Put into practice?

[Dharus]

Looking to pick up another hobby in my older age and game design might be fun to mess with (especially with the growing app market). I've picked up the free version of Unity 3D and doing some light reading in my down time.

Any of you actually tried to put some of the ideas on this subject into practice?

[strife]

Nope, but in my PC mag they mentioned Adventure Game Studio and RPG Maker as game development resources. Also Game Maker and Unreal Development Kit.

[Dharus]

I looked at those... gamedev.net is a nice place to hear chatter on engines. I went with Unity 3d because its a) free b)easy to use c) my limited understanding of languages and scripting vs learning a new one (aka heroengine and unreal I believe) and d) Some higher end games use it. Once I get the basics (which so far isn't that hard... just time consuming it seems) then I can work on mechanics. I'm finding it interesting already because some games don't offer various camera angles or collision which is fairly easy to put on or around a game object. I'm starting to understand the limitations of an open world with high graphics(lighting especially)/mechanics though. So, for example, I can understand why PotBS has instanced Battles but don't understand why they didn't make them more interesting with wave action, "limb" targeting, ragdoll like effects, ect.

I'm just trying to figure out if I want to go Freelancer/Firefly game world or Historical wargame (age of sail or maybe WW1 or 2 naval).

[Dharus]

Looking at some of the features, I'm shocked PotBS didn't have a real wind component. Perhaps it was thier custom engine but I'm still disappointed. It would have required a little more coding but still. That said, space seems a bit harder especially if your space objects have orbits. Lighting is also tricky without the Pro version of Unity but I've found a way around some of that with Blender, a free, open source, mesh, texture art package.

I was able to put a high res skybox and a few stationary planets with textures. Now I'm gonna check out creating a ship or two in Blender. 2,000 page wikibook manual that's semi out of date.

[Sebrent]

Blender works well with GIMP. They are their own separate programs but get along quite well.

[Veraphim]

I like Blender too and it's what I have used for moddeling. Milkshape is also popular, but I didn't like it as much.

I've worked with OGRE as an engine that is also easy to work with and is completely free. You might want to check it out as well. The Torchlight series of games uses OGRE.

[Dharus]

I like Blender too and it's what I have used for moddeling. Milkshape is also popular, but I didn't like it as much.

I've worked with OGRE as an engine that is also easy to work with and is completely free. You might want to check it out as well. The Torchlight series of games uses OGRE.

This difference I saw between them is the coding. Orge uses C++ while Unity can go C#, Java, or Goo. Its not a huge deal at this point. I'm focusing on the art side of things currently.

[Veraphim]

Is there C++ or even C unity source? If so, I would use that. Of course it depends on how demanding you are going to be on the engine, but for high-end stuff I would stick with the quicker processing.

[Dharus]

Is there C++ or even C unity source? If so, I would use that. Of course it depends on how demanding you are going to be on the engine, but for high-end stuff I would stick with the quicker processing.

Ogre is more flexable engine but I'm not a big programmer and I'm just going for basics. Nothing highend, mmo style. If I get there, I'm gonna need help. Right now I'm working on sculpting and textures, maybe a little animation. Then u might fiddle with scripting. This is a self teaching hobby more than serious business... Unless I get good at it.

[Diggles]

you'd be better off modding an existing game.

Warcraft 3
Natural Selection 2
Some DOTA2 shit or something
etc

[Veraphim]

Right now I'm working on sculpting and textures, maybe a little animation. Then u might fiddle with scripting. This is a self teaching hobby more than serious business... Unless I get good at it.

Well I wish you the best. I've tossed around thoughts of making something for years but always get stuck at the graphics. I have no artistic talent whatsoever when it comes to models and texturing.

[Dharus]

Right now I'm working on sculpting and textures, maybe a little animation. Then u might fiddle with scripting. This is a self teaching hobby more than serious business... Unless I get good at it.

Well I wish you the best. I've tossed around thoughts of making something for years but always get stuck at the graphics. I have no artistic talent whatsoever when it comes to models and texturing.

I'm the opposite. So, I'm working on getting real drawings placed into a 3D images. Then I'll revisit the game engines which will be a year from now at least.

[Dharus]

you'd be better off modding an existing game.

Warcraft 3
Natural Selection 2
Some DOTA2 shit or something
etc

Yeah, I've thought about that but call it stubbornism that I'm going this route (as a hobby). I was actually looking at Freelancer modding a few years back since I like that universe. So, what I think I'm going to do is break that game open a bit and use it as a guide (both artistically and mechanically). Since its so old I also might be able to "steal" parts from it as well, with some twists (not using wormholes or warpgate to go between areas, using docking, and basics for ship cameras/turrets and UIs for example). I've already downloaded a few textures from it and I've looked for the skyboxes since I personally think they are some of the best space skyboxes out there.

[Veraphim]

Working with Unity *is* kind of like modding an existing game since Unity looks like it's an entire framework package. You just need to put all of the content together yourself.

[Dharus]

Yeah, not to mention all of the online help you can find...

I found this yesterday... I'm not this far yet as I want something other than a box to work with...
http://www.unityjumpstart.com/ProofOfCon.../part1.mp4

Warning it might be extremely boring video if you aren't into development.

[Slamz]

I think if I had the talent and the spare time, I'd like to try making a permadeath starship game.

Everything will be objective based. There will never be any reward for killing anyone other than it gets them out of your objective in permanent fashion.

Blowing up starships will be really difficult. Maybe they all have Battlestar Galactica style jump drives or something. Mostly you will blow up another ship only when it's such a close fight that both sides think they're winning and neither wants to back off of the objective. (Actually, the game FTL might be a good, extremely simple model for this. If you imagine FTL was a PvP battle, you would have a hard time really destroying someone's ship. You can focus on their drives and crew to make sure they can't jump but that means their guns are going. You can beat their guns and shields and they'll probably jump out, leaving you to the objective.)


Basically I think that right now it's too easy for a game designer to think, "What should the player do in this mission?" and the answer is always just "kill everything!" Alternative mechanics don't get the attention they deserve because "kill everything" is too easy of an answer.

And usually "kill everything" games have simple combat mechanics because if the game is built around killing everything, it's easier to create complexity by throwing more enemies at you than by actually thinking about the combat mechanics themselves. If the game is built around fighting but NOT built around killing then we're forced to think a lot deeper about combat mechanics and what the player is actually supposed to be doing.

A "kill everything" game doesn't really need politics, diplomacy, stealth, suspense, intrigue or any of that. You just kill everything. Take that away and all that energy and attention will have to be built into other systems in order to keep the game interesting.

[Dharus]

I was thinking about that actually. Since i'm working on how to use Blender and make models and artwork, I can stew overall design for later. I did think of something like a DayZ starship game... Earth has expanded into space and built a fledgling empire and then it all changes and it dies somehow (ex alien attack, ET virus, evasive spieces like Aliens) and the survivors have fled into space to survive. You'd need fuel, ammo, food, O2, crew especially if you send redshirt ensign Malroy to scavange off a derelict spacecraft... very BSGish though.

It could be very thrilling but I was trying to think of more endgame other than rinse and repeat. Maybe have cloning but with limited use only for higher "levels", player built safe areas, and NPCs that are deadly as hell.

[Vllad]

Earth has expanded into space and built a fledgling empire and then it all changes and it dies somehow (ex alien attack, ET virus, evasive spieces like Aliens) and the survivors have fled into space to survive. You'd need fuel, ammo, food, O2, crew especially if you send redshirt ensign Malroy to scavange off a derelict spacecraft... very BSGish though.

So Day Z in space?

You scavage for everything?

Are you going to introduce ship system upgrades? Crew stats or are we single pilots? In otherwords does my ship have an entire crew with different specialities or is it a single pilot ship trying to survive?

[Dharus]

I donno. Like I said I'm just thinking. One man ships is easier to put in but multi-person ships seems more realistic. Then you could add crew experience, upgrades ect. One think I think PotBS did well was the ship to person aspect even if the avatar implementation was bad. So, you can have a "wave" investigate a ship and you be the leader or even better you could go X-Com route and have a team. Problem with X-Com route is if the game is real time. You could have a min crew needed for your ship (or you take penalties) and a max crew (which might require more food). That way you could have more "lives" but still be "hardcore" unless your ship explodes and kills everyone.

I definitely think a ship should be upgradable but I think weapons wouldn't be ideal. I'd want it so that blasting your way out of a problem is probably last resort.

I don't know if a "ship" flying through space is as scary or intense like DayZ is.

[Vllad]

I donno. Like I said I'm just thinking. One man ships is easier to put in but multi-person ships seems more realistic.

Not multi-person, multi control. i.e., your ship has a captain, engineer, doctor, tactics officer etc. They are all NPC's but you train them or pick them as crew to use their special talents.

NOT multi-player as in multiple PC's.

I don't know if a "ship" flying through space is as scary or intense like DayZ is.

DayZ is intense because you might die if you don't find the things you need to survive or Zombies might kill you if caught. That can be re-created in space. What if the things that killed man-kind are still out there and they have way better ships. What if you run out of fuel? Air, food etc?

You run across another player, are they there to help you or try and kill you and salvage your ship?

[Slamz]

Another thought might be to make it more like an RTS.

You start off with a bunch of ships:
Big chunky battleship
3 destroyers
2 miners
2 fuel processors
2 agricultural ships
1 cargo ship
1 mobile shipyard

You can park in "deep space" which is basically like an invulnerable area (it's impossible for anyone to find your fleet in deep space). When you want to do something you can bring any combination of ships with you. You only "die" if you lose your last ship. So, for example, you decide to explore a moon for minerals -- you park your fleet in deep space near the moon. You bring in a destroyer to check it out and if it looks safe you bring in a miner to grab some minerals. Someone jumps in with 15 battleships you go oh shit and jump out. If you're too slow maybe you lost your destroyer and miner but you still have the rest of your fleet.


This way the game can be "permadeath" in a sense but it's going to be really hard to totally kill someone, especially once they've built up their fleet to have a lot of spare miners and cargo ships so if you wipe out their warships they can slink off and try to build back up somewhere else.

Since you have a fleet instead of a single ship, there's an endless amount of advancement available. Not only can you upgrade your ships but you can just get more. An extra shipyard will help you build faster. Extra cargo ships will let you carry more reserve materials, etc. Maybe you just upgrade everything with armor and guns and jump in your entire fleet everywhere you go or you play it cautious. And while your "deep space" fleet is invulnerable the real good stuff may require more permanent structures built on planets and moons which other players can readily find and attack. Like a mining ship can extract common minerals at a medium pace but a permanent mining base can extract common minerals at a fast pace and a lot of rarer things that mining ships can't handle. Anyone can make "Shield I" from common elements but "Shield IV" takes rare minerals that only a mining colony can dig up.

This idea might allow the combat engine to be somewhat easier too because players can fuss over the tactics and layouts of many ships rather than trying to make one big ship interesting enough on its own, and maybe it can even be heavily AI controlled, like Gratuitous Space Battles, which may solve the problem of "offline combat". I protect my base Trade Wars style -- by parking a fuckload of ships near it and if you want my base you have to clear out my ships first and it's going to be my AI versus yours.



I could envision something like battle zones being limited to 30 ships per side (ummmm, too much radio interference to have more than that! warp drive harmonics setup a destructive resonance! insert other treknology excuse here!) but as your ships die, more can warp in. So I could protect a base with 30 ships on station and 500 more in deep space with automatic orders to jump in as room opens up while I log off for the night. Someone coming to attack my ground base might not have any idea if he's up against 30 ships or 3000 and the guy with 3000 doesn't have as huge of an advantage over the guy with 300, other than he has a lot more reinforcements.


The fleet + deep space idea also means that a mining colony, for example, could warp out minerals to the fleet once every 30 minutes, automatically, rather than having to setup a situation where players build up (and lose) tons of goods due to a 4am strike by some guy in Russia. He can still do the 4am strike to wipe out your base but when you log in the next day you'll at least have whatever you pulled out of the ground before he killed it.


The Gratuitous Space Battles type combat (fully AI controlled) could also setup things like being able to have multiple battles going at the same time. I've got three bases under attack and I'm attacking two others all at the same time.



Of course now I've spun completely away from your original concept of a Freelancer type game.

The problem with Freelancer type games, though, is dealing with that whole "long term gameplay" problem. And for 24/7 universes you have to deal with what happens when your guy logs out.

I think a game of Trade Wars meets Gratuitous Space Battles meets EVE could solve a lot of really hard problems that plague other MMOGs. Dunno what the appeal would be like but *I* like it!


Step 1:
Build a client-server model where a server controls some ships that fight each other with AI while the client displays the action.

[Slamz]

Incidentally, the one problem with DayZ was that there was nothing to do long term, really. Even if he added permanent settlements (I haven't kept up -- maybe he did), you'd have the problem of having to man them 24/7 against other players. We can barely get people to guard a tower in GW2 for 5 minutes without action (exception: bonestomper). People aren't going to stand watch in a DayZ type game either.

DayZ is fun but unless there's a way to introduce longer term, persistent world elements that somehow can survive overnight while I log out, I don't see how it can hold an audience.

The only solution I can really think of to this problem that really makes sense is an RTS style game that's largely AI vs AI for combat.



This idea could also work for fantasy games. Think MMO-Dungeon Keeper where you are building up a base and sending minions out to do things and fight other people's minions and control territory and build new bases.

Spaceships are easier though.

[Dharus]

Yeah, that's the problem with the dayz model. So, even if you savanged your way to having an updated battlecruiser what then? You could add in player structures that could out last the player but that's not playing over and over.

That is why I wasn't sold on the space thing. Granted I'm still using blender to design ships (I realized I made the old buck Rogers crusier) but once i get better with the software it should open up any kindof theme. That's why I haven't settled in a real design or setting.

The better endgame seems to me RvR with players changing the world. Any perma death doesn't seem as potentially fun. Perma death also limits any crafting, building mechanics, or character skill building. But it adds tension so some middle ground might be interesting.

PS slamz, my though was having a potbs dock were you could pull your fleet out which would work the same. So, if you survived and rebuilt ships they would go there. Basically, adding lives to a perma death game. The other endgame idea was that survivors were one faction and there were two really powerful npc factions fighting it out in the world. These fights would leave wreckages to scavage but you would have to dodge scouting ships. Players could band up to capture a base or planet. Problem I see is balancing. To easy = boring. To hard = exciting but also fustrating. Then figuring out an endgame that doesn't put you at start again and takes a while to get back.

Dayz is neat but not very deep. If you want deep, you can't make it as intense.

[Dharus]

Incidentally, the one problem with DayZ was that there was nothing to do long term, really. Even if he added permanent settlements (I haven't kept up -- maybe he did), you'd have the problem of having to man them 24/7 against other players. We can barely get people to guard a tower in GW2 for 5 minutes without action (exception: bonestomper). People aren't going to stand watch in a DayZ type game either.

DayZ is fun but unless there's a way to introduce longer term, persistent world elements that somehow can survive overnight while I log out, I don't see how it can hold an audience.

The only solution I can really think of to this problem that really makes sense is an RTS style game that's largely AI vs AI for combat.

u

This idea could also work for fantasy games. Think MMO-Dungeon Keeper where you are building up a base and sending minions out to do things and fight other people's minions and control territory and build new bases.

Spaceships are easier though.

My fantasy idea is putting players into the monsters and having NPC heroes hunt them. So, you are a goblin and you scavenge stuff and build a lair then you get attacked by heros. That could be dayzish as well.

[Dharus]

Just to expand on that... Players can start as kobold, goblin, ect for free. As they survive they gain points, but gain more points by stealing, ravaging, pillaging, killing, etc. However, that also attracts the npcs. Points can be used to spawn in as bigger monsters or used to attract npc followers for lair defenses. So, it can be a tower game, mmo, hardcore, and possibly have good endgame. Problem is its freakin fantasy...