Chain Game II - Brainstorming

[Deckiller]

 ​

Chain Game II: Brainstorming Time!​

So the first chain game is complete (with some polishing to be had) and it was a lot of fun! Despain started it off, and 10 other users contributed to what became a 6-hour adventure over the course of a couple months. We all learned a lot from it, and we should use that knowledge to make the second one even better. That's what this topic is for.

We've already had some discussion regarding gameplay and story. Someone mentioned that we should avoid traditional battles and go with pure exploration or ABS. I'm not against this idea as long as there is a concrete, easy-to-digest system and engaging gameplay. The puzzles were a hit, so maybe we should make this game a puzzle-driven action RPG in the spirit of Zelda! "Collect the 8 MacGuffins from the 8 Dungeons to rescue the Princess!" I'm a huge fan of Zelda and involved dungeons, so I'm all for having a similar format this time around.

Also, opinion seems to be split on whether this chain game should be a sequel, because at the end of the first one...

Spoiler

Some of the characters go to rescue others in Arum, the RM Universe.

Anyway, we should get started by just sharing each others' ideas. Here are some questions to break the ice:

Should we have a stricter framework/rules for content? (For example, "each dungeon should have a special item", or "there should be a new character in each chapter.")

Should we be very strict about time limits? How should we handle instances where someone has to take a long period of time? Perhaps we should pass it on to a backup and ask the user to use their work in a later chapter, once they are free again?

How should we handle battles/gameplay? DBS, ABS, no battles at all? More exploration? Zelda-style dungeons again? Linear vs. non-linear?

Should the story be a direct sequel to the first chain game? If not, what kind of story would you like to see? Should we have a collection quest again to give the chain game some sort of objective and framework?

 

[Clord]

First Chain Game is so good because of it being so random experience. If you put too many restrictions on place, it would kind of defeat the purpose of doing Chain Game II.

What I would like is to have minimum length or something for each contribution. That way we define what is "enough" for other contributors.

 

[Cartridge]

And maybe something like at max a week or two to complete your chapter. That'd be great. As for the rest, I would use the same rules as the first chain game.

 

[emirpoen]

1) Time limits help keep the flow going, but chaingames are more meant for fun, so I think relaxed enforcement of the time limit would be best, but that's just my opinion.

2)The framework should fit the game, but at the same time, give the creator freedom to express what they'd like to for their part. Translation; nothing too strict.

3) When in doubt, puzzles!*shot* As for battles; why not try something crazy and let the creators experiment a little? In the end, it'll have to be edited to make everything work together anyways.

4) A direct sequel would require everyone involved with this one that wasn't involved with the first one to play, and it would, in a sense, be just continuing the 1st one, which I'm neutral about. This may be good for people who wanted to add more to the 1st games story or even world, I tend to prefer new and different settings when and where possible.

Don't mind me though; just an opinionated rant from someone considering giving chaingame participation another chance.

 

[Zeuzio]

A brand new adventure would probably be best, since more people would probably be inclined to join that way. That doesn't mean it can't tie in with the last one somehow, though! I'm up for anything, battles, puzzles, whatever. I just want to be able to make a true chapter. ;w;

 

[postnjam]

I think we should add some scripts to the mix to make the game look Unique, hell, is anyone here competent with ruby scripting? you could make our own battle system. 

Using custom tiles would be cool as well.

 

[postnjam]

Also, we need a different system for when the game becomes available to make the next chapter, every damn time, I would check my emails in the morning to see that the chapter was complete but someone else had taken it, however, I could never call it because in the UK, it was like 3 to 4 in the morning when the spot was claimed, i think we need a list system.

 

[Zetu]

I think it SHOULD be a direct sequel, considering the ending, starting with Gita traveling through dimensions towards Arum. I think we should chill with introducing new characters and expand the story of the ones that already exist (since some of the character's purpose seemed confusing, especially after the first 4).  Similar to the first, where each dungeon contains puzzles with wandering monsters that battle you.  Also, a name for the game should prolly exist, now.

 

[Robin]

Should we be very strict about time limits? How should we handle instances where someone has to take a long period of time? Perhaps we should pass it on to a backup and ask the user to use their work in a later chapter, once they are free again?

If someone has to take a long period of time, maybe give them one or two extensions, but then if they still haven't submitted, it just goes to the next person. That seems fair.

Also, we need a different system for when the game becomes available to make the next chapter, every damn time, I would check my emails in the morning to see that the chapter was complete but someone else had taken it, however, I could never call it because in the UK, it was like 3 to 4 in the morning when the spot was claimed, i think we need a list system.

This is a good thing. Someone else had taken it meaning that someone always had the game. I thought that was the point of a chain game. There is simply no guarantee that someone will be available when their name is at the top of the list.

 

[Ratty524]

Should we have a stricter framework/rules for content? (For example, "each dungeon should have a special item", or "there should be a new character in each chapter.")

Yes. Just for the sake of consistency. One thing I didn't really like about the first chain game was that items that were useful for one dungeon didn't become as useful later on as people were throwing in their own ideas. You don't need to add in TOO many rules, but I'd like it if this game was a LITTLE less of a hodge-podge.

Should we be very strict about time limits? How should we handle instances where someone has to take a long period of time? Perhaps we should pass it on to a backup and ask the user to use their work in a later chapter, once they are free again?

Maybe give each person a week or so to do a level, then pass it on? I'm not quite sure.

How should we handle battles/gameplay? DBS, ABS, no battles at all? More exploration? Zelda-style dungeons again? Linear vs. non-linear?

The puzzles were the most creative aspect of the first chain game, and the most enjoyable. Unless we bring that same creativity into battle systems, I recommend no battles at all.

Should the story be a direct sequel to the first chain game? If not, what kind of story would you like to see? Should we have a collection quest again to give the chain game some sort of objective and framework?

Don't really care.

 

[Seacliff]

I did give out like, half of those opinions but here goes.
 
Should we have a stricter framework/rules for content?
Sure, it would be boring if we just give it to someone and just say "do whatever" (though it came automatically with the first chain game, 5 out of the 7 dungeons had a Zelda styled dungeon item, if you count the last one...) a couple of vast rules that still require creativity would keep the game interesting.
 
Should we be very strict about time limits?
Yes, about a week, that should be enough time to get what you want done, a chapter in the first game was only adding an extra area and/or dungeon so an average of 3-4 days would be expected with a little extra time added on just in case.
 
How should we handle battles/gameplay?
I did bring up the idea of the sequel, so it would work best if battles were the same if we did that (maybe with a couple tweaks like add
Yanfly battle system or something) but if we are not doing a sequel, we should just do what des did and start out with just puzzles and the next person decides what the system is. That or ABS and I mean a simple, basic, easy to use script. (Vlad's, yes. XAS, no)
 
Should the story be a direct sequel to the first chain game?

Spoiler

I never played an Arum game before, so I think I should play a few before I help on to the sequel... it was a good idea to connect the two worlds though.

Maybe we could have something like Arum... if we didn't do a sequel, have all the chain games in the same world. Referencing others every once in a while.

Also, as espon (I think it was him) said that we should have two chain games at once, it wouldn't be a bad idea to have on a sequel and another a different game (but still in the same world, let's not be final fantasy for once). And the sequel could be for those who have worked on/already played on the chain game.

 

[Espon]

Should we have a stricter framework/rules for content? (For example, "each dungeon should have a special item", or "there should be a new character in each chapter.")

Maybe some, but not too restricting.  The main thing is to see what a person adds and contributes to the game.

Should we be very strict about time limits? How should we handle instances where someone has to take a long period of time? Perhaps we should pass it on to a backup and ask the user to use their work in a later chapter, once they are free again?

Time limits definitely need to be much stricter this time around.  We had a dead period for about 3 weeks which really killed momentum and interest.  Ideally it should take the a person between 3-5 days to create their chapter, with a week being the maximum. Sometimes things in real life happen, if it you're unable to work on the game anymore then it's probably best to kindly step down and let someone else work on it; there's always a chance in the future to work on the game again.  The next person can start from the beginning of the chapter or try to finish up what the previous person started up.

How should we handle battles/gameplay? DBS, ABS, no battles at all? More exploration? Zelda-style dungeons again? Linear vs. non-linear?

I think there should still be battles.  I don't think going into a heavily scripted battle system would work though since not everyone might be able to understand how to implement things with it, it would have to be something easy to use.  I like seeing puzzle-based dungeons, but it's really up to what the current person wants to make.

Should the story be a direct sequel to the first chain game? If not, what kind of story would you like to see? Should we have a collection quest again to give the chain game some sort of objective and framework?

One of the fun things about having a chain game is that it can go in completely unexpected directions, you never know until a person releases their chapter.  I'm not really interested in seeing sequel though, mainly because newcomers might feel like they have to play the first, and it would be nice to start fresh and let new ideas come in.  Of course, that doesn't mean creators cannot sneak in references or cameos from the first game. =P

it might also be a good idea to do 2 chain games this time so that there's more openings available for people join in on.  You can even go with the idea that one game is mostly random like the first game, where as the other has more of a structure to it where certain requirements are needed for chapters (for example, every dungeon must be puzzled based and the each cast member must be a cat).

 

[Clareain_Christopher]

For a chain game, we should follow the rule of KISS.  Once a certain script or feature starts to bog down development time, it might be smart to remove it.

Every person creates a new character AND a zelda-like item? That might come to bite us in the ass.

And don't forget about Yanfly Engine Ace Core, and setting the FPS from 20 to 30. That should be in the RM ten commandments for how much it improves a game, and how easy it is to implement.

.

 

[Seacliff]

Every person creates a new character AND a zelda-like item?

I think he meant one or the other. And for the zelda-item part, it would only be necessary if you are doing a dungeon, a few chapters in the last chain game didn't have dungeons at all.

As I said, lets only have just one rule or so, so every chain game doesn't end up being the same thing. We could have a different rule each chain game and that could be it's 'theme'.

 

[emirpoen]

A core set of scripts and nothing outside of them would be for the best; adding or tweaking scripts could prove to be hazardous.

Are zelda like items even needed? just my thoughts on it.

 

[Clareain_Christopher]

@emirpoen


The items you found from the first game were all pretty awesome. It could be unfortunate to not see them implemented in the sequel.

 

[Seacliff]

I think the items would only be necessary in the sequel. It would ruin the consistency if we didn't since the sequel would be more like a second story arc that continues right where we left off.

 

[Espon]

But Samus loses her power-ups after every game.  Same goes for Mega Man!

 

[Seacliff]

Same goes for all the links too. But  that still doesn't stop them from re-collecting them again. I don't think we were planing to move all the items to the sequel... but data transferring... is that possible because that would be awesome if we did that.

 

[Espon]

They're actually different Links from different time periods!  Well, most of the time.