So, I'm making a game.
- Thread starter Kopikatsu
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Two things.Kopikatsu said:
First is that doing the total opposite of all cliches is cliche. Really cliche. Character cliches usually lie on two ends of a spectrum. if you try and do the polar opposite of all the goody two shoes cliche you will probably end up with "Zero motivation moustache twirling dick bag for no real reason" cliches and they piss me off even more to be frank.
As it is it that sounds like a really bad idea:
"You need to save the world"
"No im going to stab you and stab a baby and enslave everyone for no raison and also kill stab evil mean bad MWUAHAHAHAH"
If this is at the start we know nothing about the character other than "Everyone thought he was nice i guess but i have no evidence of this at all and now hes an evil asshole in all ways every way for seemingly no reason"
If its instantaneous evil thats boring and stupid. A VERY VERY slow draw out to the dark side is interesting. My favourite books, the Eisenhorn trilogy, are about a hard line puritanical and pious inquisitor who slowly goes rogue and starts binding demons into the bodies of innocent people. But every damn time he does something awful i agree with him and feel a twist of shame. Because its justified. Because he had no other choice. He was put in situations where LITERALLY the only option was to be the lesser of two demon summoners. To stab friends in the back. And betray oaths. And traffic in disgusting magic and demonology. It was very interesting to see such a transition. It was even better because the first book has him stay mostly within the lines on ALL occasions and you would feel justified and rightious in agreeing with all he did. It set the stage.
Drama is like building a house of cards and knocking them down. Suspense is when you KNOW certain cards will inevitably cause the whole thing to fall but you dont know when or how. And surprise is when something totally out of the blue knocks it all down utterly and reshuffles it. But it all requires you to build a house in the first place. To have preset norms so you can ruthlessly rip them down.
In game of thrones Ned Stark is shown to be moral and loyal. Its talked about VERY often that these traits made him Roberts best friend. And the norths trusted ruler. Always doing his duty and doing it well. We learn a lot about him and we learn why he is awesome and why everything that makes him great REALLY makes him great and how relying on his steadfast and honest personality gave him EVERYTHING he has today. Then we watch those things murder him extremely swiftly when he goes somewhere unfamiliar. Thats tragedy. He is the loyal moral perfect knight. We are him and we love him because hes everything in this genre we are familiar with but NOT overdone and cliche. He wasnt perky or childishly naive. He was down to earth and forward and a little sombre. It wasnt that he believed all men to be good. It was that he had simply never encountered evil in the form of a friends knife in the back. Since he is the first character we are and know we compare EVERYONE from then on to him. And since hes a saint and they, quite franky, are a bag of dicks it makes the contrast far worse.
Secondly: In a game losing all your stuff and time over and over is a blow that makes many gamers quit. I didnt equip ned stark or spend ages puzzling over what stats are tactically best for him or which gear to sell to make sure he is always in top shape to play with. I didnt make a personal investment like that, i just read about him and liked his personality. I didnt decide what colour cloak he should wear for 2 solid hours. If i did and he died id be pissed as fuck and probably not in a good way. I wasted all that time and in game money when i could have totally ignored him and focussed on the surviving members. Youre also at risk of making the game unplayable if you carry on with the same party minus the protagonist. What he he carried them with ALL the damage.
See...BiscuitTrouser said:
Plus, I gave it a lot of thought. At first, I couldn't come up with a compelling enough character to replace the protagonist with...but then I came to a realization. And now I do. I believe that what I have in mind will make the game fairly special, although I'm not entirely sure if it's a game people would want to play. Mmmm...well, we'll see.
That is where I would draw inspiration from. Soul Nomad is my favorite game of all time and I strongly suggest anyone with a PS2 to pick it up. Or buy a PS2 if you don't have one, because why the hell wouldn't you? It has the biggest and greatest library of any console. It would be somewhat less comedic as I'm not very good at writing comedy, but I'm doin' my best.Ryotknife said:
Edit: Besides, much to some's chagrin, I have no problems with using cliches. Everything is a cliche, so there's no point in trying to do something unique for the sake of being unique, like a transsexual elf mage. Do you know how many of those there are? I don't, but I'm sure it's a double digit number.
Depending on how it was executed it could be good. I mean, the game play would be what keeps me in a game to get that far in to it in the first place, and I would hope that main character dying isn't a selling point because that alone wouldn't be much a reason to play it(and it would ruin the surprise).
I guess depending on what happens next would decide my mood on the scenario however. If you become someone else who had been in the story (doesn't have to be someone you played as) who was adequately equip then I would be fine. Unless you suddenly started playing as the villain, then that would be a middle finger of sorts... UNLESS! unless the plot got to a point where the original hero fought so far, you think you're at the conclusion then BAM! The hero figures out they've been working for the wrong side only to then get killed.
Long story short: If the game play is good, I would still play it, and then I go about multiple scenarios in which I wouldn't dislike the story for it.
I guess depending on what happens next would decide my mood on the scenario however. If you become someone else who had been in the story (doesn't have to be someone you played as) who was adequately equip then I would be fine. Unless you suddenly started playing as the villain, then that would be a middle finger of sorts... UNLESS! unless the plot got to a point where the original hero fought so far, you think you're at the conclusion then BAM! The hero figures out they've been working for the wrong side only to then get killed.
Long story short: If the game play is good, I would still play it, and then I go about multiple scenarios in which I wouldn't dislike the story for it.
Well, I'm setting up the world map at the moment and...
Is it better to design it a la early Final Fantasies were you're not barred from most places? As in, you're free to go almost anywhere after leaving the starting area...but if you go off the 'wrong' direction, you'll find yourself being one shotted in short order. Or should it be that you're restricted from those areas via broken bridges and such until you're ready?
Right now, I have it set up as the first example (And it will be left that way for the 'starter' game, because the protagonist of that game is, and is meant to be, ridiculously overpowered compared to most enemies. His stat cap is 9999 in everything, and he hits those fairly quickly. I do plan for him to 'retire' early on after establishing himself in the world and simply let his army do the fighting, at which point you take control of the second in command though, so it won't always be so easy). But for the 'real' game? Eh. I think I'd prefer the first, but again, veteran game designer I am not.
Second thing...er...well, I've forgotten the second thing.
Edit: When I say it'll suck, I mean...it's not really unique nor is it actiony. It's a JRPG. Expect slow and methodical. I do want it to be fairly difficult, but I'm not sure if I want the difficulty to come from the necessity of proper preparation a la The Witcher or simply require you to abuse elemental and damage types. Maybe neither. I'll think on it. Still have up until the Dark Lord 'retires' to have to actually flesh out the combat system.
Edit 2: I do actually have a certain plot twist in mind that I feel will make the game great, buuuut...it still requires the protagonist's death well before the conclusion of the story. But, I feel like if I handle the transition well enough, it'll be fine. This part I'll be vague about though, because I reaaally like it and I don't think anything like it has been done before. And if someone tells me that it has (and it probably has), then I will have to kill them. Sorry, but that's just how it is.
Is it better to design it a la early Final Fantasies were you're not barred from most places? As in, you're free to go almost anywhere after leaving the starting area...but if you go off the 'wrong' direction, you'll find yourself being one shotted in short order. Or should it be that you're restricted from those areas via broken bridges and such until you're ready?
Right now, I have it set up as the first example (And it will be left that way for the 'starter' game, because the protagonist of that game is, and is meant to be, ridiculously overpowered compared to most enemies. His stat cap is 9999 in everything, and he hits those fairly quickly. I do plan for him to 'retire' early on after establishing himself in the world and simply let his army do the fighting, at which point you take control of the second in command though, so it won't always be so easy). But for the 'real' game? Eh. I think I'd prefer the first, but again, veteran game designer I am not.
Second thing...er...well, I've forgotten the second thing.
The gameplay is going to suck. I'm trying to break up the monotony with differing events and situations, but...it's a basic turn based RPG. Nothing ground breaking.Ham Blitz said:
Edit: When I say it'll suck, I mean...it's not really unique nor is it actiony. It's a JRPG. Expect slow and methodical. I do want it to be fairly difficult, but I'm not sure if I want the difficulty to come from the necessity of proper preparation a la The Witcher or simply require you to abuse elemental and damage types. Maybe neither. I'll think on it. Still have up until the Dark Lord 'retires' to have to actually flesh out the combat system.
Edit 2: I do actually have a certain plot twist in mind that I feel will make the game great, buuuut...it still requires the protagonist's death well before the conclusion of the story. But, I feel like if I handle the transition well enough, it'll be fine. This part I'll be vague about though, because I reaaally like it and I don't think anything like it has been done before. And if someone tells me that it has (and it probably has), then I will have to kill them. Sorry, but that's just how it is.
If you realize having a generic "naive goody two shoes hero" is not terribly interesting writing. Why not add more depth to your character, maybe add a different motivation for the heroine, rather than simply being a naive force for good. A wicked scar and backstory do not make a character interesting. The player (though this applies for every media) needs to witness the character's personality and flaws before they can feel invested in the character at all. Simply mentioning a scar and back story is no substitute for a three dimensional character with realistic motivations, flaws and a unique personality.Kopikatsu said:
EDIT: Apologies, that sounds a lot more harsh then I intended it to. Obviously I have not played the game or read your intended story for it. I doubt the brief synopsis of your game did it justice. This was simply meant as constructive feedback, I am not trying to criticize something I have not played.
I'm having flashbacks to MGS2 now. It is difficult for people to care about the struggles of someone they barely know in a story and more often than not is just contrived. Have the replacement act as audience surrogate to their actions and have him be just as much the main character as the hero is, so that the shift isn't as jarring and the audience can have a reason to not like the hero along with you.
Mostly just bringing realism into it. For example...there's been a war with the Northern countries that lasted hundreds of years, and Mira wants to put a stop to it after personally losing family and friends to it, as well as meeting others who have suffered the same. But prior to the war, the main causes of death in the world were starvation and disease. But once the war started, the Kingdom involved started making alliances with it's neighbors to strengthen itself. This started a circulation of money, resources, and renewed trade...which cut the morality rate significantly once the wealth between the countries started to become equalized, in addition to causalities from the war reducing the spread of disease and lowering the strain on food supplies.Ham Blitz said:
The countries in the alliance are funding the army to enforce the border they've created against the Northern countries, and so it helps keep money in circulation. However, where they're located is basically frozen tundra. They can't grow crops or really hunt. So Central sells them supplies with the money that they're loaning to the army, thus keeping the economy in a good state and raising the standard of living for everyone. In addition, birth rate is very high during this time- imagine if the WW2-era levels of production in the US never ended, and just kept building and building to unsustainable levels, up until where the war was absolutely necessary for the country to remain intact.
But if the war were to end, hundreds of thousands of people would be displaced. If they remained in the North, they would perish. If they returned to Central...they have no skills or abilities except fighting. They would place an unsustainable demand on the nation's infrastructure and the economy, food industry, and housing would all collapse. Millions would die, and the land that was abandoned by their army would be taken up by the North countries, who are used to living in such conditions. In addition, there is an army of monsters positioned nearby. Without the war as a showing of arms, the monsters have a high chance of moving on either the Northern or Central countries, which would prove disastrous for either.
Most of the high ranking government officials in Central understand this, and that's why they continue with the war despite seemingly having no motive initially. Northern works differently. They pretty much just like to fight. They select their leader through a trial of arms- it doesn't matter if you're the lowliest peasant or nobility. If someone bests you in one on one combat, they take your place. So the King of the Northern Tribes is a seriously badass ************ while the King of Central is pretty useless.
Anyway, I don't know if I want this explicitly stated in the game, and simply hint it with things like...talking to some people in the Merchant's Guild will reveal Central's economic situation, talking to someone in the borderlands may offhandedly comment that they rely on the supply caravans to survive, etc. And just leave it up to the player to figure out. But if I do that, I'm afraid people might not understand it. Not because logistics is a difficult concept, but people just aren't in that mindset when they think of 'MAGIC AND DRAGONS, HIYOOOOO'.
It would be fleshed out over the course of the game. It's not like...'About that scar...' 'Oh, this? Long story. NO TIME.'.First_Snow said:
I feel like naive goody two shoes can be made interesting by the world around them. For example, Batman is the least interesting character in anything that he's in. It's the characters and situations around him that make his exploits such a joy to follow. But also, it allows me to use Mira as an audience surrogate because she's just as clueless as to the true state of the world as the player is. She's used to introduce the player to the world and it's struggles, basically. But, I would ask that you read the last post I made, about how I would like to incorporate realism into the story. I think then you'll understand why I feel Mira works better as a naive and ignorant person.
I read as far as that site goes on that manga and Tatsumi isn't dead yet. What gives!?Kopikatsu said:
Well, I should hope they get upset. Otherwise I'd feel like I failed as a writer, because I'd have failed to make my character likable. It's supposed to upset people.Hasido said:
Not upset them like Knack though, where they immediately delete the game and review bomb it, but...you get what I mean, surely.
Besides, I think my second protagonist is a good one. Although, other people might not like them. Well, most people might not like them. Hmm...
Well, the idea is that they start out unlikable because they've only been seen from Mira's perspective the entire time. Once you actually get to play as the character, then you start seeing an entirely new side of the story. But I will say that the second protagonist has raped someone. Many someones. She's also a woman. Go figure. But there is a good explanation given for it. An extremely good reason, actually. You'll have to take my word for it for now.
Of course, if you read my post at the end of the second page, then I'd probably be spoiling more with this post than I meant to spoil. Whoops.
Edit: I'm going to point out now, there are no sex scenes in the game currently, nor do I plan to make any. So...sorry, people who wanted to see some hot 16 on 32 bit action, but it probably ain't happenin'.
Well, I wouldn't say that it couldn't work, but if I'd invested much time in such a game and felt the sudden twist wasn't in service of anything more than the author's sadism, I'd be pretty pissed off. And not in a "wow, that's new and different" way, but rather in a "gee, thank you ever so much for making me play a game that's for your entertainment" kind of way.
In a short-form, experimental game setting, it could probably work. For something longer, it had better have something else going for it- a clear sense of satire, the revelation that you've been playing the bad guys, something. Once a game is "in the wild", it can't exist only for its creator's sake any longer if it's going to be considered a successful work, artistically or commercially.
In a short-form, experimental game setting, it could probably work. For something longer, it had better have something else going for it- a clear sense of satire, the revelation that you've been playing the bad guys, something. Once a game is "in the wild", it can't exist only for its creator's sake any longer if it's going to be considered a successful work, artistically or commercially.
I hate to keep pointing to it, but I would recommend that you read the post I made at the end of the second page. Strictly speaking, you will be playing the bad guys despite their motive being to help people. I mean, Mira's motivation and goals will be more than just what relates to the war, but...yeah.Callate said:
Sounds pointlessly depressing to me, but then I'm not a fan of G.R.R.Martins work either for precisely that reason. Still he seems to be doing well for himself so there must be some audience out there for fantasy masochism stories.
I should warm however that the whole 'kill the protagonist' is a fairly common trope in fiction. Seriously, it pops up a lot. Depressing endings are even more common. Thing is a lot of the time killing off the protagonist just stupid as it's really hard to kill off a protagonist in such a way that either A: people don't get frustrated and just stop reading (Or playing in this case) B: Has meaning the player can interpret, because if there isn't a satisfying meaning or reasoning behind everything it just leads back to A.
Don't just kill a character because you want to kill them or for shock factor, that never works. We humans are wired to try and seek meaning in things, and if we find out the meaning was that the author (Or game developer in this case) just wanted to mess with the reader (Player) then that just leads back to situation A yet again where everyone gets frustrated and leaves.
I should warm however that the whole 'kill the protagonist' is a fairly common trope in fiction. Seriously, it pops up a lot. Depressing endings are even more common. Thing is a lot of the time killing off the protagonist just stupid as it's really hard to kill off a protagonist in such a way that either A: people don't get frustrated and just stop reading (Or playing in this case) B: Has meaning the player can interpret, because if there isn't a satisfying meaning or reasoning behind everything it just leads back to A.
Don't just kill a character because you want to kill them or for shock factor, that never works. We humans are wired to try and seek meaning in things, and if we find out the meaning was that the author (Or game developer in this case) just wanted to mess with the reader (Player) then that just leads back to situation A yet again where everyone gets frustrated and leaves.
Well, like I've said, I'm not adverse to cliches (or tropes, in this instance).The Madman said:
The moral of the game, or at least the first part, is basically 'The road to hell is paved with good intentions'. Actually, I think I'm going to add my explanation of the world to the OP, because I keep pointing back to it. My intention is to impress on the player that while Mira's character may not have finished her development arc, her story can go no further.