The link is here http://www.distortedgames.com/modules.php?name=Downloads&op=getit&lid=3 can you go check it out id like it if you commented on the site but here is good too its a really beta story that i have edited out some crucial parts that are on a need to know basis thank you

I took a look at it. Something you might want to consider is trimming the focus. You have several big topics; The New Axis, The main character and who is both a war vet and a drug user and in an asylum, the year 2080, the zombies, his survival in the world.

I would cut some of that out. For example, cut out the New Axis and 2080, and the drug thing. Your explanation for the zombies could just be simple and vague (ie mysterious)

thanks for reviewing
i get your point
but if we just add the zombies, wouldnt it be just another zombie game?
i definetely dont want that
or maybe i could say all those topics u say i should leave out
but make them noticed in the game throughout dialog or the reading of journals.
but apart from that, i totally get you,
i dont really feel comfertable telling you this straight from me
so ill tell the head honcho dude to come here so he can fill you in on the story.

Yeah, it could be just another zombie game or just another futuristic apocalypse game. It's up to you to make the idea new and interesting. I didn't read your whole story, but I wanted to help out by mentioning the first thing I noticed - that there seemed to be too many ideas going on. I suggest limiting the scope.

Feel free to have your head honcho guy say something about it.

Hey, I'm the head honcho guy. lol.

Well, I think what would be the best way to approach this stype of situation is go into the past of what exactly was I thinking when I wrote it. When I started off talking with Churroe, the beginning was not a story idea, it was presented as a enemy type. The main beginning was:

"Why don't we make a game with zombies?"

The first thing, before the the story and the main character was created, was the enemy. So, under all possible changes that come to the game, this will be the main thing the game will focus on. When I started to make the story, I wanted some sort of theme concerning the ultimate good vs. the ultimate evil. Though in the end, acctually before the game even starts, the bad wins. There was no way for you to have prevented it as a single person.

The next step was the character. In my opinion, all characters should have some faults. Whether it's personality, physical, or in this case mental. I thought by making him a hallucinator, it would add another wrinkle of gameplay not fully explored in this type of game.

Now, the version you saw was just a summary. I'm not sure if you read far enough, though it states that none of the information expressed in the "history" section of the summary is known to the character and therefore the player at the beginning of the game. That means that the story and history will be slowly revealed at an appropriate pace throughout the game and not all at once, as the summary started out.

Simplicity is almost always definitely better, though for some reason that's not how I write. I believe that there is a reason to everything, just like in real life. But since this isn't real life, there dosn't have to be over descripted storys. Such as why, with biological books as a refrence, the virus does what it does. Or why they decided to join each other. It creates a more submersive environment as a game to have a detailed story, though sort of distracts you from the hard questions, such as the ones above.

If you have any other questions, you can reply back!

Mackon

It's hard to give a good judgment on your story idea since all you've given us so far is the beginning. While I assume you some ideas on a middle and end, as an audience I need to see all three before I can comment definitively on any one. If your exposition with the "New Axis", "The Condemned" and all the other history you've laid out pans out nicely by the end of the story, then it works finely. But just being given the beginning, I don't know if what I'm seeing is critical information or merely superfluous drivel.

What I can say now is that it's obvious you've spent a fair amount of time thinking about your world you're trying to create. If this is just a zombie game, then I'd suggest tossing 90% of your exposition and history, but if there's more, then you may want to keep it. But since I don't know what's going to happen with your story, I can't offer a good judgment on it.

Quote: It's hard to give a good judgment on your story idea since all you've given us so far is the beginning. While I assume you some ideas on a middle and end, as an audience I need to see all three before I can comment definitively on any one. If your exposition with the "New Axis", "The Condemned" and all the other history you've laid out pans out nicely by the end of the story, then it works finely. But just being given the beginning, I don't know if what I'm seeing is critical information or merely superfluous drivel.

What I can say now is that it's obvious you've spent a fair amount of time thinking about your world you're trying to create. If this is just a zombie game, then I'd suggest tossing 90% of your exposition and history, but if there's more, then you may want to keep it. But since I don't know what's going to happen with your story, I can't offer a good judgment on it.

Well, unfotunately that's not the most I've done with the story. In fact, there are about ten more layers of information which I've left out. The beginning scenario itself is about 60% of the total game. It's still significant to the story in a whole, though the rest that's revealed halfway through (I'm not sure which edited version you read, we've revised it a lot on the site) is EXTREMELY different when compared to the two situations. The theme is the same (preservness....good against evil....resurecting peace....etc), though the actual content is completely different.

This can be viewed as a good thing or a bad thing. On the bad side, it could be a totally "This is rediculious twist" and you sorta laugh at the plot from that point on. OR, if it's pulled off correcly then it could be one of the "OMG...I never saw it coming!" moments and everyone loves the change. It would also extend the gameplay tremendously and provide a refreshed view of the game. Unfotunately, the last plot isn't developed as much as the first and public one, so it might also just end up being sloppy. Though, these are the things we're trying to avoid by paying attention to reviews and other negative or possitive comments expressed in these forums.

For anyone who's curious (I know this isn't the help wanted forum, though I might just say it while I can)you can sign up for the team by clicking here. You will be required to participate in either a IM interview, or fill out the same information, but in word document form. No biggie though!

The best advice I can give you guys is to not start with such lofty goals. Try something simple first and gradually work on more advanced projects. I mean in terms of both creating games and writing stories.

It's acctually kind of funny....because I started off with these exact words:

"I need to start with something simple, then make it more complicated as projects go on."

So, the simplest, though most fun circumstance I could think of was zombies. And that part stayed in. Though I just have a habit of adding more....and more...and more until it's a full on Hollywood script with twists and turns and backstabbings and multiple storys going on Memento style. You should see the outlines for the OTHER projects I have written. They're INSANE!!!

But yes, I totally agree with you on the technology wise. At first it was going to be a simple stealth game, and in a way it still is. Sort of like Splinter Cell with a more hands-on approach with the weapondry and stuff. With zombies!!

Anyway, thank you for your advice and we'll be sure to put it into consideration.

I would actually try to keep it as simple as possible. The greatest flaw in videogame stories today is that they are just too damn complicated. Take a look at the Resident Evil series. It started out as a good simple concept, zombies, people, survive. But then the developers threw in all the superfluous side-stories and extra characters that really just muddled things up.

Whenever I have a story concept and I try to make the transition from concept to hard, structured story, I take a cue from Dr. Lecter and just ask myself "what does it do? What is its nature?" These questions really force me to narrow my focus and only put into the story structure what benefits the story. So my bottom line is just simplify, simplify, simplify.

But simple doesn't necessarily mean easy. In most cases, the simple stories are the ones which are harder to make, but almost always better a better end result. Both Alien and Silence of the Lambs are simple movies; Catcher in the Rye is a simple book, and Metroid (any one) is a simple game. While several of these examples have complex relationships and deep thematic currents, they are all simple stories. There isn't any contrived background to be understood, nor are there unnecessary sideplots and "just for convenience" characters.

So, in short, my advice is to keep it simple.