Long subject line? incase you missed it:
RPG: Bob, go do what you want for a while
Anyways, I was thinking. If in an RPG you wanted to travel somewhere or do somthing (like sleep, or research a spell) you could kind of suspend the charcter. You could have a kind of control panel for it:
Primary action:
resarch Otto''s Amazing Watsit spell
Secondary actions:
eat
sleep
Return control when:
attacked
no food
emergency (fire, flood, etc)
loss of health -> 1hp
finished task
This would allow for more complex simulation in games, while not having the player act out all those little things.
Say for traveling you would have basicly the same thing only use "Travel to So And So town" and "Stay with party"
It allow for more realism in things like the traveling view in Fallout as well as the waiting (or whatever it was) panel as well as better support for partys instead of just one charcter.
It would prevent things like having the game take a rediculasly (sp?) long time. If the whole party was "suspended" the game could just simulate and return control, having acheived what would have taken posibly hours of usles play time.
What do you reckon? Good idea? How could it be improved? etc.
ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Web site coming soon...
🎉 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!
RPG: Bob, go do what you want for a while
I''m a strong supporter to let the computer do tasks than are stupid and repeating. Why spoil all the fun with such things?
But, on the other hand you don''t want to make an artificial life simulation out of your RPG, do you? That''s propably why most games are not "real", they let out parts of our world for simplicity. The real world is not as fun as a world where all the stupid things you have to do all day are gone and you can concentrate on the ones that are really important!
So, it''s quite a good idea to let the computer take over the pointless tasks - but only to a degree. I guess every player would be angered if his/her hero wanders off during a fight, because he is hungry (just an expamle ;-) )...
But, on the other hand you don''t want to make an artificial life simulation out of your RPG, do you? That''s propably why most games are not "real", they let out parts of our world for simplicity. The real world is not as fun as a world where all the stupid things you have to do all day are gone and you can concentrate on the ones that are really important!
So, it''s quite a good idea to let the computer take over the pointless tasks - but only to a degree. I guess every player would be angered if his/her hero wanders off during a fight, because he is hungry (just an expamle ;-) )...
Seems pretty silly to me. If these are pointless tasks, why put them in the game? For the sake of realism? I think not.
Just take out the pointless long-winded tasks. Get rid of the problem instead of finding a convoluted way around it.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Mad Keith the V.
Just take out the pointless long-winded tasks. Get rid of the problem instead of finding a convoluted way around it.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Mad Keith the V.
Alot of the time, the journey is part of the game, especially in RPG''s. If you ripped out the journey and battles that accompanied them, you would be left with a game that could be beaten in a tenth of the time, and the poor story telling would show through more clearly and quickly. Also removing these aspects from an RPG would do a great deal to remove the sense of grandness associated with traveling a long distance. When you are on the other side of the world in an RPG, you don''t want to make a quick trip to your hometown, just because it takes so long in real world minutes.
Ut
Ut
If you let the PC automate the journey, that equals ripping it out. If it''s not interesting, it shouldn''t be there. I''m not saying that there should be no journeys in the game, but why have them if you don''t plan on making them interesting?
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Mad Keith the V.
People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
Mad Keith the V.
The only justifiable reason to include something that seems a bit mundane on the surface is if because of that action something else interesting does happen.
Traveling, for instance, could in itself be mundane but if it leads the player to accidently find a lost civilization that the player would otherwise not find, it just might be worth including. Although, ideally, we''d rather make the mundane action fun or interesting in some way. That only makes it better.
"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
Click here to see my current project.
Traveling, for instance, could in itself be mundane but if it leads the player to accidently find a lost civilization that the player would otherwise not find, it just might be worth including. Although, ideally, we''d rather make the mundane action fun or interesting in some way. That only makes it better.
"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.
Click here to see my current project.
Actually, this has been done.
Angband (a rogue-like) has an option for the computer to control the character. They call is a borg, and it plays the game in your place. It also plays as fast as it can, meaning the little @mphora zips around the screen.
It''s funny at first, but then you realize that the computer can play the game as well or better than you can. I let it run for 3 days straight on my 400MHz and it almost made it to the end.
It gave me the heebie-jeebies, because the player was not required to play the game.
soapbox:
To me, this is a design flaw. If the game does not require a human brain to think or interpret in order to play, then the game is nothing more than TV with some finger exercises (IMO). We should strive for better.
That said, I think automating things is good. If you removed the mindless stuff, you quickly realize where the empty parts are, and how little or how much meat there really is in your game.
/soapbox
Angband (a rogue-like) has an option for the computer to control the character. They call is a borg, and it plays the game in your place. It also plays as fast as it can, meaning the little @mphora zips around the screen.
It''s funny at first, but then you realize that the computer can play the game as well or better than you can. I let it run for 3 days straight on my 400MHz and it almost made it to the end.
It gave me the heebie-jeebies, because the player was not required to play the game.
soapbox:
To me, this is a design flaw. If the game does not require a human brain to think or interpret in order to play, then the game is nothing more than TV with some finger exercises (IMO). We should strive for better.
That said, I think automating things is good. If you removed the mindless stuff, you quickly realize where the empty parts are, and how little or how much meat there really is in your game.
/soapbox
Author
Well, what I was thinking was to return control to the player or somthing - so no one misses things like fights and important detail.
also this feature would have to be activated manualy, so the charcter(s) dont wonder off during a fight.
It would be specificly designed not to play the game for the player. For example, "Fight" or "Puzzel solve" would not be avaiable as an action, however things like "travel", "research" or "sleep" would be.
I have also had another idea:
If the player does go traveling, the game could simulate it and come back with a breif description on what happene. (only the mundane, important / intresting would have control returned to the player still)
ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Web site coming soon...
also this feature would have to be activated manualy, so the charcter(s) dont wonder off during a fight.
It would be specificly designed not to play the game for the player. For example, "Fight" or "Puzzel solve" would not be avaiable as an action, however things like "travel", "research" or "sleep" would be.
I have also had another idea:
If the player does go traveling, the game could simulate it and come back with a breif description on what happene. (only the mundane, important / intresting would have control returned to the player still)
ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Web site coming soon...
Author
Also, it is not only used for traveling. It provides an a reliable and consistant interface for other tasks like I mentioned before: Research, Sleeping
And most importantly: waiting.
Say if the dragon would arive in a week, you would not have to play out the whole week.
Also, this system is more suited to a more dynamic RPG engine, not a Diablo 2, fixed story kind of deal.
ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Web site coming soon...
And most importantly: waiting.
Say if the dragon would arive in a week, you would not have to play out the whole week.
Also, this system is more suited to a more dynamic RPG engine, not a Diablo 2, fixed story kind of deal.
ANDREW RUSSELL STUDIOS
Web site coming soon...
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
