• 🏆 Texturing Contest #33 is OPEN! Contestants must re-texture a SD unit model found in-game (Warcraft 3 Classic), recreating the unit into a peaceful NPC version. 🔗Click here to enter!
  • It's time for the first HD Modeling Contest of 2024. Join the theme discussion for Hive's HD Modeling Contest #6! Click here to post your idea!

Tamer ORPG. Direct or indirect monster control?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Level 13
Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
1,009
Alright I'm making an ORPG where the player can control one master at a time with up to 3 ownable.

I was given the idea to make the monsters indirectly controlled. You'd be given a spellbook ability full of monster commands like attack, move, ability 1,2,3,4, hold position, etc. By default it will follow you around and attack anything close to you.

Would this be better than say the creature being under your direct control? I mean what do you think people would be more open to?

Pros and cons to indirect control:

[+]More realistic and simpler to control.
[+]Adds depth and strategy to character control.

[-]More coding work.
[-]Makes some systems impossible or incompatible.

Will add more as I see them, or expand them to be more detailed.

Would like to get an idea of what people think. This is gonna be a save/load ORPG, and the monsters do save. Levels and all.
 
Level 4
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
118
Eh its hard to tell which could possibly be better because it depends on the likes/dislikes of the player. But the Indirect sounds pretty good, with the spell book idea though, you could go more in-depth and use the move command for them to be like when you click move, another part of the book comes up asking which direction and the unit will move a default distance. They can still follow the player, but a pro for this would be a bigger area covered by your units, and if you want them closer to you, then tell them to move back.
 
Level 13
Joined
Jul 26, 2008
Messages
1,009
Monsters wlil not have a sight range, which will change the dynamic of the game. Because of this, keeping your monster in sight range is somewhat vital.

When you want to tell the beast you control to move, it'll be a spell with the range of your sight radius. This will prevent the creature from moving out of your sight and into dangerous predicaments.

When you move out of sight of your beast, he will close the gap and move back to your position. The point of this is to allow your beast to take the first plunge into areas you know are dangerous, then follow up to support him. Beasts will be better at managing damage than Beast Tamers.

An Eyes of the Beast spell may be created that'll extend the sight radius of the beast and leash range of the beast, we'll see.

It seems the majority of people may feel they'll have a better time with indirect control, which is good. That's what I want to go with.
 
Level 5
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
123
Indirect would make it more realistic. If you made a system that gave you basic control over the animal then as you progressed it gave you more advanced options.
Otherwise it is just a matter of charming an animal.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top