Basic Features

Started by winkio, March 03, 2011, 08:46:56 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

winkio

March 03, 2011, 08:46:56 pm Last Edit: March 04, 2011, 10:40:06 am by winkio
Basic Features:

  • 8-16 hours gameplay? - maybe more with sidequests

  • Reaction based 2D battle system? - golden sun perspective

  • Quest Journal?

  • Day-Night System?

  • Tactics based enemies? - same few attacks won't always work - weak points

  • Weapon+Armor Upgrade System?



Alright, it's never too early to start thinking about the basic feature of the game.  These are things like what type of battle system?  How long should the game be?  What sorts of things will be important elements of the game (think things like pieces of heart, etc.).

I for one would like to see a reaction-based 2D battle system similar to Paper Mario, where if you press a button at a certain time during an attack, you do more damage.

I would also like to see a quest journal to help keep the game objectives and side quests organized.

WhiteRose

I think, as far as the length of the game, we don't want to be too overly ambitious - that tends to be the downfall of many projects, even community ones. It needs to not overstay its welcome. I'd say a good length would be about that of a shorter console RPG, like Mario RPG for the SNES. It needs to be long enough to let the story completely unfold, but not feel unnecessarily padded.

I agree that a reaction based battle system would be awesome, but CBSes are generally difficult to code and take a significant time investment. Maybe we should just create a plug-in to an existing CBS?

winkio

Existing 2D CBSes suck, just putting that out there.  If we ended up going in this direction someone (probably me) would script something that:
a) could use RTP charsets and animations, so we wouldn't need to make hardly any extra graphics.
b) was compatible with everything.
c) was not overcomplicated.

You'd be surprised at how simple doing it right actually is.

Also, are we saying 8-16 hours?  Does that sound right?

WhiteRose

Quote from: winkio on March 03, 2011, 08:59:51 pm
Also, are we saying 8-16 hours?  Does that sound right?


Yeah, that sounds about right; we could always expand it with things such as additional side quests and the like if we feel that it needs more substance.

winkio

March 03, 2011, 10:37:04 pm #4 Last Edit: March 04, 2011, 01:04:54 am by winkio
I think a world map screen that gets revealed as you visit certain places would be cool.  That could be evented.

EDIT: Also, Day-Night system.  We can use one of the ones from the CP database.

AliveDrive

Quote from: WhiteRose on March 03, 2011, 09:04:18 pm
Yeah, that sounds about right; we could always expand it with things such as additional side quests and the like if we feel that it needs more substance.


Secret bosses always seem to do the trick for other games.

I think a quest journal is an absolute necessity due to our community nature, I don't envision it being time consuming or difficult to implement as we go.

If I got to put just ONE feature in this game (that hasn't already been said), I'd choose an upgrade system for many weapons and armor. I know that this is possible from personal experience, albeit time consuming in the database. Getting a fresh sword to swing around really motivates you to keep playing, or to try that hard side quest again. When base weapons include multiple lines, as they should, it adds replay value (What if I chose the thunder sword instead of the raw damage one?). This extends the game's custom features.

Those are my thoughts.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

Subsonic_Noise

I agree, I think if we have a turnbased / ATB system, we should include quicktime events ala paper mario that can trigger different outcomes for an attack.

What I would like to see, too, in terms of battle system if we're gonna have as custom one: One with a perspective ala Golden Sun - it works great and is really not as overused as most other perspective. We'd need rather large animated battlers, then, though - but I think it'd be worth it.

Another important part should be that we massively include tactics in the battle system - no primitive using the same attack 100 times and hoping the hp doesn't run out. I'm thinking multibody enemies, as in you can attack certain parts of the enemy, and they'll have different weaknesses. And, if you "killed" certain body parts, the enemy will not be able to use certain attacks anymore.
This is more for bosses, anyways.

A quest jounal, as you mentioned, is pretty important imo, though I think it should also log the main story. It happened to me far too often that I forgot about a game for some time and then had problems getting back into the story - Tales of Symphonia though had the whole story written down as if the characters kept a diary. That helped alot.

In terms of substance, the game definitely needs some rather large sidequest(s) that are difficult and difficult to find - to give the player a sense of just having discovered something big, like the whole Cursed Weapons or the Maxwell quest in Tales of Symphonia - it both ended in epic boss battles (one was even stronger than the final boss) and gave the player unique abilities.

Blah Blah I'll add more later.

AliveDrive

Pit of 100 Trials anyone?

And yes, even Super Mario RPG included a rough "timed hits" feature so I'm sure we can achieve this.

I like the boss idea of weak points, you could even have say the chest "break open" (transform into another monster) and then be weaker to an element type. A la http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jA4xjyo-UpM

If element weakness is a big deal, it forces the player to try new lines of weaponry.

What does everyone think?
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

winkio

March 04, 2011, 10:46:23 am #8 Last Edit: March 04, 2011, 10:57:20 am by winkio
I don't like the idea of weakpoints as multi-bodied enemies, as it just presents a small obstacle.  There is no timing or aiming factor required to hit the weakpoint, so if you know where it is, you are guaranteed a hit.  However, since we are talking about a reaction based component, we could make some aiming/timing required to hit the weakpoint/deal extra damage.  For example, when you use a bow, a large crosshair pops up, which takes about 1 full second to shrink down to a point during which you can move it around, and then the arrow is fired.

Also, sub, could we use RTP charsets/battlers for your idea, or do you know of graphics we could use?  Because we aren't going to use a ton of custom sprites for charactersets (we will for attacks/battle actions though, but those will be considerable easier.)

AliveDrive

Or some sort of timing system like blacksmithing in fable.

I think we should be mostly RTP, but if we find someone to make custom characters that would be cool.

I volunteer for making custom icons for items/weapons/armors. It's not so hard, but with lots of custom items it's sure to take some time.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

winkio

I'm just saying for the size of the project, it's not worth it to start from scratch graphically for a battle system.  Also, because this is a community game, I think it should make good use of the RTP to use something everyone can work with and decrease filesize.

AliveDrive

What do you suggest battle system-wise?

I agree, we should try to exhaust the RTP before expanding outward.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

WhiteRose

I agree that we should try and use the RTP as much as possible, however, I do think that we should use original sprites and battlers for our main characters so the players can relate to them better and not think, "Oh, look, it's Arshes again." Using RTP tilesets and sprites for enemies and generic NPCs shouldn't be a problem, though.

AliveDrive

Anyone but Arshes xD

So this calls for at least 4 custom sprites, and battlers.

Are we going to stick with 4 party members? We could have more characters, but 4 would suffice.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

WhiteRose

Quote from: AliveDrive on March 04, 2011, 03:02:03 pm
Anyone but Arshes xD

So this calls for at least 4 custom sprites, and battlers.

Are we going to stick with 4 party members? We could have more characters, but 4 would suffice.


I think we should stick with 4; it eliminates the need to come up with a party switching system, and allows all of the characters plenty of screen time for proper character development, in addition to allowing them to each have a definite, unique personality and role in combat.

winkio

Anything that you can do with more than 4 party members can be done just as well or better with 4.

AliveDrive

There are some pretty simple party switchers out there.

What about the possibility of finding a secret character or two?

I agree that fewer characters is better for development.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

winkio

Here's how I see it: if you have a party switcher, then that means that there are characters which the player is not using.  Why even have those characters in the first place?  Every character should be playable all the time.

AliveDrive

Oh true i never thought of it that way.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

The Niche

So much for BABS then...and damn, I was looking forward to working on a babs community project :/

There's a lot of features I could offer, but they're all babs driven.
Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

AliveDrive

I feel like as awesome as BABS is, it would be easier to do a community game without it.

What sort of features Niche? We could work on converting them possibly?
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

The Niche

Taming is my baby for the offering, but that can't work without babs for obvious reasons. A skill levelling system that needs to be able to store the damage done by the skill.  I'll probably come up with others, but honestly, I'm not really interested in large scale contribution to this project if it's gonna be a tbbs. I'll help with spriting and writing, but I'm out for eventing.
Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

AliveDrive

That could be done with variable I imagine.

I enjoy eventing, but what's a tbbs?

something something battle system?
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

WhiteRose

Quote from: AliveDrive on March 04, 2011, 07:03:45 pm
Tbbs?

something something battle system?


Turn-based battle system.

@Niche: I don't think not being able to use plugins you've already created is a good reason to not work on a project you otherwise would enjoy; maybe you should give working with whatever battle system we end up using a chance, and see if you like it at all. In the end, though, it's your choice.

The Niche

It's not plugins I've already created, it's plugins I can create. I literally cannot stand turn-based battle systems. They drive me insane. And I plan on working on the project. Just not to the degree I was originally going to.
Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

AliveDrive

You're multi-talented, we can use your skills in many places.

There's ways to make turn based not so bad.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

The Niche

I know there is. But turn based is always turn based. Transferral to an alternate screen, the use of alternate characters, is to me, very gamebreaking.
Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

AliveDrive

If we do well enough with what we have to work with (and with a really talented team) we should do very well, despite our limitations.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

The Niche

Call me stubborn, but that's basically all this is. At an emotional level, I really do not want to work on a turn based game. So I'm going to do graphics and I'm going to do writing, but as for putting the game together, I'm out.
Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

AliveDrive

Well any contributions will be greatly appreciated.

And, as always, if you change your mind don't hesitate to jump on in.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

ForeverZer0

I developed a Chrono Trigger ATB system, though it is only about 85-90% percent finished. I don't have the time at the moment to finish it, but I would offer to this project as either a script to get ideas from, or even if someone wanted to attempt to finish it for me.

It has way too many feature to list here, but it basicacally just think of CT's system, where you have a caterpillar, but when battle is initialized, each character runs to there place and combat begins on the map. The biggest thing that needs done on it is to finish how stances work during different commands, but a combo system for dual and triple attacks is already implemented, and high comaptibility with almost every script in Tons and other popular scripts has been maintained.
I am done scripting for RMXP. I will likely not offer support for even my own scripts anymore, but feel free to ask on the forum, there are plenty of other talented scripters that can help you.

AliveDrive

Niche you have a quest. Do you accept?
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

The Niche

Well, that does sound a lot better. How much spriting will it require?
Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

ForeverZer0

Depends on the number of characters used. The system by default uses a three character configuration. Check out CT and see what all stances the characters use. If that much could be done it would be more than sufficient.
I am done scripting for RMXP. I will likely not offer support for even my own scripts anymore, but feel free to ask on the forum, there are plenty of other talented scripters that can help you.

AliveDrive

F0 what all work remains before the system is finished? Could you give us bullet points for clarity?
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

ForeverZer0

I'll probably just post it in a little bit. I have a copy that WhiteRose used to test that is filled with notes and explanations detailing everything such as known bugs, what needs finished, what I plan, etc, etc.

In fact, here's the link. The password is "rose" (I think).

http://www.mediafire.com/?nwmyg2puenbrc5k
I am done scripting for RMXP. I will likely not offer support for even my own scripts anymore, but feel free to ask on the forum, there are plenty of other talented scripters that can help you.

AliveDrive

I looked at it and I think this is spectacular. It makes a battle feel way more fresh than the standard turn base system.

Thank you for this.

@Others Alright people...my vote is totally for this.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

winkio

I agree :)  I would finish it if nobody else volunteered ;)

ForeverZer0

Feel free. I give what is done to CP.
I am done scripting for RMXP. I will likely not offer support for even my own scripts anymore, but feel free to ask on the forum, there are plenty of other talented scripters that can help you.

AliveDrive

I'd volunteer but...

No skillz. Not in that department at least. I feel so useless right now. :haha:

The only things I really can't do are script and write a story. (Although I'm feeling more confident about the story-writing lately.)
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

winkio

So I just tried out the demo and it feels a little too... chaotic.  There's also no way timed hits can work.

Also, I personally don't like ATB, because I always feel like I'm either waiting (for the bar to recharge) or being rushed (when multiple bars fill up at the same time).  I like sequential systems better.  I would much rather prefer some type of SBS.

What do other people think?

WhiteRose

Quote from: winkio on March 07, 2011, 09:46:35 pm
So I just tried out the demo and it feels a little too... chaotic.  There's also no way timed hits can work.

Also, I personally don't like ATB, because I always feel like I'm either waiting (for the bar to recharge) or being rushed (when multiple bars fill up at the same time).  I like sequential systems better.  I would much rather prefer some type of SBS.

What do other people think?


Though I like Zer0's CBS for what it is - a Chrono Trigger style CBS - I agree that it's not the best fit for this game. I think the best combination would be some sort of mix of the Super Mario RPG and Final Fantasy X battle systems.

winkio

Right, I mean if we include timed hits, there's only so much that can be going on at once.

But as for the battle happening on the map, I think it could be pulled off really effectively.  Using the same character sprites and the same map, and just organizing into fighting formations would look pretty good imo.

WhiteRose

Quote from: winkio on March 07, 2011, 10:01:26 pm
Right, I mean if we include timed hits, there's only so much that can be going on at once.

But as for the battle happening on the map, I think it could be pulled off really effectively.  Using the same character sprites and the same map, and just organizing into fighting formations would look pretty good imo.


The only problem with that is that then we would have to implement movement during combat (approaching target to attack, etc.) Players will be used to seeing those sprites moving and walking around; having them just freeze for combat would seem like a cop-out on the developers' (read: our) part. If our scripters are willing to develop a system that would allow for this, though, I'm fine with it.

winkio

True.  I also just realized that tiles with priority, (including trees and especially including whatever shenanigans we pull in the corruption zone) would cover the sprites.  So battlebacks seem like a much better idea :)

Hatsamu

I have no problem at all with Turn Based systems and the old "being transported to another map during fights" thing.


The timing feature would be cool, and:

Quote from: winkio on March 04, 2011, 10:46:23 amFor example, when you use a bow, a large crosshair pops up, which takes about 1 full second to shrink down to a point during which you can move it around, and then the arrow is fired.


We could add something like a "magic symbol" with the same purpose.
(Something like this:
Spoiler: ShowHide

winkio

So, for our battle system, we know we are using battlebacks, but do we want to arrange the characters horizontally (party on left side, monsters on right side) or vertically (party on bottom, monsters on top)?  Diagonally is not really an option, because we would have to do too many graphics.  I am in favor of vertically myself.

Slightly diagonal would work, for example:
X         O
X         O
  X         O

or

             X
X                         X


             O
O                         O

WhiteRose

I think we should have the party on the bottom and the monsters on top; it would also look neat (in my opinion,) to have the party member's backs to the screen, rather than the standard RTP style with everyone facing the screen. It also might be neat to have everyone on the battle back, rather than having the party members in a window like the standard battle system. We'd have to find somewhere else to put the command windows, though. Maybe we could have them appear above the party members when it was their turn?

Hatsamu

Quote from: WhiteRose on March 08, 2011, 03:26:48 pm
We'd have to find somewhere else to put the command windows, though. Maybe we could have them appear above the party members when it was their turn?


Or maybe a window at the bottom with a picture of the selected figther, like this:

             X
X                         X


             O
O                         O
[O attack  magic  item ]

winkio

Also, another thing to think about is that if we do it vertically, it would get cramped pretty quickly.  Would we want to size down battlers, or maybe find/make smaller ones, or something else?

WhiteRose

Quote from: winkio on March 08, 2011, 04:34:20 pm
Also, another thing to think about is that if we do it vertically, it would get cramped pretty quickly.  Would we want to size down battlers, or maybe find/make smaller ones, or something else?


We could probably stick to the RTP enemy battlers, but since we're going to need custom battlers for our party anyway, we could just have them designed to be a little smaller than the default RTP battlers.

AliveDrive

I'm fine with either style.

I was curious about actually visualizing a row position.

Melee attackers and damage sponges in front.

Mages, rangers, and potions in back.

This feature is actually included in RMXP but is not displayed, and that always bothered me. I dislike hidden attributes.
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

The Niche

Level me down, I'm trying to become the anti-blizz!
Quote from: winkio on June 15, 2011, 07:30:23 pm
Ah, excellent.  You liked my amusing sideshow, yes?  I'm just a simple fool, my wit entertains the wise, and my wisdom fools the fools.



I'm like the bible, widely hated and beautifully quotable.

Dropbox is this way, not any other way!

RoseSkye

I'll join this project... just send me the project when it's my turn to edit (if it's that type of community project) and I'll pwn.

winkio

Awesome.  There's not really turns, so when you see something that you want to do (something in mapping/eventing from the sound of it), just post saying that you are doing it.  Of course, if it was a mapping task, you would need to be 'licensed' first.

WhiteRose

Quote from: RoseSkye on March 10, 2011, 02:49:00 pm
I'll join this project... just send me the project when it's my turn to edit (if it's that type of community project) and I'll pwn.


Awesome! It'll be great to have your help; I've watched some of the footage of your games on YouTube, and you definitely have a lot of talent in RMXP.

winkio

Quote from: winkio on March 04, 2011, 10:46:23 am
I don't like the idea of weakpoints as multi-bodied enemies, as it just presents a small obstacle.  There is no timing or aiming factor required to hit the weakpoint, so if you know where it is, you are guaranteed a hit.  However, since we are talking about a reaction based component, we could make some aiming/timing required to hit the weakpoint/deal extra damage.  For example, when you use a bow, a large crosshair pops up, which takes about 1 full second to shrink down to a point during which you can move it around, and then the arrow is fired.


I've developed this further, and its at the point where I'm wondering if it will be too complex for the player to grasp.  What I'm thinking is this:

We will define multiple 'hitboxes' for each battler, which should correspond to detail on the characters battler.  When attacking, your cursor starts out at a random place on the battler, and you have 1 second to move it to your target hitbox, after which the attack hits whatever hitbox it is on.  We would have a script where we can define how damage is calculated differently for each hitbox, and thus have weakpoints and armored points and such.  Optionally, when defending a monster's attack, you will see the enemy cursor and your own cursor (both of which start at random places).  The enemy cursor will move according to somewhat random patterns, and if you manage to keep your cursor on the same hitbox as the enemy cursor once time runs out, you defend the attack (half damage, just like normal defending).  The same could be done for when the player attacks enemies (where we program the enemy cursor to follow the player's)

I think it would be cool and different, but it would make long battles tedious, and I don't know how well the player would grasp it.

Also, I had a separate idea where timed hits would just be based off of charging an attack for the correct period of time (ex, hold down spacebar and your character gets lighter and lighter, release at white for maximum charge (0.5-1 seconds), hold too long and it deals uncharged damage.

And finally, just something about how battles are fought in general:

In the default battle system, you select your whole party's actions at once, and then they are performed according to agility stats.  I'd prefer performing actions one at a time, immediately after they are selected.  For example, the fastest person (enemy or actor) would choose to attack first, the attack would be executed, then the next fastest person (enemy or actor) would do their action, etc.  It would also allow us to have extremely fast bosses that have multiple attack rounds for round the party members have.

Hatsamu

Quote from: winkio on March 11, 2011, 12:30:49 am
We will define multiple 'hitboxes' for each battler, which should correspond to detail on the characters battler.  When attacking, your cursor starts out at a random place on the battler, and you have 1 second to move it to your target hitbox, after which the attack hits whatever hitbox it is on.  We would have a script where we can define how damage is calculated differently for each hitbox, and thus have weakpoints and armored points and such.  Optionally, when defending a monster's attack, you will see the enemy cursor and your own cursor (both of which start at random places).  The enemy cursor will move according to somewhat random patterns, and if you manage to keep your cursor on the same hitbox as the enemy cursor once time runs out, you defend the attack (half damage, just like normal defending).  The same could be done for when the player attacks enemies (where we program the enemy cursor to follow the player's)

I think it would be cool and different, but it would make long battles tedious, and I don't know how well the player would grasp it.


I like it (and I've got it right first time I've read it.)
I'd try it, I think players will get it the right way. The only issue I could see against this is battle's lenght. We need to be sure not to make them longer than they should be.


Quote from: winkio on March 11, 2011, 12:30:49 amAlso, I had a separate idea where timed hits would just be based off of charging an attack for the correct period of time (ex, hold down spacebar and your character gets lighter and lighter, release at white for maximum charge (0.5-1 seconds), hold too long and it deals uncharged damage.


I sincerely don't like this too much as it is.
Maybe if the timing varies from attack to attack pretty much like in SMRPG where some attacks where more effective if you pressed the button at some exact moment and others where powered up by repeteadly tapping a button. If we add this to the "charge" thing and make different kind of attacks have different kind of timed hits it would be better and "less repetitive".

Anyway, I like better the aiming cursor idea.


Quote from: winkio on March 11, 2011, 12:30:49 amIn the default battle system, you select your whole party's actions at once, and then they are performed according to agility stats.  I'd prefer performing actions one at a time, immediately after they are selected.  For example, the fastest person (enemy or actor) would choose to attack first, the attack would be executed, then the next fastest person (enemy or actor) would do their action, etc.  It would also allow us to have extremely fast bosses that have multiple attack rounds for round the party members have.


Yep, I agree with this; its more dynamic.

WhiteRose

I really like winkio's idea regarding action order, and think we should definitely implement that.

As for your ideas with the cursor and charge attacks, I like them, but, like you mentioned, they might make quick random battles seem longer than necessary and tedious. A few solutions would be to either have them only apply to certain attacks, be able to disable them (speeding up battles, but taking away the potential for any bonus damage and just giving a fairly average amount for every hit,) or to just make sure the battles flow very quickly so the mechanics don't seem so bad - this could be done by having very little time in between attacks, or even going slightly FFX-2 style and having attacks be able to happen at the same time if the user mashes the button quickly enough.

I'm partial to either my second or third idea. The second would be fairly easy to implement; the third might be more difficult, but it would make battles seem very fast paced and exciting.

Another possibility would be to implement more than one of these ideas or, of course, come up with something else entirely.

One other things we could implement that might be interesting would be applying more than one type of action-event (the cursor thing, or the charging attacks,) and having it be different either for different characters, or for different weapon types. One problem with that is we would have to come up with a variety of different action-events and, perhaps an even bigger issue, code them all up. So, it might be best to just stick to one. I figured I'd at least throw the idea out there, however.

winkio

March 11, 2011, 08:36:33 pm #59 Last Edit: March 11, 2011, 11:33:14 pm by winkio
I don't think the cursor would work well with small battlers, I say we think of something else.

If we made custom animations for every skill/attack, we would use those to time the hits/blocks.  Animations are built in to have hit and miss animations, but we could just always use the miss animation for normal hits, and only use the hit animation for timed hits.  I'd say it's probably our best option right now.

EDIT: I just finished making the one-person at a time modification to the default battle system.  I'll hold onto it and integrate it into whatever we end up using.

[Luke]

My not-so-humble suggestion:

I'm begging you - keep the numbers real. Not in mathematical meaning, I'm sure you're not even gonna make them non-integer :D but I mean the reality of the integers. Examples:

  • Nobody carries around 10 000 gold coins with themselves. So nothing really costs that much.

  • GOLD isn't that easy to get. A gold coin should be worth more than 1/500 of one mana potion.

  • If all the prices in a potion shop are over 100 GOLDEN COINS, in means it's too freakin' expensive. Image anobody paying with even 10-gp coins. The price of any non-equipment non-rare-artifact item should fit in a small money bag.

  • HP and damage. I always wondered why the heck anybody needs to break the default RMXP values. How can anobody feel the values, track what's effective and what's not, when a single weapon hit deals 700 damage? Player's HP should be around 50-200 to make each point valuable. Monsters - 10-500 for monsters, up to 1000 for bosses. Keep those numbers imaginable.

  • Same for stats. Keep them in small enough numbers to make the player realise their meaning.



Also please, I'm begging you, quit tormenting the players with "random encouters". That was cool in Pokemon. And never more.

WhiteRose

Big numbers have their advantages as well; if players have 5000+ HP, then it's easier to have status effects and the like that are supposed to inflict very small amounts of damage that add up over time. If players only have 50 HP, then that's impossible. Not to mention, there are few things as awesome as hitting for ridiculously high numbers towards the end of the game; it really lets players see how much more powerful they've become since the beginning.

While I agree with you about the gold situation, we also want to make sure that we don't make realism get in the way of practical gameplay. End game equipment and materials should cost much, much more than the player would ever be able to get at the beginning of the game, so using high values is necessary. I've always figured that one "gold" doesn't necessarily mean one coin. Coins could be worth 10, 100, or even 1000 "gold." Players shouldn't need to worry about exactly what coins they have on them, though - can you imagine a player having to go to a store and ask if the owner has change for a 1000G coin? Thus they are only presented with the value of the money they have on them, not the actual number of coins.

I'm not saying your ideas are bad ideas; I'm just presenting the opposite end of the spectrum for everyone to consider.

winkio

On the numbers thing:
We should decide whether to work in 3-digits or 4-digits for maximum stats/money.  Either will work, but I'm personally a fan of 3 digits.  That means near the end of the game, the party's max stats are 3 digits, things cost 3 digits of money, and normal damage is 3 digits, although extremely powerful attacks and enemy health would break 4 digits.

For random encounters, I completely agree.  I would like enemies on the map that chase you (or just ignore you, in some cases).  They should only respawn when you exit to the map world and reenter a zone.

[Luke]

I'm a big fan of chapter-respawn. Once defeated, monsters don't bother you anymore, but when the respawn occurs, new monsters appear.

winkio

The chapter thing clearly sections the game too much, limiting the player's options to a single chapter.  By respawning every time they go to the world map, it allows for random variation as well as no limits.

AliveDrive

*Dives in*

The problem with having monsters go away when defeated until the next chapter, is that if you get to a boss that's too strong for you:  :>.<: Game Over.

I am a fan of monsters on the map that try to engage you, and when they make contact the battle begins. It would be neat to also see weaker monsters run away from you... unless one shotting every slime that you run into is your thing.

To reuse this picture:
Spoiler: ShowHide
Quote from: Blizzard on September 09, 2011, 02:26:33 am
The permanent solution for your problem would be to stop hanging out with stupid people.

winkio

Quote from: AliveDrive on March 20, 2011, 05:10:44 pm
The problem with having monsters go away when defeated until the next chapter, is that if you get to a boss that's too strong for you:  :>.<: Game Over.


good point.  There should be room to have some minibosses or storyline-related enemies that permanently disappear, but in general, they should respawn whenever you enter the map.