Game Development Community

Games have stagnated?

by Charles Rhinehart · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 07/31/2003 (5:04 pm) · 14 replies

I love FPS games. Nothing has changed other than the eye-candy, which in it's self is enough IMHO.

I always wondered why only two teams in capture the flag.. why not 3, 4 or even 5? Put the flag in neutral territory, and make the delivery point in neutral territory opposite the pickup point. Or make control points that teams have to dominate in order to win he match.. or both ;)

You can kill yourself trying to be original.. me, I like to blend things together to make something unique.. as an example : Tribes meets SteamPunk (romantic science ala Jules Vern).. heh.. running around with Rocketeer style jet-packs, firing Tommy Guns, riding motor-cycles and Model-T fords to the enemy camps.. hehe

My game idea (besides the one above) would be to start with a point in history - a conflict. Romans vs Celts. Advance the timeline to World War 2 tech levels.. merge the Roman machine with the Nazi's. the Celt's with the English, throw in some player classes.. even some 'Fantasy Technology' like lightning projectors, clanky robots.. hell. even some limited psionic / magic abilities like Healing, or Telekinetic push / pull..

But like the Forum states "Ideas are cheap".. and that was my 2 cents worth.

#1
08/01/2003 (5:35 am)
Quote:
I always wondered why only two teams in capture the flag.. why not 3, 4 or even 5? Put the flag in neutral territory, and make the delivery point in neutral territory opposite the pickup point. Or make control points that teams have to dominate in order to win he match.. or both ;)

A lot (if not all) of these ideas have been tried in various early quake/quake2/half-life mods and found to not be all that popular. I can offer theories as to why if you like. However, feel free to mod out an existing game and try them again. Maybe if you do it right and hit just the right crowd they will catch on.
#2
08/01/2003 (2:22 pm)
I would love to hear your theories.

Do you think that map size and layout would have had a large part to play in why these other multi-team based ideas may have not been popular?
#3
08/01/2003 (2:37 pm)
Multi team can only work if you have exactly the same amount of players in each team... almost impossible to do... unless you're adding bots, but then you kill the experience we call multiplayer.
#4
08/01/2003 (2:42 pm)
What about "Auto Team" functions that some games have to try and keep the two team-based games even? How do you feel about that?
#5
08/01/2003 (2:51 pm)
Most don't work so well in practice. It used to annoy me to no end when Soldier of Fortune 2 would force me onto the other team due to a shortage then 10 minutes later switch me out to my old team due to a shortage on the other side... It really breaks the whole point of having team based games if the game is swapping you back and forth between each team often.

I think the new system in Planetside works pretty well, and I think smaller FPS games would do well to copy it (where appropriate). Instead of trying to ensure each team has an equal number of players, teams will be penalized or get bonuses in small but significant ways based on team population count.

eg. Got more players than the other team? Fine, but each person on your team is going to spawn with less health, etc.
#6
08/01/2003 (3:02 pm)
I like that! That seems like a better approach IMO.

What do you think about maybe a delay in allowing players to spawn (like a cue) to keep the balance ?
#7
08/01/2003 (3:13 pm)
As a player, that would just piss me off. I'd rather have less health because skill can compensate. Not being able to spawn is just annoying.
#8
08/01/2003 (3:17 pm)
Agreed. That would be annoying now that you say it..
#9
08/01/2003 (3:31 pm)
But less annoying than being 'Auto Switched' to other teams?
#10
08/01/2003 (6:13 pm)
I think it would be best to just add bots to the smaller teams to compensate. That wouldn't annoy anyone.

But people in this thread don't seem to like bots for some reason.
#11
08/01/2003 (6:27 pm)
No, Steve, it's because it was supposed to be a multiplayer experience, I agree to Ward.

Charles, I love this aesthetic I know as "Forgotten Future". A weird FPS game with some antique "futuristic" machines would be awesome. Maybe there's a place to it in Isotope X. Why don't you drop a line to Eric about your gameplay ideas?
#12
08/01/2003 (6:56 pm)
Bots have progressed to the point where they are OK at team deathmatch, but they are horrible for virtually any other team based game.
#13
08/01/2003 (7:05 pm)
Thanks Adib, I'll look into it!
#14
08/02/2003 (7:10 am)
I guess then, to wrap up, a game that provides all of the team balance options (despite personal preferences) would be better off over-all.