What I want to discuss is the future of multiplayer adventure games. I've been experimenting with the TCP/IP plugin for AGS with a few others in the #ags chat room, and we've found it works quite well. It has quite a few nice features, yet it's kept very simplistic in its functionality and implementation.
I recognize that some people will disagree with me about this, but I personally don't like the idea of making a multiplayer epic quest. Regardless of the game's design, you would probably be dependent on the other player(s) throughout the entire game. Each player would have to stay caught up with the others. You couldn't advance through the storyline without the other players being on the same wavelength. This degree of dependency is not a desirable feature, in my opinion. Instead, multiplayer adventure games should take a different angle if they're going to be recognized as an enjoyable part in the future of gaming.
Any multiplayer game needs either (1) teamwork and/or (2) competition. In some of the most widely-played multiplayer games, both teamwork and competition are incorporated. The players understand that by working together they can "beat" the game faster or have a better chance of doing so. Competing against a human adversary is the ultimate challenge, since no AI yet has been made that can imitate the unpredictability of human thinking.
These are the proven features of multiplayer games that players tend to find enjoyable. How do we transfer these features into an adventure game? One idea in particular seems quite promising to me. This is all purely conceptual, and is just a brief introduction to the idea. Any comments and suggestions you might have are most welcome.
A Multiplayer Murder Mystery
I'm quite excited about this concept. Have you ever played Mafia, the party game where a group of people sit in a circle, draw cards to randomly determine who are the cops, the mafia, and the townspeople, and then try to eliminate the Mafia each turn? The idea here is similar. The setting of the game is, e.g., a mansion estate. Appropriate characters are chosen at the beginning of the game, such as a butler, a doctor, and so on. One player is randomly selected as The Killer. The others have to figure out who the killer is, and avoid being murdered in the process.
The game is very much an adventure game. Puzzles are solved, normally consisting of gaining access to certain areas of the play area, like the attic's drop-down stairs or the locked garage. Some items, such as a fireplace poker, a machete, or a gun can be used as murder weapons or as items to solve puzzles. Each player has an inventory, but only 2 items are allowed at a time. Because of this, players will constantly be dropping items. Every time someone touches an item, he/she leaves fingerprints on it. Certain items such as gloves or a handkerchief can be used to avoid leaving fingerprints or wipe them away, but these are difficult items to find. Fingerprints can be scrutinized by other players.
General Philosophy
As far as I'm aware, a similar game like this has not been made. It goes beyond mystery games like Clue!, since the killer is still very much active, and the life of each player is threatened with each step.
The idea is to invoke paranoia in each player. You don't KNOW who the killer is. You don't KNOW if the crowbar you see a character holding is going to be used as a murder weapon against you in a few seconds or just to open the locked trunk. You don't KNOW if the guy lurking in the shadows is going to burst out with a chainsaw or just passively observe you. Teamwork is possible, to figure out who the killer is, but the paranoia is always there, since you can never be sure you're teaming up with the right people. Whenever the player is selected as the killer, he would have to be very devious and put on a fake identity for everyone, trying to convince everyone he's just a normal non-killer like the rest of them.
The Server-Client Network
As a software developer, I'm very much aware that creating a multiplayer game is no easy task. The most effective way to create the game would be to designate one player as the server and the others as clients. Every time a player wants to do an action, it would poll the server, which keeps a record of where every item and every character is. It would simplify the game process and avoid duplicate actions (such as two people trying to pick up an object at the same time). Typical stuff, as well as a proven effective method.
The Atmosphere
The game undoubtedly would contain a survival horror element. Normally, survival horror games have to be carefully planned out and the atmosphere thoughtfully constructed. In this game, enough elements can be given to the players so they can construct their own survival horror atmosphere. In some rooms, lights can be turned off, casting shadows all over. Doors can be locked, so you can avoid the killer chasing you. Dialogue with other players should be restricted to the same room, rather than a global in-game chat, adding to the element of seclusion. Plus, this would avoid the problem of a sneaky player saying at the beginning, "BUDDY SYSTEM! Everyone choose a buddy and stick with him/her. If someone dies, we'll know the buddy did it!"
Replayability
The game can't be the same each time, since that might get boring. Items could be placed randomly (yet still in appropriate locations) whenever the game starts. The fact that someone different is the killer each time would keep the game interesting and replayable as well.
I'm going to draft a detailed design document for this game (when I get around to it), then post a link to it for comments and criticism. Hopefully, this will invoke further interest in the idea. Would anyone be interested in working on a project like this down the road? I think it has enormous potential. It could definitely leave a mark and be a good way to bring adventure games into the multiplayer world.
One thing you might notice is the lack of storyline. Stories are typically important to adventure games. There might be a way to accommodate a story, such as giving each character a purpose in the game, or adding a secondary quest for the players such as finding a hidden treasure, and throw in some NPCs. This may or may not be a good idea.
Eventually, I'd like to see different versions, i.e. different levels, of the game made. It doesn't have to take place in a mansion. The setting could also be a desert island, an abandoned amusement park, or (my favorite) a teenage party.
But first, I'd like to make a smaller multiplayer game. One idea is a Spy vs. Spy type game where two players try to sabotage each other. It would let us experiment with incorporating multiplayer features in AGS, and be a nice stepping stone before launching into the larger multiplayer murder mystery project. Some of the network features could be carried over, too.
Do you have any comments other than "Sounds brilliant!" (which I do appreciate). Any potential flaws you see, or any reason why you might not want to play such a game? It might be useful to make this an open source project, too, so those who don't know how to program for a network could benefit from it, and learn how to use the TCP/IP plugin to do so.
I'd really like to know if people would be interest in working on such a project. Not immediately, but somewhere down the road. Like I said, I'm going to write up a design doc so everyone can have a better idea what we were talking about in the #ags chat room.
Migs, I think that it sounds at least very good.
And remember what Elvis says!
Spoiler
A little less conversation, a little more action please!
That's an interesting idea. The point would be that no one knows what anybody is. That's the paranoia: you can never be completely sure. What would happen is that when you THINk you know who the killer is, you lock in a vote. However, once you make your vote, you can't change it. If, say, the majority of the players vote correctly, the non-killers win and the killer loses. If they guess incorrectly, the killer wins.
There has to be a balance. It shouldn't be TOO easy for the killer to kill people. For example, rather than just picking up a gun and shooting, he has to find bullets first. Moreover, most of the clues the players will use will probably be just observing what the other players are doing and carrying. It would be quite incriminating to see a player carrying around a sniper rifle (he could try to play it off by saying, "I'm keeping it so the killer doesn't get it"). If the killer is given a handkerchief right from the beginning, what's the point of even giving the other players the ability to look for fingerprints at all? I think most objects should be located during the course of the game, adding the necessity for strategy and just plain good fortune.
I admit, the idea strays from how we traditionally view adventure games. Nonetheless, the basic adventure game elements are still there: inventory and puzzles. Story could be incorporated, too, but that would require some careful thought. Would you find a multiplayer game that had the same story each time you played it enjoyable?
Nice ideas Migs. I'll throw mine into the mix (so it doesnt get forgotten again) and then talk about yours later this evening.
I had an idea once for a multiplayer adventure, it'd be a race to find say, the treasure, (simple cliched plot but it'll get the idea/point across).
Basically, lets say the game is 30 rooms or so. Up to four players can play (for example) and the main goal of the game would be to locate and find the Stone Of Slofrueiughdr. Each player starts in a randomly selected room, they could find themselves in an office, at a sea port, in a museum, etc.
They'd walk around in search of this thing, getting clues from characters within the game. As characters tell the players clues, they'll get a little less happy to talk to say, the last person - and will give them a harder clue, etc.
Along the way the players will bump into each other and will be able to chat to one another, revealing whatever they want but also hiding the truth or meddling with clues to put them off etc.
Eventually one person will find the stone, and when the others get to that point the ending will be different for each of them.
It's a rough idea but I thought it'd make a great multiplayer adventure game.
Darn it. I had composed an excellent reply and then lost it.
Spy vs Spy is quite a well thought out but simple game, so it would be a good starting point. I doubt that the split-screen stuff is managable in AGS, though. Some of the gameplay relied on you being able to see the nother player setting traps, so I dunno how it would work if you couldn't see it. Count me in on the Spy vs Spy project, at least. (I was going to do this myself afetr I get the Sphinx demo out)...
As for the murder mystery: even if people had buddies, think about what happens in horror movies: there is always some trapdoor, revolving fireplace or something that separates the buddies in the buddy system. Now, if people know about these then they may try and avoid them, so maybe we need to work out how to make them unavoidable: have them right next to entry/exits and fired randomly, or maybe the doors themselves open to different rooms each time you use them (have you seen/read Steven King's Rose Red?)
Also, the non-murderers need some motivation to move around. Maybe completing various tasks can let a player get some evidence that shows that another player didn't do it or even gives the player a bulletproof vest so that if the killer does try to kill them , the immediately win (because they survivie and yet know who the killer is). Also, maybe you need to reach the telephone to call the police once you know who the murderer is, but the killer might kill you too. The killer wouldn't be allowed to kill everyone though becuase then it would be obvious who did it, maybe there are limited murder weapons too.
Maybe a mechanism to frame other people too. And lockers to hide items in so people can't ask you what you're holding (where a refusal to show would be suspicious). Framing could maybe be the killer finding a "clue" item or something that both killer and a non-killer would want and then rendering it useless in some way, but the other player wouldn't know until they pick it up and leave fingerprints. Also, the murderer would have to dispose of the murder weapon somewhere, but then someone else could find it. Maybe there's a crowbar around to break into other people's lockers...
And if there's one NPC, the butler, who can also possibly be the killer...
Lots of possibilities here. But start with simple Spy vs Spy first... 320x200, roger sprites and concentrate on getting up to speed on gameplay and using the TCPIP stuff.
Sounds interesting, but I have a question. I guess it has to do with the "story" part which is, as you say, not finalised yet. What would be the reason for the murderer to murder? Just cause he got the "murderer" card? There should be some other mission for him to need to complete (ie. the reason) by killing someone. If this is so, the placement of items should not only be randomised, but the elements of the story as well.
Also, would the other players be restricted to not being able to murder? Will they also be able to murder other people (even the murderer himself)? What is going to stop a player from taking all items and hiding them in some place by dropping them on, for example, a walkbehind?
Don't take any of my comments as meaning I think this is a dumb idea, its just constructive criticism for you to use to bring your idea to reality. It sounds like a great idea, I would love to see it implemented.
Quote from: m0ds on Tue 16/03/2004 15:54:26
Nice ideas Migs. I'll throw mine into the mix (so it doesnt get forgotten again) and then talk about yours later this evening.
I had an idea once for a multiplayer adventure, it'd be a race to find say, the treasure, (simple cliched plot but it'll get the idea/point across).
Basically, lets say the game is 30 rooms or so. Up to four players can play (for example) and the main goal of the game would be to locate and find the Stone Of Slofrueiughdr. Each player starts in a randomly selected room, they could find themselves in an office, at a sea port, in a museum, etc.
They'd walk around in search of this thing, getting clues from characters within the game. As characters tell the players clues, they'll get a little less happy to talk to say, the last person - and will give them a harder clue, etc.
Along the way the players will bump into each other and will be able to chat to one another, revealing whatever they want but also hiding the truth or meddling with clues to put them off etc.
Eventually one person will find the stone, and when the others get to that point the ending will be different for each of them.
It's a rough idea but I thought it'd make a great multiplayer adventure game.
I like this idea. A lot. A multiplayer treasure hunting adventure game would be very enjoyable, provided it's as random as possible, so that even if someone plays it 100 times, he/she wouldn't necessarily know where the treasure is after just a few minutes of playing and recognizing the pattern.
It seems like it would play on the whole idea of not knowing if someone is deceiving you or not, too. There seems to be a common theme there. What would be the advantage to helping someone find the treasure as opposed to hiding what you know?
Quote from: SSH on Tue 16/03/2004 16:04:49
Darn it. I had composed an excellent reply and then lost it.
Spy vs Spy is quite a well thought out but simple game, so it would be a good starting point. I doubt that the split-screen stuff is managable in AGS, though. Some of the gameplay relied on you being able to see the nother player setting traps, so I dunno how it would work if you couldn't see it. Count me in on the Spy vs Spy project, at least. (I was going to do this myself afetr I get the Sphinx demo out)...
It wouldn't have to be exactly like the original. We were talking about a WWII theme for the game, where you could plant land mines, bombs, possibly snipe the other player, and so on.
Quote from: SSH on Tue 16/03/2004 16:04:49
As for the murder mystery: even if people had buddies, think about what happens in horror movies: there is always some trapdoor, revolving fireplace or something that separates the buddies in the buddy system. Now, if people know about these then they may try and avoid them, so maybe we need to work out how to make them unavoidable: have them right next to entry/exits and fired randomly, or maybe the doors themselves open to different rooms each time you use them (have you seen/read Steven King's Rose Red?)
If people start off in random locations and are only able to talk to each other when they're in the same room as another, the problem is practically resolved. People could use the buddy system if they find another player in the course of the game, but how would you know that person isn't the killer? You'd be taking a serious chance.
Planting traps would also be a great way to kill people, like dropping chandeliers on players CB-style. I do like the idea of setting it in not just a mansion, but a HAUNTED mansion. NPC ghosts could roam around or something. They could be used to weave a story into the game, like the former owner of the mansion was wrongfully murdered.
Quote from: SSH on Tue 16/03/2004 16:04:49
Also, the non-murderers need some motivation to move around. Maybe completing various tasks can let a player get some evidence that shows that another player didn't do it or even gives the player a bulletproof vest so that if the killer does try to kill them , the immediately win (because they survivie and yet know who the killer is). Also, maybe you need to reach the telephone to call the police once you know who the murderer is, but the killer might kill you too. The killer wouldn't be allowed to kill everyone though becuase then it would be obvious who did it, maybe there are limited murder weapons too.
We were talking about this, too. Also, simply surviving a murder attempt would not make you automatically win, since you would have to find all the other players and convince them the guy tried to kill you. The killer could just follow you and pretend that you, the would-be victim, actually tried to kill HIM.
I was thinking that maybe once everyone has locked in their votes, the roles could be reversed. Suddenly, all the non-killers are capable of killing, and the killer has a limited amount of time to escape. Just a thought.
It seems that the non-killers in the beginning of the game just dwell in the mansion, without any action starting until the killer actually kills someone. Then it's no fun for the first victim (he could still roam around as a ghost or something). Here's an idea, but it would require assigning roles to each person, similar to Mafia.
Gossip Rule: One player could be randomly selected as the Detective (he could have some special advantage, like being able to look at anybody's inventory), one as the Killer, and the others as just normal players. The normal players could be given the chance to select anybody to learn "Gossip" about. If they choose a normal player, they'll know that person is just normal. However, if that person is SOMETHING, i.e., the Detective or the Killer, the player will know it, but won't know if that player is the Detective OR the Killer. Nevertheless, he could use this information, find other players, and tell them what he knows. Then the players could track down who they think is the killer and try to trap him/her in a lie. It would be up to the players to use it as a strategy. The killer could pretend to be the detective to try to fool the other players.
Hopefully that wasn't too confusing.
Quote from: SSH on Tue 16/03/2004 16:04:49
Maybe a mechanism to frame other people too. And lockers to hide items in so people can't ask you what you're holding (where a refusal to show would be suspicious). Framing could maybe be the killer finding a "clue" item or something that both killer and a non-killer would want and then rendering it useless in some way, but the other player wouldn't know until they pick it up and leave fingerprints. Also, the murderer would have to dispose of the murder weapon somewhere, but then someone else could find it. Maybe there's a crowbar around to break into other people's lockers...
This could be implemented by wearing gloves when picking up items. Objects could contain only the fingerprints of the last person to touch it, so it would seem as if someone else was holding a murder weapon.
I think the best way would be to give the players a bunch of items that have multiple functions, and let them decide what to do with them. There could be multiple ways to reach and pull down the rope to the attic, so the killer could be waiting up there for someone to come up. Or when the killer is pursuing someone and the person locks the door behind him, the killer can go outside and break through a window.
Quote from: SSH on Tue 16/03/2004 16:04:49
And if there's one NPC, the butler, who can also possibly be the killer...
That would be immensely interesting. I was thinking there could be a clown character, too, for the abandonment amusement park scene. Nobody would trust the clown no matter who was selected as the killer.
Quote from: Babloyi on Tue 16/03/2004 16:06:07Sounds interesting, but I have a question. I guess it has to do with the "story" part which is, as you say, not finalised yet. What would be the reason for the murderer to murder? Just cause he got the "murderer" card? There should be some other mission for him to need to complete (ie. the reason) by killing someone. If this is so, the placement of items should not only be randomised, but the elements of the story as well.
One possibility is that the killer could secretly be given a [random] motive when he's selected. Maybe he could score extra points (or something) if he kills certain characters first, or within a certain time frame. If this is going to truly be an adventure game, and if people really think having a story to this game is important, care will need to be taken to make sure the story is enjoyable and interesting enough each time the game is played.
Quote from: Babloyi on Tue 16/03/2004 16:06:07Also, would the other players be restricted to not being able to murder? Will they also be able to murder other people (even the murderer himself)? What is going to stop a player from taking all items and hiding them in some place by dropping them on, for example, a walkbehind?
No, the other players wouldn't be able to kill. If they were, we'd just have another FPS on our hands, and I think we need to create something unique.
The players are restricted to two items each, so hording items isn't possible. We could script it so when players drop items, AGS checks to see if there's a walkbehind and places the item a little to the side so it's not obscured from view.
Quote from: Babloyi on Tue 16/03/2004 16:06:07Don't take any of my comments as meaning I think this is a dumb idea, its just constructive criticism for you to use to bring your idea to reality. It sounds like a great idea, I would love to see it implemented.
That's really all I wanted when I posted this, just constructive criticism. It's good to know if people are actually going to WANT to play something like this before going to the effort of creating it.
I would like to make a multi-player VPXT game, and have always dismissed the use of two-at-one-pc because you'd need two mice to work at the same time (which is how you'd want to be able to play...)
Perhaps using the plugin it would be possible, but I don't know enough about the mechanics, and I don't have an example network I could use... sniffle sniffle oh well...
Still, I think the problem with jumping into plot-based multi-player games is that multi-player and plot-based are two very disprate eXtreems of the game spectrum. People would need to get into the mind set of both before they could bring them together, which would probably mean taking the time to make specifically multi-player non-adventure games, then slowly introducing plot and adventure elements to them, one game at a time. Obviously this would take AGES, but I think that trying to skip a few steps and dice in at the deep end is asking for trouble (or fairly un-memorable games...)
Or you could take adventure games and strip the mechanics down further and further, until multi-play makes proper sense...
Migs... WOW. That is an AMAZING IDEA!!!
I want to play that, NOW! Hehehe.
But seriously, I thiknk this idea could go very far, and I would be willing to help out in any graphical or musical means. I look forward to seeing updates on this progress. Create a play test, using all rogers, and place holder graphics. If it works, then I could probably get the rest of my team to help graphically and with other small things, such as hopstop descriptions (Looking at things in the mansion) and so on.
Ok, i've read most of what migs said (in his 1.st) and what m0ds said.
I was thinking, what about the dialogs, could we be able to chat, or even SHOUT? so other people can hear us when we're dying?
But how to unable the abuse of it like "I 0wnZ y00!!"
And I have a similar idea, a combination of mods' and migs'.
What about the a murder mystery, where YOU are the detective, but, you are not the only one... You see where i'm getting, it's something like m0ds's idea, but with migs' elements of murder mystery.
And about the actual game being played, it could be like those FPS, we make up a server, several players register (up to 16?), and then they play. If they wish to stop ( in a mutual agreement), they can save, but then, all of them must start it again together, and/or the player that is missing will be considered dead...
Do i make any sense?
Quote from: Captain Mostly on Tue 16/03/2004 17:00:55I would like to make a multi-player VPXT game, and have always dismissed the use of two-at-one-pc because you'd need two mice to work at the same time (which is how you'd want to be able to play...)
Perhaps using the plugin it would be possible, but I don't know enough about the mechanics, and I don't have an example network I could use... sniffle sniffle oh well...
I really do think any work done on this should be open source. It would benefit everyone who feels too intimidated to use the TCP/IP plugin.
Quote from: Captain Mostly on Tue 16/03/2004 17:00:55Still, I think the problem with jumping into plot-based multi-player games is that multi-player and plot-based are two very disprate eXtreems of the game spectrum. People would need to get into the mind set of both before they could bring them together, which would probably mean taking the time to make specifically multi-player non-adventure games, then slowly introducing plot and adventure elements to them, one game at a time. Obviously this would take AGES, but I think that trying to skip a few steps and dice in at the deep end is asking for trouble (or fairly un-memorable games...)
Or you could take adventure games and strip the mechanics down further and further, until multi-play makes proper sense...
I don't necessarily think multiplayer games and plot-based games are diametrically opposed. However, your concern is precisely why I think careful planning of the story needs to be undertaken, since it's not difficult to see a lot of problems emerging when the story conflicts with the multiplayer gameplay. It might be best not to incorporate a story into the multiplayer murder mystery, at least until we know the basic mechanics work and the gameplay is sound. Having NPCs, dialogue trees, and secondary objectives could be considered in future versions.
Quote from: BerserkerTails on Tue 16/03/2004 17:17:42Migs... WOW. That is an AMAZING IDEA!!!
I want to play that, NOW! Hehehe.
But seriously, I thiknk this idea could go very far, and I would be willing to help out in any graphical or musical means. I look forward to seeing updates on this progress. Create a play test, using all rogers, and place holder graphics. If it works, then I could probably get the rest of my team to help graphically and with other small things, such as hopstop descriptions (Looking at things in the mansion) and so on.
I like that idea. To start out, I think I'm going to rip the graphics from a game like Fate of Atlantis and just have it so players can connect, choose a character, walk around, and talk to other players in the same room. It would give me a chance to make a simple (!) server-client system that could be used in later games. Then I could advertise the game as INDIANA JONES ONLINE! Hours of fun.
By the way, most of the credit goes to a-v-o, Geoffkhan, and Hotspot. They came up with the best ideas (not to mention a-v-o made the TCP/IP plugin). Now let's just make the ideas come to life.
Quote from: Czar on Tue 16/03/2004 17:31:22
Ok, i've read most of what migs said (in his 1.st) and what m0ds said.
I was thinking, what about the dialogs, could we be able to chat, or even SHOUT? so other people can hear us when we're dying?
But how to unable the abuse of it like "I 0wnZ y00!!"
I think if you chat, it should only be with people in the same room as you. However, if you die, you automatically scream and other people can hear it. Then it tells each player in what direction the scream came from or something, assuming they're in a reasonable promixity. If a player is in the basement, he wouldn't be able to hear someone who is murdered in one of the far corners of the mansion estate; or if the game's setting is the teenage party, you wouldn't be able to hear someone who is being drowned in the swimming pool outside if you're right in the middle of the partying and boozing. This could be used as another clue for acute players...they could try to recall who was in the proximity at the time of the murder. This would also mean the killer would need to act quickly, and possibly try to dispose of the murder weapon and just act cool.
Quote from: Czar on Tue 16/03/2004 17:31:22
And I have a similar idea, a combination of mods' and migs'.
What about the a murder mystery, where YOU are the detective, but, you are not the only one... You see where i'm getting, it's something like m0ds's idea, but with migs' elements of murder mystery.
So the competition would involve trying to figure out who the killer is before anyone else does, and then if you do, you win? That's a good idea, too. Basically, in the MMM idea, everyone is a detective except the killer, and ideally they WOULD work as a team, except their paranoia and inability to truly trust any other player might keep them from doing so. Would you want to have an NPC killer then?
I think the idea has so much versatility that is left up to the players, without necessarily incorporating too much into the game itself, that the game would be an enjoyable and unique experience each time it's played.
Quote from: Czar on Tue 16/03/2004 17:31:22
And about the actual game being played, it could be like those FPS, we make up a server, several players register (up to 16?), and then they play. If they wish to stop ( in a mutual agreement), they can save, but then, all of them must start it again together, and/or the player that is missing will be considered dead...
Do i make any sense?
It's a good idea. Consider the cost and work involved in creating a server, though. Moreover, I don't think each game should be long enough to warrant saving. Half-an-hour per game at the most. What do you think?
Eventually, I'd love to see this whole idea turned into a game using the latest 3d technology (still 3rd person adventure, though...the last thing we need is another FPS) with a bunch of different levels, different and unique characters, and different items for each level.
Question: How will conversations be handled?
If you use text overlays or background speech there's only so many people that can be talking at the same time in the game. If you go into your own little two headed room like in Innocent Until Caught [or locally, Shadowplay] then you'll not know who's entering and exiting the room and the killer can walk in stroll around and murder both of you.
Instead of a mansion imagine this: Take Scorpious' CCS plugin and add let's say, 20 computer controlled people to the game. Imagine walking around outside and there are 8 people walking around and... Wait, is that person following me? Oh no! Is that the killer? I'll duck into this alley and see if he follows then I'll run... Ok, he didn't follow that was scary... Wait, who's this hiding in the shadows ARGHH!!!!
Maybe you have 1 day to stay alive and find the killer. You start in early morning and it ends late at night with the sun going down and the stars coming out and as the day gets later less and less computer controlled people are about because they're all going home. This makes it harder for the killer and easier for the victims [who had it easier at the beginning of the game staying alive] now you have only a few people to be curious of and there are less people around for the killer to kill you easier [let's say the killer can't kill you if anyone else is in the room, so you could stand in a populated place for protection though it would discourage a 2 person buddy system cause death would come easier.]
add in the flashlight plugin and nighttime gets uber scary [finding a light source first [flashlight/batteries lantern/fuel]
How does a vicitim stay alive when confronted by the killer?
The addition of a character select screen [adding special facial features/clothing so everyone doesn't look the same and one can hide among the NPCs better]
If someone dies within earshot of one of the NPCs the NPC will retain a short description of the last person they saw or something "He had a mustache and he went down that alley."
Adding the ability to run [like Revenants] this will make you suspicious to other NPCs and PCs.
The killer will have a photo of all the players in the game [since the character selection screen would allow new people to be created each game the photos would be necessary] or a description.
Can the killer kill NPCs?
i think i'm going to stop because i may just go on for pages
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18Question: How will conversations be handled?
If you use text overlays or background speech there's only so many people that can be talking at the same time in the game. If you go into your own little two headed room like in Innocent Until Caught [or locally, Shadowplay] then you'll not know who's entering and exiting the room and the killer can walk in stroll around and murder both of you.
A-v-o updated the test game for the TCP/IP plugin, and it uses text overlays in the default LucasArts style. It looks really good. Background speech obviously wouldn't work. When players speak, they need to speak in real-time; the game can't halt just because someone is speaking. One solution to the potential screen clutter is to limit the number of characters a player can type at a time. Problems would only arise if the game had quite a large number of players, like 10+, and they all decided to crowd together in one room and blabber at each other. In later versions, more than one killer could even be designated for larger games. That could get interesting.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18Instead of a mansion imagine this: Take Scorpious' CCS plugin and add let's say, 20 computer controlled people to the game. Imagine walking around outside and there are 8 people walking around and... Wait, is that person following me? Oh no! Is that the killer? I'll duck into this alley and see if he follows then I'll run... Ok, he didn't follow that was scary... Wait, who's this hiding in the shadows ARGHH!!!!
Maybe you have 1 day to stay alive and find the killer. You start in early morning and it ends late at night with the sun going down and the stars coming out and as the day gets later less and less computer controlled people are about because they're all going home. This makes it harder for the killer and easier for the victims [who had it easier at the beginning of the game staying alive] now you have only a few people to be curious of and there are less people around for the killer to kill you easier [let's say the killer can't kill you if anyone else is in the room, so you could stand in a populated place for protection though it would discourage a 2 person buddy system cause death would come easier.]
NPCs would be a nice feature to have, and the CCS plugin would definitely be the best bet, but I think starting simple would be the best maneuver for now. In later versions of the game, NPCs could be used to incorporate a story into the design. Setting the game in a teenage party like I mentioned earlier would be a great place to include NPCs. It would be a great classic take on horror movies, because people only die when they're all alone. The unofficial "safe zone" would be where everyone is gathered, dancing, getting drunk, getting high, making out, having sex (open to debate), and so on. For now, though, I think we should focus on how we can successfully make this a PC-only game, with the intent on adding more to it later.
Imposing a time limit might work. One problem I can see is that this may discourage the killer from killing, if the condition is that the players have to figure out who the killer is. Perhaps the game could start with a NPC murder and the clues could be randomly generated, but I'd rathed avoid making the game create things like this, when the players can create their own clues, their own suspicions, and their own fear sufficiently well. The game also wouldn't be very enjoyable if the killer found it easy to kill people. I think a lot of testing will be necessary, with different combinations of features turned on and off to get the right feel to the game. Ideally, half the time the regular players will win and half the time the killer will win.
The 2 person buddy system was just a point that was raised during discussion over the game. A cunning player could propose having a buddy system at the beginning, but only if all the players started in the same room, or had the ability to talk to players regardless of where they were. Placing the players in random rooms at the beginning and only letting them talk to each other if they're in the same room safely avoids this problem.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18add in the flashlight plugin and nighttime gets uber scary [finding a light source first [flashlight/batteries lantern/fuel]
This would definitely be a worthwhile addition.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18How does a vicitim stay alive when confronted by the killer?
What do you think people would prefer? In most survival horror games, the player has a method of defense, but in this game only the killer is capable of killing. Maybe bulletproof vests could be used, but this obviously would only protect from bullets. We can give the players the ability to lock certain doors behind them and turn lights on and off to hide in shadows. These could be used strategically by both the killer and the other players. In most cases, though, there should be alternative methods for the killer to reach his target, e.g., if a player is being chased he can lock himself in a room, but then the killer can use the master key to unlock it, or circle around outside and break in through the window.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18The addition of a character select screen [adding special facial features/clothing so everyone doesn't look the same and one can hide among the NPCs better]
Definitely. Each character could even have unique abilities, too. One character, for example, could be a doctor and heal murder victims if he can reach them in time. Of course, this would mean the killer would probably want to eliminate him first. Just an idea.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18If someone dies within earshot of one of the NPCs the NPC will retain a short description of the last person they saw or something "He had a mustache and he went down that alley."
This would be a great idea if/when NPCs are included.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18Adding the ability to run [like Revenants] this will make you suspicious to other NPCs and PCs.
The ability to run is a must.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18The killer will have a photo of all the players in the game [since the character selection screen would allow new people to be created each game the photos would be necessary] or a description.
All characters in the game are sprites, so too much diversity can't be used. If we allow for numerous combinations in hair color and eye color, these all have to be individual sprites. Even just by doing quick edits of a base sprite, this would be difficult and perhaps more trouble than it's worth.
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18Can the killer kill NPCs?
I don't see why not. Kind of a useless thing to do, but immensely fun for the killer. Maybe this could give the killer points or something. Or maybe that's a dumb idea).
Quote from: MrColossal on Tue 16/03/2004 19:55:18i think i'm going to stop because i may just go on for pages
The design doc will address every single possible feature of the game, and I'll make a short multiplayer demo game, too, then post a link to them so everyone can see how the game will basically function.
QuoteWhat would be the advantage to helping someone find the treasure as opposed to hiding what you know?
Heh, haven't figured this one out entirely - but I'd assume you could follow them or something, then when they're stuck on a puzzle you could solve it, leaving them behind ;)
The advantage of helping them though could be used as a bargaining tool. I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine, kind of thing. Depends if the player is an asshole or not, I guess!
::)
WOW, Migs, I think your idea is GREAT! Really! ;)
I mean, it's an excelent way of implementing the multiplayer system, and also making a game that'd be fun to play...
QuoteWould anyone be interested in working on a project like this down the road?
Hell Yeah!
I could help you with it if you want ;)
I also have many ideas for it but I won't talk about them now cos it's really late.
PM me if you want, and we can discuss more about it.
BTW, I'd like to see the design Document to have a general idea of what you want...
Cheers
-Felipe-
I would love to work on a project like this. Its a pity i got uni now and don't have much time. I'm still really interested in this idea, especially the haunted mantion thing. It sounds really cool.
Oh man, feel free to contact me...
Erics idea makes me so excited, i blow a load!
It would be fantastic to see it implemented properly.
It would be a lot of work, but it would bring adventure games into the 21st century...
Okay, if anyone can pill this off it could be one of the most important things in things community EVER.
A few random suggestions:
Maybe one of the players could be randomly selected as a butler who knows all the secret passages at the beginning of the game.
Maybe it should take a few seconds to lock, unlock a door (just like in a horror movie where a victim is fumbling with a key while being pursued).
Maybe the music could provide a sort of clue as to how much danger you're in. Nothing gets the adrenaline going like the music suddenly changing from calm and incindental to fast, loud and frightening.
Maybe there could be ways to die without being murdered. If someone finds a body in the cellar...They'll assume the killer got them rather than the player just fell down the stairs (In the 'teen party' game: It might be a bad idea to climb down stairs while drunk/stoned...It could also take longer to perfom certain actions, like the aforementioned locking of doors.)
I'd enjoy greatly helping out with...well anything non-technical.
everyone always suspects the butler...
but anyway, i think alcohol would be an interesting factor, but not in a teen movie style...
I think this will realy work, I'd be glad to help out with the graphics part. I'm also experienced 3dModeler/Animator, if you ever think of converting this to 3D.
Great idea, Migs!
Having NPCs in the game is a difficult decision. You may not want to have them simply to add more human interaction (and thus more replayability). But then again, you'd have to have more people playing at a time.
What you should do is figure out basic uses for objects and sort of make a checklist. Write a list of all the objects in the game. You should probably also make the game expandable by having the object art and abilities in separate files from the game, instead of being hardcoded. Something like this:
Knife:
Weapon: yes
Removes fingerprints: no
Noise level: very small
etc.
You could implement the shout command like Czar suggested (maybe by holding down shift while you press the chat key) so that people in adjacent rooms can hear you.
Remember, the murderer must have:
1. A motive
2. The means
3. The opportunity
A multiplayer platformer would be fun and exciting, or just using some of the elements and making a multiplayer boxing game.
Quote from: Eggie on Sat 20/03/2004 16:41:22
Maybe the music could provide a sort of clue as to how much danger you're in. Nothing gets the adrenaline going like the music suddenly changing from calm and incindental to fast, loud and frightening.
That could be done with regions, If one player steps on one around the corner, then the player that steps on one on the other side, a sound effect could play
And text can be done with sprites, maybe like 30 phrases you could say by clicking on them using object on
Maybe a compass to show where the players are or a map with little moving dots. When some1 dies the dot dissapears.
Perhaps it could be team based, mafia wars, cops and robbers, cowboys and indians etc... and you can only see your own team on map.
You could have objectives for each team like for mafia wars, robbing another teams warehouse. Police might have to defend a bank. And indians could capture a forts flag
Heh. I started making a murder mystery game in AGS once. I got quite a bit of it done, before I realised how awfully boring my game was turning out to be.
Maybe it has something you could use in it. http://www.agagames.com/ghormak/murder.zip
Quote from: Eggie on Sat 20/03/2004 16:41:22
Okay, if anyone can pill this off it could be one of the most important things in things community EVER.
A few random suggestions:
Maybe one of the players could be randomly selected as a butler who knows all the secret passages at the beginning of the game.
That's an interesting idea. To implement this, perhaps all secret passages require a key, or a secret combination, and he's given these. There could also be a safe, too, which he knows the combination to at the beginning. However, the butler seems like a character a player would choose at the beginning, rather than a random assignment. I think, eventually, we might want to experiment with using character classes, so when players select a character at the beginning, they know they'll be using a different strategy for that character. The butler, like you mentioned, could have initial access to secret rooms and stuff. There could be a thief in the game who can steal items from other players. Another character could have exceptional hearing, knowing precisely where a victim's scream came from rather than just a general direction.
For now, though, it might be best to just keep this as bare-bones as possible...no extra goodies. Those can be saved for later versions.
Quote from: Eggie on Sat 20/03/2004 16:41:22Maybe it should take a few seconds to lock, unlock a door (just like in a horror movie where a victim is fumbling with a key while being pursued).
That might be more frustrating than enjoyable. If the killer is hot on your trail, it would be kind of discouraging to have to fumble around to lock a door, when you, as a player, are agile. We could certainly run some tests with this idea, though, just to see how well it works.
Quote from: Eggie on Sat 20/03/2004 16:41:22Maybe the music could provide a sort of clue as to how much danger you're in. Nothing gets the adrenaline going like the music suddenly changing from calm and incindental to fast, loud and frightening.
Nice idea, however this could easily give away who the killer is. I'm not sure it should be up to the computer to give clues like this to players. A possible solution is to make it so if ANY player has a weapon like a rifle or a chainsaw drawn, the music will change. This way, the other players still don't know for sure if it's the killer or not, but they still feel the tension of being in the same room with a possible killer. In my opinion, the players should ultimately be in charge of creating their own clues.
Quote from: Eggie on Sat 20/03/2004 16:41:22Maybe there could be ways to die without being murdered. If someone finds a body in the cellar...They'll assume the killer got them rather than the player just fell down the stairs (In the 'teen party' game: It might be a bad idea to climb down stairs while drunk/stoned...It could also take longer to perfom certain actions, like the aforementioned locking of doors.)
I think in the teen party version, if/when we get around to that one, everybody could have a constantly increasing drunkenness meter or something, so it's just assumed they're getting drunk...otherwise, why would you choose to drink or get stoned in the game? Maybe if you choose to drink with other people, they can give you clues.
Also, the killer could set traps and stuff. This would probably have to wait until a future version of the game, since it's a little complicated for a first multiplayer murder mystery.
Quote from: alamabad on Sun 21/03/2004 10:10:59I think this will realy work, I'd be glad to help out with the graphics part. I'm also experienced 3dModeler/Animator, if you ever think of converting this to 3D.
I'd love to see this become a 3d game someday. Not a first-person-shooter of course, but with 3d characters we could really be liberal with the camera perspectives and everything, giving us an edge on creating the right atmosphere (e.g., showing a top-down view of a room from some wooden rafters, limiting visibility and such).
It might be easier to use 3d pre-rendered sprites for the characters, since characters will need more than just 4 walk animations. Some visible items may need to be added to each sprite, like certain murder weapons. It would be much easier to just add an object to the 3d character and render separate animations than modifying each frame individually.
Quote from: Geoffkhan on Sun 21/03/2004 21:12:11Great idea, Migs!
Don't be so modest. :) As I mentioned earlier, you and a-v-o came up with most of the good stuff. I just decided to make a post out of it.
Quote from: Geoffkhan on Sun 21/03/2004 21:12:11Having NPCs in the game is a difficult decision. You may not want to have them simply to add more human interaction (and thus more replayability). But then again, you'd have to have more people playing at a time.
It can't hurt entertaining the possibility of NPCs, but I doubt they would be necessary to put into the first version of the game. It's good to speculate about future possibilities, though, since this may very well determine how the game is initially coded.
Quote from: Geoffkhan on Sun 21/03/2004 21:12:11What you should do is figure out basic uses for objects and sort of make a checklist. Write a list of all the objects in the game. You should probably also make the game expandable by having the object art and abilities in separate files from the game, instead of being hardcoded. Something like this:
Knife:
Weapon: yes
Removes fingerprints: no
Noise level: very small
etc.
I'm already planning on that. Objects would be much more flexible and allow for easier expansions if everything is accessed from an external file. I'm not a huge fan of hardcoding when it isn't necessary.
Quote from: Geoffkhan on Sun 21/03/2004 21:12:11You could implement the shout command like Czar suggested (maybe by holding down shift while you press the chat key) so that people in adjacent rooms can hear you.
That could definitely work. It would still maintain the desirable sense of seclusion, while giving players the ability to challenge the actions of the killer a little better, even making the killer act a little more tactful in how he kills.
Quote from: Geoffkhan on Sun 21/03/2004 21:12:11Remember, the murderer must have:
1. A motive
2. The means
3. The opportunity
The motive is the trickiest part, since the killer is just killing because he has to. Using NPCs and such to weave a story into the game would be a useful design tool, but for beginners we might just have to leave the motive out for now. I mentioned the idea that maybe the killer could be given a list of certain characters he would do well to eliminate first, scoring him more points or something. Maybe a reason for killing these certain characters could be given.
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 21/03/2004 21:23:02A multiplayer platformer would be fun and exciting, or just using some of the elements and making a multiplayer boxing game.
Everybody loves a good multiplayer platformer. What kind of multiplayer boxing game are you talking about, though? To be honest, both these ideas sound more like arcade games than adventure games to me.
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 21/03/2004 21:25:17That could be done with regions, If one player steps on one around the corner, then the player that steps on one on the other side, a sound effect could play
Except that the killer is constantly moving. The game has no way of predicting where the players will move.
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 21/03/2004 21:25:17And text can be done with sprites, maybe like 30 phrases you could say by clicking on them using object on
Why not just type it?
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 21/03/2004 21:25:17Maybe a compass to show where the players are or a map with little moving dots. When someone dies the dot dissapears.
Interesting idea, but it might be unrealistic to show the location of all players, not to mention this would negate the atmosphere or seclusion.
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 21/03/2004 21:25:17Perhaps it could be team based, mafia wars, cops and robbers, cowboys and indians etc... and you can only see your own team on map.
I'd to eventually see a game where more than one killer is involved, so the game could really get interesting and challenging for the normal players. For now, though, the teams are basically just (1) the killer; and (2) everyone else. Keeping it simple for now is the best bet.
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 21/03/2004 21:25:17You could have objectives for each team like for mafia wars, robbing another teams warehouse. Police might have to defend a bank. And indians could capture a forts flag
I'd like to see a multiplayer game like this, though this might enter the realm of RTS instead of multiplayer adventure. Wonderful ideas, though!
Quote from: Ghormak on Sun 21/03/2004 21:32:16Heh. I started making a murder mystery game in AGS once. I got quite a bit of it done, before I realised how awfully boring my game was turning out to be.
Maybe it has something you could use in it. http://www.agagames.com/ghormak/murder.zip
Thank you for this, Ghormak! I'll be sure to check it out. Out of curiosity, what do you think was making it boring?
The problem with my game was that there was no challenge to it. It would have just been a matter of asking everybody about everything, and then checking whose stories didn't match. I must admit I didn't spend too much time planning it, I just love murder mystery games so I wanted to start working on one as soon as possible, heh. With a little planning I'm sure your idea will turn out beautiful.
Well, if anyone needs me, contact me on msn or email.
MSN:
an_an_cr@hotmail.com
E-MAIL:
alamabad@planethalflife.com
(LostTraveler, if youre intrested in robbing warehouses check out
http://www.planethalflife.com/heist but its a FPS not an adventure)
Wow, that was his first post. Yeah, i'm intruiged and happy to help out. Very intriguing project.
Got an idea for you, Migs. Instead of making a separate 'shout' command (and thus adding to the complexity), why not simply check to see if the player has an exclamation mark in his sentence? :)
i think that people will forget to add them like this post its not very understandable but if someone needs to type something fast like a cry for help they will just foget and its easyer anyway
sorry for that, its ment to be that way.
This could be a whole lot of fun.
I think the Butler should be given a map as an inventory object. If the killer kills the butler he will get all his belongings, including the map. So at the beginning the butler has to be found and guarded by at least two people. (since one of them could be the killer :) ) Kind of like getting the fox, the hen and the bag of corn across the river. :)
but if you play the game and are the butler one time and then aren't the next you'll still know where all the secrets are even if you can't use them you can still avoid them.
this is a bad idea.
Quote from: Geoffkhan on Mon 22/03/2004 21:41:55
Got an idea for you, Migs. Instead of making a separate 'shout' command (and thus adding to the complexity), why not simply check to see if the player has an exclamation mark in his sentence? :)
It's so ridiculously simple it just might work!
Quote from: alamabad on Mon 22/03/2004 22:12:57i think that people will forget to add them like this post its not very understandable but if someone needs to type something fast like a cry for help they will just foget and its easyer anyway
Perhaps a player can either hold down SHIFT or press the CAPS LOCK and type everything in capital letters, or use exclamation marks (or both, obviously). As I see it, though, implementing shouting isn't a high-priority feature, since it isn't really necessary for a bare-bones game to function. It wouldn't hurt to add something like this, but only after other more crucial features are in there, and after we can better tell whether it would be conducive to maintaining the balance of the game.
Quote from: YOke on Mon 22/03/2004 22:32:23
This could be a whole lot of fun.
I think the Butler should be given a map as an inventory object. If the killer kills the butler he will get all his belongings, including the map. So at the beginning the butler has to be found and guarded by at least two people. (since one of them could be the killer :) ) Kind of like getting the fox, the hen and the bag of corn across the river. :)
Quote from: MrColossal on Mon 22/03/2004 22:47:32
but if you play the game and are the butler one time and then aren't the next you'll still know where all the secrets are even if you can't use them you can still avoid them.
this is a bad idea.
The idea doesn't make sense to me, unless the whole map was randomly generated each and every time (which is nigh impossible with 2d backgrounds). After several times playing the game, it's expected that the players will learn all the nooks and crannies, and develop strategies. Moreover, I don't see why the map would be such a crucial object. It wouldn't really be that essential that you know where everything is. The enjoyment is in discovering things for yourself, trying to find the objects which are randomly placed in the game, in most cases to gain access to certain rooms.
This makes me more certain that there should be some secondary objective, like finding a hidden treasure, because otherwise why would players even bother solving these puzzles? The only possible reason they would want to find, e.g., a key to the garage, is to see if the killer stashed anything in there. No, I think there should be a treasure involved, too. Nothing major, just a randomly placed treasure that is guaranteed to require solving more than one puzzle to locate. If a player finds it, great! He'll be given a trophy or something at the end.
Maybe finding the treasure could let the player know precisely who the killer is. Instead of looking for riches, they could be searching for the ultimate clue, like a written confession (heh). Of course, this would require that other players aren't notified when someone finds the treasure, and then the treasure would disappear once it's found. After that, the locator will have to convince everyone he actually knows who the killer is, and that he's not lying.
This could really add a great twist to the game. Imagine being the killer, and walking in on someone blabbing to another player he found the treasure and he knows who the killer is. You'd have to be careful not to kill him right away, because otherwise everybody would know he wasn't lying, but perhaps lay low for awhile, and try to persuade others he's lying to everyone. Just an idea.
Amazing and perhaps a bit terrifyingly big ideas here. I have about 40 years to live and If making such a game could take longer, I'm gonna live even longer until that day to see this with my own eye...
Quote from: InCreator on Tue 23/03/2004 01:29:04Amazing and perhaps a bit terrifyingly big ideas here. I have about 40 years to live and If making such a game could take longer, I'm gonna live even longer until that day to see this with my own eye...
The thing is, it's really not as complicated as it may seem. I'm just talking about it a lot, so it probably seems more complex an idea than it really is. When you get right down to it, it's just a matter of giving the players a bunch of items and letting them go nuts. Once the server-client network and interface are programmed (obviously no easy feat), expansions will be comparatively simple. At least that's how I'd like to see it programmed, so that all developers have to do is copy/paste the code and just be responsible with coming up with their own items, rooms, and characters.
but it still is a lot of work...
you can have all the code in the world but if you can't make a fun game out of it it's pointless.
trying to get the people to actually explore is a problem, trying to get them to not just run away as soon as someone else walks into the room is a problem, trying to balance the game so the killer can't just kill everyone in the first minute of game play is a problem, trying to find out how the game even works is a problem.
it's more than just giving a player a bunch of items, telling them how to use them and when and why and giving them reason to is hard.
Of course! I'm very much aware of all this. I was just trying to simplify it for InCreator's sake, and just so the fundamental point of the game doesn't get bogged down in all the details. The idea is simple; creating it isn't. The only way to approach this is one step at a time.
I think the best way the right balance can be found is by lots and lots of playtesting. Once the game is functionally complete, we tweak the game often -- perhaps leave out some items, adjust how close the killer has to be to murder someone with a melee weapon, change the locations of where players and items can possibly start, etc. -- until it becomes a satisfactory, working product.
Here's a possibility for murderer's motive: lots of people on IRC seem to be the kind of people that would happily volunteer to be the murderer: maybe at the start of each game you can say if you want ot be or not. If no-one volunteers, an NPC (maybe need more than one so there is still some doubt) such as the butler becomes the murderer. Now, people might agree on #ags beforehand that no-one wants to be the murderer, but the truly devious murderer will be lying! Obviously, if more than one volunteers, only one is picked, but maybe still a small random chance of it being an NPC.
Quote from: SSH on Tue 23/03/2004 07:36:57Here's a possibility for murderer's motive: lots of people on IRC seem to be the kind of people that would happily volunteer to be the murderer: maybe at the start of each game you can say if you want ot be or not. If no-one volunteers, an NPC (maybe need more than one so there is still some doubt) such as the butler becomes the murderer. Now, people might agree on #ags beforehand that no-one wants to be the murderer, but the truly devious murderer will be lying! Obviously, if more than one volunteers, only one is picked, but maybe still a small random chance of it being an NPC.
So the motive is basically "I want to kill people"? And why would people not want to be the murderer? I think that's one reason people would keep playing the game, in hopes that they get selected as the killer! Having a possible NPC killer might be interesting...obviously, it would require that NPCs exist in the first place regardless of whether they're selected as a killer or not. It wouldn't be too difficult to tell who the NPCs are. That could really be an interesting twist. Of course, this would also require programming a somewhat complicated AI.
Just have the "murderer" selected at random. Start with a murder done by the "murderer" (who selects the mode of death or has it randomly selected). The murderer and NPC victim start off in the same room, and the killer finishes the job while the other players gain their bearings (they maybe have limited space to walk about for the first couple minutes or so). The murderer has time to hide the evidence (remove bullets/hide the knife, etc) in that scene and then the game proper begins. There are numerous weapons/items throughout the area, and a limited space in which no weapon/item can be permenantly lost or destroyed (for example, a gun placed in the river leaves a "glint" object, a knife dropped down a well can be resurfaced and a rope can be pulled from the drawer at any time. Weapon-sounds too could be "heard" within a certain distance (for example, if a gunshot is made in room A4, and you're in room A5, you might get a message saying "You hear a loud shot to the East," or "There is a scream to the East," whereas someone in B6 might hear "You think you hear a scream somewhere in the house."
Just like in other murder mystery games, everyone could take on a character with a particular past, and certain details could be inserted or altered at random at game-start-up from a pre-selected list. The murderer would be told WHY they committed the murder (out of a randomized selection), and others PCs would be told at the start bits of information that their character "knows" about other player (or, their character could find it out by looking at other players). The game would be set up such that if everyone collaborated, the evidence would point to one person, but that anyone could lie or be persuaded to join the conspiracy.
Further, create NPCs with certain skills that could not be emulated by just anyone. Things like fingerprinting expertise, local lore, etc--in reality they are programmed to give clues about the murderer based on the actions the murderer took, but they just make investigating more practical. Other players who are dead perhaps can still interact as "ghosts" with limited communication ability (say by moving things in the house from one location to another, etc., or can simply observe. If someone solves the murder, they win, and if no one solves it before a certain time-out (several days game-time, when everyone has a chance to skip the country?), the murderer wins. But the murderer has to cover their tracks because by default little clues like blood, tracks, fingerprints etc are left, including noises as above. This would be reason why murderers would have to be very careful about covering their tracks, and the information held by others would be reason to kill more people off.
In my view, this would mean programming many responses, possibilities and interactions with items (including the ability to trade), but the game itself would clearly be no more difficult than the creation of a fairly intensive game, since most puzzle-making would be fairly self-defining.
Quote from: rogermun-444 on Thu 25/03/2004 03:11:10
Just have the "murderer" selected at random. Start with a murder done by the "murderer" (who selects the mode of death or has it randomly selected). The murderer and NPC victim start off in the same room, and the killer finishes the job while the other players gain their bearings (they maybe have limited space to walk about for the first couple minutes or so). The murderer has time to hide the evidence (remove bullets/hide the knife, etc) in that scene and then the game proper begins. There are numerous weapons/items throughout the area, and a limited space in which no weapon/item can be permenantly lost or destroyed (for example, a gun placed in the river leaves a "glint" object, a knife dropped down a well can be resurfaced and a rope can be pulled from the drawer at any time. Weapon-sounds too could be "heard" within a certain distance (for example, if a gunshot is made in room A4, and you're in room A5, you might get a message saying "You hear a loud shot to the East," or "There is a scream to the East," whereas someone in B6 might hear "You think you hear a scream somewhere in the house."
I like your idea about including extra hiding places which entirely remove the item from sight, but still make it retrievable. In my opinion, destructible objects should not be allowed at all. Also, I'm not entirely sure clues should be planted at the beginning.
Here are my thoughts:
The players should feel as if they control the game, rather than feel like pawns subject to the game's design. Although giving the killer the ability to choose how he carries out his first murder gives him some degree of control, this is still an automated procedure which restricts the player's options. Different killers may want to adopt different strategies. One killer may want to be sneaky and carefully plan every murder, check around for possible witnesses before he commits it, and make sure there's a good place nearby to stash the evidence. Another killer may just grab a nearby chainsaw and start mutilating the crap out of everyone. Placing the killer in a situation where he is instantly required to flee a crime scene may go against his own personal style of gameplay.
There are certain things the game should avoid doing, such as automatically planting clues linking the murders to the secret killer at the beginning. While this would be a method to give the players something to start with, it would go against the game's philosophy of player control. It would encourage the killer to
react to the clues planted, rather than
act as he wishes.
It's important to distinguish the difference between predictable and unpredictable computer involvement. Predictable computer involvement includes, e.g., the functions of items. Once players learn the system, they will learn what items can do and where they can be used. They will learn some good places to drop items if they don't want them to be found. Unpredictable computer involvement includes, e.g., the random placement of items and players at the beginning of the game. Once the game starts, how it plays out should be left up to the players as much as possible, with automated [unpredictable] computer involvement kept to a minimum.
Alternatively, there could be a NPC murder at the beginning, without any clues left at all. In this case, the players will have to wait for the killer to make a move, while they look for the "ultimate clue" (mentioned earlier), which could be something like the killer's secret journal, or, going with the notion of a haunted mansion, invoking the spirit of the murdered NPC who reveals who the killer is. I think the idea of an ultimate clue is really what the normal players need, so they don't just wander around aimlessly waiting for the killer to strike. It would give the game a good objective for the killer and non-killers.
Quote from: rogermun-444 on Thu 25/03/2004 03:11:10Just like in other murder mystery games, everyone could take on a character with a particular past, and certain details could be inserted or altered at random at game-start-up from a pre-selected list. The murderer would be told WHY they committed the murder (out of a randomized selection), and others PCs would be told at the start bits of information that their character "knows" about other player (or, their character could find it out by looking at other players). The game would be set up such that if everyone collaborated, the evidence would point to one person, but that anyone could lie or be persuaded to join the conspiracy.
For now, I believe it's best to go with the "bare-bones philosophy"...keep the game as simple as possible. This includes little or no NPC interaction, since NPCs have to be designed and programmed. I like your ideas, though, and I think they'd work very well in a future version of the game. We'll definitely have to keep that in mind.
Quote from: rogermun-444 on Thu 25/03/2004 03:11:10Further, create NPCs with certain skills that could not be emulated by just anyone. Things like fingerprinting expertise, local lore, etc--in reality they are programmed to give clues about the murderer based on the actions the murderer took, but they just make investigating more practical. Other players who are dead perhaps can still interact as "ghosts" with limited communication ability (say by moving things in the house from one location to another, etc., or can simply observe. If someone solves the murder, they win, and if no one solves it before a certain time-out (several days game-time, when everyone has a chance to skip the country?), the murderer wins. But the murderer has to cover their tracks because by default little clues like blood, tracks, fingerprints etc are left, including noises as above. This would be reason why murderers would have to be very careful about covering their tracks, and the information held by others would be reason to kill more people off.
The possibility of poltergeists was discussed earlier, but I think it would give an unfair advantage to the normal players. All a ghost would have to do is follow the killer around until he enters a room with someone else and start madly picking up and dropping objects, so the player sees it and knows who the killer is. The way I see it, if you're a ghost, you've lost the game. The only thing you can do is wait it out. Giving people the ability to walk around and talk with other ghosts is just something for them to do so they don't sit in limbo the whole time. They could also just disconnect from the game and go walk their dog in the park if they want.
Alternatively, there could be a slight chance (25% or whatever) that one player is randomly selected as a psychic, and has the ability to commune with the dead. It could put an interesting twist on the game, since you would never be entirely sure if anyone actually has the ability, and thus you wouldn't know whether to trust them or not. The killer could be masquerading as the psychic (or in fact be the psychic...it might be funny if the killer could hear what the players say to him after he kills them). This might encourage the ghosts to at least try to communicate with every player they meet. Also, I would eventually like to see footprints, blood, setting traps, spying via binoculars through windows, and all sorts of features implemented, but most likely not in the first version (bare-bones philosophy).
Quote from: rogermun-444 on Thu 25/03/2004 03:11:10In my view, this would mean programming many responses, possibilities and interactions with items (including the ability to trade), but the game itself would clearly be no more difficult than the creation of a fairly intensive game, since most puzzle-making would be fairly self-defining.
Do you mean that NPCs would be carrying certain items that the PCs have to obtain from them? That would be a nice way to include additional puzzles requiring NPC interaction. I also think your idea of giving NPCs special abilities is a great one. Definitely something to consider for a future version. (I'm keeping a log of every idea mentioned, regardless of whether it would be necessary in the first version of the game or not.)
Would players be able to chat to each other without pre-determined phrases? If yes, I would like toleak info about a Nanotech sequel, even before the Nanotech demo.
I was just in the middle of sleeping and an idea came to me, so I came down to the computer to type it out (sorry if it's not so lucid, as I'm not).
ANYway, if you're thinking of having a supernatural element (or even if not, I guess), a possible killer motive could be a constantly-climbing "Insanity Meter" or something of the sort. See, s/he's tormented and crazy (possibly due to the game's ghosts), and has to kill in order to not totally freak out (at which point, they'd be pretty easy to spot as the killer or something).
If you ran with such an idea, the ghosts of the dead players could come into play in (somehow) tormenting their killer, making things harder and harder for him/ her as more people were killed.
Did that make any sense?...
Quote from: IntentInsane on Sun 28/03/2004 21:41:50
Would players be able to chat to each other without pre-determined phrases? If yes, I would like toleak info about a Nanotech sequel, even before the Nanotech demo.
Yes, of course, no predetermined phrases. That would be too limiting. It would be just like a regular chat, except you can only chat with people in the same room as you. A-v-o made a demo game where you just type in what you want to say and the character says it (in the Lucasartsian above-your-head style). That's kind of what I imagine the in-game chat would be like.
Whether you want to use the in-game chat for your own insidious designs would be entirely up to you. :)
Quote from: Ozwalled on Mon 29/03/2004 09:23:20I was just in the middle of sleeping and an idea came to me, so I came down to the computer to type it out (sorry if it's not so lucid, as I'm not).
ANYway, if you're thinking of having a supernatural element (or even if not, I guess), a possible killer motive could be a constantly-climbing "Insanity Meter" or something of the sort. See, s/he's tormented and crazy (possibly due to the game's ghosts), and has to kill in order to not totally freak out (at which point, they'd be pretty easy to spot as the killer or something).
If you ran with such an idea, the ghosts of the dead players could come into play in (somehow) tormenting their killer, making things harder and harder for him/ her as more people were killed.
Did that make any sense?...
Thanks for your idea (and not going back to sleep)! It would be a great way to inject some personality into the killer. I think this could be implemented, but it would have to be done carefully. For one thing, the killer needs to feel free to go at his own pace, since different killers might act differently...one player may be a tactful, thoughtful killer, planning each move carefully, while another player may be a reckless killer, hoping to quickly eliminate people before they have a chance to regroup and share secrets. However, I think making it so the killer can automatically see the ghosts of dead players might be a nice thing to put in, so the players are in charge of tormenting him. This could also be an Easter Egg that occurs in just some of the games. Maybe dead players could move in front of objects so the killer can't click on them, or block entry into other rooms. Ghosts could also have some sort of scary mode they can activate, that makes their head expand and their eyes pop out or something.
Your basic idea, making it more difficult for the killer, nails it right in the noggin. It can't be too easy for the killer to win each time. Ideally, once all players have figured out the mechanics of the game, each game should be roughly 50-50: half the time the normal players win, half the time the killer wins.
Thanku Migs, in that case I'm going to start researching a potential Nanotech online.
If AGS made multiplayer adventure games i would jump out of the window beacuse im so happy :P
I hope that windows pretty high.... lol
Have you ever considered for a start a no interaction online game? Like you can see the other character but theres no contact?
Quote from: LostTraveler on Sun 20/06/2004 23:02:33Have you ever considered for a start a no interaction online game? Like you can see the other character but theres no contact?
What would be the purpose of such a game? Just to test the functionality?
Yes, You always need a base to work off of, You dont build a tower in the sand, you need a concrete foundation
Quote from: LostTraveler on Mon 21/06/2004 16:42:22
Yes, You always need a base to work off of, You dont build a tower in the sand, you need a concrete foundation
No disagreement here. I mentioned I'd like to make a smaller game first. But your idea and more has already been accomplished in a-v-o's test game: http://a-v-o.selfhost.de/ags/ Players can walk (materialize) around and talk to each other.
Link aers not works :'(
It works fine for me.
anything happen of this? I was really interested in this project and was wondering if any progress had been made
Quote from: Babar on Thu 05/08/2004 00:56:14
anything happen of this? I was really interested in this project and was wondering if any progress had been made
Yeah, is this forum dead? What happened?
Hey Migs, what happened to this project? I remember testing avo's tcp/ip demo with you, that was like a year ago.
Is this game still in progress ??? it sounded really cool and i had some ideas. What if depending on how long you survived, or if you figured out who the killer was or you are the killer and you won, you would get points. Then you could use the points to buy new clothes or hats or other things to change your characters apperence for fun or for deception. Also, what if the killer could find a mask or something and wear that when he kills someone, so if someone sees the murder through a window or something, they dont know who the killer is and the killer could place the mask somewhere where it would frame someone else. Or what if the killer didnt have anywhere to hide the evidence, he could hide under a bed or something, so when everyone came in he could wait there until they left (of course if you were found under the bed, you could say you were hiding from the killer). Also, what if you used a knife or something similer to kill someone, there would be blood on it, so if someone saw you putting down a bloody knife you would highly be a suspect
I've had many ideas for the game, but I haven't seen Migs around for quite some time.
He came around #ags a week ago or so, try emailing him or mesaging him.
No offense, but I think that multiplayer adventuring would be completely pointless. In my opinion, a game should be completed by himself (an adventure game at least, not like other games like Guild Wars). Plus, it would really take away from the enviornment. I can just picture some dude bugging up the chatting area with things like "free sex pics at www.sexpics.com", or insulting you. Plus, there are some kinds of people who would purposely block a path, swear at everyone who's playing, take items you need and run off with them and not helping...the list is endless. If there were some way to prevent something like that, by all means, hook me up with an online adventure! Otherwise, the idea should just be left dead.
-TheCheese33
EDIT: HOLY ****! That turned into a link? NOBODY CLICK THE LINK! NO ONE! I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT WAS A REAL WEBSITE NAME!
i was thinking on this whole "Murder Mystery" thing... Why stick with the Adventure aspect of it? Why not branch out? I'm thinking, you start out in a giant mansion, with no inventory at all. You can kill any other player (provided you've found the proper means) and you can "unnoficially" make truses with players via chat. The ending effects:
-Backstabbing
-Dead where you stand
-Probably a lot of profanity
-A nearly infinite array of ways to kill or prevent yourself from being killed
-A constantly expanding/updating game
hah, sexpics.com... do you honestly this that it wouldn't be a real website?
Multiplayer adventuring should be done. It will
be amsing to see how it could expand. The
possibilities are truely endless. But none the
less, its true what cheese said people will be
annoying when it comes to these things. They
will try and spoil all our fun.
The only way around this is HAH 10 bucks a
month subscription. This will stop them from
being idiots.
That costs more than most regular video games... It could work the way the warcraft 3 games worked, one host who can kick people from the server if they act like assholes, and basically moderate the people in the game if they decide to be stupid.
I have little time, and will read this topic over once later on this week, but as you say it to me.. there is a multiplayer function on ags? does it works with scripting? if yes, could you pm with some information about it, I am very interested in a multiplayer ags game..
(this was messaged to the starter of this topic and anyone else who knows)..
anyways, this is kind of an old topic, if you are still working on this multiplayer project, I am really willing to help testing..
Greetz..
Ahem, tcp/ip plugin.
tcp/ip support for AGS is problematic at best. This in no way reflects poorly on AGS, mind. It wasn't designed around a multiplayer framework, that's the crux of it. Now you CAN (and quite easily) make a two player game that works like Super Mario Bros. etc(trading off control or using different keys for each character) but beyond that you will have a slew of performance issues.
exactamundo progZmax. though for easier, and less buggyness, why not do away with the whole online thing? there was multi-player BEFORE on-line. as you said, mario brothers. in fact a there is (or was ) a potentiay multi-player adventure game on the market.
I am thinking the maniac mansion games, but where you all huddle to gether and each plays one of the charactors. And THAT could be a model( loosely) for multiplayer adventure games.each main charactor starts in a differant location, the game is broken up into small acts, centering on each charactor. and (wowzer) it tells a STORY! though the back stabing sounds fun. it tels no story, if you can figure out how do it online, all the power to ya, but this way would be simpler and more story driven.
Hello all.
At first, I want to apologise for necroposting this old thread. I couldn't be sure if I should start a new topic.
I came up with a game idea this morning that I would want to share with you.
If I would start anew thread, it would be "Server based AGS games".
Now imagine a single-player adventure game that takes place in a -probably haunted- mansion (like Scratches). The player character is to solve a paranormal mystery (or something like that; maybe a crime).
What different is; it is possible to have a ceremony to call a spirit/genie with a seance.
Let me explain something; there is a certain type of spirit calling: Some papers with the all alphabet letters and "yes", "no" are arranged on the desk, and when the spirit comes, it moves a cup on the desk to the papers; for answering the questions of the callers.
When it rains in the game; this ceremony becomes possible to do.
And why this is about internet servers:
*The spirit is not AI. It is controlled by the admin of the game. The admin would lead the player to hints, or the inverse.
Why the rain is necessary for the seance? It only rains when an admin/mod is available.
*The content of the game is can be changed by the admin. The players get an account on servers first; and the admin can change some variables in the account. For example, whenever the player enters the bathroom, the variables about bathroom on server are checked. If Var(100)==0, the player sees the bathroom in an ordinary way. But if the player taunts the spirit, the admin can change the value to 2. I left it to your imaginary what could happen when PC enters bathroom :)
Well, I'm seriously planning to make this game. But I'm not sure if this could be achieved with AGS. First of all, a server based control panel would be requiered.
I think some other programming language is necessary for such a game.
Anyway, I'm waiting for your comments.
P.S: May I start a topic about this game in Adventure Related Talk?
The multiplayer AGS game idea is not bad at all!
The problems mentioned before are indeed possible and need attention. However, I think that problem with idiot spammer people could be solved with just a bit of modding. But then the moderator, who i suppose to be a host, couldn't play the game since he has to know everyhting. So this leads to a job opportunity which means that the system must have a server and monthly fee with enough players to keep the moderator alive. I think that is the problem.
Another way over this is just ignoring it, gathering up with buddies in a private server and just enjoy, create special chatrooms for people to meet up to gain trust between each other, so they won't turn into spammers. And besides, there are tons of games out there that deal with spammers, still they work and there are enough servers for everyone! Also, I don't think click-adventure games will be so popular among idiot spammers... They most-likely tend to go with mainstream.
The bigger problem would be instant logging in/logging out thingie. What if the murderer just logs out in the middle of the game? How long will the game last? And how exactly will the murderer capture work?
And with AGS type of games, limited items, wether they are randomly placed or not, can still cause repeating gameplays. I don't see a proper solution for that, except just making every item found on shelves, ground, chairs, cupboards etc (~100 items at least) usable in many different situations.
With such type of gameplay, if there are so many items, game can last quite long. Well, I remember playing one Natural Selection match (usually lasts for 30min) for lover 4 hours, but long online matches tend to not work properly because sooner or later people will log out.
A better way of online AGS game is to make characters more self-dependent, maybe. There could be an island and a treasure, everyones goal would be getting the treasure somehow. But people could still team up. However, this idea is more complex and I don't exactly know how and why the treasure should be found...
But anyway, I think the solving of mystery case is still worth of trying! You will never know if you don't try! Its just that the players should be organized and deticated, which I believe, at least AGS forum members will be!
EDIT:// Oh, just red the last post! Well, the idea itself is not bad but what fun will the admin get?
Quote from: radiowaves on Tue 12/12/2006 21:39:05
EDIT:// Oh, just red the last post! Well, the idea itself is not bad but what fun will the admin get?
I think it would be quite enjoyful to roleplay as an unpeaceful ghost :)
As both the 'caller' and the 'ghost' are not AI, the opportunites are unlimited (and also as the ghost has the ability to "modify" the mansion).
The TCP/IP plugin in AGS is flaky and unsupported, so I'd do it with another game-making tool, if I were you.
Quote from: SSH on Wed 13/12/2006 13:07:27
The TCP/IP plugin in AGS is flaky and unsupported, so I'd do it with another game-making tool, if I were you.
Or a better TCP/IP COULD be done, in theory.
There was a discussion about that lately. (http://www.adventuregamestudio.co.uk/yabb/index.php?topic=30467.0)
Two words.
Myst Online.
Quote from: Migs on Tue 16/03/2004 15:12:44As far as I'm aware, a similar game like this has not been made.
http://games.byond.com/hub/SuperSaiyanGokuX/MurderMansion
-- Data
What about an MMO aventure? Like, there would be one big explorable and updatable world with some scenarios, sidequests and such, which players could explore alone, or while interacting with other players. May be even a little RPG system, I mean like in Quest for Glory. There could be some individual missions, maybe a little quest for glory style monster hunting, and may be SOME missions which require teamwork (Like Maniac mansion, only multiplayer). Can this be done on AGS?
I don't know but shooters have been done in AGS. That doesn't make shooters adventure games.
There was a Halflife 2 mod made at one point, The Ship. It was basically a multiplayer murder mystery. Wikipedia's article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Ship_(computer_game)) does a decent job of describing the gameplay.
There were no puzzles involved, but it had tons of "murder mystery" ambiance. This was because there were hundreds of passengers milling about the ship, and you had no way of knowing which one of them was actually another player with you as their quarry.
The weapons you could use to "kill your quarry" were apparently hard to get ahold of, but I don't think it was a true adventure game. More of a "search and destroy." Anyone remember that old NES Spy VS Spy game? Kinda like that, only multiplayer.
I think things like online adventure FPS like halo, or HL , Or even MMORGS really stretch mutliplayer in adventures.
However
For traditional click n point adventure games, theres a limit I think.
Basically, it's 6 whole years since Migs said he would be trying this revolutionary idea out.
It's good, it will be a breakthrough, but till now, no documents, no demos, no nothing.
If anyone wants to make such a game, I hope a new post will be created. Not much constructive discussion can carry on here.
Uhm, why would you reply to a 6 year old thread saying how nobody should reply to a 6 year old thread? The next oldest post is like 3 months old.
lol
-Bill
I don't see any harm in bumping in the popular threads board. I'm sure someone, somewhere is working on something like this.
It would be an unbelievable amount of work but it would be amazing to have a free roam city filled with a set amount of puzzles and items for players to find, with a server storing all the data... and a realtime in game public transport system! No mindless killing and car theft though, please.
Servers could run until the final end game puzzle was completed, which in order to complete should require ten or so players with individual items (collected throughout previous server playtime).
If any hardcore programmers want an artist to give this a go with, give me a shout.
It's possible, easy in fact, to use the existing Legend of Green Dragon (earlier version if you don't like the new licence) and make a very similar type of game to an AGS adventure game. It's even possible to do the awareness of other player characters and their current state, etc.
Not a port of AGS, just duplicating all the same functions and instead of the many games using that engine or very similar but just displaying text, and there are legions of them, use graphics plus text, a la Facebook games, etc.
Unlike Facebook games though it is possible with eg LOGD to truly duplicate the functions of AGS, also on top of that dropping and picking up items can be put in natively- as in an inventory, indeed inventory of arrays not just single items, and so on, and also get the game to save by room or location what is plonked down there.
People including me rewrite basic modules constantly, eg there is a bank module which allows banking functions, and so one can adapt that to a general
if drop crap in room remember it's there and take it off character type thing.