quote: Original post by Ketchaval

What about being able to positively or adversely affect the lives of the other characters? And learning about their lives after your character completes his tour of duty and retires ? Which maybe a good idea in this type of game, to stop people being bored with POINTLESS toy style play with characters.

I __LIKE__ this! Okay, I''ve got to think of a way to not go gonzo here, but what if: Some of the characters you''ve served with / paired up with pop up later in the game, even before you retired.

This could range from minor to detailed. For instance, by semi-random chance maybe you meet an old crewmember after he''s left your team under good terms. Say he''s running a shop or something, and gives you discounts or inside info.

Or maybe you really wrong a crewmate and he turns up as an adversary... with all the nifty equipment you gave to him! (Turncoat SOB, you think...!)

There would be a limit to how much this happened, but I can see it making for a very consistent universe.

quote:
I thought that the concept that the way that YOU BEHAVED when he joined your party COULD CHANGE HIS/HER outlook on life was fairly awesome ! Ie. If you went around mugging, slaving and destroying things then s/he would become a bad character, or if you were a good guy who saved people he might learn from your example!

Hey, this might work for young, impressionable folks. It also might be a source for conflict, too, as your protege goes along with the first few muggings, then has qualms when you move up to grand theft starship, and finally opposes you when murder plots begin. ?

Wow, this is rich territory!!!! But you''d have to be damn clever about the rules system so the AI could actually understand this. I could see this working, tho'', if you could figure out a reputation system for the player, and weight it based on player actions. Then characters who liked your reputation would be more likely to join you. When you''re reputation changed, there''d be conflict.






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

I wish I caught this thread earlier.

I think that the idea is cool and all, and I see many fabulous ideas. But I think that the whole relationship stuff between characters would be a relative piece of cake. I''m sure most of us could work out an AI or something. We understand what''s involved. The hard part I think is what Ketchaval came up with first, how does the player control the characters?

A fun part of a game is to watch the characters do stuff, but to maintain the intrigue and mutiny type of stuff, you can''t always see what''s going on or be able to control the characters. If I send out away team A to get get me a nice shiney rock which will involve a harrowing experience which will change the lives of the characters forever (which would be nice to watch) how do I add in Lt. Data shooting Worf in the back and then have him lie about it to the captain later? (which the player shouldn''t be allowed to see or the intrigue is gone).

Giving characters orders and then decisions on how/if those order will be acted out is one thing, but can anyone think of a way to get past this exposition thing? I don''t think a fog of war alone is quite the answer.

kseh "how do I add in Lt. Data shooting Worf in the back and then have him lie about it to the captain later? (which the player shouldn''t be allowe to see or the intrigue is gone)."

Key words ?: LIE to Captain, how about having it so that what you see is a report of the situation so far.. from a character''s viewpoint. But how do you do this a. in a fair manner. b. In real -time so you can order them to do stuff whilst it is going on.. or maybe it is TURN based?

quote: Original post by kseh

A fun part of a game is to watch the characters do stuff, but to maintain the intrigue and mutiny type of stuff, you can't always see what's going on or be able to control the characters.

Well, the problem is, you're either omniscient or you're not. If you are, then control is easy as is being aware of what's happening, but intrigue's impossible. But if you're not, then control is harder to do, but covert situations become possible.

If you're the captain, then I think your viewpoint should be limited to a certain area around you. That way, to see others interacting (in the mess hall, or at their stations) you'd have to be in the room. You could have cameras...

Here's another thought: In TNG when a crewmember is paged often the view switches to them. Maybe this would work. For instance, you don't know what's going on in the engine room until you comm Geordi. Once you do, you get their view / line of sight. That way, you could actually control the character, assign duties, check progress, etc.

This could beget some interesting and even funny situations: A crewmember doesn't return a page, and you have to go looking to find out why. Maybe it's because they're knocked out, or stone drunk. Or maybe it's because they're doing something shady, like stealing from inventory or sabotaging something... or maybe they're sleeping with someone they shouldn't be or sleeping on the job...

... either way, you can control them and see the interactions when you page them, otherwise you get "Crewmember X Is Not Responding..."

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

Edited by - Wavinator on October 3, 2000 7:26:00 PM

Crawls out his little openGL hole...

*KICK ASS IDEA!*


Crawsl back into his little openGL hole...

You might be able to use impenetrable signal-blocking rock (very Star Trek) to hide what was going on, as then the crew cameras wouldn''t work, but you might still be able to see via your loyal sergeants.

Yeah, I forgot about those Star Trek sensors. Able to detect a single nanotech robot in an area the size of a city, but still can''t penatrate that pesky rock for some reason. At least it would give a good reason to explore that dungeon looking cave.

Now that I think of it I suppose if you wanted to follow an away teams progress a little topographical map with a couple blips representing the chars would work. Tells you enough info to follow their progress without seeing just exactly what they''re doing. Would have to becareful though. I could just see a beautifully rendered ship interior in 3D that you could explore for days, but you wind up spending 75% of the game staring at a 2D display that could have be done 15 years ago.

And a comm system would definatly help things along too. I forgot that along with the captain sending his orders you could also use it to recieve reports. And if the comm system is down for whatever reason then you have an instant plot twist.

Maybe this isn''t as difficult as I originally thought.

The characters (might) have to be pretty tough, ie. only susceptible to certain attacks / plot twists ? Ie. They are only knocked (Pokemon) out instead of dying (Highlander !?). That way the characters would be more important, as they would be there most of the time, and would stop the player reloading because a cherished character had died.

Wavinator - Cool idea.

Regarding scale - there is really no need for a space ship to have 600 crew like the enterprise - just assume a significant level of automation and robotics and the problem is solved. Keep it to a small number 6-12 characters.

And go for it!

/Strategy
Imperium - Rise of Rome

quote: Original post by Strategy

Wavinator - Cool idea.

Regarding scale - there is really no need for a space ship to have 600 crew like the enterprise - just assume a significant level of automation and robotics and the problem is solved. Keep it to a small number 6-12 characters.

And go for it!

Thanks! Yeah, my thoughts are to just concentrate on a few chars and the interactions between them. Even if you have 600 crew, they should be abstractly represented. Star Trek''s idea of a Senior Staff is very compatible with you, and could even support the idea of growing from a shuttle-sized ship to a capital ship... because it''s the same staff you''ve had all along.

Thanks for the encouragement!



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