|
|
 |


|
| Idea Info |
Name:
Boarderline Chaos Index:
Primary
Category:
Simulation Submitted:
12/1/2003 10:57:12 PM Written By:
James Dryden |
|
 |
Boarderline Chaos
12/1/2003 10:57:12 PM
By: James Dryden
Show
all Game Ideas by this Member
Category: Simulation Games
Learn Game Programming
DeVry's Game and Simulation Programming curriculum will prepare you for taking on various development roles in the game industry.
Game Art & Design Degree
Westwoods’s game art & design program will teach you everything you will need to know before you apply for a job in the game industry.
The game (actually two games) is a mix of a war stragety, city simulation, civilization stragety, fighting, exploration, adventure, and RPG. In a nut shell, it has a lot. There are two primary focuses of the game. One is in the view of the Kings of the world and the other are Heros. Kings are the archetechs of Civilization and anything that comes from it. Their goal is to advance their civiliation to its maximum limits and to quite posibly conquor the world. The other aspect is that of the Hero. Their goal is to aquire power, fame, and wealth by any means they see fit. The conflict of the game is when the Kings meet the Heros who have very different agendas. Boarderline chaos is two games on one world, each game effecting each other and creating an endless possibility of conflict and game play.
The King has the responsibility of a civilization. They set into place the policies of prosperity. They can choose to be peacefull and create a wonderfull utopia or militaristic and stragatize a way to defeat their enemies on the battle field. Insted of one map inwhich to conquor, there will be hundreds. There is no telling where a civilization will establish. Kings will have to manage food, comodities, trade, military, policy, economy, education, technology research, magical research, and almost anything a civilization has to deal with. There will be hundred of different building types and thousands of visuals to help design a unique kingdom. The things the King make directly create the world the Heros play in. The King's POV is a 3/4 view of the map in which they controll.
Heros are born into a random kingdom but can be free sprits that go where they please and do pretty much as they please. They aquire fame and fortune by fighting monsters, solving dungeons, and even toppling powerfull Kings. The POV Heros experience the world in is first person. This style focuses on the individual and thats why they are refered to as Heros. The POV helps with the fighting style that will be used for this game. It is an RPG in the sense of battleing monsters, hitpoits, exp and magic but does it like a 3d fighting game would. There are a multitude of fighting techniques avaliable for Heros and a huge variety of weapons (pretty much every weapon made by man). A unique armor system realistically portrays the difference between taking damage and your armor protecting you from it. Combine the two games and you get an ever evolving, unpredictable, fresh game every time you play. While a King is bussy preparing for an upcomming war with an enemy, that enemy may be making a deal with a group of Heros to give them the advantage. Being the King is a strategic and thinking game. The Hero is a fast and exciting battle machine. A King is a creator, a Hero is a destroyer. Having a good conflict is what makes any subject interesting. Heros prove to be the greatest advasarys to Kings and vice versa. The game is about the balance between the two and the sence of chaos created when the two exist togeather with only the laws of the game to govern them. Features:
1. Two types of game in one world. This creates an organic enviroment that is never static and ever changing. There is no set way of acheaving seperate goals and the players hold all the power.
2. Intergrated fighting and RPG style playing. While the battles between Heros will seem like epic versions of Soul Calabur, battles between armies will seem like Dynasty Warriors, there is a base of hit points and experience. The tougher the opponents a hero faces, not only with their skill with the character increase, their character will also gain levels that increase their stats to incredible heights.
3. Relistic and relivant damage calculations. Unlike most RPGs where the strength score and weapon are the only things that factor into creating damage, this game uses physics as a base. Strength can carry you only so far when swinging a sword. In reality it has no bareing on how fast you can swing it and we all know that mass times speed equal momentum. It is that momentum that determines how much force is applied to the target. The weapons sharpness and the skill of its user plays a huge part in dealing damage as well. Strength only tells you how much weight you can swing.
4. Realistic armor protection. Again my problem with most RPGs will be fixed with this feature. Armor is a thing meant to divert force from your delicate flesh. When someone in full plate takes a beating with a sword there are two different damage types at work. One is the force damage, or the transfer of momentum from the sword to your body. This damage is the most difficult to protect yourself from because of the law of physics involved. The other is attribute damage, This damage is the cutting or piercing of ones flesh. It only takes a loss of less than 1% of the human body for it to die. That 1% can be a sliver of flesh or the slight piercing into an artery or heart. If a brick were to fall ten feet and hit you on the head on its flat surface, you would have a chance of surviving or possibly taking no damage at all, however if what fell on your head was an arrow with the same force or an axe head, you're dead. Armor is meant to absorb the force and to not harm the user at all and here it does that. Inted of a defence number, there is an armor rating for three seperate sections of the body, the upper, middle, and lower parts. Each piece of armor has it's own armor rating. Added togeather they provided a percentage of defence from damage. If the percentage is over 100% then there is no damage taken by its wearer. There is ofcorse the problem of armor taking damage its self and becoming less protective.
6. Creating a building in one interface, creates the same building in the other. A King builds a caste to hold his treasure, that same castle has a life in the world of the Hero, some where to explore, defend, or loot.
Edit 12/5/03
While this game seems to cover everything, its not necessarilly one game but rather two. The Kings play a game involving other Kings primarily, while Heros conversly deal with each other. It is a game designed to be multi player game online. While it would be great to have thousands of Kings and heros on at one time, such as Earth history has experienced, it may be overload for a computing system. A King can have a Hero or vice-versa and is expected and encouraged. My personal experience with most AI systems have been rather unrealistic and two dimentional. By reducing the need on computer controlled creatures/enemies keeps the game from becoming predictable (camp, spawn pops, fight, rest and wait for another pop). At most the AI will be used when heros combat soldiers or monsters during battle.
|
Add your comment to this Game Idea
large scope
12/5/2003 9:38:38 PM
Comment by:
alan2110
Cool game idea. It is a very large scope though. Games that let you do "everything" sound cool but are difficult if not impossible to create. Your spec doesn't say if it is a single player / multi player / online universe game. How much does the computer control via AI? Can I play both a king and one of my hero's? Or is this a massive online universe where everybody is a player?
|
re: Large Scope
12/6/2003 2:48:30 AM
Comment by:
James Dryden
Details details! :P Yes, I am very aware of the game's scope yet when you begin to view the game as not one, but two games you can kind of break down the objectives involved. Heros don't involve themselves with any sort of stragety, its the smash, explore and destroy philosophy of game play. Its the Ever Quest, Asheron's Call, and Ultima perspective in a 3d figher style. In those games a players controll wizardry was almost nonexistant and the outcome of a battle depended mostly on the equipment you had, weapon skill level (numeric), and ability scores (also numeric). The modern RPGs are still on the ancient system of having to use your imagination to concluded what the numbers mean, ie seeing:
A goblinoid has hit YOU for 10 points of damage.
Our technology is good enough to actually involve the player a lot more and on their controller skills as a gamer. In the above games, players of the same class that fought higher level players with equipment suited for their level had no chance of victory. With a 3d fighting style, you are tested on your controller wizardry yet there lacks growth beyond your own skills. By combining the two perspective styles, you can grow as a gammer and so can your Hero. Heros have HP, weapon skills, special abilities, just like anyother RPG, but fight as a 3d fighting style game.
There are a lot more deatils that I have worked out but printing them would require about 200 pages of information. I'm still taking suggestions on forseable problems.
|
fall between 2 stools
12/6/2003 4:39:20 AM
Comment by:
TheNewMan
is it a good idea? Yes. Unfortunately, as I often point out, there is more than the pure idea with game ideas. Games need to sell. That means tapping into the largest market. There is a large strategy market and large action market, but little crossover between the two. Still some, but the idea, if it were ever made would likely fall between the two camps and be embraced by neither. You will not like this idea, but I would suggest a significant rewrite of the Heros section. Make that strategic as well. The kings still deal with kingly duties like taxation etc, while the heros are concerned with more personal stuff (repairing armour, getting food, upgrading weaponry etc). They could perhaps later on 'employ' henchmen that would need regular pay to prevent them from leaving (if they are more morally flexible, they may try to give your throat a nice big red smile on the way). Perhaps have the combat be 'tactical' in stead of caliburesque: isometric grid, movement points, height advantages, scenery interaction, ambushes, all that and more. The king's battles could then play out more like those in the 'total war' series. This would make the game more consistent, hence not alienating most of its possible fan base while still keeping the two parts different. You might argue that making the two halves more similar defeats the whole point, which is fine, it is your game idea after all, I just feel I should point out the downside. Note: physics note: damage would be in proportion to energy, which we all know is half mass times velocity SQUARED. Consider what I have said carefully and good luck.
|
Distinction
12/8/2003 4:54:30 PM
Comment by:
James Dryden
Maybe I should redo the distinction between a King and a Hero. If you were to only play the "Kings" style then it would be just like playing AOE over multiple huge maps with a focus on civilization construction. "Heros", alone, would be like playing Dynasty Warriors with more of an experienced based growth system and varied controlls. Its not either of these two games, "Kings" or "Heros", that the game focuses on, its the merging of the two styles. If you say that this hybrid of styles won't sell then I need to consider that, however, reality is much more interesting than fiction. Now how did I manage to connect reality with this game idea? In all games there are limitations. In Everquest there is no change of scenery no matter what the player does. If a guild destroys every evil undead in Mistmore Castle, the next day it would be like nothing ever happened. You will see the exact same monster in the same spot you slew the day before with no change in its abilities or stats. Now let's say Mismore Castle was actually run by another human being. That same guild capable of whiping out the castle would have to contend with a human intellect and not a computer AI. Evil creatures may fortify their positions and attack from behind walls or rush out and attack the guild all at once. Now I'm sure most RPGers know that not all zones are run at specific times of the day and it might be weeks before a guild decided to raid a specific zone. Having a Gm wait around and employ alternative measures when it does happen is a waste of money. My solution is to give players, people who pay you to play, controll those zones and build them as they see fit. That, to me at least, sounds like a lot of power to give players, but if you make their role to contend against other zone controlling players you make a differend game in its self. Now apply the Kings style to this example. A fresh map with various resources, harvesting stone for walls and wood for buildings setting up defence parameters to defend against enemy Kings. It is just like AOE, and that game sells and still sells after being out for over five years. Everquest is just walking around waiting for mobs to pop, resting to heal and seeing the same things over and over again. That game also sells and still sells for at least four years. The different "King" and "Hero" styles are avatars of our technoogy. Is a fighting game that grows with a player not appealing to a market. Fighting games that are the same thing every time you play with no changes except for a dificulty setting or the person you're playing next to have left me unimpressed. Tekken hasn't chaged with exception of graphics in a long time and most 3d fighters are just the same. Then again I may be a lone gamer who is becoming less impressed with the games that are out and over hype with graphics, or hopefully not.
|
Not bad
12/9/2003 6:33:30 PM
Comment by:
arkainjalex
i think this idea is rather interesting but the problem with the "large scope" does apply no matter what perspective you choose to look at it. There is a recent game by the name of Savage, i believe, that is part RTS and part first person shooter as you can take control of your units in battle. This idea reminds me of that, though this one is far more complex and i'm not sure that's a good thing. Not that complex strategy games aren't good, but something doesn't seem to fit here. I think most of all the game needs more detail and personality. I need to know more about the types of heroes and their deeds and abilities, and i need to know more about the civilizations available to me and how far my power as a king would stretch. If it were an online game, couldn't a king abuse his powers when dealing with other players (like heroes), seeing as he commands a whole army and the hero is just himself, regardless of how skilled he may be. Well i still say it's a cool idea, just a flawed one which can be fixed with more effort. good job though, better than alot of ideas i see on this site.
|
Detail to come
12/10/2003 10:11:08 PM
Comment by:
James Dryden
You're right ark, in my discription of the game there is a lack of personality. So I plan on putting more up but I'll have to set up a web site for it. The game is very complex on the inside and there are a lot of factors that impact how things interact with each other and I know imposing the complexity on those playing it would be a big mistake. the game needs to be simple enough for people to play for fun but the avalibility for more indepth game play for adicts. Anyway, any comments will be received and answered and critques are welcome.
|
Add
your comment to this Game Idea
GameDiscovery.com : Simulation Games : Boarderline Chaos
|
 |
|
|