Print

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

[Thes33]

So I have this idea for a game where you play the role of newly anointed medieval knight in charge of a meager manor.  It will behave similarly to Wurm online as far as terraforming and overall transformation of one's environment, in a style us DF-enthusiasts will enjoy.  I guess the game would be a medieval fantasy farm sim.  But I really want to focus on the realistic aspect of running a fief as a minor knight.  I'd like to see the character work their way up into higher ranks by virtue of success in war or by paying good homage to the King.  I hope the world to be randomly generated in a kingdom of some 1700 manors or so, with the character controlling but 1 meager one.  Acquiring more will cost gold and other goods to buy off other lords or to win lands through challenges (perhaps in a way similar to Crusader Kings).

Highlights of the game to include:
   - Ruling over peasants that arrive to create homes in your protection.
   - Combat (including mounted combat) to protect the fief from bandits and creatures.
   - First-person RTS management of resources and minions. (Will include RTS overhead map for management)
   - Creation of many buildings and various constructions and tools. (Hope to be easily moddable).
   - Realistic soil fertility concentrating on humus content, pH, and plant diseases and pests.
   - Growing plants and raising livestock in a realistic way to feed yourself and your peasants.
   - Kingdom interactions with your superiors.  (Be sent to war, pay taxes, organize fairs and tournaments).
   -  Eventually rule a town or city as your fief grows and acquire more lands.

Any ideas or support for this project would be appreciated.


EDIT: 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



As of now Fief is in development as a 2D Rogue-like game. 
Check out the development website:  www.arboreantears.com/fief

[Yolan]

Ideas about games are as common as advice on what to do with your money. The skill and expertise necessary to make said game is much more rare.

Nothing wrong with ideas, love em. But you aint got really no 'project' that people are going to want to devote their skills to, not unless you inherited a whole pile of money.

EDIT: Heck, I don't mean to be entirely a kill-joy, but what can you do? Can you code? Code something, show it, and if people like it and want to contribute, then maybe you can claim to have a project.

[Thes33]

The game is currently in work using jMonkeyEngine.  I have much of the logic and object hierarchy finished.  I'm just gauging the level of interest.

[gamefreak1]

Seems a lot like mount & blade to me but yeah it sounds fun.

[Seamas]

I would play it.  That's a brilliant idea for a game.

I've been waiting for something like this for a long time.

[Tilla]

Seems a lot like mount & blade to me but yeah it sounds fun.

Mount and Blade almost completely ignores the RTS aspects though, the building and town management etc.

+1 interested

[Smitehappy]

Sound totally rad.

[Sowelu]

Niiice.

When I skimmed down to features and saw soil pH and stuff, I thought "Oh god, that's too complicated for some strategy game."  Scrolling back up and reading that that it's more like a farming game PLUS other stuff...I think it's wonderfully brilliant.  WONDERFULLY brilliant.  Go for it!

I LOVE games that start you out with just about jack, and let you work your way up, too...

[Nordic dorf]

sounds cool if you could put it together. i like mount and blade but even with mods, developing a town isnt exactly much more than a few menu choices,and recruiting 100 meatshields to defend each castle.

[Kagus]

I've always wanted a game that put you into some sort of managerial position where you played the actual character instead of just the hovering god-bird that dominates all standard strategy games.

[yamo]

sounds good

[Sowelu]

I've always wanted a game that put you into some sort of managerial position where you played the actual character instead of just the hovering god-bird that dominates all standard strategy games.

I've seen some military strategy games that came close.

There's one I don't remember the name of, but you only saw the world as a grid that looked like a late-80s game...it was set in a modern-day combat theatre, and the concept is that you're just a commander looking at a map, you tell your units "Okay, for the next day, engage under these parameters, if you run into this kind of trouble then do this, etc", and then you bite your fingernails and hope they don't screw it up.

Strategy changes a lot when you can only give vague guidelines to your troops, and you can't respond instantly to changing conditions.  It really takes you out of the loop a bit and makes you feel powerless, which in some ways is kinda cool I guess...but meh.

Then again, there's always the SNES classic Actraiser, where you WERE a god telling people what to do, and every once in a while, you came down to Earth in-person to smack down some evil.  It's kind of nice when they make it literal.

But yeah...  Generally, I think people figure "if the player can't interact with this part of the game, let's not simulate it, let's just abstract it out".  Which is quite sensible.

In any case...I guess you could go and play some Civ game or Alpha Centauri and turn all the governors on, so other people make all the fine-detail decisions for you, and turn on auto-explore whenever you want units to run around.  But that gets so FRUSTRATING.

[magikarcher]

I would play it, would probably buy it if it was on Steam or something. Unless you are really good at 3D Graphics, I would hold off on that part until you actually have the core gameplay elements implemented. I would actually love to play this as ASCII.

[SHAD0Wdump]

Definitely interesting.

[Muz]

Yeah, what Yolan said. Don't mean to discourage you, but you're going to lose a lot of the vision once it turns into a design document and even more when it turns into code. Realism needs a lot of research. Game mechanics to handle realism are even harder to merge, because there's a fine line between a realistic game and a boring simulation.

But IMHO, it's a little too complicated. You have a farm sim and a RTS there. You have combat - is it going to be RTS style or Mount & Blade? You have a city builder. And then a strategy aspect, with conquering other fiefs. That's a lot of games in one, and I worry it's going to be too much to do to enjoy.

I think it's a bit more fun if it's in some smaller pieces. If I was doing it, I'd split it into Fief I, II, and III.
Fief I has purely city building and farming aspects, no combat yet. Combat is abstracted out - if you buy 200 soldiers, they defend your city and all, but you don't see the fighting.
Fief II would add RTS features to the first game, but keep it at only defense mode. You'd be encouraged to build a castle, and to keep the farms outside of the castle (because of building costs or whatever). It'd be something like Stronghold, with no attacking, and a lot more realism.
Fief III would then expand the RTS feature to allow you to go out and capture other fiefs, and maybe even add an aspect with you serving the monarch and all. Add quests. etc.

That way you have manageable chunks for people to play and comment, and get a more realistic outlook of any possible problems with the design. You also get a lot more satisfaction, because you're completing some goals

Just my humble opinion