High Concept / Design brief #1147
Comments
|
1 - I would say the humor. That's what we really lack IMHO in this game because it would require some funny animations and that would mean more work on the artists shoulders. Note that there is a global creature issue that might answer some of your questions #1081 I understand your will of trying to find clear goals but here, it is a spare time project. The issues we open here are to be picked up by volunteers. We define the milestones we aim for but we change at every version depending on what has been done. Usually, when one of us has an idea, he just opens an issue to discuss it until we reach a consensus. I believe that if one of us was to try to be the leader and to rule everything, the other team members would leave. ATM, I have fun working on the game and that's why I do it. If I was told what to do and how to do it, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't stay and I guess it is the same for the others. IMHO, that's the biggest difference between professional games (where you can say everybody what to do since you pay them for that) and a spare time project (where you need to let people do what they like or they might go away). |
|
When the last team left, the project was a real mess, most of it was just some proof of concept mechanics and lots of unrealistic goals. At first i simplified and shaped it a lot to resemble more the original DKs, after that i stepped down and everything is decided among all, my opinion may have some weigth but its not final or decisive, so i dont consider myself the project leader, just the older member around.
Exactly my thoughs, i dont want to rule or be ruled, this is for fun even if we are serious about it |
hwoarangmy commented@hwoarangmy So (1) a funny (10) multiplayer focused game. That would be quite a challenge I think as comedy is much easier to do in a single player/story setting than it is in a multiplayer game. When you have a 30-minute battle with a friend, you're not exactly wanting to watch your creatures dance when the casino has a jackpot right? So do you have any idea how you'll wanna get there? And DK1 being too easy is a symptom of underlying problems, not a problem in itself. The main game was very light on content, just a single 20 level campaign which spent a lot of time teaching you the game. The later levels where challenging enough for newcomers, but only the first time you played it. The Deeper Dungeons expansion showed some of the real problems, where it showed that some of the design problems made it very difficult for level designers to show some proper levels. (For example prison+torture room are the most fun rooms in the game, but they are so effective in adding the strength of the enemy to your own that giving the enemy more creatures doesn't provide more of a challenge.) It is possible though, try this map and you'll probably lose. Having a design does not mean having a leader. A good developer is worth his weight in gold and designers and testers are there to support him, not to lead him. Yes, when you're told to do something you don't like to do on your hobby you'd be silly to do so, that's why I said the design should be their to support your vision of the game. But also, when you spend a lot of time on the game and it is shaping up to be something that just doesn't work, is no fun to play, you'll also quickly lose motivation. I've yet to meet a developer who enjoys it when he finds out that what he has built can be thrown away because it is not what the customer wanted/is no fun/doesn't fit with the rest of the product. Danimal696 commented@Danimal696 I'm not saying you need more leadership, and I'm certainly not saying I'm should be the boss. I've been the major boss and the minor boss, and I'm retired now so I'm also not looking for that. What I'm saying is that it would be very nice for everybody involved if all features, mechanics and other work that is done serves some overall design and benefits the end result. That everything fits together well. That doesn't help, yes winning is nice but you just said having the game be very easy is no fun. So let me rephrase, what should make the combat fun? How are you as a player involved in the victory? Or do you want a single button that says 'attack' and do you sit back and wait to see if you win or lose? |
Yes, of course, looking at your creatures will be much more on purpose during the campaign than during the game. I would also had that once you have seen the black mistress in the torture room once, you won't find it as funny the next time. But you will remind that it was fun. And that's what I think we should go for.
Well, difficulty depends on the map. Changing them is not too hard. What is difficult is to balance the game so that it is chalenging in multiplayer. Making sure that there is no unique strategy that beats all the others and that every player will go for. That's what is hard. For this reason, we have set in config files (text mode) the description of most features. This way, if someone wants to try to balance the game, he doesn't have to be a developper and to compile the game. Changing the config files is enough. |
well, i dont consider myself a boss at all (and dont want to be) and your feedback is pretty welcome, im not taking any of it as an offense. Anyways, putting something like that together will take a lot of time and effort but may be worth it, currently the wiki tries to fill that spot.
Thats a Conan quote! how cant you not know it? heresy... |
|
@Danimal696 The High Concept does not take that much time at all. It should fit on a single page of text. Naturally speccing out the game further will take a lot of effort and that will go along side the development of the game. It sounds to me like both of you prefer the dungeon management aspect of the game, and that combat in itself is not important. |
|
Theres already such a mechanic, when invading enemy dungeons you cant drop creatures nor in unclaimed lands, there is a spell that makes all ready creatures rush there "call to arms". |
|
Yes I know, just like both dungeon keepers. However, this can all be claimed, and most attacks are begun by claiming first and then fighting on the edge where red and blue land meet. Heroes are almost exclusively battled on claimed ground. This means almost always you'll just drop all your creatures directly on the battle. |
|
We have :), rock 0% fullness |
|
My turn I guess. (Been pretty busy, but well, I like design discussions :]) Anyone, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but here is my opinion: @Loobinex If I may, I think this issue is pretty cool to summarize a bit why every people involved around is still around. :)
The good thing is that you care enough to try and refine the design goals of this game, the thing I'm trying to understand though is: Basically, you have understood we're working on a game heavily inspired by DK1/2 games, but we don't exactly want to make a clone. So yes, we want to take the essence out of it, and refine it into our own beast. I will be straight but, everyone here has a growing experience in what he wants about the DK game, and I think we already had some discussions about the 3 builds type of creatures in combat, the different strategies (dungeon building planning, rush strategy possibility, use of strategic point on the map) and so on. Having other grand plans is great on paper to me, but on a spare time projects, it may hurt the projects, especially the design changes as we see fit, because implementing the desired features can take (much more) time and because people change their mind on what is fun over time. The game is quite fun already and we know we lack a campaign mode and good well-balanced fun maps. Is there anything else you need to know? |
|
@Bertram25: Thanks for the reply. I apparently misunderstood the current status of the project, when I played it I assumed you were in the process on getting an engine running and had focused purely on technical issues. I did not know the current build is already considered fun. (I'm sorry, this sounds mean, it's not intended that way.) In any case, I've gotten plenty of information on this issue that I could have otherwise gotten from a design brief. Enough to be able to raise some topics that should give you some food for thought. |
Lol, well, it's so good to be bad, right? ;P
Now there is something interesting, if you can pinpoint what is "too easy", we can maybe work on that point per point.
Good! I guess the future of this issue belongs to forums or more precise tasks, then? |
|
When I have some time I indeed want to raise some topics about dungeons and creature concepts. I'll leave the administration of closing issues and moving discussions to other places to you. However, if you feel you'd like to have High Concept, I have received input for it here so I could provide one for you all. If you don't see any value I won't make one as it is a bit of work. |
|
Note that ATM, we are lacking room diversity. When we will have more models, we might be able to have creatures depending on rooms (like in DK). Since you are talking about concepts, to increase the strategic aspect of the game, for the first attempt at balancing, I've made tier 4 creatures specialized (physical, magical and elemental) depend on 2 corresponding tier 3 creatures. This way, switching from one specialized type to another is not (or at least less) trivial and makes checking your opponent dungeon a bigger priority. Regarding this point, when the 0.7.0 is out, I might have a look at implementing a scout spell that shows some target tiles away. |
|
I have started making a big post about creature attracting which I'll post on the forum when it's done and my account is approved there. That's not what I mean by dungeon building here,... In Dungeon Keeper the first few minutes of each level you can plan your dungeon, to build the optimal layout, and you'll have to consider things like not having creatures walk through libraries to not upset your researchers and have them shoot at your workers, to strategically place your lairs to not instigate fights between creatures that hate each other, have your workshop close to your hatchery and training room because bile demons walk very slowly, build everything in an efficient shape to be able to reinforce the walls quickly for security and room efficiency. Stuff like that. |
|
ok. That is planned and more or less implemented. Infortunately, for balancing purposes, we didn't use it much. ATM, only spiders/cavehornets fight each other when there are too many of them together. This has been done almost only to remind how it should be done. Note that you don't need to compile or build anything to test that. |
In #1132 I asked an off topic question, and the resulting answers need to be addressed. If I understand correctly nothing is written down on what this project is trying to accomplish, so the risk is that nothing is going to be accomplished. We need a High Concept or a Design Brief or something along those lines.
To respond to the comments on the other issue
Danimal696 commented:
'Basically the same thing as DK' is a first step. However, there are 2 DK games which are pretty different with some things that both games do right, some things both games do wrong, and many things that are just being done right in one of those games. The result is that if you ask 4 DK fans what they like about Dungeon Keeper, you'll get four different answers. If the OpenDungeons team has all want the same thing from this game that's great, if you want different things you'd best find out early.
Danimal696 commented:
It's good to know that on this project designers get paid but developers, modelers, testers, artists and other contributors work for free. 😄
Seriously though, @Danimal696 please share the roadmap as that's already something.
Where I strongly disagree is your implication that having a design - a clearly defined goal and direction for the project - will make it more likely for you to get sidetracked away from ever finishing. Or that outside requests are your biggest risk.
In fact the opposite is true, if you can clearly articulate what you want, have a High Concept thought out and written down, you can look at each feature that you think of or is ever proposed and ask 'does this feature reinforce the main concept of my game or detract from it'. It will give you focus and it will help you to cut features you thought you wanted but really don't need. And knowing what to cut is the difference between a successful project and a failed one.
akien-mga commented:
@akien-mga I'm willing to help, but you should realize that the people doing all the work are fundamental in what the design is going to become. I can't tell you what the final product will be like, I can only ask the right questions. If I'd design the game I'd like to play and you'd all hate nobody would be happy and it won't get done. You're putting in the work, you're not doing this to make money, so the end result should be a game you love to play. And I don't know what that is.
Again, if there's anything specific for me to read up on, show me. (For example how did Danimal696 share his view on the design with the rest of you?)
What I'll do to help is the following:
Questions on the direction of the project.
As I mentioned above I need to know what you all imply when you're saying you want a game 'like dungeon keeper'. A recent example on why this is important is the reception of War for the Overworld, which aspired to be an unofficial dungeon keeper three. The person in charge of that project loved competitive DK2 so he had his team build all kind of features around concepts like 'competitive build orders' and skill based play, but because the communication around this project was basically 'just like dungeon keeper' the people who always player a 'dungeon sim' were quite disappointed by the fast pace of the game. As a small team you need to figure out your own balance, focus on accomplishing this, and communicate these goals internally and externally.
My questions for the core team members are:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: