Rpg Scrolling and Exploration
by Steven Fletcher · in General Discussion · 06/21/2005 (10:51 pm) · 7 replies
I'm working on a freeware RPG that will feature turn-based combat. This RPG is mouse-controlled - click on a position to walk there and click on an Npc to talk to it (or attack).
I have a decision to make about scrolling and exploration, and I figured I'd ask for help. Most options are fairly easy to implement.
Screen Scrolling:
The screen either
a) Scrolls when you move the mouse to edge of the screen (e.g. Fallout, Baldur's Gate)
b) Scrolls when your character approaches the edge of the screen (e.g. Diablo)
Combat in the game will be more like Fallout than Diablo, but that doesn't necessarily main the screen scrolling has to be like in Fallout.
Option a) allows you to click somewhere on the other side of the map and tell your character to go there. Sometimes this seems like a good thing, and sometimes it doesn't.
Exploration:
Unexplored areas are either
a) Covered by darkness
b) Visible
If the screen scrolling is Diablo-esque, obviously the unexplored areas should be visible since you can only view the current screen anyways.
In the past, my "unexplored area art" has always looked kind of stupid, but I should be able to improve upon that with minimal effort.
Mapping:
Either
a) There's a minimap in the lower righthand corner of the screen that always shows the current map you're in.
b) There's a button you can press that displays a full-screen map of the current area.
c) There's no mapping feature.
Option a) limits the size of the map and takes up space on the status bar. Option b) adds an extra button to the status bar and requires that the player stop the game to look at the map.
Either map feature could have a "click on a spot to automatically scroll the screen there" if the game uses Fallout-esque scrolling.
So what do you think? What options should I use?
I have a decision to make about scrolling and exploration, and I figured I'd ask for help. Most options are fairly easy to implement.
Screen Scrolling:
The screen either
a) Scrolls when you move the mouse to edge of the screen (e.g. Fallout, Baldur's Gate)
b) Scrolls when your character approaches the edge of the screen (e.g. Diablo)
Combat in the game will be more like Fallout than Diablo, but that doesn't necessarily main the screen scrolling has to be like in Fallout.
Option a) allows you to click somewhere on the other side of the map and tell your character to go there. Sometimes this seems like a good thing, and sometimes it doesn't.
Exploration:
Unexplored areas are either
a) Covered by darkness
b) Visible
If the screen scrolling is Diablo-esque, obviously the unexplored areas should be visible since you can only view the current screen anyways.
In the past, my "unexplored area art" has always looked kind of stupid, but I should be able to improve upon that with minimal effort.
Mapping:
Either
a) There's a minimap in the lower righthand corner of the screen that always shows the current map you're in.
b) There's a button you can press that displays a full-screen map of the current area.
c) There's no mapping feature.
Option a) limits the size of the map and takes up space on the status bar. Option b) adds an extra button to the status bar and requires that the player stop the game to look at the map.
Either map feature could have a "click on a spot to automatically scroll the screen there" if the game uses Fallout-esque scrolling.
So what do you think? What options should I use?
#2
06/21/2005 (11:48 pm)
In RPG's, I prefer the click to move rather than scroll and select a move. It's mainly a control issue. In a RTS/TBS, I prefer the scrolling method as I have multiple "parties" to deal with. In a RPG, I have a singular party and want absolute control over them rather than removed control.
#3
I prefer a scrolling system from the edges of the screen with the mouse - as long as there is ALSO a keyboard option to scroll the map. I liked Arcanums system as I could scroll around with one hand on the keyboard and click on other stuff with the mouse. I absolutely hate games where the screen does not scroll until my character is at the edge. I much prefer to be able to see maximum areas around my character or party by constantly keeping them in the centre of the screen.
Unexplored areas. Darkness or not, I don't care too much. Limiting the distance one can scroll from their player will help this (2 screens distance max, or something like that), and also solves the annoying problem of scrolling too far away and then struggling to centre your character on screen again.
I prefer a fullscreen map by far.
06/22/2005 (6:48 am)
Aren't both options clicking to move?I prefer a scrolling system from the edges of the screen with the mouse - as long as there is ALSO a keyboard option to scroll the map. I liked Arcanums system as I could scroll around with one hand on the keyboard and click on other stuff with the mouse. I absolutely hate games where the screen does not scroll until my character is at the edge. I much prefer to be able to see maximum areas around my character or party by constantly keeping them in the centre of the screen.
Unexplored areas. Darkness or not, I don't care too much. Limiting the distance one can scroll from their player will help this (2 screens distance max, or something like that), and also solves the annoying problem of scrolling too far away and then struggling to centre your character on screen again.
I prefer a fullscreen map by far.
#4
a) and b) aren't specific enough because of all those choices I listed.
Ramen:
I'm programming this game in Java, so I won't be using the RTS starter kit. I've made attempts at programming RPGs in Java before, so I already have alot of code lying around. It's just that alot of it is atrocious - closely coupled classes, not many comments, and a ton of special cases written just to make a whole set of silly little features work.
David/Vernon:
So 1 vote for option 1 and 1 vote for option 2. Also 1 vote for a fullscreen map.
And, yes, in either case, it's "click to move".
David's reasoning does make a bit of sense since there's only the one party. I find that it's easier to control option 2 RPGs, but option 1 RPGs often allow you to target some spot far away on the map and tell your party to move there.
I could have keyboard scrolling - that isn't a problem.
Vernon said that he liked keeping the party in the center of the screen. I could use a modified option 2 where the screen is always centered on the player (or maybe it stays centered close enough that the player is within 3 squares of the center of the screen - basically, the "edge" of the screen would be close to the middle).
I don't like limitting the distance one can scroll from their player. When I can scroll the screen, I want to be able to direct my characters to move to the other side of the map. Still, limitting the distance has some appeal.
For option 1, I would have a "center the screen on the player" key on the keyboard. The problem is that hardly anyone reads the instructions to games, so no one would know about.
One thing I have is a "roof" layer that appears over buildings. The roof isn't displayed over the building you're in, but it is displayed over the others. This partly eliminates the need for darkness over unexplored areas. If I used option 2 or used option 1 with limitted scrolling distance, that would reduce the need even more. I don't really like having darkness over the unexplored areas too much, so if I use option 1, it probably will be with limitted scrolling distance (even though I don't like that either).
06/22/2005 (10:33 pm)
From now on, I'll denote "scrolling by moving the mouse to the edge of the screen" as option 1 and "scrolling when the character reaches the edge of the screen" as option 2. It's just that I'm going to be typing them so many times. The other choices all depend upon which of these 2 options I use.a) and b) aren't specific enough because of all those choices I listed.
Ramen:
I'm programming this game in Java, so I won't be using the RTS starter kit. I've made attempts at programming RPGs in Java before, so I already have alot of code lying around. It's just that alot of it is atrocious - closely coupled classes, not many comments, and a ton of special cases written just to make a whole set of silly little features work.
David/Vernon:
So 1 vote for option 1 and 1 vote for option 2. Also 1 vote for a fullscreen map.
And, yes, in either case, it's "click to move".
David's reasoning does make a bit of sense since there's only the one party. I find that it's easier to control option 2 RPGs, but option 1 RPGs often allow you to target some spot far away on the map and tell your party to move there.
I could have keyboard scrolling - that isn't a problem.
Vernon said that he liked keeping the party in the center of the screen. I could use a modified option 2 where the screen is always centered on the player (or maybe it stays centered close enough that the player is within 3 squares of the center of the screen - basically, the "edge" of the screen would be close to the middle).
I don't like limitting the distance one can scroll from their player. When I can scroll the screen, I want to be able to direct my characters to move to the other side of the map. Still, limitting the distance has some appeal.
For option 1, I would have a "center the screen on the player" key on the keyboard. The problem is that hardly anyone reads the instructions to games, so no one would know about.
One thing I have is a "roof" layer that appears over buildings. The roof isn't displayed over the building you're in, but it is displayed over the others. This partly eliminates the need for darkness over unexplored areas. If I used option 2 or used option 1 with limitted scrolling distance, that would reduce the need even more. I don't really like having darkness over the unexplored areas too much, so if I use option 1, it probably will be with limitted scrolling distance (even though I don't like that either).
#5
bastards 10bucks a month since 97' damnit damnit damnit.
06/23/2005 (1:57 pm)
I personaly (for RPG) prefer Ultima Online i think they have the best way of doing a top down view with controls etc. Been paying thembastards 10bucks a month since 97' damnit damnit damnit.
#6
06/23/2005 (2:09 pm)
And here I was wondering how UO had managed to stay in business all this time...heheh
#7
How does UO handle screen scrolling? I've never played it - with my dialup connections, online games aren't really worth paying for.
06/23/2005 (8:24 pm)
Well, the view in my RPG isn't exactly top-down, but it's close enough.How does UO handle screen scrolling? I've never played it - with my dialup connections, online games aren't really worth paying for.
Torque Owner Cinder Games