Seems hard for some to understand that ''hitpoints'' is just a representation of health.

So yes, ANY method you use that is a representation of health will be ''just like hitpoints''... Because in the end the reason they are used (to reflect the health status of virtual beings) is always the same.

A cow is an animal.
A horse is an animal.
But a horse is not a cow.

quote:

---

Original post by Ingenu
Why do you copy Final Fantasy ?

INNOVATE !

Do something new, combine elements of many CRPG battle systems...

---

To him and all the others out there who find it necessary to say this. No one said to EQ etc. "HEY!!!! That''s a rip of D&D". The sad reality is if you really want to you can draw parallels along just about anyone''s game with a couple dozen others. Nowadays, when it comes to rpgs its about the details not the whole picture. People want to be immersed in the game world and along side a good storyline the dnd-ish etc. game engines and their kin are accurate enough to be acceptable. If you really want your "Realistic/Innovative" games why not go for degrees in biology/medicine instead of comp. science? Maybe understanding the human/elf/orc body or whatever would aid your quest to build the perfect game engine?

I still feel that we are in the 1985-dnd-kids-turned-programming-adults era so as far as new innovations don''t keep your hopes up for a while.

And aside from my rambles, "combine elements of many CRPG battle systems...". Is this being innovative? I always thought it was cut and paste.

It looks like a lot of people are getting shut up on this topic.

quote:

---

Original post by Silvermyst
Seems hard for some to understand that ''hitpoints'' is just a representation of health.
So yes, ANY method you use that is a representation of health will be ''just like hitpoints''... Because in the end the reason they are used (to reflect the health status of virtual beings) is always the same.
A cow is an animal.
A horse is an animal.
But a horse is not a cow.

---

your horse/cow analogy is clever, but misleading... if a horse and a cow were both represented by an integer, it could be argued that they are in fact the same thing with different names. but, they''re not; any implied connection between your comment and the hitpoint issue is completely invalid.

--- krez (krezisback@aol.com)

The thing I hate most about RPG battle systems is that it''s usually mostly out of the player''s control. ie you push the ''Go Into Combat'' button followed by the ''cast [insert cheesy spell]'' button, etc. This makes the system pretty unresponsive if you want to do something really fast and exploit your Quake-3-God reflex skills. I''ve always wanted to combine a turn-based and a real-time combat system, but I haven''t figured out a fun way to do it. What you''re describing seems pretty consistent to other RPGs except for the fact that you''ve changed the order/timing of button-presses the player has to do, and I don''t think it will make a big difference wrt gameplay

Tim

Hmmmm.... If you wanted to make a turn based real time combat system, you could make it like this:

Players turn comes up, he can run up to the enemy and hit him for the alloted time that may increase with level. While this is happening the enemy can fight back, but only if his turn is up, if his turn comes up he can fight back or choose a player to kill/attack.

kinda bad, but hey, whatever.

and when i say rip off, i mean a direct clone almost. final fantasy seems to be the building blocks of all battle systems

As far as using those reflexes go, you''ll have to digress from using multiple characters.

The most accurate representations of natural combat I have ever seen in computer games have been in 1-on-1 fighting games. Regardless of what you may think of this haughty statement, I possess a red belt in Tae Kwon Do, and a Black in Kung Fu, and as such I will assume a certain degree of knowledge.

The realities of close combat are horribly represented by RPGs because real combat involves ducking and dodging and weaving and prediction and feignting and balancing and planning and speed and power and using unfair advantages. All of this must take place on a moment to moment basis.

Current RPGs prefer to ''zoom out'' from those details and go for a more general approach, so they need random numbers to compensate for the lack of accuracy. Thusly, an incredible player loses out on his/her ability to react instantaneously to an onslaught.

So either you can leave the nitty-gritty of combat up to a random number simulator, or you can write a combat script that incorporates a multitude of moves per character and allows players to control their character''s moves very accurately. I think that RPGs have it fine for now because they focus more on having multiple characters to control than having ultimate control over one character. And because programming 1-on-1 fighting systems is so hard that any game that involves such an engine usually exists solely for that engine (have you ever heard of a good 1-on-1 with a good storyline and character interaction to boot?).

George D. Filiotis

I kinda like Symphonic''s idea of ''charging up'' time to use in actions. If you set it up so that being damaged reduces your time meter, and you can instruct characters to protect other characters, then you have a fairly strategic system.

Another idea is to charge up magic, rather than time. When your wizard has fully charged his magic for a particular spell, she can cast it, or keep it ready. If the wizard looses his concentration whilst preparing a spell, then not only does he loose the spell, but also all of the MP he spent on the spell. A MtG-style ''mana flare'' could also be used to add an extra level of danger to the proceedings - if a wizard looses control whilst casting a 100 MP spell, then 100 HP of damage is dealt to him, perhaps with splash damage dealt to those nearby (whether they are allies or enemies).

If it''s not too D&D, you could allow the wizard to store spells between battles. Each spell could use up some of his available MP whilst it is in memory, which you don''t get back until you cast it, or forget it. As a penalty for storing too many spells, a character''s ability to defend against magical attacks could be dependant upon how much MP they have free.

FF8''s best feature, apart from the title theme, is ''drawing''. However, it isn''t implemented to the fullest extent. Perhaps you should be able to ''draw'' MP from your opponent, allowing you to exceed your MP limit until the end of the battle, and also reducing the enemy''s limit. In this way you could ''defang'' a magically powerful enemy, whilst augmenting your own power.

Defense and movement are important. Both of the FFs I''ve played (7 and 8) are very restricted in how you can defend characters and move about, and it is my opinion that the game suffered for the restriction. Friendly fire and splash damage are overlooked but powerful strategic tools.

''Nuff said. I''ll enjoy watching you live, demon.

Well... To comment Symphonic''s thoughts on 1-on-1 combat:
Fighting game style (a''la Tekken), is the most (relatively speaking) ACCURATE way of displaying combat in realtime. As you said it would be hard to incorporate this into a rpg engine of several reasons:

1: Only one character involved.
2: How do you handle multiple enemies and taretting?
3: ...And how about ranged weapons?

As you said there has to be some level of abstraction (there always is, anyway) for it to be possible in a game. I mean, imagine Diablo II if you had to control individual footsteps of your character!


My English was bad today. Really baad!

Yes, blending realtime and group combat can be difficult.
There are several ideas that could work:

1) Turn based combat but you have to complete button
combos to use your moves (Might feel fake)

2) Starcraft like RTS gameplay, maybe more like Myth so
that you could focus on a small group.
A Mythlike engine would work fine with enough hotkeys
for the spells (Allow players to choose custom keys)

3) Realtime combat that halted when you presses the menu
button to cast a spell or use a skill


"This statement is false"