This is a full conversion project I am working on and I am creating this thread to get its name out there and to also take in any suggestions the community might have, in return I will be willing to go in depth how I achieved any of the things you spot in the video, and can also serve as a general person to answer any trigger related questions you might have. So far my plans are to include the data editor as little as possible until I hit a coding roadblock. That may also change in the future. I will need some volunteers to beta test once publishing goes live so I can tweak settings to play well with networking and such. For now this project brainstorm thread will just serve as a place where you guys can ask me questions and also give suggestions.
Yes I plan to work towards creating the full experience, I don't expect to make instances per say, but there will be world bosses with their own fights.
It's possible to have a larger player limits, but not known how to do so until the game is released, so the full editor can be used entirely for modding.
Possible that, if fits in a premium standard, can use a 3rd party client to connect to the server, using the SC2 game as a in between engine.
Yes I plan to work towards creating the full experience, I don't expect to make instances per say, but there will be world bosses with their own fights.
Joining a game is like joining an instance, so dungeon instances inside the main map aren't needed.
Maps dedicated to certain things or tiers of content might be a good idea. For example, you create a dungeon map for higher level characters that people can host a game of. When they join it loads their world of starcraft profile and their characters are loaded into the new map. That way people can start a B.net game like " WOS - Dungeon map name lvl 10+" " WOS - PvP Arena " " WOS - Normal enviroment " This is more battle.net friendly.
This was the direction I was aiming in for my design, but every time I think about it I keep coming back to the problem of eventually having people only playing the higher end maps, snuffing out any chance for new people to get a start up so If i do take the route of just having a map be a section of the game and people picking and choosing what they play I will need to find a sweet spot of how much content is in a map to make it playable for a large percentage of players. Right now the actual challenge will be to create my own encryption methods for the data that will be going from map to map. The banks unfortunately only put the data into an XML file, without putting in any safeguards against tampering, so all data that will be stored will have to be scrambled.
User has full control over the camera angle he views his character from using the mouse, but more importantly not every style of game is for everyone lol.
How are you going to keep the data from game to game? It wouldn't make sense to have these instances and everything if you consider some more "high end" than the others if you aren't able to keep gear from game to game. The only way I could think of solving that issue is as follows: you can generate a code at the end of the game or when you're leaving which will be a combination of all of your gear. You then at the start of another game have the ability to enter said code to get your gear back to what it was at the previous game.
In the lines of computer programming, and from what I've have seen... Nothing is impossible when your talking about a video game...
Just depends on how much you can endure when they throw tons of information at you... Can your brain handle all that?
This was the direction I was aiming in for my design, but every time I think about it I keep coming back to the problem of eventually having people only playing the higher end maps, snuffing out any chance for new people to get a start up so If i do take the route of just having a map be a section of the game and people picking and choosing what they play I will need to find a sweet spot of how much content is in a map to make it playable for a large percentage of players. Right now the actual challenge will be to create my own encryption methods for the data that will be going from map to map. The banks unfortunately only put the data into an XML file, without putting in any safeguards against tampering, so all data that will be stored will have to be scrambled.
Well, you could put important features like the auction house, pvp zones, professions in the main map only.
I will be using the bank storage feature to transfer everything about a person's characters between maps, its a functionality that writes XML files with categories and variables to a persons documents and I will be creating an encryption/decryption back-end that will make sure that no one can tamper with the details to the banks for my game. Save/Load codes are a hassle, both for the creator and the user to deal with, and they store little to no information because of size constraints. This type of storage will restrict a person from playing from the same computer unless they carry a disk drive with the bank with them, but it is a small inconvenience for the powerful game changing storage capabilities it opens up.
Player's banks will be accounts, and those accounts will store every detail of information needed about the characters.
Second, even if XML data is encrypted, there is still potential for abuse. Unless the game automatically saves an XML every time an item or money is transfered, I can make a game, give my money to a friend, leave without saving, and then he can save. I can reload and I have all of my money back but my friend still has my money too. I'm not sure if saving after every transaction is feasible, and even if it is, the user can presumably copy the XML file and rename it, so that even if you overwrite the first XML after he gives away his money, he can just put the other XML back in. I know it's just a game, but given the scope of this project, I would give some thought regarding whether there is any way to prevent this.
Finally, on the issue of "instances" and maps specifically for higher leveled characters, I think it may be best overall not to make leveling up a huge grind in this game. Take a lesson from Guild Wars, where reaching level 20 and getting good gear was not difficult, but there were still plenty of things to unlock and tons of content to explore once you got there. It was very good for keeping players on equal footing, and allowing players even with vastly different amounts of time spent in the game to enjoy content together. I think one of the popular WarCraft 3 ORPGs did this. They basically had a single map for "leveling up" with a vast diversity of encounters available, and then made dozens of maps for maximum level characters to enjoy. If you are worried about "level up" content becoming unpopular, I feel that the key is in not making the "level up" content too lengthy. Just my two cents.
"Instance" maps would be a great way to do PvP. I know World PvP was mentioned, but it would be great to have a PvP instance i.e. a battleground, where teams of high level characters and go face to face with specific objectives and such. WoW meets DotA!
I don't think guild wars servers as a great example, their leveling system basically handed out max level characters to anyone and when that happens, a persons pride in their own character becomes diminished. The pacing has to be just right, not too long and tedious to never finish, not to short so as to create a sense of accomplishment when you finally reach the goal. As for the XML issue, this game isn't an mmorpg, there is no economy to worry about, If a player decides to abuse the game and give themselves enormous tons of currency (If I even decide to have such a thing in the end design), they wont find much to spend it on. Gear will not be purchasable, it must be earned through playing. The only possible XML abuse that could be gamebreaking is if some cryptologist deciphered my key for the XML encryption and decided to release it and let everyone remove the aspects of the game that are actually the fun parts. As for BGs I plan to have them as an alternative to PVE leveling in terms of getting gear and experience, I am still heavily weighing pros and cons of a single map as opposed to multiple maps to be able to really make any decision about it.
It really comes down to what kind of options will be made available in the coming weeks before the end of beta and the soon after release.
I guess it depends on whether or not you consider max level the "goal." Most games that follow this paradigm are tedious grind fests with nonexistent end-game. I think WoW is so successful because it focuses more on the end-game and less on the leveling part. The fact that you are making a StarCraft map that cuts out a significant social aspect (no economy plus 8 players per "server") makes me feel like shifting it even further in that direction will be more successful.
But that's just my opinion! It is your game and I will probably play it regardless =) I'm just saying Guild Wars is definitely less social than WoW, and leveling is definitely not as much fun, but the endgame is very rich!
It sounds like a big project. You'll need lots of people helping. Me? You want me to help? Sorry, I'm no good at collaborating on one big thing online.
When you have a big project, you'll need lots of people helping. And the more people you have helping, the more people you'll have looking to you for answers. And that can be stressful. And that's why I don't plan huge projects that require lots of helpers.
Just a word of caution.
Did you start working on banks/saving yet? If you save a unit in a bank it doesn't save the experience/kills/items, just the current HP, energy and unit type, which is useless for rpg maps, and there doesn't seem to be a way to get/set the experience of a unit, or the items. Seems like saving your hero with the exp and items is not possible right now, with banks at least.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
http:www.sc2mapster.com/maps/smooth-3rd-person-movement/
This is a full conversion project I am working on and I am creating this thread to get its name out there and to also take in any suggestions the community might have, in return I will be willing to go in depth how I achieved any of the things you spot in the video, and can also serve as a general person to answer any trigger related questions you might have. So far my plans are to include the data editor as little as possible until I hit a coding roadblock. That may also change in the future. I will need some volunteers to beta test once publishing goes live so I can tweak settings to play well with networking and such. For now this project brainstorm thread will just serve as a place where you guys can ask me questions and also give suggestions.
Sadly there are limited player slots, So it will feel like diablo when joining a game.
The feature to link maps together will allow you to make massive amounts of content / expansions though so that's cool =D.
Do you plan to make scripted boss encounters?
@ephixa: Go
Yes I plan to work towards creating the full experience, I don't expect to make instances per say, but there will be world bosses with their own fights.
@SCMapper:
It's possible to have a larger player limits, but not known how to do so until the game is released, so the full editor can be used entirely for modding.
Possible that, if fits in a premium standard, can use a 3rd party client to connect to the server, using the SC2 game as a in between engine.
@dra6o0n: Go
That would be very exciting, if an alternative connection server is made possible that will completely change the way I design this game.
I would really change camera to normal isometric type. The 3rd person OTS camera is simply unplayable and not really fun.
@dra6o0n: Go
Wow really?
Joining a game is like joining an instance, so dungeon instances inside the main map aren't needed.
Maps dedicated to certain things or tiers of content might be a good idea. For example, you create a dungeon map for higher level characters that people can host a game of. When they join it loads their world of starcraft profile and their characters are loaded into the new map. That way people can start a B.net game like " WOS - Dungeon map name lvl 10+" " WOS - PvP Arena " " WOS - Normal enviroment " This is more battle.net friendly.
@ephixa: Go
This was the direction I was aiming in for my design, but every time I think about it I keep coming back to the problem of eventually having people only playing the higher end maps, snuffing out any chance for new people to get a start up so If i do take the route of just having a map be a section of the game and people picking and choosing what they play I will need to find a sweet spot of how much content is in a map to make it playable for a large percentage of players. Right now the actual challenge will be to create my own encryption methods for the data that will be going from map to map. The banks unfortunately only put the data into an XML file, without putting in any safeguards against tampering, so all data that will be stored will have to be scrambled.
@xeavien: Go
User has full control over the camera angle he views his character from using the mouse, but more importantly not every style of game is for everyone lol.
How are you going to keep the data from game to game? It wouldn't make sense to have these instances and everything if you consider some more "high end" than the others if you aren't able to keep gear from game to game. The only way I could think of solving that issue is as follows: you can generate a code at the end of the game or when you're leaving which will be a combination of all of your gear. You then at the start of another game have the ability to enter said code to get your gear back to what it was at the previous game.
In the lines of computer programming, and from what I've have seen... Nothing is impossible when your talking about a video game...
Just depends on how much you can endure when they throw tons of information at you... Can your brain handle all that?
Well, you could put important features like the auction house, pvp zones, professions in the main map only.
@helixdnb: Go
I will be using the bank storage feature to transfer everything about a person's characters between maps, its a functionality that writes XML files with categories and variables to a persons documents and I will be creating an encryption/decryption back-end that will make sure that no one can tamper with the details to the banks for my game. Save/Load codes are a hassle, both for the creator and the user to deal with, and they store little to no information because of size constraints. This type of storage will restrict a person from playing from the same computer unless they carry a disk drive with the bank with them, but it is a small inconvenience for the powerful game changing storage capabilities it opens up.
Player's banks will be accounts, and those accounts will store every detail of information needed about the characters.
@SCMapper:
And not to mention a good way to store data for Zombie shooting mmorpgs too.
I have three things to say.
First, this looks great!
Second, even if XML data is encrypted, there is still potential for abuse. Unless the game automatically saves an XML every time an item or money is transfered, I can make a game, give my money to a friend, leave without saving, and then he can save. I can reload and I have all of my money back but my friend still has my money too. I'm not sure if saving after every transaction is feasible, and even if it is, the user can presumably copy the XML file and rename it, so that even if you overwrite the first XML after he gives away his money, he can just put the other XML back in. I know it's just a game, but given the scope of this project, I would give some thought regarding whether there is any way to prevent this.
Finally, on the issue of "instances" and maps specifically for higher leveled characters, I think it may be best overall not to make leveling up a huge grind in this game. Take a lesson from Guild Wars, where reaching level 20 and getting good gear was not difficult, but there were still plenty of things to unlock and tons of content to explore once you got there. It was very good for keeping players on equal footing, and allowing players even with vastly different amounts of time spent in the game to enjoy content together. I think one of the popular WarCraft 3 ORPGs did this. They basically had a single map for "leveling up" with a vast diversity of encounters available, and then made dozens of maps for maximum level characters to enjoy. If you are worried about "level up" content becoming unpopular, I feel that the key is in not making the "level up" content too lengthy. Just my two cents.
@MasterDinadan: Go
Okay, four things.
"Instance" maps would be a great way to do PvP. I know World PvP was mentioned, but it would be great to have a PvP instance i.e. a battleground, where teams of high level characters and go face to face with specific objectives and such. WoW meets DotA!
@MasterDinadan: Go
I don't think guild wars servers as a great example, their leveling system basically handed out max level characters to anyone and when that happens, a persons pride in their own character becomes diminished. The pacing has to be just right, not too long and tedious to never finish, not to short so as to create a sense of accomplishment when you finally reach the goal. As for the XML issue, this game isn't an mmorpg, there is no economy to worry about, If a player decides to abuse the game and give themselves enormous tons of currency (If I even decide to have such a thing in the end design), they wont find much to spend it on. Gear will not be purchasable, it must be earned through playing. The only possible XML abuse that could be gamebreaking is if some cryptologist deciphered my key for the XML encryption and decided to release it and let everyone remove the aspects of the game that are actually the fun parts. As for BGs I plan to have them as an alternative to PVE leveling in terms of getting gear and experience, I am still heavily weighing pros and cons of a single map as opposed to multiple maps to be able to really make any decision about it.
It really comes down to what kind of options will be made available in the coming weeks before the end of beta and the soon after release.
@SCMapper: Go
I guess it depends on whether or not you consider max level the "goal." Most games that follow this paradigm are tedious grind fests with nonexistent end-game. I think WoW is so successful because it focuses more on the end-game and less on the leveling part. The fact that you are making a StarCraft map that cuts out a significant social aspect (no economy plus 8 players per "server") makes me feel like shifting it even further in that direction will be more successful.
But that's just my opinion! It is your game and I will probably play it regardless =) I'm just saying Guild Wars is definitely less social than WoW, and leveling is definitely not as much fun, but the endgame is very rich!
It sounds like a big project. You'll need lots of people helping. Me? You want me to help? Sorry, I'm no good at collaborating on one big thing online.
When you have a big project, you'll need lots of people helping. And the more people you have helping, the more people you'll have looking to you for answers. And that can be stressful. And that's why I don't plan huge projects that require lots of helpers. Just a word of caution.
Did you start working on banks/saving yet? If you save a unit in a bank it doesn't save the experience/kills/items, just the current HP, energy and unit type, which is useless for rpg maps, and there doesn't seem to be a way to get/set the experience of a unit, or the items. Seems like saving your hero with the exp and items is not possible right now, with banks at least.