RPG with large open world/Open ended scenrio

[Captain Shrek]

Can such a game be really great?

NOTICE ADJECTIVES LIKE: Large, Open etc.

Consider the following limitations:

1) How will you make the quest line interesting?
2) How will the compass work? How will the map work?
3) How will you have large number of NPCs that actually look/say different things.
4) How will you populate the world?
5) Will you simulate an economy?
6) How will you design the RPG elements so that they don't get repetitive or Boring?
7) What about the enemies? Remember that soon you will become too powerful for the enemies with lots of combat available early. Should there be respawning? Should there be level scaling?
8) Will you like a Enemy vs. Enemy system?


And other points you can think of.

 

[Raapys]

1. Well-written non-cliché story, many, hopefully well-made, non-combat quests( puzzles, investigations, etc.)
2. North south east west. The map will have world locations and names on it.
3. Randomization when it comes to appearances, anything from hight and facial/body features to beard growth, within reasonable and game-world consistent parameters. No easy way to make them say different things if you want many of them, just have to do it the hard way and make lines for it all, preferably triggered my some ( not necessarily player-triggered) world event. Daggerfall tried the other way and it didn't work too well(even if it had worked as intended).
4. 'Realistically'.
5. Too much work for too little gain, I suspect. Would definitely be a cool feature, but it's too exploitable and whatnot. Player could easily ruin everything and making the AI adjust would be difficult. Difficult to balance, too.
6. What exactly are RPG elements?
7. Don't have a lot of them. The shitty way most games do it is to not have you walk 10 meters without meeting an enemy. This is bullshit. Save enemies for special encounters, and stop having the entire forest aggro you on sight.
8. Simulated AI wars and stuff? Good in theory, but never really worked well in practice.

But yes, it can definitely be great. But if you go for the really large stuff, you pretty much have to do it Daggerfall-style, and that makes it lose some depth. You'll have "template" quests and NPCs and stuff, instead of hand-written. Can still be good, though maybe not great, but it's much harder to do than simply just scripting everything by hand as in most newer titles.

 

[Xi]

Can such a game be really great?

NOTICE ADJECTIVES LIKE: Large, Open etc.


1) How will you make the quest line interesting?

In a grand open world type of game, you really cannot accomplish a grand story to go with it. It makes no sense to even try. It would be better to manage a bunch of micro-stories that have branching interactions so that choices made in one area affect other aspects of the game later on. You have numerous beginnings and ends. Maybe have the stories range to a few hours in themselves, but have lots of them!

The other reason you do this is to create re-playability. If you have a character system that has consequences so that characters are unique, and many story arcs that are both unique and inter-related via branching, the game can be designed to play through numerous different times. The other side of this is consequences for story choices, reputation, etc. Modern games don't offer story consequences because in doing so the developers would be shutting off gameplay where there was very little to begin with. Thus, you solve this via lots of micro-stories where the player can decide how to resolve them.

The final result, IMHO, would be an experience unique to the player and how they played the game. That's key. How did you resolve that one micro-quest? Who did you side with? What moral choices did you make? What other areas of the game did it affect?!

 

[Vaarna_Aarne]

Yes, if you had infinite resources so you wouldn't need to cut around corners.

 

[Mastermind]

Working on a design on this type of game myself. Probably never make it but the design process itself is its own reward.

1) How will you make the quest line interesting?

IMO, stories need at least one of two things to be interesting (and it should preferably have a bit of both):

a) Intrigue. Political plots, manipulation, cat and mouse games, etc.
b) Mystery. Reveal the bare bones so any idiot can access them. Add some meat for the player to discover on his own for those so inclined. This could be anything from hidden motivations of antagonists or seemingly friendly players to discovering things that may or may not be related to the plot that will make things easier for you in the long run. Something like New Vegas's main plotline, only without being spoonfed details about helios, the boomers or hidden robot armies. Leaving those things for the player to discover and use to his advantage in the final battle would have added a great deal of extra satisfaction to the plot.

2) How will the compass work? How will the map work?

I actually intend to make maps and stuff like quest compasses a part of the skill system. IIRC I have this stuff under the Exploration skill. A character with little to no skill in it would have a (very) basic map with just his location and major settlements he discovered marked on it. As he gains skill points and related abilities he'll be able to map out more and more details. Eventually, once he has the equivalent tracking and mapping skills of a grandmaster ranger he'll be able to predict the location of dungeons and ruins from huge distances, as well as figure out the type and strength of creatures within the dungeon (abstracted tracking, basically). Detailed text description of each location, including likely patrol patterns and types of traps will be included. Wisdom and Intelligence will also be able to pinpoint some locations, based on assumed prior reading in the case of the former and deductions based on obscure hints in the latter. The possibility of buying maps from scouts and rangers or finding/looting them will also be available, with more complex maps being considerably more expensive.

3) How will you have large number of NPCs that actually look/say different things.

I probably won't as the scope of my game is huge and it just isn't realistic to voice what could amount to npcs in the millions. I'll probably just divide them into (a large number) of archetypes and give them generic lines for that. If I ever make it I would really like to use an advanced text to speech system so that I'm not dependent on voice actors and can throw in voiced stuff on the fly, but that's well into the future.

4) How will you populate the world?

Through the level editor.

5) Will you simulate an economy?

I'd very much like to. In fact one of the five archetypes the classes are built around (the agent) has the skills necessary to become a powerful lord/merchant with his money grubbing tendrils all over the world. The opportunity for the player to not just influence but be heavily invested in the economy would be there. This would also mix well with some of the other skills (like using engineering funded by your enterprises to build a massive steamwork creature army, or alchemy + merchant acquired labs to equip your mercenary army with grenades and potions).

6) How will you design the RPG elements so that they don't get repetitive or Boring?

Have lots of them. There's 10 primary attributes, about 16 races, some of which have subraces (15 for human is about as high as they get IIRC), all apart from commoner humans having specific (and more important, useful and highly distinct) special abilities. The skill system was running at near 100 skills, though I've toned it down a little as I would like each skill to have a lot of things you can do with it. In other words, variety and lots of options. The spell system is also immense, with about 15 basic domains, each of which has 8 circles you can learn. For example, fire magic starts off with the Heat circle, which allows you to singe enemies, melt ice, keep yourself warm in deadly cold environments or piss off enemies. A mid-tier aspect is the Blaze circle, which allows you to create actual fire. Getting set on fire is a big deal because it won't go away on its own. For weaker spells/flames you can just stop, drop and roll if you've got the skill and mental fortitude not to panic. For stronger fires you'll have to jump into water and for the most powerful fires even jumping into water won't help, you'll have to use powerful extinguish spells/potions or die. The 7th circle, lava will require you to have some knowledge of earth magic as well before you can even learn it, but lava is one of the most powerful attacks in the game, taking off a % of the enemy's health in addition to the normal damage, blinding enemies permanently if it hits the face, and latching on to them (and slowing them down in the process). It can also be used more subtly (like melting a lock so the door is permanently jammed). Each spell domain also unlocks a certain type of spell that increases tactical options considerably. At higher air magic levels you can get the ability to create cloud spells, which linger in an area affecting everything in them. Earth spells can create walls, ranging from earth's own metal walls which are very hard to destroy (and possibly spined), fire walls that burn and set on fire anything that walks through them, Order magic walls that create impenetrable force fields and space/time magic walls that teleport enemies to a pre-determined anchor (if you don't bother with that it flings them into outer space ).

7) What about the enemies? Remember that soon you will become too powerful for the enemies with lots of combat available early. Should there be respawning? Should there be level scaling?

Enemies in the wild will mostly spawn randomly. I might have a rarity or extinction meter that affects spawn rates, but it wouldn't be a priority and I won't cry myself to sleep if I don't have it.

Dungeons would be slightly different in that enemies will eventually respawn, but the player will be able to find and destroy a certain object (like an altar) which will permanently end respawning in that dungeon and maybe drop a useful item. I don't like the idea of finite enemies in an open world game, but I also want to allow the player to set up bases in obscure dungeons if they choose to, so this is a nice compromise.

8) Will you like a Enemy vs. Enemy system?

There are a lot of factions from rival countries to smaller cults. Some of them hate each other and will start hacking if they meet. There will be no weird stuff like bandits and wild animals only attacking the player. Anyway, sorry, I got a little carried away there.

 

[mondblut]

Can such a game be really great?

*Only* such a game can be really great.

1) How will you make the quest line interesting?

I dunno, by creating good quests? You know, just like in railroading shit but with a benefit of being subject to logic and sense blissfully absent from the former.

2) How will the compass work? How will the map work?

The compass points north. The map represents the terrain on a two-dimensional surface in a smaller scale.

3) How will you have large number of NPCs that actually look/say different things.

A database of conditional generic conversations and a face generator are old as dirt. All different, what for?

4) How will you populate the world?

By spawning a shitload of generic random NPCs using a conditional algorithm for different cultures etc.

5) Will you simulate an economy?

Being blissfully void of the "every subsequent town is 10 times more expensive than the previous one" is very helpful for the healthy economy. It's not like any kind of a computer game devoted to killing thousands of well-armed individuals and ancient hoarders of magical treasures AND taking all their stuff could support any kind of healthy economy in the first place.

6) How will you design the RPG elements so that they don't get repetitive or Boring?

Oh, but you don't. Somehow some people get an impression an "open-ended game" is ought to be enjoyable nothing short of forever. Bullshit. A tourist doesn't have to run faster than a bear, a tourist only has to run faster than another tourist.

A freeform openended RPG isn't supposed to bring you 10 hours of relentless enjoyment every day of your life until you're 90 years old. Providing more entertainment than an average grindfest-on-rails and for a little while longer is just about enough. Games like Darklands, Daggerfall, Mount&Blade, Unreal World do get repetetive and boring after a while, yes. What's important is that the "a while" in question lasts a lot longer than any given railroaded game.

7) What about the enemies? Remember that soon you will become too powerful for the enemies with lots of combat available early. Should there be respawning? Should there be level scaling?

A little bit (sic!) of both is unavoidable and acceptable. What's truly important is that by the time you became so powerful nothing can challenge and entertain you any more, you already have enjoyed the game for longer than non-freeform one.

8) Will you like a Enemy vs. Enemy system?

Wut? AI fighting one another? Sure, why not.

 

[Mastermind]

I missed the level scaling. How I'd handle it:

1. No level scaling for most of the world itself. The most dangerous spots will be hidden well enough that you'd have to go out of your way to find them. If you see bones littered everywhere around a cave and you walk in as a level 1 mage whose offensive power is limited to causing mild irritation, you deserve to die.
2. Some characters (companions, other active players in the main quest) will gain power in the same way you do.
3. If someone sends out assassins after you, he will send assassins appropriate to the power level the person who wants you dead thinks you have. No sense sending a veteran after a newbie or newbies after a player who razes cities to the ground. I want the player to be able to pretend he's weak if he wants to, and scaling would kinda ruin that.