I''m fed up with seeing all these games that look like each other. How many doom/unreal/counter-strike/quake were released ? It seems to me that so many developpers only focuse on technology and not on concepts, originality, and fun. To me game developping became a bit too much commercial. That''s why i''m very interested on new concepts. I actually try to find some good ideas who could be really different than all we have nowadays. Of course it''s something quite hard to find, so I wanted to talk about it and to know what were your ideas, your interests in a game, what do you want to see in a game ....

First of all, it seems to me that this post would be better suited in the Game Design forumn...

Anyhow, back to the point. I would like to see more realism and more human AI characteristics. Its is something I aim to implement.

My eventual plan is to create a game with a set number of enemies, take it away from the whole Hollywood "infinite soldier" approach. Thats one thing I would like to do. Of course, this would have to be based in the size of the arenas, etc. Commanders would have the ability to order soldiers to a certain area alá MGS2.

Secondly, I have an idea for an AI selective structure that works on a soldiers experience\ communications with other soldiers. For example, soldiers who survive an encounter with the player learn through a stat based system under a large number of different catagories; i.e: unusual sounds, shadows cast, etc. This will allow the AI to make up its own mind based on past experiences using probability theorms. Again, an example: A soldier hears an unusual sound in the corner of the room; does he go to investigate? Does he leave it alone, knowing that he and his buddies already scraped through a similar encounter. I think that introducing a human-like element of fear in the AI will make a game far more interesting. By using a different set of stats for each soldier we add a sense in individuality to each enemy, resulting in less predictable scenarios (I hope!).

So I've got my work cut out for me then...

If at first you don't succeed, call it version 1.0

SketchSoft | SketchNews


[edited by - doodle_sketch on October 17, 2002 9:05:08 AM]

I want to create a game that comments on the nature of reality - kind of like The Matrix. It will blur the lines of relaity and a player will be forced to accept that telling the difference from the imaginary world will be of no consequence to outcomes on a game - to illustrate that perception is perception dreamed or "real" It will be first person though.

Draw inspiration from Black and White - thats a game with a difference !

But a friendly pointer: this is the game *programing* fourm, your topic is more for the game design fourm.

Good topic though.



If it can be remedied
Why be unhappy about that?
If it cannot be remedied
What is the use of being unhappy about that?

It''s time to put a stop to this procrastination, later.

Do, or do not; there is no try.

Ok, moved...

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost | Asking Questions | Organising code files | My stuff ]

how many of these doom/unreal/counter-strike/quake have you played? They are not all the same. They are original and fun. Also, they are not the only games out there. I dont mind that you want to make new ideas, or even that you dont like current games, but saying that current games are all the same is just ignorance.

How about a game that simulates an ecosystem where you can introduce certain types of creatures, environments and amount of plant life and try to acquire a balance. Natural disasters occur that you have to counteract, etc. Kind of like a Sim City but in nature.

Bah - they probably did this already.

A game that REQUIRES people to work together. Person 1 holds door open for person 2, who needs to hold a lever so that a trap door stays open for the next person, etc.

A fortress style game where players can man defensive positions and repel invasions, or storm a fortress with defenses.

I'm not focussing on technology, obviously...

A first person RPG where you don't just click on enemies you want to attack, you have to actually draw your bow and pick an enemy to fire at (you can run around with your arrow ready to fire by holding the mouse button, when you release, it fires). This could work for anything. Shields used to block high or low blows, or knock your opponent in the head...

A dune buggy racing game. With hills and loops and ramps, of course.

A jet or other flying craft racing game along exotic locales. Down a waterfall into the mists, through cavernous tunnels, along the lava pools in the core of the earth, along the upper edge of the atmosphere, etc.

Just spitting out stuff.

A game set in the afterlife or in the ethereal realm, where resources and laws of nature are redefined to make interesting gaming dynamics.

A MMORPG where players can be mystical beasts, each with unique abilities (dragons, giants, etc.), and you can raises levels and increase physical and magical abilities, and oh, I don't know, you go after humans trying to steal your treasure... I've mentioned this before...


[edited by - Waverider on October 17, 2002 1:43:02 PM]

publishers dont really like things that are completely unprecedented...there is a huge risk involved.

Of course not all games are the same...I think he just meant that he would like to see games break from the current trends... especially if they were to get away from the trappings of genre.
too often, things are done a certain way because "its an FPS" or something. Which is no excuse.

I hate to toot my own horn here, but if you check out the game I am working on, it is technically a 1st/3rd person shooter, but it avoids a lot of the things that the always seems to have. For instance, it doesn''t have any kind of health meter, there is no ammo or new weapons lying around...

url: http://www.msu.edu/~meyermi5

an example: No One Lives Forever had a very unique setting and style, but the gameplay itself is nearly identical to all the other first person shooters...

So what I would like to see in games is for them to quit doing things a certain way just because some other good game did it that way. Super Smash Bros. is about as far removed from Street Fighter/Mortal cambat as you can get and still have a "fighting game", and look at the great game that resulted in. Basically, I don''t like to see people designing games to genres. Genres are for classifying existing games, not guidelines for making them.

Well...thoser just my thoughts on the subject.

Game ideas are plentiful and cheap. Many are also not very good. It''s hard to tell whether a given idea is good until you''ve invested a lot of time and effort into implementing it. Nobody wants to waste time and effort on a bad idea, so they''d rather use ideas already known to be good and refine the concept or introduce a new twist. Innovation is risky business, and as the games industry stands it is actually rather risk averse (devil-may-care posturing to the contrary).

If you''re really dedicated to innovation, make and buy innovative games. Keep in mind, however, that "innovative" isn''t the same as good. In creating a new kind of game, you''re asking the potential player to take a risk with you: you dared to make the game, and you''re daring him to try it. Thus quality should be a primary goal for innovators - you can''t rely on the strength of your concept because you don''t know the strength of your concept.

quote: Original post by Waverider
How about a game that simulates an ecosystem where you can introduce certain types of creatures, environments and amount of plant life and try to acquire a balance. Natural disasters occur that you have to counteract, etc. Kind of like a Sim City but in nature.

Bah - they probably did this already.

Sim Life & Sim Earth

quote: Original post by Waverider A fortress style game where players can man defensive positions and repel invasions, or storm a fortress with defenses.

Sounds awfully a lot like the Assault gamemode in Unreal Tournament.

quote: Original post by Waverider A first person RPG where you don''t just click on enemies you want to attack, you have to actually draw your bow and pick an enemy to fire at (you can run around with your arrow ready to fire by holding the mouse button, when you release, it fires). This could work for anything. Shields used to block high or low blows, or knock your opponent in the head...

Morrowind''s weapons work like that, the shields are passive though.

quote: Original post by Waverider A dune buggy racing game. With hills and loops and ramps, of course.

I''ve seen a few older (more than 6 years old) ones, can''t remember any specific names though.

quote: Original post by Waverider A game set in the afterlife or in the ethereal realm, where resources and laws of nature are redefined to make interesting gaming dynamics.

Ever heard of Afterlife?

Not picking on you, just trying to show you that most ideas have already been used somewhere. It is however rare to see a successful game using those concepts but if you think a concept is much more fun to work with than another standard game then go for it, who knows you might just hit the right combination of new game elements at the right time.

I think games that tell a story should do just that not just give you the whole story in the promo for the game. I mean let the player explore the character and game world not just be given goals to achieve. Also I think the problem is''nt with the developers it''s the publishers only willing to back known cash cows like fps and branded games. Anything different that comes thier way unless it''s designed by a certain unnamed game developer of old who likes to get his mug shot in any mag on the planet(anyone for a game of populas)then they just are not willing to take a chance.