Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[McTraveller]

I've been working for quite some time on a "hobby" project game, and have a fair amount of infrastructure in place.  But for the life of me I can't decide on what "tech level" to use as well as "point of view".

Some background: this is another resource gathering, world-building game, although I have done some things that make it more than "yet another" DF, Minecraft, Wurm, etc. clone*.

By "tech level" I mean - stone age? Medieval? High-tech?  The basic engine would work for any of the above.  But, before someone says, "why not allow any of them?", part of the game is interaction between different worlds, and I don't want to have complex meta-rules for managing interactions between high-tech versus low-tech worlds.

But, there are pros and cons: High tech makes it easier to justify world interaction (can do it with tech, not with supernatural forces), but harder to justify why there would be so little infrastructure in the world.  "Low" tech fits better with the narrative, but needs some kind of hocus-pocus to provide inter-world interactions.

The other dilemma I have is deciding a point of view. First person? Squad? "Overlord" (e.g., DF)?  I'm almost leaning toward DF-type, but perhaps with an option to specify a squad for micromanagement (even though this makes economy somewhat more difficult).

Thoughts? What's popular? What would be fun and "different" from the numerous other options out there? Criticisms? Calls for more information?

*Mostly these are in world shape, economy, resource distribution, and simulation elements.

[Eagleon]

Why are you asking us? It's your game! Drawing from your post and inclinations, I'll just arbitrarily say low-tech with hocus-pocus travel between worlds, dungeonkeeper-style RTS with squad creation, and a theme based on Miley Cyrus and snowboarding.

[McTraveller]

Ah, I suppose perhaps I was a bit rambling -

Basically, I'm asking B12 to help avoid being "just another..."  - and to get a feel for general interest: is "medieval" worn out? Steampunk overdone?  Cyberspace blasé?

Or does genre not really matter as much as gameplay and execution and I'm overthinking it?

[Eagleon]

I think you are. I could give you ideas to make your game not "just another...", if you'd like. [edit: just off the top of my head, you're driving a team of extraplanar explorers through an unknown wilderness of magitech and have to build up the understanding of each world's unique forces before you can move on to the next] I've always seen genre as a frame for a much more involved theme and story of your own. Genres only get worn out when people stop thinking of them as something to put more work into - if your idea of steampunk or medieval or cyberspace draws entirely from other people's portrayals, it's a fair bet that it's not a genre you should be writing/programming/acting/whatever in. Everyone's played Shoot the Nazis, so no one's really making those with any serious commitment anymore (EA doesn't count for anything )

In short, be creative, or hire a writer/designer

[My Name is Immaterial]

Well, as a suggestion for your problem about interworld travel, each planet could have a few [sciency words] portals to other planets, making it a minimal amount of hocus pocus, while still allowing hocus pocus.

[McTraveller]

I suppose there is always the Stargate approach - some ancient artifacts are strewn about which allow travel, but technology doesn't exist to replicate the artifacts.

Hrm. Now that I think about it, that might actually help with some other elements of gameplay which I've been trying to decide - namely, on any given world, the number of "portals" to other worlds should be:

• a limited resource
• something which ensures movement between worlds takes place at discrete locations

The "ancient artifacts" approach fits in with that idea, although I'd have to think of a non-trite way to justify having those artifacts spread over an arbitrary and unlimited number of worlds...

[My Name is Immaterial]

They could be the things that created life in the first place, ala Space Oddessy(? Never watched it. Monoliths and stuff.)

[Armok]

Hmm, if you want to be "not just another clone", why use any predefined set of tropes at all? I mean, it's not like the "high tech" would be realistic, or that "magic" necessarily has thematic ties to real world traditions. Those are just aesthetic and naming schemes, so, do objects the same functions as you would under either of those systems, but don't adhere to either leveling it open to interpretation and alien on look, and give it the kind of name a child would name it using either nonsense words or plain description of function. Basically, surrealism bordering on dadaism.

On perspective, one thing that's to rare is having a first person *perspective*, but "Overlord" for actual controls and main tools. As in, you control a character that's not a heroic combatant but maybe some kind of general, about as useful in direct combat as a below average cannon fodder you send to die by the hundreds, but giving orders and pulling important levers and controlling important devices, and maybe having a kind of inverse to the typical possession spell/mechanic where you enter an RTS like view and can give orders more directly.

[McTraveller]

Hmm, if you want to be "not just another clone", why use any predefined set of tropes at all? I mean, it's not like the "high tech" would be realistic, or that "magic" necessarily has thematic ties to real world traditions. Those are just aesthetic and naming schemes, so, do objects the same functions as you would under either of those systems, but don't adhere to either leveling it open to interpretation and alien on look, and give it the kind of name a child would name it using either nonsense words or plain description of function. Basically, surrealism bordering on dadaism.

This has been another option I've been considering - even so far as not even naming resources, but just calling them "resource A", "resource B", and the like.  I'm not sure going that far would be fun though... "not just another clone" is an important thing to me, but I don't know if I want to be that avant-garde.

[Armok]

You can actualy do the same thing but without giving that impression. Just make it ambiguous rather than explicitly abstract. I'd give specific examples but I dont know what kind of objects you need the manes and looks for specifically enough, or how the engine works.

[darkflagrance]

You have some features that make your game unique, you say. What are they? You should have your setting make them a central point so that player can easily see why your game is different.

[Biag]

You have some features that make your game unique, you say. What are they? You should have your setting make them a central point so that player can easily see why your game is different.

This, a lot of times.

As far as PoV- it might be interesting to have an artificial intelligence that grows/administers a settlement in Dorfort style, but have the player control one citizen or small squad of citizens who belong to the settlement. If you want to have distinct settlements and cultures on different worlds, that could be a really interesting way of making those differences directly affect the player; for example, you currently belong to a very restrictive colony with a strong military, and you could defect to a colony that would give you more freedom but might not be as safe (and defecting might make you some enemies, as well).

In addition to that, I think it would be worth it to mix tech levels- maybe not as extreme as "prehistoric to futuristic", but tribal villages interacting with Ancient Greece-level city-states and feudal lords would provide some cool situations without being too complicated.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

You can have high tech SF with limited infrastructure by assuming that the infrastructure never developed, or that the infrastructure crumbled.

For the first, perhaps the "homeworld" is poisoned and worthless, blasted by war, and only the colonies exist. While the homeworld was active it was able to spread technology, but after its fall high tech no longer spreads. So you can have a mining colony with high tech mining equipment and infrastructure, but around it you have the sprawl of a low-tech shantytown that had to grow to fulfill the needs of the growing population.

Or you could have the action occur on terraforming worlds where the environment varies from Hellish to Sorta Hostile because of where it is in the terraforming process. The only infrastructure there will be the terraforming installations and the minimal needs of the workers there (if any - could be robots).

If the infrastructure crumbled, you could have an Empire of the Petal Throne situation where the spacefaring civilization is cut off, the old ruins buried under new construction, and civilization now looks like an ancient swords-and-sandals kinda thing. The old technology is now "magical".

Otherwise perhaps the homeworld was able to support the infrastructure but is no longer able to. Without the technology to support and renew their high-level stuff, all of the outposts must rely on the lower level of technology that was more durable or that they can maintain. Ability to maintain and expansion into the old sciences can vary between worlds, meaning some may be on the verge of spaceflight, others with a few ships, others with fleets, and still others just struggling with agriculture.

Infrastructure can crumble from neglect. A WALL-E situation where people let automated systems take on more and more authority could eventually lead to people being unable to maintain them. If the robots take over, the humans may fight back and choose a hardscrabble primitive life over one under the cold metal thumb of Friend Computer. Alternately, the robots (perhaps now viewed as gods) have a problem they can't fix and need to recruit the humans to help.