Okay, now suddenly, I'm getting more interested in a Tekken vs. Virtua Fighter game again. I guess the backgrounds for the characters are good enough. They don't have to be super detailed nor do they need some kind of flashy story (at least it still has a story, just not explained in the games themselves). Of course, I still wouldn't mind the other things I mentioned though. I like the realism in the VF games so I really hope it DOESN'T get all flashy like Tekken or DOA. Possibly the only mainstream fighting game series that feels like a real martial arts competition game.
But anyway, this is such an obvious crossover. I wish this was already done before the Street Fighter/Tekken crossovers. Maybe this will be next. After all, the Capcom x Namco Bandai x Sega game might lead to it. I can't wait to see which Tekken and Virtua Fighter characters will make it in.
Story driven RPG with shooting, fighting, driving, puzzle and platforming elements.
Game World by Bethesda.
Story by Bioware.
Shooter elements by makers of Call of Duty.
Fighting elements by makers of Demon's Souls.
Puzzle elements by makers of Portal.
Platforming elements by Nintendo.
Vehicles/Mounts by makers of gRand Theft Auto/Red dead Rdemption.
Music by John Williams.
Graphics by Square Enix.
Sounds like a game with zero identify because it's trying to have dozens. Numerous production companies and designers is also nightmarish from a continuity of experience standpoint.
Sorry bro. I'd youtube the soundtrack, but that's about it.
Not really because each company or person would be in charge of their own specific area. Behesday design the history and lore and geography of the world. None of the others intrude on what they're doing. Then Bioware design the story, just like they did with a preexstiing setting like they did with kotor. Lots of shooter/fighting hybrids, with platforming and puzzle elements, or vehicles. Each designer can design each seperately. Music is obviously fine. Then Square Enix listen to Bethesda's description of the world, and bring it to life with art and graphics. No problem as I see it.
Then you've never worked in game design. Neither have I, for the record, but I am friends with those who do, and have a basic understanding of some of the structures and limitations of the job. I don't want to rain too hard on your parade here, because this is a hypothetical game on an internet discussion board. I'm sure it's awesome in your mind, which is the important thing.
But what you're missing here in the big picture is that a game isn't just a series of great elements, but how those elements work together to create a seamless experience. Ignoring for a second the raw legal, financial, and logistical nightmares of getting all these groups to work together, the game would not come out as you imagine.
Hmm. I don't know if I agree. While yes the different elements of videogeames, music, story graphics and gameplay to complement eachother to some extent, they're still very seperate. It's like within a single stuido, you have different depeartments and people working together, who may interact but are still left to individually add to the whole project. Only difference here is you have entire studios cooperating and not simply divisions.
Storywise, Bioware already proved they can work with other people's setting, as they did with Star Wars and The Forgotten Realms. Bethesda can create the setting however they like. No conflict.
Music, John Williams can do what he wants and it will be great. Perhaps he can get a sense of gameplay and music an dlook to understand how best to convey atmosphere, but still he can do his thing. Same with Square Enix and graphics.
Only problem may be with gameplay, but then, platforming is more about level design then what your character does, so perhaps nintendo can be in charge of level design, along with the portal guys to help coordinate puzzle. Vehicles should be fine. Swordfighting and shooting from two different studios would be hardesr, but if they work well together it could work.
I really think if it happened it'd be something special, my opinion.
This would be one badass crossover here. It would be the true successor to the Capcom vs. SNK games. This should satisfy fans who wanted to play Sammy vs. Capcom until it was cancelled.
Legend of Zelda game where you play as Link at beginning, only to get brutally murdered by Ganon. Rest of game you play as Zelda, hunting down Ganon on a quest of revenge. Directed by Suda51.
Nintendo Wii U owners receive their own exclusive Yoshi mounts and Toadstool pets. New Mushroom Kingdom realm outside Azeroth with all your favorite Nintendo characters! Quest Lines where the Panderans and Super Mario bros team up to thrawt the Lich King on one of his nerfarious schemes. And to coomemorate its release, for a full month before its release, the Stormwind theme will be replaced by the closing credits theme of Super Mario Galaxy. Not since Cataclysm will the World of Warcraft have been so totally revampeld. March forth Heroes of Azeroth and help protect this world against any new dangers it may face at the side of your fellow toadstool and atop the back of your Yoshi mounts! The Wolrd will truly never be the same.
Like I said, hypothetical game on an internet forum, so I won't get into it too much with you. If you ever meet a real-life game designer though, tell them this idea. I think you'll be surprised at the reaction.
I only have two ideas, and they're basically the only two things I'd ever ask of the gaming industry. For the most part, they do their jobs a lot better than I ever could, and have lots better ideas.
I. In a nutshell, it's Smash Bros. in a fully destructible 3D environment, with comic book characters. Think "Hulk: Ultimate Destruction" or any of the free-roam Spider-Man games, but with dozens of playable characters and city-sized environments to do battle in. I'd format the controls much like Smash. Bros, or THQ's wrestling games, where the basic control scheme is the same for each character, but the moves themselves are varied enough to give each character their own unique flavor.
I'd also probably break them into a few rough "tiers" of power, so that you could do justice to, say, Silver Surfer's power set without having to nuke him down to something like Captain America's level. Within each tier there would be a normalization of power balance, though, so that equal battles could be created.
There would be a geeky cameo-filled single player plot that incorporated many of the characters to get used to playing as them, but the meat would be in multiplayer.
II. This is an old idea of mine, and many of its elements have since been created. Free-roam RPG along the lines of Elder Scrolls. Except what I've always disliked in Elder Scrolls is that you could being the head of the Mage's guild AND the Warrior's guild, but actually be playing a sneaky thief-type. From a "lots to do" perspective, it's great. From a narrative one, not so much.
So, it's a Celtic setting, much less magic than most fantasy. And it's entirely free-roam, but there are several "World Paths" (my own term) that take you on completely different courses. So you could spend the game being a thief who takes over the underworld of a shady city or simply loots from the rich to live in luxury. Or you could become lord of an entire area of the country, leading armies into battle and controlling the social and economic stability of your empire. Or several equally as diverse paths between those two extremes. Some might overlap, but you could not do all of them. Classic RP elements and skill customization would be present, and there would be medieval-fantasy style upgrades that you could hunt down and acquire that would cater your character to different play styles (think Deus Ex but in fantasy terms). There would also be some basic turn-based strategy elements that have to do with kingdom management (or organization management for other Paths), but as much as possible I'd want them dealt with in an intuitive way that doesn't take the player out of the experience.
Questing would deal much more with politics and human interaction, and not so much "clear the dungeon, get loot." Assassinations, protecting villagers from raiders, that sort of thing. The world would need to feel alive, with quest trees branching out from actions in such tasks.
The level of detail I've built into this world would require a much larger and more intricate game than any that exists. It would need a functioning economy, cities as big as many games, and quest trees that allow for each World Path to be satisfying and epic (since there's no "main" quest).
...
The first of those is completely possible, and would kick all kinds of ass if done properly.
The latter probably isn't, because the production time would be ghastly, and the elements too diverse to put into a polished product. It's part of the reason I latched on to the Game of Thrones show recently. I was like "well damn, this is basically the book/TV form of my game, just with different settings and characters."
Which is what I assumed, but that's why I was confused. It's an internet forum after all...you have to allow for more than a couple hours for a reply most times.
Haha I know I was just kidding, I saw that you wrre online so thought I'd say it...
BTW I really like the second idea. One thing I though, that would be cool ins this kind of RPG, is if we have moments where the story changes, we can call them trees, the threes are usually choices that you make, but what if the trees became performance instead? So depending on how you do, lets sya hoq uickly you egt somewhere, or how many people you kill, how far you get into a competiion etc, the story chanegs vastly depending on how you do. Or perhaps the tree could be you dying, where you get revived as a ghost or a zombie or something, and you take part in a completely seperate story as an undead instead. And if you never die you take part in main story. And both stories can be connected as well, just from two completely different perspectives with different results. Stfuf like that could make the main story branches very big and different, and I think could be really cool.
Also I always thought that xp systems were slightly flawed, as sometime repetition can make you worse at something than better at it. Constant use of your muscles can wear your body down over time. Repetitive actions can make your limbs stiff or inoperable. You spend too much time reading you get tired more quickly. Etc...
The last change is a push for abject real-world realism in a video game, which doesn't necessarily translate. A lot of "realistic" aspects of things are left out because it would be less fun. Where's the fun in becoming tired from reading? And even if you can answer that for yourself, you have to justify it for a larger audience to warrant inclusion in the game. Nobody wants to take it easy with their badass warrior because he got a muscle cramp.
That's the general idea with branching stories, though I'd rather it be about player choice than arbitrary performance that the player may or may not be aware of. It's an interesting concept at least. I'd stay away from overt paranormal aspects like ghosts or zombies, but that's only because of the setting.
I was probably at work and just left my KMC tab up. I generally only post for about 10 minutes over lunch unless it's a really slow day.
What about time travel? One thing I thought would be really cool is that you could travel back in time to a place you had previously been, and you get to observe your very own in-game activity itself (rather than say a cutscene), and perhaps you could try your hardest to somehow form contact, but no matter what you do elements of the environment and people around you and obstacles and circumstances etc. prevent you from changing anything (if in the setting it was so that you can't change the past). That would be quite a cool feeling imo, you could try your hardest to change the past, in-game itself, and while it seems like you would the game just stops your every attempt.
It's a pretty accepted idea, and backed with empirical evidence, that players respond to rewards. It's the reason we have a level structure in many games, and also explains the rise in popularity of achievements in games. Such a game as you describe, were it to achieve any popularity in the first place, would induce ME3-ending style riots. Or would simply be ignored.
I was with you on the time travel aspect though. Lots of fertile ground for game mechanics there.
But would it be reward to change the past, and would it matter when the game still rewards you at the end of the quest maybe by you ultimately finding success in what you are doing? I disagree there are lots of games that prevent you form doing stuff, whether its going somewhere or being able to do something. Gamers don;t get hung up on small stuff like that. If the game at the ending completely shits on all the effort you put into it, then that is something else.
I still think it would be really cool. Just imagine; you know you need to prevent your previous actions to save the one you love. You travel back in time. You feel like you are literally in shouting distance of your past player. And no matter how hard you try to reach him, to catch his attention, to sotp him, tpo even slightly alter your original gameplay experience, the game uses something to stop you. Of course this is just a concept. It would be up to scenario designer to work out the details.
KMC Community Forums
Mar 23rd, 2012 08:12 PM
