You've got a whole planet full of alien animals... so what are they good for? Taking to heart advice I encountered on the web about developing a game to match one's programming and artistic abilities (rather than throwing in features and hoping for talent to materialize) I've been trying to figure out I should represent alien life in the planetary exploration portion of my space game. My first big hurdle is in mapping out what the creatures should be able to do. But this is inseparable from the second problem, which is my less than stellar art skills (at least when it comes to representing nature, I might be okay with machines). The way I see it, I've got these options: Option 1: Xenocide Kill all the alien life on planets, make up some story excuse, and put evil robots or something in their place. Any purpose animals could serve could be served by merchants, pirates, aliens, etc. Philosophically this isn't really an option. Conveying a sense of life (rather than a game about things) has been a driving reason for trying to make this game, so this would be a last resort. Option 2: Symbolic Life The old game Starflight allowed you to land on hundreds of procedurally generated planets, but alien life was represented symbolically. Icons gave you the general feel of what you were encountering (biped, triped, quadruped, etc.) and text description filled in the rest. A more modern representation might look like this: Combat, collection, avoidance, etc. would all play out on a map that would be a subsection of a much larger planetary map. Gameplay might break down to:

• Land at sites where you want to collect/harvest
• Move rovers to grid spaces on the map, avoiding hostile life
• Manage resources (in this example lander fuel, for takeoff and relocating to new sites, and rover fuel; and maybe air, water and food, which might be things that could be synthesized from different types of life or mineral sites)
• Success in interacting with life would come down to gear on the rover and training of those running it

Option 3: CYOA Interaction The "Choose Your Own Adventure" Approach: Landing on planets could be a matter of pop-ups with different backgrounds and strategic choices for interacting with life. This approach could also be combined with #2 so that only some squares have these sorts of special interactions. Option 4: Poor Man's Spore My art skills suck but I might be able to pull off mix and match sprites and create an top-down driving game where you pick up minerals, fend off hostile life and try to capture lucrative specimens. Animals would be created in layers, with parts "glued" onto other parts like in these images: A big drawback (besides art quality) would be that creatures would not be very animated and may end up looking robotic. There's more to say about about the pro's and cons of the different options but I'd rather hear your thoughts at this point.

hi,

this is the first post from you I do not have to read a ton
of text...

imho an alien planet comes automatically with exploration and
adventure. So i would use a combination of the second and third
approach. The second option is about strategic decisions and the
third option is about tactical choices.

have you started the game yet, it sounds pretty cool.

Quote:

Original post by sitwind this is the first post from you I do not have to read a ton of text...

Yeah it's getting easier to show pics as the game comes along. Thanks for the past reading, tho'!

Quote:

imho an alien planet comes automatically with exploration and adventure. So i would use a combination of the second and third approach. The second option is about strategic decisions and the third option is about tactical choices.

#2 and 3 would be easier to develop. One thing I should have mentioned is that you get to the planet by flying the ship in action oriented gameplay. Tactical / strategic gameplay might be a welcome switch. But it also might be jarring because it's so inconsistent.

Having a top down driving mode would be more consistent, but it just might not look good enough.

Quote:

have you started the game yet, it sounds pretty cool.

Thanks, yes it's in progress, though still early. Stars and solar systems are in and just like Elite you can travel to hundreds of systems. I just revamped the random planet code and you can see the results in the pics in the upper right mercator projection. I'm now working on expanding the planet view to put in creatures, ruins and mining.

My money's on approach #2. A somewhat abstracted "game board" approach to planetary interaction would be just fine for me. I'm assuming that the outcomes of interactions wouldn't be affected, and you could get thorough scans or open talks or scorch the earth from the symbolic map as easily as you could from the CYOA menu in option #3.

A nice, clean gameboard-interface would be easy to pick up and wouldn't become stale after hundreds of missions. If you don't like that element of the game, you just click on the most direct route and fire tachyon beams from the orbiting mothership to get the locals out of the way, and if it's what you like best, you can spend a big chunk of your play time tracking down, studying, befriending or battling the denizens of each world, taking risks and gaining rewards in each case.

I'm thrilled to see these pictures, it really makes your game seem tangible. I've been watching this project evolve for years now and am incredibly excited about it. When it's done, I can guarantee you that at least one copy will be sold.

Certainly a very interesting concept. I'm regretting disappearing from the community the past year, but life has been hectic. That said, back to the point. Personally I don't see a big issue in combining aspects of Option 2 and Option 4. I can certainly see your concerns that the experience may become disjointed with the vastly different modes of play. As such, it may be advisable to retain at least elements of the interaction from the 'main' game mode in this planetary exploration mode.

A top-down navigation game (Option 4) may be the best means of interaction for retaining immersion. That said, this option does not necessary discount a broader scope nor less combat-focused gameplay. Stylising alien types in an symbolic fashion, such as in Option 2, is still possible even if the art assets are a touch more detailed. You would simply need to create assets for bipedal, tripedal, gaseous, etc aliens possibly altering the colour procedurally for some variety. Depending on your choices a 'driving' game may show quite a large map with your 'vehicle' a small piece in the centre.

Either way, I look forward to seeing this when it's completed. Now, back to my own programming! :'(

Your programmer art is 100x better than mine.

Well, I love Starflight, it's one of my all time favs.

I think the key thing you need to do here is implement a few of the ideas (cruddy art or not) and play test the idea. Remember, if it ain't fun, it's pointless.

For me, option 2 and 3 look like those old pc/mac games in the beginning of the 90's, that get boring after one or two hours of game.. A driving game would definitely enhance the fun aspect. Plus, you would feel more free... Maybe you could integrate the option 3 part though. A pop-up window would appear when your vehicle gets near to a creature.

The pop up would be like a sort of scanning device. At first you would get a pop up with the creatures image, and a text like " alien lifeform = ???unknown???"

Then you could either scan it, and get more info, or shoot it if you dont want to take any risks, or be stealthy,try to capture it, follow it, etc.. I beleive having "written" options and consequences can easily get quite boring and repetitive. It seems better to give the player interaction options which are done through the actual gameplay.
It's not a boardgame, its a video game..


As for art quality, why dont you search for an artist to help you? Since your project is so advanced, Im sure it wouldnt be too hard to find. I know I would help if I was an artist

Quote:

Original post by Wavinator #2 and 3 would be easier to develop. One thing I should have mentioned is that you get to the planet by flying the ship in action oriented gameplay. Tactical / strategic gameplay might be a welcome switch. But it also might be jarring because it's so inconsistent.

If it's action oriented it could look nice if you have a hover craft fly over
a 3D terrain. Since you already have a height map in your screenshot, it should
be quite easy to generate a 3D landscape. But the camera needs to be tilted to
show the "hovering" effect. (of course only if you want to use a 3D engine)

Quote:

Original post by Iron Chef Carnage My money's on approach #2.

When I'm not worrying about being seen as too old school this is the one I favor. As I said faster to develop and with the number of encounter types really only limited by the creature symbols and library of creature abilities.

Quote:

I'm assuming that the outcomes of interactions wouldn't be affected, and you could get thorough scans or open talks or scorch the earth from the symbolic map as easily as you could from the CYOA menu in option #3.

This makes sense although the only thing you might lose is context, buildup and mystery. #3's more a story approach and harder to randomize, but possibly more personal. On the other hand, how many times could you stand to see the 2d encounter pics, even if I could mix and match elements (different background, foreground, element positioning, etc.)

Quote:

A nice, clean gameboard-interface would be easy to pick up and wouldn't become stale after hundreds of missions.

It could also support a wider variety of complicating events. I was thinking, for instance, of avalanche, flash flood and earthquakes which produce fissures. These are hard to do even in 3d, but would be impossible with #4 (driving mode). But they could be represented as iconic barriers or event popups with a gameboard motif.

Quote:

If you don't like that element of the game, you just click on the most direct route and fire tachyon beams from the orbiting mothership to get the locals out of the way,

Hmmm.... if the tile map where fine enough you could blast terrain. Have to think about this. Be interesting to create craters but things like water flow would get scary.

Quote:

and if it's what you like best, you can spend a big chunk of your play time tracking down, studying, befriending or battling the denizens of each world, taking risks and gaining rewards in each case.

Any more detailed thoughts on this point?

I was thinking of using a base Civilization-style combat and movement system if I went with the board game approach. Your expeditions and the flora and fauna would have attack, defense and movement rates.

Combat could be anything from traditional "stack versus stack" or something more elaborate, maybe either a turn-based or time-based with facing direction, rate of fire and turning rates as factors.

It's the tracking, studying, etc. that's traditionally weak, however. From a board game point of view, how would they work-- or more aptly what would be the point of doing these things as opposed to blasting every poor baby harp seal you see?

I was trying to find something more than "scans and samples give you money." It would be cool if you had to know a little about the ecology in order to be effective. Maybe you have to learn that lightning throwing floaters hate radio signals, and thus can be lured away for a time by decoys; or that those armor plated mastodons get very violent when it's raining. (But would this be flavor detail or hassle?)

Quote:

I'm thrilled to see these pictures, it really makes your game seem tangible. I've been watching this project evolve for years now and am incredibly excited about it. When it's done, I can guarantee you that at least one copy will be sold.

Thanks for the support man!

Quote:

Original post by NathanRunge Personally I don't see a big issue in combining aspects of Option 2 and Option 4. I can certainly see your concerns that the experience may become disjointed with the vastly different modes of play. As such, it may be advisable to retain at least elements of the interaction from the 'main' game mode in this planetary exploration mode.

#2 and #4 might actually play out like a ground based version of Strange Adventures in Infinite Space, which would not be a bad thing at all. Just like in that game, maybe you could automatically escape / evade if you didn't want to play the action portion (I've been trying to figure out ways you could similarly avoid the action portion in space, btw, with a hope of supporting older gamers who don't care for twitch).

Quote:

A top-down navigation game (Option 4) may be the best means of interaction for retaining immersion.

I wince a bit when I hear immersion. I'm using a 2d engine (Torque Game Builder) so I've got to appeal to retro sensibilities. This means there are a lot of interactions you can't have with terrain (climbing hills or mountains) or with animals (running over a creature or having a 3m tiger-like thing bat the vehicle).

If I do #4 it'll have to be somewhat cartoony so that there's less expectation for these things.

Quote:

Depending on your choices a 'driving' game may show quite a large map with your 'vehicle' a small piece in the centre.

Right smaller might be better. Like those Flash zombie shooters a driving game might have to emphasize vehicle rotation, weapon facing and masses of enemies.

One alternate thought I've had is to make more dangerous, aggressive enemies completely alien. Maybe they're flying / floating constructs with bizarre whipping tentacles that shoot fire or something. Chuck biology in the name of fun, at least for some encounters.

What do you think of the driving game only being accessible in some encounters? Unlike most driving games where cars are the obstacles could driving over empty terrain be all that appealing in the name of immersion? Or would the land and creatures have to be very challenging (that is, wind storms, sliding on ice, lots of those weird cretures I mentioned above).

Quote:

Either way, I look forward to seeing this when it's completed.

Appreciate the time!