Where are we headed?
by Ratt · in General Discussion · 06/05/2002 (12:29 pm) · 21 replies
Before i really start to contribute with concept arttextures,and 3d models, i wantn to know: "What IS Realm Wars exactly?"
Is this going to be like any other fantasy game,where you are either human,orc,or some pansy little elf(dont get me started on elves,they belong in the keebler workshop,not the battlefield,and you just run around shooting each others brains out with no real impact on the game/server?
I 90% agree with Jeff on how this should be like warhammer40k. We can have all types of races (more races means more players and moreexciting gameplay) and you dont EXACTLY have to fight 100% of the time.you can do sneak attacks,plan,trade,and maybe we can have a stat system(PLEASE ADD A STAT SYSTEM). There would be more advanced things than Crossbows (Bolters,flamers,Farg and rak grendes,ect.). It would be a bold new step in gaming and a game that most people like,since it would have a bit o everythging (RPG elements for RPGers,Wits and guts for strategy gamers,and plenty of brain-busting action for action lovers)
This sounds great,but i have a good twist for it. it wouldnt be run by the government (space Marine Corps) but it would be in a state of confusion,where nobody FULLY rules. A future-day Hell on Earth, with the streets over run by gangs and thugs,and the rural places overrun by beasts and the not-so-civilized(orcs?
It can kind of be like a "Magic Vs. Technology" or like i say "mana vs. metal". We should all post what we think of makin it more WH40K or keeping it like all other fantasy games.
Is this going to be like any other fantasy game,where you are either human,orc,or some pansy little elf(dont get me started on elves,they belong in the keebler workshop,not the battlefield,and you just run around shooting each others brains out with no real impact on the game/server?
I 90% agree with Jeff on how this should be like warhammer40k. We can have all types of races (more races means more players and moreexciting gameplay) and you dont EXACTLY have to fight 100% of the time.you can do sneak attacks,plan,trade,and maybe we can have a stat system(PLEASE ADD A STAT SYSTEM). There would be more advanced things than Crossbows (Bolters,flamers,Farg and rak grendes,ect.). It would be a bold new step in gaming and a game that most people like,since it would have a bit o everythging (RPG elements for RPGers,Wits and guts for strategy gamers,and plenty of brain-busting action for action lovers)
This sounds great,but i have a good twist for it. it wouldnt be run by the government (space Marine Corps) but it would be in a state of confusion,where nobody FULLY rules. A future-day Hell on Earth, with the streets over run by gangs and thugs,and the rural places overrun by beasts and the not-so-civilized(orcs?
It can kind of be like a "Magic Vs. Technology" or like i say "mana vs. metal". We should all post what we think of makin it more WH40K or keeping it like all other fantasy games.
About the author
#2
What would like the long-term impact to be?
"you can do sneak attacks,plan,trade,and maybe we can have a stat system(PLEASE ADD A STAT SYSTEM)."
The problem with a stat system is the levelling treadmill that removes any element of skill from the game. How to get around that?
"There would be more advanced things than Crossbows (Bolters,flamers,Farg and rak grendes,ect.)."
One question I do have about a strict fantasy setting is how to get a good variety of weapons. In terms of projectile weapons you have what? Crossbows, normal bows, rocks, spears, maybe boomerang type things...all low rate of fire, no spread or explosion, etc. Unique and interesting weapons are hard to come up with in a strict fantasy setting.
"It would be a bold new step in gaming and a game that most people like,since it would have a bit o everythging (RPG elements for RPGers,Wits and guts for strategy gamers,and plenty of brain-busting action for action lovers) "
Lots of games that have a bit of everything end up being bad at all of them. What are your ideas as far as long-term strategy goes? What is the ultimate goal? What are you trying to accomplish on the larger scale?
06/05/2002 (6:44 pm)
"...,and you just run around shooting each others brains out with no real impact on the game/server? "What would like the long-term impact to be?
"you can do sneak attacks,plan,trade,and maybe we can have a stat system(PLEASE ADD A STAT SYSTEM)."
The problem with a stat system is the levelling treadmill that removes any element of skill from the game. How to get around that?
"There would be more advanced things than Crossbows (Bolters,flamers,Farg and rak grendes,ect.)."
One question I do have about a strict fantasy setting is how to get a good variety of weapons. In terms of projectile weapons you have what? Crossbows, normal bows, rocks, spears, maybe boomerang type things...all low rate of fire, no spread or explosion, etc. Unique and interesting weapons are hard to come up with in a strict fantasy setting.
"It would be a bold new step in gaming and a game that most people like,since it would have a bit o everythging (RPG elements for RPGers,Wits and guts for strategy gamers,and plenty of brain-busting action for action lovers) "
Lots of games that have a bit of everything end up being bad at all of them. What are your ideas as far as long-term strategy goes? What is the ultimate goal? What are you trying to accomplish on the larger scale?
#3
Weapons in a fantasy setting is pretty easy to come up with, becouse you can always add some magic to it and if you want some inspiration just look at a book about weapons from the medievil times.
06/06/2002 (5:19 am)
Jeff has already stated that this will be in a totally fantasy setting(ie no big fusion ultra laser guns, but sleek bows etc).Weapons in a fantasy setting is pretty easy to come up with, becouse you can always add some magic to it and if you want some inspiration just look at a book about weapons from the medievil times.
#4
I don't envision Orcs with big guns (well, maybe I do, but the rest of the GG guys don't), but we do see having interesting weapons.
Think of RW more as a platform than a game. Imagine a hand to hand, fantasy based area that is the RW we are working on here. Then add on the RW 39,500 Steam Punk stuff that Phil is working on in another area. Now, imagine somebody adding in the "Tactical Shooter" that is so popular in among current publishers.
What is the biggest difference between these games? Art, rules, and scripting data. The difficult things such as networking, rendering, and back end database are all the same. Even a lot of the scripting data is very portable. CTF is CTF whether you are capturing a flag or kidnapping the Queen or substituting some other item for the flag. It cracks me up to see some huge production like 1942 with a basic gameplay still tied to CTF. We can do better and we WILL.
Anyway, all of these different "mods" or TC's could be accessed with a single user account, and have a common menu or map or 3D front end allowing the player to choose which one they want to play today. If we can pull this off, we will own the on-line action category. Our product will get better and better until the big publishers concede the category and move on.
Jeff Tunnell GG
06/06/2002 (7:50 am)
But we do have magic, so that is how we get interesting weapons and effects. Note that the current crossbow projectile explodes when it hits.I don't envision Orcs with big guns (well, maybe I do, but the rest of the GG guys don't), but we do see having interesting weapons.
Think of RW more as a platform than a game. Imagine a hand to hand, fantasy based area that is the RW we are working on here. Then add on the RW 39,500 Steam Punk stuff that Phil is working on in another area. Now, imagine somebody adding in the "Tactical Shooter" that is so popular in among current publishers.
What is the biggest difference between these games? Art, rules, and scripting data. The difficult things such as networking, rendering, and back end database are all the same. Even a lot of the scripting data is very portable. CTF is CTF whether you are capturing a flag or kidnapping the Queen or substituting some other item for the flag. It cracks me up to see some huge production like 1942 with a basic gameplay still tied to CTF. We can do better and we WILL.
Anyway, all of these different "mods" or TC's could be accessed with a single user account, and have a common menu or map or 3D front end allowing the player to choose which one they want to play today. If we can pull this off, we will own the on-line action category. Our product will get better and better until the big publishers concede the category and move on.
Jeff Tunnell GG
#5
06/06/2002 (9:35 am)
Jeff... you forgot the evil cackle at the end of that ;)
#6
Of course this idea may completely suck too. I was just thinking that I would hate to get ready for a battle expecting a sword fight and get plucked down from 100 yards with an exploding arrow.
Dave
06/06/2002 (11:12 am)
I kind of like the idea of having weapons that aren't super hi-tech, or even medium-tech. Since there aren't jet packs, mobility will be pretty straight forward. I think it would be fun to have weapons that don't hit every time, or that don't even hit most of the time. You could make it so that combat isn't at a fast and furious pace. It would be far more primitive, with vastly innacurate weaponry calling for super close combat battles with short range weapons and hand to hand combat. The closer the combatants are, the more accurate their weapons would be. Of course this idea may completely suck too. I was just thinking that I would hate to get ready for a battle expecting a sword fight and get plucked down from 100 yards with an exploding arrow.
Dave
#7
You have no problem with that, right?
06/07/2002 (12:13 am)
*picks off David from 100 meters with an exploding crossbow bolt*You have no problem with that, right?
#8
*Laughs manicaly, and then disapears again*
I dont really know but I think hand-to-hand combat and long-range combat would rock.
06/07/2002 (4:14 am)
*Cuts Hughs head off with my katana from less then 1 metre**Laughs manicaly, and then disapears again*
I dont really know but I think hand-to-hand combat and long-range combat would rock.
#9
I also had a cool thought on arrows. The long range arrows could be nutralized with teamwork. Think of a troop of warriors, in formation, with shields above their heads. Watch the first few minutes of gladiator to see what I mean. Great tactic against bows. Now that would be phat. It won't stop, say, a big catapult rock. Then when you get close to the archers, you break and charge. Ah, the sweet art of ancient combat.
06/07/2002 (9:18 am)
Personally I am not very fond of the exploding crossbow. Maybe if you had a magician and an archer working in unison that would be interesting. The magician casts on the arrows and the archer lets loose. That would be interseting, but to start off with exploding arrows seems to be to quick to the good stuff. Let players progress to that.I also had a cool thought on arrows. The long range arrows could be nutralized with teamwork. Think of a troop of warriors, in formation, with shields above their heads. Watch the first few minutes of gladiator to see what I mean. Great tactic against bows. Now that would be phat. It won't stop, say, a big catapult rock. Then when you get close to the archers, you break and charge. Ah, the sweet art of ancient combat.
#10
06/07/2002 (12:49 pm)
I like the idea of a line of people with huge shields to take the arrows. That would be cool. It would force teamwork also. You could maybe bring formations into the mix also, wedges and things like that..
#11
a: You do you get/keep people in formations?
b: How is being in a formation useful?
I think a lot of real-life reasons formations are useful might not directly apply to a game.
The idea of people blocking arrows with shields is cool though.
06/07/2002 (2:52 pm)
Formations are an interesting question. Two thoughts:a: You do you get/keep people in formations?
b: How is being in a formation useful?
I think a lot of real-life reasons formations are useful might not directly apply to a game.
The idea of people blocking arrows with shields is cool though.
#12
The why it works is arrows tend to rise and fall along an arc. And the decent is excellerated as the arrow slows down. So by raising your shield above your head, the falling arrows tend to strike your shield and fall away. The most exposed people are obviously the ones in front. Their heads are covered but their fronts are exposed. The romans used very large shields that would allow the warriors in the front to hold their shield like normal, and the warriors behind them would cover themselves and the people in front of them. The large shields also let them overlap thus making a better cover. This is a tricky manuver but would be great if we have some castle sieging.
06/07/2002 (7:28 pm)
I actually thought of the how after posting. There would need to be a follow command. You would get in position, then latch onto the guy in front of you. Dark Age of Camelot has a comand like this where you can follow someone. The only problems I see are lag causing the formation to expand and contract which alway happens in DAOC with a large group. If we made the movement serverside, this would negate the problem, but cause the client to jump around when it tries to correct any differences with the server.The why it works is arrows tend to rise and fall along an arc. And the decent is excellerated as the arrow slows down. So by raising your shield above your head, the falling arrows tend to strike your shield and fall away. The most exposed people are obviously the ones in front. Their heads are covered but their fronts are exposed. The romans used very large shields that would allow the warriors in the front to hold their shield like normal, and the warriors behind them would cover themselves and the people in front of them. The large shields also let them overlap thus making a better cover. This is a tricky manuver but would be great if we have some castle sieging.
#13
06/12/2002 (9:38 am)
Where does Realm wars stand on animal transport? How about animals with a basic instinctual AI ie: movement, attack pattern etc that can be 90% controlled by a player if they mount? When the animal is loose, it acts as it would. I'm thinking mounted wild boars etc that you steer into combat, but that boar with their tusks and rear and snort of their own accord. meanwhile you let loose with your arrows.....(anybody seen princess monoke? :) ) 
#14
06/12/2002 (9:43 am)
Nothing has been coded for this yet (Phil?) but I believe there is plenty of desire for this so it is likely to make it's way in early on. If nothing else I plan to add mounts (animals not points) as a major part of a future game of mine and will share that to Realm Wars.
#15
06/12/2002 (4:04 pm)
One of the pieces of concept art shows an Orc riding some sort of beast. It would certainly be cool. (Fondly remembers playing Golden Axe the arcade game)
#16
06/13/2002 (6:22 am)
Yeah, i loved that too :) After watching Princess Monoke, i love the idea of various weird and wonderful creatures ( and also real world ones) being rode into battle. I wonder if soem of the player races could actually be animals? Would perhaps be cool to join forces with another race and have a two player rider and mount scenario....
#17
06/13/2002 (10:45 am)
THAT would be interesting, and your rider couldn't communicate with you except for giving you up/down/left/right commands and such. In fact, how about making it so the animals can talk to each other, but not the riders? 
#18
"If you want to play a game like that, play that game."
I think when people usually say that; it means that they really loved that game but they think there is room for improvement and expansion of the idea. It is not necessarily a bad thing.
06/13/2002 (11:17 am)
In response to Jason's comment in regards to comparing your game to another. ie. Like a cross between Half-Life and Dues Ex: "If you want to play a game like that, play that game."
I think when people usually say that; it means that they really loved that game but they think there is room for improvement and expansion of the idea. It is not necessarily a bad thing.
#19
If you look at something like Black & White, it's the culmination of all of Peter Molyneux's previous god games. He's been slowly working towards Black & White all his life. Similarly something like Grand Theft Auto 3. It's the natural progression of the original titles. My point is, as the guy above me said, even very original games have room for improvement, and more importantly, EVOLUTION.
But hey, what do I know.
06/13/2002 (11:36 am)
I'm but a mere newbie, so my input probably isn't all that valid, but some of the best games of all time have come about via combining two or more other games and/or concepts. Best example I can think of is probably something like Thief, or maybe System Shock. Essentially, that's combining stealth and RPG elements with a first-person shooter. And it works very very well.If you look at something like Black & White, it's the culmination of all of Peter Molyneux's previous god games. He's been slowly working towards Black & White all his life. Similarly something like Grand Theft Auto 3. It's the natural progression of the original titles. My point is, as the guy above me said, even very original games have room for improvement, and more importantly, EVOLUTION.
But hey, what do I know.
#20
How about destroyable bases (forts is a better word for Realm Wars) Walls that take damage, catch fire, and eventually collapse. You could even take that further and do defend and destroy type missions where the objectives are, for example, to destroy the enemies armory, watch tower, etc.
Also I liked the idea of hand to hand combat brought up in another thread, useing defensive moves. I propose various types of clubs and morning stars as some of the weapons.
Another idea in the weapon category.... catapaults that you can use to hurl various projectiles, rocks, tar, flameing tar, etc.
Yet another idea :0) a rock sling (like David and Goliath) low damage high ammo or maybe even ammo-less considering rocks aren't hard to find. It could be a mainstay type weapon that is used when all others are depleted. Then again if you are going to do hand to hand combat, fists would be that.
06/13/2002 (8:50 pm)
I have a couple of other ideas to throw into the mix.How about destroyable bases (forts is a better word for Realm Wars) Walls that take damage, catch fire, and eventually collapse. You could even take that further and do defend and destroy type missions where the objectives are, for example, to destroy the enemies armory, watch tower, etc.
Also I liked the idea of hand to hand combat brought up in another thread, useing defensive moves. I propose various types of clubs and morning stars as some of the weapons.
Another idea in the weapon category.... catapaults that you can use to hurl various projectiles, rocks, tar, flameing tar, etc.
Yet another idea :0) a rock sling (like David and Goliath) low damage high ammo or maybe even ammo-less considering rocks aren't hard to find. It could be a mainstay type weapon that is used when all others are depleted. Then again if you are going to do hand to hand combat, fists would be that.
Jason Breitweiser
I am new to the community here, but from what I've read so far it seems like there is a really creative group of people out there. RW should shun convention and try for different. I don't want to play Tribes2 with swords. Or something with ultra realistic weapons(at least not guns) and locational damage(although the posibility of beheading would be cool).