Thoughts and Ideas General

calithlin

Insider
Initially this is what we did, except for the more dangerous moves, we actually made them more cautious when low and more daring when they thought they were winning. Visible effects on animation had too big an impact on combat however and it just seemed unbalanced and annoying so we removed it.

Ah... as I feared. I can see how it would be really terrible if you were close to defeating someone, but due to low stamina you kept dieing due to your lowered reaction time.

I guess we can just chalk it down to adrenaline rush kicking in when you're at low stamina. Sort of a final push that keeps you going before your body completely gives out. I can live with that.
 

walltar

Insider
Ah... as I feared. I can see how it would be really terrible if you were close to defeating someone, but due to low stamina you kept dieing due to your lowered reaction time.

I guess we can just chalk it down to adrenaline rush kicking in when you're at low stamina. Sort of a final push that keeps you going before your body completely gives out. I can live with that.
Prety much what i was going to say. Sometimes less realism makes better game.
 

walltar

Insider
And too much of less realism, saints row 3 makes it too daft to like
Well that is problem of most fantasy games for me. I don't even speak about gameplay stuff ... but when i see armor with hole in belly area or 300kg hulking plate armours i am ready delete that game. I played saints row 3 for about two days before it felt dumb.

But in general for me the more realistic and more complex game is the better ... because i mostly stop playing game when i know most stuff i can about it. Because of that i kept playing EVE for almost two years ... it took me that long to know considerable amount of stuff about it. I think i don't play games for fun factor ... for me fun is about learning how game works.
 
If you want to make a ridiculous and over the top game like Bulletstorm, fine, that's awesome and I am sure I will enjoy it. But if you don't market it like that and try to make it looks realistic or something then I draw the line.
 

scurra

Insider
Now while the developers have mentioned that new Npcs don't just spawn how does this work with enemies? Is each enemy or every soldier in the game a unique Npc? In that case once you clear out an area it will always be clear? Also, if there is some event where monsters attack a village will that town always be stuck at two guards after they lost their other 10?
 

Kaizer0002

Insider
If we're assuming that some monsters = animals, it could make sense for them to migrate into the area. Granted, the edges of the map are going to have to be some sort of barrier that we can't pass (deep waters, mountains, etc) which begs the question of how monsters will reasonably cross it. It is an interesting question, regardless.
 

scurra

Insider
If we're assuming that some monsters = animals, it could make sense for them to migrate into the area. Granted, the edges of the map are going to have to be some sort of barrier that we can't pass (deep waters, mountains, etc) which begs the question of how monsters will reasonably cross it. It is an interesting question, regardless.
It would be pretty interesting if they made some of the barriers actually consist of impossibly strong monsters that live in say the one pass between a large mountain range and while normal people can pass unnoticed your powers or the reason you can resurrect attracts them and they blocks your path. This could also allow for expansion of the game by providing a quest to defeat the monster when they release the area beyond the range. They could also use very large(20-30 monsters) infestation of monsters in the same way.
 

Kaizer0002

Insider
An interesting idea as typically it is some sort of environmental effect, else we have to determine why the monster does not stray from it's environment. Allowing for it to be something that has a reasonable reason not to leave it's environment (guardian, lake monster, carnivorous conifer, etc), games have tried unkillable monsters in the past (see Kerafyrm). There are other sorts of barriers that could be overcome as well, although they don't sound as epic as what you propose (giant gate, getting on a boat..).
 

BigT2themax

Insider
I think maybe we could give Sui Generis the benefit of the doubt when we're wondering how enemies respawn. It'd be rather dull to not have enemies come back when you kill them, as you'll eventually just have nothing to do. Imagine you travel from town to quite-far-away-middle-of-nowhere, slaying monsters that ambushed you or whatever, or killing a stray bandit that attacks you. Then, when you've finished your business wherever it is you are and decide to return to the same town, you're just walking down the same path and backtracking the huge distance. Boring, right?

Same for the underworld. Enemies (not the exact SAME enemies in the same place, they should be new enemies maybe showing up somewhere different than before) should come back so you don't end up just clearing a huge area and having an empty ruin left. I think monsters and beasts would move back into the cosy dungeon, no?

Of course, the problem is how quickly they should respawn (edit: I mean how new enemies should spawn). I think maybe it should depend on how thoroughly you cleared an area of enemies. For instance, if you clear a small mausoleum of skeletons, they should be gone for at least several in-game days or weeks. Another example would be possible bandit camps, where, if you kill all (or most) of the bandits there, then they don't respawn and the camp is abandoned.
Of course, just having the bandits respawn in the same camp after a few days all the time would be boring, so maybe have bandits set up new camps every so often, or if a camp is destroyed? It'd be an interesting concept, to be travelling the same path between towns you always take, and then you come across a bandit camp that's been set up since the last time you've been there. Obviously the camp would start off with just a collection of tents, then maybe they set up an outpost and some wooden walls or something, I dunno.

Also, I like saints row 3 :(. It's daft and silly and fun, and it's awesome for it.

Edit: nice idea for the barriers at the edges of the world! Sounds like it'd be awesome to find an ancient guardian or something and be unable to continue.
However, it should be really obvious (or maybe just stated outright using some lore or something to explain why it's not possible to pass these enemies) that the unkillable enemies signify the edges of the game world. Otherwise some players might obsess about finding some way to kill them and get past, which is impossible, obviously.

also, I forgot to add another point about new enemies spawning, and that is how far away you are from whatever you just killed and how long ago you did so. I think it would probably be a good idea to only have new enemies spawn if it's been quite a while and you're not anywhere nearby, otherwise you'd be all "woah, I just came this way and killed everything, where'd these guys come from?".
 
I like the idea of bandits setting up camp, BigT. That would add a cool level of realism. Of course, there would need to be restrictions on where the camps could be made. No self respecting lord is going to allow a bandit camp to be built on his doorstep!
 

BigT2themax

Insider
That sounds cool. The town's been wiped out, and is now nothing more than a lair for beasts or a camp for unscrupulous types, or is simply plagued with undead.

edit:
I like the idea of bandits setting up camp, BigT. That would add a cool level of realism. Of course, there would need to be restrictions on where the camps could be made. No self respecting lord is going to allow a bandit camp to be built on his doorstep!
Well, yeah, of course there should be restrictions! I didn't think to mention that. maybe have the camps be at least a certain minimum distance away, based on how strong the militia or guards or whatever are at the town? And in some cases, have them be a minimum distance to a path (again, closer or further based on if there's a lot of merchants going that way or there's lots of guards). If there's in the middle of nowhere they wouldn't be able to bandit things very efficiently, would they? :p
 

scurra

Insider
If there is dynamic development then fortifying effect could be seen in many situations. Such as undead infesting an area attracting more unconscious minds(what makes the skeletons in this world) to gather and slowly warping the area or like you said avoiding a bandit camp just causes it to get better situated. Then migration of monsters or outlaws could also occur in cleared areas or be stopped by say helping to build an outpost for a lord.
 

nox

Insider
Well, may be more irritating than interesting if NPCs never respawn x(
Maybe that is the endgame they've been talking about, the black plague! After X hours playing the black plague starts to spread an everyone dies, and it's up to you to find the cure before it happens. :p
 

Infidel

Insider
Well that is problem of most fantasy games for me... when i see armor with hole in belly area or 300kg hulking plate armours i am ready delete that game.
That just about sums it all up for me. Oversized and or over stylised weapons and armour completely ruin the atmosphere of any game for me. No matter the gameplay, it just makes everything feel stupid.
 
Top

Home|Games|Media|Store|Account|Forums|Contact




© Copyright 2019 Bare Mettle Entertainment Ltd. All rights reserved.