Which do you think is the easiest game to make and why?

PONG!

Um...maybe you meen...

Between roleplaying and fighting...which is easyer to develop?

well a roleplaying game typicaly requires a lot more resources...from art to music...to number of detailed maps for players to explore...while (graphics aside) the raw game engine isn''t terribly difficult to develop (but you do get more into advanced programing concepts like data driven scripting)...Also a RPG is a little easyer to balance then a fighting game (mainly because combat is treated more on abstract levels)

A fighting game doesn''t need the vast number of art resources that a RPG would need...but the combat model and play balanceing is quite a bit more complex...you have to deal not only with how much damage each attack causes...but how long these attacks take, and at what point in the animation the damage is to take effect and where it connects to other characters...game AI is also very important in these games (when in single player mode)...and collision detection is very important in that it much match whatever is shown on screen (while a RPG can get by with less graphical visualisation to gameworld visualisation accuricy)

It''s easyer for a small team to make a fighting game in a limited amount of time then a RPG...mostly because of the difference in art resources...but in terms of work, effort, creativity, and originality in game design...they are both pretty equal (and open to new possabilites with enough effort)...

However, if this is to be your first game...make Pong!

Ask yourself this: what would you rather slave hours and hours upon?

Story and content?

Or modelling, intensive collision detection, and ridiculous AI?

swift URL | browse my bookmarks [server may not always be on]
SotteD | View/download my Song of the Day
Sensimed | Info/download

Fighting, without a doubt!

Isn''t it obvious?

I''m not sure what you mean by a fighting game, but I''m guessing that what you mean is a typical Tekken-like game; two combatans kicking eachother until the other one isn''t standing anymore.

Things that take a lot of effort : Animations, and coming up with 10 or more attacks per character. Attacks has different characterics such as which part of your body to use, and how much damage it does.



In an RPG, you have to come up with 50 weapons or so, each with maybe 4 different characteristics (damage, damage type, trading value, and... how much damage it can take before it breaks).
Naturally a lot of these can be automatically generated (steel sword +1, wood sword -2 etc.) but that is also a lot of work.
Then there''s stuff as armor, items.

You also have to come up with 5-100 skills, stats, and figure out a way to balance these with the different weapons.

Then there''s enemies. If they''re all human, fine. But if you want elves, wolves, dwarfes, giant insects etc. then you have A LOT of balancing to look into.

You now need a story, preferrably a GOOD one, and a world setting. This alone can be more of a problem...

And finally, after all the creature, items, and skill balancing, and story designing, you have to create TONS of 2d (and 3d art if it''s a 3d game), cities, "dungeons", and whatever else you want in the game.



And that''s why designing an RPG is so much more fun :D :D

Yeah. I mean a 3D fighter like Tekken or Dead or Alive. I figured an 3D console rpg has alot of work in it as well as a fighting game.

[edited by - Mr_Rational on January 2, 2003 9:54:41 AM]

How would you create an RPG with the realistic fighting of a fighter game, but without going into the same kind of loading style of Shemune?

It all depends, if you want generalize it a fighting game will be easier than an RPG. but if you actually take time to develop your ideas and put effort into it you''ll find that they both take a similar long hard time to create.

Let''s say that you have an RPG with the fighting moves of, say, Dead or Alive. Now also imagine it all being rendered in 3D-cell anime style (mainly to give the graphics engine a break while it figures out the more important stuff.)

If you come upon an enemy, you can push a button for combat stance. By doing this, you give the existing controls new meaning (this is for the console version.) Your directional controls are still the same, but you now have a button-configuration that can be pressed in combinations to pull off combos and such acrobatic feats that you see in fighting games. You can still use your weapon because, when equipted, the engine will draw upon the information that is used for that weapon until you either change it out or have it disarmed from you.

If you have a ranged weapon, such as a pistol, you can still use all the previous buttons but you can also use an extra button to fire. (This is so you can pistol-whip somone if you want!)

I also suggest, that with this setup of controls that you start out only having to fight no more than 3 enemies at a time in the lower-level stages and no more than 7 at a time in the high-level stages. This is to compenstate for the difficulty of learning a new control-system.


If possible, it would even be cool to drive vehicles as well in such an adventure. Shoot and dodge enemy fire and even highjack one from an enemy that is in it.

Now because fighting games are much more different than RPGs, there needs to be a camera behavioral change when a character steps into combat mode that is relative to the character you are playing. It should also be intellgent enough to never take the main character out of view.

As for vehicular camera intelligence, it will most always be the 3P mode with exception of air manuvers like those in StarFox.

When in non-combat mode, you should have the option of FP mode or 3P mode due to the fact of odd camera angles and possible limited vision due to the surroundings ( the purpose of having multiple levels of camera intelligence is still for the fact that in combat you worry about the enemy at hand, while when not in combat, you worry about where you need to go. And let''s face it you don''t want the camera to be pointing in akward directions when you''re just trying to find the switch to open a door that''s probly going to flood you with enemies anyway.)


Of course, like many RPGs, you could have thematic elements that play towards a larger story-line plot and brief cinematic moments that give you an idea as to why you''re even playing the game.

All and all, I think that all these elements together, would be good general concept to implement. If you have any other suggestions, please say.

The funny thing is, I see and don''t see the generalizations a lot of people here are making. In this project, we''re working on all fronts:

• Heavy art requirements: 3d models of guns, horses, knives, furniture, playing cards, saddles, architecture, humans, etc.
  
• Heavy terrain generation requirements: however, we''re being automated and algorithmic about it, with processes and procedures of generating acquiring, treating, stitching, repairing, and overlaying real world data.
  
• Balanced gameplay, requiring methodlogies to be worked out for firearms, brawling, knife fights, swordplay, and firearm usage from horseback.
  
• AI, in terms of computer players and opponents, and detailed simulation of equine behavior, and how this behavior evloves with regard to the player. Pathfinding also plays a role.
  
• Detailed atmospherics, including the evolution of the day, the sky, the path of the sun, and weather.
  
• Experience plays a role, but a FPS style prevails.

There you are! Just where is that forum at again? I can''t find the thread.