"Is this something anyone stopped to consider? That's why I suggested making an action game. So I guess suggesting to make a game that could actually be finished quickly is 'getting ahead of myself', right Phant? "
I've thought about that. That's ultimately why I'm against Gamemaker's idea of padding fights to make them rewarding. A complex fight that's interesting takes time to make. It's also why I'm in favour of an action/platforming game, because they're easy to make; That's also why I jumped the gun on saying what it looks like the genre would be, to help speed things along towards production. I only mentioned RPG elements because that can be left up to interpretation, and as such could easily be cut or simplified.
I said people were getting ahead of themselves because they were just throwing ideas out there without apparent regard to the bigger picture. It's easier to cull these ideas when they're being discussed. There's less to cull when people are focused, too. Now, while I'm not the one who has to make the call of what gets culled or not, I'm at least going to try making it easy for something to be culled through discussion. (I'm not the one to make the cull!)
Have any of you ever played Zeliard?
I'm only mentioning it because it's one of my favourite games, and it sounds like the kind of thing many of you guys are talking about making.
It's basically an action platformer with RPG elements, such as: levelling up, learning new magic, buying better weapons/armor/items, a storyline, NPCs to talk to, towns & shops, etc.
I'm not suggesting a remake, but it would not be unrealistic to attempt something similar in MMF - quite easy in fact, and do-able within a reasonable timeframe.
Good, good. People, you're all doing fine, but you're not talking enough about the style thing. Let me give examples of things people might say. Stuff in the vein of what Sketchy said, as he provided an example of what he's thinking (albeit not so much what he thinks should be in this project as much as it was what he thinks we're coming up with). Adam Phant also did well, as he actually gave pacing ideas, and elaboration on how that pacing could work (with his areas idea).
Look at the Metal Slug games. Those would be of a gritty, combat-heavy war style. Then look at Noitu Love 2 or The Legend of Princess, fast-paced colorful action run 'n gun style. These are the kinds of things we're looking for. Once we establish a style, we'll be able to decide on story, engine, graphics, and sound that meet that style, work with that style, and complement that style.
@ Gamemaker: You said to make the battles more rewarding. How? Does this mean making players want to experience battle (as in, some sort of interactive element that makes it exciting, like on-screen prompts for button combos or timed button presses that activate dodges, parries, and such) or a result of battle that entices players to battle to get something (like rare items, coins, such as those)? We could also make the battles more visually appealing and engaging to keep people from growing tired of battling, such as various battle styles or requirements.
@ Adam Phant: Padding battle is indeed a bad idea, people will grow tired and leave the game before they get to experience other elements of the game, or will dislike the game more than they would.
@ Tetsuya: The project will take as long as it takes to complete, and the timeframe depends on how quickly people work, how many people work, the initial quality of each piece of work, and experience of the people in the areas they decide to work (when we get that far). However, this was being thought to be relatively long-term, maybe six months at the very least, around a year, as I doubt we could work so fast. Also, the RPG elements don't have to be extensive; Super Paper Mario only included HP, Level Ups, and Attack Stats. We could simply include a basic level-up system where you get points from fighting, quests, and other things, then level up and improve whatever stats you think will make the game easier. A basic but thorough weapon customization system (like that of Fire Emblem: Radiant Dawn or Path of Radiance) could be simple and nice as well. As for your projected release date, hmm... Summer 2010.
@ Matthew Wiese: Yes, kinda. It's more than just a platformer with a battle system, as that wouldn't be the only RPG element. It would also be part adventure, as that could make the game more deep and entertaining. Give it better replay value.
@ AilsArk: Puzzles, explorations, and item-usage (ala Zelda, as you said) are more adventure than RPG. Sorry, just a semantics thing. But yes, an adventure element would be nice, and is sort-of implied by the RPG elements.
Maybe I should just post more often, but I don't want to interrupt discussions, and I don't want this thread to be full of comments by me.
@Jon Lambert: That sounds like a good timeframe to create a more complex game. Which is a good thing, of course. Now I have a new question for you; did you intend for anyone to contribute media? Or where we going to have a set group of people do each task. Also, take care not to be too cocky. Until there is something released that is playable, this project is no different from the past failed attemps. But I have hope this time we can make it work.
I intended to allow anyone to contribute media, but there will also be groups that moderate the content contributed by everyone. So, for graphics, there would be a graphics leader and any number of graphics assistants that the graphics leader chooses, and the leader's job would be to comment on and help people with their graphics submissions, as well as give lessons so that more people will have the capacity to make and submit graphics. Similar procedures would be followed for programmings, sound, and story. I'll make an outline of project procedures once we get through this part of the discussion, as I don't want to be making updates every day and stealing the spotlight from other projects that actually have tangible material.
Cocky? Is this about me saying good job all the time? I just thought it was positive reinforcement, but, okay. I'll stop doing that so often.
Why not use the best of both Platformer and RPG/adventure and go in a Zelda 2 for the NES kinda style?
You know, a map to travel on with random battles that pop up, but the battles and castle areas are 2d platforming.
Then get someone to make a good platforming engine, a good map engine, and the best character sprites, and piece them together on an example, preferably in TGF1 so everyone will access the files and participate.
Next, everyone should make their own area using the platform engine and map engine which were already made.
The difficult part is always getting a solid foundation for everything else to be stacked upon.
Note: .gam files load into MMF but .cca and .mfa do not load into TGF.
In this manner, each area could have a very distinct style all its own, without clashing, and having a big group of people will become a big plus instead of a detriment that needs to be worked around.
As for making battles rewarding, how about making it so there are lots of bosses and mini-bosses and after you defeat one, it adds something to the attack for mini-bosses (take a look at how the weapon in King of Dragons for SNES changes as you travel through levels), and adds a new attack to use for the big bosses. Attack style could be changed via a menu to keep it to a few buttons during battle (one button opens the attacks menu, and another button to quickly pick the attack, and same thing with the attack style menu).
Just a few ideas that could make things go a little more smoothly.
Blood of the Ancient One, Seen only as Shadow, Faster than Lightning, Fierce as the Greatest Dragon, Nearly Invisible, Floating in a Dream, Entered through the Demon Door, Destroyer of Evil in a Realm with a Red Sky Scarred, Who could I be ?
Great Idea for MBK, allowing everyone to freely use the Platform/Map engine to create their own levels in great! So you don't have to tell one person what you want, and only they add it. So when all the levels are done, we copy pasta all the frames into one game. Also, I would like to suggest using a cute, fasted paced fun style, because I'm sure many more people would be able to create graphics for that type of a game, rather than complex MS style sprites.
I agree with most of what MBK and Matt Wiese said.
Having an overworld between levels could be cool, but I don't like the idea of random encounters, and I personally thought Zelda II was a terrible game. Seriously though, I think everyone should at least play Zeliard - it's a really good game (I'm going to shut up about it now).
I've got some ideas that I think could tie this project together.
First, my idea for the style. A grim, though cartoony/vibrant game. Rather, a game with a deep or somewhat complex plot, with several themes working togeth to create a really compelling narrative. The art style would ironically contradict that, being more vibrant and colourful than it should be. The art style would distract you from the plot, because you'd be asking yourself things like, "How can something go wrong in a such a cute world!?"
The storyline could be one of the driving motives to keep the player going at first, and subsequent playthroughs. The art style would eye-catching to the people who think graphics are everything, but they wouldn't be so overdone that it always looks too busy (like NL2).
I think this style would fit a steampunk or some other kind of sci-fi/fantasy theme. I prefer steampunk because it gives you a means to over-generalize how everything works, without having to go into very much detail about it. It also means that levels could be detailed with useless doodads that would make them look visually appealing. It's also much easier to switch to another theme from steampunk, as you have sci-fi and fantasy elements that you can break off to.
Now, keeping in line with the action platformer with RPG, it could have very simple RPG mechanics. This next idea is actually just a rehash of Neuro's idea that I originally disagreed with; Multiple playable characters. Just a handful of them, 2-4 at most. They would use the Smash Bros system of moving and combat, where it's the same controls with different abilities. However, every character would have the same "stats;" The all move and attack the same way, but it's their special abilities that will set them apart.
These abilities could be "customized" in a way that's very RPG-ish: You gain experience and spend it on unlocking a new ability combo, or upgrading them. If needed, the experience points could be scrapped entirely and you would get these upgrades from defeating the bosses. Getting ability upgrades exclusively from bosses compliments the hub-based level design idea I posted earlier: How you get to customize your upgrades would be totally dependent on where you start and which area you attempt first.
Multiple characters also makes for a way to make battles feel rewarding. Instead of aiming to create rewarding battles for each character and giving a tangible item, you reward the player with the simplest feeling of all: Satisifaction. By having multiple characters, you leave it possible to turn the characters you didn't pick into rivals (or have one an ally if you don't want to outright dismiss the possibility of co-op). The best way to reward the player is by throwing a one-time event at them, like a battle with these rival characters. If you lose, then you're left with the feeling that you chose poorly. If you win, then you're left with the feeling that you made the right decision. Of course the inherent problem of coding these fights still exists, but it really would be no different than coding a boss fight.
I agree with Sketchy, random encounters with a platform game is really weird. I kind of agree with Adam, though steampunk could still be hard to draw for some people.
Advertisement
Jon Lambert
