Build, not destroy
by Marco Maltese · in Game Design and Creative Issues · 05/14/2003 (10:40 am) · 18 replies
Hi everybody,
I am new here... I read some thread in this area and I find that the "new" idea that many propose are remakes of the usual crap around, FPS, RPG and so on...
Now, I know that it will be REALLY difficult to invent something REALLY NEW, but if you start saying "I want make a game similar to Unreal-Quake-Tribes-Halo" and so on, that's not a great start, I think...
Now, after my critics ;) I can tell you my idea.
And my idea is to make a game where you have bricks (or better big blocks) and you have to build something.
No shooting, no destroying (for now... but a game evolves while developing).
So you have these big blocks, you see in transparence the "trace" of the house (or bridge or skyscraper or tower or whatever will be) and you have to bring the blocks there in the right way to build the thing bottom-up (as everybody knows, houses cannot be built starting from roof :D).
The blocks should be "sticky", so that when we put one near another they stick and we can proceed to take one more.
The main character should be able to jump on the blocks, to bring up other blocks and so on.
Let's say the proportions are like an ant bringing a seed, while the dimensions should be something less than a human.
Base game is to proceed to build the buildings under a strict time, while some small monsters bust us in the process (but we can kick them ;)).
Round after round then as a final round build up a 1000 meters skyscraper without the help of any machine LOL.
Variations are quite obvious:
- one on one who is the fastest building his house this time?
Everybody going to ONE only place to take the pieces so they push each other.
- race, a one on one with more participants, in center is the blocks source, everybody has to build in his zone.
- team race, like a 2 on 2 or a 3vs3vs3 game is going and so on.
And now for the request:
I am 33 old graphic, I already realized a game, an old shoot'em up for Amiga, published some ( :
I am new here... I read some thread in this area and I find that the "new" idea that many propose are remakes of the usual crap around, FPS, RPG and so on...
Now, I know that it will be REALLY difficult to invent something REALLY NEW, but if you start saying "I want make a game similar to Unreal-Quake-Tribes-Halo" and so on, that's not a great start, I think...
Now, after my critics ;) I can tell you my idea.
And my idea is to make a game where you have bricks (or better big blocks) and you have to build something.
No shooting, no destroying (for now... but a game evolves while developing).
So you have these big blocks, you see in transparence the "trace" of the house (or bridge or skyscraper or tower or whatever will be) and you have to bring the blocks there in the right way to build the thing bottom-up (as everybody knows, houses cannot be built starting from roof :D).
The blocks should be "sticky", so that when we put one near another they stick and we can proceed to take one more.
The main character should be able to jump on the blocks, to bring up other blocks and so on.
Let's say the proportions are like an ant bringing a seed, while the dimensions should be something less than a human.
Base game is to proceed to build the buildings under a strict time, while some small monsters bust us in the process (but we can kick them ;)).
Round after round then as a final round build up a 1000 meters skyscraper without the help of any machine LOL.
Variations are quite obvious:
- one on one who is the fastest building his house this time?
Everybody going to ONE only place to take the pieces so they push each other.
- race, a one on one with more participants, in center is the blocks source, everybody has to build in his zone.
- team race, like a 2 on 2 or a 3vs3vs3 game is going and so on.
And now for the request:
I am 33 old graphic, I already realized a game, an old shoot'em up for Amiga, published some ( :
#2
But not so easy to implement, after all.
There could come out some VERY big problems when I talk about the "sticky" blocks.
As you know collision testing can be REALLY hard to implement when you go to watch objects standing on other objects.
Try to imagine 3 blocks like one door of Stonehenge: that should not be difficult, but if you make a bit more complex things there could come BIG troubles.
I tried to make collision detection in TrueSpace and I found BIG problems... try to imagine what this can mean in real time!
You could avoid that collision complexity by creating PARENTAL relations between 2, 3, 4 and so on blocks, but I don't know if this kind of programming is supported by Torque.
Should be easy to set up plans where the blocks should fit by making some collision detection or better intersection.
A nice variation of this game could be the building of a space station. First small stations, then bigger and bigger up to have a lot of composed tubes to travel into... a nightmare :D
Could be nice with the implementation of inertia, a little help for the internal computer that can "stabilize" the ship, the aligning phase and so on... realistic, but not too much!
You travel with your spaceship, take the part, go to the core of the space station, align to the connection, thrust a bit and connect the part, then you go take another one.
This should be easier to make, no gravity force in this case, but parental relation is necessary to fix the objects to the core.
I still have to buy the Torque, so I don't know how is its elasticity :(
05/14/2003 (3:02 pm)
Yes, I think that it could be quite funny and long-life game...But not so easy to implement, after all.
There could come out some VERY big problems when I talk about the "sticky" blocks.
As you know collision testing can be REALLY hard to implement when you go to watch objects standing on other objects.
Try to imagine 3 blocks like one door of Stonehenge: that should not be difficult, but if you make a bit more complex things there could come BIG troubles.
I tried to make collision detection in TrueSpace and I found BIG problems... try to imagine what this can mean in real time!
You could avoid that collision complexity by creating PARENTAL relations between 2, 3, 4 and so on blocks, but I don't know if this kind of programming is supported by Torque.
Should be easy to set up plans where the blocks should fit by making some collision detection or better intersection.
A nice variation of this game could be the building of a space station. First small stations, then bigger and bigger up to have a lot of composed tubes to travel into... a nightmare :D
Could be nice with the implementation of inertia, a little help for the internal computer that can "stabilize" the ship, the aligning phase and so on... realistic, but not too much!
You travel with your spaceship, take the part, go to the core of the space station, align to the connection, thrust a bit and connect the part, then you go take another one.
This should be easier to make, no gravity force in this case, but parental relation is necessary to fix the objects to the core.
I still have to buy the Torque, so I don't know how is its elasticity :(
#3
05/15/2003 (6:28 pm)
Tribes 2 Construction Mod may be interesting to you. There were some sticky blocks, and you could build stuff. It also had a lot of other little things.
#4
the construction mod for tribes2 is generally what your idea is about...
I'm trying to port it over to torque atm... but you know how fast those things go. :P
well.. good luck with your project.
05/16/2003 (2:49 am)
Yup, max is right.the construction mod for tribes2 is generally what your idea is about...
I'm trying to port it over to torque atm... but you know how fast those things go. :P
well.. good luck with your project.
#5
05/17/2003 (9:50 am)
Your already too laye. The creators of the T2 Construction Mod have already started on Construction The Game, and have beams working.
#6
05/17/2003 (9:53 am)
Heh... just ignore that.
#7
Maybe they are making that "serious", while I want create something in "comic" style.
And the "space construction" idea is still there, and is quite good, I think ;)
05/17/2003 (10:22 am)
Nice that you tell me that there are similar games or mods coming in, but you know, SMALL differences can make similar games much different.Maybe they are making that "serious", while I want create something in "comic" style.
And the "space construction" idea is still there, and is quite good, I think ;)
#8
05/18/2003 (11:08 am)
Construction The Game is supposed to be for fun, too. They said that if you build an awsome spaceship, you can fly it. You could build anything you want with it.
#9
And what marco is talking about is probably more in the direction of fun as in
Reactor fun
wich I would suggest checking out if you haven't already marco... I don't know the specifics.. but they claim to have pretty good and easy collision handeling.
05/18/2003 (11:44 am)
Don't believe everything brack tells you josh.And what marco is talking about is probably more in the direction of fun as in
Reactor fun
wich I would suggest checking out if you haven't already marco... I don't know the specifics.. but they claim to have pretty good and easy collision handeling.
#10
05/18/2003 (1:25 pm)
Looks like you are joking me... anyway... I watched the reactor engine and it is quite "choppy" for my standards...
#11
You need to think of something more than transparent blocks. Let's say you have a 3 block thick wall. How are you going to select the block in the middle? if you are positioned on one side, you will select the block closest to you. The only way you can get inside to the middle block, you would need to remove one of the ouside layers of the wall, then put them all back.
If you can think of a "layer system" where you can chose which layer of blocks you will select from, that will really boost your gameplay.
05/18/2003 (5:39 pm)
another think you have to look out for.You need to think of something more than transparent blocks. Let's say you have a 3 block thick wall. How are you going to select the block in the middle? if you are positioned on one side, you will select the block closest to you. The only way you can get inside to the middle block, you would need to remove one of the ouside layers of the wall, then put them all back.
If you can think of a "layer system" where you can chose which layer of blocks you will select from, that will really boost your gameplay.
#12
05/18/2003 (9:09 pm)
I wouldn't know about choppy... I thought it was just an art-style..
#13
On my 2GHz machine it worked SLOW...
Eric: the walls will not be composed by more than ONE block in thickness... the building will come up quite FAST.
The selection of a block is simple: you take what you have in the center of your aim. If OVER that block is standing something else, then you CANNOT take it ;)
If you can SEE the block and get near enough, then you can take it.
Hey but there are no programmers here around?
05/19/2003 (2:21 am)
For "choppy", in my poor english, I mean that I downloaded the demo and it looks a bit "poor" for what I want realize.On my 2GHz machine it worked SLOW...
Eric: the walls will not be composed by more than ONE block in thickness... the building will come up quite FAST.
The selection of a block is simple: you take what you have in the center of your aim. If OVER that block is standing something else, then you CANNOT take it ;)
If you can SEE the block and get near enough, then you can take it.
Hey but there are no programmers here around?
#14
btw, I'm a programmer, but I can't dedicate to projects with that intensity, since I'm a full-time student from time to time too.
Besides.. what your doing doesn't sound all that hard,it's just the collisions I'm not sure I can handle.
05/19/2003 (3:50 am)
Right... I never tried actually playing the game, just the engine features sounded like something to make that kind of stuff much easier, than just using plain torque.btw, I'm a programmer, but I can't dedicate to projects with that intensity, since I'm a full-time student from time to time too.
Besides.. what your doing doesn't sound all that hard,it's just the collisions I'm not sure I can handle.
#15
Can I ask you if you can only give a look at the manual of torque and tell me if it is possible to realize the project?
And if you find half hour of time you can try to put 3 or 4 cubes one on the other and see what the collision engine will do?
I wouldn't trash money buying the application and find myself with a thing I'll not use...
Games like ThinkTank and Orbz can be funny for some time, and they are well realized too, but I would make something a bit more "deep".
For the Reaction Engine I read somewhere that it is not based on the Torque, and I tested the Chain Reaction that is a game realized with that engine...
05/19/2003 (4:15 am)
Hey you are very friendly Sebastian ;)Can I ask you if you can only give a look at the manual of torque and tell me if it is possible to realize the project?
And if you find half hour of time you can try to put 3 or 4 cubes one on the other and see what the collision engine will do?
I wouldn't trash money buying the application and find myself with a thing I'll not use...
Games like ThinkTank and Orbz can be funny for some time, and they are well realized too, but I would make something a bit more "deep".
For the Reaction Engine I read somewhere that it is not based on the Torque, and I tested the Chain Reaction that is a game realized with that engine...
#16
05/19/2003 (4:19 am)
Couldnt you mount these blocks onto each other with mount points and some modification to the engine?I dont think that it would be too hard to implement with torque. Im doing something similar, but you build a maze, and I have just got it connecting the blocks and rendering them together. There really is no 'collision system' just do a quick ray trace every player update to see if there is a block in front of them and if so, 'stick' the block to it.
#17
@Marco, the problem is, the collision engine currently only works for specific objects like for example, players and vehicles which are ment to move around. Generally it's not a good idea to use those object-types as building blocks.
There are items which would have lots of motion and collisions stuff.. but they are limited in their rotation.
I personally find it easier to do what dylan does and simply say point and build.. not dragging the stones around but rather instantly stick them where the player is looking since that allows allot more percise building.
Wich reminds me... why exactly are we talking about collisions
there'r no moving objects are there?
05/19/2003 (5:46 am)
@ Dylan, Yup... thought there's no real need to actually 'stick' the blocks together using mounting unless your going to move the base (and want the rest to move with it). @Marco, the problem is, the collision engine currently only works for specific objects like for example, players and vehicles which are ment to move around. Generally it's not a good idea to use those object-types as building blocks.
There are items which would have lots of motion and collisions stuff.. but they are limited in their rotation.
I personally find it easier to do what dylan does and simply say point and build.. not dragging the stones around but rather instantly stick them where the player is looking since that allows allot more percise building.
Wich reminds me... why exactly are we talking about collisions
there'r no moving objects are there?
#18
I'll try make some screens in 3D tomorrow, so I can explain it better.
"There really is no 'collision system' just do a quick ray trace every player update to see if there is a block in front of them and if so, 'stick' the block to it."
This is what I was exactly afraid of...
I know how much difficult is to make a good phisics engine and how much calculations this requires...
That is why I suggested the alternative to make the block a "parental" relation to another block.
But I'll make it clearer with some pic tomorrow :)
05/19/2003 (9:45 am)
I think I was not clear enough... but it's not easy if using only words...I'll try make some screens in 3D tomorrow, so I can explain it better.
"There really is no 'collision system' just do a quick ray trace every player update to see if there is a block in front of them and if so, 'stick' the block to it."
This is what I was exactly afraid of...
I know how much difficult is to make a good phisics engine and how much calculations this requires...
That is why I suggested the alternative to make the block a "parental" relation to another block.
But I'll make it clearer with some pic tomorrow :)
Torque 3D Owner Ted Southard
It's a great idea, and damn simple to implement using a 3D engine. All you really need is some transparent objects, good collision testing, a timer, some multiplayer support, and the "plans" that can tell if a player built the object correctly and completely or not. Except for the last part, that's all very basic stuff and well within the parameters of the TGE.
And if I was heavy into TGE coding, I'd be able to help you out, but I'm not.
There's a market for that kind of game though, and not just for kids, like object assembly for tutorial programs(mechanics, robotics, etc).
Take your idea and run with it, I guarantee if you hit the right subject, you'll suceed.