sim656:

Why don't we do some sort of complex morality system, we can base it on just the day of one person, but little actions have huge repercussions

Hmm... Go on....

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

I don't think it would work as a game, but might be fun as more of a demonstration project. Show a new way of how morality could be judged in a game and how a little choice you didn't even realise you made, actually has some quite dramatic effects that don't take effect for a while. A brief example would be say from the film groundhog day, when the he tramp he doesn't give money to dies, the tramp inevitably dies anyway but how would that make you feel as a gamer, this would have no effect on the game but would hopefully have some emotional bearing.

But I haven't thought about it that much, just from reading the article from the fable III section on morality, I think it could be interesting to see how we would/could do it.

---

Getting gamers to feel morally engaged by the ingame characters is certainly a big challenge, and some consider it the holy grail of game design. But I think it'd be easier if we wheren't talking about a singleplayer game.
Have you ever heared of a little (non-computer)game called Diplomacy? Around here it's nick-named 'the game that ends friendships'. It's basically a strategy game where the players have to create diplomatic alliances but they can also break them. This means you'll be lying to your fellow players, backstabbing them. If the other players had been non-player-characters in a computer game it wouldn't have made much difference, but these are your friends, and you're lying to their faces. If you want to do this in a computergame, you'll need to be able to see your fellow players, and engage in voice communication. It'd blend the computergame with the old fashioned boardgame, which is a step into the future if you ask me.

That sounds quite cool, got an example?

---

Here's a link to Wikipedia description.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diplomacy_(game)

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

Hey, I have been following this thread from the start and am liking what you guys are doing . I have never created a game myself but I think remembering what technology you have on hand is inmportant to remember for when you start creating the actual game (restrictions etc...).

I like all the ideas - especially that Diplomacy game idea. But to throw my idea in - I have always wanted to play as an ordinary guy (or girl) in an RPG elemented game where you get to choose one super power at the start of the game (e.g. flame, lightning, speed etc...) and then build on that power.
Idea The main plot could be your chasing down different people with seperate powers to yours (fire vs water) and once you defeat the person you could gain there power too and work on building it up. Once you have obtained every power you could finally attack the main bad guy.


Sorry it is completely random to throw this in but like I said, it is only an idea .

---

Nah feel free to chip in. Nice idea, sort of like highway man in that there can be only one.

---

The reason Diplomacy is a game with moral implications is because it gets personal, so if we take Hawk's idea and make it personal, one way of doing it is to put distance between the players and their avatars (sounds contradictive, I know, but let me explain).

Most often in RPGs, your ingame avatar represents you. And still, if you look at MMOs you'll often find that someone insulting your avatar won't envoke anywhere near as much of a response from you as someone insulting you to your face. So perhaps Hawk's idea needs to be less about the avatar, and more about the person behind it. Say that your avatar is actually it's own person, and you more negotiate with it than that you directly control it. The aim is still to create a stronger avatar, just like in normal rpgs, but the avatar nolonger functions as an emotional shield. If you can see other players over a video screen, and can talk directly to them, then it'll be like talking to their avatar's 'lawyer'. Let's say you and your friend's avatar can be made stronger by gathering an item. To get the item you and your friend must work together to negotiate with your avatars or influence them to get the item. Only one avatar can get the item in the end, so you lie to your friend that he can have the item and you're just helping out. As the quest plays out, your avatar ends up backstabbing your friend's avatar as per your instructions, but your friend doesn't know this. You could say it wasn't you who backstabbed your friend, it was your avatar. And your friend might never be the wiser, unless he manages to find out, and then it's personal. Not only do you get to betray your fellow players, you also have to worry about how loyal your own avatar is to you. Will he 'spill the beans' if another player gives him something he wants? Will your avatar choose gaining a new lightning power over being loyal to the player who influences him?

I especially like the idea that your own avatar isn't directly controlled by you. I like that it could betray you. That's very interesting.

Imagine an environment where there are enemies, neutrals, friends, and your best friend is your avatar.

Who's in your circle? Reminds me of a cell phone plan.

I like it!

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

I'm just thinking out loud here again:

Let's say there are players and there is a pool of brokers (avatars). Everyone is dealt a random broker.

Your broker is your liason to the game world (whatever that might be, haven't gotten that far yet). Each broker can communicate with their respective player and with the other (dealt) brokers. Each broker has a set of attributes that determine the broker's playing style.

Perhaps one of the game mechanics behind this is that a player will want to set up his or her broker's attributes in a way that will influence the other brokers to make decisions that are ultimately based on the player's goals.

or

Perhaps attributes are randomly "dealt" to players that they can then choose to apply to their broker or they can use the attribute in some other way or discard it.

The gameplay might actually be quite mechanical with really no ai whatsoever behind the broker. There are a few rounds for everyone to build up there broker and then the game begins. The attributes determine the outcome of a "duel" -- kind of like rock paper scissors. Those attributes and the order of play determine the winner.

Just thinking out loud. After reading this over I'm not sure I like anything that I wrote, but it's probably worth posting anyway.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

If your broker is similar to a religious leader, and you represent a god, then through telling him your devine will, he will relay it to his followers. Ofcourse, he also has an agenda of his own and he might twist your words for his own personal gain. This means that to get the people of the gameworld to do what you want them to, you might have to go to another religious leader or oracle who can hear your words. It's rather like Black and White but with a twist.

I like that.

It also reminds me of how normal people like you and me trust a financial broker with our investment portfolio (ex. 401k). I could see an MMO built on top of an fictional economy. It would be a very casual MMO; just like how we are with our 401k's -- very casual.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

What I like the most about what we've been talking about lately is that the player doesn't interact with the game world directly. Everything has to go through an avatar that may or may not agree with your ideas.

Unless we figure out a way to simplify it, I think this is too big of a challenge for us to accomplish as a first project.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

I think it can be simplified quite easily. For instance, imagine it as a cardgame in the spirit of Magic the Gatherling...
First all the players draw a mission card at random, this card tells them what the world's characters have to do before their mission is complete. Then, everyone puts a broker/religious leader-card in front of them at random, each of those have a set of attributes. In your own hand you have a set of broker influence cards, these change the attributes of your, or another player's broker for the remainder of the turn. Then you also have a set of instruction cards, which you can apply to your broker once each turn. Those cards tell your broker what to tell his people to do. The broker also has a set of instructioncards of his own to represent his own agenda. An instruction card has 3 options on it, when you play your instruction card, you have to pick an option, but before you play it, every player is allowed to play one of their cards that modify a broker's attributes. When the attributes are changed and the option is picked, the broker turns it's top instruction card. Each option on both instruction cards is accompanied by a set of attributes. If the option you picked matches the broker's attributes closer than any of the options on the broker's instruction card, then the broker will cary out your instruction. If not, the closer match on the broker's instruction card is carried out. On the playing board there will be a world with inhabitants and several different things for those inhabitants to do. If you can get the inhabitants to do what is on your mission card, you win.

This sounds pretty . Let's continue to flesh this out.

I was thinking we should attach a codename to this project. I was thinking, "Thwart". It's what games are all about -- thwarting your opponents -- and it's a fun word to say. It's just a suggestion.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

Thwart sounds to me

---

Allright, Project: Thwart it is
The concept I layed out is pretty much the most basic form. Adding more to it will make the game more interesting to play. But we need to take a look at what we are capable of. Can we actually program this thing, or do we have to make a real-life board/card-game out of it?

Aynen:

Allright, Project: Thwart it is
The concept I layed out is pretty much the most basic form. Adding more to it will make the game more interesting to play. But we need to take a look at what we are capable of. Can we actually program this thing, or do we have to make a real-life board/card-game out of it?

Yes, I would like to create the game in digital form, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't test it out on paper in analog form first.

We still need to nail down the rules of the game and the requirements for the software. We need artists for the various kinds of assets: graphics, audio, music, etc. And more programmers are encouraged to join too. We're still at the very beginning of this.

Which brings us to the elephant in the room -- how do we manage this project with people that live across the globe? Also, where do we house the project? I was thinking SourceForge. There are lots of open source games at sourceForge.net. http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php?form_cat=80

I suggest we use XNA Game Studio for this project to make it easier for beginners. It's free from Microsoft. It let's you concentrate on developing your game without have to build the underlying framework. It looks like a great fit for prototyping at the very least. XNA should be able to handle everything that we've talked about so far with this turn-based game. I think some schools use it to teach game development. http://creators.xna.com/en-US/

These are just my suggestions. I'm open to any ideas.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

To actively recruit, we'll need to look at different forums than just this one. Places like Devientart.com might be a place to find artists, and I'm sure there are equivalents for programmers and all the other things we need.

Also, since the idea was created on the Lionhead forum, you might ask them if they are interested in lending a helping hand to make this happen. It's a long shot but you never know

Anyone can join. Nobody has to say who they work for.

Also, to be clear, I don't work for Lionhead.

This is a side project for anyone who wants to be a part of something fresh from their day-to-day. Maybe you write software, maybe you bake donuts, maybe you're out of work, maybe you go to school... If you have some spare time, a mind, and want to be a part of our little game development project then you are welcome to join us.

We're still in the fun idea phase of this project. Start posting ideas.

No pressue either. No one is forced to stay on the project. Not even me. Wait! How would that work? Well this is grass roots game development and this project will be open source. Don't worry, I plan on seeing this through to the end, but if I get hit by a bus, there will hopefully be others on the project that will keep pushing it forward. If not, perhaps someone a few years down the road will see the project on SourceForge and take it over and finish it.

I also consider it an experiment. I want to see if we, a diverse, global community, can actually pull this thing off.

Keep in mind this is meant to be a small project. This is a project meant to educate me and anyone else about game development. I happened to be a software engineer that wants to create a game.

What's the worse that could happen? As I said before we could fail miserably. Actually, if I get hit by a bus, that would be pretty bad for me.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

I love the idea stage, but I'm not a fan of staying in it for too long, as all thinking and no action is quite a passifier. Considering the ideas we allready have, what do you feel they lack that makes you confident they would make a game which we'd be capable of making?

I agree. Let's keep going down this path to flesh it out. We shouldn't start designing until we've nailed it down.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

You didn't really answer my question though

Aynen:

You didn't really answer my question though

Sorry, I think I misunderstood your question.

Here is a list of the ideas that we have talked about so far:

game based on gravity
game based on time
game based on diplomacy gameplay
game based on collecting super hero abilities
game based on broker

I think that's everything we've talked about. I think that we can do any of these ideas. If you want we can pick one and concentrate on it going forward.

I like the broker and diplomacy ideas. There are some interesting dynamics in the gameplay there. It could be turn-based and so far it resembles something like a board game or a card game. Which means the game could be played on a computer or on a table without a computer.

The broker idea might allow for a solitary version of gameplay. You're either successful or your not. The broker, the population, and random events can be adversarial.

The rules for a board/card game are strict and rigid. We can design the rules for the game like that, but still make the gameplay feel more dynamic on the computer.

What does everyone else think? I agree we should probably pick an idea soon and then focus on it and hone in on the details.

---

http://projectthwart.sourceforge.net/

Doing it as a cardgame or boardgame has one major weakness: Since you're dealing with real life objects, you can't easily distribute work internationally. With a digital game that's less of an issue. Rigidness in cardgames and boardgames isn't really a given, there are loads of ways to randomise things in board and cardgames. (the use of dice being the most common one)
I could probably even come up with a game that blends the gravity, time, diplomacy, superpower collecting and broker ideas all in one. Could be interesting, will be very complicated, and possibly way beyond our ability to program.
So far I feel the diplomacy and broker ideas would be the most fun, and if possible I'd love to see them be multiplayer based. It's how they would work best. Adding an idea like the superhero power collecting thing should be quite easy, it'd be compatible with all the other ideas aswell.
The gravity and time ideas would work well as games, but would really only be remarkable if you had a remarkable engine and team to execute it. If we made a simple sidescroller with those ideas, I will get the sense of 'been there, done that, got the 2 dimensional t-shirt'.