next »

[Xion]

THE KING IS DEAD:
KILLED BY AN ASSASSIN FROM NEIGHBORING NATION X.
THE KING WAS BELOVED BY HIS PEOPLE.
HIS DEATH HAS INCITED A WAR.
A WAR WITH NEIGHBORING NATION X.

BEFORE THE KING PASSED AWAY,
HE SPOKE HIS FINAL WORDS TO HIS FOUR NOBLE SONS;

 "YOU ARE WORTHY ALL OF THIS THRONE,
 BUT THERE IS ONLY ONE THRONE.
 SO ONLY ONE OF YOU CAN BE KING.

 I SHALL DIE SOON.
 WHEN I LET LOOSE MY FINAL BREATH,
 A WAR WILL BREAK OUT.

 MY SONS, 
 WORK TOGETHER
 TO END THE WAR.

 DO THIS AND IT SHALL BECOME APPARENT
 WHICH OF YOU IS MOST FIT TO RULE."

AND IT CAME TO PASS
THAT THE KING'S GHOST LEFT HIM,
AND AT THAT MOMENT THE KINGS SONS OBEYED.
HIS FOUR SONS SET OUT TO END THE WAR,
TOGETHER.

HIS SONS SET OUT TO CLAIM THE THRONE,
EACH WITH A GLEAM IN HIS EYE.

[s0]

I could make some minimal techno/electronica/ambient for the soundtrack, if required.  

Also, a few design suggestions:

I'm not sure if this was already discussed, but I'd prefer a Diablo-style "lobby" system over an MMOish persistent world. It often gets messy, or necessitates the implementation of strict, limiting rules. I guess it's also more straining on the server.

Secondly, how about introducing some "procedural generation" of some sort to increase replay value (extremely important in a multiplayer game). It wouldn't have to be anything big, just random item locations or dungeons where the rooms get "switched around" on each playthrough.

And lastly, there's been some talk about plot already, but how about we leave it out altogether, just a bit of backstory and that's it? In my experience, people who play online multiplayer games usually don't give a shit about about whatever story there is, or do you know anyone who actually reads the quest texts in WoW? If there was a story, we'd have to implement in a non-obtrusive way like what L4D did with dialog between the characters happening during the "actual gameplay".

[Poor Lazlo]

I'm not if this was already discussed, but I'd prefer a Diablo-style "lobby" system over an MMOish persistent world. It often gets messy, or necessitates the implementation of strict, limiting rules. I guess it's also more straining on the server.

I'm not sure anyone had suggested a persistent world, but yeah, this.

And lastly, there's been some talk about plot already, but how about we leave it out altogether, just a bit of backstory and that's it? In my experience, people who play online multiplayer games usually don't give a shit about about whatever story there is, or do you know anyone who actually reads the quest texts in WoW? If there was a story, we'd have to implement in a non-obtrusive way like what L4D did with dialog between the characters happening during the "actual gameplay".

I agree here, too. We shouldn't shove story down the throats of players in a multiplayer game. It gets boring. However, this probably means we should work on the story even more. The lack of traditional storytelling in Left4Dead only works because they have every aspect of that story and universe completely worked out. I don't think there's any point not going for a good, deep story. This is what every Zelda game lacks, and not being beholden to a universal audience, we're probably in a better position to do this than Nintendo. We just have to find a way to deliver it in such a way as not to piss off people who are replaying the game, or just don't care about the narrative.

[Lord Tim]

This project looks awesome and I would love to help with it after Assemblee. I am a programmer . Might I suggest that you use flixel instead of GM, though? There seem to be quite a few flixel projects popping up around here, so I don't think we'll be short programmers, and as far as I know, flixel is a quite a bit easier to work with. Not to mention that it can be played instantly in a browser.

I don't have much experience doing networking stuff, but I am sure I can learn, and there will be others to help with that.

[unsilentwill]

Oh hey fantastic! I was thinking about flixel early on, but I wasn't sure how well it networked. Hey this means we can get moved into the projects forum soon, yaaay. Bring your friends 

I personally feel that there's never really been a solid multiplayer game with a story before, at least one that actively involved the characters. But I agree... we'd be much better off simplifying the story, actually not to far beyond Xion's IDEA. I am bothered however by people who are bored by a good story, but the best solution is not having giant blocks of text or cut-scenes to tell it, which is want I wanted to do all along.

Along the same note I had suggested a persistent world, but I'm starting to like this direction instead, as long as it doesn't get too arcade-y.

[Ashkin]

 

I've been excluded.

Also: Are you kidding? Arcadey is great!

[Poor Lazlo]

Flixel is fun and easy to use, so whoo. I'm also not aware of how easy it is to do networking in flash, but it's certainly been done well before.

My sister is obsessed with Club Penguin. I don't really get it.

[s0]

Yeah, what's wrong with arcadey? Arcade games are the best multiplayer games. Fact.  

Also, you can add me to the list as a music composer, I'll see if I can whip something up.

[unsilentwill]

Excluded? Because of Flixel?

What I mean by not too arcade-y is that it shouldn't be just about points.  The gameplay style should be basically the same chaotic fun as Four Swords, with tossing people around, backstabbing, rupee hording and whatnot. However, if we could do a bit more than "hey there's a bad guy kill him", I'd think the game would be more interesting and better respected.

[Poor Lazlo]

Ah, so by "let's not make it too arcadey", you mean "let's have some kind of story"?

I assumed you meant in the style of gameplay.

[Bree]

You say arcadey, I say accessible.

On that note, the only reason I would advise against towns is that it's hard enough to keep four people focused in a normal gameplay level. A town with a large area means that four players all can separate and get lost/frustrated with each other. A persistent world is all fine and good, but it has to contribute to the game somehow.

[s0]

What about making the towns real small, like just a couple houses, 8bit JRPG-style? That could work.

[TheDustin]

Secondly, how about introducing some "procedural generation" of some sort to increase replay value (extremely important in a multiplayer game). It wouldn't have to be anything big, just random item locations or dungeons where the rooms get "switched around" on each playthrough.

If memory serves me right, Four Swords had some minor randomization in its level layouts. The core of the level was persistent, but some rooms were randomized to a degree. I think it's a must, the 'A.I. Director' from L4D is a big reason why I play it so much.

And lastly, there's been some talk about plot already, but how about we leave it out altogether, just a bit of backstory and that's it? In my experience, people who play online multiplayer games usually don't give a shit about about whatever story there is, or do you know anyone who actually reads the quest texts in WoW? If there was a story, we'd have to implement in a non-obtrusive way like what L4D did with dialog between the characters happening during the "actual gameplay".

I know most of you won't know what I'm talking about (yet), but VVVVVV has a great implementation of its story. After the introduction you aren't required to sit through any dialogue, you're the one who initiates all conversations. And it has a System/Bioshock like codec system that has computers scattered around the world that gives more backstory. I think the awesome story should be there for those who want it, but it should be as unobtrusive as possible. I think that a great way to tell a story in a game is for the mechanics to aid telling it, so we should focus on making the players rely on each other. With tons of room for screwing around and messing each other up, of course.

As for gameplay, I think the Link's awakening style two items, one offense and one defense (though the shield may have a spike, the sword may be broad) that are unique to the character's race. One item will be won per dungeon that will be held by one player, but it may be able to be used/combo-ed by other players. The one who takes it makes a choice to sacrifice either a defense or offense item willingly, allowing them to decide how they want their character to be.

I think this is a good compromise.

Flixel is awesome, we won't have to worry about alienating Mac & Linux users. And as soon as I finish polishing it up I'll link to an album I'm working on, I do a variety of stuff. I'll post it and see if you guys would want to use anything like it.

[s0]

If memory serves me right, Four Swords had some minor randomization in its level layouts. The core of the level was persistent, but some rooms were randomized to a degree. I think it's a must, the 'A.I. Director' from L4D is a big reason why I play it so much.

Come to think of it, you're right. That was one the reasons me and my buddies played through it multiple times actually 

I think the way VVVVVV presents its story is excellent for a singleplayer game, but for a co-op multiplayer game I'm not so sure. There's always the danger of the players who are interested in the story bogging down the players who aren't, which almost always results in no one reading the story out the fear of making a nuisance of themselves. Most MMORPGs that have a story have it "optional" in this way too, but almost no one cares for it.

[TheDustin]

True, the only way to have it work would be to have the text scroll at the bottom of the screen, but even that would probably be too distracting. "Dude, where were you? I just died." "My bad...hey, did you know that my character's uncle is the chief of my village?" I think the fundamental problem lies in that you'd have people focusing on seperate things; not everybody wants a story in their multiplayer (I personally prefer the interaction between players and the game state) and if we try to cater to both crowds we'll invariably piss one group off. I don't tabletop roleplay, but I've read essays on that exact problem. With RP you can alter the game rules on the fly, but computer systems are obviously a lot more rigid. I think for now we should focus on making the gameplay as kick-ass as possible, and maybe after we get this game under our collective belt we could figure out a way to integrate a story into a multiplayer setting?

And it hasn't been brought up yet, but I think a Diablo-style chat function should be in order. We won't be in the same room, so having a chat system would be great, and Diablo's worked well from what I remember.

[s0]

Well I think we should look to Diablo 2 for inspiration in general. When it comes to cooperative/competitive multiplayer, D2 is still top notch. On the one hand, you're cooperating against enemies, on the other hand it's a race for items. I think we should have an "instrinsic reward" like this in our game too, instead of just scores.

[Petethegoat]

Hey all. Bearing in mind I've not read the thread properly, I think you are attempting a story driven multiplayer RPG? Or something along those lines? This is probably more suitable for an MMO, but whatever. Here goes:

I have sometimes thought that perhaps the best way to weave story into a multiplayer game would be to have a player percieve other players differently from how they appear to themselves. Naturally, this is difficult to explain coherently, so I will use an example;

Player One:
You are Sebastian Morris, a fair child from the countryside, born to mundane parents.
Whilst playing in the woods, you meet a friendly druid who asks you if you would like to help him pick berries. You agree, and head off together in search of the elusive dunberry, having been promised rewards.


Player Two:
You are John 'John Howard' Howard, a apprentice to a powerful druid.
You meet an orphaned black bear in the forest. Talking to him, it appears he is cold and tired, but has no where safe to sleep. He asks if you would help him collect wood to build a shelter out of. You agree, and after finding enough wood, you gain progress towards completing your apprenticeship.

Now, as we can see, both players have very different experiences. The limit is in the players, or more specifically, their characters. For example, Player Two must remain a druid even to Player One, because of druid specific abilities.
Player One, however, has abilities and stats perhaps comparable to a baby black bear. (Putting realism aside for a moment. )
Here, each players performance helps the other, and supports the perceived plot of the other player.

The biggest problem with this system is of course creating believable and workable additional persona's and quests for each player, and this is before considering more than two players. That said, the third player could just have another generated plot, and be shoe horned into the other plots. Or something.

Well, I hope all that was somewhat coherent, and that it made sense to somebody.

Edit:
Oooh gawd, just realised that the topic title is "(Smaller) Community Project!: Four Swords-like Adventure".  

Edit2:
Oooh gawd, just realised that this probably belongs in the design forum. 

[Poor Lazlo]

Edit:
Oooh gawd, just realised that the topic title is "(Smaller) Community Project!: Four Swords-like Adventure". 

Edit2:
Oooh gawd, just realised that this probably belongs in the design forum. 

Your input is welcome, in any case.

[Ashkin]

I tried to learn Flixel. Did the Hello World Tutorial. Didn't know where to go from there.

The thing with languages other than GML is that I don't see the need for all that public class stuff.

As for arcadey, I would definitely like the game to be a flashy light show of colors and points zooming everywhere.

Arcade games are the best multiplayer games. Fact.  

QFT.

[Xion]

Arcade games are the best multiplayer games. Fact.  

QFT.

and again.