Dynamic world framework

ConsumerHans · 2017-11-29T20:39:28

I know the title sounds awful - I'm after some real world feeback about an idea I have had in my head for about a decade. I have to say I'm not a game dev, I'm a consumer. There are game engines - Frostbite, Unreal, to name some that I have heard of myself. They add the physics, AI, rendering, collision and some other aspects of the game. What they don't seem do is to simulate the world that the game actually plays in. Therefore more often than not, this world seems to be simulated by scripted events (missions, waypoints, etc.) or in a more "Open World" kind of approach that let's you do whatever you like, but often without any real consequences. I was thinking about a framework that simulates, on an abstract level, an artificial dynamic world, and that could be connected to a game engine by choice via API/interface. I'll try an example: There's a table with a suitcase full of guns. It is rendered by the game engine. I can kick the table and the suitcase will fall down. But if I pick up the suitcase and go out on the street and happen to run into a police control, I'll either get arrested or, in case of resistance, shot at. So on an abstract level, there's an item A that triggers a response from a group B based on my action C. I know that this can be done by scripting, but that's not what I'm interested in. I'm looking at a dynamic framework layer that a game dev could connect to a game/physics engine in order to create a game. Is this understandable? If so, is this in any way doable or marketable, from a professional's point of view? Thanks, Michael

Game Design and Theory Game Design

Started by ConsumerHans October 16, 2017 03:21 PM

21 comments, last by ferrous 6 years, 11 months ago

aganm

41

November 27, 2017 05:31 PM

5 hours ago, ConsumerHans said:

However I'm not really convinced yet that the future of mainstream gaming consequently has to be linear or static Open World, or somewhere in between. It's like saying fossile buring cars have to be the norm forever, because anything else is too complex to conceive.

It's not that it's too complex to conceive. It's that it's too complex to use.

In the case of car innovation like 100% electric cars, it's even more accessible because 100% electric cars don't have manual transmissions like fossil fuel cars. Even if it is harder to make for the engineers, it's easier to control for the user so there is no problem. The new car technology is more efficient and easier to use so it's a win win situation.

In the case of gaming, it's like going backwards in ease of use. The static world was like an automatic car for the user, and now we're going back to manual cars with dynamic worlds. People who love driving will actually like you for giving them more control and complexity, but you make it harder to use and less accessible for the whole population

Though their will always be a market for this type of complexity. It's better for the indie community if this type of game stays niche because if it was mainstream, your dynamic world would have to compete with Rockstar's next 300 million budget .