Yeah, I disagree with you about the colorful costumes, and realism as far as setting. I think not all RPGs have to simulate our Dark Ages. Maybe dyes are cheaper, and the people are more cheerful. But, I like to see beauty in games, and not things that look the same. So I actually prefer the colorful costumes. As far as being cardboard cutouts...yea, it would be better if NPCs had more individuality. In some games, they do, like most modern Final Fantasy games(I know, they''re not so open ended, dont kill me hehe). But if you (like the Anon guy likes) just do a lot more different models, you won''t notice that they''re all kinda cutouts. Or you can do different torsos, legs, faces for all of them, and then you have 3 times the possibilities. (Well prolly less because some might just be silly)

As far as limping, broken arms, etc. You would do the broken arm just the same as the limp. change the model/sprite to something different. You could have an upper body model, and a lower body model, and your characters can turn around a little bit while standing in place. (Which is more realistic.) And then you don''t have to worry about what if my character is limping and has a broken arm, or which arm is broken, etc. (I''m assuming your character won''t just have one weak arm and one strong arm, and the weak arm breaks all the time.) Anyway, it of course is all a magnitude of complexity. You add random animations/bad effects to your character when they get low on health, or you can implement body-part specific damage. Since you aren''t doing an MMORPG, I''d say go for the body part specific damage. It''s not so processor intensive if done right. In Return to Castle Wolfenstein, they implement a small amount of it. If you shoot people in the head, it causes a lot more damage. So if they can do it in a FPS that 30 people can play at once, surely your rpg can do it too. =D (Provided it''s important enough for you to want to do.)

-=Lohrno

if you have a good skeletal/animation setup, i dont see why you couldnt set new constraints for a useless arm that just hangs limp at the character''s side.

and i agree that mmorps are here to stay. my frustration is with indie developers who are talking about mmorpgs. why? they cost millions to develop, and there really isnt a way to compete as an indie.

will mmorpgs dominate online gaming? maybe, but they hardly meet every gamers idea of a good time. to my mind, rpgs will start to migrate to the desktop, and traditional roleplayers will not be satisfied with mmorpgs. theyll want a deeper, more story-driven game.

the simple fact that %99 of gamers think a crpg is a medieval fantasy with elves, dwarves, and orcs where you level up every third hour is a clear indication that the rpg market is mostly untapped.

how about a space rpg, or a talking animals rpg, or whatever?

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
how about a space rpg...

Ahem... actually have one in the concept phase over here.



Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

quote: Ahem... actually have one in the concept phase over here.

cool...as long as there are elves in it

Have you ever heard of Earth and Beyond? It''s kinda like EQ in space from the looks of things but there are definite differences, and they have some interesting ideas. It''s a space MMORPG, but without any of the simulator things.

-=Lohrno

quote: rpgs will start to migrate to the desktop, and traditional roleplayers will not be satisfied with mmorpgs.

Actually, they''re migrating off the desktop to the internet. Back when computer games were still in their infancy (well, maybe not infancy, but definitely childhood) you had 2-4 RPGs out at any point in time. Now what do you see? Basically very little. EQ? That came out almost 3 years ago, IIRC. UO came out quite a while ago also. I don''t count console RPGs because they are basically linear stories that you kind of interact with most of the time. Back in the day, you saw Bard''s Tale, Ultima, King''s Quest, AD&D (Pool series) and Phantasie (didn''t note versions on any of those, sorry) all coming out in the same year, not to mention a number of smaller RPGs. Nowadays, you see maybe 2 RPGs come out in a year and those are usually AD&D based games. Don''t really count Diablo and it''s ilk either, as those are almost more action games than RPGs.

UO came out a little over 3 years ago, then EQ, AC, AO and DAoC and there are around another 5 that are scheduled to come out in the next year or so, such as Horizons (if it hasn''t become vaporware), SW:G, ShadowBane, Atriarch, AC2 and Big World. Even the least successful of those games (debate between AC and AO) are still largely profitable.

I don''t think that it will be a case of the games going back to the desktop, I think that it will become a situation where the makers will spend more money developing storylines and plots (and plots within plots) for their games. Even developing AI programs that will generate their own plots eventually. This means that the MMORPGs, which have substantially more power than a desktop machine can start to do that which you really can''t put in a traditional RPG.

The biggest problem with trying to create a story in the current batch of MMORPGs (and I toss them all in as 1st generation MMORPGs, unless you want to call Meridian the first generation) is their lack of true dynamics. The next generation of MMORPGs will have better AI and will start to become more dynamic, even if it''s simply handling spawning differently. You won''t be able to simply run to CB to kill Crush and get his tunic. Crush might not even be there anymore. The orcs may have moved to a better location where they won''t get slaughtered by the masses constantly. You don''t think they''d leave their castle? I would if I got killed within 2 minutes of being born for 2 years (about 12 years game-time +/-). Let the Gnolls have CrushBone, I''ll go hang out in Lesser Faydark for a while with the Dark Elves. At least I''d have some allies to help me out occasionally.

I don''t think that further advancements in RPGs will come from the desktop, I think they will come from a crop of MMORPGs that may not have even been conceived of yet.

One other thing to remember though, most RPGers don''t role-play simply to role-play. I role-play so that I can have a good time hanging out with my friends. Yeah, I like most computer RPGs, but they only hold my attention for so long. I''d rather go over a friend''s house and play some D&D with 5 other guys than sit around playing Baldur''s Gate or any other CRPG and if I can''t do that then I''d rather spend a few hours in EQ with those friends than play Baldur''s Gate by myself, regardless of the lack of actual story.

Easily half of role-playing is the social interaction. Show me a GM that banned his group from talking about anything out of character at the table and I''ll show you a GM without a group, or at least with half of his gamers in the other room hanging out. You won''t get that social interaction from a CRPG, you''ll at least get part of it with an MMORPG. If you can add a dynamic storyline, then it will be even better, but even without it, it''s better than sitting in my chair playing a normal CRPG.

quote: Original post by solinear
or at least with half of his gamers in the other room hanging out.

"Where'' the Cheetos??"
(Kudos to anyone who knows where THAT quote is from!)

Excellent post overall by the way.



Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

The bonus movie in summoner? =D

-=Lohrno

Hehe... bingo!

"If there''s any girls there, I wanna DOoOOo THEEEMM!!"

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development
"Reducing the world to mathematical equations!"

quote: Original post by InnocuousFox
"If there''s any girls there, I wanna DOoOOo THEEEMM!!"

Did you ladies here that? "Pasty SWM seeks unihibited woman who enjoys game programming."



-----------------------------------
"It''s groin-grabbingly transcendent!" - Mr. Gamble, my teacher, speaking of his C++ AP class