[gameprogrammer] Re: COMMENTS PLEASE, CCRPG-[intro]

On Thursday 20 October 2005 23:06, Alan Wolfe wrote:
> I've seen alot of stuff suggesting modeling this RPG after reality in
> alot of ways, not to end the fun by any means but don't forget -
> games are fun, real life is not fun!!! (:

Well sometimes it is. :)

> ie modelling after reality is not the same as making a good game,
> some of the funnest games are blatantly not modeled on reality.

I agree, but I don't like stupid artificial obstacles, like not being 
able to take my ass of when things start to hurt etc.

So reality is good for other games and not so good for others. Balancing 
the reality aspects is quite hard, but when done correctly it will give 
immensive boost to the game play.

And some games definitely need realism. There is not a better way to 
kill car game than rubberband AI. Or making sliding in asphalt the 
fastest way of cornering really doens't feel right. If one likes to 
make sliding racer use gravel or snow and ice as the surface and you 
can make more realistic racing experience.

> for instance, ID software has deffinately shown that they realize
> this is the case with quake 4.
>
> In the quake series, because of how they did physics etc, various
> versions would have various "physics exploits" such as "power
> running", "box jumping" and "strafe jumping", not to mention rocket
> jumping and plasma surfing.
>
> in q4 they fixed the box jumping, power running, strafe jumping etc -
> but because they knew how much people loved these skill based
> abilities, they coded them back in - ON PURPOSE! - into the
> multiplayer game.
>
> They knew that real physics does not equal fun in this case.

As I said it depends on the game, which way it should weight the 
realism.

I like UT2004 although not very realistic game. I usually prefer more 
realistic games, like Op. FlashPoint, but realism in it's own is NOT 
enough to make good game. I like GTA too so I like even unrealistic 
driving games. ;)

> I used to play half life team fortress and it was the best game ever
> - you know why? one of the funnest things to do was to do concussion
> grenade jumps. basicly you could use them to grenade jump but they
> didn't do any damage and they had alot more kick that a standard
> grenade. There was one map with a huge verticle wall on each side of
> a moat leading to each enemy base with a couple windows near the top
> where snipers could shoot down from. As a medic my favorite thing to
> do was to primme a conc grenade, drop it when it was about to go off,
> swim over it and if you timed it right, it would toss you right up
> into the window where you could poison or shoot the snipers that were
> all zoomed in and they would flip out. It was great fun.
>
> Similarly, you could have the most realistic system existing in your
> RPG where strength points start to decay at the same rate someone's
> muscles in real life atrophies. You could make it so if you get hit
> in the eye you are blind for life and lose stat points permanently
> etc. But, the bottom line is - is it fun?

Nope, but same would be for the other direction too. One can use too 
litle realism and that can make games as bad as too much realism.

> I'm talking fun to play, not just fun to code (;

Well if something isn't fun to play most of us don't want to code it 
either.

> so don't lose sight of the fun when you go chasing after realism

I agree 100% to that one.

> On 10/20/05, Sami Näätänen <sn.ml@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 19 October 2005 10:03, Craig Chambers wrote:
> > > > You might consider a hit point location system.
> > > > Instead of "you just
> > > > got hit for 11 points. Sorry, you are dead." to "You
> > > > just got hit for
> > > > 11 points in the right arm. Sorry, you will have to
> > > > fight with your
> > > > left arm at reduced capability." A hit point
> > > > location system is
> > > > somewhat of a pain to manage in a paper and dice
> > > > game, but a computer
> > > > game would have no problem at all managing it.
> > >
> > > this is what i'm planning to do anyway. the 'hit
> > > points' would be a function of the muscle and bone in
> > > the location. i had to include bone because there
> > > isn't much muscle in the head.... except for maybe
> > > body builders (AKA 'muscle heads')...he he...just
> > > kidding:)
> > >
> > > this means that when you get hit in a location it
> > > reduces the 'strength' for that location until the
> > > wound heals. if a wound is not properly healed, the
> > > loss may be permanent or need exercise to fully
> > > recover.
> > >
> > > wait for my next post, probably tomorrow, it will
> > > explain this a little better (I hope).
> >
> > I don't play RPG's, so my comments are just some mumbling to be
> > ignored. :)
> >
> >
> > How about to make it possible for the charater to escape from
> > batle?
> >
> > If the opponent is superior (ie no chance of wining it right now)
> > the character would gain some inteligence points. The earlier the
> > escape hapens the more inteligence points one would gain.
> >
> > It also could be possible to escape pass the opponent. This should
> > fail almost all the time, but for example great agility and
> > inteligence could make it more probable if the opponent is slow.
> >
> > If one escapes a matching or weaker opponent, one would loose
> > courage points. Due the lack of courage one would gain attack
> > points etc slower than when courage is higher.
> >
> >
> >
> > This kind of system is of course much harder to balance than the
> > simpler ones, but I bet this kind of system would gather players if
> > it is correctly balanced.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------
> > To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html


---------------------
To unsubscribe go to http://gameprogrammer.com/mailinglist.html

Other related posts: