I would say the most important thing in every RPG game is highly interactive environment and freedom to do lots of stuff.

If you are doing a multiplayer game
-----------------------------------
I think it's important to be able to make very individual characters with lots of different skills to choose from (many skills quarantee possibility to do many different things). Then ofcourse interaction possibilities with other players are also important.
And possibility to affect the world permanently, for example, if one could build a house at some point it would be awesome, but ofcourse it's pretty difficult to implement.

If you're doing a singe player game
-----------------------------------
You might still consider the option of allowing multiple players. For example support 4 player multiplayer mode.
I think the story is pretty important in single player RPG. You should have the main plot that goes from the start to the end, and then fill the game with smaller plots that keep players busy. I just had an idea of having the main plot being pretty small (like finding the cure for player's soon to be wife's genital herpes.. just kidding and when player is reaching that goal, the smaller plots could actually be a lot more important, so that player could save the world (maybe couple of times) while he's trying to reach the main goal.. Just an idea though..
Then about rising levels. I don't think it's good to just add some hitpoints and hit probability when player reaches higher level. But if player would for example get more skills that he can creatively use to achieve different goals, it would be pretty cool..
And you should avoid linearity by all means necessary, I hate rpg games that are linear.. You might encounter something in game that you cannot handle right now, and you just have to give it up and come back later when you have tools/skills to solve the problem.

That's pretty much it.. I have a lot of ideas for RPG's since I'm planning to do one myself (one of these days), but I'm too lazy to write all of that down right now

Couple of more things tho (that I just thought of).. Don't make just combat spells, since combat is what fighters are for. Make spells creative and make them for very different purposes (ofcourse this adds complexity to creating the game, but..).

And learn from Half-Life! Use scripted encounters if possible. You could have goblin's escaping with wagons just after they have slaughtered and robbed some innocent (or maybe not so innocent.. make twists to the plot) travellers.. Or you could have a big monster that's way too hard for players to kill, and the solution for problem could be like shotting fireball to a big tree so that it falls on top of the monster, and kills it.. or something.. you get the idea.

Thanks, again, to all for the feedback.

I have been thinking of ways to improve our Game Design, based in part by the messages you have placed on the board.

Design Concept:
What about creating a fairly detailed setting environment, (not to say "gaudy" or cluttered) where the user begins the game with so many possesions? The user then can choose to explore the land(s) or stay in the local area and build up supplies, etc.
While the user is figuring out what to do, we could introduce semi-random encouters to add elements of the plot, being also somewhat random in nature. Of course, I feel that it is necessary to incorporate a little linearity in the RPG. Otherwise, you can have no objectives.
My theory is that the player can go through several sub-plot steps, not set in any given order, to find out what his/her objective really is. There will be no set story line persay, only the framework for the user to develop the storyline. This way the User could play the game twice with a different twist than the time before.

For matters of simplicity, I believe we intend it to be single player. In a future project, we may choose to incorporate a multi-player RPG, but right now we need to start more basic.

I would like the game to have a grandiose epic sort of feel, like the game is really a big deal. And that user be drawn in to taking it seriously. We will introduce friends and foes, some will interact with the player and others will simply be static enemies like bog slimes, what have you...
We could add features like the users ability to create a market in town to sell goods for gold or something, or the capacity for the user to start their own kingdom, like in Ultima...

The framework is still in development, and I want to get it narrowed down soon so that we can further develop code for the actual game. So far our progress is mainly isolated to the technical aspects, such as the sound/music and graphics engines.

[This message has been edited by stviemr (edited December 19, 1999).]

One thing I think is important is a big and yet realistic world. Zelda 64 for example had the coolest world in my opinion. I thought the best part of the game was exploring that world and finding the new areas. However, the world was kind of small so later in the game I thought it became kind of boring. Stress two points: A story and the world.

You should, nay, must have a story. While the hardcore RPGer may love the non-linearity of the game, the casual gamer will most likely not. Usually, do not ever make the player work out what they are supposed to do by themselves.

If you do, have encounters but not random ones with a few random ones thrown in. Have encounters that have to do with the plot. I'm talking like...ummm... people in the town are getting sick because of the town river (their water source) and this is because some sort of poisoning or pollution is occurring further upstream and the player finds out it was a battle site and the dead bodies are poisoning the river and then the player finds out that some sinister force is sneaking in to take out the country (or whatever) and there we have a beginning to a story right there (hmm sounds corny at the end, but whaddya gonna do?).
Throw some red herrings in as side plots or stories which although are red herrings add to the world's complexity itself.

But then, that's all my opinion...

I like the idea about the poisoned river... Very good points.
I agree about linearity being necessary, I thinks it's when the linearity becomes so obvious and dominant that the player realizes they have no control over how the game goes that it gets boring...
Much as you said, I want linearity, I would just like some of the "Red-herrings" to be unessential plot elements that the player may or may not encounter. There will be many preprogrammed encounters, and some will be random. I guess we need to find a happy medium for the Pro RPG-er casual gamer.
I would enjoy hearing more from you on this.

Steve-

Heh, perks of being an old fashioned pen and paper roleplayer...

Anyway, to go further with the red herrings and continuing with the poisoned river idea, sure you could do a townsfolk ask hero to go get a herb from some place to help cure everyone, which while ok I suppose, is an obvious fedex quest. Be careful here not to do too many as they get tiresome, unless you do it well (FPS comes to mind). It would be better to say, ummm, the poisoning has disturbed some water trolls which are adding to the woes of the townsfolk and the hero has to track them down, while the townsfolk have to go without water, yet another thing to do. Behind the scenes though, every day the hero takes is one more day the sinister force has. A side plot is born. What's the red herring? The trolls. Perhaps change trolls with something else? Just throwing random thoughts out...

Make your world live.

Lhae0 is a blubbering idiot.

Since I've played a lot of different styles of RPGs, I'd like to offer my likes and dislikes of many popular types of games. Hopefully this will add a somewhat fresh viewpoint. (I think this is my longest post yet!! )

I think the most important thing in a Role-Playing Game (RPG) is the role the main character(s) play in the outcome of the game. (I just had to state the obvious.)

Now, there are many different styles of RPGs; some stress combat, others stress plot and interactive movies, some stress puzzles, others stress sub-games (Super Mario RPG comes to mind). In short, much of it is subjective and depends on what the user wants to experience/develop.

I personally like many different types of RPGs: Might & Magic, Diablo, Final Fantasy, Secret of Mana, Breath of Fire, Shining Force, etc. They are all good RPGs, but in a very different way.

The only really useful piece of information I might be able to add is the element of weapons/armor/magic availability. Make lots of stuff! I mean really cool things that people can tell/brag to their friends about. Maybe that super-secret ultimate weapon. Or a cool-looking piece of armor. What makes a game really boring to me is when I can't purchase the latest stuff and the monsters are all using it for like 10 battles or so and my characters are getting massacred (think Shining Force II).

But don't ever fall into the trap of making an item just to address a short-coming in the game.

What I am trying to say is to add a lot of variety -- enough so that many different people can play the game and enjoy it, each with slightly different goals. For example, I personally would rather clobber the monsters with a large ax, but that's mostly because the magic in most games is terrible. It's either a real pain to get and not worth the trouble, or really really really limited and simply worse than regular fighting. Diablo was great this way because it let you pick a style of play and then mold your character, equipment, and spells directly to it. And have you ever played it multiplayer using a LAN? WOW! It's like a completely different game!

Very few (if any) RPGs actually show the character's equipped stuff all the time. Why should I buy a Mighty Broadsword of Evil if it looks like an ordinary broadsword? That is very frustrating. And it encourages the player to buy equipment that looks more like the actual character graphic. There must be better ways of keeping character abilities unique throughout the game!!

Finally, what most games overlook is the idea of data security (yes, I know what I'm talking about here). Many games have "cheat" utilities that completely ruin the effect of the game. I say ruin because as a game designer, you want to be in complete control of the user's senses from start to finish, even if it's generated randomly or along several different storylines. That's why games (and gamers, of course) continually seek more realistic graphics, sound, communication, and input. Cheat utilities destroy this control and thus ruin any emotional effects you wish to have upon the player.

Just make it so people with very different backgrounds can play and enjoy the game with different goals and for different reasons and endings. If you try to fit everyone into a stereotype who just likes combat, or plot, or sound, or sub-games, you'll alienate your audience.

Good Luck

- null_pointer

There is a limit to making a game too varied and too customized!
You can't please everyone all the time. You are not going to come
up with a hundred different variations on a theme and make them all
work out. I personally only would perfer at most 3 different outcomes
of a game. I don't want to be drowned in a soup of customization.

Lastly, people cheat because they want to cheat. Let them. Don't
bicker over security. This is pointless. Some people just want to
finish the damn game if it drives them nuts or if they do finish it
without cheating, they want to explore the limits of the game by
cheating. Let the players decide if they want to "ruin" the game.
It should not be your decision. And these "cheat utilities" weren't
designed for cheating players in mind, they were designed to let the
developer debug the game! They left them in so the player could
have fun with the game, not ruin it.

DatsIt

Thanks for the detailed entry, null_pointer.

I am pushing a more "universally admired" type of game. Believe it or not, I do not regret posting this board topic one bit, and I am sure that it will be a BIG help in designing our game from all points. My colleages are for the more part hard-core, full bore or no bore types, (Programmers, Graphics Arts types) The lead programmers are immersed in building engines, but we are still quite hazy on what the game will be like, and about...
I've sort of taken the task of molding an RPG out of the bits and pieces the group has contributed. We have some good ideas, but they have, until recently been only ideas. Now I am focusing on making the ideas work. I've been careful not to get too attached to elements and ideas culminated this far, as I end up rejecting a good share of them in the sake of producing a solid, money-making game.
I do know that there will be a remarkable degree of freedom for the player. Also, there will be a variety of characters and items. The game itself will have a serious, epic sort of feel (which it seems many recent games are void of, excluding Final Fantasy.) I also like a little humor to lighten things up.
I figure the game events will work something like this:

{
We will create several Static events that are not directly related to the ultimate plot, but may lead the player to a Crucial event.

Like in this example posted by Jeranon, (people in the town are getting sick because of the town river (their water source) and this is because some sort of poisoning or pollution is occurring further upstream and the player finds out it was a battle site and the dead bodies are poisoning the river and then the player finds out that some sinister force is sneaking in to take out the country - Jeranon)

(People sick = Static element) -> (Sinister force = Crucial element; ) etc.
}

I am also opting for shorter average gameplay. (About 40-50hrs tops) as opposed to 60-70hours. I feel that if we keep the pace moving and get the dedicated player some satisfaction in a week or so of play, they will be more pleased with the game, only a select group of gamers are prone to waiting through three months of play for a resolution.

By the time people get sick of this game, we might have a sequel.

Joe, one of the Programmers is more set on moving on to a different genre and subject matter in future projects. I think there is definately validity in sequels, (though I don't want 8 or 9.) Plus a sequel should have come improvements, or at least some enhancements over the original engine. (in my opinion...)

steve

[This message has been edited by stviemr (edited December 22, 1999).]