Re: [crossfire] Things to fix
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Yann Chachkoff wrote: | Le jeudi 29 mai 2008, Nicolas Weeger a écrit : |> Hello. |> |> Here are some things that need fixing IMO. I intend to start some, but I |> can't do everything alone :) |> |> |> The game is missing lore. Some is on the wiki, but not much is integrated |> in the game itself. Also, many many maps are missing hints relative to |> their location or purpose (warrior tower, ...). |> |> So we need people to first incorporate the existing lore, then add missing |> one, into a coherent thing, then add hints to various places or things. |> Ideally, *all* houses and maps could have a whole story (ok, not a whole |> quest maybe, but some background). |> | I'd answer "yes, but with comments" on this one. A lot of places do not really | need a "story" - places like pubs, inns or shops often don't require such | background for themselves. | | OTOH, what they always require is a "taste of truth". A shop is technically | nothing more than a place where you can buy objects; but in-game-wise, it is | a place where people work and try to make it so customers are attracted. To | achieve such a result, "utility" maps, or maps that are too "small" should | get details that make them more believable: customers passing by in shops; | drunk lads causing trouble at night in the pub; and so on. | | Another small idea: most places are probably not open all the time, or offer | different things based on the time of the day - that wouldn't be very hard to | implement either, but would make the place more alive. | I agree with Yann Chachkoff. | |> I'd like to expand towns to let's say 5 times their current size. This |> would enable even more things, and make the scale better IMO. |> Ideally, the world itself could be much expanded. |> | I'm not sure of that. If you mean "scenaristic expansion" (more active NPCs, | clues - true or false - or dynamic effects that have an impact on the story), | then I agree. But if you are speaking of geographic expansion, I'd disagree: | IMHO, the main issue is not how small cities are, but how (in)efficiently the | available space is used. | Or to say it in another way: it is not the number of pages that makes a book | good. Besides that, I believe it is easier to not start with huge projects, | but rather work with smaller scenaristic chunks and maps, and expand places | only step by step, as the need arises. Indeed, we need to fill up the current bigworld a bit before we change to a hugeworld, it is mostly empty as it is. More quests out in the wilderness. | |> I'm not sure of the best way to put lore ingame. Currently we have books |> (random things), NPCs. I added some professors in Navar university, one can |> tell you a long story about Lorkas if you ask. |> Things to take into account, IMO, are: one NPC shouldn't know everything of |> the world, or maybe even all the details of one thing. On the other hand, |> it can be weird to have exactly all the people you need to learn things... |> |> Opinions on how to present lore or on those issues? |> | Two main paths for information diffusion: | - Random diffusion, from automatically generated books, artifacts, or NPCs; | - Human-implemented, by map-makers. | | Random lore bits should be managed just like any other item: the rarer they | are, the higher the chance for them to be meaningful/important/accurate. With | a few dead-end ones, to trap the player, of course: not every legend known | has to be true, or lead to a quest. Just because Karis Imaden told you there | was a huge treasure hidden in one room of the Scorn's Inn doesn't make it | true :). | Human-implemented lore should follow the classical rules of scenario writing: | enough clues to allow the player to be able to progress through the story, | but with a layer of uncertainty/inaccuracy, whose importance depends on the | average difficulty level of the quest. The principle of "key objects" one | must own to trigger a new clue, or the right action to take at the right | moment, should be much more extensively used. Most current NPCs are only | working on a keyword/answer paradygm, simply because nothing else was | possible; this is no longer the case, and we should thus make full use of the | available possibilities. I agree. | |> The combat rebalance needs to be finished. Mark, how can we help you on |> that? Also, do people have comments about the current hand to hand combat |> rebalance? Can be seen on the Ailesse servers (one permadeath, the other |> non |> permadeath). |> What about general item/monster fixing/balance? |> | No opinion on this. No opinions on this either. | |> IMO, the best way to progress is "game experience-driven development": |> develop things because they add stuff to the general ingame atmosphere, not |> for the sake of it "because it's cool". In the same way, we should avoid |> the "not invented here" syndrom and try to use existing libraries when they |> exist. |> | Again, I'd agree - with
Re: [crossfire] Things to fix
Le jeudi 29 mai 2008, Nicolas Weeger a écrit : > Hello. > > Here are some things that need fixing IMO. I intend to start some, but I > can't do everything alone :) > > > The game is missing lore. Some is on the wiki, but not much is integrated > in the game itself. Also, many many maps are missing hints relative to > their location or purpose (warrior tower, ...). > > So we need people to first incorporate the existing lore, then add missing > one, into a coherent thing, then add hints to various places or things. > Ideally, *all* houses and maps could have a whole story (ok, not a whole > quest maybe, but some background). > I'd answer "yes, but with comments" on this one. A lot of places do not really need a "story" - places like pubs, inns or shops often don't require such background for themselves. OTOH, what they always require is a "taste of truth". A shop is technically nothing more than a place where you can buy objects; but in-game-wise, it is a place where people work and try to make it so customers are attracted. To achieve such a result, "utility" maps, or maps that are too "small" should get details that make them more believable: customers passing by in shops; drunk lads causing trouble at night in the pub; and so on. Another small idea: most places are probably not open all the time, or offer different things based on the time of the day - that wouldn't be very hard to implement either, but would make the place more alive. > I'd like to expand towns to let's say 5 times their current size. This > would enable even more things, and make the scale better IMO. > Ideally, the world itself could be much expanded. > I'm not sure of that. If you mean "scenaristic expansion" (more active NPCs, clues - true or false - or dynamic effects that have an impact on the story), then I agree. But if you are speaking of geographic expansion, I'd disagree: IMHO, the main issue is not how small cities are, but how (in)efficiently the available space is used. Or to say it in another way: it is not the number of pages that makes a book good. Besides that, I believe it is easier to not start with huge projects, but rather work with smaller scenaristic chunks and maps, and expand places only step by step, as the need arises. > > I'm not sure of the best way to put lore ingame. Currently we have books > (random things), NPCs. I added some professors in Navar university, one can > tell you a long story about Lorkas if you ask. > Things to take into account, IMO, are: one NPC shouldn't know everything of > the world, or maybe even all the details of one thing. On the other hand, > it can be weird to have exactly all the people you need to learn things... > > Opinions on how to present lore or on those issues? > Two main paths for information diffusion: - Random diffusion, from automatically generated books, artifacts, or NPCs; - Human-implemented, by map-makers. Random lore bits should be managed just like any other item: the rarer they are, the higher the chance for them to be meaningful/important/accurate. With a few dead-end ones, to trap the player, of course: not every legend known has to be true, or lead to a quest. Just because Karis Imaden told you there was a huge treasure hidden in one room of the Scorn's Inn doesn't make it true :). Human-implemented lore should follow the classical rules of scenario writing: enough clues to allow the player to be able to progress through the story, but with a layer of uncertainty/inaccuracy, whose importance depends on the average difficulty level of the quest. The principle of "key objects" one must own to trigger a new clue, or the right action to take at the right moment, should be much more extensively used. Most current NPCs are only working on a keyword/answer paradygm, simply because nothing else was possible; this is no longer the case, and we should thus make full use of the available possibilities. > The combat rebalance needs to be finished. Mark, how can we help you on > that? Also, do people have comments about the current hand to hand combat > rebalance? Can be seen on the Ailesse servers (one permadeath, the other > non > permadeath). > What about general item/monster fixing/balance? > No opinion on this. > IMO, the best way to progress is "game experience-driven development": > develop things because they add stuff to the general ingame atmosphere, not > for the sake of it "because it's cool". In the same way, we should avoid > the "not invented here" syndrom and try to use existing libraries when they > exist. > Again, I'd agree - with caveats. Adding things "because they are cool" is perfectly fine - as long as they allow cool in-game results, and just not because it is technically esthetical. I'd prefer seeing development being driven by the "what kind of game do we want ?" reflexion; the "game experience-driven development" is part of it, but there is more than that - mainly the need for a coherent idea of the
