Home » Genesis: the world, to the players

Add new comment

Re: Genesis: the world, to the players

Innsmouth on August 8, 2006 - 14:16.

My difference is that i want full permadeath for all the beings in the game. hear me out...

Each player is controlling a "bloodline" or "society". Their first character is the founder. basically its the same as a NPC just fully controlled by the player (1st, 3rd person). You are able to lead the npcs by commanding them, as well as gaining "followers". Your account would get a number of slots for followers. You designate one follower as your "heir". When your main character dies, all the possessions pass over to the heir.. and you can swap between your followers at any time (but your main is always the "leader".

From the pure design perspective this idea is silly. What's the actual difference from just respawning, beside the name change? So that your enemies can brag to have permakilled Sir Diesalot XIII?

The rest it was discussed here.

While the NPC/bot system is reserved to the level of the guilds and not for the single character. This for two basic reasons:
- If each player could set one or more NPC bots, the server would just die instantly under the load.
- If each player had his own castle and domain, then there wouldn't be just enough space in the world.

My idea is closer to what Eve-Online anticipated, but within a carefully handcrafted, beautiful and immersive world.

The branching skilltree (where you use generic skills to then unblock and specialize into stiles or new areas) is instead something interesting. But again I don't see much sense in a dependence of skills between the character and the NPCs, since it's again all at the level of the guild.

Instead, for what concerns the NPCs, I'd just reply RTS mechanics. Where you upgrade your troops to be able to perform new tasks. But without that tie between character progression (which happens in the PvE portion) and NPC's abilities.

Being able to control a group of different "alts" (like building your own party) is an idea I've seen many times but not something I want for this particular idea since I still want the focus on one character only.

Instead being able to control a large army with just one player is a kind of game that fits better other, non-massive genres.

Reply

You are not authorized to post comments.