I''m working on something similar now. The game lasts a set number of game years and always ends at the same time. Missing events doesn''t cause problems it just effects the ending you get. I think the two most important things when making a game like this is making sure you can finish the game in a short period of time. Maybe like 5 hours. So they don''t mind playing it over and over again. Also make sure there''s plenty of different events and things to discover so every time they play through the game they find something new. You should take a look at the Princess Maker games if you can find a copy of one. Ive only played the 2nd one but they should all be similar. It does this very well. The game has multiple endings depending on what you do but it always ends on the same day.

I''ve played quite a few games that take place in more or less real time and I''ve yet to find one that actually works. It places limits on the player without adding anything to the game (no, it''s not more realistic, since pretty much every timed game out there has time passing much faster than it would in real life.) Remember, your goal as a game designer is to let the player have fun, and placing pointless limits on the player isn''t any fun.

Unless this is some kind of MMORPG, you could have time be an expendable resource in the game, and it''s passage be dependant on the events (big and small) that occur, rather then on teh player''s fumbling with a controller. Let me demonstrate this idea.

The date is June, 1st 198AD, Noon. Player decided to go visit the girl down the street. Upon entering her house, its 12:15PM. Talk to her for a while, stare at the polygons, throw pottery, rummage draws, steal panties. Leave the house, its 12:45PM. Player runs to the bathroom and forgets to pause the game. Player go gets ice cream, player talks to real girlfriend on phone (well, that one is debateable, but play along). In the real world, the player has spent several hours in La La Land, and remembers the game is still going. Player picks up controller and gets the character back to it''s own house, in game time is 1:00PM, player goes to the castle 1:10PM, player talks to King, time is 1:25PM, player leaves town and travels to dungeon, time is 2:25PM.

Now, it probably sounds a bit dumb, and the immersive factor (provided the player has been dilly-dallying) would slightly suffer, however the player at the same time wouldn''t have a time constraint unless an event imposed one. Since he''s timed that a walk from one house to the next is 15 minutes, he''d not do that if an event was 5 minutes away. What this all does is make the player strategize his timing so that he''s always on time for the events that he wants to go to. (It''d be fun to see what kind of change would happen to an event if the player were a few minutes late, or even a few minutes early).

The only balancing issue here is figuring out how much time stuff should spend, and some arbitrary things that would spend time, which maybe a Forward Moving Time magic spell, or a TV could handle (if this is 198AD, then lets replace TV with a rock and some birds in a field).

There would defenityl be accelertad time options. For instance sleeping would cause 8 hours to pass. As well there are times with actions take a long time and so the game while just skip ahead to when its completed or the action becomes interupted.

-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document

As long as you make sure that the game can be completed no matter how bad the player misses out, it''s ok. If you can "win" the game with all the player begins the game with, then it''s ok to let him miss important things. If something is required to finish the game, you cannot let the player miss it. It''s simply bad design to do this. If you have an autosave that saves often enough, and it tells you when you miss a necesary event, then it could warp back to the autosave.

Just some ideas, but I''ve gotten myself stuck in several games where I simply could not finish the game because I screwed up near the begining. This gives me a baaaad memory of those games! (Fallout 2, I hate you. You''re no fallout 1!)

Still, I like the idea of a time-based game where time is actually important (such as zelda:mm) but I''m not so keen on letting the player miss important tasks. And all the time-based games I''ve played have been flawed because of the time aspect.

Zelda:MM - Replaying dungeons from the begining = major annoyance. Of course this would have been solved if they would let you save at the begining of the dungeon and reload if you run out of time.

Fallout - Love this game, they give you enough time. But I still had trouble finding the water filter in the right amount of time, and as that was my one main quest, it made me frustrated when I ad to fight the clock. On the good side, the clock doesn''t progress all the time, only when traveling, if I remember right.

Animal Crossing/mmorpgs - Oh great, I logged on at the wrong time. The store is closed, there is nothing for me to do. Or, hmm, all the best players aren''t in my timezone, guess I get to play with these jerks the whole time. (not that the other timezone is really much better lol).

Just some food for thought, but I think it can be done. I''m trying to handle it in my game anyhow Basically with my game, time goes slow, and I don''t think I HAVE any important/required quests, most of them are optional. Also, most of the biggest quests don''t have a time limit. So while you may miss events, you wont miss most quests (unless you want to of course).

I think that there would be a bad ending if the player misses key events. I think I''d make the key events important enough so that the player has a chance to learn about them. But it wouldn''t make sense for the player to get to grand finale if they have particapated in key events.

AS far as fallout 2, I can''t imagine what you''ve missed that would prevent you from winning the game. In fact there are only 3 areas at the end you need to visit.

-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document

Personally, I don''t like timed games. Especially RPGs. That''s at least partly because I''m a completist--I want (need) to poke into every corner, look under every rock, etc. I tend to keep several saves floating around, in case I find out that I''ve missed something. RPGs are games of exploration. The ability to wander around, talk to random people on the street, go thirty miles out of my way to see if there''s a cave on the other side of the mountain, all help me enjoy them more. If I feel like I''m being rushed from point a to point b, I''m not happy.

Also, there''s the issue of levelling up. As we all know, that can take a while. If you get behind in your levels, you can generally struggle through for a bit, but eventually you need to spend some time beefing up. The further behind you get, the harder it is to catch up. Add time constraints into the mix, and most players won''t want to take time to level up, and so they''ll be really struggling by the end. (And yes, some of my favorite battles have been ones where I''ve been ridiculously weak and had to pull out every trick I could to win; however, the ability to survive those only comes with experience--a novice player would not fare nearly as well.) Of course, you can adjust your design to account for this (remove levelling entirely, or make your character grow over time, etc.), but then you''re getting away from what most people consider to be a hallmark of RPGs.

I could go on, but I''ll leave it at this: I am an RPG fan(atic). I like to take my time exploring the worlds the designers have created. I like being able to take a break and smack slimes around every now and again. While I can appreciate the draw of having time drive things, adding a sense of urgency, etc., I would not play such a game. To my mind, all time limits do is punish weaker players (if you''re really good, you can do stuff quickly, so time isn''t a factor; if you''re not, then every second is precious...). I would not play (or buy) an RPG which has time driving everything along.

-Odd the Hermit

Very good points Odd the hermit. I feel the same way about some games. I find that I feel better if I resign myself to one goal etc, but I still always am a little miffed about not being able to see everything the game has to offer. Take as an example morrowind and gothic. Two games where time matters as far as night/day, but the date doesn''t really matter. In this case, I much prefer Gothic, because while the world feels huge, and there is a lot going on, it''s still small enough that I feel capable of going everywhere and doing everything. In morrowind, I feel like I can really only follow a narrow track otherwise I''ll be totally utterly lost. If time is enough of a factor that I can''t proceed through the game at my own pace without worrying about missing something, then it''s too much making the gameplay about time.

I just got another idea about this:

Don''t have the game happen in real time. Let you explore each area to the fullest without worrying about time. If you want to rest/wait for a few hours for an event to happen, you can do so. If you want it to be the next day, you have to get a bed at the inn. Then have travel time for going from one area to the next, say one town to the next, or one town to the dungeon.

If any of you have played escape velocity, it handled time well. You always know how much time you have, but time only happens when you travel through hyperspace. You know how much fuel you have for the jump, and how long it takes to get to the different places you need to go, and you can plan without feeling rushed. I think something like this would probably work best if you want time to be a major factor.

Also don''t make time the main gameplay element. We deal with time enough in the real world, its not so much fun if time is the main thing to focus on in the game.

I think you mistunderstanding something. Time would be an aspect of gameplay and not the primary focus of gameplay. Let me clarifiy. You come across a sign that sign that says "Bridge under construction, completeion date: September 7, 2003" Now in traditonal rpgs that would mean that you have to complete some quest that would trigger the completed bridge. In an active time RPG like I''m trying to achive that means that on september 7 the bridge will be finished, it has nothing to do with player. They maybe able to influnce events such donating money to speed up construction, or stealing supplies to slow construction.

There also time sensitive "quests" for instance The major askes you to resuce his daughter she''s going to sacrificed by heritcs at midnight on the eve of the summer solistice. Now Normaly you''d get there in the nick of time no matter how much time actully passes. But in an Active time, you can arrive early, in the nick of time, late, or not at all. Each would alter the situation and result. For instance if your late, she''s dead a doppleganger has assumed her appearnce. If your early you''ll find less hertics to interfere with the rescue and you''ll have more time to explore their citdal. If you arrive in the nick of time you''ll have a tougher time, but you may be able to see the head of the hertic cell. If you don''t arrive at all then the doppleganger will begin to cause mayhem in.


There will also be events that are triggered at preset times. The main point Is that instead of the traditonal approach of events all based on player actionns they are time based.

-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document

I agree with Hermit and Saluk. I also like to explore everything in RPG''s. I just don''t like it when I am forced to miss out something. However, I think this has to do with how the games are designed.

I think that a game can be designed in a way that the player loses the need to explore everything. But how would that be done without making the world too huge & detailed?
The best thing to do would probably be to make things happen in the game world that are caused by player action, not the designer''s scripts. So that the player doesn''t feel the need to < find all the things the designers put in >, but rather < try to do this and that and see how the game will react >.
The passage of time would probably be a part of this too, but I think it should be left up to the player to decide when to advance the story and when to do other things (it should be clear to him on what conditions the main story will continue).

There is passage of time in the game I''m designing, but key events are based on player actions (and maybe AI actions), not time. There might be some time-based quests, but the trigger times will not be predetermined i.e. in the beginning of a new game it is not known that the bridge will be finished in Sept 7, but rather when the bridge-related quest is triggered, it will be known that it will be completed in 30 days.