• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

132 Neutral

About creeper

  • Rank
  1. Jusr an open posting about what those  3D rinters might do for computer games (and games in general)   The way the technology is going they will have these machines alongside the picture printers at specialty and general shops sooner than later.   Custom props for a game --  to fondle while a level is loading  ?   'skins' for game controllers matching the games theme ??   all kinds of game paraphernalia (patterns) you get with a game to be 'printed'  (some future mechanism to block easy cloning/copy limiting)
  2. What would you make armour out of?

    Cloth soaked in resin  (or some other stiffener aztecs di d cotton cloth hardened with salt ??)   Or the pillowing effect cloth in puffy layers  (conquistadors adopted indian cotton cloth armor when their metal stuff was to hot/heavy and the indians didnt have the metal weapons the steel plate was designed for  and it worked well on the low penetration of most indian arrows)   Armor of illusions  (so awesome your enemy wont even try to hit you ??)   I recall mongols wore shirts of raw silk so tough an arrow wouldnt pierce it but still could force it into your flesh,  but by tugging on the silk it would pop right out  instead of getting wedged into you.(sooner foreign matter is out of you, faster you can avoid infection)
  3.   Nah, I think you could potentially prototype this with something as simple as a command prompt application (no visuals necessary, unless of course you must incorporate some animations as a visual queue, and even then those could be textually expressed) The question is how to make it challenging, fair, not dull (i.e. requiring some thought), AND keep it fun all at the same time.     I meant to make the whole thing work 'the whole enchilada'  (the logic needed to operate in the whole game with the plethora of sitations) because there would need to be many other aspects of the game that would have to warp to support it  (internal states and behaviors (AI) for the NPCs .to get tehm to act out appropriately)   But yes you could prototype pieces of it just to see if there is anything in it - limit it to a few chosen situational scenarios.   Something like 20 questions to classify the situation and then use different logic trees  (tree customized, varying with the  perp involved who has varying inclinations and motivations).   Extra credit would be generalizing the 'solver'  more  (more AI than narrowly choreographed)
  4. "What about something drastically different from combat?"   I actually have a longer blob of text in progress that talked about that  - take a 'thought experiment'  about how Bioshock could be turned into an MMORPG (I agree wont happen),  but with the motivation to capture rather than kill Splicers to cure them and rebuild the City.   As a MMORP it would be  more a campaign with long term results and more time to 'figure things out'.   I was trying to compose ways such a game would have alot more varied situations and outcomes for the player in the world.  There would be alot less fatality and many more ways of dealing with inhabitants in the still 'uncivilized' parts of Rapture..   Lots more traps and tricks and coersions and reasoning even.   But as observed, it would take a major programming project to create the behavior logic for that  (something companies general think gets in the way of the profits...  and IMO most couldnt do if they tried).   Thinking about it - how well can these games present you a situation to discern and you can largely do it intuitively and not have to read 6 pargraphs to get across an opponents intent/motivations/etc so you can chose the right tactic/actions to get done what you need.   I suppose you can make the indicators overt (telegraph it so a syphilitic rhesus mokey 'gets it') and alot of the time it could be, but other times the player should have to piece things together and even  make small moves that bring out the information (without it being unsubtle and precipitating an unwanted  bloodbath)  -- in other words players actions would need subtleties as would the opponent NPCs..     How many players could sit still for a game that was even a little like that  ??   Maybe there would be a whole nuther group of players to be attacted to that kind of game who are turned off from the violence whoremongering so many computer games are today.
  5. Improving AI of MMORPG Raids

    I was have been looking at a game that will be coming out this month  and after alot of the game mechanics were shown on the way too many trailers and interviews,  it was obvious that by randomizing game factors (plot scene order, weapon/powerup mixes, opponent spawn content, props to effect cover) they could vastly change/vary the players game experience.    That would be good for replay (needed with the shortening play-thru times).    That would also be without require much/any  costly expansion (expense $$$) for additional  choreographed special scenes or flavors of opponents.  There are always plenty of generic situation in between  where simple combinatoric options could be applied).   But no, apparently nothing remotely like that is to be there, just the usual 'led by the nose'  fixed path and scene and opponents.
  6. Enslaving doesnt work too well if there is a lack of controllability (via threat of easy overpowering and punishment, restriction on movement/action, longterm mental adjustments that prevent consideration of contrary actions, etc...)  Caveman days was a little to freeflowing for alot of those things.   Caveman X is enslaved by Caveman Y and at first opportunity brains caveman Y with a convenient rock and make his escape.  Not too practical.  Stealing women might be more common but thats more adoption than enslavement.     BTW if multiple humans existed in the same local there WERE social conventions (even animals do this) so you might have to build up proper repercussion for 'taking things too far'  (and making it plain to the player )   That is actually were the complexity explodes in behavior mechanisms where you move up a magnitude.    To be closer to realistic there has to be 'history' not just reactions of the moment.  Things happen as a continuum where an action has results/effects that may last a long time - the overall situation has to be considered in motivations and reactions you can get.   ---   Another avenue may be people who want to join you (strength in numbers and survival dependant on sharing resources).  A typical 'capital' punishment' in many nomadic societies would be exile where the environment was often such that it basicly WAS a death penalty.   It also might make you look more than twice at someone who comes along solo who cant provide an adaqute reason who MAY have been exiled and might not be the best candidate to join you ....   Another consideration is balance.  You COULD enslave that person but do you need them will they supply something you need or already have too much of.   One guy has 10 slaves (with little autonomy) and unless he is mean enough to cow them all sufficiently one might get the idea that with a few others they might easily overpower the master.     Too many women for one Caveman and it throws off the 'hunter gatherer' balance (he has to/cant hunt too much to maintain the nutritional balance to be flexible in the seasonal variations)     ----   Something I formulated years ago - all social interactions are part of a negotiated agreement of some kind.   " I dont attack you and you dont attack me"  is one of the simplest.    Another is  "I join you and do what you say and I make use (and add to ) your resources."   It all is based on getting something you want/need and giving/supplying something in return that isnt too much.
  7. Paying to enter a shop?

    A 'sellers market'  where the goods are in such high demand (and the supply so low) that even the chance to buy is an advantage.   To be in such demand (like for survival) is an abormal situation where there can be only a few handled customers possible (supply runs out fast)  or there is some exclusivity where lookeeloo customers are a waste of the merchants time (and people who want to look but not buy might be 'milked' as a side business).   Product with entertainment value ? Then purchase may not be the main business .   Generally there is sufficient competition (or l;ack of real need)  that the merchant EXPENDS money to get prospective customers.
  8. MW3 you manage to shoot down half the Russian army pretty much by yourself (and they almost  line up to let you do so)   Bioshock where you slaughter hundreds of opponents pretty much the same way and literally murder children to get further in the game.    Bullet Sponge player characters in all these games when a single bullet in reallife usually takes you out of the action.     You would think they could come up with alternatives to make the games less a slaughterhouse and more varied ("you kill one russian soldier/splicer youv'e killed them all".)   You can still spectacularly blow things up in various creative ways.  The guns can still go bang bang and things kaboom with glitzy special effects.    Wouldnt making your enemy take to their heels and not stop running be a similar ego boost for the player?  Still count as 'beaten' ?   How about clever distractions/blocking an enemy to nullify them?   More wounding and disabling instead of an obvious "he's dead jim" ?     Or is it just 'too hard' for these game companies who use nealy the same game logic as 10-15 years ago on the same old trigger box choreographed terrain situations.  Too much budget for fancy scenery/special effects/cutscenes,  when the behaviors (and game mechanics of possible actions)  are left in their 'good enuf' stagnation?     SO  what else can we have the players/game do ?   More capturing enemies (get points for that)  and Incompacitation is what counts. More enemies that run away/surrender  (with a few that might come back so you better keep your eyes open) More effects of wounds on YOU to shift the way you have to fight (ditto for enemy) More actions to cause distractions/obscuration/blockage of the enemy to handle them (and they do the same to you making you use the terrain on-the-fly more) More obvious wounding (instead of death) that you know they are out of the fight More emphasis on the objective rather than bodycout for scoring More interesting results that can suprise the player (quality over quantity of deathdealing) More tactics/actions  to handle situations (may have to have player fed directions from 'sarge' to clue them in to what they can do for a situation instead of 'scream and charge' like they were bulletproof.)       Things that stand in the way of improvements:   Players who dont want to have to think Costly programming/assets that eat into the profits when the suckers keep buying the same old thing anyway Steeper learning curve for more options/actions to use them right Chronic mentality of Ego and Insta-gratification   Harder to make a game free flowing (well short of a stealth game)