Ok...first off a question.... why do we control ALL of our party members? why not just "our" character, and the other party members do their own thing? ok...on that note...how about making other NPC''s with different motives. such as the direct you to another person in another village. then while they are talking to you, they decide to come with you. therefore you now have an NPC as a party member...but you can''t control them. maybe they want to go to the other village because they are scared of all of the monsters, and want to be escorted there. then you could have NPC''s as party members...that have feelings towards things. as in...the more trolls you kill...the less they respect you and feel that you are just a killer. therefore..they decide to leave your party. therefore...it makes it more like an rpg with almost a simulation mini-game of sorts...where you have to keep your NPC''s happy...or else they leave you, and won''t help you anymore. just thinking aloud. thats all. -Luxury

Why would you want this in a game?

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

quote: Original post by Luxury

Ok...first off a question....
why do we control ALL of our party members? why not just "our" character, and the other party members do their own thing?

From my experiences, the reason that other party members don''t usually do their own thing is because, when they do, it is incredibly annoying and frustrating. If you''ve ever played Fallout, you''ll see a perfect example of how ''autonomous'' party members can make things much less fun. Sure, you can get NPCs to come with you, but when they shoot you ''on accident'' in every battle, why bother?

I''m not saying that it couldn''t be done better, but the real question is whether it should be. I personally like to have control of what is going on in a game, especially an RPG. When I play a game that takes some of that control away from me, I usually avoid that feature like the plague. (For example, the only NPC I have join my part in Fallout 1 is the dog because he can''t shoot you in the back)

I think that maybe developer and designer time would be better spent on making the non-party NPCs smarter and leave the party to the player.

Just another way to discourage people from the mindless bashing.

but really...its would be just another little thing to make the NPC''s and game world seem to have more depth. plus it could be a lot of fun if done in the right way. just think about pokemon. what if you treated your own pokemon cruelly, so they left you? or better yet...revolted against you. hehe

-Luxury

I think it''s an okay idea. In RPGs I hate having to control more than 1 character. It would be interesting as long as the AI for them was good.

I''m a GameMaster since several years (about a decade), and I RARELY see players playing a role... so allowing a player to play several characters at the same time... biggest joke I''ve ever heard...

As a player I HATE to play more than A SINGLE character. I already have problems to play correctly a single character so don''t ask me for more.

Of course what I can understand is this :
RPG were Wargames... (AD&D IS a wargame)
In wargames you control an army, but since they tried to come closer to RPG than wargames, they manage to make you control only a small party.

This allow the player to have good strategy in battles...
But KILLS any roleplay.

IF I can create good strategy with the NPC, and they don''t do foolish things, I would like to have independant NPCs.

Alternatively I would like to be able to play the game with party members as real players through LAN or Internet.

-* So many things to do, so little time to spend. *-

On an almost unrelated note:
What if you designed a strategy game where you have only one unit? The command unit, that is...
Every other unit in the game would be controlled by the AI, and you simply issue orders, in the hope that they will hear them, and actually follow them correctly.

Wouldn''t that make for an interesting change of pace?


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

quote: Original post by Paul Cunningham

Why would you want this in a game?

Urggggh!?!?! Uh, Paul, were you not among the crowd (myself counted among them) that supported sleeping and eating as part of an RPG mechanic? Maybe I''ve got the wrong guy, but I thought you wanted fun realism!!!



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

I was suprised that Paul said that as well...

Ingenu, I haven''t seen you around as much...speaking of which...where the heck has dwarfsoft been?

quote: Original post by Luxury

Ok...first off a question....
why do we control ALL of our party members? why not just "our" character, and the other party members do their own thing?

This is a sweet idea and I''m aiming for it in my current SF RPG design. The difficult thing, as others have noted, is getting their AI right. The shooting in the back crap in Fallout was egregious (was supposed to be fixed in Fallout2, but I''m not sure as I never finished)

quote:
ok...on that note...how about making other NPC''s with different motives. such as the direct you to another person in another village. then while they are talking to you, they decide to come with you. therefore you now have an NPC as a party member...but you can''t control them. maybe they want to go to the other village because they are scared of all of the monsters, and want to be escorted there.

Yes, this I''m trying to do some of, too. NPC''s have their own lives, man! Unless in your employ (and maybe even then, sometimes), they have things to do and places they want to go. (As others here would say, "they''re people too")

quote:
then you could have NPC''s as party members...that have feelings towards things. as in...the more trolls you kill...the less they respect you and feel that you are just a killer. therefore..they decide to leave your party. therefore...it makes it more like an rpg with almost a simulation mini-game of sorts...where you have to keep your NPC''s happy...or else they leave you, and won''t help you anymore.

Leaving your party is fine, as long as they warn you beforehand and you have a clear understanding as a player that this might happen. For instance, in my design there are combat loving NPCs and science and exploration loving NPCs. They don''t mix well, and the more you do of one type of activity the happier one side is while the other grows more disenchanted. From time to time they complain that there''s not enough action, or they want to see something new. Eventually, they give notice and leave; and you have to find replacements to man your ship.



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...