Hensman Int'l wrote:Another thought... How about those games we've started for a small competition but didn't finish in time? I have a few that I did not complete that might fit into this concept.
Duncan_B wrote:Why have a room limit? I like the idea that each floor could be wildly asymmetrical and have no chance of "lining up" with the previous or next floor.
If we want people to just go through the rooms in order, why not use stairs instead of an elevator? I have no personal problems with an elevator, that's just a thought. Is it necessary for players to go through in any particular order, do you think?
Campbell wrote:I'm not sure object redundancy should matter too much as disambiguation is much improved now. I do wonder how the world model will work though, implementing verbs not in the standard library. For example, someone implements "shake", and creates a default response to this, perhaps with a "shakeable" property for objects. If there is any overlap with another floor then tasks may fail to run.
I suppose each entrant could create a location group and restrict any custom verbs to their floor.
Po. Prune wrote:Maybe if you made it max. 10 rooms in stead of a limit of 10 rooms?
I know it's the same but with a max of 10 rooms you indicate that everything up to 10 rooms is acceptable, whereas a limit of 10 rooms sound like you expect 10 rooms ... Or maybe it's just me.
Another thing. It sounds to me that you are planning on having this project growing through time, meaning that people can add to the building endlessly. But do you think people would go back and play the game again?
This also calls for a descission whether you should create a random elevator, or the player should be able to choose the floor s/he wants to go to.
If you choose the random solution the player could end up on a floor where s/he'd already been once. Unless you put in a restriction so the player can't land on the same floor twice. But by doing that you need to make sure that the player can't leave unless s/he has completed the "floor"
Are you sure you realise what you've gotten yourself into?
ralphmerridew wrote:I'd suggest not allowing objects to be transferred between floors; you'd have to be aware of everything on every other floor otherwise. Imagine having a puzzle that requires feeding a hungry creature. You'd have to know which objects from other floors to have it accept, or arbitrarily just have it refuse food objects from other floors. If you allow objects to be transferred between floors, but players just get used to objects not working on other floors, then requiring an object from another floor is bad. You'd better at least give a reason why the player should expect to use that one object.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests