Jump to content


Photo

Hunger Games?


  • Please log in to reply
38 replies to this topic

#1 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 18 April 2012 - 12:11 AM

Origional Post (pointless to read, but whatever): Lets just say that we all worked together to create a multiplayer game like the movie Hunger Games. Would any of you actually be interested in making/playing this? Just a thought...

Edited, WAYY better post:

I have an idea... create a game like Hunger Games! I am not sure if it would be easy to create... I for sure wont be able to do it, ha. I have some ideas for it, but I need opinions, or ideas from you!

The type of game would either be 2.5d 3rd person (if you have ever played guerilla bob or something for the iPhone/iPod/iPad... you'll know what I'm talking about), or full first person 3d, like first person shooters.

Somethings you can do in the game would be:
- "sneak" to avoid being seen by other players.
- use items you find to find/kill other players.
- maybe even craft things... maybe.

Features of the game:
- maybe a time limit.
- maybe some creatures.
- hid items in random places.
- have small maps.

I need some more ideas on gameplay, what would happen in-game, and things inside the game. Thanks :)

Edited by theepicgeno, 23 April 2012 - 07:21 PM.

  • 1

#2 lukew23

lukew23

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 276 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 18 April 2012 - 12:47 AM

Yeah, I thought about making a hunger games multiplayer game (before the movie came out), but I don't think it would work. You could do the hunger etc stuff easily ( i think theres a skyrim mod which would work the same way), but you couldn't get people to play for hours straight.
  • 0

#3 Saijee

Saijee

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2430 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 18 April 2012 - 01:40 AM

like the movie Hunger Games


It wouldn't be to hard, just have the camera always way too close and make sure that it's always shaking irradically :medieval:

But seriously, no I don't think that you'll be able to get GMC to work on this project together.
  • 0

#4 Hookhandedman

Hookhandedman

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 236 posts

Posted 18 April 2012 - 06:31 PM

As I read the book I thought it might be interesting to make a game where you play as the Gamemakers (the guys who control the weather and stuff in the arena). Like you'd have to get a certain player to win. Or you get more points depending on how awesome of a show you put on (like by forcing the tributes to fight or making it easy for them to team up).
  • 0

#5 Oelip

Oelip

    Kinda Geek

  • GMC Member
  • 145 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 19 April 2012 - 10:01 PM

Even if you'd manage to get a team to work on it, the game wouldn't be that interesting.

To keep it fair, you'd need to have all players connected at the same time for multiples hours straigh, without leaving.
And the world would have to be VERY open. More then Skyrim - that's alot (why do you think it took 5 years?)

I don't think you could adapt that movie.
  • 0

#6 The Legend

The Legend

    Unashamed

  • GMC Member
  • 1126 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 19 April 2012 - 10:52 PM

like the movie Hunger Games


It wouldn't be to hard, just have the camera always way too close and make sure that it's always shaking irradically :medieval:

But seriously, no I don't think that you'll be able to get GMC to work on this project together.

Have you read the books?!?!? Of course he could! The only problem would be creating it a form that can easily utilize all 3 dimensions because unless GMCs best work on this, it'll have to be 2-D. Also, Multiplayer would need to be... limited. perhaps call multiplayer "Hunger Games simulation" Which goes on for a certain amount of time or until everyone gets slaughtered and make the main part of the game single player. AI would have to be pretty smart though. But despite these challenges if this game comes off right it'll be an internet hit.
  • 0

#7 Saijee

Saijee

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2430 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:08 AM

Have you read the books?!?!?

Nope, but that's irrelevant. Because he was asking about the movie, not the books.

Of course he could! The only problem would be creating it a form that can easily utilize all 3 dimensions because unless GMCs best work on this, it'll have to be 2-D

Of course he could what? The question he was asking is if he could get a bunch of GMCers to collab on a project, to which my answer is: Not Likely.

Also, a lot of people have this crazy idea that I'm an expert on using GM to make 3D games. Which, I don't really think is true. I'm just good at modeling and animating. But I know enough to say that GM is more than capable of delivering a full 3D experience with quality at least as good as the PS2 (But that depends on the skill of the artist).

Now I'm not trying to show off or anything (I didn't even do the graphics for this one) but here is a screen shot for a project that I've been programing for, just to show that Game Maker can have quality that is at least this good:
Posted Image
  • 0

#8 lukew23

lukew23

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 276 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:36 AM

The whole point of the original idea was a MULTIPLAYER game. This simply cannot work because you cannot make people play for extremely long periods of time, which would be necessary if you wanted to make an accurate multiplayer game.

The point about the GMC also stands. This kind of thing has been done before, it didn't work (apparently).

Also, The books are better than the movies. It wasn't another stormbreaker or eragon but it could have been better. Apart from Caesar, he was perfect. I don't think the movie really captured the essence of the books, so a game based on the books would be better.
  • 1

#9 Saijee

Saijee

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 2430 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 20 April 2012 - 04:06 AM

Luke, if you do not mind me asking. Where are you going with this?
  • 0

#10 lukew23

lukew23

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 276 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 20 April 2012 - 04:09 AM

Ignore the tangent about the books etc. I am basically saying that making a multiplayer hunger games game wont work, and that even if it was possible to pull off well, I highly doubt you could organise and control many members of the GMC.

Edited by lukew23, 20 April 2012 - 04:09 AM.

  • 0

#11 chance

chance

    GMC Member

  • Global Moderators
  • 7108 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 20 April 2012 - 11:48 AM

Lets just say that we all worked together to create a multiplayer game like the movie Hunger Games. Would any of you actually be interested in making/playing this? Just a thought...

The Hunger Games theme(s) could certainly be used in a game. Lots of games are set in the future after some apocalyptic event. Lots of games use battles between the player and another character. Lots of games use similar themes -- such as conflict, survival, moral dilemma, self-sacrifice, etc.

But I wouldn't recommend multiplayer. I'd stick with single player. Just write a short narrative story, and make a clear objective -- like survival.

NOTE:
You should change your post to discuss game design. Because right now it sounds like a "community game" idea. That doesn't belong here, and it'll just get your topic closed.
  • 0

#12 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 20 April 2012 - 01:46 PM

NOTE:
You should change your post to discuss game design. Because right now it sounds like a "community game" idea. That doesn't belong here, and it'll just get your topic closed.


Then where does the topic go so the mods could move it?
  • 0

#13 Jobo

Jobo

    Freelancer

  • Local Moderator
  • 2622 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:06 PM

I would most certainly play a game like this.
But not in a low-quality Game Maker state.

As good an idea as this is (even though it would take a lot of planning to pull off properly, both for players and creators), it's too large and difficult for any indie team to pull off.
  • 1

#14 Nocturne

Nocturne

    Nocturne Games

  • Administrators
  • 20923 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:13 PM


NOTE:
You should change your post to discuss game design. Because right now it sounds like a "community game" idea. That doesn't belong here, and it'll just get your topic closed.


Then where does the topic go so the mods could move it?


That depends... If you want to form a team, then this should be closed and you should post a team request in the (surprise!) Team Request Forum. If you want to discuss the IDEA of the game, then re-format your first post to outline the idea and the topic can stay here. If you want to discuss a community game then it would go in the Community Forum, but if that is the case then it will get closed as we do not permit GMC projects. The GMC is too big and has too great a user base to properly have a GMC game/project.

So, you decide... Posted Image
  • 0

#15 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:22 PM

Ok, thanks for the info Nocturne! I am gonna post this in the team request forum... so I guess this topic could be closed, if you want it to be.
  • 0

#16 Nocturne

Nocturne

    Nocturne Games

  • Administrators
  • 20923 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:33 PM

Actually, if you want to keep discussing the idea, you can... thinking about, I can't see any harm as long as you change the focus of the topic to being about the gameplay and how you would design it and not about the team that's going to make it.
  • 0

#17 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 20 April 2012 - 03:45 PM

Alright, ill instead just edit the post and talk about the gameplay, and design ideas.
  • 0

#18 Spyro Conspiracy Theorist

Spyro Conspiracy Theorist

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 54 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 21 April 2012 - 01:38 AM

I could actually see this working. I wouldn't worry too much about the length being too long, because it wouldn't have to go on for hours to give you that experience. There are other open-world games that do this very, very, well. Project Zomboid comes to mind, and if you haven't heard of it I suggest you look it up. It's a zombie survival game, and the rounds are short enough that there isn't even a save function (at least in the last update I played). It's a really compelling game where you spend the majority of the time a) not starving b) not getting seen c) exploring to make sure a & b are met for as long as possible. There are points in the game when you just have to lay low, in darkness, waiting for danger to pass. My average round in this last about... an hour and a half, maybe. But that experience could be refined to a much smaller timeframe, while still keeping the key elements that give it this feeling. So don't worry too much about people saying it's impossible to convey the experience of Hunger Games in a multiplayer round timeframe.

Of course there would still have to be parameters in place for when a player does log off unexpectedly... It shouldn't be too hard to blame that on the "gamemasters," by creating a little environmental hazard that "killed" the dropped player (it would have to be a small enough hazard to not allow for any trolling, though). As each player is killed or dropped, those that died can remain in a spectator mode (maybe they could even bet on the players), and the game could ramp up the frequency of natural hazards to make the difficulty actually increase.

One of the big problems I see off the bat, though, is that dying wouldn't be particularly consequential: quit out of spectator mode and find a new game. Thus, all the players will be a lot more reckless than they should be, which would make it basically impossible to convey the experience you'd want to. A possible way to fix this would be to make you lose all your stuff if you die right off the bat but get some benefit from being the last player standing. You'd probably have to give some more trivial reward to people who survive longer, too. It's not a perfect system, but it could probably be tweaked.

Just some ideas. I think you should definitely try to make it, I'm betting it's totally possible. It will be incredibly difficult to design and program, though. At least the story has a built in excuse for any deus ex machina you'd have to do to make the gameplay fit with the story (Gamemasters: game developers' dream story-element for making a game, it was awfully nice of Collins to put in a specific story element just to give an excuse for more random stuff to happen), which is a benefit most fangames don't get.

Edited by Spyro Conspiracy Theorist, 21 April 2012 - 01:40 AM.

  • 0

#19 xhawkeyex

xhawkeyex

    GMC Member

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

Posted 22 April 2012 - 12:41 PM

The whole point of the original idea was a MULTIPLAYER game. This simply cannot work because you cannot make people play for extremely long periods of time, which would be necessary if you wanted to make an accurate multiplayer game.


In the game, we could all only allow certain areas in a map to accessible during a match. That way, the world is very limited and the players will not all be too far away from each other. If you don't understand what I mean, then take a look at grand theft auto. It is a huge area to run around in, but you are limited to where you can go because you are not allowed to leave the first Island. That is what I mean for this game.
It will make the matches much shorter and players can focus more on the main goal, "kill every other player."


As each player is killed or dropped, those that died can remain in a spectator mode (maybe they could even bet on the players), and the game could ramp up the frequency of natural hazards to make the difficulty actually increase.

In the book, they turned the deceased into vicious dogs. So maybe when a player dies, they control the main points on how the game works, but every now and then, the killed player's could become vicious creatures like the dogs. When the dogs are killed, those players go back into spectator mode until it is time for them to play as another creature. This will keep players occupied if their character is killed.

Edited by xhawkeyex, 22 April 2012 - 12:49 PM.

  • 0

#20 lukew23

lukew23

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 276 posts
  • Version:Unknown

Posted 23 April 2012 - 05:07 AM

Or just make the spectators go into "sponsor" mode. There was recently a minecraft hunger games held by some youtube commentators which I believe highlights the flaws in a multiplayer hunger games experience. They had to commit to being online for the entire time (1hr+) which is probably unrealistic. Making games shorter by emphasising the killing other players aspect simply would deny the whole point of the hunger games - it is about survival and strategy, not an all out bloodbath in the first 10 minutes. I do not think that players would commit to being online for a length of time long enough to accurately portray the hunger games.

The spectator issue is really a non-issue. Once a player is killed, they could go into sponsor/gamesmaster mode (where they can help/hinder the other players - maybe not gamesmaster, as they could just pour lava over everything and kill everyone, as shown in the Minecraft games), as they did in the Minecaft hunger games. Or they could just leave the game. There is no point in forcing them to spectate the rest of the game.

Overall, I think the main issue is creating an experience which is long enough to allow the players to understand the strategy and survival aspect of the games but also making the players commit to being online for long enough to finish the game. (there is no pausing in a multiplayer game and you cannot implement a "rest" feature as in the Elder Scrolls games, as that would require foreknowledge of what each player will do). This could be done on a small scale, with a group of people willing to play in an organised timeframe, but it wouldn't work as a normal multiplayer game.
  • 0

#21 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 23 April 2012 - 07:22 PM

Updated the OP. More to talk about.

Edited by theepicgeno, 23 April 2012 - 07:52 PM.

  • 0

#22 PizWiz

PizWiz

    GMC Member

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

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:24 PM

I don't get why people are saying things like "How are you gonna make people play for hours" and "It would be impossible to make people play that long". It doesn't have to be that long! It can be like Sims! Sims simulates real life but a day doesn't actually take hours. Anyway, this seems like a great idea. It can be randomly generated each time you play or something. Then you have to find resources which can be collected or you can fight people you see. It wouldn't have to be exactly accurate but it would definitely be fun! n_n
  • 0

#23 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:32 PM

It can be like Sims! Sims simulates real life but a day doesn't actually take hours.


I think your confused. But if you mean in-game time, then your right. But if you think about it, you trying to find people, and trying to avoid them killing you. That's what everyone means when they say that it will take hours.

Anyway, this seems like a great idea. It can be randomly generated each time you play or something.

That's a pretty good idea. The random generation would be pretty cool.
  • 0

#24 PizWiz

PizWiz

    GMC Member

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

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:42 PM

I think your confused. But if you mean in-game time, then your right. But if you think about it, you trying to find people, and trying to avoid them killing you. That's what everyone means when they say that it will take hours.


Well the maps don't have to be giant and maybe if they're a certain length from you it points you in that direction except for when they're sneaking then, they're hidden. The only cost of sneaking is that it would make you SUPER slow. How bout that?
  • 0

#25 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:57 PM


I think your confused. But if you mean in-game time, then your right. But if you think about it, you trying to find people, and trying to avoid them killing you. That's what everyone means when they say that it will take hours.


Well the maps don't have to be giant and maybe if they're a certain length from you it points you in that direction except for when they're sneaking then, they're hidden. The only cost of sneaking is that it would make you SUPER slow. How bout that?


That is a good idea, but if your being followed by another player, you could know where they are too. You wouldn't be nervous because you would know where they are.
  • 0

#26 _242538

_242538

    GMC Member

  • New Member
  • 23 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 24 April 2012 - 03:38 AM

I think we already know a concept like this would work because we have the Survival Games in Minecraft which looked pretty awesome.
  • 0

#27 GenoDoucette

GenoDoucette

    BrokenIMG

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

Posted 24 April 2012 - 02:09 PM

I think we already know a concept like this would work because we have the Survival Games in Minecraft which looked pretty awesome.


I kind of agree... but a lot of people who play Minecraft could play for hours. But who would play for hours if its a new game?
  • 0

#28 Sirblueshue

Sirblueshue

    GMC Member

  • GMC Member
  • 5 posts

Posted 03 May 2012 - 08:27 PM

I was recently thinking of working on an online game of Hunger Games. But what I was going to do about the rest problem was that when the player wanted to go do something else for a period of time, or wanted to "pause" the game, they would have to find a place to hide. Such as Katniss hiding in a tree for the night. Players could choose a hiding spot and hide there for as long as they are not online.
And for the trolling players, this will not be a problem to get rid of them. There will be players who have died, and have become sponsors, and can force the people into a confrontation, like in the book. If a person does not move to avoid these pitfalls, they will surely die. Because of this the limit for camping would probably be around 48 hours.
And let me get this perfectly clear, this is NOT a game that would be made in gamemaker. Maybe in to the point that a sort of "basic design" state of a game. Just to get the ideas in order. Not so much that the game would be so in-depth in gamemaker. It just CAN'T be done in gamemaker. This is an idea that needs to be suggested to a larger video game making company.
And the space needed for this game would not need to be larger than skyrim. It is an enclosed area with an end. That is very pointed out in the book.
And to the point of PizWiz, I think that there would be a better quality of sneeking and getting hunted if you changed it to a 3d sound. The same as a river, or a fire. The farther away someone is, the less you hear them. If they are not moving, silent, if they are sneeking, reduce sound by 75%.

And I like solving or thinking of solutions, so if you have some problem to give me, just reply and I will most definately try to come up with a solution.

If you would like to argue, just respond. Thank you for your time :).

And may the odds be EVER in your favor.

Edited by Sirblueshue, 03 May 2012 - 08:44 PM.

  • 0

#29 Takagi

Takagi

    GMC Member

  • Global Moderators
  • 4275 posts
  • Version:GM:Studio

Posted 07 May 2012 - 04:33 AM

And let me get this perfectly clear, this is NOT a game that would be made in gamemaker. Maybe in to the point that a sort of "basic design" state of a game. Just to get the ideas in order. Not so much that the game would be so in-depth in gamemaker. It just CAN'T be done in gamemaker. This is an idea that needs to be suggested to a larger video game making company.

There's a lot of naivete in this statement. Let's ignore that typically, this forum is meant for game maker games' design. First of all, you'll need a video game company to lend you an ear. That in and of itself will be impossible. Secondly, even if a company listens to your idea, and lets say they like it, there's a very very low probability they'll make it just because of licensing issues and costs.

Instead of sticking to the characters etc. as Hunger Games, why not take these basic ideas, twist and shape them to make the game easier to make (and more fun) and go for it? Food for thought (pun intended).
  • 0

#30 creators124

creators124

    awesomeliciousmember

  • GMC Member
  • 866 posts
  • Version:GM8

Posted 07 May 2012 - 07:38 AM

I hope it would be 3D!Posted Image
I don't think it will be good on a 2D type.
make it so when your to far away from the others you'll get attack towards them!Posted Image
also sounds great for an multi online game!Posted Image

Edited by creators124, 07 May 2012 - 07:38 AM.

  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users