Game Idea - Throw Your Ideas In


Zuk

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
107
I honestly don't care if anyone steals this and takes it to production. I'm never going to do it. If you can make it, GO FOR IT! If you can make it better, DO IT!

My idea is a one player versus one player battle, but it's kind of DND, turn based rules, but each person has a five character team built out. Think Ogre Battle, but you have a five character team and are facing another human with a five character team.

Ogre battle may be a bit too much, I'm thinking just skirmishes, no campaign. When you lose, you lose everything.You have to start again, from scratch. But, if you win, you get level ups and whatnot.

All it would be, in my mind, is just a team building up, fighting other teams on different maps. But if you lose, your team is gone.

There would obviously be a pool of different characters to choose from with many different skills.

Maybe losing and going back to beginner is a bit too much, but it amps the stakes.

Is that exciting for anyone?
 
  • Like
Reactions: rSl

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
12,661
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
I don't know Ogre Battle and I don't really know DnD either. But I'm imaginging a type of JRPG battle screen, if that's what you mean.

I tend to think you either need to make CPU opponents to allow people to play on their own, or perhaps make it online only (and even then you'll have trouble if you're the only one playing at a particular time).

I also feel that wiping your victories as soon as you lose a match is likely to be frustrating to many players. It would also tend to encourage a single uber powerful victor in every time zone, who can never be beaten unless the levels don't improve stats, or there's always a chance that anyone can lose due to some rare super attack or something, which would feel a bit of a cheat.
 

Elw3

ƐʍlƎ
Joined
Aug 10, 2010
Messages
1,390
Killing chars, loosing all progress, i like that.
But unless you manage to gather a couple of hundred players an online version would suck.
The only way to drive around that is to make a battle system that does not require the players to be online at the same time.

Speaking of frustration, check out games like grandia xtreme. One of the rare JRPGs that does not allow any kind of saving while you play. After an 2 hours dungeon you are left with zero MP, half HP and no items just to face a badass boss that you know will kill you. And the save point is after that guy. Its good, makes you realy play hard. Noadays you loose a battle, shrug the shoulders and just start again from the savepoint. I hate that, whats the point of even trying?
 

Silent-Hunter

Hardcore Member
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
3,185
I would just quit at that point. 2 hours of play, and if you lose you have to do all two hours over again? I might as well have an assembly line job, it would be just as interesting, doing the same thing over and over.
 

Grench

Forum Addict!
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
6,576
I would just quit at that point. 2 hours of play, and if you lose you have to do all two hours over again? I might as well have an assembly line job, it would be just as interesting, doing the same thing over and over.
Sounds like Bike or Die. Or Geometry Dash. There are plenty of games with what can be -long- levels of "oops you're dead". But - those are mostly skill based. For an RPG to do that with what I'm assuming are random dice rolls, that is quite rough - and might need to be rethought?
 

ible

professional vim user
Joined
Mar 24, 2014
Messages
2,371
Location
Seattle, WA
this feels like a better fit for general (development) discussions.

i was given some advice in a game dev forum (i think?) a long time ago. if you aren't making the game, no one else will. everyone has lots of ideas (myself included) on what fun type of game to make, but limited time to make them. of course, it's still fun to come up with ideas. a related one of mine is to do some sort of card-based RPG battle system between psychics; certain moves can show the other person's hand (actions available to them in their "focus"), or see what their library has (maybe "subconscious" or something). there'd be other moves that attack or defend, as well.

not enough time in the world, though; that one's pretty low on my radar.
 

Zuk

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
107
I still have what I got done on my old laptop. I just don't have the time anymore to work on it. Life is busy. :(
 

Zuk

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
107
I think besides my divorce messing that up, it was the fact that there were three balls. I copied Super Dodgeball on the NES 100% to the pixel. it doesn't fit in a 720p screen. How do you track 3 balls so two players can see everything that is going on? I mean, yeah, it's MOST of it. I got a bit too ambitious with this one. Sure, I could have shrunk the court. I didn't want to. What you don't really see there, I have an input buffer, so I could detect like Street Fighter moves. I wanted like "Hydouken." I'm still into the idea. I won't do it in GLBasic like I did before if I pick it back up. "Space Base Pandora" probably interests me more. For real, check out Zillion on the master system, or whatever it's called in Europe or other places. It was metroidvania before metroid or castlevania. Space Base Pandora is/was that but with more traps and a level editor so everyone could make their own maps.
 

Zuk

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
107
I'm really starting to get interested in game programming again. Let me know if you would like to see Dodge Ball or Space Base Pandora in some form. Shout out to pmprog to re-invigorating my interest. Shout out to getting drunk and randomly posting on a forum to even get back into this. That idea for the team fighting, I had that back in the 90's. I just re-remembered it while drunk. LOL! My dog is probably going to be upset that I am at my computer more. So, what's the best development pipeline for Pyra? What C++ coder/compiler is the best? I get GLBasic, it's easy, I have a feeling it coverts GLBasic to C++ then compiles. Let's cut out the middle man. I can learn C++ or whatever is the language of choice. Please stear me the right way.
 
  • Love
Reactions: rSl

pmprog

DNF (Did Not Finish)
Joined
Apr 25, 2011
Messages
4,023
Use whatever language/compiler suits you. I like using Allegro 5. I made an engine wrapping it called LitheFX in C++ that let you set up multiple displays, with different "planes" (tilemaps and sprites). It fit the style as you program things like the c64 with hardware sprites, but i felt it didn't really fit with my workflow, so I've ditched it to a smaller header only C wrapper I've called FastFx, and you still use mostly Allegro functions.

I'm hoping there is an Allegro build for the Pyra at some point.

Alternatively, I've been watching javidx9's YouTube, and he's got a C++ header only Gl interface/framework called olcPixelEngine.

But if you like GlBasic and it compiles for Pyra, continue to use that (I'm even tempted to give it a try to see how it compares)
 

ible

professional vim user
Joined
Mar 24, 2014
Messages
2,371
Location
Seattle, WA
i would recommend finishing a game in the framework you're comfortable with, then maybe starting a new project in something else. unless you have something against the framework...
 

Grench

Forum Addict!
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
6,576
Not sure why, but the above discussion gave me an idea to share. 3D pong or brick destroying game - and then some.

The screen is the 'player wall view'. One nub controls left/right/up/down of the 'paddle'. The other nub controls left/right/up/down of the player - and thus their view of the portion of the 'player wall' that they are currently in. Effectively one controls the 'body' and the other 'the racket'.

The 'balls' bounce off the floor, roof, both walls, obstacles, etc. The view from the player is a 3D room/hallway with changing angles (depending on the position of the 'player') and of their translucent 'paddle'.

Multiplayer cooperative and deathmatch (players on opposing walls) should be possible. Castle defense maybe?

Powerups, different properties of obstacles/bricks/whatnot.

Different paddles in size and shape - imagine a curved shield paddle - or a doughnut shaped one even.
 

levi

Still fresh, damnit!
Joined
Oct 6, 2008
Messages
12,661
Location
Somewhere off the coast of the EU
If the balls bounce off the floor and the ceiling, how do you lose a life? Other than that it sounds like much of it's already been done in some breakout clone or other, since they run from about 1981 to some point in the early 90s.
 

Grench

Forum Addict!
Joined
Oct 3, 2008
Messages
6,576
If the balls bounce off the floor and the ceiling, how do you lose a life? Other than that it sounds like much of it's already been done in some breakout clone or other, since they run from about 1981 to some point in the early 90s.
When it makes it past you to the 'wall-less-void' behind you. Game area is a cube - you're effectively guarding the one wall that is 'missing'. I have seen a ton of breakout clones - they were always '2d'. This would be 3D.
 

Zuk

Member
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
107
I feel like if I were to finish a game, it would be a more straight forward one, like Space Base Pandora. It's one player. It's a screen/room at a time. It's just a platformer. With dodgeball, what if your team had all three balls at the same time? Yeah, I made it so you can switch the character you are in control of easy enough. Balancing the AI for your non-controlled, or even opponent characters is a big step into what I'm not used to yet. I even got a bit weird with dodgeball in that there weren't even "hitboxes." it was a pseudo 3D math going on there so you wouldn't arbitrarily get hit if something was going in front or behind you. It had to hit your "width." If that makes sense to you. Like yeah, we have the X and Y of the screen, but there is a Z depth also, into the screen.
 

acitu19

Newbie
Joined
May 10, 2020
Messages
1
I honestly don't care if anyone steals this and takes it to production. I'm never going to do it. If you can make it, GO FOR IT! If you can make it better, DO IT!

My idea is a one player versus one player battle, but it's kind of DND, turn based rules, but each person has a five character team built out. Think Ogre Battle, but you have a five character team and are facing another human with a five character team.

Ogre battle may be a bit too much, I'm thinking just skirmishes, no campaign. When you lose, you lose everything.You have to start again, from scratch. But, if you win, you get level ups and whatnot.

All it would be, in my mind, is just a team building up, fighting other teams on different maps. But if you lose, your team is gone.

There would obviously be a pool of different characters to choose from with many different skills.

Maybe losing and going back to beginner is a bit too much, but it amps the stakes.
I'm going to do it
 
Top