Wednesday, August 18, 2004
There's a game I want to play. I woke up with it in my mind this morning and it's bugged me all day.
Take a strategy game like one of the Total War titles. Mmm, strategy and a campaign to tie it all together and a pretty awesome setting.
Now lets add in-depth multiplayer and cooperative play. The strategy fan gets to be the commander. He plays the game from various camera angles and, using waypoints, map markers and other visual and audio queues, directs his AI units and the other players. The other players play as lieutenants. They play from a first person perspective and can "tag" squads of troops to follow their direct commands and can also directly affect combat by playing a combat role, much like the AI units.
Gameplay would flow as such: The commander sets his strategy using markers. Lets make these banners that are viewable only to his team, representing locations that he wants troops to move to. He slaps banner A onto the field, then selects an infantry squad (AI controlled) and then indicates an action such as "move to" on the banner. The AI troops move to the banner. Now the commander wants his lieutenant to fortify that position with their squad. He highlights banner A again, then highlights his lieutenant and activates the "move to" action again. The feedback for the commander is the same as if he told an AI group to move. To the lieutenant, his display shows banner A as highlighted and a map ping fires off to let him know he was just commanded to move to a location. Since his squad is tied to him, those troops won't go unless he does.
Expand on that. Add configurable formations that can be set by the commander and lieutenants. A quick response chat system similar to the order menus in Counter-Strike or Battlefield. In-depth actions beyond "move to" such as "assault this location", "defend this position".
Add variety: infantry, mounted. Swordsmen, pikemen, archers. Multiple, yet distinct and unique factions. Random and wide-ranging terrain.
Customization is critical. Let the commander pick his faction, colours, units that he's bringing to battle. Let him choose battle locations. Let him choose the strategy, what time of day to fight. Represent this with a battleskill. The commander with the better skill can influence these important factors to try and sway the environment to best suit his units. Let him design his units. Have the option to pick medium armoured one-hand axemen with medium shields, or heavy armoured elephants with rifle-wielding light infantry.
Give the lieutenants the same choices. Give them the choice to be that medium axeman, or the light rifleman.
Let the players progress! Commanders get experience for completing massive goals such as completing a siege. They can then pick abilities that allow them to influence the next battle, or open up opportunities for wider troop selection or technology. allow them to reward their lieutenants with items that not only affect gameplay, but also visual enhancements. Lieutenants gain experience from smaller goals such as waypoints and from direct combat. Following breadcrumbs (command waypoints) should yield massive experience to encourage actual strategy and not just mindless killing. Lieutenants have access to combat abilities and abilities that directly enhance the small squads they lead, impoving the effectiveness of the combat machine.
Make it easy for people to play. Allow a handicap system so you can play your level 10 characters against a newbies' level 1 character. Give him the temporary skills of the equivalent level so they can compete on a realative flat field. That level 1 character will still be lacking the rewards that a level 10 may have acheived during their career, but they still stand a fair chance and will gain levels rapidly until the near equal status. Open the game to long campaigns and short skimishes. Have a built in chatroom to discuss strategy beforehand and a save feature so you can finish a fight later.
Add detail. Fantasy settings are amazing for the variety, cliches, backgrounds, environments, and even strategy. It provides equal opportunity for both ranged and melee combat, for ground, sea and arial combat. Have a great history; excellent reasons for the players to want to crush each other into pixel dust. Let the players choose their own path. Take the morale high-ground, ally with the perceived villain or take the middle road and every other road in between.
It would be a massive undertaking. It would be my perfect game. Will it ever get made?
Take a strategy game like one of the Total War titles. Mmm, strategy and a campaign to tie it all together and a pretty awesome setting.
Now lets add in-depth multiplayer and cooperative play. The strategy fan gets to be the commander. He plays the game from various camera angles and, using waypoints, map markers and other visual and audio queues, directs his AI units and the other players. The other players play as lieutenants. They play from a first person perspective and can "tag" squads of troops to follow their direct commands and can also directly affect combat by playing a combat role, much like the AI units.
Gameplay would flow as such: The commander sets his strategy using markers. Lets make these banners that are viewable only to his team, representing locations that he wants troops to move to. He slaps banner A onto the field, then selects an infantry squad (AI controlled) and then indicates an action such as "move to" on the banner. The AI troops move to the banner. Now the commander wants his lieutenant to fortify that position with their squad. He highlights banner A again, then highlights his lieutenant and activates the "move to" action again. The feedback for the commander is the same as if he told an AI group to move. To the lieutenant, his display shows banner A as highlighted and a map ping fires off to let him know he was just commanded to move to a location. Since his squad is tied to him, those troops won't go unless he does.
Expand on that. Add configurable formations that can be set by the commander and lieutenants. A quick response chat system similar to the order menus in Counter-Strike or Battlefield. In-depth actions beyond "move to" such as "assault this location", "defend this position".
Add variety: infantry, mounted. Swordsmen, pikemen, archers. Multiple, yet distinct and unique factions. Random and wide-ranging terrain.
Customization is critical. Let the commander pick his faction, colours, units that he's bringing to battle. Let him choose battle locations. Let him choose the strategy, what time of day to fight. Represent this with a battleskill. The commander with the better skill can influence these important factors to try and sway the environment to best suit his units. Let him design his units. Have the option to pick medium armoured one-hand axemen with medium shields, or heavy armoured elephants with rifle-wielding light infantry.
Give the lieutenants the same choices. Give them the choice to be that medium axeman, or the light rifleman.
Let the players progress! Commanders get experience for completing massive goals such as completing a siege. They can then pick abilities that allow them to influence the next battle, or open up opportunities for wider troop selection or technology. allow them to reward their lieutenants with items that not only affect gameplay, but also visual enhancements. Lieutenants gain experience from smaller goals such as waypoints and from direct combat. Following breadcrumbs (command waypoints) should yield massive experience to encourage actual strategy and not just mindless killing. Lieutenants have access to combat abilities and abilities that directly enhance the small squads they lead, impoving the effectiveness of the combat machine.
Make it easy for people to play. Allow a handicap system so you can play your level 10 characters against a newbies' level 1 character. Give him the temporary skills of the equivalent level so they can compete on a realative flat field. That level 1 character will still be lacking the rewards that a level 10 may have acheived during their career, but they still stand a fair chance and will gain levels rapidly until the near equal status. Open the game to long campaigns and short skimishes. Have a built in chatroom to discuss strategy beforehand and a save feature so you can finish a fight later.
Add detail. Fantasy settings are amazing for the variety, cliches, backgrounds, environments, and even strategy. It provides equal opportunity for both ranged and melee combat, for ground, sea and arial combat. Have a great history; excellent reasons for the players to want to crush each other into pixel dust. Let the players choose their own path. Take the morale high-ground, ally with the perceived villain or take the middle road and every other road in between.
It would be a massive undertaking. It would be my perfect game. Will it ever get made?
