Hello everyone!
Some time back I posted my idea for a game in the interest check thread. I’m working on a medieval-fantasy game where you play as a ruler (king/queen). The game is very sandboxy in nature. I wish to give players a huge amount of freedom, so everyone can truly be the ruler they want to be. Given the nature of the game, there won’t be one overarching storyline, but rather a larger amount of smaller plots, while the player will get to do most things you’d imagine a medieval fantasy ruler would. I want to make this game feel like a grand-strategy game, which still has narrative quality of HG and CoG games, even if it may be not as strong in this case considering the nature of the project.
Now, I am debating a very important decision. I could take the game in direction of one ruler’s story, with hand-crafted side characters and ROs, where the death would mean the end of the game. Or I could go for even bigger sandbox, and give players an ability to continue as the player’s heir esentially allowing the players to play for a long long time creating a dynasty, with characters that aren’t 100% hand-crafted, but rather act on a sort of personality system.
The first option would certainly feel more like a typical HG or CoG game.
The second option is more experimental, so I feel like I should expand on the idea. Every character in the game would have theirs’ personality traits which would determine how they act. A very callous person would have different dialogue than a compassionate person. Characters would also have hobbies and other personality-related traits, which would for example determine what they can invite you to do and much more. I’d certainly like to write a lot of romance content, because I’m a sucker for it, so there would be that as well. And this way, the game wouldn’t be limited by a number of ROs, so there wouldn’t be anything stopping you to get that advantageous marriage with any royal house in the game, or finding secret love with a servant or your royal guard. But there is one minus I see: It would be inevitable that you’d see some scenes more than once with different people, because I can only write so much. On the other hand, it would allow for a new expirience with a grand-strategy feeling to it, with a great amount of freedom, and where the player can affect their story to a great extent.
So, what do you think about this rather atypical way of approaching characters in IF? I’m attaching a voting poll, but I’d be more than happy to read your thoughts on this. Thanks to everyone who votes or replies!
I prefer the more traditional way: One playable protagonist, hand-crafted characters, limited amount of ROs, multiple set endings etc.
I think I might like the more experimental approach more: Possibility to play as my heirs, personality-based characters and ROs, bigger sandbox etc.
I voted for the single playable protagonist as I tend to prefer that, but if you’re into the strategy, longer-scale approach, that’s great too.
I will say that the audience here leans heavily towards customising playable characters, so would recommend the heir characters being customisable rather than having set characteristics.
I’d also say it will be a huge amount of work to make it not feel repetitive. I worked on a multiplayer non-IF game along these lines, and building the system for triggering storylines in the sandbox was very time-consuming, as was writing a wide variety and volume of characters and stories for players to engage with. With repeated characters or scenes, it is also harder for players to have the feeling of freedom or impact.
All that said, it sounds like you may be feeling more excited about the dynasty approach, and it can be great to try something outside the box - so if that’s calling to you, go for it!
I like the experimental idea because is a new to this type of games (i imagine is maybe as the crusaider king type of dinasty ) but as the name says is experimental so i don’t kwon how really gonna looks like
Both certainly have their place. But if you are going to choose the ‘infinite’ option then I think you will have to accept that after a certain point it will cease to really… be a story where people read every bit with intention and focus. More likely just having people repeat actions to get the numbers up or to get a certain goal. Be it a dedicated or made up. Although most commonly, the next properly written scene that isn’t made up of random personas or generalized characters.
It is sorta what I experienced in uh… The war for the west I think it was called. After a certain point. Particularly if I was replaying it. I’d just zoom through all the building stuff boredly waiting until one of the pre-written events happen so I can see what happens next.
This can of course be defeated by a frankly insane amount of writing. But I am not sure anyone should bring about themselves such suffering. It is sort of why the green orc story never appealed to me despite its huge 1 million+ word count. The more sandboxy aspect of it meant that I was less building something or trying to create an orc army and more so just trying out options that lead to actual like dialogue and characters.
Just keep that in mind given the medium’s limitations, But otherwise. Go crazy with what seems most fun to write though. At the end of the day though. Doesn’t matter if you min-max genres and readability and all that jazz if you just don’t enjoy writing it.
If you’re comfortable at writing with code and have experience with writing and finishing CYOA games, then experimental could be a great way to give yourself more to play with as an author and I’d imagine it being a great way to learn more about programming/writing for choicescript. Otherwise, I believe it could prove to be much more taxing on a new author to code so many different scenarios and follow the branching than solid RO’s.
I voted for the experimental approach because it seems like you’re excited about it, which is the most important thing, and because I think if you’re going a non-traditional route, you might as well see how far you can take it.
That said, I encourage you to consider the advice of HarrisPS and dryinspection very carefully. The community on the forums tends to prefer a more traditional take on their HG/CoGs and so if mass appeal is important to you, or if big sales and popularity are goals for you, then you may be better served going the traditional route.
I think you are absolutely right about the repeating content. I am aware of it and that it will be inevitable shall I decide to go the experimental way. But to be honest, I think that’s okay. If I go the experimental way, this project will actually be more game than interactive book. If I could make enough written content and enough fun systems (such as warfare or tourneys) for like 3 generations, I think I’d be happy for the base game.
But people seem to like the more traditional approach so far. And even though I do this mostly for fun, I still want to write something that people actually enjoy playing. I’ll wait for a couple of days to see how people voted, and then I’ll move forward.
Thank you very much for your feedback! I truly appriciate it!
I think both you @HarrisPS, and you @yelhsa are right about the difficulty of such a project. The code is the thing I fear the least. Although I am pretty new to coding, I’ve been playing with it for the last two months, and I found the language easy to grasp. I am also using CSIDE, which is so intuitive that it’s amazing. And even if it’s a simple language, I feel like we can create a lot with it, including complex systems. (I just wish the bug with *rand and going into the stats tab would go away )
What I fear the most is the writing itself. I’m new to it, and I’m not a native speaker. (Although many who have WIPs here aren’t, and they write wonderful prose, so I shouldn’t be using it as an excuse )
Either way I go, I’ll be doing this mostly for fun. Even if making money from something you enjoy doing is great, creating something even just a few people find fun to play and I actually enjoy creating is much more important to me. I’ll wait for a couple of days to see how people voted, and I’ll go from there.
Thank you all for feedback! I truly appriciate it!
As a huge Crusader King’s fan and a fan of Dynasty games in general, I love the second option and the overall premise a lot . . . though I think option 2 will be tricky to pull off. Either way cheering you on and looking forward to checking out the game eventually! Best of luck!
Kind of a side bar, but this isn’t really a bug (technically, choicescript is setting the random variable when it sees it, which is what it’s meant to do). It sure is annoying though, I agree!
The way I get around this when I use *rand is to call it a little while before you need the results of the variable.
For example, if you put the *rand before a *page_break where the results are actually displayed, then the value will have already been set on a previous page, and *rand won’t get re-run even when the player goes into the stats screen.
Does that make sense?
examples
*rand color 1 3
Your hat is @{color blue|yellow|green}.
This will change the value of color every time the player goes into the stats page, like you say.
But
*rand color 1 3
*page_break
Your hat is @{color blue|yellow|green}
won’t have the same effect if the player goes to the stats page after the page break, because the variable has already been set on a previous page.
If you have a *choice that lets the player randomize something, you can similarly set the *rand stuff before the choice, and then just display the results after the player chooses what to randomize. That will have the same effect.
example
Buggy version
*choice
#Randomize a new character.
*goto new_character
*label new_character
*rand personality 1 5
*rand height 1 3
*rand clothing 1 5
Your character is a @{personality haughty|flirty|hilarious|boring|tired} woman of @{height short|medium|tall} height wearing a @{clothing knee-length robe|worn traveller's outfit|very fancy disco suit|t-shirt and pants|sundress}.
Non-buggy version
*rand personality 1 5
*rand height 1 3
*rand clothing 1 5
*choice
#Randomize a new character.
*goto new_character
*label new_character
Your character is a @{personality haughty|flirty|hilarious|boring|tired} woman of @{height short|medium|tall} height wearing a @{clothing knee-length robe|worn traveller's outfit|very fancy disco suit|t-shirt and pants|sundress}.
@Zodac01 Crusader Kings series surely is one of my inspirations. I love when you get huge freedom in games, especially when the possibilities are fun and intriguing. Only thing I feel like could be done better in CK games are personal relationships with characters. And I know, I know that really isn’t the focus of such games. But it seems to me like it almost always is the focus in IF. So I feel like combining the best of the two could result in an interesting project.
And yeah, I absolutely agree with you that the more experimental approach will be harder to pull off. People here also seem to prefer the more traditional approach so far, but to be honest, I’m still tempted to just try going with the second one. I’ll give it a bit more time, and I’ll see.
Thank you for your insightful reply and the fact that you took time to provide those clear examples, @Stewart_Baker ! I’ll have to use this workaround a lot if I decide to take the experimental approach. I’ve already coded some of the systems for my game, and I can tell that this will end up being a code-heavy project shall I decide to double down on the sandboxy aspect of it. So keeping this in mind as well is annoying, and it will certainly make debugging a little bit more tedious, but I’ll get used to it I’m sure.
I think the answer ultimately depends on what you want to do, but something to consider is that the choicescript engine is designed specifically to make the ‘traditional’ CoG/HG type of work. If you go down that route, you have an advantage in that the affordances you gain from the engine work well with your story structure and theme.
With your experimental approach, you may find you are fighting the medium, and might be better off in a more generic game engine so you can focus on the more procedural and systemic elements of your design.
But, like a few people have noted, it sounds like you’re excited about this idea, and at the end of the day, making something you really enjoy is what’s going to prepel you to seeing this thing through to the end.
I think there is room for both. We will never overcome the barriers of the experimental approach unless we try, but that’s not to say they are non-existent. If you’re enthusiastic about the experimental approach, do it for yourself, do it for the craft, and hey, maybe it will work out. I think that the traditional approach is tried and tested and much more often results in satisfying characters and relationships, but the genre will stagnate if we don’t get pioneers willing to try different things, even if they’re likely to fail.
I think a “Crusader Kings game but more character focused” sounds really cool. But I second the idea that a multigenerational game in ChoiceScript would be really difficult to execute properly. At least with the idea that relationships will be more in-depth than CKIII.
As a suggestion for compromise: why don’t you write one game that focuses on the life (personal life and as a ruler) of a singular person. When you’re done with the game, if you’re still in love with the concept, you can always create a sequel dealing with the child of the original character. Hosted Games can easily transfer game data. That way you can create a focused game dealing with kingdom management and character relationships while still leaving the door open to that multigenerational storytelling. All why not locking yourself into either strategy you may regret
@Anna_B
I’m currently planning out everything that would need to be done should I take the experimental route. Even if most people seem to prefer the traditional approach, I still want to entertain the idea at least for a bit to really help me decide. Your idea is great, and if I find the experimental option too difficult to create, I’ll probably go the way you described.
Thank you for helping me in this creative process, as well as everyone else who shared their opinion under this post!
But there is one minus I see: It would be inevitable that you’d see some scenes more than once with different people, because I can only write so much. On the other hand, it would allow for a new expirience with a grand-strategy feeling to it, with a great amount of freedom, and where the player can affect their story to a great extent.
)
