🔒 Locked

Player Control

Started by melvosh Jul 30, 2002 at 2:49 AM 3 replies 500+ views

Original Post

Jul 30, 2002 at 2:49 AM

I was reading my design doc for a iso game that where making and the part about what the player can control came up. Just to add some background first is that in the game there is no resource control or advancement in technology in the game. You start and your "side" is fully laden with equipment ready to go. Basically its like you have been placed into a war 100 years from when had started. That being said my main question would players prefer to play as "one" character and have the AI control your other troops. That way u could watch him grow etc etc Or would they rather be in general control of the whole army picking and choosing what each troop does? Thus having no single character advancement. I guess thats more like a C&C style of play. Or perhaps have a single charcter that you can advance and still be in control of the rest in a general way? I know all of it could rely on what style of game it is but the game is played in real time and the planned battles or "quests" will vary in size. Any thoughts would be appreciated. Cheers Adam

Cahaan

Jul 30, 2002 at 6:39 AM

"would players prefer to play as "one" character and have the AI control your other troops."

=> RPG-Like

"Or would they rather be in general control of the whole army picking and choosing what each troop does?"

=> RTS-Like

"Or perhaps have a single charcter that you can advance and still be in control of the rest in a general way?"

=> Hmmm... Battlezone like ?

If your game is a RTS, the first choice would probably not be a good idea. My favourite gameplay for a real time strategy game would be the third one; when your units are not completely stupid and are able to act on their own. In Battlezone it was really well done, you were able to give orders to each unit/group of units. But perhaps this kind of gameplay would suit better to a 3D RTS. If it''s ISO, I''d probably choose the classic way (C&C like).

walkingcarcass

Jul 30, 2002 at 12:15 PM

your mentioning fully developed tech trees got me thinking

what if there are a series of freindly bases near each other. you only control one. each base is limited on what it can produce.

to get the benefit of unit types complementing each other, you have to agree to form one of your attacks in cooperation with one of the others who is interested in the same kind of approach ("oi, mate, ive got extra snipers. let''s make a deal").

melvosh

Jul 31, 2002 at 2:14 AM

Thats interesting walkingcarcass as i think that could actually work in a way. At the moment the idea is that the player recieves his orders and missions from the main base so the game never stops so to speak as u can fully enter the main base much like the old game UFO enemy unknown where u sorta could do the same at one point.

Maybe perhaps i could have smaller bases at the war zones that u get dropped to where u can set up your team etc etc thats going into battle. And each base has certain equipment that others do not, sorta like some bases are to far away from home to recieve regular cargo dropped to them etc etc. Hrmm that could even be a mission now that i think of it to deliver supplies...hrmm

Thank for the replies...

Cheers
Adam

Topic Locked

This topic has been locked by a moderator. New replies are not allowed.