This. The concept sounds good, but don't make it like Heavy Rain and have the character play out menial tasks.Furburt said:
I'm intending to make a computer game, and would like some feedback on the core idea.
- Thread starter YesConsiderably
- Start date
Recommended Videos
What happens when you're at the end of the game and you've screwed up earlier on and can't continue? You're just boned? Sounds like a bad idea to me.
I guess that not everybody is ready for such a revolutionary concept. But i am not surprised that most of you seem to like the idea.
I'll keep you updated. In fact i have already written some of the music.
I'll keep you updated. In fact i have already written some of the music.
That's unnecessary.iBagel said:
By your own admission, this is a concept that hasn't really been done before. The idea of punishing a player for poor choices (above and beyond the loss of an in-game life, which isn't really a punishment) is not something that has been explored in any great detail.
You say there is a reason that it hasn't been done before.
I say that you are wrong. I'm going to push the envelope, and if the gaming world doesn't like it, i can at least say that i tried to do something new.
But i am fully confident in my ability to make this game magical.
A player can be rewarded in many ways. Improving in-game abilities is only one route taken by a relatively small amount of games, so to suggest that it is the only way of going about it is rather silly.iBagel said:
Taking care to spell correctly and use punctuation properly doesn't make me a "wanna-be Countdown champion". Sure, i'd love to meet Carol Vorderman, but maths is one area in which i'm not terribly proficient.
Not if it's true.starfox444 said:
If you know you're not strong enough to survive the later levels, wouldnt you push the restart/reset button to try again when making mistakes? And if you are doing really bad, why continue playing if you know things are about to get impossible?
I the current leveling up is to encourage people to play on and to learn the new stuff. The chance of having stuff you like being taken away, is a good for challenge but may lead to frustration.
If you take all the considerations, you could make a good game out of the idea. Good luck with it =)
I the current leveling up is to encourage people to play on and to learn the new stuff. The chance of having stuff you like being taken away, is a good for challenge but may lead to frustration.
If you take all the considerations, you could make a good game out of the idea. Good luck with it =)
Unless you can make games competently, it will turn out terrible. The idea itself, whilst unique, fails on account of you sounding like a really annoying person. Have fun making your ego-simulator anyway.
OH, I'M SORRY, is this a game for two?YesConsiderably said:
It seems like a nice idea, but don't make it about yourself, mainly because I wouldn't (I also don't think a lot of other gamers, for that matter) would want to play a 4 hour long jerking-off simulator.
Oh, unique artstyle you say? Good luck with that, dawg.
Sure. English isn't my first language so if i do make any mistakes, feel free to correct me. I have a feeling that you will just be capitalising the letter "i" a lot, though.CheeseSandwichCake said:
I'm aware that it is grammatically incorrect, but i like to use a small i when referring to myself because the letter looks better in the lower case.
Hell, my heads exploded, so he must be some kind of robot. Or he's got brains splattered all over the keyboard too.Furburt said:
In all honestly; it's a terrible concept...one that has already been explored, and will only serve to bore the player - as was the case in The Last Remnant.YesConsiderably said:
I don't want to be punished for playing the game. I don't want to be punished for decisions you beleive to be "wrong". It's a stupid concept that would irritate the player.
Well there's no such thing as a "poor" decision; just a different turn of events that the player may or may not cause through their decision; this isn't so much role-playing as it is finding out the best decision to "win" the game.
I think your idea's pretty terrible...
EDIT: The post below pretty much sums it up very well.
To be honest, I thought this was a good idea at first, but after reading some of the comments, I'm realizing that this is a game based solely on punishment, not reward. If we're going to be playing as you going through your life, why does everything start off maxed? Is it because you're a teenager, and your Intelligence is maxed because you know everything? Is your Charisma maxed because you see yourself as some smooth-talking Bond-like character who can talk his way out of any situation? Is your Authority maxed because you're a model citizen, and thus have the respect of everyone and everything you meet?
Treat these stats like normal stats from an RPG (barring the whole argument in what counts as an RPG or not). As you make right decisions, your skills in a particular area should go up; bad decisions should make your skills go down. You should also put in neutral options that do nothing to those stats. Furthermore, give each option a certain difficulty to go along with them: make the good decisions harder to do (i.e., you need higher stats, a certain item, etc.), but gives the player a substantial reward upon its completion (i.e., stat boost, important item, not dying, etc.). Make the bad decisions easier to do, and have the one that penalizes stats the most the easiest to do. Then, for the neutral options, make them the easiest of all (or not). And if you really want to mix it up, put in options that will raise one skill, while simultaneously lowering others.
If we apply this to your yo-yo example, here's what we could come up with:
1. Ask Michael politely for the yo-yo. ("Best," requires high charisma.)
2. Report Michael to the school authorities. ("Better," Authority goes up, Feared goes down.)
3. Pay someone else to kick Michael's ass, take yo-yo. ("Bad," requires money.)
4. Steal it back, unnoticed. ("Worse," needs a higher Feared stat.)
5. Kick Michael's ass, take the yo-yo. ("Worst," Feared goes up, Authority goes down. Need a high Strength to guarantee a win.)
6. Walk away, forget about the yo-yo. ("Neutral." Nothing happens, but you lose the yo-yo.)
This would require significantly more work on your part, but it would take away from the whole "egotistical life simulator" aspect that you seem to have right now, and would give the player more meaningful choices than what you have now.
Also, if this is going to be your first game of real consequence, you might want to work with on a smaller game with similar significance before going straight into this one. I'm not familiar with the Reality Factory engine, but if it's only used for adventure-style games like this (and I'm assuming it's point-and-click, like the King's Quest series), then you might want to create one that is more puzzle-oriented, rather than one that is focused on offering meaningful choices.
Treat these stats like normal stats from an RPG (barring the whole argument in what counts as an RPG or not). As you make right decisions, your skills in a particular area should go up; bad decisions should make your skills go down. You should also put in neutral options that do nothing to those stats. Furthermore, give each option a certain difficulty to go along with them: make the good decisions harder to do (i.e., you need higher stats, a certain item, etc.), but gives the player a substantial reward upon its completion (i.e., stat boost, important item, not dying, etc.). Make the bad decisions easier to do, and have the one that penalizes stats the most the easiest to do. Then, for the neutral options, make them the easiest of all (or not). And if you really want to mix it up, put in options that will raise one skill, while simultaneously lowering others.
If we apply this to your yo-yo example, here's what we could come up with:
1. Ask Michael politely for the yo-yo. ("Best," requires high charisma.)
2. Report Michael to the school authorities. ("Better," Authority goes up, Feared goes down.)
3. Pay someone else to kick Michael's ass, take yo-yo. ("Bad," requires money.)
4. Steal it back, unnoticed. ("Worse," needs a higher Feared stat.)
5. Kick Michael's ass, take the yo-yo. ("Worst," Feared goes up, Authority goes down. Need a high Strength to guarantee a win.)
6. Walk away, forget about the yo-yo. ("Neutral." Nothing happens, but you lose the yo-yo.)
This would require significantly more work on your part, but it would take away from the whole "egotistical life simulator" aspect that you seem to have right now, and would give the player more meaningful choices than what you have now.
Also, if this is going to be your first game of real consequence, you might want to work with on a smaller game with similar significance before going straight into this one. I'm not familiar with the Reality Factory engine, but if it's only used for adventure-style games like this (and I'm assuming it's point-and-click, like the King's Quest series), then you might want to create one that is more puzzle-oriented, rather than one that is focused on offering meaningful choices.