These things I'm suggesting is expected to be like 10x greater in size in triggers and anything else, bigger than the mods and maps you can currently get in SC2!
I'm thinking actual huge game sizes, not minigames and the likes that I see way too common.
Mappers needs to think bigger, badder, and have a larger motivation to create something huge.
The Map Arcade will be quite important for this, because you want your map to stand out from the bunch, but you also need to solidify your 'ratings' as a mapper first before attempting to sell them, and even then, you don't really want to make every single map afterwards a 'premium' paid map.
You can use these 'boundary' cut outs to separate game areas, and its used common when making map selection...
What if you can use that in a huge game instead? Offering optimized rendering size (so your big ass game doesn't lag everyone who has less than decent pc) and special triggers to spawn the units into the map when needed.
This is smart development, and isn't easy, it is hardcore and very nasty for the average mapper. It involves you planning ahead to every single region and spawns for structures, players, and such, and developing a system that handles the spawning so the game doesn't end up using too many resources, and when boundary changes, the rendering will be cut so resources still aren't used when you don't even see them!
I'm saying, quit being a mapper, and actually develop games! Don't look at a SC2 mapper as your 'greatest achievement' look further and try to actually be a real game developer.
That is what Blizzard wants out of it's community, actual developments of actual games thanks to maps starting them off to a good start.
My friend is developing a isometric mmo using C#, and he originally got into mapping games before getting into programming. It's quite important to never stop at one skills just because you are a mapper and not a real developer, because that same skill is quite handy in other roles too.
I'm not a great programmer, I can't draw very well, or solve or come up with awesome logics, but I do like to be creative in what I do and mix and match my ideas to make new ones. In SC2's case I can't terrain well because of the level of details needed and the skills to use the editor properly (or the PC that don't lag and crash and make you hate it), but I did use the SC1 trigger editor and such to start off years back. The complexity seems a bit out of reach for me but that doesn't mean I can't do anything. I seem to be a awesome analyst for games and can easily figure out the pros and cons, the balance and the imba, and the likes... Basically I'm better at playing and testing games than actually making em.
Well now its time to bring out your ideas. Im working on hero survival (And I suppose Im just doing stuff randomly without any trace of planning).
Well I already have some spells and now Im working with the gameplay. I have been thinking of somekind of randomization for waves (like overlord drops, nydys worms or so...).
There is good chance my project will end up in failure since I havent planned it too far ahead, but whatever! :(
Try to set up patterns for waves or at least make it slow but steady.
Like not too hard, but not easy enough, and make it somewhat challenging, but not annoying.
This means your players will kill them often, and you will want to throw a few 'shocks' from time to time.
Think Left 4 Dead Ai director. A system which knows how the players are doing, and throws hidden aces out of it's sleeves.
This is as dynamic as it can get and it can be tricky to make a system like that...
Maybe have a few triggers set up to certain feats by the players?
IF [PLAYERS] KILLS [100] UNITS WITHIN [30] SECONDS
{ SUMMON [MINIBOSS 1] }
OR
{ ADD [20] UNITS TO NEXT WAVE }
So then every wave always have a consistent number of units, but if the players takes too long to kill them, or kills them too easily the system adapts and changes the waves.
So say within the first 5 waves, the players aren't doing so well. You can make the system lower the amount of units for the set amount of waves.
Just need to know how to set conditions and needs TONS of playtesting.
Example:
- Consider player count in the game, and the time players takes to complete the wave.
- Come up with a formula to measure the 'difficulty' the players are having...
Say for instance if wave comes every 60 seconds (one minute), the value will be 100% if they can't kill those units in 60 seconds, and 0% if they can kill them under a second (but they can't). This is to gauge how fast they kill the waves and you determine by percentage of up to 100% of how hard they are handling it.
Each player counts can be a significant number of percentage to difficulty... For instance if the game by default requires 4 players:
4 Players = 100% difficulty
8 Players = 0% difficulty
1 Players = 175% difficulty
7 Players = 25% difficulty
Then mix and match the player count and the time it takes to complete each wave.
If its 4 players at 100 value, and they take 30 seconds to beat it, which is 50% value.
Total is 150%.
If its 8 players which is 0% and they take 45 seconds to beat it, which is 25% value.
Total is 25%.
Now lets set a 'base standard difficulty for these measurements now:
Lets say 100% to 200% is the standard difficulty range, so if it falls below 100% it means the game seems pretty easy for the players.
If it goes over 200% it means the players are having a tough time beating it.
So if they can barely beat the wave past 60 seconds, and has 4 players, then it will be a sum of 200%.
How do you add events into the difficulty now?
Assign events that occur at specific ranges of the % of difficulty, and measure it so it reponds to the correct level of difficulty the player is experiencing.
Say the players are suffering after their base took a major hit, they barely took out the wave past the usual 60 seconds. There are 3 players.
100% (60 seconds) + 150% (3 players) = 250% difficulty.
Say at 225% difficulty, the wait time between wave is slightly slower, and 'a sandstorm caused some scrap debris to be found' and spawns resources on the map.
The poll doesn't include survival types, and I really don't like any of those other sorts on the poll because it feels too repetitive to the actual gameplay you've already seen in SC2.
What I want is something that doesn't feel like SC2 meaning the mapper actually put a ton of effort into making it NOT like SC2.
Hopefully by HOTS expansion, the new editors will be sweet and help everyone create much much better content (and hopefully I got the money to get a better computer so I can actually learn to use the editor and not get discouraged by the friggen lag).
As for the survival idea, I DO NOT LIKE ANY WAVE BASED REPETITION. *points to last stand alpha*
Yeah it's fun and all but for how long?
The key point of survival games is to make it fun even after a long period of time, and it will take quite a bit of innovation to make it work.
I liked the Stranded on Krydon, and while it does use the wave system, there is a dynamic feel of the actual game shifting and adjusting their waves according to what you interact to the world. Destroying vital zerg buildings in that game will disallow them to spawn in those areas, and over time they will 'evolve' and change their unit types like in last stand alpha, which not only gets hectic but very annoying.
I would like more dynamic into survival games I guess...
Like if last stand alpha give up the 'randomized wave' idea back to a normal wave BUT with a huge twist;
Each wave will consists of:
- Main group id 1 swarm unit (always outnumbers the rest and is designed to outnumber, and outmass, not overpowering by brute strength).
- Secondary group id 2 to 4 utility units (always have a certain air of strategy or use to them, like a few banelings, or a few hydras, or a few roaches).
- Tertiary group id 5 boss unit (only spawns at certain point or if the player actually 'did' something, to reflect a 'reactive' boss to the player's action (players amass siege tanks and kills everything from afar, so the boss is a air unit)).
These things I'm suggesting is expected to be like 10x greater in size in triggers and anything else, bigger than the mods and maps you can currently get in SC2!
I'm thinking actual huge game sizes, not minigames and the likes that I see way too common.
Mappers needs to think bigger, badder, and have a larger motivation to create something huge.
The Map Arcade will be quite important for this, because you want your map to stand out from the bunch, but you also need to solidify your 'ratings' as a mapper first before attempting to sell them, and even then, you don't really want to make every single map afterwards a 'premium' paid map.
You can use these 'boundary' cut outs to separate game areas, and its used common when making map selection...
What if you can use that in a huge game instead? Offering optimized rendering size (so your big ass game doesn't lag everyone who has less than decent pc) and special triggers to spawn the units into the map when needed.
This is smart development, and isn't easy, it is hardcore and very nasty for the average mapper. It involves you planning ahead to every single region and spawns for structures, players, and such, and developing a system that handles the spawning so the game doesn't end up using too many resources, and when boundary changes, the rendering will be cut so resources still aren't used when you don't even see them!
I'm saying, quit being a mapper, and actually develop games! Don't look at a SC2 mapper as your 'greatest achievement' look further and try to actually be a real game developer.
That is what Blizzard wants out of it's community, actual developments of actual games thanks to maps starting them off to a good start.
My friend is developing a isometric mmo using C#, and he originally got into mapping games before getting into programming. It's quite important to never stop at one skills just because you are a mapper and not a real developer, because that same skill is quite handy in other roles too.
I'm not a great programmer, I can't draw very well, or solve or come up with awesome logics, but I do like to be creative in what I do and mix and match my ideas to make new ones. In SC2's case I can't terrain well because of the level of details needed and the skills to use the editor properly (or the PC that don't lag and crash and make you hate it), but I did use the SC1 trigger editor and such to start off years back. The complexity seems a bit out of reach for me but that doesn't mean I can't do anything. I seem to be a awesome analyst for games and can easily figure out the pros and cons, the balance and the imba, and the likes... Basically I'm better at playing and testing games than actually making em.
Try to set up patterns for waves or at least make it slow but steady.
Like not too hard, but not easy enough, and make it somewhat challenging, but not annoying.
This means your players will kill them often, and you will want to throw a few 'shocks' from time to time.
Think Left 4 Dead Ai director. A system which knows how the players are doing, and throws hidden aces out of it's sleeves.
This is as dynamic as it can get and it can be tricky to make a system like that...
Maybe have a few triggers set up to certain feats by the players?
IF [PLAYERS] KILLS [100] UNITS WITHIN [30] SECONDS
{ SUMMON [MINIBOSS 1] }
OR
{ ADD [20] UNITS TO NEXT WAVE }
So then every wave always have a consistent number of units, but if the players takes too long to kill them, or kills them too easily the system adapts and changes the waves.
So say within the first 5 waves, the players aren't doing so well. You can make the system lower the amount of units for the set amount of waves.
Just need to know how to set conditions and needs TONS of playtesting.
Example:
- Consider player count in the game, and the time players takes to complete the wave.
- Come up with a formula to measure the 'difficulty' the players are having...
Say for instance if wave comes every 60 seconds (one minute), the value will be 100% if they can't kill those units in 60 seconds, and 0% if they can kill them under a second (but they can't). This is to gauge how fast they kill the waves and you determine by percentage of up to 100% of how hard they are handling it.
Each player counts can be a significant number of percentage to difficulty... For instance if the game by default requires 4 players:
4 Players = 100% difficulty
8 Players = 0% difficulty
1 Players = 175% difficulty
7 Players = 25% difficulty
Then mix and match the player count and the time it takes to complete each wave.
If its 4 players at 100 value, and they take 30 seconds to beat it, which is 50% value.
Total is 150%.
If its 8 players which is 0% and they take 45 seconds to beat it, which is 25% value.
Total is 25%.
Now lets set a 'base standard difficulty for these measurements now:
Lets say 100% to 200% is the standard difficulty range, so if it falls below 100% it means the game seems pretty easy for the players.
If it goes over 200% it means the players are having a tough time beating it.
So if they can barely beat the wave past 60 seconds, and has 4 players, then it will be a sum of 200%.
How do you add events into the difficulty now?
Assign events that occur at specific ranges of the % of difficulty, and measure it so it reponds to the correct level of difficulty the player is experiencing.
Say the players are suffering after their base took a major hit, they barely took out the wave past the usual 60 seconds. There are 3 players. 100% (60 seconds) + 150% (3 players) = 250% difficulty.
Say at 225% difficulty, the wait time between wave is slightly slower, and 'a sandstorm caused some scrap debris to be found' and spawns resources on the map.
The poll doesn't include survival types, and I really don't like any of those other sorts on the poll because it feels too repetitive to the actual gameplay you've already seen in SC2.
What I want is something that doesn't feel like SC2 meaning the mapper actually put a ton of effort into making it NOT like SC2.
Hopefully by HOTS expansion, the new editors will be sweet and help everyone create much much better content (and hopefully I got the money to get a better computer so I can actually learn to use the editor and not get discouraged by the friggen lag).
As for the survival idea, I DO NOT LIKE ANY WAVE BASED REPETITION. *points to last stand alpha* Yeah it's fun and all but for how long?
The key point of survival games is to make it fun even after a long period of time, and it will take quite a bit of innovation to make it work.
I liked the Stranded on Krydon, and while it does use the wave system, there is a dynamic feel of the actual game shifting and adjusting their waves according to what you interact to the world. Destroying vital zerg buildings in that game will disallow them to spawn in those areas, and over time they will 'evolve' and change their unit types like in last stand alpha, which not only gets hectic but very annoying.
I would like more dynamic into survival games I guess...
Like if last stand alpha give up the 'randomized wave' idea back to a normal wave BUT with a huge twist;
Each wave will consists of:
- Main group id 1 swarm unit (always outnumbers the rest and is designed to outnumber, and outmass, not overpowering by brute strength).
- Secondary group id 2 to 4 utility units (always have a certain air of strategy or use to them, like a few banelings, or a few hydras, or a few roaches).
- Tertiary group id 5 boss unit (only spawns at certain point or if the player actually 'did' something, to reflect a 'reactive' boss to the player's action (players amass siege tanks and kills everything from afar, so the boss is a air unit)).