Game features and dynamic ideas

[Vaizer]

So. I've been through many games... played many heroes and killed a few bad guys in my day. I have a couple 'features' that I found enjoyable and may make someone wealthy one day if done right by incorporating into a big title. (Just don't forget that I sparked inspiration)

The inspiration of writing this by the way is my recent victory of Mass Effect 3 on Xbox 360 in under 40 hours.

So. Features.

1. I'll date myself with Valkyrie profile for Playstion. I SUPREMELY enjoyed (even for this game) the ability to take a Einherjer whom you cultivated, leveled, and armed with gear and send him/her to Valhalla. Though losing a strong comrade, you then see periodical reports on their advancement in army rank and what heroic deeds they accomplished in battle with a full on description of what they did. I think this is something to think about.

With this, I can see a couple things off the top of my head. For instance, if you were to have a story line battle as part of a war. You'd then get reports on heroic deeds from your heroes or colleagues.

2. Suikoden. I do like the recruiting feature this game provides. Especially the whole, recruit so many people then things will happen to your fort. Though, it could easily be expanded upon. Don't just make a nice castle.. Give me some troop support!! (Mass Effect 3 did great in the troop support department and Dragon Quest did great in the recruitment-bigger village department)

With this. Why can't I do side quests that either add to or provide support in say my army strength or the efficiency of defense in castle walls. Just a thought. Why can't I do a quest that rescues a blacksmith or merchant that you convince to open shop it town? That'd be realistic and cool to see your town getting bigger.

3. Dark Cloud. Why hasn't anyone seen or played this game for Playstation. Yes, It was crappy BUT it had a unique feature. It was about going back and forth in time. Collecting resources and materials needed for cities. Yes, it was an rpg you went back and fixed cities that were crappy. Why can't that be implemented in games? Oh, let's go back it time (chrono trigger) and plant this tree here, future it's a giant forest.

This, this is spectacular. What if we went back and did a side quest for a guy and in the future the city turns into an empire. Better yet, if we don't do the quest its a shack in the middle of an empty forest.

4. Speaking of Chrono Trigger. It had two distinct features I liked. One being the time thing. The other, the clearing of the castle. One section of the game, if you played it, had you clear a wing of a fort for monsters and when you came out you paid to get it fixed up. When you came back clear another wing... again you paid until you did it all and the fort was back to new.

With this, I can see some good ideas. Such as, clearing an old church to do repairs or killing an enemy and taking over the base.


Just a few thoughts. What do you think?

-V

[KFCrispy]

i don't like time travel at all. forget growing a forest, why don't you just go back and kill the antagonist(s) preventing all of the bad things from happening? i'd also make billions of dollars with time travel just cuz i can.

[Raww Le Klueze]

While time travel is an awful plot device that should be avoided, going back to kill the antagonist just creates a paradox in that if you kill the antagonist before he becomes the antagonist then you have no reason to go back in time since there's no antagonist, since you don't go back in time to kill the antagonist he rises to become the antagonist and you go back to kill him, etc etc. and now we're stuck in a time loop.

[Xelinis]

I like the idea of time travel as a game's central theme, but I have yet to see it done right.

[KFCrispy]

While time travel is an awful plot device that should be avoided, going back to kill the antagonist just creates a paradox in that if you kill the antagonist before he becomes the antagonist then you have no reason to go back in time since there's no antagonist, since you don't go back in time to kill the antagonist he rises to become the antagonist and you go back to kill him, etc etc. and now we're stuck in a time loop.

as if any other actions don't create a paradox? you go back in time to tell ppl to grow a tree, but since now there has always been this tree you don't need to go back in time and tell the person, but then there is no tree..

[ninjaluc79]

Something like that sort of happened in Final Fantasy I (yes, that's right, THAT first ever Final Fantasy). The Four Warriors of Light killed Garland, but why is the end of the world still bound to happen? Turns out that the Four Elemental Fiends were sent into the future by the main villain Chaos, and in turn the Four Fiends sent Garland to the past as Chaos.

The time loop occurs as long as Chaos keeps defeating the Four Warriors of Light forever. It breaks when by a fluke the Warriors of Light defeated him, bringing peace into the world but as a result the WoL cease to exist, and the people will never remember them, let alone know them.

[patapi]

That kind of nonsense paradox is why all these time travel stories spawn the idea of changing specific events result in the world branching into parallel dimensions where both original scenario as well as the altered state can co-exist.

[kratoscar2008]

Time traveling is getting too much milked, there is no creativity these days.