Escape From Zombie City (t money's Worklog)
is t money still working on that zombie game? yes, yes he is. 
looking for opinions
Initially, when I first was coming up with the idea for zombie city, one of my main thoughts was to try and make it have high re-play value. So my plan was to incorporate a lot of random variation to each play through, and to have many different stories that you would randomly be put into. As I've mentioned in the past I have 12 different potential villains who COULD be behind the zombie outbreak. So at the start of each game, the computer would randomly select one of the villains for you and you would have to narrow them down until you've figured out who it is.
The other option I'm debating is whether to, instead of having the computer randomly select a villain at the start of the game, let the user determine the villain during gameplay. Sort of in a "chose your own adventure" style where certain actions eliminate certain suspects. For instance, choosing a direction to go in from the initial map would wipe out half of the suspects. the user would not be aware of how their actions are affecting the selection of the villain, they would still have to talk to other characters to determine who the villain is.
Additionally, I'm having a dilemma over whether to keep things generic so that the villian/story is not tipped off to the player if they've already seen it before, or if there should be more story elements worked in during the game. If you've played the WIP and figured out who the villian is, you'll notice that all of the information the other characters give you is generic, and not related to what the scientist explains later. I'm OK with that, but at the same time I do like the idea of building up a story before it gets to the point where you know who the villain is.
for example, lets say that I had a suspect that was a wizard (i don't) and he is the villain on this particular play through. The wizard accidentally cast a zombie spell on Zombie City when he was trying to make chocolate chip cookies for a bake sale. So I could make it so that maybe another character mentions something about a bake sale, and maybe another character says something about the wizard buying a bag of chocolate chips. And then when you go into a certain area, you see zombies that are half chocolate chip cookies. Just vague hints that would set up the story for the villain. The down side, again, is that once you've encountered the chocolate chip cookie zombies on one play-through, you will know who the villain is right away on any other play-through that you encounter them.
Now, to mix the issues, if I choose to have the villain selection be random, I can incorporate any story elements from the very beginning of a play-through; where as, any story elements would have to wait until a villain has been determined by the users actions if I make the villain a user selection.
Basically, I'd like to get any feedback from you guys that I can, on what you think would be more fun. Random selection Vs. User selection; and on the amount of lead-up to a villain confrontation.
thanks
The other option I'm debating is whether to, instead of having the computer randomly select a villain at the start of the game, let the user determine the villain during gameplay. Sort of in a "chose your own adventure" style where certain actions eliminate certain suspects. For instance, choosing a direction to go in from the initial map would wipe out half of the suspects. the user would not be aware of how their actions are affecting the selection of the villain, they would still have to talk to other characters to determine who the villain is.
Additionally, I'm having a dilemma over whether to keep things generic so that the villian/story is not tipped off to the player if they've already seen it before, or if there should be more story elements worked in during the game. If you've played the WIP and figured out who the villian is, you'll notice that all of the information the other characters give you is generic, and not related to what the scientist explains later. I'm OK with that, but at the same time I do like the idea of building up a story before it gets to the point where you know who the villain is.
for example, lets say that I had a suspect that was a wizard (i don't) and he is the villain on this particular play through. The wizard accidentally cast a zombie spell on Zombie City when he was trying to make chocolate chip cookies for a bake sale. So I could make it so that maybe another character mentions something about a bake sale, and maybe another character says something about the wizard buying a bag of chocolate chips. And then when you go into a certain area, you see zombies that are half chocolate chip cookies. Just vague hints that would set up the story for the villain. The down side, again, is that once you've encountered the chocolate chip cookie zombies on one play-through, you will know who the villain is right away on any other play-through that you encounter them.
Now, to mix the issues, if I choose to have the villain selection be random, I can incorporate any story elements from the very beginning of a play-through; where as, any story elements would have to wait until a villain has been determined by the users actions if I make the villain a user selection.
Basically, I'd like to get any feedback from you guys that I can, on what you think would be more fun. Random selection Vs. User selection; and on the amount of lead-up to a villain confrontation.
thanks
(Posted on October, 29th 2009, 23:33)
Comments
Sandman said:
Wouldn't the chocolate chip cookies tip me off too in random mode?
Besides, you can have that wizard also bake a cake in other stories, in which he succeeds and then another guy is the villain. This way you can still have the "omg I saw a wizard buy chocolate cookies" clue. This kind of stuff can be applied to other things as well.
I also think that you should be happy with 12 different stories, because if anyone plays your game 12 times, you can be a very proud man. Resident Evil 1 for example, determines a few events based on the paths you take and the amount of time it took you to take them, so no randomness. But still, if you play the game a second time, you're not going the same way, so the game would be a bit different anyway.
You could also have a Story mode and a Random mode.
Besides, you can have that wizard also bake a cake in other stories, in which he succeeds and then another guy is the villain. This way you can still have the "omg I saw a wizard buy chocolate cookies" clue. This kind of stuff can be applied to other things as well.
I also think that you should be happy with 12 different stories, because if anyone plays your game 12 times, you can be a very proud man. Resident Evil 1 for example, determines a few events based on the paths you take and the amount of time it took you to take them, so no randomness. But still, if you play the game a second time, you're not going the same way, so the game would be a bit different anyway.
You could also have a Story mode and a Random mode.
(Posted on October, 30th 2009, 00:25)
t money said:
I don't think I was entirely clear. It's really 2 separate (but related) issues I was bringing up.
1- how the villain is selected. either random, or based on player decisions.
2- little/no story lead up to conflict with villain, or more lead up to conflict (one of course is more interesting, the other keeps villain secret during replay).
I should have also mentioned that my mindset for a play-through is that it would be relatively short (20-40 min-ish). I'm hoping it's short structure and unlockable characters and items will encourage replay.
1- how the villain is selected. either random, or based on player decisions.
2- little/no story lead up to conflict with villain, or more lead up to conflict (one of course is more interesting, the other keeps villain secret during replay).
I should have also mentioned that my mindset for a play-through is that it would be relatively short (20-40 min-ish). I'm hoping it's short structure and unlockable characters and items will encourage replay.
(Posted on October, 30th 2009, 01:26)
Sandman said:
Hmwell both have their things.
Fixed (based on choices): being able to reply a certain story at will, choosing a different story on purpose
Random: possibly never getting the 12th story
No story lead up: plain stuff, can get boring, especially if you play 12 times
Story lead up doesn't have this problem and can be quite entertaining.
If you ask me for an opinion, I would say fixed+story.
Fixed (based on choices): being able to reply a certain story at will, choosing a different story on purpose
Random: possibly never getting the 12th story
No story lead up: plain stuff, can get boring, especially if you play 12 times
Story lead up doesn't have this problem and can be quite entertaining.
If you ask me for an opinion, I would say fixed+story.
(Posted on November, 1st 2009, 01:23)