Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 12, 2015 17:11:48 GMT
... I would forget the mobile version I made. Recover the art stuff okay, a few mechanics and principles, and make a game for what a game s for damn it.
|
|
|
|
Post by eddiemonsta on Jan 12, 2015 19:00:50 GMT
what parts would I keep. Sculpting - but make it free. By far the most addictive part of Godus. Gems - I know people associate gems with mobile and therefore bad, but having a high tier resource isn't a bad idea AKA gold? Weather system - pretty well done, I'd make chests rarer but much more rewarding or bad (special skills, resources, trigger a god power) Powers - add some more, whirlwind, volcano, lightning strike, stink hole, flood, create angel, create demon, grow forest, plague (release the gorgon  ) etc Astari - but allow them to expand, set your people to aggressive or passive build and live with or fight Astari for space. All dependence on how you treat the Astari. Squish them or attack there base and the become aggressive don't and try to take over passively. What would I remove Cards and stickers - I would use followers time/belief to unlock timeline skills. Buried temples and beacons - buried temples are just pointless, hide cool things to discover like you did before. Or build special colossal statues/building. Replace with God temples (churches) that have area of influence. Which do take time to build and upgrade and are expensive. Belief collection - at least via the blobs. Automatic via area of affect. Biomes - in favour of my brush suggestion. You as a god paint areas and you followers of the brush type gravitate towards these areas and work them (with miners actually removing painted layers and returning home with minerals. Paint with farm brush followers build farms and return with wheat. Paint forest, woodcutters chop/grow the trees. What I'd change. Abodes, with no need for belief allow you to specialise the abodes to farm/mine/breed/fish/woodcutter but still auto collect resources Military needs other weapon types(I guess that's coming). I like and agree with a lot of what you say here. I'd be more inclined to retain the fact that sculpting costs belief, but in my opinion the belief cost should be uniform across the layers (with the exception of sand, which should remain free to sculpt). My reasoning for this would be that there should be advantages and disadvantages to all the layers. Sand should be infertile, except possibly around river estuaries. The mountain layers would be more difficult to farm, trees would be more sparse or even not grow above a certain height, but easier to defend and maybe more fruitful to mine. The grass layers would be the best for farming, but mining less effective. I know these probably aren't original ideas, but it's all about adding a bit more strategy to your worlds. To this end, I think the maps should be much, much larger, and automatically generated. You should be able to choose how many other tribes also occupy the land, if any at all, but they shouldn't necessarily be agressive towards you. For example, why should the astari default to raiding parties? I could understand it if you had resources they didn't have access to, but as it stands, that is never the case. Speaking of the resource system, I am in complete agreement with the consensus that it needs fleshing out. I also agree that followers should have to gather these resources and they should be stored in specialist buildings. If you can't gather these resources fom your area of influence, you should be able to trade for them with other tribes or even fight for them if that is your choice. I don't like the implementation of mines. I'd make a single mine have a much higher capacity of miners that use it. A small mine should take like 20 miners, Medium 30, large 40 and so on. That way you wouldn't have large areas of mines blightling the landscape. I also believe a plot should appear over multiple layers. It doesn't have to be loads, say 3 layers for example, but if you look at all the artwork they have buildings on hillsides, and this should be possible in the game. As for combat, I'd start from the powemonger take on thing with regard to weapon types. Your followers start unarmed, but with careful resource gathering you can have things like boats, spears, bows, catapults, swords, etc.. Each unit having it's own strengths and weaknesses. Of course, this all depends on the resources actually becoming something you gather for a purpose, but it opens the way for things like ploughs to improve farming and ideas like that. Followers should die of old age, or in battle, or of hunger etc. Even killed by animals. There should be more plant life, and as a god, we should be able to say where we want flowers or trees to grow, but the should be affected by environmental conditions as described earlier. I've probably missed a few thing out here, and none of what I've said is probably new or original, but i feel like rambling on now so I'll leave it here and maybe revisit this later if i remember anything else. I really hope 22 cans can rescue this game because I think we can all see it has massive potential. |
|
|
|
Post by Spiderweb on Jan 12, 2015 20:12:04 GMT
Hopefully according to FuriousMoo's post the dev team has changed and it going to be PC focused for a while and one item among many they are aiming to fix is combat. Fingers crossed we see some improvement soon. All our suggestions have been mentioned before in some form or another, probably at times phrased a lot better to, 22 cans claim to collect these (the goods ones at least) and store them in some (must be massive) spreadsheet. I wonder if they have ever been looked at, no way to tell! Apart from the new request for focussed design ideas I think I'm going to stop submitting suggestions. They can be appreciated by fellow posters but don't go anywhere with the designers. I'll keep posting but not any more general ideas, just hope for a good game somewhere down the line. |
|
|
|
Post by eddiemonsta on Jan 12, 2015 20:52:21 GMT
I'll keep posting but not any more general ideas, just hope for a good game somewhere down the line. That's the part I find most frustrating about this whole situation. I've read so many good suggestions and ideas for this game and what it should become that it's an absolute travesty we find ourselves in the sitution we currently do. There's a cracking game burried somewhere under all this F2P twaddle. I just hope that FuriousMoo can unearth it. |
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Jan 13, 2015 4:08:17 GMT
I'll keep posting but not any more general ideas, just hope for a good game somewhere down the line. That's the part I find most frustrating about this whole situation. I've read so many good suggestions and ideas for this game and what it should become that it's an absolute travesty we find ourselves in the sitution we currently do. There's a cracking game burried somewhere under all this F2P twaddle. I just hope that FuriousMoo can unearth it. You might not even know the half of it. There have been so many suggestions over the previous two or so years, it's fairly astonishing how bad this game is despite the community effort. There's been so much repetition, regurgitation, and rehashing of ideas, I don't know how they can not possibly have enough to build on. The fact that we're being asked, yet again, to provide ideas tells me that all of that past participation was a complete waste; which is part of the reason we're all being so hesitant and asking a lot of deep rooted questions about the organization and core programming. |
|
|
|
Post by Deth on Jan 13, 2015 5:31:03 GMT
FuriousMoo seems to be too new and I guess never followed the board or warranted being in on the update passed on from the boards. So he would not know of what we put fourth.
|
|
|
|
Post by earlparvisjam on Jan 13, 2015 7:47:56 GMT
FuriousMoo seems to be too new and I guess never followed the board or warranted being in on the update passed on from the boards. So he would not know of what we put fourth. If that's the case, then we've been outright lied to by George et al for long stretches of time. Moo's been around since at least the Kickstarter (he's a backer too). Supposedly, they were compiling reports of our suggestions and commentaries and giving them to the developers since at least 2.0 came out. So, when we bring up our old stuff, he should at least have a passing familiarity with some of it. Then again, maybe what happened is that they were compiled and handed to Peter or Jack (and not the actual developers), who circular filed them. We did a lot of speculating that was the case last summer. After the third time we tried this, I just lost the energy to dig back into the archives and re-post what I'd done so many times before. It's hard, even now with Moo sounding so earnest about wanting our input, to actually try again. I managed to find one thread, but it's not really what Moo's working on now so won't really matter for the time being... I'm certain I'm not the only person on here that's just not able to drum up the enthusiasm to try again until we see something tangible actually result from the talk. Couple that with the fact that fleshing out combat ranks only slightly above my desire for them to better integrate Facebook for the pc version and I'm hard pressed to have anything to say. I've given my recommendation that it's a bad call, discussed it to an impasse, and moved on to mostly lurking while I watch how this all shakes out. |
|
|
|
Post by militairensneuvelen on Jan 13, 2015 10:09:26 GMT
We need a day/night cycle in which followers need to do certain tasks (eat, drink, sleep/shelter)
These tasks are requirements.
As long as these basic requirements are not met, followers will do nothing else than trying to accomplish these tasks.
If the requirements are met (eat, drink, rest once a day/night cycle), they can do jobs (farm, mine, guard, build etc.).
I also think that the happiness bar should be in place right from this moment (even though there are no Astari).
Fulfilling basic tasks and accomplishing secondary jobs affect the Happiness level of a follower
The reason why I mention happiness and the happiness bar is because I think "Happiness" would be an excellent engine for "Belief" generation.
Now you have an actual reason to work on your follower's happiness (instead of the simple tug of war)
The player uses "plant tree", "water spring" and "create rock" (which needs to be made of course) to create the basic items.
The player uses god powers to paint and transform the basic soil types to modify what grows there (changes what the basic rock changes into (ore or clay for instance (beautify and swamp respectively)).
This adds several different resources usable in different tasks/jobs(something many people would like to see).
And instead of specialized settlements, I would like to see a single type of settlement, where followers do whatever jobs there are in the direct surroundings.
The player should balance the available resources for the followers. (basic resources are replaced by cultivated plants, domesticated animals, and actual mines later in the game)
If we would add modifiers to the effectiveness of the resources (based on height levels, specific types "prosper" or yield better volumes on certain levels, modified by off-level)
Now we get map variation.
And the effectiveness of the resource dictates the time required in the process of whatever job at hand (and indirectly the happiness level of the follower (easier jobs = more accomplishments= more happiness)
A similar system would work with animals b.t.w.
Each "biome" has 1 type of creature. Paint with god powers and they change into different types.
And this could possibly work with water and fish as well.
Simple in thought. Probably huge in manpower requirements though.
|
|
Raspofabs
Former 22Cans staff
Posts: 227 
I like: coding, high peat single malts, ... , yeah, that's about it.
I don't like: object oriented design, and liver.
Steam: raspofabs
|
Post by Raspofabs on Jan 13, 2015 10:13:47 GMT
I would keep a tutorial, but not a hand holding one:
You start with a very small visible area of land. Everything outside is space / gone white pure so you can't even see the shape of the land. It's just not there to see.
You start with two people on the shore of this small land, and they get up and wander around a bit, and the sculpting is left for you to discover.
As soon as you make enough space for a tent, the followers point at it and build on it real quick. There are no icons on the tent, just the tent.
If you hover the mouse over the tent, the cursor changes to show that something different will happen if you tap it.
Tapping on the tent pulls a person out of the tent, they explore for a while before heading back if they can't find a place to put up another tent.
If the people are hungry, they will go out and look for berries nearby.
If the tent only has one person in it, it will take some time, but will grow another.
As the followers move around the land, more land becomes visible, based on how high up the follower is. Once a certain amount of land is discovered, the first threshold is reached, and the power of compulsion pops up. Compulsion power would be like the totem. It will engage the followers to go towards a location. All followers nearby will be able to feel the pull. With this power, you will be able to force the followers to explore more and more land.
As the amount of land you have discovered increases, more powers become open to you. Powers charge up over time, like in magic carpet, and the rate at which they charge is based on the respect of your people. Respect is earned through use of power to help them, or punish their enemies. We all like powers. We all like to improve or destroy in miraculous ways.
As the number of people increase, sometimes a follower will have a bright idea, these ideas can be extinguished by killing the follower, or nurtured by elevating them to prophet status. The ideas would be the technical advances such as fishing rods. As an example, extinguishing fishing rods would make your people tend towards building sea defences, and taking to the hills. Elevating the fishing rod idea follower to prophet would lead to boats and other sea based actions, but would pull away from agriculture. Leaving the follower to themselves will lead to the median path, where boats and agriculture are discovered at a more casual pace.
People will hunt down resources to make larger buildings, build better boats, smelt and all the chain of things you find in a game of settlers. In particular, the chain to get to steel is really important for swords, which you need for handling other natives.
Expansion brings new powers, people's respect and their number brings the ability to use those powers, discovery of new people brings conflict or opportunity. First contact can be made aggressive or passive with powers, and will affect that race's impression of your people. War is good for innovation, but bad for resources. Peace is good for resources, but makes your people fat and less good at war.
The world should be procedurally generated, but everyone gets the same seed unless they choose to play a custom game, that way the community can find things and share.
Once the number and size of a population has reached the gameplay limit (must have acquired the latest age, and have more population than any other known enemy race), it will become possible to ascend the land and consume all the friendly souls. These souls will be used to pay for upgrades to powers or unlock new ages for the next play through. In the beginning, all the races will be limited to iron age, otherwise new players will get nuked by hard AI hiding in the corners of the map. In the later games, influence and vision radius will be massive, the ability to force inspiration on your followers will make them rapidly climb the tech ladder, and total domination of a planet should take little time, at which point, you will be able to gather enough souls to create a multiverse, and then you will be invited to play with the other gods.
Hubworld: take your powers and unlocks with you and duke it out on the shores of a procedurally generated infinite world where to be the god of gods, you must take the land in the centre of the world, and the only way to do that is by war or allying yourself with other gods until you reach the centre, then stabbing them in the back to claim the goal for yourself. Every new player adds land to the shore of hubworld, making the land ever expanding, and harder and harder to get to the centre. Lose all your followers, and you go back to the shore. The god of gods totem is slowly, but constantly, moving. This gives us the technical ability to prune lands as they become unloved and too distant to ever reach the centre, but also means that there will never be a way to passively win the multiplayer.
|
|
Casinha
Master
Posts: 217
Pledge level: Partner
|
Post by Casinha on Jan 13, 2015 10:31:33 GMT
Funnily enough you've pretty much described - to a tee - what I was imagining when I backed the project. Followers would take on roles based on what you as a god imply is good and bad. *Follower has invented the fishing rod!* *I like this. Bless follower.* *More followers become fishermen.* *With additional exposure to the coast, follower has invented the fishing boat!* *Hmm, don't want my followers to take to the sea, would rather they stuck to their home territory. Omen given.* *Followers expand inland as time goes by, spreading through the plains and developing agriculture* A game where what you're doing isn't pursuing objectives or building things yourself would be exactly what I was picturing. Nothing but doing stuff that tweaks variables in the AI coupled with some more physical, but brief, powers. |
|
heggers
Master
Posts: 203
Pledge level: Partner
|
Post by heggers on Jan 13, 2015 10:32:06 GMT
^^ and this is why we're all very sad you were dragged away from the Godus team...
|
|
stuhacking
Master
Posts: 170
Pledge level: Partner
|
Post by stuhacking on Jan 13, 2015 10:42:21 GMT
Is this anywhere within the realms of possibility? Making the focus of the early game more exploratory, and making the discovery of technology something that can be encouraged or crushed sounds great! What I would like is the idea that decisions you make shape the kind of society that develops... so maybe it would be nice if you could only explore certain areas effectively if you shaped society in a certain way (e.g. Woodcutting/Stonecutting decrease time to clear trees and rocks, so followers could move through and inhabit heavily forested or rocky areas, wherease societies without those might move around them, but have advantages in other areas. (This supposes a changes where the followers themselves go out and work the land, cut down trees, employ various skills). I think it would be acceptable if skills were not tracked per follower, but were considered 'known' by the whole tribe (e.g. If the tribe has a skill, it is assumed that they can always send out someone who can apply said skill). Practical skills Hunting, Farming, Fishing, Swimming, Climbing (can ascend ledges 2 tiers high), Woodcutting, Stonecutting, Masonry (unlocks stone buildings), Mining, Metalwork (military/hunting advantage) Social skills Piety (belief increase), schmoozing (followers breed slight quicker) Idk, should probably stop now I've started rambling. |
|
|
|
Post by Deth on Jan 13, 2015 13:09:12 GMT
FuriousMoo seems to be too new and I guess never followed the board or warranted being in on the update passed on from the boards. So he would not know of what we put fourth. If that's the case, then we've been outright lied to by George et al for long stretches of time. Moo's been around since at least the Kickstarter (he's a backer too). Supposedly, they were compiling reports of our suggestions and commentaries and giving them to the developers since at least 2.0 came out. So, when we bring up our old stuff, he should at least have a passing familiarity with some of it. Then again, maybe what happened is that they were compiled and handed to Peter or Jack (and not the actual developers), who circular filed them. We did a lot of speculating that was the case last summer. After the third time we tried this, I just lost the energy to dig back into the archives and re-post what I'd done so many times before. It's hard, even now with Moo sounding so earnest about wanting our input, to actually try again. I managed to find one thread, but it's not really what Moo's working on now so won't really matter for the time being... I'm certain I'm not the only person on here that's just not able to drum up the enthusiasm to try again until we see something tangible actually result from the talk. Couple that with the fact that fleshing out combat ranks only slightly above my desire for them to better integrate Facebook for the pc version and I'm hard pressed to have anything to say. I've given my recommendation that it's a bad call, discussed it to an impasse, and moved on to mostly lurking while I watch how this all shakes out. I could be wrong, I thought he said he was not around long in one of his post. I know he has said he did know know Peters plans and I just got a feeling that for what ever reason he did not know a lot about the older community ideas. I agree on the lack of will to rehash ideas again. I am in the same boat. The only reason I still follow this is because it is more habit then anything. That and it is like watching a car crash in slow motion, you are horrified but can not pull your eye away. |
|
|
|
Post by FuriousMoo on Jan 13, 2015 13:58:02 GMT
I've been with 22cans for a year and followed development a year before that. I've initiated a big feedback collation myself once and George did it himself too. I probably have a better overall picture of the feedback as a whole than anyone.
The problem with community suggestions in general, for any developer, is that it is incredibly hard to make practical use of. Many suggestions are mutually exclusive and it's very difficult to judge which would prove most popular. If you cast you mind back to the Godus forums in alpha you may remember just how wildly and passionately divided opinions were on what Godus should be. It's basically the worst incarnation of the 'too many cooks' scenario. I often get the impression that here is a belief among the community that some sort of consensus has been reached on 'how to fix the game'. This is very far from the truth.
The other problem is that said suggestions are very high level. Even with a well written list like that of fabs, every point he raises generates a dozen questions about the specifics that I need to carefully consider and answer before I can even evaluate the feasibility and quality of the suggestion. We have hundreds of suggestions and the majority are nowhere near as well delivered and thought through as that of fabs.
Also any designer worth a damn is likely to already have a few different solutions and ideas for every problem in mind already. The reality of the design role is that the majority of your best ideas will never be implemented in a game for reasons outside of the designers control.
This is why I'm trying a different approach with focused and highly detailed feedback in areas I'm currently paying the most attention to. My expectations are low, but I'm hoping something useful may come out of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by engarde on Jan 13, 2015 14:10:29 GMT
1) That's why the designers get the big bucks
2) Enjoy your 30.000 ft view of feedback we want to see results other than doing the opposite of what that feedback represents
3) As a developer too I agree that pesky end users might not give you the detail or info you find most useful, however you need to steer them, and so what if you were lurking for a year before working for a year and appear a couple of weeks ago, it gives us nothing to steer with.
4) Thus far feedback appears to be a tickbox somewhere that says ask for feedback, not that that has any other effect in game aside from tick we got feedback.
5) You can try and focus the detailed feedback on the areas your are currently paying attention too but the rot runs deep and wide in the game currently, with gameplay running shallow and thin.
|
|
|
|
Post by FuriousMoo on Jan 13, 2015 14:15:47 GMT
1) That's why the designers get the big bucks Thanks, most amusing thing I've heard all week. |
|
|
|
Post by 13thGeneral on Jan 13, 2015 14:38:53 GMT
1) That's why the designers get the big bucks. 2) Enjoy your 30.000 ft view of feedback; we want to see results other than doing the opposite of what that feedback represents. 3) As a developer I too agree that pesky end users might not give you the detail or info you find most useful, however you need to steer them, and so what if you were lurking for a year before working for a year and appear a couple of weeks ago, it gives us nothing to steer with. 4) Thus far feedback appears to be a tickbox somewhere that says ask for feedback, not that that has any other effect in game aside from tick we got feedback. 5) You can try and focus the detailed feedback on the areas your are currently paying attention too but the rot runs deep and wide in the game currently, with gameplay running shallow and thin. Bingo. 1) That's why the designers get the big bucks Thanks, most amusing thing I've heard all week. Oh, only if I got a 5% raise every time someone said that to me while I worked as an under-appreciated and underpaid graphic designer at a small local printshop. Anyhow, comedy aside, there's an answer here somewhere. It seems Moo is trying to get us to focus our suggestions, and we're essentially burnt out having provided feedback on so many occasions. With all this back and forth on both sides, with many points of view, we reach an impasse where the community ideas are too disjointed and without consensus, and the design team is too restricted and very busy. What we need is find a compromise (which is partly what FuriousMoo is trying to do, I think) in how the information is presented and what gets focused on. Here's where outlining your basic idea in a single thread helps out. This is also where, when the design team sees an idea that has merit, they inform everyone that "this idea we want to explore more" and thus everyone turns focus on building upon that idea. To get the ball rolling, perhaps the design team could present something to focus on that is less general, and more specifically refined (other than simply "Combat"), based on past feedback/suggestions/pleas.
Hypothetical Example; Design Team: We like the idea of using commandments as a way to influence your followers into action. Where should Commandments come from, how should they be achieved? Community: Well, how about they come from (tech cards)? Design Team: What kind of Commandments would you like to see, and how would they affect change in your follower behavior? Community: Maybe Combat is only allowed when you enact the Commandment " Destroy Thine Enemy", or they can be peaceful with the " Love thy Neighbor" thus avoid combat? How's that sound, does that make sense? I am kind of in a rush to get to work, so I had to type this quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by FuriousMoo on Jan 13, 2015 15:15:54 GMT
1) That's why the designers get the big bucks. 2) Enjoy your 30.000 ft view of feedback; we want to see results other than doing the opposite of what that feedback represents. 3) As a developer I too agree that pesky end users might not give you the detail or info you find most useful, however you need to steer them, and so what if you were lurking for a year before working for a year and appear a couple of weeks ago, it gives us nothing to steer with. 4) Thus far feedback appears to be a tickbox somewhere that says ask for feedback, not that that has any other effect in game aside from tick we got feedback. 5) You can try and focus the detailed feedback on the areas your are currently paying attention too but the rot runs deep and wide in the game currently, with gameplay running shallow and thin. Bingo. Thanks, most amusing thing I've heard all week. Oh, only if I got a 5% raise every time someone said that to me while I worked as an under-appreciated and underpaid graphic designer at a small local printshop. Anyhow, comedy aside, there's an answer here somewhere. It seems Moo is trying to get us to focus our suggestions, and we're essentially burnt out having provided feedback on so many occasions. With all this back and forth on both sides, with many points of view, we reach an impasse where the community ideas are too disjointed and without consensus, and the design team is too restricted and very busy. What we need is find a compromise (which is partly what FuriousMoo is trying to do, I think) in how the information is presented and what gets focused on. Here's where outlining your basic idea in a single thread helps out. This is also where, when the design team sees an idea that has merit, they inform everyone that "this idea we want to explore more" and thus everyone turns focus on building upon that idea. To get the ball rolling, perhaps the design team could present something to focus on that is less general, and more specifically refined (other than simply "Combat"), based on past feedback/suggestions/pleas.
Hypothetical Example; Design Team: We like the idea of using commandments as a way to influence your followers into action. Where should Commandments come from, how should they be achieved? Community: Well, how about they come from (tech cards)? Design Team: What kind of Commandments would you like to see, and how would they affect change in your follower behavior? Community: Maybe Combat is only allowed when you enact the Commandment " Destroy Thine Enemy", or they can be peaceful with the " Love thy Neighbor" thus avoid combat? How's that sound, does that make sense? I am kind of in a rush to get to work, so I had to type this quickly. Let's try a quick little thing here: Pretend we are in a room having this conversation. I ask the question (pick one of them), you give me the answer. Now write down for me what you think my immediate followup question/s would be. |
|
Casinha
Master
Posts: 217
Pledge level: Partner
|
Post by Casinha on Jan 13, 2015 15:17:42 GMT
I was under the impression that this thread was meant for those high-level ideas that would require a complete, and I mean complete, re-working of the existing system rather than giving practical feedback, which is what the DEV THREAD stuff exists for. I've been playing Godus again recently and when I loaded it up this morning I found my settlements burned down and a load of Astari continuing to burn down the rest of the buildings. I have since recovered, but what I thought while doing it was "Why is this game playing itself while I'm gone?" What would the consequences of stopping things from happening while you don't have the game open be? All I can think of would be the need to introduce the ability to save and load game states. Is there anything in particular that's reliant on the game catching up with what was "going on" while it wasn't running? EDIT: Sorry for the combo breaker, FuriousMoo hadn't replied while I was typing this up, so don't want to appear like I'm derailing the conversation. Carry on |
|
|
|
Post by Spiderweb on Jan 13, 2015 15:40:04 GMT
"I was under the impression that this thread was meant for those high-level ideas" Exactly this ^^ I started this thread as a bit of fun before Moo opened the dev threads. dev threads are focused on what Moo's actually would like community input on. |
|
) etc
Aug 21, 2024 19:32:37 GMT
Aug 21, 2024 19:32:37 GMT
