Opinions requested on a game I'm developing

[eviltechie]

I'm currently in the prototype phase of developing a new shmup-type game. I figured this would be a good place to run some of my ideas by people to get a feel for which of the planned features are good, which need refining, and which to throw out completely.

The game is currently lacking a name, but the general back story is that earth is fighting an invasion by an alien force. The invasion has come by means of nanotechnology and bacteria, which work together to manipulate machines and humans. In the beginning you are working to destroy the "infected" machines and cull the infected humans. You do with with ridiculously powerful weapons. Not much of a story, really, but you don't play this kinda game for the story.

The art style of the game is mainly high-contrast grayscale. The exceptions to this will be your weapons, enemy bullets, explosions, and power-ups. I'm building the player ships and enemies as 3D models, which will then either be rendered in 2D or locked to a 2D plane and rendered in 3D...I like the second option in that I can skip the step of sprite animation and do everything in code.

Anyway, that's all just background info. Here are the gameplay ideas I'd like some opinions on. Oh, the intended release platform is Xbox and possibly PC as well.

1. WEAPON SELECTION - The plan is to have several different weapons which are selectable by the player. Each weapon will have a unique mechanic to it that sets it apart from the others, hopefully making it so there is no "best" weapon, but that each one is useful in specific situations or is fitting to a particular play-style. I like the idea of upgrading the weapons, but I don't really want to burden the player with a complex weapon shopping system in between levels. So, instead I was thinking of using a system kind of like Ratchet & Clank uses...where the current weapon is upgraded simply through use. I'm thinking new weapons will be gained by killing certain bosses (like in Mega-Man). Using those two mechanics I think I can avoid the weapon shop, while still allowing your guns to be upgraded. Also, due to weapons having different primary purposes, I want to let the player carry multiple weapons into the level and switch between them at will. To make switching easy I was considering something like what a lot of 3D games use, where you hit a button and move the stick toward the weapon you want.

2. PLAYER SHIPS - I had originally planned on having seven ships, which could be purchased and upgraded and such. I've since decided I think that over-complicates things. I'm currently thinking there will be two or three ship options, and they'll be selected at the beginning rather than purchased and upgraded. Of the available selections I plan to have them work differently to fit different play-styles. One ship will have tight handling and be very responsive, but it will be a one-hit kill. Another will be a bit less responsive, be more affected by inertia, and be able to take two or three hits before death. Think F-22 vs. A-10.

3. BOMBS - Personally, I don't like bombs. But I know a lot of people do. So, I was trying to think of alternative ways to implement a "panic attack" to give the player a way out periodically when they get overwhelmed. I don't have a working prototype of it yet, but I've been playing with the idea of a weapon that would fire an energy blast forward and as it contacted enemy bullets it would absorb them, it would gain power by absorbing the bullets, but it would also lose speed. If it dropped it zero in speed, it would just explode where it was, but if it impacted an enemy it would be a very powerful hit. The general idea being that it would carve through bullet patterns, but wouldn't be godlike in power due to the slowing.

4. FIRING STYLE - The weapons currently all fire continuously when the fire button is held down. The fire rate isn't limited by anything currently...mainly because fire rate limits annoy me. I also don't want to have to concentrate on rapidly pressing a button as I'm dodging things. Any reason to implement limits on fire rate?

5. HIT INDICATORS - Obviously bosses need life meters, or some way to tell when you are hurting them. My question is about the fodder before the boss. I was thinking of just making the enemies show flames and smoke progressively as they're damaged. The weapons each will have a hit indicator as well, sparks for bullets, small explosions for missiles, etc. Is that enough or do you like enemies to flash when hit to give a very obvious indicator that they're taking damage. Another option I had played with is making the damage amount for each hit fly off the enemy as text...like in Borderlands.

6. VIEW DIMENSIONS - This is planned as a vertical scrolling shooter, but since it is targeted for the Xbox most people aren't going to have vertical screens. Should I just make it wider, and compensate by making things approach from the top slower or give up a lot of screen real estate on the sides to make it more of a standard vertical shooter layout?

7. RANDOM LEVELS - I was playing with the idea of having a random mode for the game. It would have the standard levels, which would be predefined and would always be the same. But the random levels would be built procedurally and would be different each time. Is this something you would enjoy? Or, would it just be a place to show-off fully upgraded weapons, since score would be meaningless in a random level? Basically, worth including or not?


Alright, that's all I can think of at the moment. Let me know your thoughts and opinions on those things. What parts you think would work, what parts suck, what you'd change. Thanks!

Oh, also, here's a very early look at some of the weapon prototypes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UvLUI_CO0P8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lF0mMN6KaO4

Keep in mind those are very early and the art is all placeholders, the current "game" is just a sandbox for me to test various concepts with. Hardcore development and art creation will begin once I feel gameplay is perfect.

[mjclark]

Really like the idea of grayscale ships and enemies with coloured bullets, explosions etc. Gives the whole thing a kind of Art Deco feel.
Also like the idea of a vertical shooter which stretches from side to side of a 4:3 screen a la Gigawing and Mars Matrix.
What about some way of controlling the motion of the energy blast/bomb? what if you could bounce it or nudge it in some way?
But please, please no inertia on any of the ships....ever

[eviltechie]

Really like the idea of grayscale ships and enemies with coloured bullets, explosions etc. Gives the whole thing a kind of Art Deco feel.
Also like the idea of a vertical shooter which stretches from side to side of a 4:3 screen a la Gigawing and Mars Matrix.
What about some way of controlling the motion of the energy blast/bomb? what if you could bounce it or nudge it in some way?
But please, please no inertia on any of the ships....ever

The grayscale idea came by accident while rendering some untextured 3D models for it.

The energy blast/bomb thing could certainly be controlled. That would definitely make it more useful if someone got themselves stuck in a corner and needed to blast a path out. My first thought would be to just map it to the right Xbox stick, that has no use in the game currently and it would allow the left to continue to be used to steer the ship. Could also make it more fancy, like engaging "bullet time" and zooming in on it.

[Sasupoika]

I spy something starting with an i, and ending with a.

[Udderdude]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQYo4krdT60

[eviltechie]

Haha, I get it...no inertia.

Any opinions on the rest of the stuff?

[Udderdude]

1. Weapon upgrading not such a hot idea, it didn't turn out well in RSG. Be very careful with this. If I were you I'd just introduce one new weapon per level, and have no upgrades.
2. If you have multiple weapons, having multiple ships as well is major overkill. Just one is fine.
3. You could try something different like super powered weapons for 3-4 seconds that destroy enemy shots and do major damage.
4. Nope, full auto all the way plz.
5. Enemies flashing when hit and pulsing when damaged is always good.
6. The term for this is "Vertizontal" and there's nothing wrong with it as long as it's still 4:3.
7. Some people here wouldn't enjoy this too much (mostly highscore players). Some people would enjoy it. As long as it has a seperate highscore table, it can't hurt.

Weapon prototypes: These don't look very interesting, try to add some more variety.

[Ixranin]

I'll give you a medal if you can figure out how to make the Ricochet Blades not suck.

The lots-of-weapons path is a tricky one, especially since it's easy to end up making weapons with overlapping purposes. (Shrapnel gun, lock-on rockets, magic hateballs, and crazy blades are all popcorn enemy clearing weapons.) If your aim is to have the player switching between weapons Radiant Silvergun-style, you'll have to specialize the weapons more and build the levels around them. Even then, there'll still be some weapons that see little use. (The Lightning Beams in RSG for example.)

Otherwise, there's the easier method that games usually fall back on: you pick up guns as you progress in the game and they basically act as "upgrades" themselves. As in, one weapon is more useful then the other and you'll usually switch to using it after you get it.

[eviltechie]

1. Weapon upgrading not such a hot idea, it didn't turn out well in RSG. Be very careful with this. If I were you I'd just introduce one new weapon per level, and have no upgrades.
2. If you have multiple weapons, having multiple ships as well is major overkill. Just one is fine.
3. You could try something different like super powered weapons for 3-4 seconds that destroy enemy shots and do major damage.
4. Nope, full auto all the way plz.
5. Enemies flashing when hit and pulsing when damaged is always good.
6. The term for this is "Vertizontal" and there's nothing wrong with it as long as it's still 4:3.
7. Some people here wouldn't enjoy this too much (mostly highscore players). Some people would enjoy it. As long as it has a seperate highscore table, it can't hurt.

Very good points! Thanks. It seems the recommended way to go is actually saving me work.

Weapon prototypes: These don't look very interesting, try to add some more variety.

Quite true. They'll get better. The weapons (and the functions driving them) are just placeholders. Most of them were just built to try concepts out. I'm also prototyping a lot more weapons than I plan to use. Anything that doesn't feel right or have the potential to look good is getting dropped.

I'll give you a medal if you can figure out how to make the Ricochet Blades not suck.

How would you like to see them work? Some things I had considered were increasing initial velocity and having it drop after each hit to limit their lifespan and have it look less like pinball, and increasing the spread to give more useful angles of attack.

The lots-of-weapons path is a tricky one, especially since it's easy to end up making weapons with overlapping purposes. (Shrapnel gun, lock-on rockets, magic hateballs, and crazy blades are all popcorn enemy clearing weapons.) If your aim is to have the player switching between weapons Radiant Silvergun-style, you'll have to specialize the weapons more and build the levels around them. Even then, there'll still be some weapons that see little use. (The Lightning Beams in RSG for example.)

Otherwise, there's the easier method that games usually fall back on: you pick up guns as you progress in the game and they basically act as "upgrades" themselves. As in, one weapon is more useful then the other and you'll usually switch to using it after you get it.

I definitely agree. The lots-of-weapons thing isn't easy to do well. If it seems like it isn't going to add to the game I won't include it. The main goal is to make the weapons fun, graphically interesting, and to not overlap (much) in purpose. By that I mean that most guns will be more than adequate for popcorn clearing, but some will be better for returning fire while concentrating on dodging bullets, some will have good penetration for getting through "stacked" enemies, some will allow useful angles of attack (shrapnel being able to hit from the side or behind where direct fire weapons would be lacking).


-----------------------

I thought of a couple more things I'd like to get opinions on as well.

8. SCORING SYSTEM - I haven't spent a lot of time on this part yet. But one idea I had was that when enemies are killed they'd leave behind sparkly dust type stuff...which you would collect for additional points. The dust seeks your ship when it is nearby, to make picking it up easier. However, the dust also seeks enemy ships (basically the closest ship), and if it is absorbed by the enemy they become worth more points and drop the dust from both ships when killed. Uncollected dust would dissipate after a few seconds. Do you think this kind of thing would be enjoyable, or annoying? It would force the player to deal with more enemies (and thus bullets) on screen at once to maximize their score. It would also force them to choose between staying at a distance from their targets so they don't absorb the dust too soon and being up close and being sure to get the dust before it dissipates even if it isn't highly valuable. It would also limit the scoring usefulness of the screen-clearing weapons, as enemies killed simultaneously would not multiply the dust.

9. MUSIC - What are your feelings on certain levels being sync'd with music? Nothing major, but maybe enemies would fire in time with the music.

[Udderdude]

8. Enemies stealing your bonuses? That's new. Actually I kind of added something like that in Space Dudes, there's a inverted color player ship that grabs bonuses and can only be caught by running into him. Anyway, I don't think it would be very interesting unless it was implemented like how I did it, or similar.
9. It's been done before (See: Zillion Beatz). Not very interesting and kind of gimmicky.

[Sasupoika]

8. So basically kill enemy -> Wait for dust to jump -> Jump it around more, increasing the worth -> Collect?
Sounds fine. Don't make it too obnoxious.
9. Lots of shmups have done that. Some shmups synced music with bosses. A good example of this is Zillion Beatz.

[Udderdude]

SAS SAPPIN MAH POST >:O

[eviltechie]

Thanks again for the feedback! It's definitely helping to shape the design of this game.

I'll post a new video of the progress soon.

In the mean time, another question...

10. BOSS FIGHTS - I've been playing with some ideas for various boss fights. I will definitely be including some standard "big hulking bastard" bosses. But I'm also considering adding some fights against ships relatively equal to your own. However, that presents a problem given the difference in how the player ship works versus how enemies do (fast bullets vs. slow bullet patterns). So, to make the matches against evenly matched bosses fair and enjoyable there are a couple options I can think of.

• Indirect Attacks - Perhaps flying beside the boss, split-screen style (or on the same screen with normal weapons disabled), and you both trying to trigger things that would put up an obstacle for the other or initiate an attack on the other.
• Temporary Health Bars - For the duration of the boss fight you would be given a health bar, as would the boss. You'd chip away at each other, but would be able to sustain a lot of damage...just like the boss can, since you would be facing weapons like your own.
• One Hit Kill Boss - Kind of the opposite of the previous idea. The boss would be a one hit kill target, like yourself, but would have a tiny hitbox. You would be limited to slow moving projectiles, as would the boss, and the boss would dodge your attacks.

I've also come up with a working title for the game: "Profit of Doom". Seems to fit, as you are basically a mercenary sponsored by a corporation.

[worstplayer]

Indirect Attacks - Perhaps flying beside the boss, split-screen style (or on the same screen with normal weapons disabled), and you both trying to trigger things that would put up an obstacle for the other or initiate an attack on the other.

Like this? I think that's better option than the rest.

[microcosm]

I haven't watched your Youtube clips, but based on what you wrote:

1, 2: Both these ideas will need you to balance them correctly. No matter how much variety they offer, you need to make sure that each one of them is no more useful than any of the others. Otherwise players will just choose the most powerful option, and the others will be wasted.

You need a great deal of expertise to design a game with multiple options, all of them balanced. I advise you just to implement the one ship and weapons-system that you would choose when playing your game.


3-5: Some ideas from arcade shoot-em-ups:

3. Donpachi ties bomb use to the ranking system. When the player bombs, he's effectively admitting he's not skillful enough to evade that bullet pattern unassisted. Bombing becomes the equivalent of choosing the easy skill level, but doing so within the game itself (when the player actually find out if he needs the easy level), rather than at the start screen.


4. I'm happy enough with a pumpable auto-fire, like the blue shot in Raiden, where pressing the fire button gives a half-second burst of fire at the auto-fire rate, so for continuous autofire you just tap the fire button absent-mindedly while concentrating on dodging the enemy. Donpachi takes this a step further, implementing two firing methods on one fire button (pumpable auto-fire for the shot, and also held down for the laser).

I dislike games with no autofire, where the faster I hit the fire button, the faster I fire. If I have to do that, I might as well be playing Konami Hypersports, a game on which I broke seven joysticks and an arm.


5. There needs to be some indication that each of your shots is doing some sort of damage to the enemy. If it's just floating around waiting for its time-out so it can self-destruct, the player might as well concentrate fire on something else.

Enemies that flash white when they take damage are a throwback to the 1980s, before graphics hardware could implement transparency methods. Back then, sprites had a mask (an outline character, all white) that would overwrite whatever was on the screen there, then each pixel would be bitwise-ANDed with it.

Nowadays, use any indicator you like.


6: Most of your target market will be using a widescreen (16:9) display, which is even further from the standard arcade aspect ratio (3:4).


7: There's nothing mystical about a psuedo-random number generator: it simply outputs an integer between 0 and (2^(2^n))-1. All the cleverness has to come from your generation procedure, which has to produce an interesting game experience for every possible output from the PRNG.

At its simplest, a procedural generator will simply discard the PRNG output, and build the levels from your precompiled data. Start from that point and work upwards, so as to retain a firm idea of what your psuedo-random generator is doing for you.