Vopisk

Members
  • Content count

    179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

144 Neutral

About Vopisk

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Children

    The idea was used in the original Shogun: Total War. As the leader of your clan, you would (I assume) randomly spawn offspring that would come of age and could be made into generals of your army... However, if your avatar (as the Emperor type thing) died and you had no heirs, the game ended, but if you had an of-age heir, the game would continue as your heir now the lead character as it were. Of course, that was more of a strategy game a la Risk and not so much of an RPG or something, but it's something worth thinking about. -Vopisk
  2. Need some game design help

    Quote:Original post by Edtharan Another game could be a Magic Duelling game where the players have to cast spells at each other. The spells would consist of Gestures that the player has to scribe out on the screen. An attack spell might involve scribing a spell gesture and then flicking (rapid hand movement towards the enemy) it at the target. A defensive spell might also involve scribing an arc or shape around the object or area that is being defended. complex spells might involve simultaneous gestures with two hands (and or multiple fingers) and "Combos" might be generated by a series of gestures. I like this idea, kinda like stripping out the micro-management of Black & White and focusing on the "Godly Powers" of casting fireballs and making it rain and so on. Make one hand signal to "cue up" the spell and get it ready to cast and then another hand gesture for how it's cast, your throwing a fireball is a good example. I think this would be a good, pretty easily implemented game that could be instantly engaging, have a relatively low learning curve (especially if you use the bottom of the screen hints like B&W did...) and definitely show off all the flashy things you could do with such an interface. Another thought might be something like an FPS sword fighting game or anything similar. RTS games would probably be neat on such an interface, but I would focus on what you can do with "reflexive" systems that are requiring user input right here, right now. I suppose the key is to keep gestures and stuff from getting too archaic and cryptic that it impedes gameplay. Good luck, Vopisk
  3. You know, in general, your ideas are not revolutionary, new or groundbreaking. In fact, I'm sure an Atari game somewhere in the 70's featured most if not all of them. Especially considering the fact that you even CONSIDERED doing the game in ASCII, it can't be all that "new". You only hurt yourself by trying to keep the "details" hidden, because quite frankly, everyone here is developing their own game or learning how to create the game that they have imagined in your mind. If we had little more to do than troll around for ideas to make games out of, we would probably tell a lot less people how to improve their game concept and instead take it and run away with it. In general I've found that gamedev.net is one of the most supportive communities around and you can only benefit yourself by sharing your ideas, receiving people's feedback and also their criticism or praise. In my experience, people who try and sell things based on suspense, that is, Wait until you see it!... Generally don't have anything to sell and are trying to build up hype only to rehash mediocrity. So you've got a multiplayer wargame, with TONS of features (some you already admit are stolen) and that's all we get and you want to know if we're interested, but you don't want us to steal your stolen ideas? Give us some idea of what the game actually is and we might be able to offer you actual advice as to whether or not people will like it, namely ourselves. My two cents, something to chew on, VOpisk
  4. As far as the wimps go (those who don't want to get hit in the face) I have an idea. Let's say you're doing battle and you acquire X number of scars on various parts of your body. Well, if it was a relatively unimportant battle, and you don't really care to remember it, just get yourself down to the local doctor/magic healer type person, and have them healed up and removed. Thus, you only keep that one big gash across your face that you got while slaying the evil dragon Mazboolah the Fiery! I like the ideas of tattoos and the like and yes, scarification is an actual process that people CHOOSE to get done, look it up. Tattoos and whatnot could allow gangs/groups to mark their membership in such a way that one member meeting another could demand to see their "mark". Of course, these could be faked, but one would need to know what kind of tattoo that particular group uses. Anyway, just some random nonsense... Vopisk
  5. Quote:Original post by axcho Vopisk, that is pretty much exactly what I was thinking of. I'm curious to know who thought of that idea before. Is there an earlier topic about it that you could point me to? http://www.mudconnect.com/discuss/discuss.cgi?mode=MSG&area=adv_code&message=13511 Scroll through all my garbage and look at the post originating from a user named Astiral.
  6. Quote:Original post by axcho Quote:Original post by Iron Chef Carnage I'd like a system where a character's "experience" comes from actual in-game experiences with different elements. The "use a sword, learn swordsmanship" principle is a good one, but I'd like to see a little more to it, like "Fight a bear, learn about bears," and, "Feed a bear, learn about bears," and "Train a bear, learn about bears."Then you can come back with a Bear guardian spirit! :D Anyway, that idea would work pretty well with an emergent AI-based skill system. Otherwise you would have to program in all the different possible actions, which would not scale very well. It doesn't seem like anyone saw my earlier post. Do you not have any comments on my idea about avatars with their own AI? Well, as part of some frequent forums discussions I take part in, regards to MUD development, there are usually at least several discussions about whether the games should be based more on player skill (twitching) versus character skill (game reflex). Someone mentioned and I absolutely fell in love with the idea of having your character basically be played out by an evolving AI script. What this basically would do is put the player in the position of the character's mind, giving them the directives for what they should accomplish, but allowing the character, based upon their AI, to take the best course of action. This seems to me, to be the true way to create an RPG. You do not play an RPG to prove that you can spam mouseclicks the fastest, this is twitch gameplay that depends on the player's skill. It would be nice to take that control away and let the player merely give orders to the game character who fulfilled them, but in order to make this style of gameplay fun in the slightest, the AI must be capable of advanced learning. For example, my character may have absolutely no idea how to chop down a tree, so I would have to train him to equip an axe and then swing it at the tree in order to "chop down the tree". Likewise with swords, magic, or anything else, there is always a set of steps that must be taken. Perhaps a system like this could best be described as "Determining character actions" as opposed to "Taking character actions". Fallout I think is a nice example of "Determining Character Actions". You, as the player, determine what the character learns, what dialogue paths they follow, where they go, the things they pick up and the enemies they swing/shoot at. However, the mechanics of accomplishing these goals are left up to the computer. You don't have to worry about holding down the UP arrow until you come to stand next to the chest, you merely tell your character to walk there and open it, then once the chest is opened and you find out what's inside, you tell your character what to take and to then ignore the chest. It's something worth thinking about, and I think the success of Fallout 1 & 2 can speak to the fact that this method of gameplay doesn't necessarily have to be boring. My two cents, something to chew on, Vopisk
  7. I can't offer anything specific here really, as I have never worked on a truly large-scale project and don't have much experience of my own, but having recently tackled C++ file I/O, which took about 2 months of here and there study to firmly get a grip on... Why not use binary files and dump the information necessary for things like savegames completely into the source file? This way you just need to os.read() all the data directly into the relevant objects in game when loading and you're good to go, no need to write messy text-parsing garbage. I might be wrong, but then again... I might be right, interested to here ideas or suggestions on this one. Vopisk
  8. Classes

    Quote:Original post by Zahlman 0) Items, Characters and Monsters are not kinds of Rooms: rather, a Room is a container for those things. So the setup we want looks something like: 1) Containers contain their contained things (duh). 2) Contained things should know about their container. To check "siblings", a contained thing talks to its container. Thus, each "thing" interface described below implies a reference to another object implementing "container-of-thing". 3) A room can contain both "nonliving things" and "living things". It therefore implements "container of nonliving things" and "container of living things". 4) Characters and Monsters are both kinds of Creature. Creature implements "living thing", and also can contain "nonliving things". It therefore implements "container of nonliving things" and "living thing". 5) Items implement "nonliving thing". On a not so serious note, don't forget to make the copy constructor to turn a living thing into a nonliving thing when they die! Gotta be able to perform actions on corpses, which certainly are not alive! However, Zahlman's representation of the game architecture is sound. Rooms are basically the "world" they are the stage or the setting for the game, without which, you have no game, just like without a stage, you have no play (arguably). So our "rooms" must contain all other things, specifically though, only those objects that lie within the room itself. Rooms must also contain information about other rooms that they are connected to [i.e. exits]. Objects (props) and Characters (actors) will also need to know which room they are in, something as simple as an integer value that corresponds to the room's unique identification number. This will be important for things like allowing characters to manipulate and perform actions on items and other characters in the same room as them.
  9. thinking in c++ exercise

    Quote:Original post by password A little off-topic, but isn't thinking in c++ available for free as an ebook? Yes, but the book is also offered for purchase in standard book format. A lot of people like to have a physical text in front of them so they don't have to keep switching between their IDE and the Code Example or text resource they're attempting to learn from. In my case, I decided I would just print out the book and arrange it in a large 3" binder, but that's just me. Also, it is the annotated solutions guide which is available for purchase, this is the answer to the test questions at the end of each chapter, not code examples, those you should have received with a CD in the book, and if you didn't you can always download the e-book to get the code examples. To the end of completing the tests and offering the answers for free on the internet, yes it's quite likely that this would be illegal, as the author still maintains the rights to the material and he is offering the solutions for purchase and not giving them away for free. Of course, there's also the likelihood that your answers would be wrong, so decide at your own risk.
  10. Getting Started: Beginning OpenGL

    [Random Bad Advice Warning!!!] Try enclosing the #include statement in apostrophes #include "..gl\glut.h" or however it goes... If it's in the folder, it should load using this method. [/Random Bad Advice Warning!!!]
  11. Hacking

    Yeah, hackers would use keystroke loggers and other programs to keep track of what they have tried and done so that they know what not to try again in the future and whatnot. Question is though, hacking seems to quickly be becoming the central focus of the entire game. If it's something that you want for a minigame inside the larger game, don't go overly into the details of how every little X, Y and Z work, otherwise as I said, the game will become a hacking game with some shooting thrown in, rather than a shooter with some hacking thrown in. Just my thoughts, Vopisk
  12. Quote:Original post by templewulf Quote:Original post by VopiskOn that note, the other implementation of "Leveless" systems that I've seen feature the White Wolf-style system of awarding characters experience points and allowing them to spend these in upgrading their character. However, I find flaws in these systems in that a player can gain experience by hacking through monsters with a battle axe and then use their experienced gain to increase their charisma statistic, this is completely unrealistic mapping of in-game actions to character advancement. I completely agree with the unrealistic part. Sudden jumps in power in unrelated fields is utterly incoherent. Although, I have to ask about moving your character in a new direction. Let's say you're an ogre, and you're great at smashing, but you're not so good at thinking. However, you're a curious ogre, and you'd like to learn more about thinking or magic or whatever. How, then, do you learn about those things? You certainly aren't going to start using magic on the mobs you are capable of smashing. You'd have to go back to the Cave of N00bs and slay rats with your pitiful magic skills. I think a better way would be a hybrid of the two systems. Take the "use sword, get better with sword" paradigm, but add hobbies. For instance, take our ogre friend again. Let's say he declares his hobby to be "arcane magic". He's not very good at it, but he practices it in his spare time. You could say that every action could give 1/50th the amount of experience to your hobby. So, you swing a sword, block, make a sandwich, disarm a trap, and each of those would get exp. The ogre would also have gained 4/50ths of a point of exp in "arcane magic". Otherwise, you'd need to have players sitting down and reading enthusiast magazines about "arcane magic" or whatever, and that doesn't sound very fun at all. Well, in the field of psuedo-RPG's that I've played, often these types of things, where a player wants to get into a new field without having experience enough to be able to raise their skills naturally (through practice), this is most often manifest by game designers with books/schools/etc... where a player studies the selected media(or attends the class as it were) and gains some small percentage in that particular skill. While this may be realistic, perhaps it takes time away from the playing of the game simply to gain a new spell you want, which is what we DON'T want to do. I enjoy thoroughly your suggestion of a "Hobby", not only does this add an interesting layer of depth to the character themselves [i.e. the seasoned veteran who enjoys crafting toy dolls for his daughters in his off time], but allows players to work on various "alternate fields" that interest them without forcing them to sit out for X amount of time to gain their new skills. I've been pondering on the idea of auto-skill advancement and the rates at which it occur recently. I like more and more the idea of decimal-point percision numbers when combined with skills, so that whenever one is practicing their skills, they may have (hypothetically) a 5% chance of gaining between .01 - 1.0 in the particular skill, perhaps learning more through use (a higher amount) when they are young and don't know much therefore giving them much to learn from their mistakes and learning slower or less as they advance since they are becoming closer and closer to being masters. Also, I think that a character should be able to learn from their failures, so something along the lines of a .01 - .05 with a 1% chance per failure. This will help speed up the process of learning through use while not making it radically fast. On that note as well, the game Fallout restricted the amount of times you could perform certain skills in succession, which kept players from standing in one point and using their skills to gain experience and subsequently levels. Anyway, kinda losing track so I'll end things here before I really confuse myself with the math, Vopisk
  13. Hacking

    I think the minimap is a good idea for something the player could find to assist them in their hacking. For easier locks/puzzles there would be less need as the labelling system would be more intuitive, however, harder puzzles might be all but impossible to hack through without having some vague idea of how element A works with element B.
  14. I'm not sure you couldn't still use physical cards to playtest the effects of using one spell against or in conjunction with another. You'll still be able to find the glaring holes in game balance issues and the like with this method before investing a large amount of time into implementing something that perhaps needs to be taken right back out again. Also, with my suggestion of 3x5 cards you can quickly scrawl notes on them about how a particular spell should be changed in this way or that before ever putting in the code, I find it easier to write the proper function/script in the first place rather than implement something I'm going to have to constantly go back and rework. However, I do understand what you're attemping to accomplish with your stamina regeneration, but I don't think that this is necessarily a prohibiting factor in testing it old-school style if you will, if it works as a turn based card game and you know the spells are pretty close to balanced and work well with themselves and others, it's just a mattering having to fine-tune the stamina regeneration in order to maintain balance. To touch on some other points, you ask for emergent combos and the like, but without game mechanics it's hard to say, will you have trample and if so, will you also have phasing? There are 14 years worth of cards out there and a lot of different magical "abilities" that have been introduced over the years, created by whole teams of individuals who sit around and ponder nothing but how to make a fun trading card game. Some ideas that I would certainly find interesting would be things like artifacts and enchantments though, perhaps in the mode of allowing a player an inventory like you would normally find in an RPG-style game. Allow them to wear special equipment that gives them some bonus to X stat or spell (Cloak of the Elves drops forest casting costs by 1? Dwarven Mithril Boots allow the character to summon forth little 1/1 Dwarf token creatures at X rater per turn or some such). Also things like the glasses of Ezra or other "wearable" artifacts could have their own bonuses/abilities. Other than those, I think primarily you're going to have to look towards original and interesting character summons and try to do something other than the run of the mill "direct damage" spells like we've all seen rehashed time and time again in ever magic system ever put into text, video or other type of game. Anyway, more of my comments, hope something in here was helpful, Vopisk
  15. Quote:Original post by Fournicolas Quote:Original post by TechnoGoth A lot depends on the type of game. The player generally has to progress to greater and greater challenges so you need some way for the character to continue to improve to face those challenges. There really isn't that much difference between gaining experince to gain levels and gaining gold to buy better equipment. If its a non liner game then abilities could be a good idea. What if it at the begining of the game the player could choose one of 50 abilites to give their character? The other 49 abilites are given to special npc in the game. As the player encounters and defeats these characters they gain one of the npcs abilites. Meanwhile the npcs are also encountering and fighting each other, until there are only two left the player and one other npc. What about parts? The player rides a mech or battles with a robot, and its stats are determined entirely by the parts the player can install it. A la mech warrior... but an rpg... OMG!! It's Megaman!! Really? My first thought was... Highlander the Game! On the topic of removing levels though, I have quite a bit of experience. Why, because I am predominately a MUDder by nature. If you don't know what MUDs are, don't worry about it, though I'm sure next to everyone in here does. Now, there has been a great change in influence in recent years amongst the MUD community to develop classless and levelless games. What this basically means, at least in terms of "levelless" is that the numeric game components are moved behind the scenes, a lot like someone mentioned that your leg muscles twitch X times per second and exert Y amount of thrust per twitch over Z distance. All you really know is that you can run fast, the numbers aren't what's important. Now, in most of the implementations of this I've seen, what it basically amounts to is allowing characters to advance their character based upon how much they user (practice if you will) a particular skill, ability or physical trait, so doing heavy lifting often will increase your strength statistic which instead of being displayed numerically is often given a generic term like "The Strength of a Dragon". What this amounts to in my mind is basically, replacing Strength: 10 into Strength: The Strength of a Dragon! It's still level 10 no matter which way you slice it. I always thought this would be a perfect place to use floating point decimal values for statistics and some fuzzy logic to kind of blur the lines and keep the player from ever knowing exactly how strong or dextrous or charming or whatever they are and instead only allow them to have a general idea. On an interesting note here though, and to merge into my next point, in the White Wolf series of T-RPG's you can have player Merits and Flaws and as a flaw you could give the player's a "Large Ego" which causes them to exaggerate their own worth and therefore, have a skewed view of what they're actually capable of. On that note, the other implementation of "Leveless" systems that I've seen feature the White Wolf-style system of awarding characters experience points and allowing them to spend these in upgrading their character. However, I find flaws in these systems in that a player can gain experience by hacking through monsters with a battle axe and then use their experienced gain to increase their charisma statistic, this is completely unrealistic mapping of in-game actions to character advancement. On the note of ranks and the like giving a general idea of where a player lies, I like the idea of giving characters some sort of token trophies, be they titles, ranks or ribbons/medals of merit depending on what type of game you're using. For example, in the SWAT series of games, your team members can gain medals for frequently bringing hostage situations to a peaceful resolution. They amount to absolutely nothing, but it's something for a player to strive for. They can gain the "Congressional Medal of Honor" or they can be dubbed "The Savior of the Pixie Village of Nob!" but either way, it's something shiny that they can show off to others and say, look what I have accomplished. In my mind character advancement or achievement should not be measured by the amount of enemies they have managed to survive, this is the ends to the game, it should be the tactile means that they use to reach those ends that are rewarded, those this doesn't necessarily mean having to be a complete pacifist, as finding a way to kill the Unslayable Dragon of Doom, would be considered a great feat as well. Anyway, this post is getting long and I'm losing track, so that's my two cents, something to chew on, Vopisk