Alright folks, let's just suppose for a second that I'm involved in making an online game that takes a lot of cues from games like the Jagged Alliance series.
Let's suppose that this entirely fictional game lets players choose whether to create their own PMC or function as freelancer mercs which can then choose to specialize as an array of things from being a medic to a JTAC, and then just have everyone play missions for money which lets you buy new and cooler weapons for you to fuck shit up with.
Now supposing this game was going to happen and you could pitch whatever features you wanted to these imaginary developers, what would they be? Keep in mind this is entirely hypothetical so the sky is the limit.
Guys, please. If I can't get any replies to this thread, I'll be forced to samefag to bump it back to the first page and OH SHIT look what you made me do!
>>343964624
give me ability to kill niggers and infidels
directional communication to simulate talking for normal communication, PRC-343s for close range communication, 148s for long range communication.
>>343964624
If you're actually a developer, read some game design. Players largely don't know what's good for them. Take some design ques from Rimworld, the dev is shit artist but with good game design and code he was able to make up for it very well.
If you're asking for opinions on /v/ though you're probably no good at it anyways, so i'll make a bullet list for you.
- Procedural gameplay can be greatly increase replay value, even for a multiplayer game.
- Don't sacrifice gameplay for realism. If you need to balance something, it doesn't mean jack shit if it doesn't make a whole lot of sense as long as it plays well.
- Give the player freedom and choice- you seem to have this part down. Customization can be an easy way for players to express themselves, as well as netting you some more cash.. Be sure not to overdo it, though.
- If you're going the early access route, remember not to overshoot your promises. Many other EA games, such as Project Zomboid, got a lot of money initially and made a lot of promises they couldn't immediately make good on. They're still paying for that mistake, years later.
Try watching some of Valve's design videos, even if they don't actually make games anymore they really helped me understand game and community interaction as both a game dev and a player. Good luck on your game, if you're even making one.
>>343965834
I hear ya.
>>343966131
Got that covered. I mean, I would've, if I was really making said game.
>>343967063
If I was indeed making a game, that would've been a lot of great advice - thanks a lot man.
bump for op
Don't take away control from the player. Shit like airblasting in TF2 is the worst fucking thing.
Give players the opportunity to have fun while fighting, but not at too much expense of other players.
I would personally like to see it take a fallout tactics like approach to mechanics, where you can either play it turn based or time based (ala 7.62). This would help market it to a wider audience and therefore maybe reinvigorate the genre.
Realistic approach to weapon attachments. If you slap a bipod, suppressor, m203, and laser sight onto an M4 it should take considerably longer to ready the weapon. Suppressors should do just that-suppress, not silence.
Using automatic fire for extended periods of time should result in unintended discharges and warped barrels.
Make an intuitive, but not too dumbed down approach to inventory management. In a game like this U.I. can make or break.
Take the JA2 approach to stealth. You can attempt to be quiet while walking, but no matter how sneaky you are walking around a corner in front of a guard shouldn't leave you hidden (ala silent storm).
Micromanagement for those that want it, not so much for those that don't. If I want to put a tracer round into my ammo belt every fifth round for my SAW I should be able to. At the same time, if I just wanna jump back into more action, I shouldn't have to spend 30 minutes sorting ammunition and reloading magazines.
EVERYTHING is destructible. I'm talking terrain even. If an enemy has a neat miss with a mortar I should have a handy crater to take cover in. Why the hell should I bother killing the sniper in the guard tower when I can just blow up the whole tower?
>>343971287
That's the kind of post I wanted to get, very appreciated.
>>343972237
NP anon, here's some more:
Keep it grounded in reality. No sci-fi halo level shit, no post apocalyptic shit, no alternate history shit. Just needs operating in a setting that's plausible.
Deep RPG elements. Stats that determine effectiveness with skills, skills that grant access to unique perks. All of which needs to be used to be improved.
Moral system with brutal consequences. That merc that just saw his team he's been with for thirty missions get gunned down and is shot in the leg and surrounded? Yeah, he just decided to eat a bullet.
Grenades that are effective and can be thrown more than 10 feet.
Realistic ballistics. Windage coming into the equation on long range shots. Overpenetration causing collateral damage. You just unload a mag from 10 feet away into three inch thick steel? Enjoy that ricochet in your neck.
Speaking of ricochets. When coupled with terrain destruction this could get very interesting. That concrete wall you're taking cover next too just took a full burst from a SAW? You've now got a leg full of concrete.
If it's 3D take advantage of the fact. Use vertical elements every chance you can.
>>343973819
Although if I was making a game like that I would probably decide on a fictional and realistic near-future without going too crazy on the setting (sort of like Alruco), things like a moral system and RPG stats would be very much in line with what I would have in mind for it.
