Jump to content

Home

If SWGB 2 added heroes......


FroZticles

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Luke's Dad: It's Ziff Kalasco, not Zalasco! Or is Zalasco your generic-named hero?

 

Froz: Exactly, RM is not the story. So what's the problem with having movie characters in it?

 

Darth: How does having Luke in a skirmish contradict the movies? I seem to remember in the Battle of Hoth after his snowspeeder went down, he was right in the skirmish, taking out an AT-AT and everything.

 

 

 

Everyone: Is the major problem with having movie characters in the game the fact they can die? If so I have a concept that gets around that without making them uber-characters like WarCraft III:

 

When a hero gets to 1HP (just about to die) they become invulnerable and cannot be targetted by enemy units anymore. They can no longer attack or use any special abilities, and their line of sight is reduced to one (so they can't see anything). They move at a very reduced rate because they are near death. You have to get the hero back to your Command Center where they can be dunked into a vat of bacta and restored to full health.

 

This is very realistic because if you think about it, this is exactly what happened to Luke (kind of) when Vader cut off his hand and he fell down the pit: he was effectively dead. But he was rescued and brought back to full health for more adventures. The same with Han when he was frozen, and with Obi-Wan when he was taken by the Geonosians, and with Anakin when Dooku cut his arm off. In fact if you think about it, rescuing incapacitated heroes is a big part of Star Wars.

 

Thoughts?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read up to where you could "fix" the movie heroes damn that is just crazy enough not to work....

 

 

It makes things a whole lot worse losing a hand or arm is one thing but when you are half a second from dying and then you cant lose health is insane. Your lord of the purists no more you have disgraced them I now give Darth Windu your crown thats how unrealisic that idea is.

 

With movie heroes in RM it introduces stroy into RM which is irrelevant. You can't use Luke battling AT-AT on hoth as a back up you said so yourself it isn't a story so take your scenario toy box with your movie heroes with you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the idea of heroes being incapacitated. This could be expanded a little, players could have a prison building which allows them to capture enemy heroes (probably with a special and expensive unit, maybe the bounty hunters that I described earlier).

 

Lord Angelus

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry Vostok but that really is a lousy idea. It would piss off the enemy so greatly. Besides, it makes no sense at all. He's near dead and no one can kill him...wth?

 

I'm reconsidering the whole idea of heroes themselves...perhaps they shouldn't have such a place. AoM did fine without them(Greek heroes are not errr...heroes...).

 

 

Anyway, for the sake of the debate, I'll take SWBF as yet another example. In Star Wars Battlefront, you'll be able to cal upon the help of a jedi/sith hero after you accomplish something(that I don't know).

Now Luke and Vader have already been confirmed to be in-game NPCs so if they can throw in movie characters in the midst of a battle, I guess SWGBII can too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

Actually, it's even more minor.

 

 

 

 

 

 

I can't believe we're arguing if heroes should be named Ziff Zalasco or Luke Skywalker...

 

That means that we've got nothing to discuss on, and that we desperatly (sp?) need a new RTS...

 

@ Vostok : bad idea. Doesn't make any sense to me.

 

... and WC3's heroes are not suber-extra-uber invincible. They only become super strong (not uber) if the game lasts too long... and that means you don't know how to play if it lasts too long.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aww, no-one likes my idea. :( I thought it reflected the movies quite well. The idea is not that they become invincible near death, it is that the enemy supposedly thinks they're dead, so stops targetting them, when they actually aren't dead at all, and they sneak away to fight another day. But if everyone really hates it I'll do away with it.

 

What if I alter my idea by going on what Angelus suggested? That is, when they get down to zero health they are not killed but are instead captured by the enemy. You can no longer control them, and to get them back you'll have to mount a rescue mission. Perhaps there could be additional effects, such as while the enemy has your heroes prisoner, you lose an amount of your resources every so often. It could also be modified into a game mode, kind of like where you win if you have all the holocrons, instead winning if you can hold onto all the enemy's heroes for a period of time.

 

Is that better?

 

 

Froz: Jedi Outcast allowed you to use whatever characters you wanted in online multiplayer mode, including Luke Skywalker. So you could have eight Luke Skywalkers all battling each other. If I'm not mistaken, Jedi Outcast has been the most popular Star Wars game to date...

 

My point is there is no possible way multiplayer games don't follow the movies, but they do try to capture the feel of the movies. That's what I'm trying to do. The game isn't reliving the movies, it's just for fun, which is surprisingly what a game is meant to be.

 

And perhaps you should learn the definition of Purist before you give yourself the right to de-throne me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, i'm just going to go ahead and say that Heroes shouldnt be in multi-player games. They dont fit, and really this game is supposed to be about large battles between huge powers, not a few people.

 

PS: froz - vostok is actually being purist because he is chosing film characters over non-film characters. Oh yes and Vostok, i hate your idea too :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windu- I don't want heroes in RM at all..... Vostok is still not a purist with his unkillable hero idea and he stills wants 8 Lukes in one game....

 

Vostok-Jedi outcast is not a RTS and it is dead now since the release of JKA. Which you create your own characters and is more popular than Jedi OUtcast ever was.

 

Your rescue mission idea is bad there are no missions in RM unless you count killing all your enemies a mission. It could work in a game mode but I don't see the appeal.

 

It is a RTS you try turning it into a RPS now a first person shooter very interesting....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by lukeiamyourdad

Froz, try playing Savage. It's an RTS/FPS.

 

You'd be amazed.

 

 

JKA doesn't have the popularity JKO had in its prime. JKA was blah...bad storyline, bad online community...blah...I guess JKO wasn't much better but still...

 

Actually, JO was (and is still) a superb game. However, most players are attracted by the damn staves and dual sabers. (it was a really bad idea to add them, IMO)

 

About capture & rescue : I don't think it's a good idea. If you want this, go play Rebellion (or start a petition so that they make a rebellion 2 :) ).

 

And don't forget that the game should not be centered around heroes. They're just additional stuff to make the game more enjoyable (unless you want it to be more like WC3, but that wouldn't fit with SW).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Froz: Actually in RM at the moment you can win by collecting all holocrons, and this is what capturing all enemy heroes would be like.

 

I think heroes are an important enough part of Star Wars to be included, but you are right Darth in that the game shouldn't revolve around them.

 

I'm just finishing up my revised design of SWGB2, and I want to include heroes. So what is the best way for them to exist?

1) My unkillable heroes idea is right out, no-one likes it.

2) My capturable and rescuable heroes has people divided.

3) What if they can be killed? Either you can only ever build one, or...

4) Build a new one every time they die... very unrealistic but seems to be the way most games include them (Generals, Age of Mythology, WarCraft III...)

 

So how should they operate? And don't just say no heroes at all, I want them so I'm trying to determine a good way to include them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Windu, I know you don't want them. If you re-read my post you'll note I said this:

And don't just say no heroes at all, I want them so I'm trying to determine a good way to include them.
So what I'm saying is, if you had to include them, how would you do it? So far that's two votes for reviving them (while the same as cloning, I'm not going to call it cloning, and I do have my reasons but they are too long winded to put here).

 

It is important to note that the way my heroes work is not the same as WarCraft III. Jedi/Sith Heroes are powerful, but that's to be expected as they work similar to as the existing Jedi/Sith Masters, except you can only have one of them instead of a whole heap. But my Military and Political Heroes for the most part only have powers that advantage surrounding units, not themselves. As such the emphasis is on the rest of the army, not on the hero by themselves. This should please you Windu, because the emphasis will be on large forces. By themselves the Military and Political Heroes are useless, but as a part of a large force you will get results.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...