Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

Video Game Ideas: Ever Had One?


grhqofb5

Recommended Posts

Plenty of threads on here about gaming, etc., but here's a new one: Have you ever had an idea for a video game, or a game you wish someone would make, etc.

 

Here's mine (which may be really dumb and boring to some of you).  If you remember back around 1995, a game called DOOM 2 was out on PC, was very big, etc. Something like 30 levels, you could walk around, open doors, there was a pretty intricate layout of each level, elevators, stairs, stuff on walls, and various other details.

 

Now what if Major League baseball came up with a game, similar layout, where you could walk around all 32 stadiums and basically just do whatever. Get popcorn, buy a bobble-head, eat some nachos.  Could even roll it into an actual baseball game, just make the stadium tour a special option or something.  Or make an MLB franchise game where you act as the GM and have to deal with the business part.  Like roller coaster tycoon.

 

Would you buy it?  Any other thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a thread like this has been done before. Anyways, like I've mentioned before, my dream game is a multi-layered, open world cop game. Your standard tutorial will be the Police Academy, which will cover (in a broad sense) everything that the game entails.

 

Like Fallout 3, you'll have a built in skill system, that you can mod to your liking, which gives you an advantage in certain career paths (Regular blue, SWAT, State Trooper, Gang Unit, Detective/Homicide, Surveillance, Undercover, etc, and groups within them). Then you get the specific job tutorial, like the SWAT Sniper, Helicopter Pilot, pursuits, raids, hostage situations, robberies, drug busts, etc.

 

Each assignment you are given have 3 or more built in chapters Also, each assignment/chapter can be replayed from a different POV after each time you complete that particular storyline. In a bank heist (SWAT), imagine being able to control the sniper, the helicopter pilot, or an individual on the team being sent in, repelling from the helicopter In the detective portion of the game, some cases )depending on how ell you gather clues) will purposely go cold (in game time not real world time) only to heat up again after you get a break in the case.

 

As a regular blue, you will be assigned to patrol a particular area, where anything is bound too happen You have to respond to calls, make routine stops( where at one  end of the spectrum you will be stopping a harmless, yet neurotic soccermom, and at the other end,  you have to immediately avoid a point blank gunshot, and being run over. You will be called for backup, and you can radio for backup.

 

The city will be either open world Miami, or open world Vegas. Games like The Getaway, Payday: The Heist, and Heavy Rain ort of touched on what I would want the game to be like, from a strategical, intensity, and realism standpoint, but I would want it to be more exclusive and immersive, and thick with plenty of activities... and difficult. This aint no playplay. You will have to use your brain. You will have to employ strategy.

 

There will be no magic healthpacks, painkillers, bottles of vodka, pieces of chicken, etc, only real life first aid stuff that will either help you manage minor stuff, or slow your bleeding enouh to give you a window to complete your task before you die One well placed hit will kill you (depnding on weapon, range, and overall skill of the bad guys), instantly, and where you are hit will determine how effective you are (like speed, accuracy, etc) so using great cover tactics is a must, or you will find dying to be the easiest thing in the game.

 

Lastly, it will be real, but not too real, meaning everything will be done within the game to keep your attention, and maximize your experience, meaning no going to but fast food (unless it's part of a cutscene), taking a dump, walking your dog, or anything like that. Please someone, make this (or something like it ) happen. Anything sort extra curricular will be done videogame style. Oh, and if verything goes well, I would also have a Secret Service/ FBI DLC ready to roll.

 

 

This upcoming gen I think has the potential to pull off a game like the one I mentioned. Other dream games of mine would be a full fledged 18th century pirate game (which may be coming with Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag) and a game based on time travel, or some other deep space/sea exploration kind of game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a thread like this has been done before. Anyways, like I've mentioned before, my dream game is a multi-layered, open world cop game. Your standard tutorial will be the Police Academy, which will cover (in a broad sense) everything that the game entails.

 

You've mentioned this before?  I don't seem to recall that.  At any rate, your idea is a good one. But I think the whole "you're shot once and you're likely dead" thing would annoy a lot of people.  Sort of like real life isn't all that exciting, so need to have more action.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've mentioned this before?  I don't seem to recall that.  At any rate, your idea is a good one. But I think the whole "you're shot once and you're likely dead" thing would annoy a lot of people.  Sort of like real life isn't all that exciting, so need to have more action.

 

Yeah I have. I don't know if all the old threads can be found since the site change yet, though. But yeah, I've mentioned it before. As for the one shot thing, it can happen, but like I said, it has to be a very good shot. I've played games like Rainbow Six: Vegas, and Uncharted: Drakes Fortune, where I've been killed by one shot, whether it was close range (like a shotgun blast), or a head shot. That, I don't think falls into the "Too real" category. You can counter that with constant movement, cover, and flanking. I'm flexible though  :). Like eliminating the limb shots that affect your movement. Maybe there can be a non armor "3 Strikes" policy, and bullet proof vests and such.

 

I just think some games go overboard with the checkpoints and healthpacks, and it makes it kind of boring sometimes. I figure why not try some innovation. I'm sure the first run won't sell like hotcakes because of the difficulty, but it would have mass appeal for hardcore adult gamers who have been dying for a new experience. But like I said before, my game will have plenty of action, assignments/missions/"Side quests", etc, not to mention you r random run of the mill crazy ****.  :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an idea for an asymmetric online objective-based war game that was part FPS and part RTS. There will be a commander on each side giving regiments their sub-objectives and guiding them to waypoints like an RTS. The instructions of the commander will be received by field officers who are in charge of leading their regiment to complete their sub-objectives. New players (or perhaps players that have died) can be added mid-battle in the form of reinforcements (I'm thinking something like Left4Dead's game director that makes it different every time to throw a wrench in the opposition's plans).

Different missions and different sides will have different objectives. Sometimes you'll need to defend a location and be able to hold out for a certain amount of time, while conversely the other side will have to overtake your position. The commanders could come into play by having a regiment flank the opponent, or maybe take out their artillery so their main forces can make a frontal assault. Perhaps the map has bridges that the defenders can take out if they have to (channeling Saving Private Ryan here), but they have a secondary objective to keep the bridges intact if possible, leading to a better rating if victorious. Maybe taking out the enemy's communications will keep them from calling in reinforcements or air-strikes. Speaking of air-strikes, I'm thinking they'd only be available at specific times, and maybe you'd need a soldier to paint the target.

I'm thinking there'd be post-battle rankings where the commander can rank all of his field-officers based on the ability of the regiment to complete their objectives, and then the field officers would in turn rate the commander on his battle plan, etc.. The ratings can be used in match-making, and a part of an algorithm that would determine your role in a match (commander, field officer, rifleman, maybe sniper, demolitions, etc.).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hate to break it to you, but I'm pretty sure that a thread like this has been done before. Anyways, like I've mentioned before, my dream game is a multi-layered, open world cop game. Your standard tutorial will be the Police Academy, which will cover (in a broad sense) everything that the game entails.

 

Like Fallout 3, you'll have a built in skill system, that you can mod to your liking, which gives you an advantage in certain career paths (Regular blue, SWAT, State Trooper, Gang Unit, Detective/Homicide, Surveillance, Undercover, etc, and groups within them). Then you get the specific job tutorial, like the SWAT Sniper, Helicopter Pilot, pursuits, raids, hostage situations, robberies, drug busts, etc.

 

Each assignment you are given have 3 or more built in chapters Also, each assignment/chapter can be replayed from a different POV after each time you complete that particular storyline. In a bank heist (SWAT), imagine being able to control the sniper, the helicopter pilot, or an individual on the team being sent in, repelling from the helicopter In the detective portion of the game, some cases )depending on how ell you gather clues) will purposely go cold (in game time not real world time) only to heat up again after you get a break in the case.

 

As a regular blue, you will be assigned to patrol a particular area, where anything is bound too happen You have to respond to calls, make routine stops( where at one  end of the spectrum you will be stopping a harmless, yet neurotic soccermom, and at the other end,  you have to immediately avoid a point blank gunshot, and being run over. You will be called for backup, and you can radio for backup.

 

The city will be either open world Miami, or open world Vegas. Games like The Getaway, Payday: The Heist, and Heavy Rain ort of touched on what I would want the game to be like, from a strategical, intensity, and realism standpoint, but I would want it to be more exclusive and immersive, and thick with plenty of activities... and difficult. This aint no playplay. You will have to use your brain. You will have to employ strategy.

 

There will be no magic healthpacks, painkillers, bottles of vodka, pieces of chicken, etc, only real life first aid stuff that will either help you manage minor stuff, or slow your bleeding enouh to give you a window to complete your task before you die One well placed hit will kill you (depnding on weapon, range, and overall skill of the bad guys), instantly, and where you are hit will determine how effective you are (like speed, accuracy, etc) so using great cover tactics is a must, or you will find dying to be the easiest thing in the game.

 

Lastly, it will be real, but not too real, meaning everything will be done within the game to keep your attention, and maximize your experience, meaning no going to but fast food (unless it's part of a cutscene), taking a dump, walking your dog, or anything like that. Please someone, make this (or something like it ) happen. Anything sort extra curricular will be done videogame style. Oh, and if verything goes well, I would also have a Secret Service/ FBI DLC ready to roll.

 

 

This upcoming gen I think has the potential to pull off a game like the one I mentioned. Other dream games of mine would be a full fledged 18th century pirate game (which may be coming with Assassin's Creed 4: Black Flag) and a game based on time travel, or some other deep space/sea exploration kind of game.

 

here is something even better. Tie it to a police scanner of that city and get real crimes generated in real time. But it would be something generic like the police scanner reports a domestic issue at X address. The game goes into its scenario base and pull out a random DV issue. Maybe a homicide reported in another area and the game generates a homicide in that area.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spy themed story driven RPG. Think Mass Effect meets Splinter Cell.

Only if you don't disappoint people with the ending of the third game, don't fundamentally change gameplay in the 5th game, and don't change from an iconic, aged voice actor to a generic, young voice-actor in the 6th game.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A lot can be done with

 

here is something even better. Tie it to a police scanner of that city and get real crimes generated in real time. But it would be something generic like the police scanner reports a domestic issue at X address. The game goes into its scenario base and pull out a random DV issue. Maybe a homicide reported in another area and the game generates a homicide in that area.

 

Sounds interesting, but ultimately, I think that would bring so much controversy that even if developers were capable  of doing it, they wouldn't touch it... not even Rockstar. Too many ways for people to spin that out of control.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once thought of a pretty cool adventure game.

 

You're a regular blue-collar guy, like, maybe a contractor or electrician or something, and you have to rescue your girlfriend from this bad dude who lives in a secret network of underground pipes and tunnels and castles. You're unarmed, so you have to fight his minions by jumping on them or maybe knocking them out by kicking random objects at them. To help you on your quest, you can gain special powers by eating, say, a magic tomato. You can gain points by collecting loose change hidden throughout the terrain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had an idea for an asymmetric online objective-based war game that was part FPS and part RTS. There will be a commander on each side giving regiments their sub-objectives and guiding them to waypoints like an RTS. The instructions of the commander will be received by field officers who are in charge of leading their regiment to complete their sub-objectives. New players (or perhaps players that have died) can be added mid-battle in the form of reinforcements (I'm thinking something like Left4Dead's game director that makes it different every time to throw a wrench in the opposition's plans).

Different missions and different sides will have different objectives. Sometimes you'll need to defend a location and be able to hold out for a certain amount of time, while conversely the other side will have to overtake your position. The commanders could come into play by having a regiment flank the opponent, or maybe take out their artillery so their main forces can make a frontal assault. Perhaps the map has bridges that the defenders can take out if they have to (channeling Saving Private Ryan here), but they have a secondary objective to keep the bridges intact if possible, leading to a better rating if victorious. Maybe taking out the enemy's communications will keep them from calling in reinforcements or air-strikes. Speaking of air-strikes, I'm thinking they'd only be available at specific times, and maybe you'd need a soldier to paint the target.

I'm thinking there'd be post-battle rankings where the commander can rank all of his field-officers based on the ability of the regiment to complete their objectives, and then the field officers would in turn rate the commander on his battle plan, etc.. The ratings can be used in match-making, and a part of an algorithm that would determine your role in a match (commander, field officer, rifleman, maybe sniper, demolitions, etc.).

 

I thought about something similar once, but instead of just discrete battles, make the game like a virtual real time war.  Sort of like the SIMs, but just never ending.  You sign up, there's a virtual world that is at war.  Your assigned a country, and you start fighting.  The biggest dorks (like the Warcraft guys who play 19 hours a day) will rise to become generals for their countries, and can assign various military units to battles.  You could have a political component to the game where you vote for a president, etc.  Just make it a virtual world. If you die, you sign up again and start over, perhaps assigned to a different country.

 

If you had thousands of people playing this game, imagine the marketing/advertising opportunites.  You could throw a commericial for gatorade in during the middle of the most important battles, have McDonalds commercials while scanning the aftermath of a napalm attack, etc. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You know what? I wouldn't mind a Spider-Man open world game, similar to Arkham City for Batman. I'd mark out for that. X - Men too. Hell, maybe even a Blade game, just for the hell of it. I remember having a lot of fun with one (based n Blade II) back in '02  on the PlayStation 2.

 

I was going to include Superman, but I'm not sure how you could give it the Arkham City red carpet treatment, when you take all of his powers into account. He's practically invulnerable, and you can't make him mortal, and you can't get cheesy and have regular goons throwing kryptonite balls or some other dumb **** at him. Oh well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was going to include Superman, but I'm not sure how you could give it the Arkham City red carpet treatment, when you take all of his powers into account. He's practically invulnerable, and you can't make him mortal, and you can't get cheesy and have regular gons throwing kryptonite balls or some other dumb **** at him. Oh well

You could have him fly through rings.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My idea has always been to bring the visceral, massive hand to hand combat battlefields of Braveheart, Gladiator, and Lord of the Rings etc to life in video games. This is my idea and with the next gen tech, especially the Kinect it might be possible. The take on it is a little different. It's a FP perspective and death is all but guaranteed. The goal here is realism. 

 

Imagine a massive field area, two armies, hundreds of soldiers lined up across from each other. There are guys with swords and shields, maces, spiked ball and chain things, spears etc maybe some guys on horses in the back of each army. 

 

Charge, they start running toward each other and this is where the camera dips into your character perspective. You are a nobody, a grunt, destined to die basically. You engage the enemy and start hand to hand combat. Parry his attack with your shield. Slice his torso he falls. You turn to the right see an enemy has just slain a comrade. You stab him through the back and kick him off your sword. A guy charges your right, you raise your sword to block but he counters to quickly and strikes you down.

 

You're dead.

 

But this battle is far from over. Once your character dies you immediately and automatically switch to the another random warrior on your side of the battlefield, mid combat. The goal is simply to use as many warriors as it takes and hope to defeat the other army. AI will of course be engaging in combat and killing each other too. It is non scripted but you won't win the battle just based on the AI. You're going to have to kick some ass with all the warriors you take over to sway the tide.

 

After you take over the second warrior, you are kicked in the chest and fall to the ground. A behemoth of a man stands over you and swings his axe down. At the last second you raise your shield to block the attack. With your right hand you quickly  slash at your foes feet to bring him to his knees. You stand up and decapitate him only to see at the last second a spear plunge into your stomach, heaved from afar. 

 

Next character. This guy is a badass, he has two swords and you proceed to wreck fools with his dual wielding. One guy tries to block you with a spear. You cut it right down the middle with one sword and then stab him with the other. Walk up behind two enemies who are engaged in combat with others and stab each in back with each of your swords. Finally you are overwhelmed by 2-3 guards etc and then you switch again. 

 

Continue to fight hand to hand until the other side is defeated or retreats. At that point you can accept victory or follow your enemies in their retreat to finish them. Beware of possible surprise attacks though. Battles can vary in size and scope and will typically take 30-40+ minutes to complete. This is war. It takes a lot of effort to win, but it feels great when you do. But you can pause and save during a battle and resume where you left off. 

 

Story is framed around the commanding general of the army, this is technically your character. He is on a quest for his country but learns through his battles the true cost of war and blindly following orders etc. Good stuff there.  Prior to each battle he has the opportunity to coordinate and plan his strategy. This will have a great deal to do with the results of the battle too in addition to your actions on the field. For example, he can choose to have archers shoot arrows from back of the army to try to thin down the enemy ranks before you charge and engage but this comes at the expense of less warriors on the battlefield for the actual fight, as the archers are defeated quite easily in hand to hand combat. Some battles take place in abandoned ruins or are city sieges so there are structures and things like that to consider. The general can also set up positions to attack from, timing of horseback warrior entries, flank positions, and number of warrior classes, IE axe vs shield, spear guys etc. 

 

The kinect would allow 1:1 controls potentially so combat could be very fluid and non repetitive since your blocking and attacking are all done through your own movements. We aren't talking Skyrim level FPS sword combat here. Every battle could be different, more so, every encounter you have with an enemy could play out differently.

 

There are bonuses and XP that are unlocked based on battle time, soldiers lost, kills etc that allow the general to upgrade his strategic options. Also things like number of soldiers played and battle time can also be put on leaderboards for competition. Outside of the story mode there is an exhibition type mode where you can take part in various battles against the CPU or head to head. multiplayer support for at least 8v8 online battles.

 

Only thing is there would have to be a lot of likely boring filler content between these large scale battles in the story mode with the general and his personal story. I guess it would be similar to Shadow of the Colossus where the epic battles are the treat etc but with more story involved. I think my idea would be better served in a fantasy setting so I could introduce monsters or orc like armies and weapons to engage in. That would mix things up from just human vs human battles.   

 

But there would be a lot of variety in the battles. Sometimes, it's a battle in a massive field. Sometimes, you are defending a city under attack ala Helms Deep. Other battles will have you attacking a city or fighting in the fallen ruins of a long lost colony etc. Lot of different battlefields and scenarios to keep the fights fresh and exciting. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had an idea for a Bioware style RPG, where your decisions matter to point where you don't just get multiple endings, but you change the way other characters react to the main character on the fly. Where literally every decision you make alters the game's reality in small and large ways. I've even created a story for it and some basic foundations of a battle system. The game designers would put in certain game altering events that would only be activated when the player made certain decisions. I'd also have perma-death for all characters but the main character. This would create completely unique experiences for every individual who played.

I'm not sure technology has advanced far enough to effectively create the game I have imagined, but maybe one day in the future.

What do you mean?

I think he may have been sarcastically talking about "Superman 64". An old Superman game on the N64 that was basically you flying through floating rings high above Metropolis. It has to be in the top ten worst superhero games ever.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had an idea for a Bioware style RPG, where your decisions matter to point where you don't just get multiple endings, but you change the way other characters react to the main character on the fly. Where literally every decision you make alters the game's reality in small and large ways. I've even created a story for it and some basic foundations of a battle system. The game designers would put in certain game altering events that would only be activated when the player made certain decisions. I'd also have perma-death for all characters but the main character. This would create completely unique experiences for every individual who played.

I'm not sure technology has advanced far enough to effectively create the game I have imagined, but maybe one day in the future.

I don't know that technology is the issue (hardware) so much as you'd need carefully think out all the branching to characters and story based on your actions and the deaths of characters. The other inherent problem is that with so much breadth, you'll probably have to make sacrifices to depth.

I think he may have been sarcastically talking about "Superman 64". An old Superman game on the N64 that was basically you flying through floating rings high above Metropolis. It has to be in the top ten worst superhero games ever.

:)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know that technology is the issue (hardware) so much as you'd need carefully think out all the branching to characters and story based on your actions and the deaths of characters. The other inherent problem is that with so much breadth, you'll probably have to make sacrifices to depth. :)

My bad, I should've been clearer. I doubt the storage capacity of today's games would be adequate enough to allow a developer to fully utilize my idea. So I agree, to make this today you're going to have to sacrifice some depth.

I also envision this game being played online, so the developer could gather statistics on the various stages the gamers are in within not he game. With this data they will provide updates, creating more events to be activated based off the more common threads the story has evolved to. For instance, if your character has overthrown a dictatorship that has been the dominant theme of the game. Normally this would be the end of the story, but the death of the former ruler would activate the plot twist of a neighbor country seeing the upheaval of a rival and deciding this is the perfect opportunity to invade. In contrast, losing that final battle could make all your comrades dead and you a prisoner. Potentially activating new characters to be introduced to you, and for you to rebuild your rebellion with.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My bad, I should've been clearer. I doubt the storage capacity of today's games would be adequate enough to allow a developer to fully utilize my idea. So I agree, to make this today you're going to have to sacrifice some depth.

I don't think storage would be the limiting factor here. Art assets probably take up the majority of the storage space of a game, so I don't feel a branching storyline like that would increase the needed space all that much. If it were to come down to it, I'd gladly sacrifice graphics for a better game. The sacrifice to depth, I think, would be a result of only having so much time and money you can put into the game, so if you want more breadth to the game, you'll have to pull resources from elsewhere. And the more bredth the game has, the more expensive the depth becomes as you have to get that depth for all the branching options.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

American Civil War Total War.

I would like to see this, too.   

 

Unfortunately, with CA being a British studio, owned by a Japanese publisher (Sega), we are unlikely to see anything involving the Western Hemisphere that doesn't involve Japan or the UK.  WWI/II might be possible, but for various reasons those eras don't lend themselves well to the TW mechanic.

 

This topic comes up from time to time on the Total War forums.   It normally gets shouted down by the Europeans and Asians which are a significant chunk of the customer based and 95% of which have no interest in the ACW.

 

Problem with the ACW, is you only really have two (playable) factions, so theres not as much diplomacy possible   You could definitely include the UK/Canada, France and Mexico in a somewhat farfetched foreign intervention scenario, but making those factions playable and from the start of the conflict would be a huge historical stretch that CA probably wouldn't take. 

 

If they did something based on post-Napoleon 19th century (Victoria: Total War), we might see an expansion based on the ACW, but even then I doubt it.   If they made it moddable, I'm sure there would be enough interest to make an ACW mod.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...