Utterly Mad

Quote from: FoobyDude on March 05, 2015, 08:17:09 pm

I've been hearing a lot of talk about no good WW1 games...

Valiant Hearts: The Great War
-snip-

Enough flippin said.

Read closer, we're talking RTS and FPS

But I mean as a WWI game in general. This thread was started as WWI games, Not just FPS and RTS.

But if I were to give an idea for a WWI FPS, I like the MMOFPS approach. PlanetSide 1 and 2 were able to do it, and one of them is like 10 years old.

Generals in back giving orders to guys upfront, guys up front following or disobeying those orders. (Following orders give points, which you can use to sustain healthiness in the trenches. If you disobey however, you may get sick, hungry, or exhausted because of a lack of funds. And yes, WWI didn't work like that, but it gives people incentive to follow orders!)

I think you guys are thinking a bit big there since I do believe this will be the first game any of us have worked on.
Also, code rage: fuck you code academy I'm doing the substring exactly like you are telling me to and you still refuse to let me pass this damn thing!

Oh, and I just remembered we need a 3d animator to animate the models.

I think we're going to give it a shot.

Nothing ventured, nothing gained. Probably a hybrid game, like Battlezone 2 or NS2.

Yeah, stuck on substrings right now, think I'll pick back up tomorrow.
Anyway, for now I think we all need to get ready, learning to code and work what all we'll need to.

I'll get a test map with a few guns working tomorrow ( the mapmaker comes with a couple guns and zombie ai to test maps with)

I actually have played a game where it shifts between RTS and FPS depending on rank. Think it's set in a fictional semi-futuristic cold war. Really, really cool concept, but in practice, the FPS guys do not ever do what the RTS guys tell them to. We'd have to find a way to counteract that. Autoshot for desertion seems plausible, but might be a little frustrating. Maybe the RTS guys control a grand overview, where they can say unit 1, 2, and 3 go fight at vimy, which then leads to them having a realtime FPS battle there, while unit 5 and 6 go fight over a nameless hill with offmap artillery support. They'd have to fight, because otherwise they'd have nothing to do.

It would make sense to have the strategic point in real time too, though maybe not to be able to see the outcome of battles until after a timer has run out (which would also make sense in this setting). Thus, you could be pounding a now friendly trench with arty in which all the enemies are already dead if you do it without being requested to by the guys "on the ground", or you could accidentally send some reinforcements into a battle long lost. My issue with RTS games is that most of them require more macro usage than actual thought and tactics, this sort of thing would require a commander to actually be a commander. Could really get into it with logistical choices (stick these new players in squad 1 or squad 5? who has better "soldiers" and can still achieve the objective without backup? More ammo for the frontlines, or save some for the machineguns in reserve incase that line actually broke two minutes ago and the survivors haven't regrouped for redeployment yet?) too.

Just an idea.