Search Unity

Creating an engaging in game building system

Discussion in 'Game Design' started by snacktime, Oct 5, 2019.

  1. snacktime

    snacktime

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2013
    Posts:
    3,356
    So our game design has a strong focus on pvp and in game building. And one reason why is they are historically good drivers of engagement and retention. And in areas that scale well cost wise for smaller studios. The game is multiplayer 3d Rpg.

    Looking for anything to improve on what I'm trying to accomplish here. Which is basically make building fun and engaging in both a pvp and pve context. Without giving up too much in either area to accommodate for the other.

    Big picture the game has pve and pvp areas. Without getting into the details you can acquire land to build on that is free from pvp, but it won't ever be as economically productive as the free for all pvp areas. But if you just want to build your big fancy castle and live in peace, it works great for that with pve only income being enough to get you there (eventually).

    I wanted building to be fun in both a pvp and pve context. In a pve context I wanted the building system to provide tools that enabled a good amount of creative expression and something you can build on over time. A lot like the paradigm that exists in minecraft.

    But for pvp the whole point of structures is they get destroyed at some point, to be integral to pvp that has to be a thing.

    So currently the design to reconcile this is two fold. One the pvp game is just designed more defensively when it comes to structures. An overwhelming force can come in break down gates and kill everyone in fairly short order. They could make off with a fair amount of valuables. But to actually destroy a well built castle would take hours even if not heavily defended. I'm sure it will take a lot of tweaking once live, but that's the general idea.

    The other part to make it work better in pvp is to reduce the time to build stuff. This is accomplished simply by not using features that add more creativity but don't add value in a pvp context. Like you can create multiple floors in a structure out of wood and stone and craft things like supporting beams, floor panels, doors, etc at the specific dimensions needed. But in pvp you really just need strong walls and gates made of basic building parts that are easy to craft (default presets for sizes) and easy to place.

    Another part of the building worth mentioning, and if someone has any ideas on how to improve it that would be great. Which is I didn't want building to be a huge grind in the wrong ways. I'm trying to make the time sink the building itself, one reason I went with building is more granular. One example of what I did here is crafted building items automatically go into a supply depot. And if you are in range of the supply depot you can place whatever is in it. So you don't have to manage inventory. The flow is craft what you need, go build, go back and craft, etc.. Harvesting is also made easier but won't go into the details of that.
     
    tylerguitar75 and JoeStrout like this.
  2. BIGTIMEMASTER

    BIGTIMEMASTER

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2017
    Posts:
    5,181
    interesting to read, i dunno if i can offer any real advice as i haven't played games like this very much and so probably not understanding completely. But if you need a playtester at some point feel free to ding me. Always happy to help with that.
     
  3. JoeStrout

    JoeStrout

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2011
    Posts:
    9,859
    Sounds like a neat system and something I would enjoy playing.

    One way to add depth — if you'll forgive the shameless plug — would be to add an in-game scripting system. You could fit this into the theme of your game as spell scrolls, or programmable machines, etc. This would allow players to automate repetitive tasks, make custom behaviors (tricks & traps), and so on. It could add quite a lot of depth to the game.

    (Shameless plug because, of course, I would recommend MiniScript as the scripting engine to do that, though there are of course other possibilities too.)