You're making a video game.
What do you write first, and prioritise your ideas towards?
The script, the plot, the gameplay or the characters?
>>320046740
Depends.
gameplay -> level/encounter design -> characters -> plot
>>320047201
The only valid answer
/thread
>>320046740
plot/story > level design > art assets,characters > gameplay > music
I want to make an RTS game, and want to make it innovative.
I guess my focus on writing the story would be first making a coherent world, with defined origins for every race, then work towards the characters in it, previous wars and events, the relationship with each race, etc.
>>320047391
>I guess my focus on writing the story would be first making a coherent world, with defined origins for every race, then work towards the characters in it, previous wars and events, the relationship with each race, etc.
Nothing of this would guarantee that it's innovative.
first thing i do is write essentially a really in depth manual.
it covers everything from game play mechanics to story.
Gameplay -> Plot -> Characters -> Script
Anything else is madness.
> making the gameplay or anything else before story
enjoy shoehorning everything!
>>320047976
Enjoy shoehorning the gameplay in your walking simulator.
>>320047976
>Shoehorning the plot to the gameplay is worse than shoehorning the gameplay to the plot
Gameplay is king
>>320046740
The level design, it's a lost art in games nowadays
>>320046740
Gameplay>Level/encounters> Characters>plot>script(actual dialogue) The intent would be so that I get a game that has a great customization and locale along with finely balanced combat.decent story and atrocious dialogue so that you get those amazing bethesda moments of insanity. ~walks into room~ THE MUDCRABS THIS YEAR ARE DELICIOUS! Have you heard about the rats junk?!
>>320047707
i had a brainfart, forgot to add the other part.
To make it innovative, each race would be unique, and i'm not saying that in the sense that "you do everything similarly but units look different". Instead of relying on Gimmicks, each race would have it's own unique way of collecting resources, building, producing units and have something that will be just for them.
For example, the Deep Dwellers would have 1 building for monsters and another for infantry, and infantry can mount monsters and have unique abilities for each combination.
A scorpion+archer would have a poisoned arrow, bats+halbadiers would have a drop down attack that ignores armor, etc.
>>320048978
Just a random thought, would it not make more sense that a scorpion riding archer could attack multiple targets instead of poisoned arrows? like it can attack one with the scorpion bits and another with the arrows?
>>320048978
Alright, that sounds cool. Hard to balance for the multiplayer crowd, but still cool.
>>320049154
well, i could always implement a melee/ranged stance, so you could have the archer fire on the move, go to melee or keep their distance
>>320049393
thats fair.
>>320049367
I honestly want to make a fun game first, competitive game second.
The focus would be an excellent single player campaign, amazing world domination game mode, with a big ass world to conquer and unique mechanics, fun Skirmish and if possible a MP game that is balanced and fair.
I was always a huge fan of the turn based combat games. so I think I'd likely do something like that, I'm a sucker for the post apocalypse though so I'd be treading dangerously close to the legal monster that is bethesda, so its likely best I dont.
>>320049645
Yep, that could work. I'm playing the original dawn of war for that exact purpose.
>>320050191
DoW had the right idea, the problem is that game also had a fuckton of previously done material to help with making diverse factions.
Doing it from the ground up will be hard as fuck.
>>320050449
Battle for Middle Earth as well, 1 and 2.
And Rise of Legends did it also kinda well, but had some different problems.
>>320051091
I really liked BFME, with the expansion is an amazing game. And it didn't shit on the lore too hard, i can buy scorpion riding goblins.
The main problem with Rise of legends i feel was how lifeless the units felt, no unique responses or anything.
>>320051538
>The main problem with Rise of legends i feel was how lifeless the units felt, no unique responses or anything.
I don't remember any unique responses at all, so you might be right. I also felt that only the Vincis were really fleshed out, with different special buildings and units. The other factions were also kinda cool, but nowhere in depth as the Vincis.I still liked it more than RoN
>>320052124
I like RoN, but yeah, if you are not into the history setting then it isn't as fun.
Rise of legends didn't even have unit responses, just weird generic sounds for all units.
>>320046740
Here's how it works for me
>come up with a decent story, with a few twists here and there
>come up with a unique mechanic
>implement that mechanic into an already existing system
>change the story around as necessary without losing the main component
>BOOM!! Game
I'd go in depth with the example I'm currently working on but it's still too early to show anything
