Envision, Create, Share

Welcome to HBGames, a leading amateur game development forum and Discord server. All are welcome, and amongst our ranks you will find experts in their field from all aspects of video game design and development.

The Quick Ideas/Concepts Thread

This thread is to post quick ideas and concepts you've thought up that don't deserve to have an entire thread to themselves. Similar to the screenshot thread, others can comment on your ideas and give you advice. This thread includes things like:

-Ideas for characters and their history, personalities, and goals
-Character designs, names
-Conflict between characters
-Enemy ideas
-Gameplay and battle ideas
-Important plot points/events
-The setting of a game (its world, towns, forests, dungeons, etc.)
-And so on.

So get postin!
 
I think this thread is a great idea.

Just recently I was thinking of battle ideas for a modern game setting that wouldn't use magic. I came up with something similar to the final fantasy tactics orator class only using swear words.
I think it would be fun to somehow chain words together that would cause stat effects.
I don't think there would be a limit or gauge like "MP" since some words won't have an effect on enemies. And figuring out what words work is part of the gameplay.
The only hole in my idea is how the characters will expand their vocabulary. It's not something you'd buy in a store, or gain as you level up. Maybe I could encourage npc interaction, like talking to the seemingly unimportant child in the corner to add "damn" to your list.
silly idea?
 
Amusing idea. Would there be a limit to the number of words you could say?
*You find an urban dictionary! You add C*&T, S&^T, and D*@K to your vocabulary*
 
coyotecraft":1tp75m6y said:
I think this thread is a great idea.

Just recently I was thinking of battle ideas for a modern game setting that wouldn't use magic. I came up with something similar to the final fantasy tactics orator class only using swear words.
I think it would be fun to somehow chain words together that would cause stat effects.
I don't think there would be a limit or gauge like "MP" since some words won't have an effect on enemies. And figuring out what words work is part of the gameplay.
The only hole in my idea is how the characters will expand their vocabulary. It's not something you'd buy in a store, or gain as you level up. Maybe I could encourage npc interaction, like talking to the seemingly unimportant child in the corner to add "damn" to your list.
silly idea?

I tried something similar where it was an on map ABS where whatever the word you typed a differing attack would be used. I set it to a max of five letters so that the number of words possible wouldn't be too infinite. I gave up the idea after trying to script it for about three months. Decided I wasn't that good at scripting and went blah!


An Idea I'm still trying to pull off is the non-death concept where instead of losing HP you lose EXP. I'm still twisting this idea into a game of mine but it's harder than I thought because boss battles refuse you the opening to run away and train so if your too weak you will inevitably fail. Though I am toying with a capture idea where if you get knocked out long enough for the enemy to trap you, you get caught and restart from a previous area similar as if you just died.
 

oboys

Member

Interesting thread but shouldn't it be in the concept development subforum? How about a similar thread but where people should feel free to use the ideas in their own stories, a kind of writing resources thread.

coyotecraft":2u9jujpx said:
I came up with something similar to the final fantasy tactics orator class only using swear words.
I think it would be fun to somehow chain words together that would cause stat effects.
I don't think there would be a limit or gauge like "MP" since some words won't have an effect on enemies. And figuring out what words work is part of the gameplay.
The only hole in my idea is how the characters will expand their vocabulary. It's not something you'd buy in a store, or gain as you level up. Maybe I could encourage npc interaction, like talking to the seemingly unimportant child in the corner to add "damn" to your list.
silly idea?
I hope there's a good reason for using swear words, e.g. like Southpark, or else it just seems silly. The ability to combine words appears interesting and reminds me of Treasure of Rudra. Although, you may want to make the effect of combined words to be more than the simple and independent evocation of the involved words and/or choose the words so that the meanings remain the same but the combination is more powerful than the individual evocations. In other words, things like

Fire+Ice => Water attack (possibly a failure)

Traitor - Attack your allies until next turn.
Speedy Gonzales - Receive a bonus turn. Damage done and taken increased by +50% until next turn
Traitor+Speedy Gonzales is therefore a rather powerful spell, having an opponent attack his allies twice, using up his own magic supplies, dealing 50% extra damage in the first attack and furthermore take 50% extra damage from you.

I don't think you need to have a hard limit on the number of words that can be used, simply add an countering effect that will naturally place the optimal word count among the low numbers. You could simply change for instance the casting time, mana cost (could be hidden), or success chance. If you only change mana cost, then it must be changed superlinearly, or else you will prefer to spend enough of the mana reserves to produce a single killing attack (trading mana for speed). Likewise, casting time must be changed sublinearly or else one will prefer to cast them independently (e.g. cast A+B in 2 sec, aborted if attacked or cast A in 1 sec, aborted if attacked + cast B in 1 sec, aborted if attacked). Summed mana cost, unchanged casting time, but altered success chance seems like the most interesting since the optimal will change considerably over the course of the game.

Are you saying that the effects of the words should not be visible?

The only hole in my idea is how the characters will expand their vocabulary. It's not something you'd buy in a store, or gain as you level up. Maybe I could encourage npc interaction, like talking to the seemingly unimportant child in the corner to add "damn" to your list./quote]
Learning these things through experiment or from the world seems like the most interesting and you have more than enough freedom here. Complete a side quest and a captain thanks you for your help, says he'ss sorry for not giving you anything in return, and curses the perpetrators.

Sneaking up on the guards instead of running out shouting might provide you with some interesting dialog.

Escaping from your pursuers by climbing out the bathroom windows gives you a chance to throw a glance at the wall writings.

You will have a natural excuse for why the words can only be found in certain parts of the worlds and those ancient temples may be particularly attractive.
 

oboys

Member

An Idea I'm still trying to pull off is the non-death concept where instead of losing HP you lose EXP. I'm still twisting this idea into a game of mine but it's harder than I thought because boss battles refuse you the opening to run away and train so if your too weak you will inevitably fail. Though I am toying with a capture idea where if you get knocked out long enough for the enemy to trap you, you get caught and restart from a previous area similar as if you just died.
Losing EXP temporarily or permanently? It may turn out to be fairly annoying to the player if it takes as long to regain the exp as it took to gather it in the first place. Especially if you're in an area where everything's too strong for you. I think you could make it work and be interesting but it would not work for every game.

Surely, when you reach 0 EXP, you pass out and the monsters do with you as they please?
 
This idea sounds really nice. I can see it fitting a 'criminal' head character, rather than a preacher.
He can use moves on NPCs and force them to do stuff for him, or on guards (SleepyHead- make NPCs fall asleep).

Here's an idea I've been toying with.
Player vs Player battle system, which is offline (my game doesn't use Netplay).
I can tweak my Trading system, and send a file with the whole party (instead 1 actor) to the "host" player,
and when battle is over, send the result as a file, which contains the battle log + the prize item if you won.
One player is the "host", and the battle will be executed on his computer. The "challenger" sends him a file which contains data about his party. The computer will fight the host using a smart AI. The winner gets a 'star' item, and there's a website with High-score, score = how much stars you have.

What worries me is 'the human factor'. Sending a result file isn't automatic- the host must do it himself. If he lost, he might not bother/ refuse to send it saying 'No fair, you cheated!' This behavior may discourage players from using the system.
I may use a limited friend list you can trade with, with only 3 slots. People are lazy :D They won't like erasing a friend to temporarily add another. It's a small inconvenience and may be worth it.
*wow.. long post o.o*
 
This idea sounds really nice. I can see it fitting a 'criminal' head character, rather than a preacher.
He can use moves on NPCs and force them to do stuff for him, or on guards (SleepyHead- make NPCs fall asleep).

Here's an idea I've been toying with.
Player vs Player battle system, which is offline (my game doesn't use Netplay).
I can tweak my Trading system, and send a file with the whole party (instead 1 actor) to the "host" player,
and when battle is over, send the result as a file, which contains the battle log + the prize item if you won.
One player is the "host", and the battle will be executed on his computer. The "challenger" sends him a file which contains data about his party. The computer will fight the host using a smart AI. The winner gets a 'star' item, and there's a website with High-score, score = how much stars you have.

What worries me is 'the human factor'. Sending a result file isn't automatic- the host must do it himself. If he lost, he might not bother/ refuse to send it saying 'No fair, you cheated!' This behavior may discourage players from using the system.
I may use a limited friend list you can trade with only 3 slots cause People are lazy :D They won't like erasing a friend to temporarily add another. It's a small inconvenience and may be worth it.
*wow.. long post o.o*
 
oboys":3m1z8h3u said:
Interesting thread but shouldn't it be in the concept development subforum?
Yeah, that was a mistake on my part. The thread's now where it belongs.

coyotecraft":3m1z8h3u said:
I think this thread is a great idea.

Just recently I was thinking of battle ideas for a modern game setting that wouldn't use magic. I came up with something similar to the final fantasy tactics orator class only using swear words.
I think it would be fun to somehow chain words together that would cause stat effects.
I don't think there would be a limit or gauge like "MP" since some words won't have an effect on enemies. And figuring out what words work is part of the gameplay.
The only hole in my idea is how the characters will expand their vocabulary. It's not something you'd buy in a store, or gain as you level up. Maybe I could encourage npc interaction, like talking to the seemingly unimportant child in the corner to add "damn" to your list.
silly idea?
The problem I see with this is that scripting it would be very tough, like ultimaodin mentioned. And I'm wondering, how the player would figure out the words? It could lead to some interesting possibilities in gameplay, for sure. I could imagine it would be neat to see, especially if you could combine words (e.g. you have "fira" to mean fire, and "hydro" to mean water, so if you use "firahydro" you would use an attack that combines fire and water) Again though, implementing this into the game would be difficult. I'm no programmer so I dunno if this is even that feasible, but I say if you're determined enough try it out.
 
I have a few battle concepts.

The first concept is based on Final Fantasy X's battle system. Different characters are able to effectively attack different enemies like some being good against high armored enemies and some against evasive enemies and so on. You can also easily switch characters in and out of the fray so if you need a high accuracy character you can swap one in and have a low accuracy character serve as bench warmer instead.

The major difference is that this also applies to defense. Some characters have strong armor, some have good evasion and some have good magic resistance. Enemies are just like characters suited to different targets. So, not only do you want to attack enemies with the right characters, you also want to make sure the right characters are currently in the active party when it's the enemies who attacks. While accomplishing one of those objectives should be easy, doing both is trickier.

To encourage the player to learn both effective offense and defense, I don't want to include any MP replenishing items, instead characters recover MP every time they injure enemies. The MP recovery formula is something like following:
MP recovered = 10% of character's Max MP * damage dealt / expected damage

Expected damage is some sort of number the game calculates which will among other things assume the character uses an effective attack. For those who have played FFX, it works kind of like the warrior overdrive mode except you get MP instead of overdrive. This will discourage MP farming since killing an enemy with ten weak attacks will give you just as much MP back as killing it with two strong attacks will. Leaving a high defense enemy alive and have the mage hit it repeatedly for a pitiful damage won't be an effective strategy.

With that feature in effect, the player will want to minimize the amount of damage taken. If you spend more MP on healing than you recover by attacking enemies you will eventually run out of MP. The damage you take will count even if it doesn't actually kill the character.

The only issue is status attacks and defensive spells. Since status attacks and defensive spells don't give you MP back unlike offensive skills, they are rather unattractive. However, as long as they can save more MP from being used due to the player having to heal characters than what they cost to cast, they are useful. So if I for example make a sleep spell I have to make sure putting an enemy asleep can be a better option than not putting the enemy asleep and heal the injury you take due to the enemy now being able to attack.

Another battle idea I have is making skills that are both offensive and defensive in nature. A problem I've seen is that many want the battles to be fast, but it's hard to make battles both fast and strategical. Several strategies are factored out if enemies are quickly defeated. Inflicting a status effect can prevent an enemy from acting. Killing the enemy also prevents it from acting. A defensive spell can decrease the damage you take. Killing an enemy will decrease the amount of enemies that attacks and therefore also decrease the damage you take. As a result, attacking enemies have the same benefits as defensive spells and status effects have and they also progress you towards victory.

If enemies take three hits or so to kill then a status effect can be worthwhile since only one one casting can prevent one from acting while you need three actions to prevent it from acting by killing it. A defensive spell can also with one action accomplish what you otherwise need three actions to accomplish by killing the enemy. However the faster the enemies are defeated, the less useful anything which doesn't damage or heal becomes.

My idea of a solution is to give skills both offensive and defensive properties. When you choose how to attack an enemy you also choose how to defend against retaliating attacks. Exactly how I'm to accomplish that I don't know. I could use a rock, paper and scissor system, but I want more dept. Ideally I want something that allows you to affect what the enemies can do, but which requires some brainpower to pull of.

This idea is not that different from my first idea in that it focuses on both offense and defense. The difference is that my first idea is more about which character you use and my second idea more about which skill you use. As such, the first idea would be more appropriate for a large cast while the second can be used for small casts.

I have a third idea, but it's more of a problem I'm hoping to be able to solve than an actual idea. One problem is that battles can easily become repetitive. The fourth time you encounter two frost wolves and an ice giant the battle will likely be the same as the third time that happened. The first encounter often differs a lot from the rest since you likely are testing things out and trying to figure out the best strategy to use. However, the more times you fight an enemy, the more it will be just the same. You can make the encounter rate really low, but fight can get repetitive really fast and sometimes different enemies fight fairly similar (elite soldier being a beefed up version of the veteran soldier and so on).

This would be solved if there was a way to make enemies action actually heavily affect what strategy you should use. That way, the random number generator will make the battles different unless it just happens to make the enemies use the same skills.

My experience so far is that even if enemies have a pool of different skills, what they happen to use rarely affects your strategy significantly. If they status a character to uselessness, it's more a speed bump than a change in strategy. You may sacrifice an action to cure the condition or you may just make due with the rest, but you will otherwise keep grinding the enemies down just as before.

If what actions the enemies chooses effectively opens and closes your available options, then battles would become much less repetitive.
 
*battle roles
First of all, you'll want to keep it simple for the player:
You can use classes- one class better at evasion, one better at defense, etc.
Give each enemy a class too. make sure the player can guess the enemy's class by how it looks. So he can switch in the right characters.
* MP recovery:
I think it makes no sense. If you want to reward the player, a simple 'score' shown at the end of
battle will suffice. Players will try harder to increase their score.
* Offensive & defensive skills
If you do your status effects right, they can still be attractive. ie, a 'poison' status that slowly drains HP
and also lowers the foe's attack. Please don't base the 'score' or MP recovery on how fast you kill the foe, it will discourage using strategy.
Here's an example from my game for a move: Fire wall.
It blocks an enemy's attack if it's magic, otherwise the enemy will enter the fire wall and take damage equal to 60 power attack.
I suggest to use a single attack, instead of selecting offence & defense every turn as it'll double the length of your battles.
 
silver wind":1iit9wof said:
*battle roles
First of all, you'll want to keep it simple for the player:
You can use classes- one class better at evasion, one better at defense, etc.
Give each enemy a class too. make sure the player can guess the enemy's class by how it looks. So he can switch in the right characters.
Actually, I would use stats, characters with high evasion are good at evading, characters with high defense are good at, well... having high defense and so on. That should be simple enough and I haven't experienced that players have a problem with keeping track of which character is good at what. As for enemies, I'd try to make it intuitive. If it's a golem it has high defense, but poor evasion. If it's a wolf it has high evasion, but low defense. For human enemies I can use the armor they wear as indicator.

* MP recovery:
I think it makes no sense. If you want to reward the player, a simple 'score' shown at the end of
battle will suffice. Players will try harder to increase their score.
Limit breaks never made any sense, but that didn't stop Squaresoft and some others who used that idea as well. As for score, I don't think that will be enough on it's own. Unless the score gives a tangible reward, many (most probably) will just ignore it. Of course, the obvious solution is to indeed give the player very tangible rewards. Still, I intend to make some effort towards avoiding taking damage mandatory. I'll keep in mind not going overboard though.

* Offensive & defensive skills
If you do your status effects right, they can still be attractive. ie, a 'poison' status that slowly drains HP
and also lowers the foe's attack. Please don't base the 'score' or MP recovery on how fast you kill the foe, it will discourage using strategy.
Actually, poison is one of the status effects that under my system wouldn't be attractive since monsters would lose HP without the characters getting MP for it. That's certainly be one major weakness. Maybe I just implement a score system and then have characters recover MP based on the score.

As for how score is computed, if I factor in speed at all, it will have a minor effect. Taking as little damage as possible will be much more important than killing enemies as fast as possible.

I suggest to use a single attack, instead of selecting offence & defense every turn as it'll double the length of your battles.
I meant you select one skill and that skill has both an offensive and a defensive property. So if you choose a paper type attack, you defend well against rock type attacks and poorly against scissor type attacks. You do not have to make two selections every time a character has to act.

Anyway, thanks for the feedback. You did manage to alert me of some flaws with my first system and I got a few ideas of how I may fix those flaws.
 
Right, I overlooked that.

Here's an idea I've been toying with.
Player vs Player battle system, which is offline (my game doesn't use Netplay).
I can tweak my Trading system, and send a file with the whole party (instead 1 actor) to the "host" player,
and when battle is over, send the result as a file, which contains the battle log + the prize item if you won.
One player is the "host", and the battle will be executed on his computer. The "challenger" sends him a file which contains data about his party. The computer will fight the host using a smart AI. The winner gets a 'star' item, and there's a website with High-score, score = how much stars you have.
I hope the host is also limited to using the AI otherwise it would be unfair. As for the AI, I suggest you limit the skill options to what the AI can handle. There are decisions I doubt even a smart AI can handle in a satisfactory way and I think the best would be to avoid putting the AI into such situations if possible.

What worries me is 'the human factor'. Sending a result file isn't automatic- the host must do it himself. If he lost, he might not bother/ refuse to send it saying 'No fair, you cheated!' This behavior may discourage players from using the system.
I may use a limited friend list you can trade with, with only 3 slots. People are lazy :D They won't like erasing a friend to temporarily add another. It's a small inconvenience and may be worth it.
*wow.. long post o.o*
If your idea actually flies, there will sooner or later appear a player obsessed with the idea of having the top score and being willing to cheat. Challenging a strong party of your possession with a weak party also of your possession strikes me as one way to cheat. Prepare to see a lot of cheaters on the scoreboard.

Maybe you could enable a third party to act as a host. Two players fight against each other and a third person hosts the fight. At least that way people could arrange tournaments or something and have a good tool to prevent cheating. This should probably be optional though else you inconvenience the player.
 
Yeah, The AI part is unfair for the challenger. What if I give the challenger more control, like let him set a preferable order of skills, ie: 1,1, 2, 4 for each actor.
Or, like you said: have a 'judge' who runs the battle on his computer, where he controls both parties. combined with AIM/MSN, he can tell the players what happened, and they select what move they wanna use next. How does that sound? I'll have to script a battle system where you control both sides, and only release it to 'judges'.

Edit: Cheating is harder this way, since the judge & 1 player must agree to cheat. So I can let anyone be a judge for any 2 players, if they don't appear in his friend list. (so he has no reason to cheat). The 2 players may decide to let 1 of them win, but with the judge watching they may think twice.
 
I'm not sure if this fits in, but I was thinking about creating a 'The Apprentice' type game, where there are 11 other NPC characters competing for the same job. The 'Boss' would give each team a task each week, and in the losing team each week, one character would be fired. I'm not sure how fun I could make it, but the player would customize their character, be able to volunteer as team leader, and then take/give orders and make decisions. NPCs would be given personalities and interact with eachother, and the game could record what each NPC would do throughout a task and the information would be used for/against them in the Board Room (for those who don't know, that's where the losing team go. The team leader picks two other characters to blame for the loss of the task, and then they would plead their case to the Boss who would then decide who was responsible and consequently fired).
Of course interaction between you and all other NPCs might be hard to implement, but I think it could be done given enough choices. Do you think it would be possible to give enough freedom to make it fun, and would you play a game like this?
 
It looks to me like you have set it up so that there will be a lot of cases where NPCs are contesting each other. I wonder how fun it will be to see two NPCs arguing who shall be booted. Also if the player looses and can choose which two will be in danger of getting booted, he will not be in danger himself for a long while. This may not even be an issue though, I know a lot of players will reload if they lose and thus it will always be the opposing team which looses members.

I'm think that in a setting where characters are trying to be the last one left, most players would want to have a real danger to fight against. Manipulate other characters to not get you booted and instead boot someone the player perceives as a treat. By putting the player on a position where he cannot be booted you have removed the excitement.

As for whether or not it's possible to make such a game, I imagine it will be hard. Just such a thing as the game taking into account who's booted and who's not when NPCs are interacting with each other requires a lot of different situations to prepare for.
 
That sounds like quite an interesting concept. There's a lot of scope for all kinds of blackmailing in there - sabotaging the other NPCs to get rid of them, risking your own neck, or just trying to come out on top and put the others up for the chop.

It's a good concept. If there's enough scope for winning a couple of different ways, so much the better.




A quick idea on my side, I have been experimenting with a way to make summoned monsters stay relevant all game long. This is a battle idea.

I was thinking of tying summons directly to the level of the summoner. They gain a small amount of power for every level up. Say they have a base power of 5, and they gain 0.1 for each level. So by level 10, they have gained a base power of 6, etc. By level 99, if you get that far, they end up having a power in the region of 15 - which is only a couple of points lower than the strongest magics.

The story explanation for this is that the summons merge with the summoner's own body, and use her as a portal to enter the world, hence, the stronger she is (as in, the higher the level), the more power that the summon can bring to bear when it is called forth.

(As an aside, this particular summon concept pretty much excludes any possibility of ever getting a male summoner - summoning, in this form, requires the ability to use magic to "birth" the summon. Not sure if I will ever actually mention this, but yeah, I see the summons as requiring a woman to facilitate the summoning process. It's also got great potential to be an inversion on the old "virgin magic" trope - this particular art would be more powerful if the summoner already had children, because she would be more experienced in bringing life into the world.

Yeah, messed up, I know.)
 
It sounded good up until you started with the "only woman can summon" thing. If that is true, wouldn't that make it every time a woman summons something, she is essentially giving birth? I am probably misinterpreting this but imo just stick with the fact that summoning requires a large amount of energy from a person's body. Use the "higher level you are, more powerful the summon" but instead of the "birth" maybe try making it just use up much of the summoner's energy?
 

Thank you for viewing

HBGames is a leading amateur video game development forum and Discord server open to all ability levels. Feel free to have a nosey around!

Discord

Join our growing and active Discord server to discuss all aspects of game making in a relaxed environment. Join Us

Content

  • Our Games
  • Games in Development
  • Emoji by Twemoji.
    Top