Jump to content


Photo

Online Survival Game


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#1 Mailas

Mailas

    Send in the Mail

  • GMC Member
  • 5900 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 02 January 2009 - 10:38 PM

You start on a boat, you get on this island, and you are stuck there with everyone else.

To survive, you need to gather materials.
You get very basic tools to start out with:
-Axe to cut down trees and make logs
-A net to catch fish
-Minor Clothing
-Bucket to scoop out water etc...

You're first tasks would be to make a shelter (out of logs) to keep warm. The longer you stay outside the more you're temperature goes down. The type of shelter Im thinking of is just some kind of tent or something and you go under it.
Other people can go under the tents too but the owner are able to kick them out if they wish.
Once you've got a shelter, then you need more logs to start a fire. With that fire you can roast fish.

With shelter, food, there would also be the need of water. You could scoop up water from the ocean, but you would also need to purify it somehow.

The fun part of this idea I would think would be playing with other people.
Lets say you start a fire, other people could dump water on your fire if they wanted to, or if you're making crops on a farm, they could steal them or something, and you'd have to start all over.

Things to look out for:
- Temperature (are you cold? Get something to warm you up)
- Hunger (food/water)
- You're shelters status (is it standing straight, or is it going to come down?)
- Supplies (have people taken you're supplies?)
-Security (for thieves)

Thats what I've got so far. Need some more ideas.

Regards to DBB for the idea.

Edited by Mailas, 03 January 2009 - 03:37 AM.

  • 0

omQasih.jpg


#2 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 02 January 2009 - 10:44 PM

This sounds like a fascinating single-player game, but a mediocre online game. Being surrounded by other people undercuts the idea of survival- all of your efforts could be interrupted at any time, and if anyone has even a slightly-established settlement it's far easier to just leech off them. Basically, it takes away a lot of the attraction and interest of the setting.

On the other hand, the idea would be enhanced if it was a restricted-numbers online game (as opposed to an MMORPG).

Edited by Frostblade, 02 January 2009 - 10:54 PM.

  • 0

#3 Mailas

Mailas

    Send in the Mail

  • GMC Member
  • 5900 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 02 January 2009 - 11:14 PM

Im not sure how you're anticipating the "online" aspect of it.
Could you possibly explain how the game should be online?

Im gonna take a guess that you meant a game where everyone is equal, no skill requirements etc.?
  • 0

omQasih.jpg


#4 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 02 January 2009 - 11:30 PM

Im not sure how you're anticipating the "online" aspect of it.
Could you possibly explain how the game should be online?

Im gonna take a guess that you meant a game where everyone is equal, no skill requirements etc.?

I understood that by 'online game' you meant a continuous-play game, like an MMORPG- there is a persistent world in which people build and survive. Was that wrong?
  • 0

#5 Mailas

Mailas

    Send in the Mail

  • GMC Member
  • 5900 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 03 January 2009 - 12:39 AM

Oh all right I think I understand.
So what else could there be in this game?
  • 0

omQasih.jpg


#6 disturbed317

disturbed317

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 557 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:51 AM

If this is a continuous-play online game, like an MMORPG, than I'd say "bad idea." But, say, you limited the game to a few people, maybe 2-4 players... that would be a different story. When I first read DBB's(?) post about this, I was thinking more of an Wanderlust: Rebirth type game. Where there are several "survival situations" you can play through, and you recieve points/trophies/whatever.

(On a side note, shouldn't you give some recognition to DBB (or whatever) for coming up with the idea?)
  • 0

Currently Working On
[Project: "Forever Dreams"]
Currently: Party and Battle Demo
Next: Demo v. 1.0


#7 Mailas

Mailas

    Send in the Mail

  • GMC Member
  • 5900 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:37 AM

Yes definitely edited my post.
Also why is the fact that theres more than 4 players in this game a bad idea?
  • 0

omQasih.jpg


#8 DBB

DBB

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 248 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:51 AM

Hey thanks for the regards. ^_^ Whether what the intentional idea is, I'd just love to see it.
  • 0

#9 Bear1991

Bear1991

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 184 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 07:52 AM

If there are going to be more than players, I think they should be put on different islands with a max of 4 people per island (It just seems to be a SUPER common thing going on where all cruise ships crash and only 4 survive every time ^_^ ). Having more than 4 people on the island just seems too crowded to me. Also, about the people being able to negatively influence others´work should be limited some how. If someone destroyed my crops and put out my fire, I´d be chasing them with a wooden spear.

Edited by Bear1991, 03 January 2009 - 07:55 AM.

  • 0

#10 picc84

picc84

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 438 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 08:03 AM

I could understand this if you play'd it off like a gameshow, Yes have it online, but have private games whereas only 4-8 people can go on one island at one time. Also make it so they HAVE To work togeather to survive. Or make it a competition. Thats all up to you, I like the co-op idea, but thats just myself.
  • 0

#11 traiss7

traiss7

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 72 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:43 AM

i think you should have a lobby type setup on the main screen and enter the rooms with different long missions for around 4 people like getting to the top of the mountain for the radio to work then waiting for a plane to come and rescue them etc. each player would have to work together to get the tasks done. each mission would have different paths the party can take to finish the mission and at the end the party is given a rating of how fast they completed the mission. that way u can just keep adding to the game by adding new missions.
  • 0

#12 DBB

DBB

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 248 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 01:36 PM

Well, about the 4 per island thing. I was pitching in his other topic that instead of only jungle-like environment, it'll have all the other biomes as well. Including tundra, jungle, desert, etc.
  • 0

#13 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 02:47 PM

Suggestions for things to watch out for:
-Quality and durability of equipment. If your axe breaks, you're suddenly unable to make fire, and you die a cold and hungry death.
-Wild animals. These would probably be more of a passive threat- you quite like the look of that cave, but it's currently housing a family of bears.
-Diet. Eating only coconuts isn't going to build up your strength- this could be represented by something as simple as a buff from eating meat.
-Purity of Food and Water. Cooking fish makes it safer to eat; boiling water does the equivalent.

The problem with this idea at the moment is long-term goals: after you've established a steady source of food and water, the threat of imminent death is suddenly no longer present. How are you going to solve this? Bringing in constant challenges is contrived and artificial, while challenge is going to naturally leak away throughout the game (the exact opposite of what you want).
  • 0

#14 DBB

DBB

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 248 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:03 PM

Suggestions for things to watch out for:
-Quality and durability of equipment. If your axe breaks, you're suddenly unable to make fire, and you die a cold and hungry death.
-Wild animals. These would probably be more of a passive threat- you quite like the look of that cave, but it's currently housing a family of bears.
-Diet. Eating only coconuts isn't going to build up your strength- this could be represented by something as simple as a buff from eating meat.
-Purity of Food and Water. Cooking fish makes it safer to eat; boiling water does the equivalent.

The problem with this idea at the moment is long-term goals: after you've established a steady source of food and water, the threat of imminent death is suddenly no longer present. How are you going to solve this? Bringing in constant challenges is contrived and artificial, while challenge is going to naturally leak away throughout the game (the exact opposite of what you want).


Well, if your axe breaks, you wouldn't necessarily die a hungry death due to large vegetation (unless in tundras or deserts) but you will a cold one. XD

Maybe he could buff up the animal AI to attack or come in and steal things. Bears have been known to steal food and even destroy tents. Mountain lions or cougars could be looking for a nice snack. Of course, you could try and fend them off by weilding a knife; or even better, a knife tied securely to a long stick for a longer distance. Maybe even carve a spear.

This is why I think in terms of food and survival knowledge, it should be more expansive. Just knowing what kind of berries you can pick can mean life or death. Around 70% of black and blue berries are safe to eat and about 10%(?) of white and yellow berries are safe to eat, while red berries stand at 50%. Eating food raw will cause ou to suffer illness. Say eating a common ground squirrel raw, some have been known to spread the plague.

Also, to get teamwork involved, you could do classes. However, it wouldn't be the smartest. Here's the idea though... One survivalist is a medic, he has some medical things to help cure illnesses or poisons but not always plentiful with these items. Then, there could be a "lumberjack" like character where he so obviously, gathers the firewood. Then there's the fisherman and hunter, which is self-explanitory. The reason I say these are bad ideas is because one may become dependant on the other. If the lumberjack dies, no firewoord, no firewood equals no fire, no fire equals death. You could possibly find a way to fix this but I'm clueless in that authority.
  • 0

#15 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:12 PM

Instead of using a class system, why not use a skill system? Like so:

Skills are split into Expert and Standard skills. They are gained in a series of ranks: the highest rank in a skill is five.
Expert skills can only be gained by being taught by someone else who possesses it. An example of an Expert skill would be First Aid. You can gain skill ranks in Expert skills through practice, but it is a very slow process.
Standard skills can be trained by anybody, simply by performing the necessary task. An example of a Standard skill would be Woodcutting.

Some Standard skills have an associated Expert skill. If a player is at rank five of the Standard skill, and they continue to use it, they have a low chance of gaining the first rank of the Expert skill. This would only work with closely-related disciplines; Woodcutting would become Woodcrafting (weapons), while Firemaking would become Survival (food preparation).
  • 0

#16 DBB

DBB

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 248 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:18 PM

Yeah, I figure skill systems are the best thing for this idea. The thing though, about the expert skill, how is it selected? As in, who has it to start or is it chosen or what? Other than that, it'd be a nice prestige-like system to have that.
  • 0

#17 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:24 PM

Yeah, I figure skill systems are the best thing for this idea. The thing though, about the expert skill, how is it selected? As in, who has it to start or is it chosen or what? Other than that, it'd be a nice prestige-like system to have that.

I envisaged the Expert skills as being carefully-held resources. Each player starts the game knowing a single Expert skill from their previous life (possible choices: First Aid, Food Preparation, Woodcrafting, Foraging, Construction...), and the camp also has a single book with them that is capable of teaching an Expert skill. Both are highly volatile resources; the players have to make sure that each skill-user has an apprentice trained in case they die, and the book has to be kept safe at all times, as it has very low Durability. If it gets left outdoors too long (particularly in bad weather), or if it's being held by someone doing another task (like Firemaking), it'll slowly creep towards destruction.
  • 0

#18 FireWire Games

FireWire Games

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 1548 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 03:46 PM

I think you should focus more on co-op for a game like this. Other players being able to screw around with your (hard) work is a major turn-off, but being able to give and receive help is great. If you do this, do NOT limit the number of players on the island like people have said. Competition with cooperation will make the game fantastic. By competition I mean fighting for limited resources, such as food, water, and shelter. Players would naturally form alliances to survive in the game. And it would give you the option to make things accessible to teams only. Example: For a platform game, there's a high ledge that you can't jump to alone. So your partner gets on all fours for you to stand on him and jump to the ledge. Maybe over that ledge is a cache of resources or something like that. Elements such as the previous one would add major flare to your game ^_^

Edited by FireWire Games, 04 January 2009 - 01:30 AM.

  • 0

#19 peterrab

peterrab

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1216 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 05:10 PM

Like the idea, but if it will be multiplayer, only have a couple of people per game. A single player option would be nice if it will be multiplayer.
  • 0

#20 masterofhisowndomain

masterofhisowndomain

    The Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 3650 posts
  • Version:GM8.1

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:20 PM

Also in the online topic of your creation (why so many posts Mailas..? :medieval:):

[...] Perhaps an idea could be that two teams of online players land on an island each and compete to escape before the other? This could be a minigame or the main content, depending on how developed you want to make it. Players routinely log in and out to help build and live on the island, so it's not a mad dash to the finish. There should be a time limit of maybe 72 hours with which to escape or build up a good settlement (w/ a score for buildings, condition of survivors, extras etc.) and win. [...]

  • 0

List Of Mods And Add-Ons

(Things you must try, for the games you already have)

 

Insightful links:
Higher Order Fun -- Game Design, Maths.
The Missing Concept -- Career/Hobby?
Neither Career Nor Hobby -- Career/Hobby?
Wario Land 4 Project -- Platformer design.


#21 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:29 PM

I can't see competitive gameplay working out, really. The keynote of the game is co-operation, and the only opponent is the environment- if you bring in competition between factions, you're attacking the foundations of the gameplay, which is very likely to lead to an unpleasant mash-up of game styles.

It also seems like a pretty contrived situation anyway- if two groups are abandoned on an island with little scope for survival, the natural instinct of the players would be co-operation instead of conflict. Forcing them to take a particular route is compromising the realism of the game, and once again eroding the core of the idea.
  • 0

#22 masterofhisowndomain

masterofhisowndomain

    The Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 3650 posts
  • Version:GM8.1

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:38 PM

I assume you're referring to my idea FB?

I think competitive gameplay can work and even compliment cooperation, they needn't cancel eachother out. Cooperation only really works if it's to some sort of goal; in an MMORPG with no particular focus, cooperation swiftly becomes redundant. If however, as in the case of my idea, two teams are forced to work together to achieve something then the competitive necessity breeds cooperation. I can't see this cooperation element working in any other way to be quite honest.
  • 0

List Of Mods And Add-Ons

(Things you must try, for the games you already have)

 

Insightful links:
Higher Order Fun -- Game Design, Maths.
The Missing Concept -- Career/Hobby?
Neither Career Nor Hobby -- Career/Hobby?
Wario Land 4 Project -- Platformer design.


#23 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 10:53 PM

I assume you're referring to my idea FB?

I think competitive gameplay can work and even compliment cooperation, they needn't cancel eachother out. Cooperation only really works if it's to some sort of goal; in an MMORPG with no particular focus, cooperation swiftly becomes redundant. If however, as in the case of my idea, two teams are forced to work together to achieve something then the competitive necessity breeds cooperation. I can't see this cooperation element working in any other way to be quite honest.

I think our different ideas come from our different viewpoints; I'm seeing this game as something analogous to Wanderlust, while you're speaking about it as an MMO. If the latter is the case, then pure co-operation would be kind of redundant, and competition might work out.

The problem is that I'm pretty sure Malias hasn't specified which type of multiplayer the game is, or at least addressed the various requests to tone down the MMO aspect.

Edited by Frostblade, 03 January 2009 - 10:54 PM.

  • 0

#24 Ethelon

Ethelon

    GM Artist

  • New Member
  • 1094 posts

Posted 03 January 2009 - 11:19 PM

I'm also thinking a 2-4 player co-op game like wanderlust might be better for this idea, or maybe 5 people (hey an extra person to kill if your starving rite? Cannibalism!!!).

You could start with basic skills, and the more situations you've been in and survived through, the better you are at them, and the more survival skills you can get. And as for temperature, you can warm up by sitting near a fire, or by sitting right next to other people to share body heat.
  • 0

Wanderlust: Rebirth Beta Tester


#25 Mailas

Mailas

    Send in the Mail

  • GMC Member
  • 5900 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 04 January 2009 - 07:58 AM

or by sitting right next to other people to share body heat.


First thought in my mind was "ew" haha. But nice idea.
Im still curious as to how fun a 2-4 player game would be......that isnt a lot of people and Im not sure it would work in a game like this.
  • 0

omQasih.jpg


#26 Frostblade

Frostblade

    GMC Member

  • GMC Elder
  • 3329 posts

Posted 04 January 2009 - 06:19 PM

Im still curious as to how fun a 2-4 player game would be......that isnt a lot of people and Im not sure it would work in a game like this.

It's less about the number of people and more about the nature of the world.

If you go with the few-players approach, the game would likely take the path of Wanderlust- you create instances of the game, which you play with only your chosen companions throughout. This is closer to the 'multiplayer modes' in a traditional game, and I think it'd be much more appropriate to this concept.
If you go with the many-players approach, you would have to create a persistent world (like an MMO) out of necessity. For me, this seems to fit badly with the concept- what's the point of survival if the players set up a fully-functioning colony weeks ago? Why attack deadly bears when you can just beg food off more advanced players?
  • 0

#27 masterofhisowndomain

masterofhisowndomain

    The Designer

  • GMC Member
  • 3650 posts
  • Version:GM8.1

Posted 05 January 2009 - 06:07 PM

If you go with the many-players approach, you would have to create a persistent world (like an MMO) out of necessity. For me, this seems to fit badly with the concept- what's the point of survival if the players set up a fully-functioning colony weeks ago? Why attack deadly bears when you can just beg food off more advanced players?

I agree, having few(er) players in this kind of game doesn't really affect it so long as there are enough possibilities. The quoted post from Frostblade is exactly what I wasn't after (my suggestion for an island vs. island game was not for a persistent world, but more for a game that started and finished when the players do (more like a typical multiplayer game)) and what you shouldn't be after.
  • 0

List Of Mods And Add-Ons

(Things you must try, for the games you already have)

 

Insightful links:
Higher Order Fun -- Game Design, Maths.
The Missing Concept -- Career/Hobby?
Neither Career Nor Hobby -- Career/Hobby?
Wario Land 4 Project -- Platformer design.


#28 coollog

coollog

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 1154 posts

Posted 05 January 2009 - 11:29 PM

Will the players "die" if they are too thirsty or hungry? Should there be laws and evolution of society so there is more control?
  • 0
- Creator of Scandux


Latest post: Quick 'n Easy Pendulum Engine
Latest WIP: Bobblehead Pendulum
Check out my other content as well ;)