Ye Olde Blah

Shining game ideas: multiplayer

Anyone have any thoughts on the following?
Shining battle in style.

2 player internet game, you each get a team of 5 (randomly picked from say 30 chars) and you play maps vs monsters together.  Each map gets progressively harder, and sometimes you start on opposite sides with monsters in middle, etc.  
You can't replay maps to level up so you need to work together with your teammate to make sure you have a good spread of leveled up characters and items that are dropped, shared in order to win.
(this could be done with 4 players, 3 characters each even, and you could choose your chars yourself.. maybe that's another option)

2 player internet game, you each get a team of 10 characters, with standard stats but slightly variable, like an extra 20 ability points to spread amongst your 10 characters who have an average of "10" str and 6 defense and 25 hp.. .. different maps giving different spawns and maybe different characters.

other variables of these two.

Oh well, nevermind.

I just thought that shining battles would be a real cool experience to share online with/against another player.
I used to play the original series pretty much with my brother, because we'd both be crowding the controls, and though we had our own savegames, whoever was currently in the lead got constant hassling/advice from the other, and I always thought multiplayer co-op could be a great thing.

Shining Online will have some very similar multiplayer options, because a co-operative mode would be an excellent idea. 4-player battles would be good, if you had a smaller Force each.

Some form of challenge mode which required you to clear each stage to progress would be good as well, as would simultaneous battles a la SFIII, where one battle could influence the other.

There are lots of good ideas, of which these are just a few. SF is perfectly suited to online gameplay - it's just a matter of getting there :newtstongue:

Probibly noone had replied because the developers are all working on the basic mechanics. Plus, I doubt that many people know how to use Microsquid's COM system.

Yes. Hilarious.

Would mouse control be acceptable for such a game? It's something that's bugged me about writing an online strategy. I prefer mouse control, but it loses the shining feel, plus towns are a bit weird when you point & click on destinations.

I really, REALLY want to knock together an online demo though. I think it'd be cool.

Perhaps a one week challenge would be cool. 40 hours to write a Shining Style online battle engine. I'd be up for that in a few weeks. Anyone else? ;P

either way it has to be turn based and with arrow controls, no more than 2 chars for a 3-4 playr game and no more than 3 in vs mode.

sorta like WCIII turnbased

I think mouse clicking is an option if you keep it grid based but you'd have to code the AI for that too.. the pointer would be a different square "shadow" of some kind.

Hmm, I could always put an option for mouse or keyboard control.

One idea we had for SO was quest mode. Take 4 - 8 people, each with one character (possibly two) through a small dungeon, defeating enemies and getting unique items.

I'm going away today (again), but when I get back I'd certainly be interested in doing a challenge - either competetive or working together.

Any takers?

I guess i'm up for the challenge since i'm already working on it anyway.
I have the multiplayer infrastructure ready which allows users to chat and take turns at scrolling the map. I kind of stopped working on it because i was momentarily obsessed with the P versus NP problem, but i'm not so much now.
I'm taking the CSE Design Project Lab in september, and one of the options is to make a multiplayer game. But i'm thinking about doing a Texas Hold'em Poker game since it's alot easier and less graphic intensive.

Were I not disappearing from the land of t'Internet in September, I'd offer to test that for you, Job - I love Texas Hold 'em. Oh well.

When Ty gets back we should set up the rules for this competition and maybe some kind of prize... just ideas.

ive always thought it would be neat to have some kind of combo attack system..where if a character who hadnt used his/her turn yet happened to be standing next to an enemy that was being attacked by another character you would get an option to join in or not. The plus being extra damage or something of that nature, the downside being using up that characters turn without moving.

That's a good idea Sean, the mechanics of turn-abuse advantage would surely work out over the space of an entire battle and would give greater strategy for human players.

I think greater item variety could provide a whole lot more depth to a game like this.

Actually having 50 characters built and 3 chosen for you and three other players randomly(or have a mode where you can choose yourself too) could really create a game that is re-playable.
Even if there were only 10 battles in a game due to learning new characters and how to best use them, and how to work with your teammates it would give it something new to discover.

Even human vs human - to create one map, and you could either have schoolyard pickem or random choice and play the game again and again and again, like chess(but shf battle mode), no towns, items etc to be made.  (I feel this one could be even "easy" to make due to no AI, if you could just get the information transfer between the two players to work)

Your idea sounds a lot like my platooning idea, but the people aren't together.
:-P

Well let's do it!

I'm keen for anything where I can work on character balancing and strategy structure with multiple players.

someone use me to help do that part, please ... devlyn is tied up and can't do any cloudslayer at the moment.

I guess I could slowly learn the networking basics myself, but surely some of you have crossed that bridge already?

Imagine the sort of fanbase just TESTING a game like that would gather.

I think collaborating on this project is probably the best idea, but it should really wait for a week, because I know for a fact Ty is very interested and will want to dedicate his time to it. Hopefully the enthusiasm will still be running high by next Wednesday - we can sort out all kinds of things in the meantime :newtshappy:

Maybe I'll help develop a storyline...

Nah, I'm too absorbed in Project Candlelight.

Roger that Newts.

I haven't crossed the network bridge myself yet, although I'd really love to do so in the future.

I'm not sure how long I'll remain 'tied up' but I guess you guys could use something of an explanation. Point is that my dad will be hospitalized fairly soon, and probably for several months. I need to prepare for that, and since rather hefty times are ahead, I don't want to overload myself before all this happens either...

He knows about it himself more or less now, so I guess it's safe to post about it in public now...

I'm sorry to hear about that, Dev - I hope he'll be okay :newtshappy:

It sounds like a collaborative effort on this is going to be necessary. I hereby offer my musical and graphical skills :newtshappy:

OK, I'll see what I can do. As you have seen by my handsome foot example, I can make things in 3D

For a forty hour project, I think we'll use existing graphics, or make them as quick as possible. As nice as your foot is, we'd need a lot more than that to get this finished.

well, assuming it's going to be 3D, I can some models for you, if you want . ( houses, bridges, trees, fences, windmills, you name it :D )
Make a list of want you want, and I'll try to come up with something spiffy :D

cheers

Peter

Far be it from me to stamp my authority in this topic which I clearly know nothing about, but wouldn't it be simpler to make the game 2D? We already have loads of graphics available from various SF games and Shining Online etc., which would save us a shedload of time.

Like I said, it's none of my business, really. Whatever you guys decide is best :newtshappy:

I think it would be exciting to make something in 3D, but i haven't seen a 3D Shining Force Demo yet, so i don't feel that we're at the stage where it's feasible to do anything other than 2D, especially since 3D requires more than just 3D graphics. It would just hamper an already difficult project.

I have to agree, it's surely going to be harder implementing 3D - may be a bit much for 40 hours.

However, I love your work Peter - what about using 2d images OF 3d stuff for some of the graphics needed?

Shall we do a poll on what idea to run with?

I spent yesterday playing with networking a java session, it's not so difficult for basic stuff(I managed a kind of chat).  A server and a client....   The other way of course would be for someone to host a server and all the clients connect to it to find game partners etc.  More complicated, and I get the logic behind how to do it, but it would be more comlicated and some logistics issues involved.

@ Elvenfyre: Now that's a great idea :D

Tell you what: Give me just this weekend and I'll make some mock-ups
from 3D-scenes in 2D.

I'm in the process of making backgrounds for Dev's B.A.B.S. project.

So it's just a matter of "making screenies". No Problemo :D  

Is it ok to mail them to you? Hopefully your email is in the memberlist??!!

------------- two minutes later

Ok... your email isn't in the list  :(
Please PM me then yes?  :)

elvenfyre at xtra.co.nz

:)

Kthx  :D


(W00T I'm level 2  :lol:  :lol: )

I put up a page with two instances of what i have so far, side by side, so that when you do something in one it updates the other. It performs decently but there's some stuttering due to network traffic and/or a busy server which sometimes causes undesirable results, which is a pity.
I'm posting the link here only temporarily. Keep in mind that the stuttering will probably increase with the number of browsers connected, so there's no lower bound on the performance.
I think this really brings up some performance issues. How fast must a server be to overcome them? I think this is why i don't ever see multiplayer RPGs built with flash, the map scrolling causes too many updates and too much server/client traffic.
Anyway here's the link:
[edited out: expired]

That's cool how you got it to work, good stuff :)

I do see the performance issues you're talking about though.
Hmm.
If you're certain it's a problem with flash, and not with an amount/type of data being sent etc - then flash doesn't seem to be the best option, though it does make me wonder how online collaboration software with flash can work so laglessly when several people are drawing on the same page at the same time etc.

Some applications are well suited for flash because they don't generate alot of traffic. With an RPG, each button press causes a trip to the server which broadcasts a message to all clients connected, so scrolling for example really generates alot of traffic. Probably the best performance would come from a client-client connection, though i must say i haven't crossed the network bridge using Java or C++ myself, so i need to investigate that.

It actually worked pretty quickly on mine, but then I do have a (fairly) high-end PC. I didn't notice much unusual stuttering, and there didn't seem any lag at all, but that could easily be because the server's not too busy at this time, or any other reasons.

If you guys say Flash is out, Flash is out. Perhaps we could use a point-and-click system with the demo, so that instead of sending over each button press to maneouvre the character around the map, it sends the start and end positions, and lets the algorithm work out which way the character moved. I dunno if that'd be any quicker though - I'm clearly out of my league here :newtstongue:

ok well I made this up for a 1v1 scenario to try to hype you guys up a little.

By the way that ^^ is obviously CONCEPT art.

:)

That did hype me up a bit. :)
I'm looking at some sample network code in Java right now. I want to make a component out of it that abstracts away all of the messy network stuff, then we could just put an engine on top of it and do whatever we want.

I have a simple server and client written in java communicating on port 80. As it stands the server always replies "hey", no matter what the client says. We will need to create a protocol, so that the server can appropriately reply to requests from the clients. My plan is to have both a server and a client running on each user machine. So we could have the following timeline:

As of Wednesday I'll be officially back to my 12 hours of internet a day, so I'll contribute more ideas then.

I'm not too hot with Java, so I think it would be best if I stuck to my strengths and coded my own idea in Blitz. I realise that working together will achieve a lot, but I also think that regardless of how we work we'll all be able to learn things we can share. Like Job's network timeline, a lot of things can be abstracted so they're transferable.

Perhaps a sub-forum for this "challenge" might be a good idea?

@Elv - Like the concept, and I'll be modifying it myself later in the week to make it more look more like a screenshot.

I think everybody here wants cross the network bridge in their own way, for experience and maybe a resume filler, so Ty if you want to give it a shot with Blitz that's fine. One thing i would recommend is to use modularity, this way other people will be able to use the code, for example a network component, an engine component... etc. I'm developing a network component right now to make client communication really easy to implement.

awesome job Job :)

Roger that Ty.

One thing I do want to stress which I probably don't need to because we're all shining force fans here.. the characters should be picked randomly from a set series of characters.  (rather than attributes randomly created and a name and image randomly plastered to them based on character type)

Having set characters allows players to feel connected with the various units, and lets people talk about them(especially for strategies and reminiscing and fantalk etc).

Of course this is more to do with the whole player vs player thing.

I was thinking about using characters from the various Shining Forces. This way i wouldn't't have to worry about creating graphics which i'm neither good at nor do i have the time for.
I want to have a simple Java chat application running as soon as possible, which i'm confident i can finish pretty soon.

Schoolyard pick'em concept.

Coin toss at the beginning (insert geek prgramming joke here)

Then the player who wins the coin toss chooses a character for his team first, then the other player chooses a character - then it's back to the first guy to choose another, and so on.  
In reality, once you've chosen a player, the other guy can't choose the same person(unit in this case).. this is the entire reason for doing it one by one - and the other thing is in a schoolyard pickem since you can see the spots become empty of pictures, you will know what the other guy has on his team, so why not show you what he has in this case - and you can react to his choices possibly with counter-measures in your own choices.

concept art: (I'm letting you imagine the boxes are filled with pictures which you can click on to see stats, and then click a "pick me" button in the stats to choose them)

(http://www.jaesign.com/desmond/multi1v1-pickem.gif)

More game principles.

We all know(i hope) that weapon damage= strength - defense(roughly, what, is it 5% difference + or - ?)
I'm also thinking weapon miss ratio = minimum 5% chance (5% + (defenders agility-attackers agility))

So what I've done is come up with a standard warrior character (and a few random ideas to go with it) and start seeing what ideas come out of the woodwork regarding unique characters and balancing characters.

I think nearly every character is worth a shot no matter how imbalanced they seem as long as you give them a weakness as well as a strength - and in testing we will figure out what works and what doesn't.

Basic Warrior Idea
STR: 50
DEF: 25
AGI: 40
MOVE: 6
HP: 100
MP: 0

This means (if we imagine it) it takes this guy 4 hits to kill himself(roughly)

On this basis a normal mage might have the following stats

STR: 27
DEF: 15
AGI: 30
MOVE: 5
HP: 80
MP: (extremely high in this case?)
Magic: 5 square coverage(like blaze 2), roughly 15 damage per unit.

Other ideas for characters obviously include archers, centaurs etc, flying units if the map(s) have a few tactical bushes/streams.

Not to forget healers which I think there would be two types of (only one spell per unit is enough in my book, but I guess that's up to the programmer if he wants to go to the effort of making room for more than one) The Aura healer, who can heal 5 square coverage 40HP per unit, and the Heal healer who heals 1 unit at a time to maximum HP.

Also was an idea for a mage who has a poison spell, again 5 square coverage, but only 5 damage per unit - though it damages them for 10 turns, 5hp a turn(these don't stack if you recast on the same guy) healing may or may not cure it.

Then of course there's the option for some characters to have a single useable item.  One might be a fairly ordinary sort of archer except he has a ring which he can use once during the fight that gives him 2 turns in a row immediately after using it(so effectively he has 3 turns cos using an item is normally a turn right) - but the idea is to give him two attacks or moves or whatever.

Hi All,

I've spent the entire weekend fooling around with models and whatnot. :)
I've come up with a decent number of screenies . Mail to Elvenfyre is underway.  8)

Please feel free to comment on them after Elvenfyre has put them up.

Cheers everyone :D
Peter

Well, with a warrior and mage being around, it might be nice to have a 'priest' and a 'rogue' around as well of course :)

The priest would (obviously) cast healing spells, while the rogue would get a damage multiplier when attacking from the rear or alternatively, may be invisible to the opposing player under certain conditions.

Yet another archetype could be the knight, a warrior with less base agility and hitpoints, but with a nice charge bonus of +5-10% damage for every square traversed in the charge.

Of course, monsters would be needed too. Perhaps a sentient ooze that can attack all squares adjacent to him simultaneously with a splash attack?

You're right Devlyn, characters need not be left to be "humanoid" characters in a PvP.. they can be anything I suppose as long as both players have the chance to use them it's worth testing out.

The adjacent square thing is a great idea!

So is the charge thing.. as long as we can specify that somewhere so the player understands it.

I would recommend splitting up the rogue: Invisibility would be a good bonus all on its own I think...
(you can give less weakness then until it balances)

The damage multiplier thing could be changed to perhaps someone who is based on "luck" where they could do half damage(20%), normal damage(40%) or double damage(30%) or triple damage(10%).
-this balances him out so his/her other stats can be pretty normal. . .

That could work too of course, although you could also penalize the character on frontal attacks or side attacks.

Yet another concept is the 'aura' concept, where characters can provide statistical bonuses to other characters just by standing really close to them and "exerting their influence". :)

The "Aura" concept sounds similar to the friendship system in Shining Force 3. It's not that easy to explain, but when two characters work together (say healing each other, attacking the same monster) they gain "friendship points". Once these reach a certain amount, they go up a friendship level. Different characters have different effects, and the higher the friendship level the greater the effect. The highest level also increases the range.

For example, the lead character may have a high friendship with an archer. The archers effect is to increase accuracy, and the leader's is to increase attack. So standing an archer next to the leader is a good move, as both benefit.

It's a cool system, and one I'd like to use.

(I apologise if you already knew all that ;))