Zombie Apocalypse

[NaN]

I like the idea of a main quest or story that involves finding out how the zombie-outbreak started. I want the storyline to involve all kinds of of outrageous conspiracies.

It might also be nice to leave bits of story lying around in the form of old newspapers, diaries, photos, writing on the walls, bloodspatters, drag-marks and other traces.

In the main story-line there should always be different routes available to the player. Some should require brute force, while other might require stealth, lockpicking, driving-skills or clever use of heavy machinery or destructible buildings. (I want destroyable architecture!) Edit: Deus Ex, for example, pulled off the multiple routes thing really well.


Thanks to our new volunteers, it looks like 3D it might be becoming a real possibility. I'm starting to think we could pull off a 3D world with 2D sprites for characters. If zombies are flat sprites, we can still have LOTS of them on the screen at once. LOTS probably being more than enough to fill the entire screen. They could even be burning, oh the joy...

Edit: Anything that's too long or wide, like a car, will look crappy as a sprite though, so vehicles should be 3D.


Also, MattRDavis, have you ever seen "The Dead Next Door"?

 

[MattRDavis]

Also, MattRDavis, have you ever seen "The Dead Next Door"?

I have, it seems like it's been a long time on that one, though, so I can't accurately remember a lot of it other than it was a comedy/horror type thing with a character named after Sam Raimi. As far as "zombie comedies" go, I'd have to say my favorite underappreciated gem is "My Boyfriends Back".

 

[plopperz]

I like the routes thing, but they should be constantly overlapping each other, so for example, lets say you goal is to blow up a building. You could stealthily steal a zombie guarded bomb-armed car and ram it into the building, you could kill all the zombie-guards and take the car, or you could simply find a bomb somewhere in the city and blow it up that way. That's not the greatest example, but you get the idea.

 

[BenTolputt]

A few things need to be sorted out before deciding on an engine (and/or customising other code into said engine).

Firstly, destructive geometry does not come out of the box for any engine I know of. Faking geometry destruction (ala "Freedom Force" buildings) can be done as special case code, but this will have an effect on the visibility optimisations we can make.

Honestly speaking, what does "destroyable geometry" add to a zombie game? Even the simplest zombie games & stories are about surviving hordes of the undead, not about "blowing shit up".

Guys, I'm going to spend today writing up a game proposal, complete with an engine write-up on what may (or may not) be possible to implement using each one (in a given time frame).

IF we can get agreement on the document - then I'd like to "officially" take the leadership role. We've spent a few days now going back and forth but with no REAL progress. I STILL don't know what engine to start modding for this because we're still not agreed on the final features to be included! I know some people don't like the idea of a "coder" in charge, and as such I've not sought the role. But given when this idea was introduced to the forums and the fact that there is STILL nothing to show for it (no concept art, no storyline, no models, no engine choice, etc) - I think I need to either step in or bow out. If people would rather I bow out - let me know.

--BenT

 

[plopperz]

I agree, we should not have too many unnecessary features. As fun as it'd be to blow up buildings, it probably can't be done.
I say your write-up should be the direction the game goes in and we discuss some minor changes, so no more of this back-and-forth bullshit. You seem to have good ideas and you know what you're talking about, . You should be the official leader as of now, and whatever you say, goes.

 

[NaN]

A few things need to be sorted out before deciding on an engine (and/or customising other code into said engine).

Firstly, destructive geometry does not come out of the box for any engine I know of. Faking geometry destruction (ala "Freedom Force" buildings) can be done as special case code, but this will have an effect on the visibility optimisations we can make.

Honestly speaking, what does "destroyable geometry" add to a zombie game? Even the simplest zombie games & stories are about surviving hordes of the undead, not about "blowing shit up".

If a building is infested with zombies, you might want to blow it up. You might even lure the zombies in first. If you're backed into a corner, you could use that last stick of dynamite to blow up a bunch of zombies, but you could also blow a hole in the wall and flee. Or perhaps you could blow out the floor beneath their feet. The possibilities are endless, really. Also, all games are about blowing shit up, what are you talking about?

It's the really hard things like destroyable buildings that make me want to go with an isometric 2D engine. Things like that and other cool things like, say, procedural generation, should be easier to do in 2D and with tile-based surroundings. Though there might be a good reason I've never seen a single game that really implements destroying your surroundings.

Still, it's things like this that will make a game unique. I think gameplay is more important than graphics. If we go with simpler graphics and simpler representations, we can make bigger, more complex, more dynamic worlds. We can't beat any major game in the graphical department, but we might just be able to beat them in terms of originality and depth of gameplay.

 

[sindbad]

It's the really hard things like destroyable buildings that make me want to go with an isometric 2D engine. Things like that and other cool things like, say, procedural generation, should be easier to do in 2D and with tile-based surroundings. Though there might be a good reason I've never seen a single game that really implements destroying your surroundings.
2D is unacceptable. Destroyable buildings are not that much harder in 3D. It gets really hard when you factor in other objects in that 3D world.

While it would be nice to have, I think it's overkill. It may be possible to add later or even completely change the engine, while keeping all the content. Same goes with portals or other cool stuff.

We already have an engine: Tremulous. I am a bit of a hypocrite telling people what to do (since I don't have time to do anything myself), but content is what needs to be added. The engine modifications should be kept as low as possible, in the first stage at least.

 

[NaN]

2D is unacceptable. Destroyable buildings are not that much harder in 3D. It gets really hard when you factor in other objects in that 3D world.

I propose buildings, and parts of buildings, fall straight down when destroyed. Things in a collapsed section disappear or get burried under the rubble. If you work with square blocks, stacked on top of eachother, that collapse according to simple rules, I think large destroyable buildings are doable.

While it would be nice to have, I think it's overkill. It may be possible to add later or even completely change the engine, while keeping all the content. Same goes with portals or other cool stuff.

You make a good point. If you design it ritght, and compartmentalize the world representation enough, it wouldn't even matter if it were outputted isometrically or in 3D. Like NetHack, which was text-based, but can now be played with nice graphics.

We already have an engine: Tremulous. I am a bit of a hypocrite telling people what to do (since I don't have time to do anything myself), but content is what needs to be added. The engine modifications should be kept as low as possible, in the first stage at least.

Programming is more or less much synonymous with engine modification. What else do you propose the dedicated programmers do? (BenT should focus on modeling, if that's what he wants)

I agree that destroyable buildins should be added last, rather than first, if ever. But still, it's the kind of thing we might want to think about when making our first design. If there's one thing I've learned as a programmer, it's that your work tends to increases exponentially if you don't think ahead.

 

[BenTolputt]

QUOTE
We already have an engine: Tremulous. I am a bit of a hypocrite telling people what to do (since I don't have time to do anything myself), but content is what needs to be added. The engine modifications should be kept as low as possible, in the first stage at least.
Wrong! If all you want is another shooter - sure, take an existing FPS engine and change the content. However, another shooter clone is not going to really make a splash for Pandora when they can play the originals. It is my intention to create something "different" for Pandora, and I'm hoping that is what other people want too. Note, I didn't say "revolutionary" jsut "different".

--BenT

 

[sindbad]

I propose buildings, and parts of buildings, fall straight down when destroyed. Things in a collapsed section disappear or get burried under the rubble. If you work with square blocks, stacked on top of eachother, that collapse according to simple rules, I think large destroyable buildings are doable.

Breaking links between all block in the affected area and letting ODE make it fall nicely sounds easy, but I don't know what implications that can have in a large world.

Programming is more or less much
I agree that destroyable buildins should be added last, rather than first, if ever. But still, it's the kind of thing we might want to think about when making our first design. If there's one thing I've learned as a programmer, it's that your work tends to increases exponentially if you don't think ahead.

Yep. And that's one of the reasons I love Python

Wrong! If all you want is another shooter - sure, take an existing FPS engine and change the content. However, another shooter clone is not going to really make a splash for Pandora when they can play the originals. It is my intention to create something "different" for Pandora, and I'm hoping that is what other people want too. Note, I didn't say "revolutionary" jsut "different".

As NaN said, content can be made swappable between different engines. Since it's free and the sources are available (.blend, .psd, .whatever) it may be usable even without thinking ahead when designing the world mechanisms.

Programming is more or less much synonymous with engine modification. What else do you propose the dedicated programmers do? (BenT should focus on modeling, if that's what he wants)

I'll do absolutely nothing I guess experiment with destroyable buildings and the extent to which Tremulous can be modified within the margin of reasonable code. If it's not adequate for extensive modification of this type, try designing an engine. Prototype in an easy language (python or some other).

Getting something off the ground fast is a priority. Making a zombie-themed Tremulous mod (as a pre-alpha-preview-of-some-sort) is the cheapest way and involves little to no programming. Later on, it can be decided if Tremulous is adequate for further development or a new engine should be made.

Also, reusing existing components could save a lot of work (SDL/SFML, ODE, OGRE/Irrlicht).

 

[plopperz]

QUOTE
Getting something off the ground fast is a priority.

Why? Wouldn't it make sense to use that time working on a decent, unique game, rather than modding another?
Don't spend too much time working on destructable buildings, we need people to work on the essential things, like making the game world and the zombie AI.

 

[grayson1012]

QUOTE
Getting something off the ground fast is a priority.

Why? Wouldn't it make sense to use that time working on a decent, unique game, rather than modding another?
Don't spend too much time working on destructable buildings, we need people to work on the essential things, like making the game world and the zombie AI.

i agree, people aren't intrested in destructable environments

you need to look at the bigger picture

QUOTE
We already have an engine: Tremulous. I am a bit of a hypocrite telling people what to do (since I don't have time to do anything myself), but content is what needs to be added. The engine modifications should be kept as low as possible, in the first stage at least.
Wrong! If all you want is another shooter - sure, take an existing FPS engine and change the content. However, another shooter clone is not going to really make a splash for Pandora when they can play the originals. It is my intention to create something "different" for Pandora, and I'm hoping that is what other people want too. Note, I didn't say "revolutionary" jsut "different".

--BenT


if u want something new DONT RIP OFF ANOTHER MOD!!

 

[sindbad]

QUOTE
Getting something off the ground fast is a priority.

Why? Wouldn't it make sense to use that time working on a decent, unique game, rather than modding another?
Don't spend too much time working on destructable buildings, we need people to work on the essential things, like making the game world and the zombie AI.

MUCH faster. Most of the code is already written. Think of it as a crude prototype. Again, art and other content (even the game world) can be reused if careful.

It might even lend itself to making a decent, unique game. Needs further investigation though. In the long run, an engine from scratch might yield better results, but it takes time and effort.

 

[C B Felterbush]

Well it is not that important to me which engine you decide on or who heads up the project, as long as they are qualified. I have listned to some of the story suggestions and have put togather some ideas.

I do think how the game is played and how you guys decide to build it will in some ways affect how the game plays out. So I will wait to start the actual wright up till some things are more firm. -CB

 

[atomicthumbs]

Honestly speaking, what does "destroyable geometry"

Building fortifications out of rubble and having to defend them against zombies, maybe?

 

[NaN]

Hiroe, did you get around to setting up that Wiki? Need help with anything? I think a dedicated forum would be good too. That way we can discuss different topics in different threads, without polluting these forums with a billion threads.

Let's not get sidetracked by debating whether or not destructible geometry is a good idea. It's just one original and cool thing (IMO) we might think about adding.

But if we want any ambitious features, we should keep them in mind when creating the core of the game. And of course we should implement more important things first.

 

[plopperz]

QUOTE
Getting something off the ground fast is a priority.

Why? Wouldn't it make sense to use that time working on a decent, unique game, rather than modding another?
Don't spend too much time working on destructable buildings, we need people to work on the essential things, like making the game world and the zombie AI.

MUCH faster. Most of the code is already written. Think of it as a crude prototype. Again, art and other content (even the game world) can be reused if careful.

It might even lend itself to making a decent, unique game. Needs further investigation though. In the long run, an engine from scratch might yield better results, but it takes time and effort.

I would prefer to put in more time and effort to have a good quality game, than have a half-decent unoriginal game. Not saying that it couldn't be done using the Tremulous Engine (which I think is based on Q3, putting us back to square one.) but it would have to be heavily modded to make it a truly unique game. I never said that we should make it all from scratch, I was just suggesting we use something that would require some actual coding, rather then using a GUI level editor. I'm against the barricade idea mostly because it just sounds like Tremulous with zombies.

Hows that write-up coming BenT?

 

[NaN]

I'd like to encourage any artists who want to contribute, to start making some concept art or 3D models. Let's get some concrete ideas flowing about the artistic style and mood of the game.

 

[JakeK]

Is it gonna look something like this? http://www.bmoviezombiehorror.com/development.asp

Hell if you wanted to do pixel art this (Australian) guy charges 25 bucks an hour for some fricken good pixel art! http://www.rhysd.com/index.html

Imagine this with zombies running after you - http://www.rhysd.com/work_kukan2.html

Or even this - http://www.pixelfreak.com/i/07/index.html

 

[plopperz]

Is it gonna look something like this? http://www.bmoviezombiehorror.com/development.asp


No