I have set aside $1,000 to create a prototype semi-original RTS game that I am willing to invest 90%+ of on 3d models. I am a software developer so I definitely have the money, but to show that I'm serious, I am happy to pay iteratively rather than a lump sum at the end. Make sure you have paypal. :)
The prototype will be a free game using the SC2 engine. I don't plan on making money out of the prototype, but I may be ask for donations just like Dota and whatnot. If it is successful I will start development on a standalone game, but I'm gonna be realistic and say that will be a long way down the road, and not really my priority at the moment. I just wanna make a fun game.
At the start, a lot of the units will be recycled from the engine. As we go along we will gradually replace as many units as we can. There will be some custom units that will need to be made from the get go however.
Just to make this clear, at the moment I am only looking for 3d artists.
Basically the $1000 is a price for maximum 5-7 models of starcraft 2 quality with animations and textures.(if they are made from scratch completely) Otherwise it will be some crap.
Basically the $1000 is a price for maximum 5-7 models of starcraft 2 quality with animations and textures.(if they are made from scratch completely) Otherwise it will be some crap.
I'd be content with 7 models of good quality actually. Although 3d models on sites usually run for about $50 a model or pack of decent models. I think I want at least 10 models, I am expecting 20 max from $1000 though, so that's $50 per model.
$1000 is a lot more than the $0 budget of other projects though.
Its a free game, but I will be accepting donations. Or do you mean the actual game economy?
Possibly only one resource "ore". I plan to have each race harvest it differently (eg Brotherhood would use a structure instead of a harvester), but ill see how much that will have an effect on the game. The second resource I am tentative about, but its "oil" and will serve a similar role to vespene gas, but Ill see.
I'd be content with 7 models of good quality actually. Although 3d models on sites usually run for about $50 a model or pack of decent models. I think I want at least 10 models, I am expecting 20 max from $1000 though, so that's $50 per model.
$1000 is a lot more than the $0 budget of other projects though.
Hello, I have experience as an artist in the game industry and would like to give you some advice.
Abvdzh is correct in estimating that you'd really only get 5-7 fully completed models for 1000$
3D Model sites can sell models for 50$ due to the fact that they are stock,and can be sold to multiple customers to recoup time spent.
similar to how a stock code that cost 1000$ in man hours can be sold for 350$ to 3 people and have a net gain.
Very few stock models have textures, and even less have proper rigging.
For a Unique Starcraft 2 Model you will need:
Concept Artist:
( you had mention you had art experience and would be taking this position, for organic characters its good to have a front and profile view; for mechanical, Front, Profile, and Top. Its also recommended to have a dynamic pose to show how the character moves.)
Example:http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2010/07/ss88-hires.jpg
Textures, in my opinion, are THE most important part of the model. Its what makes us believe were looking at a marine or a hydra rather than geometry. There are 4 major texture types for Starcraft:
Diffuse: The Colors that you see.
Normal: how light is reflected from the model, also used to add detail
Specular: color and intensity of like reflected
Emissive: glowing
Character Rigging:
Creating Bones, Controllers, and skinning the model (usually done by a specialist, can be done by the model)
Robots and mechines are extremely easier to skin compared to organic models, due to the fact you dont have to worry about folds.
Character Animator:
"it's Alive! it's Alive!!" a majority of the time this is done by a dedicated animator.
Starcraft 2 units can have anywhere from 5-20 different animations or more.
basic animations are: Stand, Walk, Attack, Fidget (idol), Load/Unload, Burrow/Unburrow, etc.
Not only do you have all that but also Death Models and animations!! :D
Money/Time Saving tips
-Try and Reuse the same model with different Textures and/or Added geometry.
its alot easier to add a new gun or different helmet than to create a whole new unit.
Don't have to create new sets of UVW maps, Riggs, Animations.
Greate examples of this would be the Maruader/Firebat or the Raynor Marine with sniper rifle.
Create a website for your game, facebook, twitter, etc.
Get a following and support, Donations and Fan work/submissions can definitly help take the pressure off.
If your willing, release the assets for download, maybe ask for 1$ minimum donation.
Overall just wanted to give some insight on 3d modeling, Good Luck with your Project!!
I am actually in the midst of completely changing my strategy simply because of the lack of interest here so far. The fact that a lot of artists are doing stuff for free means that its not all about the money, I guess. :P My initial plan was that it would be easier to get a hold of some modelers first to reduce some overhead, but I guess I'm not gonna be able to do that haha.
So one of the things I was planning to do was do a concept/blueprint of the models I want made, as well as design a website with the concepts, unit specs and gameplay discussion (I am a website developer after all so that part should be not too difficult for me haha), as well as just plain get started on the things I can actually do right now in the editor. Of course I am expecting at least a months work before I come back here and update. So I will be quite inactive till then.
But yeah having someone give me some more concrete guidelines and info definitely helped :)
I guess I should answer your questions. The reason I kept this hidden was that I feared it would be information overload for just hiring a 3d modeler.
****************
"How will game resources be collected, how many types of resources are there?" ****************
I've decided to have only one resource "NeoMetal" or "BioMetal", for the moment. Its a special rare type of metal that humans initially found on the moon and synthesized this metal to exponentially further their space exploration. Now that the humans have re-aligned themselves on different planets they are fighting over it.
From a gameplay point of view I feel that having more than one resource is unnecessary. Sure, in Starcraft, gas is an integral part to the game, it allows you to decipher otherwise hidden information. If a person gets gas early, its likely that the player is going to play "strategic" (As a progamer would say). You can even "steal" the geyser to limit the options a player has in-order to increase your own read and potentially punish the fact that the opponent won't have the tech to defend against your build.
Gas is one way to achieve the above gameplay options, some games have 6 different resources, however I never felt adding types of resources added to gameplay. I figure streamlining the resources, and instead making the most out of having one resource is a better idea.
For example
One of the major differences between BW and SC2 economy is saturation. In SC2 you do not transfer large groups of workers to other bases because saturation is linear almost all the way to the maximal amount. However in BW it is completely different, saturation becomes exponential towards the maximum. This means that in BW if you split workers evenly between 2 bases, you will gain a lot more income than having those workers work on a single base. This is not the case in SC2 unless you are super saturated.
So the first design goal is gaining exponential returns on economy per base count. We can do this by slowing the mining time of workers and also changing the patch layout. I will be using unique patch layouts that prevent highly saturated areas from mining optimally, such as circle layouts where workers can't mine from the middle, rather than lines.
Making much more fundamental changes like this I think is more important than adding complexity to the game often for the sake of complexity. Something as simple as this completely changes the way games are played, we will have players opting for really risky expansions knowing that by the time an aggressive push comes they will have double the economy to compensate.
The decision isn't as obvious because greedy play can still counter aggressive play. So your choices are to be agressive and balance the economies, be hyper-aggressive and try and bring him below yours, or be even greedier and double expand and overtake his economy. This means that there is much more on the line with decision making, but to the spectator the games are more interesting because the game will become more sophisticated and there won't be any rock-paper-scissors action going on, where if someone does one build by chance it could automatically counter the opponents (which is bad).
Now lets say Player A goes for a fast expand, so Player B reacts with a double expand. Player B risks spreading his defenses too thin, but it is compensated by the boom in economy from the third base. Now Player A has many more avenues to attack Player B, meaning the trade off for aggressive play and greedy play starts to even out. Because both players are spread quite thinly you start getting squad based play with attacks all over the map.
It then becomes a battle of how much damage the aggressor can do to balance the economies, rather than punishing greedy play outright. Now that players realise that aggressive play can only put them slightly ahead instead of finish the game, metagame becomes much more hugely important. If I am playing a greedy player, I can abuse metagame in a Bo5 by going for an all-in build that will finish him off in some games. However I can't "reactively" finish off the player, I can only get slightly ahead. Now the games start to become very deep.
You can initiate all this by simply changing how a player can access one single resource. And I plan to work on as many of these fundamental changes as possible.
*************
Will there be experience/veterancy, heroes or anything like that? *************
I don't plan to have anything of the sort. I don't think its a bad idea, I love Company of Heroes and Warcraft 3, it just doesn't fit within the scope of my game. Maybe I will add it for fun later down the track, but I don't plan to have it affect the game in anyway.
***********************
How will tech and techtrees work, for example will there be tier 1/2/3, research able abilities, upgrades etc.? ***********************
Teching will be similar to Company of Heroes and Starcraft, where buildings will unlock other buildings, researches and units.
You will have some structures that are designed for research, others for production, and others for static defense.
There will also be a Command Tree that allows players to tweak their race to their style. The command tree is an external research tab that players can align their race to as the game progresses. As it is a tree, players have to strategically pre-empt the alignment of their race, because changing to another tree may be costly, and better researches will appear the further down a single tree you go.
This is to make mirror matchups much more exciting. Not only do we have mechanical/strategic styles defining the race characteristics of a player (for example in ZvZ one player may prefer to use hatch-tech play where as someone else may prefer hive-tech play), players will also have their race customisation.
Mirror-matchups tend to devolve into either rock-paper-scissors or extremely long turtle games, this happens because players have difficulty switching up their play beyond early game to gain an advantage, due to the fact that the other player can build the exact same units. So either you have to catch the player completely off-guard, or pummel him to death with pure attrition. Command Tree's allow players to switch it up even in mirror matchups to provide the same effect non-mirror matchups have
Currently I'm thinking of a way that players can figure out what command tree the other player is using, but right now I'm thinking it should just be a flag on the leaderboard or as a decal on the buildings.
*************
What's your main focus for balance, 1v1? or bigger games 4v4 etc. *************
1v1 most definitely. Its going to be a hardcore's game, which is why the focus is targeting a niche, rather than catering to a large audience. Which is why I'm not planning on making that much money out of it.
However this is for the potential side-effect of it forming into a "spectator sport". A game that people watch for fun and watch good players duke it out. A lot of top titles that try and become e-sports fail because they don't take it too seriously. The more successful e-sports have been lower budget games (counter-strike, quake, etc), my guess is this is because they are willing to take more risks with game difficulty than current top producers would.
I don't think its possible to make a casual friendly e-sport, and before you say moba games, dota took tonnes of skill. Dota really is a hardcore's game now and is very punishing and taxing on skill. LoL not so much, but we will see how Dota 2 fares over LoL a year after its released.
Once this game is finished, hopefully I will have more spare capital to be able to inject into tournaments, which will be my main focus once the game is complete.
**********
How micro intensive are you hoping to make the game? **********
Every unit is designed to have a huge degree on variance depending on how it is used. This not only has mechanical implications, but in strategy and tactics as well. Most units will either siege, or be able to move quickly and shoot for more guerilla oriented play. Light units that move quickly are a lot harder to control, because often you will send them to a base and if you aren't paying attention all the time they will die before you even realise.
The Confederacy has a large amount of mobile defense units. A player who uses this race will be one that thinks about the game in terms of territory capture. The howitzer and badger are units that cannot attack while moving, but do large amounts of damage once set up. The minelayer likewise, can only lay mines. This allows more mobile forces to punish a player who moves his army around too carelessly.
Because of the immobility of this race, it will have two support units. The Razer and the Destroyer. The Razer is a fast moving unit designed to slow down a rapidly expanding opponent who is trying to abuse the fact that you are very immoble. The destroyer will serve as a buffer for the mobile defense units and for taking down weakly defended bases, however only a player with a far superior economy can win with just destroyers.
A typical player will be constantly readjusting his siege units slowly creeping forward and capturing territory while running around limiting the enemies options as much as he can.
*
The United Front will have an easier to control army than the other races. However the catch is that this race is both less cost efficient face-to-face, and also cannot have the economy to back it up. So players who use this race need to be cunning and win through "death by a thousand needles" for lack of a better phrase. It is a race largely inspired by post-apocalyptic terrorist/guerilla warfare.
So while the core army might consist of a mobile army simply designed to keep the opponent at bay with defenders advantage, he will cause as much mayhem as possible and capitalise on key moments to win the game. So the micro intensive tasks are more tactical/micro.
Its planting hidden explosives while letting the enemy chase you and then wiping them out, distracting the player with a feigned attack and then blowing up an entire worker line, infiltrating structures, sneaking past the army, etc. Then capitalising on the advantages you gain out of that, until you can win with your cost inefficient army.
This is mostly inspired by Saviors psychological/tactical warfare in BW. Where he would feign a muta flank, and then kill the main army while the opponent was distracted. Or wait until the opponents army has moved out, bury lurkers in front of the natural while his zerglings would run into the main, and his opponent wouldn't be able to return to defend his own base. Or keep his army out in the open to threaten a backstab and pump his economy, knowing it was deterring the other player from attacking.
The units in this race are designed to facilitate that kind of play even more.
*
The Brotherhood will use micro of a different kind. It will mostly consist of a cost-inefficient attrition based force. However there will be a large amount of micro involved because of that, there will be a lot of poking and prodding with squads while trying to lose as little as possible in order to boost the economy. It is the most mobile race out of the 3. There will be A LOT of running around, harassing and dropping with a primarily biological based force. Most likely this will be the most mechanically intensive race once late game.
In the late game I can definitely see the unit cap being a problem, so I have added a spell that will balance out the race late game. Dark swarm is what made Zergling's viable late game and Zerg extremely fearful when used in the right hands, I have added a similar ability called "forcefield" in this game. Because of the lack of smart-cast it should be a lot more difficult to use than the SC2 spell hehe. Meaning you can't just spam a line of forcefields to the enemy base, so the usage of it will be a lot more strategical.
It will also allow the player to control the late-game base count of the other races, which would be otherwise auto-win if it got to split-map. After this point, the opponent can no longer sit and turtle and will have to do damage of their own if they want to win the game.
Hopefully that covered your questions. Thanks for the input.
It is something that I thought a lot about but it is very low priority. At least it will be very unlikely within the first iteration as it is primarily designed to be a 1v1 multiplayer game. However there will probably be a tutorial map for each race which may be very similar to the first mission in RTS campaigns.
Depends on what you want models of. If it is mechanical stuff with simpler animations, you can get around 10. If it is a full character model with textures and everything, you'll barely afford 1.
WHATS THIS!!!!, someone willing to put cash in to making a project, and is actually doing it the correct way instead of saying HEY i will pay you 1k to build my map. lol
Not yet, I've been very busy tackling both part-time university and full time work. My exams are in 1 week, I have to demo the project I'm working on for work, and I have an assignment due, so I've halted all progress until after then. I've also just released a ruby testing framework on github (https://github.com/DanielShuey/testme) which I decided to just get out of the way so I could focus better. The rationale behind opening the thread at this time, was in the hope of having the models ready by the time I could work on it. :)
I'm perfectly ok with people thinking this might be vaporware for now, though I will have some stuff done within next month for sure and I'm definitely capable of getting projects done. Its actually hard not working on the project, I really really want to, but I have to stick to my priorities. However Ill remain active here just to answer any questions.
Right now I'm working a lot more on the game design and scoping out what I can/can't/should/shouldn't do, which will hopefully give me a clear direction on what to do with the editor. I do have several pages of written stuff (like what I wrote above), but its not organised well enough to show as of this moment.
So here's basically what you should expect within the next month or two.
As the biological units can be recycled the easiest for this game, I plan on working on the brotherhood race to begin with and get that finished. I'm pretty sure I can use the hover train for the APC, and find some old school tank for the tank.
For the United Front. The APU (open hull mech) will have to be the merc goliath for now. Grizzly will be a merc tank or a hover unit. And the hornet will be a vulture. Demo truck should be easy.
The confederacy will be difficult. I will have to look for some artillery model and maybe have it be static-d for now, could be interesting. I don't really think the siege tank fits into what I'm looking for. Badger will be also a problem, there's no real mobile turret model in SC2 I don't think. The rest shouldn't be too hard though.
When I have done some work I will update this thread, with a site (or atleast a wiki) and some showcase videos and 1v1 reps. For now that will have to wait though.
Thanks for the questions. I'd appreciate holding off on the "what have you done so far?" questions, seeing as once I'm ready to showcase I will update the thread. Any other questions about the game I'm more than happy to answer though. Don't worry, I am planning on having a playable game by the end of August (its a stretch goal, but its achievable), and I can guarantee you will at least see an update by then.
May I suggest that you make the game "work" first, as model swaps are the easiest thing to do later.
The bulk of the work that needs to be done is inside the editor itself. Having pretty models will not make your project succeed - they are part of polishing.
This project actually reminds me quite a bit of Dark Reign 1 (units wise) ... where in AU are you?
Yeah, but also we know how likely projects are to fall through when they get to the data stage especially, because it is boring repetitive work and only a few people far and inbetween really love data. There is a lot more to the project than Models, and what I meant was; he could be doing the rest of the work that needs to be done while he waits for models (especially before he creates models) as if he thinks later on that he might not be able to finish the project, it is better that he still has money in his pocket than having nothing.
From the number of currently finished super-projects (which is none after 2 years), then you can kinda see where I am going.
May I suggest that you make the game "work" first, as model swaps are the easiest thing to do later.
The bulk of the work that needs to be done is inside the editor itself. Having pretty models will not make your project succeed - they are part of polishing.
This project actually reminds me quite a bit of Dark Reign 1 (units wise) ... where in AU are you?
I live in Melbourne, Mont Albert :)
Definitely gonna check out dark reign, thanks for the reference.
Its not that I need pretty models, but some units simply cannot be implemented properly, like the mobile hover turret and hover artillery. Siege tank would break the suspension of disbelief because it can obviously shoot while unsieged, there is no mobile minigun turret as far as I am aware of.
Yeah, but also we know how likely projects are to fall through when they get to the data stage especially, because it is boring repetitive work and only a few people far and inbetween really love data. There is a lot more to the project than Models, and what I meant was; he could be doing the rest of the work that needs to be done while he waits for models (especially before he creates models) as if he thinks later on that he might not be able to finish the project, it is better that he still has money in his pocket than having nothing.
From the number of currently finished super-projects (which is none after 2 years), then you can kinda see where I am going.
I've made a quite a few completed sc2 rebalances with new units that I tested with GM/Masters players for fun. Like getting reapers to drop D8 charges, ghosts that lay remote mines that you could detonate manually, moving shot without triggers using validators, etc. All the units and spells I know how to set up already as I've mucked around with the editor quite a lot.
I started project micro just after the beta days which a lot of people took on board as well. I created a nexus that could lift off and shoot laser beams, re-created the old thor but made barrage cannon hit air. I even created a hybrid BW and SC2 game, where you could use SC2 and BW units together (pulled the reaver/defiler/etc out of sc2bw). As all the games were extremely imbalanced and were purely for my own enjoyment, I never bothered releasing them. I have the skill, and am very capable of putting in the time and effort to do all that kind of stuff.
I just spent months creating an open-source testing framework which is essentially a DSL. While its fun to design, actually implementing a pseudo programming language is one of the most mundane tasks you could ever imagine. :P
I am actually doing what you are suggesting now though. I am going to create the game first then swap the models out, its just more efficient to have the models there first, it reduces the overhead of having to create another unit and replace it because I had to wait for the model to be made. It also skews some of my design decisions.
Please check back in 4 weeks and there should be at least 1 if not 2 playable races by then, this game should be awesome :)
Dear modders
I have set aside $1,000 to create a prototype semi-original RTS game that I am willing to invest 90%+ of on 3d models. I am a software developer so I definitely have the money, but to show that I'm serious, I am happy to pay iteratively rather than a lump sum at the end. Make sure you have paypal. :)
The prototype will be a free game using the SC2 engine. I don't plan on making money out of the prototype, but I may be ask for donations just like Dota and whatnot. If it is successful I will start development on a standalone game, but I'm gonna be realistic and say that will be a long way down the road, and not really my priority at the moment. I just wanna make a fun game.
At the start, a lot of the units will be recycled from the engine. As we go along we will gradually replace as many units as we can. There will be some custom units that will need to be made from the get go however.
Just to make this clear, at the moment I am only looking for 3d artists.
Here is some stuff I have done on teamliquid to show that I at least have some sort of work ethic, game design analysis and can see things through.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=291291
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=154223
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=196232
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=132171
I am an artist too. Here is my deviant-art. I might be doing some concept art for the game.
http://sluggaslamoo.deviantart.com/
I play a lot of BroodWar (max C- on ICCUP), you may often find me doing funky builds on my stream on ladder.
http://www.twitch.tv/sluggaslamoo
If you are interested please post a portfolio below.
What income system you plan for your rts?
Basically the $1000 is a price for maximum 5-7 models of starcraft 2 quality with animations and textures.(if they are made from scratch completely) Otherwise it will be some crap.
I'd be content with 7 models of good quality actually. Although 3d models on sites usually run for about $50 a model or pack of decent models. I think I want at least 10 models, I am expecting 20 max from $1000 though, so that's $50 per model.
$1000 is a lot more than the $0 budget of other projects though.
Its a free game, but I will be accepting donations. Or do you mean the actual game economy?
Possibly only one resource "ore". I plan to have each race harvest it differently (eg Brotherhood would use a structure instead of a harvester), but ill see how much that will have an effect on the game. The second resource I am tentative about, but its "oil" and will serve a similar role to vespene gas, but Ill see.
Hello, I have experience as an artist in the game industry and would like to give you some advice.
Abvdzh is correct in estimating that you'd really only get 5-7 fully completed models for 1000$
3D Model sites can sell models for 50$ due to the fact that they are stock,and can be sold to multiple customers to recoup time spent.
similar to how a stock code that cost 1000$ in man hours can be sold for 350$ to 3 people and have a net gain.
Very few stock models have textures, and even less have proper rigging.
For a Unique Starcraft 2 Model you will need:
Concept Artist:
( you had mention you had art experience and would be taking this position, for organic characters its good to have a front and profile view; for mechanical, Front, Profile, and Top. Its also recommended to have a dynamic pose to show how the character moves.)
Example:http://www.blogcdn.com/www.joystiq.com/media/2010/07/ss88-hires.jpg
Modeler:
(this one is kinda obvious lol)
UVW Mapper:
This is what allows the model to be textured, its essentially taking the 3D and making it flat.
UVW mapping is usally done by the Modeler. It may sound simple but can accually be a very annoying and time extensive task to be done correctly
Here is a before and after
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3UvUZ_IoRrY/RhN7Lind1BI/AAAAAAAAAOs/CkdEoHJfe4I/s1600/fig+1.JPG
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_3UvUZ_IoRrY/RhN70ind1EI/AAAAAAAAAPE/0jtjy6BrNko/s1600/fig+4.JPG
Texture Artist:
Textures, in my opinion, are THE most important part of the model. Its what makes us believe were looking at a marine or a hydra rather than geometry. There are 4 major texture types for Starcraft:
Diffuse: The Colors that you see.
Normal: how light is reflected from the model, also used to add detail
Specular: color and intensity of like reflected
Emissive: glowing
Character Rigging:
Creating Bones, Controllers, and skinning the model (usually done by a specialist, can be done by the model)
Robots and mechines are extremely easier to skin compared to organic models, due to the fact you dont have to worry about folds.
Character Animator:
"it's Alive! it's Alive!!" a majority of the time this is done by a dedicated animator.
Starcraft 2 units can have anywhere from 5-20 different animations or more.
basic animations are: Stand, Walk, Attack, Fidget (idol), Load/Unload, Burrow/Unburrow, etc.
Not only do you have all that but also Death Models and animations!! :D
Money/Time Saving tips
-Try and Reuse the same model with different Textures and/or Added geometry.
its alot easier to add a new gun or different helmet than to create a whole new unit.
Don't have to create new sets of UVW maps, Riggs, Animations.
Greate examples of this would be the Maruader/Firebat or the Raynor Marine with sniper rifle.
Create a website for your game, facebook, twitter, etc.
Get a following and support, Donations and Fan work/submissions can definitly help take the pressure off.
If your willing, release the assets for download, maybe ask for 1$ minimum donation.
Overall just wanted to give some insight on 3d modeling, Good Luck with your Project!!
Formally Kinkycactus
Thanks so much for the advice kinkycactus!
I am actually in the midst of completely changing my strategy simply because of the lack of interest here so far. The fact that a lot of artists are doing stuff for free means that its not all about the money, I guess. :P My initial plan was that it would be easier to get a hold of some modelers first to reduce some overhead, but I guess I'm not gonna be able to do that haha.
So one of the things I was planning to do was do a concept/blueprint of the models I want made, as well as design a website with the concepts, unit specs and gameplay discussion (I am a website developer after all so that part should be not too difficult for me haha), as well as just plain get started on the things I can actually do right now in the editor. Of course I am expecting at least a months work before I come back here and update. So I will be quite inactive till then.
But yeah having someone give me some more concrete guidelines and info definitely helped :)
Thanks for the heads up.
The best thing is always to post picture/screenshots or even better a video, it draws 10x the interest. Literally anything you have so far is a start.
I'm interested in hearing how you imagine the gameplay will work?
Thanks Hookah604
I guess I should answer your questions. The reason I kept this hidden was that I feared it would be information overload for just hiring a 3d modeler.
****************
"How will game resources be collected, how many types of resources are there?"
****************
I've decided to have only one resource "NeoMetal" or "BioMetal", for the moment. Its a special rare type of metal that humans initially found on the moon and synthesized this metal to exponentially further their space exploration. Now that the humans have re-aligned themselves on different planets they are fighting over it.
From a gameplay point of view I feel that having more than one resource is unnecessary. Sure, in Starcraft, gas is an integral part to the game, it allows you to decipher otherwise hidden information. If a person gets gas early, its likely that the player is going to play "strategic" (As a progamer would say). You can even "steal" the geyser to limit the options a player has in-order to increase your own read and potentially punish the fact that the opponent won't have the tech to defend against your build.
Gas is one way to achieve the above gameplay options, some games have 6 different resources, however I never felt adding types of resources added to gameplay. I figure streamlining the resources, and instead making the most out of having one resource is a better idea.
For example
One of the major differences between BW and SC2 economy is saturation. In SC2 you do not transfer large groups of workers to other bases because saturation is linear almost all the way to the maximal amount. However in BW it is completely different, saturation becomes exponential towards the maximum. This means that in BW if you split workers evenly between 2 bases, you will gain a lot more income than having those workers work on a single base. This is not the case in SC2 unless you are super saturated.
So the first design goal is gaining exponential returns on economy per base count. We can do this by slowing the mining time of workers and also changing the patch layout. I will be using unique patch layouts that prevent highly saturated areas from mining optimally, such as circle layouts where workers can't mine from the middle, rather than lines.
Making much more fundamental changes like this I think is more important than adding complexity to the game often for the sake of complexity. Something as simple as this completely changes the way games are played, we will have players opting for really risky expansions knowing that by the time an aggressive push comes they will have double the economy to compensate.
The decision isn't as obvious because greedy play can still counter aggressive play. So your choices are to be agressive and balance the economies, be hyper-aggressive and try and bring him below yours, or be even greedier and double expand and overtake his economy. This means that there is much more on the line with decision making, but to the spectator the games are more interesting because the game will become more sophisticated and there won't be any rock-paper-scissors action going on, where if someone does one build by chance it could automatically counter the opponents (which is bad).
Now lets say Player A goes for a fast expand, so Player B reacts with a double expand. Player B risks spreading his defenses too thin, but it is compensated by the boom in economy from the third base. Now Player A has many more avenues to attack Player B, meaning the trade off for aggressive play and greedy play starts to even out. Because both players are spread quite thinly you start getting squad based play with attacks all over the map.
It then becomes a battle of how much damage the aggressor can do to balance the economies, rather than punishing greedy play outright. Now that players realise that aggressive play can only put them slightly ahead instead of finish the game, metagame becomes much more hugely important. If I am playing a greedy player, I can abuse metagame in a Bo5 by going for an all-in build that will finish him off in some games. However I can't "reactively" finish off the player, I can only get slightly ahead. Now the games start to become very deep.
You can initiate all this by simply changing how a player can access one single resource. And I plan to work on as many of these fundamental changes as possible.
*************
Will there be experience/veterancy, heroes or anything like that?
*************
I don't plan to have anything of the sort. I don't think its a bad idea, I love Company of Heroes and Warcraft 3, it just doesn't fit within the scope of my game. Maybe I will add it for fun later down the track, but I don't plan to have it affect the game in anyway.
***********************
How will tech and techtrees work, for example will there be tier 1/2/3, research able abilities, upgrades etc.?
***********************
Teching will be similar to Company of Heroes and Starcraft, where buildings will unlock other buildings, researches and units.
You will have some structures that are designed for research, others for production, and others for static defense.
There will also be a Command Tree that allows players to tweak their race to their style. The command tree is an external research tab that players can align their race to as the game progresses. As it is a tree, players have to strategically pre-empt the alignment of their race, because changing to another tree may be costly, and better researches will appear the further down a single tree you go.
This is to make mirror matchups much more exciting. Not only do we have mechanical/strategic styles defining the race characteristics of a player (for example in ZvZ one player may prefer to use hatch-tech play where as someone else may prefer hive-tech play), players will also have their race customisation.
Mirror-matchups tend to devolve into either rock-paper-scissors or extremely long turtle games, this happens because players have difficulty switching up their play beyond early game to gain an advantage, due to the fact that the other player can build the exact same units. So either you have to catch the player completely off-guard, or pummel him to death with pure attrition. Command Tree's allow players to switch it up even in mirror matchups to provide the same effect non-mirror matchups have
Currently I'm thinking of a way that players can figure out what command tree the other player is using, but right now I'm thinking it should just be a flag on the leaderboard or as a decal on the buildings.
*************
What's your main focus for balance, 1v1? or bigger games 4v4 etc.
*************
1v1 most definitely. Its going to be a hardcore's game, which is why the focus is targeting a niche, rather than catering to a large audience. Which is why I'm not planning on making that much money out of it.
However this is for the potential side-effect of it forming into a "spectator sport". A game that people watch for fun and watch good players duke it out. A lot of top titles that try and become e-sports fail because they don't take it too seriously. The more successful e-sports have been lower budget games (counter-strike, quake, etc), my guess is this is because they are willing to take more risks with game difficulty than current top producers would.
I don't think its possible to make a casual friendly e-sport, and before you say moba games, dota took tonnes of skill. Dota really is a hardcore's game now and is very punishing and taxing on skill. LoL not so much, but we will see how Dota 2 fares over LoL a year after its released.
Once this game is finished, hopefully I will have more spare capital to be able to inject into tournaments, which will be my main focus once the game is complete.
**********
How micro intensive are you hoping to make the game?
**********
Every unit is designed to have a huge degree on variance depending on how it is used. This not only has mechanical implications, but in strategy and tactics as well. Most units will either siege, or be able to move quickly and shoot for more guerilla oriented play. Light units that move quickly are a lot harder to control, because often you will send them to a base and if you aren't paying attention all the time they will die before you even realise.
The Confederacy has a large amount of mobile defense units. A player who uses this race will be one that thinks about the game in terms of territory capture. The howitzer and badger are units that cannot attack while moving, but do large amounts of damage once set up. The minelayer likewise, can only lay mines. This allows more mobile forces to punish a player who moves his army around too carelessly.
Because of the immobility of this race, it will have two support units. The Razer and the Destroyer. The Razer is a fast moving unit designed to slow down a rapidly expanding opponent who is trying to abuse the fact that you are very immoble. The destroyer will serve as a buffer for the mobile defense units and for taking down weakly defended bases, however only a player with a far superior economy can win with just destroyers.
A typical player will be constantly readjusting his siege units slowly creeping forward and capturing territory while running around limiting the enemies options as much as he can.
*
The United Front will have an easier to control army than the other races. However the catch is that this race is both less cost efficient face-to-face, and also cannot have the economy to back it up. So players who use this race need to be cunning and win through "death by a thousand needles" for lack of a better phrase. It is a race largely inspired by post-apocalyptic terrorist/guerilla warfare.
So while the core army might consist of a mobile army simply designed to keep the opponent at bay with defenders advantage, he will cause as much mayhem as possible and capitalise on key moments to win the game. So the micro intensive tasks are more tactical/micro.
Its planting hidden explosives while letting the enemy chase you and then wiping them out, distracting the player with a feigned attack and then blowing up an entire worker line, infiltrating structures, sneaking past the army, etc. Then capitalising on the advantages you gain out of that, until you can win with your cost inefficient army.
This is mostly inspired by Saviors psychological/tactical warfare in BW. Where he would feign a muta flank, and then kill the main army while the opponent was distracted. Or wait until the opponents army has moved out, bury lurkers in front of the natural while his zerglings would run into the main, and his opponent wouldn't be able to return to defend his own base. Or keep his army out in the open to threaten a backstab and pump his economy, knowing it was deterring the other player from attacking.
The units in this race are designed to facilitate that kind of play even more.
*
The Brotherhood will use micro of a different kind. It will mostly consist of a cost-inefficient attrition based force. However there will be a large amount of micro involved because of that, there will be a lot of poking and prodding with squads while trying to lose as little as possible in order to boost the economy. It is the most mobile race out of the 3. There will be A LOT of running around, harassing and dropping with a primarily biological based force. Most likely this will be the most mechanically intensive race once late game.
In the late game I can definitely see the unit cap being a problem, so I have added a spell that will balance out the race late game. Dark swarm is what made Zergling's viable late game and Zerg extremely fearful when used in the right hands, I have added a similar ability called "forcefield" in this game. Because of the lack of smart-cast it should be a lot more difficult to use than the SC2 spell hehe. Meaning you can't just spam a line of forcefields to the enemy base, so the usage of it will be a lot more strategical.
It will also allow the player to control the late-game base count of the other races, which would be otherwise auto-win if it got to split-map. After this point, the opponent can no longer sit and turtle and will have to do damage of their own if they want to win the game.
Hopefully that covered your questions. Thanks for the input.
@SluggaSlamoo: Go
Is there going to be a campaign?
@Wacclian321
It is something that I thought a lot about but it is very low priority. At least it will be very unlikely within the first iteration as it is primarily designed to be a 1v1 multiplayer game. However there will probably be a tutorial map for each race which may be very similar to the first mission in RTS campaigns.
Thanks
Depends on what you want models of. If it is mechanical stuff with simpler animations, you can get around 10. If it is a full character model with textures and everything, you'll barely afford 1.
WHATS THIS!!!!, someone willing to put cash in to making a project, and is actually doing it the correct way instead of saying HEY i will pay you 1k to build my map. lol
the year 2013 will change how game are developped, people will donate for project go live and all big compagny will crash on the floor
welcome in the INdé Revolution
Do you have any screenshots or anything so far?
Not yet, I've been very busy tackling both part-time university and full time work. My exams are in 1 week, I have to demo the project I'm working on for work, and I have an assignment due, so I've halted all progress until after then. I've also just released a ruby testing framework on github (https://github.com/DanielShuey/testme) which I decided to just get out of the way so I could focus better. The rationale behind opening the thread at this time, was in the hope of having the models ready by the time I could work on it. :)
I'm perfectly ok with people thinking this might be vaporware for now, though I will have some stuff done within next month for sure and I'm definitely capable of getting projects done. Its actually hard not working on the project, I really really want to, but I have to stick to my priorities. However Ill remain active here just to answer any questions.
Right now I'm working a lot more on the game design and scoping out what I can/can't/should/shouldn't do, which will hopefully give me a clear direction on what to do with the editor. I do have several pages of written stuff (like what I wrote above), but its not organised well enough to show as of this moment.
So here's basically what you should expect within the next month or two.
As the biological units can be recycled the easiest for this game, I plan on working on the brotherhood race to begin with and get that finished. I'm pretty sure I can use the hover train for the APC, and find some old school tank for the tank.
For the United Front. The APU (open hull mech) will have to be the merc goliath for now. Grizzly will be a merc tank or a hover unit. And the hornet will be a vulture. Demo truck should be easy.
The confederacy will be difficult. I will have to look for some artillery model and maybe have it be static-d for now, could be interesting. I don't really think the siege tank fits into what I'm looking for. Badger will be also a problem, there's no real mobile turret model in SC2 I don't think. The rest shouldn't be too hard though.
When I have done some work I will update this thread, with a site (or atleast a wiki) and some showcase videos and 1v1 reps. For now that will have to wait though.
Thanks for the questions. I'd appreciate holding off on the "what have you done so far?" questions, seeing as once I'm ready to showcase I will update the thread. Any other questions about the game I'm more than happy to answer though. Don't worry, I am planning on having a playable game by the end of August (its a stretch goal, but its achievable), and I can guarantee you will at least see an update by then.
May I suggest that you make the game "work" first, as model swaps are the easiest thing to do later.
The bulk of the work that needs to be done is inside the editor itself. Having pretty models will not make your project succeed - they are part of polishing.
This project actually reminds me quite a bit of Dark Reign 1 (units wise) ... where in AU are you?
@DogmaiSEA: Go
Yeah, But he could have people go ahead and make them if hes willing to pay, then he probably wants decent ones, and good work takes time.
Yeah, but also we know how likely projects are to fall through when they get to the data stage especially, because it is boring repetitive work and only a few people far and inbetween really love data. There is a lot more to the project than Models, and what I meant was; he could be doing the rest of the work that needs to be done while he waits for models (especially before he creates models) as if he thinks later on that he might not be able to finish the project, it is better that he still has money in his pocket than having nothing.
From the number of currently finished super-projects (which is none after 2 years), then you can kinda see where I am going.
I live in Melbourne, Mont Albert :)
Definitely gonna check out dark reign, thanks for the reference.
Its not that I need pretty models, but some units simply cannot be implemented properly, like the mobile hover turret and hover artillery. Siege tank would break the suspension of disbelief because it can obviously shoot while unsieged, there is no mobile minigun turret as far as I am aware of.
I've made a quite a few completed sc2 rebalances with new units that I tested with GM/Masters players for fun. Like getting reapers to drop D8 charges, ghosts that lay remote mines that you could detonate manually, moving shot without triggers using validators, etc. All the units and spells I know how to set up already as I've mucked around with the editor quite a lot.
I started project micro just after the beta days which a lot of people took on board as well. I created a nexus that could lift off and shoot laser beams, re-created the old thor but made barrage cannon hit air. I even created a hybrid BW and SC2 game, where you could use SC2 and BW units together (pulled the reaver/defiler/etc out of sc2bw). As all the games were extremely imbalanced and were purely for my own enjoyment, I never bothered releasing them. I have the skill, and am very capable of putting in the time and effort to do all that kind of stuff.
I just spent months creating an open-source testing framework which is essentially a DSL. While its fun to design, actually implementing a pseudo programming language is one of the most mundane tasks you could ever imagine. :P
I am actually doing what you are suggesting now though. I am going to create the game first then swap the models out, its just more efficient to have the models there first, it reduces the overhead of having to create another unit and replace it because I had to wait for the model to be made. It also skews some of my design decisions.
Please check back in 4 weeks and there should be at least 1 if not 2 playable races by then, this game should be awesome :)
Thanks