still have time to react and the player may still be hit. if they react in the ''perfect'' time slot, they could roll out of the way and could attack immediately. assume they do this; the enemy swings wide and exposes their side and back to the player. Again they have the five time slots to react. lets say they react ''too late'' and swing their sword. the enemy will have time to recover and may parry the attack. et cetera.

the system would not appear so contrived, it wouldn''t be a matter of hitting the right button at the right time (and there wouldn''t be any indication of the ''current time slot''; that''d be too atrificial).

- the player''s skills would determine the length of each of the time slots. a faster, more agile player would have a longer ''perfect'' time slot and shorter ''too early/late'' slots. the enemies'' skills would also alter the time slots, making the ''too early/late'' slots longer, and ''perfect'' shorter, for example. different weapons would also affect the timing too.

- even if the player''s timing is good, the choice of weapon and attack would be crucial for a successful hit.

during these slow motion combats, the player is free to do whatever they want; cast spells, walk around, talk, and fight. there would be some cost; maybe a concentration or focus value. if the player stays in combat mode too long, or is engaging an enemy in combat mode for too long they may begin to lose concentration, afftecting the time slot lengths, and also the actual rate of slow motion; if they spend too long in slow motion the game will begin to speed up eventually.

if the player always runs around with their sword drawn this would cost minimal ''concentration'', if anything.



<(o)>

aDasTRa: "Atrificial"?

Seriously though, I think you have to be careful with your use of the word Player and your use of what should be the words Player Charater. Grammar aside, What would you intend as the control setup, I know it''s fun thinking up abstract structure, but the issue is that control must be given to the player, and that affects the combat system as much as any other feature.

digitaldirt: Cool



Consider this: Without a complex control system, there is no need for slow-mo. The need may also depend on the severity of an effective attack. It is easy for a game to raise the damage of attacks to a point of realistic repercussion, but that makes it necessary to give players a level of control which allows them to deal with the complexities of combat. It seems generally preferable for a game to give relatively unrealistic amounts of health to the characters involved so that the damages suffered for a wrong move are not so grevious as they might be in real life.

I''m not sure if this really implies that my design is overly ambitious and unnecessarily complicated. I still need a good way to handle Ranged Combat.

George D. Filiotis
Are you in support of the ban of Dihydrogen Monoxide? You should be!

I like the idea. I don''t think it is cliche since you''re using it for a purpose. To make it realistic for the player to actually guide the player character through a complex combat sequence. By slowing down the combat you make the game playable by casual gamers. However, it would be nice if you allow the speed time delay to be adjustable to suit players with different skill levels.

Palidine''s idea about changing the oponents speed based on difficulty has merit as well. There''s no reason the PC and opponent need to be the same speed.

Limit moves to the keypad as you describe now. Too many keys will just be confusing.

I think you mentioned this, but record fight sequences so players can watch a full speed replay later. I''m sure they will be entertaining to watch.

Maybe I''m over simplifying things, but why is ranged combat difficult? Can''t you just have projectiles and people both move at a slower speed? Since the purpose of slowing things down is to help the character you don''t need to throw things in like allowing the player character to catch arrows.

This game will definitely take a lot of work and testing. I''m glad to see you''re realistic by looking out 3 to 4 years. The animations alone will take forever. I also agree that skeletal animation is definitely the way to go. You''ll need sophisticated colision detection too.

--
http://www.3dcgi.com/

control scheme? i''ve considered some, but which one to actually implement could only be decided after some testing. since i want the player to be able to move around still, to have the same control as normal, i wouldn''t expect them to switch to using the keypad; the default controls use the keyboard (''wasd'' type of set up). here is the system i am leaning towards (although it is still untested):

the player continues to use w and s to move forwards and backwards respectively. a and d remain as side stepping, but instead of moving linearly, you move in a circle or arc around the enemy, if ''locked on'' (locking on/off would simple be toggled with a key press). player can jump, roll, et cetera.

the player uses the mouse to attack. two buttons == two hands. left mouse button uses left hand or arm, right uses right. lets say the player currently has a shield in the left, sword in right. how are actions done now becomes the issue...two ideas:

one, the player presses the button (or buttons) for the arm(s) they wish to move. while holding the button(s) down they move the mouse as they would have the arms move. as long as the players holds down the buttons, the model''s arms will respond.

the second, potentially simpler way of controlling would be similar, except instead of holding down buttons and moving the mouse for the action, the player just clicks on the body part of their opponent they wish to ''interact with'', the button determining which arm they use. so if you left click on the opponents sword , the character will attempt to block a blow. if you left click on their face the character will attempt to smash the opponent''s face with his shield. attacks would be a little more complicated, because there are so many ways to strike a person. it could be a thrust, a slice, a chop, a parry, etc...with the mouse movement method that isn''t a big deal, with the simple clicks it becomes a big problem. i guess the best way to solve it is to use the player''s timing to influence the attack. if the attack is on the too late side of perfect, but will still land, it may just be a quick thrust; not a lot of damage. a little early and they might sind up for a swing, which could do good damage, but has a higher chance of being dodged or parried. a perfect strike might cleave the opponent''s head right down the middle. this would further amplify the importance of timing; one good strike could down even the toughest fighter.


<(o)>

Sorry to those who never wanted to see this thread again... I missed itFor now, I''m willing to stick to the use of keys to represent entire moves. The idea of using the mouse to guide the character''s weapon doesn''t encompass footwork, balancing for power, and a host of other little bits that come into play.

The reason ranged combat is a problem, is that the style of play restricts the player''s ability to select and use ranged weapons. It also causes a fuss, because during sword-time segments, the player with a sword has a lot more cool stuff to do than the player with the bow and arrow.

The same applies to magic (if a magic system is used), unless casting spells uses a real-time combinatorial system.

Incidentally, has anyone tried something to the tune of player-makes-spells-work, that is besides Lionhead with Black & White because that really doesn''t count, it''s important that quality comes into play.

George D. Filiotis
Are you in support of the ban of Dihydrogen Monoxide? You should be!