Hey all, I've been doing some more thinking on how to make an intermediate game on the way to completing my full RPG, and I've thought about the subject of moving goalposts which will be explained a little further down. As I'd like to get a simple networked application up and running, and have support for terrain and animated md3 models, I'd like to do something perhaps similar to bomberman that would put me one step closer to a RPG, but so that I can still say that I have a completed game in its own right before completing my RPG. I wondered if changing goals might add some fun to the game. IIRC from another thread someone was talking about what makes a multiplyer game fun, and one answer that came up was the ability for players to make a comeback... I think changing goals would be fun in the same kind of way. If you look at a game like Magic the Gathering, where the whole game can change each time a new card is drawn, I think this kind of thing would translate well into a multiplayer computer game. We could have a system where random events are a part of the game, which could switch the gameplay in a second, forcing players to adapt and giving a chance for struggling players to gain back ground.... what if the players had to complete an objective: destroy the other player, deliver item x to location x, uncover powerup x, destroy building x, etc etc. Each time the player completes an objective, the next mission could move the goalposts and allow for comebacks. I know this would require careful balancing so as not to leave a player who is clearly a better player struggling. I'm also aware this is probably not the best idea for implementation, but I'm just throwing it out for sake of arguement to demonstrate my concept. I also look to games like RISK where random events could make an impact upon gameplay, something that is a little more subtle, but can still change the pace of the game or could have a profound effect at a critical point in the game.... do you feel that this helps a game, or would you rather always know where the goalposts lie? Would it be frustrating to have victory snatched away from you or would you relish the challenge of a dynamic gameplay? If you were to implement such a system, how would you do so and what could be done to improve it? Thanks, Steve

There's a card game kind of like this called Fluxx, where basically the goal is always changing and so are the rules. How many cards you can hold in you hand, how many you can play, etc.

I think as long as there are a wide variety of goals, so that it's very hard to set yourself to easily win them all, I think it'll probably work.

tj963

Calvinball anyone?