Print

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

[Niveras]

Saint's Row Anything?

[Graknorke]

A game starring a person I just came up with: Streaker Dave, the nude dude with the rudest 'tude on Planet Earth. It's like Mirror's Edge, but you're streaking the entire time.

But who would you be streaking for on a rooftop?

[Tsuchigumo550]

A FPS or TPS based on the idea of modular loadouts and somewhat futuristic weaponry.

Gun customization is a big part of the game- most weapons have a current weapon as the base of the model, but attachments run the gambit from plausible to phlebotinum-coated. For instance:

Let's say we have a base similar to the AUG A3. It looks like an AUG, feels like an AUG, and shoots like an AUG.

Or does it? You could change around the magazine to any ammo type that will fit- shell-less electromagnetic rounds, maybe?
You can further enhance it with sights- anywhere from the completely-open hologram sight to sights and scopes similar to today's red dot and holographic sights.
Maybe you want a foregrip, and maybe you want an under-barrel weapon. Or maybe you want a spare magazine holder under your barrel.

There's enough attachments to where everyone in a match could use the same gun with three attachments and not have a single repeat- although, weapons can use any attachment even if it's fairly nonsensical. The equivalent of a sniper scope on a shotgun? Why not.
---
Modular loadouts- you first choose a Body Type. This gives you base speed, weight tolerance, HP, and ability to move through a combat zone. Light characters can climb objects easier, heavy characters can bring many weapons to a fight.

Afterwards, you individually choose the type of armor for every part of your body- classified as so-
Head,Neck,Upper Torso,Lower Torso,Upper Arm(L/R),Lower Arm(L/R),Hands(L/R),Groin,Upper Legs(L/R),Lower Legs(L/R), and Feet.
Different pieces of armor offer different things- damage reduction vs certain types of damage are common, but extra holsters for equipment and guns is one thing that can be chosen, among others. Weight is somewhat prohibitive at times.
After that, you place weapons. Active, which is what you spawn with out, then any other holster slots.
Then, you choose equipment- different types of grenades, breaching explosives, all the way up to and beyond a quad-rotor scout/assault drone.

---

Let's build a sample Light character. You might think some guns are completely out of reach for Light types, and you'd be right- but there's always an option. LMGs are generally the most restricted for Light types, but any other type of gun generally has a fair spread- even sniper rifles. Let's build a class for a Lightweight designed to get somewhere, stay there, and lay down fire, then escape if needed.

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Armor-
Head: Tac Glasses
Neck: ---
Upper Torso: ---
Lower Torso: Anti-Ballistic Holster
Upper Arm L: Equipment Holster (Other)
Upper Arm R: ---
Lower Arm L: ---
Lower Arm R: ---
Hand L: ---
Hand R: ---
Groin: Equipment Belt (Grenade x3)
U Leg L: Anti-Ballistic Holster
U Leg R: ---
L Leg L: ---
L Leg R: AAP Vanguard Shield (A leg-mounted shield, sort of like a plate of metal to stop or reduce the power of most rounds)
Feet: Springboard Running Boots

You'll notice I'm lacking a lot of armor, to keep myself super-light. I did take a relatively heavy "shield" on my leg- when crouched, it's the forward leg, giving me a small amount of shielding even when there's no cover. It's not going to be hit often if I'm standing or moving about, and it makes going prone slower and louder.

Weapons/Equipment:
Active: ROC Revolver (Looks similar to a Colt Python),(Given a single change- fires Impactor rounds, which do well against most types of armor. If it hits armor,it does no damage but it knocks the enemy about somewhat, making their aim jerk slightly- if it hits an unarmored location, the effect is much greater and it does slightly more damage than the basic round.)
Holster: Lower Torso: CWP SSR Sniper Rifle (Looks like an AWP, but it's somewhat closer to the Thompson Contender in that it's a single-round break action.),(Given a high-power, nonvariable scope and Electromagnetic Shell-less rounds)
Equipment: Upper Arm: A/S QRD "Peregrine" A scout/assault quad-rotor. This variant is very fast and quiet, but lacks armor. It can fly independently, allowing it to scout for it's user, but with either control-mode engaging a target is ill advised. It's weapon is a weak microwave-based armament that loses effect quickly over range but disorients anything in it's effect radius.
Equipment: Groin/Waist: H.A.Z.E Grenades x3 (Grenades that produce smoke- the smoke messes with electronics- no thermal imaging works, and inside the smoke, electronics flicker and error. Certain weapons won't fire, will jam, or will lose fire rate inside the smoke.

Overall, this is a class built to get somewhere, set up shop, and disengage cleanly. It's well managed- able to set up the drone to scout while sniping, the camera on the drone reporting an image through the glasses. What failings this class have are often self-inflicted- the smoke grenades could disable the drone and the rifle, and the revolver is a slow reload. The shield is the main source of armor- so midway to the target, any surprise engagements are likely to be fatal ones.

Maps are built around the plethora of attachments- bipods can be quickly engaged on any cover of a certain height or while prone, some scopes can see through thin materials, etc.

Multiplayer has "Free", where any class that meets it's own weight requirement is allowed in, "Point Buy", where all items cost a certain amount of points and no one player may exceed a certain amount, "Free Competitive", where some options are brought down or up to be more equal or banned outright, but without point costs, "Competitive", which has a different set of nerfs/boosts/bans than the free version due to the points system, and "Challenge", where random challenges are given out to teams, individual players, and groups of players- they can be accepted or declined, but every player will have 1-3 criteria to meet in that match. Maybe something like "Use a light character","Use this item", and "Get this number of kills total"/"Get this many kills in one life"/"Kill this player X number of times"/etc.

[PTTG??]

This game looks outwardly bethesda-like... but here's the thing: it's all about one village.

There's a, oh, just to pick a date at random, late 1700s era village in the middle of a large wilderness area... just big enough so that if you start walking around you won't hit any invisible walls.

The real focus of this game, however, is the village. There's a hundred or so NPCs with incredibly detailed schedules and AI. They interact, they trade with each other, they even have complex social interactions (most of this can be scripted, frankly, but some degree of procedurality would be neat.)

The player then moves into this town... of course, by this point I'm sure it's beginning to sound very much like a certain lunar agriculture game. I myself haven't played Harvest Moon, but to draw a contrast, this game would be, well, the PCification of that. More detail and depth, and in particular, more convincing, humanlike characters.

This wouldn't be just a sandbox village simulator with more granularity, however. It would also inherit more traditional RPG elements and make your Player Character's growth be a part of the village's development. The PC could visit for some time and, by interacting with the NPCs, eventually change things about the village; everything from leading it to prosperity to handing it over to bandits.

[Parsely]

-snip-

We need a small scale open-world RPG like this. Imagine if a company like Bethesda just poured all their heart and effort and time into a single town of 20 or 30 people and the area surrounding. You'd get something amazing is what you'd get. Open-worlds should focus less on recreating human beings and more on the actual world around it.

[tompliss]

snip !

Makes me think about The Guild

[EnigmaticHat]

The two Star Wars games that are so obvious, yet have never been made:

Han Solo the game.  Not much to say here.  You have the Millennium Falcon, you can go pretty much anywhere but have to deal with bounty hunters if you don't pay your debts, you avoid the empire while smuggling stuff, you go to seedy bars and shoot people under morally ambiguous circumstances.  There are already games that try to do this, but they all lack one key element: Han Solo.

The second one is an Star Wars strategy game that actually understands the concept of asymmetrical warfare.  Pretty much every SW RTS ever portrays the rebels as a powerful conventional army that's slightly weaker than the Imperials but has a few underhanded tactics to make up for it.  In the movies, the rebels could never dream of attacking the Empire head on.  In the games they're launching fullscale invasions of heavily populated worlds.  I'd really like to see a game where the Rebels and Imperials had completely different gameplay mechanics and goals.  Namely, the rebels should be MUCH weaker and be constantly starved for resources, while the imperials shouldn't be able to attack the rebels without pouring money/time into searches.  The Imperials shouldn't often lose worlds or fleets until things get really bad, instead the rebels should be fighting to win any victories at all against the imperials (aka convince people they can be beaten) as well as recruiting unique starships and soldiers from worlds where Imperials are weak.  The Empire on the other hand should be attempting to spread out its influence and defend everywhere, while bleeding the rebels dry by destroying their limited resources and forcing them to spread out and move around a lot.

Basically: a very weak force that doesn't need to defend land and has the initiative, versus a very powerful force that has to constantly contend with the threat of more forces joining the rebels.

[Graknorke]

-snip-

Sounds like something that would fit in an update to Planetside 2 or any sequel that happens.

[Putnam]

-snip-

Open-worlds should focus less on recreating human beings and more on the actual world around it.

(this is why I like Oblivion better than Skyrim)

Anyway, that Civilization MMO looks like something I would daydream about existing, to my surprise.

[Parsely]

-snip-

Open-worlds should focus less on recreating human beings and more on the actual world around it.

(this is why I like Oblivion better than Skyrim)

Agreed.

The second one is an Star Wars strategy game that actually understands the concept of asymmetrical warfare.  Pretty much every SW RTS ever portrays the rebels as a powerful conventional army that's slightly weaker than the Imperials but has a few underhanded tactics to make up for it.  In the movies, the rebels could never dream of attacking the Empire head on.  In the games they're launching fullscale invasions of heavily populated worlds.  I'd really like to see a game where the Rebels and Imperials had completely different gameplay mechanics and goals.  Namely, the rebels should be MUCH weaker and be constantly starved for resources, while the imperials shouldn't be able to attack the rebels without pouring money/time into searches.  The Imperials shouldn't often lose worlds or fleets until things get really bad, instead the rebels should be fighting to win any victories at all against the imperials (aka convince people they can be beaten) as well as recruiting unique starships and soldiers from worlds where Imperials are weak.  The Empire on the other hand should be attempting to spread out its influence and defend everywhere, while bleeding the rebels dry by destroying their limited resources and forcing them to spread out and move around a lot.

Basically: a very weak force that doesn't need to defend land and has the initiative, versus a very powerful force that has to constantly contend with the threat of more forces joining the rebels.

I can appreciate this. I don't think I've ever seen asymmetrical warfare represented well in a video game.

[LordBaal]

Never, idiots will wine all the way to the Meca and back. People seems to think "balance" is utter necessary.

There's a mod for expansion of Empire at War, the one with the guy that looks like Arthas from Warcraft 3. Anyway, the mod is a Halo mod with only space battles (for now), and balance goes out the window really. The Humans fleets have to really put an extra effort in order to win and the ships resilience is portrayed just as it should. Playing as humans even against an easy IA is a challenge and I can't wait to see how crazy it will get once the galactic conquest thingy get's activated.

[Mech#4]

-snip-

Open-worlds should focus less on recreating human beings and more on the actual world around it.

(this is why I like Oblivion better than Skyrim)

Agreed.

The second one is an Star Wars strategy game that actually understands the concept of asymmetrical warfare.  Pretty much every SW RTS ever portrays the rebels as a powerful conventional army that's slightly weaker than the Imperials but has a few underhanded tactics to make up for it.  In the movies, the rebels could never dream of attacking the Empire head on.  In the games they're launching fullscale invasions of heavily populated worlds.  I'd really like to see a game where the Rebels and Imperials had completely different gameplay mechanics and goals.  Namely, the rebels should be MUCH weaker and be constantly starved for resources, while the imperials shouldn't be able to attack the rebels without pouring money/time into searches.  The Imperials shouldn't often lose worlds or fleets until things get really bad, instead the rebels should be fighting to win any victories at all against the imperials (aka convince people they can be beaten) as well as recruiting unique starships and soldiers from worlds where Imperials are weak.  The Empire on the other hand should be attempting to spread out its influence and defend everywhere, while bleeding the rebels dry by destroying their limited resources and forcing them to spread out and move around a lot.

Basically: a very weak force that doesn't need to defend land and has the initiative, versus a very powerful force that has to constantly contend with the threat of more forces joining the rebels.

I can appreciate this. I don't think I've ever seen asymmetrical warfare represented well in a video game.

"Earth Assault: Universe at War" made by Petroglyph has rather diverse factions. You've got the self powering Masari, the convert-to-electricity-and-travel along-powerlines Nova and the Hierarchy with their huge, stompy bases on legs. Plus the music's done by Klepacki, so it's got that going for it... which is nice.

[Graknorke]

Never, idiots will wine all the way to the Meca and back. People seems to think "balance" is utter necessary.

There's a mod for expansion of Empire at War, the one with the guy that looks like Arthas from Warcraft 3. Anyway, the mod is a Halo mod with only space battles (for now), and balance goes out the window really. The Humans fleets have to really put an extra effort in order to win and the ships resilience is portrayed just as it should. Playing as humans even against an easy IA is a challenge and I can't wait to see how crazy it will get once the galactic conquest thingy get's activated.

Balanced != identical.

[Jopax]

An idea that popped into my head and kinda grew, I even wrote most of it down (but that paper isn't here so we're winging it).

An RPG or action game or something along those lines, DMC or Bayonetta basically in terms of general gameplay.
A world of some sort, medium fantasy or low even, humans are generally the only race but you have demons and angels too (not sure with either being affiliated with any higher power though).
The big idea of the game is that player choice and style of play affects the gameplay and difficulty. Morality that actually affects the way you play the game. You start of as human, you are generally pretty damn weak, fighting with crappy weapons in some war or something, maybe a bit of magic to spice it up. Then a MacGuffin or something happens and you are able to ascend to one of the other forms.
Now the other forms are angel and demon. Angels are devoid of emotion, completely cold and rational, trying to carry out whatever they see as the spreading of good or justice. Even if it is ruthless they will put down an entire city if it means saving two more. The demons on the other hand are the embodiment of emotion, wild, unpredictable and completely driven by whims, this means you can have good demons or ones that flip their morality whenever they feel like it. They generally do whatever the hell they want.
This puts the two forms at odds with each other, chaos and order, doing the right thing, or doing whatever you feel like.
Now, the player is presented with choices trought the game, both obvious and less so which affect to which side he leans. Always do the right thing, regardless of your emotions or of those involved and you can ascend to become an angel. Always give in to emotion and you might become a demon.
How does this tie into gameplay difficulty you ask?
Simple, each race or form has their own style of combat with varying degrees of difficulty. The demons are quick and brutal, relying on fast attacks and combos to deal huge damage while dodging to defend themselves. The angels on the other hand are slow and cumbersome, their attacks hit like a truck but you need to have good timing, their style revolves around blocking and countering as well as planning ahead with each encounter since you can easily get stunlocked by a horde of enemies if you're not careful. And finally the human form would be the weakest of the two, using both blocking and dodging, combos and counters and some magic to boot, hardest to learn and master.
So the demons are considered easy mode (since doing whatever you want, with little regard to others is lazy and an easy thing to do), the angels are considered hard (doing the right thing every time isn't an easy thing, doubly so if it involves some very tough decisions), while the human form is very hard (hardest of all in this great war is to stay sane, normal and human, treading a thin line between extremes).
Naturally after you change forms (if you choose so) you will still be faced by choices, testing your decision each time, do you keep being emotionless as an angel or is it too much to bear so many lives on your mind, even if it is for the greater good? And if you do stray far enough you will revert to your human form, and getting back from that will be much harder than the first time. Doubly so because as you change forms your skill tree changes with them, and what you invested into one tree hardly carries over, making the challenge of falling very big. Heck, if you fail very late into the game, you might even be unable to finish (there should be some give up choice if you die too many times or something, showing or telling you what happened because you gave up).

I even made some sketches of how the forms look and act.

So yeah, that's my big game idea, kinda wall of texty but eh.

Also there was another one I had, a 2.5d sidescroller (like Trine) but played from the first person perspective, the right side would be a giant screen showing you your face (if you have a webcam or something), something like the consoles from Wreck-it-Ralph.

[SealyStar]

-snip-

Sounds like something that would fit in an update to Planetside 2 or any sequel that happens.

Sounds exactly like PS2 if you axe the pay-to-win mechanics and actually distribute Certs fairly to non-payers