• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

410 Neutral

About yapposai

  • Rank
  1. Build (almost) Anywhere concept

    The problem I have with upkeep or mobs roaming around is that really powerful players can exploit the mobs attacking more and more to gain exp or maybe annoy the lower level people by buying massive lands/buildings forcing mobs to attack the area. I don't think using money to deter is workable since a lot of long time players usually have too much money anyway. I thought of using the fantasy world itself to curb this. maybe explain that the world has forest fairies or something that seeks to balance the land. the more houses people build the fairies start planting more trees/vines which block paths/maybe damage houses or cracks appear on the ground. a lone wizard can build his tower in a secluded place but once more people build there (especially if it is in a hunting ground designated place) vines grow very quickly making travel hard, increasing upkeep in buildings. basically everybody gets a bit penalized by building on some ground, once the other players move out (or the wizard player gets annoyed and kills the other players) the vines/trees recede. If you want to set up a town you have to buy/request really powerful artifacts that suppress the power of the fairies and allow more buildings in a specified area without the backlash from the environment. This could even be a game changing quest. try to destroy several artifacts that guard the city and watch the city get overrun by trees or turn into a swamp (until they get new artifacts or move the town somewhere else). The inhabitants have the incentive to protect their artifacts. (some artifacts may be non-destructible for safe zones etc) so basically make it annoying for people to build close together but use the lore of the game to provide justification so the players will hopefully be more understanding and improve immersion.
  2. Motivations for evil masterminds...

    I guess some evil masterminds just believe that they are doing the right thing. Example is wiping out a peaceful village because he believes that only by being militaristic and strict control can the village repel invaders. After he takes control, he uses the fact that the village was invaded as proof that his way is correct and reinforces his beliefs and so he goes on the the next town...
  3. How to destroy Earth?

    How about the breakthrough that enabled general space travel caused a black hole and ate up the planet over time?
  4. A New Race

    Not exactly a race but how about something like earthworm jim where squishy/weak creatures live in a bipedal streampunk suit. Examples include a fish in a bowl, a worm, a sentient sponge,etc. maybe the industrialization polluted their habitat (ground/ocean) so they have to live on land in the suits. They are jaded beings trying to live in an environment hostile and foreign to them.
  5. Parabolic solar panel in space!

    I think that generating the power on site will be more efficient. Imagine if all the paints,windows, roofs of buildings and all the roads are capable of generating electricity.
  6. How about making areas in space where the special tech works exceptionally well. Your blood-powered laser trumps most weapons in a "bio field space (say a few galaxies)" where most things are organically powered and there are a lot of little critters which you can harvest for blood. going out of the area into a "metallic field space" will make your blood laser less effective and also harder to power. The player can outfit his ship with the current area's tech to have a powerful ship but he has to leave/refit his ship if he wants to go visit other areas. Hopefully the player can make choices like - Do I want to remove my blood laser to pass through the metallic space or just stick with it if I know there is another bio space beyond that patch? Make it so human tech is generally based on physics so its mostly effective everywhere. NPCs and maps would provide roughly where the next patch of weird space is located and possible artifacts are located. maybe even make the weird space area move such that you might be looking for a metallic field artifact in a bio field or encounter hybrid artifacts/enemies.
  7. Thanks for the reply. We'll probably stick with treating each track as different file and sticking them in subversion.
  8. Hi, I was just wondering if there is something like a version control that is designed to handle audio files. Some great functions would be if the version control works be saving each track in a multi-track file and let the user mix different versions of the tracks together. Also, saving only changed parts or pre-processing somehow to conserve disk space. I understand that since audio files are compressed, delta saving between versions rarely works but what about comparing the newer version of the audio file with the older version wav format, get the deltas and compress the delta? Does such a system or something similar exists(is it even possible, feasible?) The reason I ask is that a composer friend of mine sometimes can't decide which track/version sounds good and ends up saving a lot of duplicates and forgetting which files are which. edit: a little more background. It's not the really the composer but the players. They are in different places and they each have a track that they record in (vocal, guitar, drums, etc) The have a song to record and they can't really play together in 1 place or at the same time(location and schedule problems) they end up sending a lot of files to each other. They also use non lossy compression for quality reasons so the files take a lot of space. Worst case is we could use a normal version control system and treat each track as a separate file and only mix them to listen (still takes a lot of space since you get a lot of similar sounding tracks saved) but it's a bit tedious so I was looking for a specially made version control system to handle audio (specifically multi-track) files. [Edited by - yapposai on October 9, 2009 8:36:24 AM]
  9. I am building upon Edtharan's post with move/action cards The player sees situational cards and action cards. Situational cards are little bits of info on the battlespace (are you being chased, ammo low, engines failed, incoming missles,direct path to target, etc) which appear and disappear on screen. The player can click a situation card and resolve it by using his action cards. His action cards depends on his crew/ablities/experience, etc) having scotty on the crew would give him "fix engines in 2 mins" action to resolve the "engines failed" situation or he could just "divert all powers to shield" or "fix engines in 30 min" of course the more experience you get the more actions you can use. If the player does not resolve a situation manually, the crew AI will just try their best to cope depending on the overall mission objectives (are we defending/attacking/running away,etc). The player then tries to manipulate the battle by resolving situations to try and get better situation cards to popup. Lets say he is resolves "being chased" using "Immalmann" action to make the "fish in a barrel" situation card popup for a few secs. The player clicks this card and uses "fire everything we got" to destroy the ship. The problem with this style is the player might be overwhelmed with the combinations if situations and actions or tracking which whether a situation should popup or not. A possible resolution is the player can save chains of commands like a primitive macros. He can save the "fish in a barrel"->"fire everything" as a lesson("loop and kill") to his crew so the crew might automatically fire everything when the "fish in a barrel" situation occurs so the player doesn't need to order it next time. The player could save/learn his favorite orders/ tricks as he rises in experience. Instead of using "immalmann" on the "being chased" situation he could use "loop and kill" and move on to other things. Of course if the "immalman" action did not produce the "fish in a barrel" but still "being chased" the macro breaks and the captain has to do other things As the player rises the cards move to broader things like "hotheaded emeny commander" -> "send decoy" -> "decoy taken" -> "flank using fighters" which deals with more ships rather than a single ship. Hope this helps.
  10. How about changing the game slightly depending on what the player does during battles? If he spends more time fighting enemies directly rather than commanding his troops ,he gains more buffs or offensive/defensive skills but the number of people he commands lessen and he is limited to moving near the front lines only . A player who commands others gradually moves towards the back of the battlefield but increasing his sight and the number of people he can control at once. At one end you have a warload player who, with a small number of men can really cut through the enemy ranks and the other end is a general player who can command a vast number of weaker troops and deploy them over the battlefield. A balanced player can have good view/deployment skills but can also go himself in critical areas/battles to provide the extra edge, if needed.
  11. Penalties for Quest/Mission Abort

    some thoughts: I would go with a collateral system along with a reputation system and a negotiation skill. negotiation skill - allows players to try and a lower collateral and assess the range of values the NPC is willing to accept. A higher skill means your assesment is more accurate and the range the NPC is willing to accept the deal is wider. A low skill means you'd probably be having more "I have altered the deal, pray I don't alter it any further" scenarios. So you might be expecting to only pay the 1000 insurance fee if you failed but suddenly have a bounty hunter on your tail if you have a low negotiation skill. This makes it possible for the player to choose what he feels is the proper penalty but still introducing the possibility of a worse penalty should he fail. reputation - affects your customers, high reputation makes them willing to accept lower collateral, bad reputation makes them unwilling to accept no matter how good your negotiation skills are. This balances against grinding the negotiation skill. collateral - things like money(insurance), pledging another ship/crewmember ,having a bounty on your head if you fail,loosing reputation points,etc. having intangible collateral allows a new player/unlucky player to get jobs rather than have no missions because of low reputation and no money for insurance. In your example if I find a better deal (financially) midway but I gave my reputation as a collateral, I might ignore the deal and continue if I value my reputation more than the added money. This also makes important missions harder to quit in the middle if the player pledged a lot of collateral or the player knows that the NPC can produce harsher penalties than initially agreed Also possibly allow the player to renegotiate the penalties midway (perhaps when you are required to send progress reports to the client to allow them to pay a larger sum of money than lose reputation)
  12. Need Motive Ideas

    I think the corruption works for a rookie but it's not good for a veteran. I'm thinking the cop is like Gordon from Batman, he knows the system is corrupt but still tries his best. To get someone like him to quit you really have to rattle him. Which brings us to the question what can really rattle a cop who probably seen a lot of bad things over his career? How about he finds out that the whole city is just a big experiment/game? he finds that everyone in the city is a clone/genetically engineered human created to be controlled/manipulated. Another country/place controls each inhabitant via I dunno maybe special waves or something (perhaps a chip in the brain). A "player" can log on the system, select any person in the city to control and does want he wants with them, doing either good or bad things. Kinda like a mix between WoW and the Sims but your actions affect actual people in another city. Then he finds out he is being played by a long line of people maybe he finds he is one of the most popular "characters" to play. This makes him question his motives, whether his feelings of protecting the people is just because of the commands of the player or his own beliefs. He thinks about all his failures whether he did his best or the player merely got bored/made a mistake...
  13. Help me think of an original protagonist

    I like the idea of multiple characters making more game mechanics. how about a single mom/dad with a few AI controlled kids following you? You have to protect them but the challenge is they sometimes panic and run randomly or they cry and alert zombies or they refuse to move. Holding their hands prevent them from running away but makes you move slower/use only 1 handed weapons Or a disabled person who can ask NPCs to help him out making the game a little more squad-like (NPCs act as his gunners/help carry/move him). The problem is some NPCs are rude(refuse to help him), panics (disregards his orders), etc.
  14. I'm imagining something like the fate/stay night games. which is a visual novel type of game. A sample video is http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONsXGn_KnaI&feature=related (It's in japanese) Notice that they are using stills of the characters then just zoom, pan, add overlays, etc to give the effect of fighting. Is this somewhat close to what you are imagining? It's fun to look at first but seeing the same things over and over gets old pretty fast, unless you make a lot of stills.
  15. Just for fun: Delta Force vs. SWAT

    I think that SWAT would win by a small margin when on the attacking side since they train specifically as a team for entering scenarios. Delta is more general and varied training so they might not have the same experience handing opponents who expect them. With the equipment restriction removed though, I vote Delta since they probably have better equipment from the army.