I plan on writing Game Concepts and Treatments to get some portfolio work done. But before I rush into it, I'd like to see what you all thought about the first Game Concept. ************************************* A Prince in HellAn eerie wail breaks the calm of Gaihinom. Another Hatipet has been born. One more drop in a sea of claws and teeth. You were born as a new line of defense against these beings, given the gift of light at creation. Light that pierces the eternal darkness of Gaihinom. But it is that same light that draws the Hatipet to you. The screaming becomes louder and more distinct until a flicker of movement passes into the light. A single Hatipet steps into the light, then dashes at you, reaching out with a bestial longing to tear you to shreds. Two more join in from another direction. All the while, the screaming grows louder.Concept A Prince in Hell is flash defense game such as Medieval Rampage and Dead Frontier. The overarching goal is to survive. There is no final level or winning after a certain amount of time has passed. The entire game is based on what most games consider the 'Survivor' mode. A Prince in Hell is a game where you defend yourself from an unending tide of the damned from the darkness with the help of constructable walls and units.Come into the light... A Prince in Hell, unlike most other games, does not give the player an omnispective of the game field. The player can only see what is in the light, which starts out as a small ring around the player. As the game progresses, the player can add more light - either by increasing their own light source at the cost of health regeneration or by adding structures that can produce their own light. Built on another man's back... To do most anything in the game, the player needs to gather resources. These resources come from the fallen bodies of the enemy. But the player must be quick, for the damned won't stay down forever. We build our own four walls. Another difference for A Prince in Hell is that the player is given no predefined structures to defend or help funnel the enemy into certain areas. The player must build these themselves. Different types of walls have their own costs and defenses. If a wall becomes damaged, the player can repair them at the cost of using more resources. Great, it can walk. So what else can it do? The player can also build simple units that can help the player accomplish some task, such as defeating the enemies, gathering up the bodies, or repairing the walls. With the help of others, the player can create more fine tuned or stronger units. Eventually, the player will even be able to give these units lights of their own. You aren't as alone as you think. When the player amasses enough resources, others may join him. These others can be used to help build more complex structures and units as well as increase the maximum amount of resources. But be careful. If one dies, their benefits go with them. Screaming, wailing, then sudden silence... The sounds of the game will set the mood of the game. An example of this is that there will be no music during the actual gameplay. If there are enemies on the map, certain screams or howls will play based on the number of enemies. If there aren't any enemies, then the only sounds will be the movement of the player and related units. To look down on the world. The game will be a top-down two dimensional game. Everything will be seen from an overhead view. Everyone learns in time. A Prince in Hell has elements of leveling up. All units allied with the player gain experience towards a level up each second. Each level, the player or ally can increase a stat, such as attack or speed. Any unit with an attack can also gain experience by killing an enemy. ************************************* 1. If you were a producer, would you want to see the Treatment or even Game Design Doc, just based on the information given rather than any personal preference? 2. More specifically, do I have the right information, focus, and catch to grab the eyes of a theoretical producer (ignoring an obviously nicer visual presentation)? 3. Is there any information this seems to be missing? 4. Are the 'wity' section titles appropriate to show a producer as part of the plan to grab his attention? 5. Does the information flow well to you? [Edited by - KnTenshi on October 4, 2009 9:02:47 PM]

Dang, that's creepy. It was a little bit of a letdown to find out that it was a 2D survival game. The information flowed very well, though, in my opinion.

I can't confidently say much about the "witty" headings. My suspicion is that they are good for grabbing the attention of the reader, but the reader will almost immediately want to see some substance without the flash.

My biggest reservation is that I think a concept that powerful deserves a deeper medium than a 2D strategy/survival game. You could write a novel with that kind of thesis. I probably wouldn't read it, since I don't usually go for that kind of creepy thing [smile], but I can still tell that the idea has a lot of power and potential. "One more drop in a sea of claws and teeth"... Maybe you should have been a fiction writer!

I can't speak for a producer, but it certainly grabbed my attention, and I would be interested in seeing exactly how you intended to execute this concept.

Thanks. I swear my other stuff should be nowhere near as creepy. The reasons this is a top down 2d game is that way, I could have the player in a restricted area without invisible walls. Players would likely be more accepting of screen = playing field with such a view. It could work as an isometric view, but the player would always have a blind spot behind them.

Thanks for the complement about the fiction. I was hoping to figure out a way to give the player back story information as they gain allies, such as the origin of the hatipet and other ways they have tried (and failed) to contain them.

I was thinking of a FPS, actually. And you asked for criticism...

I quite like the aesthetics of the concept, makes me think right to Vic Davis' (not yet released) Solium Infernum, for that sort of Dante-Bosch, um, infernopunk?

If infernopunk isn't an aesthetic genre yet, it should be.

As for the gameplay:
It sounds like you're pushing tower defense toward an RTS, and partly going with the "hero unit" gameplay of Defense of the Ancients or Demigod. This is a good area to explore to build an RTS with more player identification with the/a character and without insane amounts of micromanagement.
So it sounds promising; You should make a prototype!
And:
- Can the player win? -- how?
- If not, why do they play? (Not to say I disagree with an unwinnable game, I just think you need to be able to explain/defend this design decision)

As for the section titles:
Use descriptive section titles that tell what it is you will be talking about, "Perspective", "Resources", etc. to make an easily readable document, then use the thematic, descriptive lines as sub-titles or quotes to retain the flavor you are evoking.


As for whether it works as a professional game concept document that a producer would want to see, I have no idea at all. I wonder if you should not mention technical considerations (what is the target platform? [edit: Oh, I see there you said Flash. Right!]) and commercial considerations (what is the target market?).

I'm gonna say straight up, because I'm getting a little fed up.
'survivor type' games are just lazy.
why not do a little work and give the player something to aim for.

your idea sounded interesting until I came upon the mention of it being a 'survivor type' game. then I stopped reading.

let me tell you about a real survivor type game. resident evil. silent hill. these are well made games. they have a beginning middle and end. they are scripted to give you the feeling of being overwhelmed and to make your emotions overflow. they are carefully crafted with love and attention.

if I ever get wind that a game I am playing has no end, I get the stink of unfinished, of lazy, of futility.
if the designer can't be bothered to finish the game, why should I bother to play it.

this is the kind of attitude that expects the player to make their own fun. to make their own goals. sorry, that's your job.

apologies for the rant. it's not just you. you're just at the top of the pile.
please dilute accordingly.

When you think about it most of the early video games were 'survivor' type games...Pac-Man, Donkey Kong, Robotron, Space Invaders, Galaga, Asteroids, Joust, Frogger, Defender, etc...they didn't have programed endings. Just repeat over and over speeding things up in the process...Even puzzle games like Tetris.

Absolutely nothing wrong with them.

Only thing I see questionable about KnTenshi's concept is the balanceing factor. As in how does the Hatipet keep the pressure on the player once he starts raising his units levels...well that and how does the player give orders if they are a onscreen character. Do they have to walk over and make direct contact with the units? Clicky with the mouse like in a RTS? Can/will units still take/follow orders if they are outside the reach of the players light?

I like that you can be creative in the game. It sounds like it will be a bit like Gauntlet with building structures and leading minions. Very interesting gameplay IMO.

Very few action games allows you to be creative, so that is a big plus, in that it will keep the players hooked longer, and that it differentiates itself from other games on the market.

I would improve the narratics in the beginning though. A bit too corny and not high enough quality. But apart from that, a solid idea IMO.

@dbaumgart
There is no ending, but you are right. Currently, I have no incentives to keep playing. I could implement a points-scoring method and have the push be for a high score.
Another thing is I could have intermediate rewards, such as the bits of backstory I mentioned earlier. Each time the player gains a new ally or constructs a special unit (such as a Tseobekekhi/Living Monument or a Mukhila/Choir), a new piece of history can be unlocked. But even that would only interest certain people and only on the first playthrough.
Alternatively, I could make a Normal Mode that lasts ten minuets, and an Endless Mode for seeing how long players could get past that.
I'll admit, one of my biggest problems is getting the player to play this game longer than a couple minutes without feeling let down.

@tremault
Though I believe you gave incorrect examples (Resident Evil and Silent Hill are Survival Horror games which focus on strong, creepy atmosphere and the occasional jump scare. The only survival part is that they -rightly- don't have the player bleed ammo from every orifice. They instill a fear of the common run-and-gun mentality and "Oh God, I just ran out of ammo and that thing could punt me across the level!".), I do agree with your gripe of fighting unending hordes as a way to never need to make some sort of ending. I could tell you that my game was not intended as such, but the means can't justify the ends. I don't really want to give this game a preset structure because I want the game to be slightly hectic. I'd rather not have the game end up similar to other defense games where the player gets set waves and cool down and repair time. For me, this gives the game too much of a constructed feel, such as "You have won world 1-a! Welcome to World 1-b! ... You have won world 1-b! Welcome to World 1-c!, etc.".

@MSW
My current design on making upgrading attack either useless or overpowering is by making each attack do a random amount of damage based on the attack stat (1 to Attack). But I also fear this would frustrate some players because they won't insta-kill the normal Hatipet with a high attack stat.

And I should have stated this earlier, but the player doesn't control units or allies. They run on their own A.I. scripts. I was thinking of implementing a 'Guard this' command, but other than that, they run on their own.

i understand.
how about certain objectives.
it can be free-flowing. the player can hit the objectives at any point, in any order.

perhaps the game can have an ending of sorts when all objectives are met.
even tetris had an ending.
the ending of sorts can be made as an unlockable and may not need to disrupt gameplay. and the player can either choose to finish the game to get their reward or they can continue and continue to increase their progress more.
of course, there would need to be a purpose to this, so I feel online community type features would be important such as scoreboard, ability to either save the game state for others to peek at, or take snapshots etc.