| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
Piln, I agree with your last statement in general. When the new Romeo and Juliet came out I was going out with a smart girl who loved that garbage. She begged and pleaded til I took her to see it. And I had to sit through that crap, not understanding one word that was said. Why the hell would anyone make a modern day Shakespear without normal talking? Eewww, they're wearing pants and shirts like me!!! If only I could undertsand the nonsense spewing out of their mouths.
Entertainment has evolved since seeing a play was your only option. Movies are a lot more sophisticated. Why update a play with modern characters and cinematics and not the stupid Shakespear talk? That is just dumb and must have hurt sales.
But when it comes to rpgs, I like what I like, and that is rpgs. If the industry moves beyond tb combat, character creation, character development I will be left behind. Oh, well. I'll have more time to enjoy other things.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
Sun Apr 18, 2004 1:57 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
This is an excellent topic, Roqua - I've thoroughly enjoyed reading the ideas here. Some of these ideas have bounced around in my head but none of them have been tested or critically examined...
1) Woud it be totally original or would you like to make a sequal to a favorite game? ANd why?
Original. There's enough sequels and derivatives out there already, although I'm sure I would be influenced by current works.
2) Would it be twitch-based combat, reat-time combat, or turn-based? Ad why?
Turn-based. I can enjoy real-time or action-combat but turn-based would definitely be the best system for my sci-fi CRPG. Turn-based is particularly suited to the ranged weapons that would be prevalent in a sci-fi setting (ranged combat is often flawed in realtime with the protagonists closing the gap too quickly). Action points are also well-suited to balancing the use of the large range of shields, cybernetics and other gadgets that would be available. Finally, a good TB system offers strategic depth, particularly with a party.
3) Would it be fantasy, fantasy light, Post-apocolipse, sci-fi, or modern? And why?
Damn. Gave it away too early. Sci-fi: any setting can be fun but there aren't many options for players wanting a deep, "hardcore" futuristic sci-fi CRPG. The setting encourages a huge range skill possibilities, including cybernetic implants, hacking, computer use, advanced spy equipment, neural networks, electronics, vehicles and so on, not to mention the "usual" speech and weapon skills.
4) Would it be more action oriented and fast-paced or slower paced?
I think "happy medium" is the obvious answer. I wouldn't want an "action" game but I don't want players bored to death.
5) Would it be combat heavy or light?
Not combat heavy but otherwise the balance would depend on the skill set and approach of the player. As a roleplaying game, it's important that a player can create and define a clear "role" -- be it combat-oriented or not -- and be able to play that role in a meaningful way.
6) Would you have classes and races, a detailed character creation, skill based or class based, more like Diablo and Sacred character selection, or no choice at all like Gothic?
Detailed character creation with a deep, skill-based system. As in Fallout, I would want players to be able to create an almost unlimited variety of character types. A sniper that melts into the shadows, undetected? No problem. A bumbling halfwit with a killer smile and amazing luck? No problem. All skills need to be useful - it's important that a player not pursue a skill path and find out halfway through that it's useless but they should be able to 'gimp' the character.
7) Would advancement be level based, very detailed and selection heavy, selection light and simple, no leveling like in Ultima?
Level-based, detailed and selection heavy with 5-10 points available every level and a feat every 3 levels. Traditional experience points but with little handed out for combat directly. Instead, experience is won for reaching certain locations, solving quests and so on.
Level-based advancement is still relevant because it provides a built-in reward structure for players and lets them plan characters in advance, should they choose to.
8 ) What aspect would you emphesis? Like NPC interaction, party interaction, world interaction, story interaction, etc?
Exploration and NPC interaction would be strong gamepay mechanics. I'd like interesting locations and some memorable NPCs; there would not be a permanent party so no real party interaction. I would like some world interaction - I see some excellent ideas in Fable that I'd like to touch on such as a simulated economy but it's important these elements aren't the real focus.
9) Would you like a very story heavy but linear game like PS:T, or very open and free story (non-linearity usually means not very story focused), or do you have any ideas that could correct the trade off or a happy medium?
I appreciate it's much harder to create a strong story without linearity but I think it can be done, at least to a reasonable degree. It would be very non-linear so perhaps not the amazing tale of PS:T but I thought Fallout maintained a decent story without chaining down the player.
10) Would your game be a hot seller? Would it be more for a niche market or would the main stream rpg fans love it, and why? Would you make it just because it is your idea of what an RPG should be, or are you business minded and know what other players want?
In reality it would be difficult to find a publisher for my game. It would not be a massive mainstream success but I believe a good "hardcore" RPG has a big enough audience to be a "niche hit".
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Sun Apr 18, 2004 2:33 am |
|
|
soul phoenix
Village Dweller
Joined: 12 Jun 2004
Posts: 17
Location: australia |
basicly the rpg that i would make would be like this
you could pick from 2 different story lines both story lines your a dragon but a different dragon in each one a fire breathing dragon the other an ice one say the first one the fire breathing dragon would of been lost when he was an egg cause the mother was attacked by a dragon hunter and the egg was knocked off the cliff into a swamp and hached then some guy teaches you how to fight so you go to a forest and meet the second member of your party a minature who has an axe so then you go around and train and then you go up to a castle and fight the first boss after you kill him you get a crystal that lets you go through the warp somewhere on the iland once you go through the warp you appear in a town with gates to all the other worlds but you have to collect something like boss keys to go through them so you go through all the levels meeting all the possible allies for your party and as you grow up.
then theres the other story line where your the ice dragon your actually a royal dragon from the kindom of i dont know "mytholgy" and you know who you are so you know your royal but you were kidnapped now heres the bit where the story lines cross the fire dragon comes and saves her and gets somethin like a power up or somethin. so the ice dragon finds out who the leader was of the group that captuerd you and it just happens to be the same guy that killed the fire dragon's mother. so then they go there seperate ways to go and kill the dragon hunter. so the ice dragon goes around the same as the fire one did only different ilands and worlds training and finding your allies for your party.
now this bit is the same for both story lines pretty much they find the world that the boss is and they go there this iland is a castle with a wall around it pretty much so you go through and fight your way through to the boss after you get to him you see that he isnt human well not completely any way he is part human part dragon and part demon and the dragon part is the fire dragons mother so you kill him and you see the end clip where if your the fire dragon you spit this stuff at the dragon bit and your mother rips her way out and makes him half human half demonthen he kills the mother for good and then the fire dragon gets kinda pissed and dose some mega hyper beam and blows away half of him and then he just flies over and eats the rest of him. but if you were the ice dragon there was some crystal that had some affect on demons and sommond out the demon which didnt like being captured and started fighting the boss and the boss gets slaughtered and captured himself so now you see a mainly demon human dragon thing which just looks up real evil like then all of a sudden the screen gose white blue and the boss is blown away. so the ending is something like that. probly better though if i actually made it.
and thats the game i would make |
|
Sun Jun 13, 2004 5:42 am |
|
|
Arma
Mysterious Lady
Joined: 24 Oct 2003
Posts: 1230
Location: in the middle of hell |
1) Would it be totally original or would you like to make a sequel to a favorite game? And why?
Well, I would do my own thing, definately, I want my game to be my own, and not somebody else's.
2) Would it be twitch-based combat, reat-time combat, or turn-based? And why?
I would try to make turn-based combat, that's the way I would want it.
3) Would it be fantasy, fantasy light, Post-apocolipse, sci-fi, or modern? And why?
Hmmm, tough one. It would either be victorial age fantasy, a world where technology is coming right now (sorta Arcanum-like) or set in a world, that has evolved with both magic and tehcnology. Or maybe in an alternative Earth, where magic has come to claim us all (sorta Lionheart like).
4) Would it be more action oriented and fast-paced or slower paced?
It will definately be slow paced, as my game will stress things like world exploration, party and charachter interaction, as opposed to combat.
edit : I don't actually say that there will be no combat, but combat should be avoidable. Another thing - no matter how much combat will be in my game, it will not be tough, as there will be an awfully huge arsenal of spells, items, weapons, abilities, and other means of disposing of monsters, I want players to have fun and experiment with things, not just killing with whatever makes the most damage, because there is no way to dispose of creatures.
5) Would it be combat heavy or light?
Combat will be only one of the options for dealing with things - there will be other means for things to go round - bribes, quests, diplomacy, who knows with what exactly what I will come up with when I get to make a game?
6) Would you have classes and races, a detailed character creation, skill based or class based, more like Diablo and Sacred character selection, or no choice at all like Gothic?
Definately very detailed charackter creation, there will be races and sub-races, a plethora of statistics, abilities, skills, etc. However, I doubt that there will be pre-difined classes, although there might, I much more like the idea of class title (as Ranger, Mage, etc) being out or being generated depending on skill the character develops.
edit - And just I forgot to mention - with the option of creating more than one character at the beginning of the game (Well, you could, but only you obviously you would have more than one slot less for our fun PCs that can join your party!), now that would only make geeks play the game!
7)Would advancement be level based, very detailed and selection heavy, selection light and simple, no leveling like in Ultima? Almost entirely level based, very detailed and selection heavy, with trainers coming up to teach only certain degrees ( ex. Apprentice, Master, Granmaster & the like) after a quest is compleated. Yes, I know that my system very much resembles Arcanum, but so far I have never seen a better system in an RPG, and why use a completely new schematic, when we take the best and just modify it a bit?
edit - only thing I forgot is that I would definately add feats to the whole.
8) What aspect would you emphesis? Like NPC interaction, party interaction, world interaction, story interaction, etc?
I think I already mentioned some, but here I am to make it clear -> I would be emphasizing world exploration/interaction, character & party interaction, NPC interation.l
edit - Humor is another ephasis I would try to add to the game, actually
9) Would you like a very story heavy but linear game like PS:T, or very open and free story (non-linearity usually means not very story focused), or do you have any ideas that could correct the trade off or a happy medium?
It would most probably be more story light, I would like to make as much more non-linear as I can. That doesn"t mean that I am neglecting quality of the story however, light it may be, bad -> never. I would rather risk getting When its done awards.
edit : Of course, there will be different endings and different entire chapters of the game depending on the decision the player takes.
10) Would your game be a hot seller? Would it be more for a niche market or would the main stream rpg fans love it, and why? Would you make it just because it is your idea of what an RPG should be, or are you business minded and know what other players want?
This I don't know. And I don't wanna know - I want to make my game as best as I can, and then whoever likes it, may by it. I am definately (if I ever) making my game to suit my views, rather than trying to appeal to some niche, or group of players. There is the necessary hype of course, but rather than that I would not be making a game for the mass market, nor for the so-called hard core players. I am making the game for myself! |
|
Sun Jun 13, 2004 3:40 pm |
|
|
Schattenherz
Head Merchant
Joined: 21 Sep 2003
Posts: 71
Location: Nuremberg, Old Europe |
1) Woud it be totally original or would you like to make a sequal to a favorite game? ANd why?
Original. As much as I like Scenarios like Dark Eye, Greyhawk, Arcanum or FR -except the Munchkin NPC like Elminster, Drizzt, the seven Sisters ... - only in a World created by myself I could do the things I want.
2) Would it be twitch-based combat, reat-time combat, or turn-based? Ad why?
Turn-based. Although I enjoy every kind of Fight, turn-based is the "King-Discipline" of Fighting. Maybe I would include a real-time Option for the easy battles.
3) Would it be fantasy, fantasy light, Post-apocolipse, sci-fi, or modern? And why?
Fantasy. Only in Fantasy-Scenarios can you let your Imagination run free. I would implement a few modern things like it is done in Arcanum and Might & Magic - Rune-inscribed Bullets (a Bullet with your Name on it could really be something to fear ...), Gremlins with Flame-Throwers and Chain-Saws at some Point ...
4) Would it be more action oriented and fast-paced or slower paced?
Slower paced - like the Games of Old.
5) Would it be combat heavy or light?
Combat Heavy - I like Fights.
6) Would you have classes and races, a detailed character creation, skill based or class based, more like Diablo and Sacred character selection, or no choice at all like Gothic?
Defintly Classes and Races, lots of both of them (And Feats and Perks and Skills and Special-Abilitys ...)
7) Would advancement be level based, very detailed and selection heavy, selection light and simple, no leveling like in Ultima?
Level based, very detailed and selection heavy - a Mage that is involved in a lot of Combat would get the Exp for the Fight for his Core-Class but his Combat-Skills would also improve.
8. What aspect would you emphesis? Like NPC interaction, party interaction, world interaction, story interaction, etc?
All interaction is needed. But the especialy NPC-Partymembers must feel alive. You have to spend a lot of time with these People. There must be a lot to find out about them, they must have their own personality and goals.
9) Would you like a very story heavy but linear game like PS:T, or very open and free story (non-linearity usually means not very story focused), or do you have any ideas that could correct the trade off or a happy medium?
Perfect would be a strong story in a non-lineary world. I would probably go the Privateer-Way - you have a great world (or more worlds) to explore and there are some Quests that would advance the Plot. Some of them would have to be solved in a given time, and for some you could take all the time you want - but there won't be a Game Over. If you can't rescue the Maiden before the Stars are in the right Constellation for the Sacrifice, she' dead and you have to deal with the powerful Demon that got Access to this World.
10) Would your game be a hot seller? Would it be more for a niche market or would the main stream rpg fans love it, and why? Would you make it just because it is your idea of what an RPG should be, or are you business minded and know what other players want?
It would eat up Millions in the Making and would sell a lot - but not enough to cover the Costs cause the L33t-Kids and their Moms wouldn't buy it - but Gamer-Geeks would talk about it for Decades to come ...
_________________
"Insanity in individuals is something rare - but in groups, parties, nations and epochs, it is the rule."
-Nietzsche |
|
Sun Jun 13, 2004 9:13 pm |
|
|
Ashera
Village Dweller
Joined: 23 May 2004
Posts: 4
|
1) Woud it be totally original or would you like to make a sequal to a favorite game? And why?
Original, definitely. I don't feel I have the right to touch anyone else's world vision, and I'd like to develop mine.
2) Would it be twitch-based combat, real-time combat, or turn-based? And why?
Turn-based, probably, because I think RPGs should be more thoughtful than twitchy.
3) Would it be fantasy, fantasy light, Post-apocalyptic, sci-fi, or modern? And why?
I think high fantasy (pseudo-medieval, vaguely Tolkien-esque) is overdone. I like my magic, though. So I want to do a setting inspired by something other than medieval Europe, or perhaps sticking more closely to medieval Europe than typical fantasy. (e.g., Ars Magica) I think Chinese mythology is a rich and fertile ground for games that hasn't been used enough. (The games have pretty much all been Romance of the Three Kingdoms in various forms, with few of Journey to the West.)
4) Would it be more action oriented and fast-paced or slower paced?
*pokes at answer to #2* I lean more towards tactical or strategic RPGs than action RPGs myself.
5) Would it be combat heavy or light?
Combat isn't my favorite part of most RPGs because it's usually boring and takes too long even when the outcome is a foregone conclusion. (This is one of my problems with FF Tactics Advance - even if the enemy is under-leveled compared to you, with inferior skills, it still takes a loooong time to defeat them.) What I want is a combat system that's slightly more tactical than most to keep it interesting, but where encounters below a certain threshold are either skipped or automatically resolved.
6) Would you have classes and races, a detailed character creation, skill based or class based, more like Diablo and Sacred character selection, or no choice at all like Gothic?
One thing that frustrates me is when I'm expected to know enough about skills stats, classes, and whatnot to make all the decisions at the start. (Yeah, I *suppose* I could read the manual, but...) On the other hand, cookie-cutter characters are kind of boring. Classes are useful because they're archetypes; you can look at them and say "I want to play a heavy hitter so I'll take the Warrior" rather than fiddling with a lot of skills to get the same effect.
I guess my idea is to have some sort of class selection initially, and then a short intro section where you play through and get enough skill points or whatever to reasonably customize your character. With an option to just skip the intro section for people who read the manual or have played the game before.
Of course, all this is for a traditional RPG. In a more noveau mood, I would want character creation to consist of selecting character personality traits, background history, and contacts; one my problems with current RPGs is that there's not enough customization for character personality as opposed to simply character ability. And selecting character history will at least mean that you know quite well who you are in the game.
7) Would advancement be level based, very detailed and selection heavy, selection light and simple, no leveling like in Ultima?
I liked the idea of Morrowind's where characters advanced in levels based on skills, but I'm not sure I like making skill advancement use-based. I prefer tying advancement to encounters and quests. I also prefer having a maximum achievable power but an infinite possible amount of "experience" (or whatever other measure is being used), at least if story progress requires achieving certain power levels. (Which is certainly what keeps me from advancing in most RPGs...)
An interesting thing I'd like to try is to have character become more capable of affecting the world and events, rather than simply becoming more powerful in terms of defeating monsters. Something like earning fate points you can choose to spend to make fate smile in your direction, giving you more and more of a say in how the story turns out.
8) What aspect would you emphasise? Like NPC interaction, party interaction, world interaction, story interaction, etc?
I'd emphasize story and NPC interaction first. See my answer to the next question.
9) Would you like a very story heavy but linear game like PS:T, or very open and free story (non-linearity usually means not very story focused), or do you have any ideas that could correct the trade off or a happy medium?
My ideal is inspired by the Narrativist part of the GNS model of tabletop gaming and some comments made by one of the creator of Facade. Basically, the events of the game should create a story that you can tell afterwards, but that story doesn't have to be one that the game writers created. In Narrativist play, this is done by repeatedly putting players into situations where they have to deal with moral and ethical considerations. In Facade, this is done with a newly-developed AI engine for the NPCs which repeatedly forces the players to take sides. Michael Mateas described playing Facade as being like carving a piece of stone. You start at a certain place, and end at the other side of the stone, and the game engine makes sure that the result has a pleasing shape. Facade uses a lot of pre-recorded events, each with certain prerequisites for being triggered, and at various times the game engine will select an event (whose prerequisites have been met) to play. One thing about the events are that the prerequisites are often complex and multi-dimensional; another is that the events keep forcing the player to choose sides so that they can't just fence-sit. There are also a lot of them. Even a less sophisticated version of the AI engine, if well-designed, has potential to make the game interesting. Lack of content will reduce replay value. (Facade can be played 6 or 7 times before the repetition becomes very notieable, although each play session is only about 10 minutes.)
10) Would your game be a hot seller? Would it be more for a niche market or would the main stream rpg fans love it, and why? Would you make it just because it is your idea of what an RPG should be, or are you business minded and know what other players want?
Will it sell? I have no idea. It's not a very traditional game design and does a lot of experimental things, making it riskier. I think it'll either flop completely, develop a small but loyal cult following, or sell like hotcakes. |
|
Tue Jun 15, 2004 4:48 am |
|
|
X_805
Village Dweller
Joined: 29 Dec 2002
Posts: 7
|
Since I am trying to make an RPG system, I guess I'll say what I hope it turns out like.
1.Totally original world with new languages created and hopefully original religions. Most good ideas are taken. I guess it's the implementation that counts. As for why I would want it to be original, I like creating my own things and watching how they change over time.
2.Real-time first-person combat because it seems more realistic to me, but I might try and see if I can make it work both ways because the system might work as pnp (as long as you have a calculator).
3.Fantasy but not really traditional as powerful magic requires certain materials/drugs. Basically all the powerful mages would be drug addicts except the Kelmar, powerful mages who have trained their minds without the drugs. Of course most of them were killed in the Altecan Inquisition . I would try to implement this "drug use" in a serious way though.
4.Slow-paced because I would want to emphasise the world and not the single player character. If it was fast-paced and combat-oriented, it would soon become a statistics game and not a story.
5.Combat-heavy in the sense that combat when it occurs would be very in-depth much like the rest of the game, but I would try to have the game where combat would only be necessary in few situations.
6.Classes would just be a combination of emphasised skills the player has chosen. There would be about 5 races but around 10-15 "nations". Character advancement would be done by using skills. Not the unrealistic "experience" approach.
7.No leveling because as the PC uses skills, advancements in skills would increase attributes. Very selection-heavy as I want every choice the player makes to be an important one.
8.The world should interact with itself and the character. The character should be able to make changes to the world and I already have most of the system set up for that. Now I need to make a world. The world includes the NPCs so I guess it would be considered world and NPC interaction as the major foci.
9.Very non-linear but very heavy-story. The way this would happen is that the story would already be set up and the NPCs and physical world would change as time progresses but the PC could make any changes to the world (in-game) that he wants to changing many things in the future of the story. Dynamically changing with every choice I guess is what I would call it.
10. With complex plot-lines and heavy character complexity, I'm sure everyone would love it. But in actuality, it would probably only sell well to a niche market that likes their games extremely complex.
I've been working on the concept for this type of game for a year or so but only in the last few months have I really gotten involved with all the mechanics of everything. I've tried to do a few tests also (paper-based as I have no idea how to program). |
|
Fri Jun 18, 2004 11:38 pm |
|
|
Amelia
City Guard
Joined: 18 Jun 2004
Posts: 141
Location: Ong's Hat, New Jersey |
1) Woud it be totally original or would you like to make a sequal to a favorite game? And why?
Original but I might include allusions to other worlds as jests or as interesting 'what if these two creatures crossed paths' scenarios.
2) Would it be twitch-based combat, reat-time combat, or turn-based? And why?
Turn based interpreted as real time but pausable. Much like Baldur's Gate. The perspective would be switchable from first person to third person with camera relatively locked on a target while unpaused but when paused the camera would free up for greater perspective of the situation.
3) Would it be fantasy, fantasy light, Post-apocolipse, sci-fi, or modern? And why?
Shadowrun + RIFTs+ Gamma World + Modern + futurist + fantasy with a heavy splatter, cyber and steampunk influences and a dash of pre industrial all layered with the paranormal, supernatural meanderings. Conspiracies abound. This isn't very practical but I'm talking ideal here.
I look into the crystal ball and see a biomechanically enchanced Dwarf with a cybernetic arm equipped with large fusion energy axe and multiple rocket launch utility shooting fireballs out of one hand while piloting an open cockpit mech that is constantely being repaired by millions of nanobots. His enemy, TYRANOSAUR, is a large T-Rex with DNA modifications that's had an A.I. chip installed. With the superior psionic powers he's discovered, he has converted a large planet full of tribes of savages into a large pre industrial cross modernist civilization. Supported by modern grenadiers and riflemen weilding their ancient spears next to their depleted uranium enable bullet weapons, animal symbiosis psoinically enhanced (i.e. elephants, stegosaurus, sabertooth tigers) and a priesthood full of action-at-a-distance quantum magicians this alliance of tribes is convinced to fight to the death for protection of their leader, TYRANOSAUR and the protection of their planet with the resources that it holds.
What the T-Rex nor dwarf realize is that the legendary scientific organization (with rumors aboud of practice of 'mad science' for generations) that covertly installed the A.I chip that brought the T-Rex to immense genius conciousness manipulation and intelligence is a front group and secretly funded (read; controlled) by the same Galactic Time Council that hired the Dwarf to rid the planet of the T-Rex and his savage army in the first place. Their internal reasoning behind this move is to claim the valuable resources which will improve biomechanical research immensely, among other scientific endeavours. It's left unmentioned of the origin of the Galatic Council in it's quest for immense psionic power and what this planet really holds... IA! IA! IA!
4) Would it be combat heavy or light?
Combat intensive but as a general rule of thumb, there are always other ways around combat which just as well award yourself.
5) Would it be more action oriented and fast-paced or slower paced?
It depends on how you choose to play. See above. Either way it will be epic.
6) Would you have classes and races, a detailed character creation, skill based or class based, more like Diablo and Sacred character selection, or no choice at all like Gothic?
Detailed character creation with races, subraces and crossraces but no classes. There would be premade characters and general means for your statistics so when you check character advancement you won't always have to mull through hundreds of numbers.
7) Would advancement be level based, very detailed and selection heavy, selection light and simple, no leveling like in Ultima?
Level based. But it would only determine the amount of experience you gain to spend towards improving your character. This coupled with gained experience through use would help determine base skills and statistics. Any affinities would be determined at the end of the character creation process. Feats, extraordinary abilities and paranormal abilities would be determined through experience cost and motivation to learn. Advancing those specific abilities from those catergories would be influenced by the use. Mutations will either be determined at character creation or reactionary to an in game event. Specific DNA modifications and implants - either biomechanical or cybernetic - would be purchased and could be improved through technical upgrade or through knowledge of use which would be influenced by how often used and how well manipulated. Health, damage and death would be determined by general resiliency to certain attacks recieved at specific parts of the body as well as including the aid of any armor and/or healing sequence you have available. No standard hit points.
8)What aspect would you emphesis? Like NPC interaction, party interaction, world interaction, story interaction, etc?
You would start out with only one character. You don't necessarily have to ever have anymore characters than that but the choice is left up to the player. World and story interaction would definately be very important. Crafting a world where all these elements fit together would be quite a feat and be held together by the absurd, pataphysical, shadowing of the story and NPC interaction glossed with an aura of serious intent and existence.
9) Would you like a very story heavy but linear game like PS:T, or very open and free story (non-linearity usually means not very story focused), or do you have any ideas that could correct the trade off or a happy medium?
Intense root like linearity resting inside a non linear universe. You can follow the quilt like story or weave yourself in and out of the holes for your own freedom. Expect cause and effect and the consequences thereof.
10) Would your game be a hot seller? Would it be more for a niche market or would the main stream rpg fans love it, and why? Would you make it just because it is your idea of what an RPG should be, or are you business minded and know what other players want?
If such an ideal game ever came into existence, executed properly, I suppose it would appeal mostly to niche gamers. With the numbers and settings abound I doubt many people would choose to deal with it.
_________________
The real secret of magick is that the world is made of words. And that if you know the words that the world is made of, you can make of it whatever you wish. -Terence Mckenna |
|
Sat Jun 19, 2004 2:34 am |
|
|
Chicknstu
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 15 Jun 2003
Posts: 32
Location: Dundee, Scotland |
Funny you should say this. I'm in the middle of making an RPG right now..... part from it's not really an RPG. It's a retro platformer with an RPG coat on. I'll post more details here when i do them,. Sry for neglcting this forum.
im drunk 
stu xxx |
|
Tue Jun 29, 2004 11:38 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2
All times are GMT. The time now is Wed Apr 10, 2019 8:36 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
