[JimKurth]

I've talked a lot on here lately, but this is something I kind of thought up and would like your opinion if I should/should not implement this.

My project Time Switch wants to replicate older 16-bit console platform RPGs (one thing coming to my mind is Final Fantasy III u.s. and Chrono Trigger). I've decided on using my own video format for Magic spells (no math involved; I thought this would be the easiest way to get some cool looking magic and attacks on-screen without any processing) and I asked a question in the Story/Dialogue forum about my story and incorporating different things. One thing I heard was less "boring" battles and more battles requiring players to think. And I think back on FF3 for example and I remember hating the repetitive battles. So, here's what I was thinking to make things more strategic and fun to play (less battles overall too):

*Defend is a command and RUN has gone away. Basically, if you defend, you'll only receive a % of the normal attack from the enemy and your wait-turn-meter will refill quicker than normal.
*Each playable character has 2 fighting styles (1 close-range style, and another long-range style).
*When you go into battle, before you start attacking you must select what style to use for each character to use during the entire battle.
*1 character's close-range style may be using a sword, but another player could be martial arts. It varies and animations change for each character.
*Each style has it's own Leveling. The more battles you fight with this style, the faster and stronger you become in that style. Basically, I'm throwing out the idea of needed 36 more Experience points to get to Level 10. Your battle-count is your experience.
*Each style has advantages and disadvantages: if you select close-range for all players and you're fighting a bird, you won't be able to do any physical damage. Only magic would harm it. On the other hand, your enemies could move in too close for you to use your long-range weapon for that character. It all depends, making things more strategic.
*The more you use your weapon, the weaker it becomes...to compensate for the stronger you get. Thus, you must upgrade or repair your weapons (gun weapons would require new bullets or lubricant to get it back to 100% effectiveness) if you want to stay strong in the game and not rely on HP/MP.
*Each character has a specific magic category (ice, fire, air, earth, etc) and they can only learn the 4 magic spells per category relating to that element. Once they "master" it, the character learns how to incorporate it with their style and a super physical/magical spell is allowed which uses nothign but nice video to show it off. Also considering of using the special attacks when near-death (like in FF8).

Some of the styles/weapons used include: (LR=Long-Range, SR=Short-Range)
Kaire: LR = Slingshot, SR = Bat
Natalie: LR = Guns, SR = Martial Arts
Richtor: LR = Spear, SR = Sword
Jed: LR = Inventions/Bow&Arrow, SR = Alchemy
.
.
.

Anyway, what do you think or what are your suggestions? They only give me more options to rethink this project and try to develop more ways to do the usual thing because I want a very UNIQUE game. And if you don't know anything about my project, check out the info on my project page. It's called Time Switch.

Thanks,

Jim

[Rainer Deyke]

[Ninkazu]

Something I learned about designing games is that you shouldn't base it around your battle engine. I still don't see much innovation in your ideas either.

[Nodtveidt]

If you really want to create a unique type of combat situation, try to enhance the style created in Final Fantasy 7. Customizing weapons and armor create all kinds of new attacks and defenses, plus gives you condition-specific powers and abilities, not to mention that the concept of Limit Breaks in that game could be likewise used in a similar fashion elsewhere...like a "save up power for a big hit" like Rainer Deyke suggested.

The idea of forcing a player to use only one of the styles is a very very bad idea. In real combat situations, you are never limited to only one style, and even in RPGs you're rarely limited to a single type of action, unless a character is an oaf and can do little more than swing a shiny piece of metal around.

The idea of weapons and armor deteriorating over time isn't unique, several games use this method, including one MMORPG I've played called Rush On Seven Episodes (R.O.S.E.).

Basically, the usable ideas you have aren't unique, and the unique ideas you have aren't usable. Might wanna go back to the drawing board and try again. :)
_________________
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows. - wallace

[tgramsus]

Defend doesn't have to be a normal Defend. There was a game on PS1 from Sony, where every couple of rounds, a boss would throw a really powerful attack, and the only way to survive it was defending. Also the defend command could work differently depending on the character's class or style. A knight could protect the entire party. Like if the mage is gonna cast Meteor and it can be interrupted by a physical attack, the knight could protect him. A mage when defending, could absorb any magic thrown at the party, absorbing the damage (reduced) but also absorbing the cost and adding it to his mp count.

The fighting styles could work. Maybe it's not different styles, just characters carrying 2 sets of weapons (Long range, Short range). You do have to put the sword down if you're going to use your bow.
I think it's better if you can change it before each round, like FF, where you can move them to the front row and back on the fly. But to work effectively, battles have to make the player make decisions. The Player cannot go the whole game with one style. Like if fighting a knight boss, physical attacks are not harming him. But behind him is a orb-like thing, which is casting a shield around the knight. Player needs to destroy it with long range and then kill the knight. Or a turtle-like beast, and to make it's head come out, you shoot long range weapons to a small crack on it's shell. Or a Mage, getting ready to cast Meteor, any physical attack can stop it, but cannot hit close range because there's a monster in front of him. You can beat this mage without changing the styles, but you might die a couple of times before finally beating him. Don't like having to level each one individually though.

Never liked the "weapons is getting weaker" thing. Player could be in a tough dungeon, just found the key to the boss, pumped because it's gonna fight this huge, 2 headed cyclops. But then realizes weapons are not good and is forced to go back to town. Being able to upgrade and customize them is always good.

About the magic categories. Maybe they can be combined. Like there is a 2nd set, might be "mind, body, time and space". If I have fire and time, my magic skill set will be different than one who chose fire and space.

[DeveloperX]

I loved the battle system in Squaresoft's Xenogears for Playstation.

As a character, you built up AP to create combo attack with skills that you acquired throughout the game.
As a mech, you built up AP to obtain new damage limits that became accessible as you become more powerful and obtained new items to unlock more abilities.
If you haven't played Xenogears, hit a pawn shop or www.thegametrader.com and get a copy and play it.

You should play as many RPGs as possible to get an idea of the Pros and Cons of the different systems that each game employs.

You should, however attempt to create something that has not been done before (or improve a generally poor design to create something better.)

I always wanted to try to make a combination of Final Fantasy VII's battle system and Xenogear's Combo system ..to unleash combos of high-level magics (just think...64 summons of KOTR MIMEd by the other 2 characters :D ....ooohhhh aaahhh)

Okay, thats my $0.02 ..well the best I can do as tired as I am.
Goodnight. have fun.
_________________
Principal Software Architect
Rambling Indie Games, LLC

See my professional portfolio

[JimKurth]

Okay I did some editing and here's what I am forseeing with my game system:

World:
Pre-rendered image with a boundary map attached to each. Small character and no scrolling, only 1 screensize for the current continent with a 35 degree angle perspective.

Town:
Pre-rendered grassy background with boundary map attached and sprites making up the village/city. Sprites include fore/mid/back-ground buildings/trees/obstacles/walls/etc. Town uses bigger character sprite than world view.

Stats:
HP - Hitpoint (%)
MP - Mind points
CP - Conscious point (%)
LVL - Level
EXP - Experience
EEX - Enemy Experience
STR - Attack strength
EVA - Evasion/Dodge (%)
ADR - Adrenaline (%)

Battle: (long one)
Explanation of stats here:
HP %: No longer a 999/999 HP view, but your health in % form is tracked. Eating the fruit will increase 25% of your health, regardless of what level you're at.
MP: As you level up and experience throughout the game, you earn mind points based on other stats (if CP/HP is up and ADR is low then MP accumulates faster and more)
CP %: If HP becomes 0, you lose conscious (CP drops to 50%) and another party member must protect that character throughout battle. And unless you give food/drinks/health to character, CP slowly drops towards 0%. At 10% or lower of ALL party members (1 has low HP), the battle is retreated, everyone's ADR goes up. You don't gain anything except enemy experience (which will be crucial for some bosses which won't be told), if any.
LVL - self-explanatory
EXP - " "
STR - self-explanatory
EVA - " "
ADR %: normal when it's below 50%. Boss battles and major events in the game make this go up, and the higher the Adrenaline, the harder you strike and more quick you are, but the more damage you take in and this slowly lowers over time or by sleeping.
EEX: When you fight in battle, your other party members will develop a little "AI" by comparing attacks with other attacks and determine the best way to attack a certain enemy. If hitting the Mulicles (unknown enemy name) with a bow and arrow is more damaging to it than with a sword, it will fill up the block for that enemy and when the other members fight, they'll recall what hurt the beast best and use that option. This fills up when you attack an enemy and the strike or magic you used works better than a standard fight command. There will be a message from the character stating what they learned, (i.e. "Hey! Hit it with the baseball bat!" upon battle and upon learning something new about the enemy.

Concept: You control only 1 character during battle, which can be chosen upon battle. Other members are computer-controlled and will use enemy experience to their advantage. Plus they will try new things if something is not working at all, and if that does more damage than regular weapons, they'll talk to you saying what they know about the enemy. The battle engine is turn-based (think about FF6 or FF7). Also, I thought about using a skill-job system like in FF:Tactics. You can pick from a list of different jobs for your character and they'll learn this or that way to fight and what magic skills they'll learn.

Item storage: You only get 8 items to store in your backpack with you on your journey (that's not including your armor/weapon/etc). This will be managed.

Well that's all I can think of. Let me know what ya think. If it's too much or not a good idea. thanks!

-jim

[RampantCoyote]

[Ninkazu]

If your game is Street Fighter: PART 9048!! then it makes sense to base the game on the battle engine. However, you're making an RPG. A game that should immerse the player in the WORLD.

Being immersed in the world, becoming your avatar's persona, interacting with the environment and people is not specifically, "so if he BLOCKS before his super DOUBLE combo and the next player has an esper activated, you can totally limit break and activate the three tap death chance game token."

So here I suggest this: create your world, its story, its people, its conflict. Then decide what the player's part in that world is. Discover how that role can be best played and base the environment interaction on that. If battle is an important part of the game, THEN create the system that allows the player to fight in the style of your interaction.

I hate it when games make me grind my level up to continue the story because strength in battle is everything. These two numbers are too low, go human bot for a while as your life wastes away.

Allow the people who grind to have some reward for wasting their time, but don't punish the person who just wants to enjoy the world. I think after all, since your goal is to tell a story, you shouldn't say, "if you want to hear chapter 2, come back with 400 troll heads." That's just bloat to add to maximum gameplay time.

You know what's the worst that can happen if you manage to make a great world, but allow the character to not have to grind?
"Man that game was great, but a little too short."

MINOR complaint. I'm sure the game would stay in his memory a lot longer than a game that just made him fight and fight and fight with no story, no matter how "innovative and new" the battle system were.

[Hajo]

Wow, that's some good points in there :)

While my "games" usually lack a story, I wholeheartedly agree with the idea to start with the world, and approach design from that perspective.

I really should try a more sound design of the games world before I start projects. Thanks Ninkazu for showing the right direction :)

[JimKurth]

Well, the story is completed, the interaction/conflicts/dialogue/items/etc. is all been thoroughly completed. It's just the battle engine and point system that I need to develop. Everything else is done. It's been done for years.

I'm not diving deep into this project from scratch and so I'm not stabbing myself in the back with just a battle engine. I sort of need to know how to write it though so other engines I have will communicate effectively with it. That's why I'm talking about the battle engine.

[RampantCoyote]

Ditto. Thanks, Ninkazu. It was good to get that perspective.

I'm knee-deep in engine development ATM, so I need to come up for air from time to time and remember why I'm doing this in the first place.
_________________
Tales of the Rampant Coyote - Old-School Game Developer talks Indie Games, RPGs, and the Games Biz

[Ninkazu]

If you want to know how to write the battle engine, then leave the logic of it all for later. That should be resolved with scripting.

Allow enough flexibility for the scripts to modify game objects (map, enemy, players, whatever) including stats and Cartesian coordinates.

Set the system up to allow for:
1) battle initialization
2) Event queue
3) Input (however you see yourself doing so)
4) Adding events through a script

Using a scheduled event queue, you can have concurrent actions in your battles. Enemies can attack at the same time as the players, and input can be processed in the middle of an attack.

Events can be defined however you like, but remember that offloading a large amount of logic to scripts is costly. You may want to have a lot of engine callbacks such as DefineMovementPath and have the object move a certain way or lock on to another object. Another would be PlayAnimation (of course). An important one depending on your planned battle system could be collision queries.

To allow the most flexibility with other engines is to interconnect them with scripts.