🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
Realistic RTS
Author
I know people want realism in tons of games, but what about Real Time Strategy/War games? I am designing one that is so realistic, i am about to fall over from all the research i''ve been doing. No HP, just strength and a little picture of the unit''s body and areas that are injured. If you get shot in the head, chances are that unit is dead. And i was also thinking of putting in building accidents, like a guy falls off the Great Wall of China when he is building it. Would you people actually play that kind of RTS?
Hmmm... depends if there were ways to protect against these new hazards. In a game, whenever you create a new hazard, you must always balance it with a similar defense, otherwise the player will see it as unfair and will not want to play the game. So, for the builder of the Great Wall, maybe he could tie a rope around his waist. And for the guy who''s head is too big that it get''s shot all the time, maybe he should be able to take cover.
Are you even trying to be intelligent?
'cuz if you are, it ain't workin'
Are you even trying to be intelligent?
'cuz if you are, it ain't workin'
Author
Units will have the ability to hide from battle, dodge and block attacks, etc... So there is an upside to having a very realistic damage system.
i think it is a good idea to have realistic damage for units...oh how many times has a infantry squad taken out a tank with machine guns...a big problem would be making the system efficient enough so the game is actually playable...if you are doing area-specific damage on each and every one of a thousand soldiers, the game is going to be a slide show...it wouldnt be so bad if you only consider the head shot example, but what about a flesh wound to the leg, for example? do they start to limp, walk slower, drop their gun and scream in pain? how realistic a reaction do you want? and unless you have a fully moveable/zoomable 3d camera (like every other game now a days) would this system really be worth it? can the player tell the difference between a head shot and leg shot in red alert? furthermore, can you even aim for these areas? what good would the system be if it is only used in random, relatively uncontrollable instances...
just some questions to get you thinking...
<(o)>
just some questions to get you thinking...
<(o)>
I would never play a realistic RTS, if you making decisions based on which is more realistic instead of which is more fun then your game won''t be fun. That''s all there is to it.
AP is partly right, but I think realism doesn't automatically limit fun. If so, there'd be no such thing as a sim market!
Anyways, Lynck, how far would you go? Would you put in supply lines, morale, reinforcements, and maybe dummy units?
One of the things I absolutely __HATE__ about RTS games, even though I love Starcraft, is that the bulk of strategic military thought doesn't seem to apply. It's pretty hard to go after supply lines where there are none. It's pretty tough to crack morale when units are just robots w/o feelings. You can't really cut off the head of a force, or disrupt communications, when units can not be suppressed, or the command & control infrastructure can't be hit.
It's like fighting a giant amoeba, really. This is done playability partly, but I think mostly to support the beer and pretzels crowd (dumbed down a bit). So I guess it will come down to your audience.
--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
Edited by - Wavinator on October 23, 2000 9:38:54 PM
Anyways, Lynck, how far would you go? Would you put in supply lines, morale, reinforcements, and maybe dummy units?
One of the things I absolutely __HATE__ about RTS games, even though I love Starcraft, is that the bulk of strategic military thought doesn't seem to apply. It's pretty hard to go after supply lines where there are none. It's pretty tough to crack morale when units are just robots w/o feelings. You can't really cut off the head of a force, or disrupt communications, when units can not be suppressed, or the command & control infrastructure can't be hit.
It's like fighting a giant amoeba, really. This is done playability partly, but I think mostly to support the beer and pretzels crowd (dumbed down a bit). So I guess it will come down to your audience.
--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...
Edited by - Wavinator on October 23, 2000 9:38:54 PM
Have you played the most recent release of Close Combat, Wavinator?
It does leave quite a lot to be desired, but gives you units with morale, effectiveness limited by suppression, commanders affecting the battlefield, lines of supply, and such - most of it in real time...
I still have a lot of fun with the game, even thought it is (arguably) realistic enough to make them li''le buggers blow that for a game of soldiers and hide when they get some serious incoming fire...
I guess it just depends on what you are looking for in a game (or who is the game aimed at). There will obviously be some point after which any more realism will just turn people away from the game, but I think it won''t be a problem for quite a while yet.
Lukasz
I knows der earth is flat. Dere's practically books about dat!
I think, therefore... uh... I think that I am? I think...
It does leave quite a lot to be desired, but gives you units with morale, effectiveness limited by suppression, commanders affecting the battlefield, lines of supply, and such - most of it in real time...
I still have a lot of fun with the game, even thought it is (arguably) realistic enough to make them li''le buggers blow that for a game of soldiers and hide when they get some serious incoming fire...
I guess it just depends on what you are looking for in a game (or who is the game aimed at). There will obviously be some point after which any more realism will just turn people away from the game, but I think it won''t be a problem for quite a while yet.
Lukasz
I knows der earth is flat. Dere's practically books about dat!
I think, therefore... uh... I think that I am? I think...
Wav, you might want to check out Strifeshadow, expected release sometime around January. It has an interesting resource system. Resources are more spread out instead of being in clearly defined expansions. One type of resource is beamed through towers back to your base. If your opponent damages or destroys your towers you''ll get less money. The other resource is mined, but the mines store the money until a worker picks it up. If you kill the worker you can have one of your own works steal the bag of money. It really is looking interesting, with a strong focus on tactical combat, and linking it with the strategic level but without tedious peon pumping (very few workers are needed with the system)
The problems with realistic game is: more they are realistic, more they are complicated an hard to learn!
some player like complicated game, ans somes want to get in the game fast1
Delisk
some player like complicated game, ans somes want to get in the game fast1
Delisk
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
