[project1dev] Re: automaton hacking minigame
- From: Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 2 Jul 2009 10:49:33 -0700
sounds cool (:
On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:47 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> we can have a mixture of everything
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:45 PM, Matthew Morgan <MMorgan@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> I thought there was going be a golden saucerish thing going on?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:
>> project1dev-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] *On Behalf Of *Alan Wolfe
>> *Sent:* Thursday, July 02, 2009 10:45 AM
>> *To:* project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> *Subject:* [project1dev] Re: automaton hacking minigame
>>
>>
>>
>> it sounds crazy that making it less game like would be better but if you
>> think about it, making it really mini gamey would break immersion cause it's
>> not "realistic" in the sense of the game.
>>
>>
>>
>> like in real life if you go to pick a lock, there's no high score board or
>> bonus moves and things hehe
>>
>>
>>
>> although i dunno i guess it would be a decision about the game, i
>> personally think it would be rad if the game had a ton of activities like
>> snowboarding, dog sledding, playing dice and card games with people, maybe
>> even going to a "magical arcade" for arcade type games.
>>
>>
>>
>> but, will the game have "gamey" minigames as part of every day occurences?
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:33 AM, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> ah yeah totally alan, make it less of a game - i like it!
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>>
>> It doesn't need to look like a pcb, it's just easier to make it
>> function as one for the puzzle. But speaking of the hoses, it would
>> be cool if those "spun" into place with some kind of steam gun.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:12 AM, eric drewes<figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > i still like the idea that it isn't a circuit board persay, but like
>> abunch
>> > of hoses and valves, etc. fits the theme better
>> >
>> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 1:11 PM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> yeah i agree with you guys that we would want something uniqueish, not
>> >> something recognizable as some other game.
>> >>
>> >> heck, maybe it shouldnt even play like a game, it should play as if you
>> >> are actually meddling with a cirtuit board and if you dont follow the
>> >> instructions from the book bad stuff happens :P
>> >>
>> >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 10:08 AM, Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> Pipe Dreams was a great game, btw. But yeah, we would need to add
>> >>> something else to the puzzle to give it more unique flash.
>> >>>
>> >>> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 9:06 AM, eric drewes<figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>> > right, i haven't played bioshock but maybe we can come up with
>> >>> > something
>> >>> > else so it doesnt seem derivative. i am at work but will try to
>> ponder
>> >>> > on
>> >>> > it and come up w/ something soon
>> >>> >
>> >>> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 11:53 AM, Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Eric can clarify this but to my understanding this would be a one
>> time
>> >>> >> deal for bonus character creation stuff. Not required
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Thu, Jul 2, 2009 at 7:29 AM, CiD <screamingdazeez@xxxxxxxxx>
>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> Anyone played Bioshock. The Pipe Dreams mini-game was done to
>> death
>> >>> >>> in
>> >>> >>> Bioshock. It was used to hack robots, doors, and vending
>> machines.
>> >>> >>> It was
>> >>> >>> fun a few times, but it became wearisome after 500 hacks.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> --- On Thu, 7/2/09, eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> > From: eric drewes <figarus@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> >>> > Subject: [project1dev] Re: automaton hacking minigame
>> >>> >>> > To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> >>> >>> > Date: Thursday, July 2, 2009, 7:09 AM
>> >>> >>> > kent's idea is along the lines i
>> >>> >>> > had envisioned
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 11:47 PM,
>> >>> >>> > Kent Petersen <kentkmp@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Anyone ever play pipe dreams? I was
>> >>> >>> > thinking something like that.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > If you don't know what that is you get pieces of pipe
>> >>> >>> > and then you have to connect them together to make a hose
>> >>> >>> > path. The pieces are like L and + and | etc. After some
>> >>> >>> > specified amount of time water starts going down the hose.
>> >>> >>> > As the water is running down you can still place pieces if
>> >>> >>> > the water catches up to you or if the water falls out of the
>> >>> >>> > hose, you lose. if you direct the water to the proper end
>> >>> >>> > hole you win.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > I see it like that but the proper exit would have the
>> >>> >>> > effects you are going for. Like there could be 3 exit pipes
>> >>> >>> > one for each characteristic and they can be crudely labeled.
>> >>> >>> > Then you would have to redirect the water to the chosen path
>> >>> >>> > to get the bonus. If you fail you could get booted out and
>> >>> >>> > not be able to use the device.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > To make it more steam punk replace water with electrical
>> >>> >>> > current or steam.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 8:27 PM,
>> >>> >>> > Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
>> >>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > Do we have to explicitly stick to
>> >>> >>> > things that only use steam to function?
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > So maybe you could have the circuit board thing, and then
>> >>> >>> > you are
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > blowing a gun of steam on it to "melt"
>> >>> >>> > connections into place, and you
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > have to melt the right circuits to get the current to flow.
>> >>> >>> > It would
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > be like soldering a printed circuit board, but with
>> >>> >>> > fantasy
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > technology.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > On Wed, Jul 1, 2009 at 7:41 PM, Alan Wolfe<alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx
>> >
>> >>> >>> > wrote:
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > (makin a new thread)
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > I can't think of how youd set it up so that it
>> >>> >>> > made sense how to solve it...
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > :P
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > like maybe something like you have a "circuit
>> >>> >>> > board" area where you could
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > manipulate the connections and then on the right you
>> >>> >>> > have questions you can
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > ask the automaton.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > When you ask it a question, you can see the steam move
>> >>> >>> > through the hoses and
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > into the different components and it spits out an
>> >>> >>> > answer at the end.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > So like for instance maybe you ask it "are you a
>> >>> >>> > robot" and it will say yes
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > but, if you switch something, it might say no, showing
>> >>> >>> > that you inverted
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > it's logic.
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > But i dunno, that isn't really a full enough
>> >>> >>> > thing, seems like the ideas
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > lacking a bit :P
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > anyone got any ideas for how we could make a lil game
>> >>> >>> > for hacking the
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > > automaton?
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> > >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>> >
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >
>> >>> >
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>> *******************************************************************************************************************************************************************
>>
>> This e-mail is the property of Oakley Inc. It is intended only for the
>> person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that
>> is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure.
>> Distribution or copying of this e-mail, or the information contained herein,
>> to anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited.
>>
>
>
Other related posts:
