I am currently gathering ideas for a 3rd person action-adventure game that uses some elements from different genres. The game is called NightHunter. You play as Nikhai Lesvet, the NightHunter. The premise of the game is that you are just another person struggling to make your way through life in a Moscow slum. Then, it happens. A massive gathering of vampires threatens to overrun Moscow, Russia, and the world. Thankfully, there is the Chosen One. The one who will fight back against the vampires and lead humanity to victory. As the vampire invasion draws near, local news media create a storm of hype surrounding the Chosen One. The general public is unafraid of the menace, until the Chosen One skips down at the last minute in fear of the vampires. Now you are lost in a city desperate for heroes, a city running out of time. You decide to arm yourself, heavily, in order to protect yourself. But you get more than you asked for when you meet a mysterious fellow at a run-down pawn shop. He claims he can be of assistance, and soon proves it through a variety of high-tech weapons enhancements, innovations, and upgrades. Now you are on a quest. Not only to protect yourself, but to protect humanity. With this mysterious stranger at your side, you become the NightHunter, slayer of vampires. Operating out of a small laboratory-hideout (think BatCave) you must destroy the evil that threatens Moscow, and the world. The game will combine elements of 1st-person-shooters, 3rd-person-adventure, beat-''em-ups, and tactical strategy games. Before a mission begins, you will be able to equip specific weapons of your choosing to several alloted spots all over your body (back sling, inside of jacket, side holsters, etc.). As the game progresses, you will be given the oppurtunity to collect data cards and other gizmos that allow your partner to further upgrade your old weapons, and even create new ones. There will be option to switch to a 1st person view when you''re equipped with a gun. There will also be a beat-''em-up health system and combo system when you''re equipped with a hand-to-hand or melee weapon. On select missions you will have the option to map out your plan of attack ala Special Forces/military games. And at certain points in the storyline, you will travel to different parts of the globe. The order in which you go to different places affects what happens in the other places, better get your priorities straight. Overall, think Blade meets Spawn meets The Matrix, except alot cooler. So do you think this idea could float in the stormy seas of today''s gaming community? ''''Sup ho? - Me In actuality, the unemployment rate is enormous! I mean, think of all the little kids who don''''t have jobs.

Cooler than the Matrix? Wow!

I seem to be saying this a lot lately. How''s it play?

Is it stealth based, combat based, tactically based, chain move button mashing based, or what?

As far as the story, well I guess it has potential. The stereotyping and typecasting jump out at me painfully, but then most FPS games aren''t about story. So, with that in mind, make sure your guns are cool, your main character kicks butt, that there''s plenty of eye candy, the framerate stays high, and your voice acting doesn''t suck and the story will be fine.

I think you may be overextending yourself on the multiple combat modes. While much of the game sounds like it has a control scheme and setup much like Metal Gear Solid 2, I found those aggrivating enough to have to stop playing several times. And if you invite further complexites and complete chages for different gameplay modes, well, better spend a lot of time on them making sure they don''t suck. And while we''re on control schemes, I hope that there''s some form of joystick support, because most combo systems I can think of were painful to do on a keyboard.

Also, if you try for so many things, you may end up with a set of mediocre mini games, as opposed to one good game. Make sure the pieces fit together well, and polish each one.

Hope that helps

Well you see ThoughtBubble, that''s the beauty, it can play however you want it to. The game adapts to the individual player''s favorite method of approach. Also, some missions would require different skills than others. For example, storming a crowd of vamps full-on, guns blazing and whatnot may work against a group of 4 in a small room. But try the same strategy trapped in the maze-like sewer complex crawling with roaming patrols of vamps, you''ll just end up making a lot of noise and alerting them to your presence. And yes, I realize the importance of tweaking all of the gameplay aspects so that they end up fun and exciting to use, not just as a useless bullet note describing the game''s features.


''''Sup ho? - Me
In actuality, the unemployment rate is enormous! I mean, think of all the little kids who don''''t have jobs.

There seem to be an awful lot of "chosen ones" out there.....

This game sounds like Blade. You know with his friend that makes all the weapons

cool idea though

Again, the compairsons to MGS2 seem to appear. Have you played that game?

And no, I don''t think your game would let me handle the situations in the way that I''d like.

And next you say that I can do it however I like, but that not everything will work all the time. I understand what you''re trying to say, but if I''m a blazing guns extreme killing machine, how happy will I be if I have to duck and hide and protect hostages from firefights? I think that''d be more annoyingly stupid than anything else.

And no, that''s not why you tweak the gameplay features. You tweak (tweak being far too small of a word) the gameplay, and the level design so that it''s fun, and consistant.

As an analogy, MGS2. The game has the idea that it''s about sneaking. But if you''re not into that, you can use the guns. That''s fine. But when there are rooms and situations that are nearly unbeatable by sneaking, I feel ripped off. When I have to go into a fight against 600 enemy troopers with no cover and no where to hide, I feel ripped off.

And, lets face it, MGS2 is a great game made by a large group of highly trained, expierenced professionals.

By the way, shooting at things in a third person view usually strikes me as very painful.

Remember Deus Ex? Good game, at least from the people I know who are heavily into first person shooters. But one of them relayed something to me that he got off of a website somewhere, "Every thing in the game gets down to shooting someone, or picking a lock."

Another thing to munch on: In a game of the Jedi Knight expansion, my friend ran into an obsticle he couldn''t get past. There was a statue that made a forcefield he couldn''t pass. I asked him what force powers the game made him get. Sure enough, one of them was the key to the puzzle. And it just struck me as lame. Later, the objective was to get to a platform in the middle of the level, so he force jumped off of a balcony and after a few tries, landed on the platform, fell through it, and died.

One more thought, a comment about GTA3: "Well I didn''t want to shoot the old lady, but the targeting just wouldn''t get off of her."

And by the way, if you try to be cool and get a guy with a sword in the game, make sure he knows how to swing it. I''m sick of guys who run around with swords like they''re baseball bats and swing them like they''re annoiting people with magic wands.

However, you still have a long long long long long long long long long way to go to convince me that you''ve got a prayer of making this a game that I wouldn''t get so frusterated with I''d give it away and never buy the sequels.

ThoughtBubble, you have struck me as a very antagonistic person.


''''Sup ho? - Me
In actuality, the unemployment rate is enormous! I mean, think of all the little kids who don''''t have jobs.

Sounds more lile "Cynical" is the word you are looking for.

Antagonistic? A bit. More so, I want more depth, more descriptions, and I want people to look clearly at what they''re doing. I want you to very clearly hear what I''m saying.

I hear one idea, that while it sounds great, it also sounds difficult.
"What''s it do?"
"Everything."

I just don''t think that this is a game idea that should be approached lightly. A very small lapse in something like this can wind up in some bad gameplay.

Besides, antagonistic or not, I''m about the only feedback you''ve gotten so far.

Cynical? Let''s just say that I''ve made a few games, and a few more design documents. And that I''ve played many a game that did a lot of things badly, but few that did a lot of things well.