Author Topic: Game Charter?  (Read 3883 times)

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Game Charter?
« on: October 24, 2006, 07:04:07 PM »
Is there a game charter or centeral repository for all the solidified ideas? I guess I'm just trying to get up to speed on what has actually been decided and how the game design is set to progress. What is the goal and overarching philosophy?

I've read the web page (op3game.net) and the wiki plus most of the posts in the forum. I'm just trying to figure out what way OP3 is headed? Is it like a 3D version of OP2 or is it going to be something dramatically different?

Offline TH300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
    • http://op3game.net
Game Charter?
« Reply #1 on: October 25, 2006, 02:38:48 AM »
Some ideas are already decided on. You can see that when people discussing an idea don't like it.
(nontheless we might decide to use few of these unliked ideas, later, for any good reason)
Furthermore there are ideas that we won't decide on before we tested them (won't happen very soon).

As of now, progress is going slowly. I assume, the game won't be finished before 2008.

Quote
Is it like a 3D version of OP2 or is it going to be something dramatically different?
part of both. Gameplay will be similar to op2, with some improvements. Graphics will be 3D and there will be a new colony.

Details on the story and goals will be released later.

Offline Freeza-CII

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2308
Game Charter?
« Reply #2 on: October 25, 2006, 02:29:27 PM »
Quote
(nontheless we might decide to use few of these unliked ideas, later, for any good reason)

If the ideas arent like why the hell would you use them.  I mean if the ideas are not like what makes you think they will make the game liked.  You put a bunch of the unliked ideas in the and Genesis will just implode.

Offline dm-horus

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
Game Charter?
« Reply #3 on: October 25, 2006, 07:19:31 PM »
I think putting hated features into a game simply for spite or stubborness is the opposite of game development.

In fact, this is a prime example of what Im talking about in my OPU Theory thread: people arent willing to work on a project with and for he community. As much as people would like to think, its not all just about numero uno. Its like youre asking people to hate your project.

Now, I understand that we might not have the right idea about some things or maybe there are some features that WOULD be okay in game and you just have to ignore us, but there is only so far you can go with that. Are you sure this is how you want your project to progress? I think you might be asking for more trouble than you want to handle.

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Game Charter?
« Reply #4 on: October 25, 2006, 07:33:28 PM »
I think TH, more than anything, is leaving himself the option of resurecting ideas later. I wouldn't necessarily read this as a "I'm going to do what I want" post.

This is really why I was asking about a Game Charter. Makes it more clear what people are thinking and where the hell to focus efforts. People talking about air and sea units is cool, except that there isn't anything firm that says "OP3 planets will not include water or dense atmospheres." (Unless you read through hundreds of posts)

Offline Mez

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 648
Game Charter?
« Reply #5 on: October 25, 2006, 08:36:23 PM »
Features change on implementation. Some times the original idea doesn't work out, sometimes a feature that some people say they don't like works far better than expected.
Ideas have been asked for and debated by the community at great length and a long list, that has been cut down into a list of features that the game makers want to do  is made.

These features can & will change depending on how well the testing of them works and how much time there is.  Sometime unliked features appear at the discrtion of the programmer because it the only one that worked at the time and/or the other ideas didn't work out.

Provided the result sticks mostly to the original spec (and works) then most bespoke programming is accepted, or it can be changed in a patch later so the software can be produced on time. (cough M$ Windows XP,  Vista cough)

Most people will know of the various things that the programmers of Vista decided not to implement due to time contraints, some of which have resulted in other ideas, that were less liked being used. (I personally doubt WinFS will ever get anywhere in the next 10 years even if it was going to be a better filesystem, which funily was going to work like the current *nix journalling filesystems. But time constraints resulted in the next best thing called NTFS (cough yuk cough) being used again)
« Last Edit: October 25, 2006, 08:40:10 PM by Mez »

Offline dm-horus

  • Banned
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1042
Game Charter?
« Reply #6 on: October 25, 2006, 09:15:41 PM »
Yes, the peanut gallery isnt always the group with the most insight on a subject and afterall we arent the ones developing the project... but still compromises have to be made and a balance has to be found. People dont like things like WGA or activation, but theyre still willing to live with it if the end result is worth it. If the game cant live up to its expectations and its full of stuff people dont like or outright hate, youre really just shooting yourself in the foot.

Offline TH300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
    • http://op3game.net
Game Charter?
« Reply #7 on: October 26, 2006, 01:41:09 PM »
Quote
I think putting hated features into a game simply for spite or stubborness is the opposite of game development.
Quote
I think TH, more than anything, is leaving himself the option of resurecting ideas later. I wouldn't necessarily read this as a "I'm going to do what I want" post.
I said for any GOOD reason. Its really just a backdoor that likely won't be used.

Offline White Claw

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 854
Game Charter?
« Reply #8 on: October 26, 2006, 10:37:08 PM »
Once again I visit this thread out of pain from the board.

It is quite obvious that no body knows what the framework is for ideas and suggestions. We are all struggling to come up with ideas that several people are in great protest against.

I'm not picking on anybody (so please don't read it that way) but I can definitely tell there are some people who believe OP3 = OP2 in 3D. (It doesn't matter to me either way, I just have no idea?)

If this is the case, then suggestions for additions to OP3 are being thrown in the wrong direction. Do we need new units? Are we looking for terrain ideas? Ore? Power? AI improvements? What???

Several suggestion threads end in "That isn't OP2", "It's too powerful", "It's an uber weapon" and ideas are constantly being shot down...

To me, the concept of a brainstorming phase is to come up with ideas and a possible fit for the project. After several ideas come together, you weed out the ones that don't fit the project. I think most of the disagreement is springing from the fact that we don't know what we're looking for.

Leadership is about guiding the blind to the light. Not telling them to look for it.

Offline TH300

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1404
    • http://op3game.net
Game Charter?
« Reply #9 on: October 27, 2006, 12:22:45 AM »
I'm letting you know that I understand the problem. People don't know the plot of op3 and thus can't suggest ideas that might fit.

Unfortunately there are some things with higher priority in my life right now. And the other genesis members are also kinda busy.
You will have to wait.