Chrono Spiritual Successor Brainstorm Session (Come and join the fun!)

[idiotekque]

^ Your thoughts on the spriting, exactly what I was thinking myself.

And I only mentioned the SRPG route because I know of two occasions where it's been done extremely well with both graphic styles mentioned. 1. Full 3D, XCOM: Enemy Unknown (I also think gameplay like that +  the setting we're making would be really, really fun). And 2. 3D map, 2D characters, Final Fantasy Tactics (obviously sort of the godfather of the genre).

[tushantin]

When I said "using the best technologies we have at our disposal", I didn't necessarily mean going full-on Mass Effect on a beginner-level game. I just meant that, using 3D tools, it's possible to create 2D games too (like Bad Piggies / Angry Birds), or even going for low-quality 3D games (Chrono Cross, Dark Avenger, etc.). Everything can be optimized depending on our targets. 

But since you guys mentioned SRPG....

 

*Tushantin pulls something out from his magic bag yet again*

BEHOLD! The approximately perfect engine! http://eviscerate.net/article/rpg-battle-engine-renpy

....which might turn out useless. See, that engine is licensed Creative Commons 3 Attributions, Non-Commercial. Meaning, we can't make money from it. HOWEVER.... it reveals one important detail here:

It's just a module which can be added to Ren'Py. Ren'Py is basically just a Visual Novel engine (that I've fallen in love with), and the best thing about it is that it can modified to your heart's content provided you're knowledgeable in Python; then you could add mini-games or full-fledged battle systems, anything that you'd like. The only limitation is imagination needed skill with coding, time and effort.

But there comes the curious part: if we're using Python, then why not just go with Blender? It has everything we need, and all we need is someone to code things in it. So why rely on rendered sprites to be recalled as textures, and code the animations procedures, when you can simply use in-built animations? Besides, low-poly models don't take too much time to render, hence why so many 3D games work well even on old computers (such as GTA Vice City). We could easily just slap a toon-shader on a model and make it seem 2D -- just without the outlines, because that feature isn't there yet. 

[idiotekque]

I just don't think 2D games using 3D methods look very great. Perhaps that's just a personal option, but when I think of Trine, Party of Sin (basically a Trine clone), ...Angry Birds, etc, I just don't think that fits the project or is going to look very good. I really feel like there needs to 2D art and spriting.

[tushantin]

I just don't think 2D games using 3D methods look very great. Perhaps that's just a personal option, but when I think of Trine, Party of Sin (basically a Trine clone), ...Angry Birds, etc, I just don't think that fits the project or is going to look very good. I really feel like there needs to 2D art and spriting.

Oh, don't worry yourself with game aesthetics, and let me do all the work for you.  Feel free to complain once we're getting the demo ready, because that's when we'll need it most, because sprites or no sprites, we'll need to make 3D models anyway (since we have no sprite artists). That, and the environment can be CC-like 2D. Or we could just think something up later.

For now, we'll still need to think of targets and gameplay. Anybody has ideas? Integrate time travel in the game or battle system too? Or should we just piggy-back on existing game-styles (such as ATB, SRPG, etc.)? We could also go for Infinity Blade route and have a gesture-based battle system. Or even something unique: Gesture-based battle system with Chrono Cross' Stamina-Based? We could even have three slots at the side of the touch-screen, where we can keep three Elements / Magicite / Materia and summon spells when needed. THINK OF ALL THE COMBOS!

[Acacia Sgt]

I'd say it should go for something that isn't overtly complex. Using an already existent system would be easier, though making it unique could make it stand out. On the other hand, if it were unique, again I'd say it shouldn't need to be something very complex.

[Mr Bekkler]

 Tush, you're making some broad assumptions and leaps in logic. If the project  gets into production, what is to stop you from going to a  spriting site's forum and asking people to join?
Personally, i won't be able to commit to helping (though this its a fun thread to read) but its not difficult to get artists on board, and i expect that if you're offering money and  the chance to visually build a world from scratch, they'd jump for the chance.
Also I  still feel like  if its really going to be made and it's really  going to feel like a Chrono game, it's got to be an RPG. Radical Dreamers is a bad example of what Chrono games feel like, since its connection to Trigger is last minute and tangential, and since the game was  essentially remade from the ground up into Chrono Cross, which is (I don't need to remind you) an RPG. That said, I hope you guys are able to come to some basic agreements and really get this thing started.

[alfadorredux]

In terms of game mechanics, we could always do what served Squaresoft fairly well for the Final Fantasy series before it jumped the shark: put in a standard menu-based RPG combat engine (probably ATB rather than turn-based—we don't want to go too retro), and save the ingenuity for the tech/magic/skill system (which doesn't even have to be fully fleshed out for the demo). If the thought of a text menu is disturbing, we could switch to a circle-of-icons menu of the type common in PS2 RPGs.

@tushantin: Coding 2D animations isn't really all that difficult, though (been there, done that, remember? )

[tushantin]

Tush, you're making some broad assumptions and leaps in logic. If the project  gets into production, what is to stop you from going to a  spriting site's forum and asking people to join?

If it were that easy, I would have finished RDFZ by now. I'm assuming this on the basis that we have nothing to pay at this moment. However, once we do have something to pay, and depending on the targets, then of course we've got plenty of agency to hire the best sources of art. 

...it's got to be an RPG.

I'm not saying it can't be an RPG (I'm not so closed minded). I'm just stimulating your imaginations by bombarding you guys with out-of-the-box ideas, and even to challenge our perceptions of what can make a modern RPG because the contemporary view here seems to be backwards, caught in Retro-era, with the exceptions of a few circumstances (no offence). 

For instance, when I said that we could borrow inspirations from Infinity Blade, I didn't mean that the game has to be exactly like that; instead, I meant that, if we go with the RPG route, we could replace Chrono Cross' "Menu Selecting" with a more convenient "Gesture-Based" attack for touch-screens, such as tablets and mobiles. Think about it: wouldn't it be more convenient for Serge to dish-out combos with the movement of your fingers, rather than constantly selecting "attack percentages"? But even so, (I'm only being biased here) I feel that 3D models are more efficient in such a system than 2D.

But hey, once we got a good engine to work with -- and a good programmer to rely on -- anything goes! I'm totally fine with Zenonia-style graphics for hand-held RPGs. 

@tushantin: Coding 2D animations isn't really all that difficult, though (been there, done that, remember? )

I've no problems with the "making". I'm mostly concerned about how we'd pull off. We need a good plan, because there's a serious lack of OpenSource / Free engines we could use. For instance, it's easy to make a good 3D game for Win/Mac/Linux with the help of Unity3D and/or Blender (the latter still relying on Python), but we haven't many engines we could use for Andraid/iOS/Windows Phone (and hand-helds seem to be a GOOD market these days, even though Lennis warned that the "bubble might pop"). So what are we aiming for? 3D would be good for desktop in my opinion, and 2D would be great for hand-helds. However, there aren't many 2D game engines we could make use of... unless a programmer is willing to, such as building an engine in Lua based on aesthetic requirements, and porting it to devices.

Of course, by "aesthetic requirements", I also mean "gameplay". Everything would have to be tweaked: Menus, Portraits, Character Selections, Stages, Battle Systems, etc. all based on "artsy prototypes". But where can we find such a programmer to begin with? Or better yet, an engine?

(That said, I really need to find a way of creating interactive prototypes, but programming is beyond me...)

[tushantin]

That brings me to the business model (assuming we're going with Hand-helds with 2D graphics, but it can work for PC games too):

If we go with Freemium: The first level of the game would be free to play, as well as the first boss, and the story contained within the first level would be stand-alone and a full-fledged story in its own right (with a bit of cliffhanger, of course). This would assure that our audiences are satisfied and willing to pay more for the experiences. Progressing the plot would require in-app purchase of a license to unlock "Premium".

If we go with Premium: The app could be purchased for a small fee -- perhaps the average $2.99 -- with the whole game playable, ad-free, and giving the audiences the full enjoyment of things. Of course, there will still be in-app purchases, such as getting a powerful weapon from a legendary blacksmith, or even unlocking new extra content and stages (which can be consequently added over time even after the publication of the game). Basically, "paying" can open a portal beyond the original game, and despite the game over, there's nothing stopping the gamers to "go on more adventures with more difficulty".

In either case, more money for us! I just don't want to follow the example of Gamevil, but we still need a solid model for this kind of thing.

(P.S.: Once we have the success on hand-helds, we could always just "delay" a bit and port it via Steam on desktops too.)

[alfadorredux]

If we're to make money off this at all, you can nix the Blender engine—it turns out that it's GPL, and I'm pretty (although not absolutely) sure that license attaches to the artwork as well if the game is distributed as a unit. That means anyone can redistribute it without giving us a dime. (The most usual method for making money off GPL'd software just doesn't apply to games, so we'd be reduced to begging for donations as a long-term monetization strategy—not good.)

As for money-making models...we have to decide which platform we're targeting, first. For an RPG, the best pricing model may be the classic one (free demo, largish lump sum—$20-$30, most likely—for the full game), but we can't do that if we're targeting general-purpose handhelds. Because the prices of apps are so low, it's actually pretty difficult to make money with them, and this is not Angry Birds we're talking about here—a classic RPG is not a casual game and it is not going to appeal to people who don't normally play games. Those it is likely to appeal to are more likely to have a dedicated gaming hand-held, like the PS Vita. I don't think this would make money as a cellphone/tablet app. If we can target devices secondarily it might be worth it, but I don't think they're good primary targets.

Our logical targets, therefore, are gaming handhelds, consoles, or PCs. You typically have to pay to get dev kits for most handhelds or consoles, and you need to re-write your code for each type of machine (or create a compatibility layer). Targeting PCs, on the other hand, is easy—lots of free engines and toolkits under a variety of licenses, no restrictions on pricing (or on much of anything else for that matter), no cross-compiling or other compatibility issues, no "App Store" gatekeeper to get past. (That's right, you can sink a lot of time and money into creating an app and still not be permitted to sell it.)

I really think this is premature, anyway. We need to do on the one hand story, preliminary character and location design, and very preliminary menu/UI design (not visual design, but options and hierarchies), and on the other hand, combat design (general model, which most of us seem to want to be RPG -> stat modeling and algorithms + magic/skill/tech system). Deciding on an engine and a revenue model can wait until we have some idea of what we're trying to do.

[tushantin]

Actually, Blender's turning a good business for both animators and game-developers all over the world! Not too sure about the specifics of GPL license it uses, but if I remember correctly it allows you to even sell anything you make with it without needing to distribute code, so long as you acknowledge it's made with Blender. That's probably the most important part of the license, and hence why it's "Free as in Freedom". I've taken a gander at plenty of such projects in various places, such as TouchArcade, TIGSource and even Blender Artists. There seems to be no problem whatsoever. But of course, we could totally ditch Blender in favour of other engines once we know what's feasible.

That said, for a basic and uncomplicated RPG, mobiles and tablets does fit the job. That's because if we target to NDS and PSP, we have the obligation of providing quality which we can't do on our first ventures. In that regard, the first game's story needn't be heavily developed, but just enough to captivate the audience. That's what Zenonia did.

As far as revenue goes... I'm going to take a shot in the dark and say that mobile app purchase outnumber hand-held purchases currently by over ten-fold. That's because, even in the Third World, there are more smartphones (especially Entry Level) than there are PSP or Nintendo DS. Heck, I've got a hundred friends who actually have Android phones but not one of them has a hand-held gaming device. In fact, I purchased a used HTC smartphone for $2, the price of five glasses of Lassi, but could never dream of purchasing a console! Sure, many would opt for free games, but with the Freemium business model we can still take our chances and make money.

But if we make the game primarily for Desktops, then that puts us in an even worse obligations: quality of gameplay. This means that we have no choice but to discard 2D sprites (unless it somehow helps with gameplay) because it may "hinder" quality and appeal, due to large screen sizes these days. We have no choice but to go one of two ways:

1) 3D engine, not necessarily Mass Effect quality, but Chrono Cross style would also do.
2) If Sprites, then it needs to be sufficiently high-quality, much like Ragnarok Battle Offline: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kSmXfM7dUkc

[Boo the Gentleman Caller]

I don't have the time to jump into this thread as much as I'd like, but...

Maybe I'm old school, but it just seems so much easier to make a SNES-era style JRPG as our first outing and as a true Chrono Trigger spiritual successor. The graphics are easy to make (sprite-based) and assembly is super easy. My fear is by using Blendor and a 3D engine we may never see the light of day... At least not on a first outing.

I think a lot of this conversation is great, but all the talk of a business model and an engine are WAAAAY too drawing the cart before the horse. It seems like every one has a different interpretation of what should be done. To start, we have to have a basic idea of what we want.

A 3D or 2D game? A traditional JRPG or an action-RPG hybrid? This is where the conversation should really be headed. The rest can follow once there's a framework to WHAT will be happening.

[tushantin]

The graphics are easy to make (sprite-based) and assembly is super easy. My fear is by using Blendor and a 3D engine we may never see the light of day...

But that's the basic problem here; my opinions are different. Among the people participating in this thread, I'm the only one capable of pulling off important graphics, and I'm not even good at sprites (unless you count high-res sprites like Ragnarok Battle Offline, for which I could use Synfig). In other words, for now, the only way to have the game see any light of day is going the 3D route, even if you need to make a 2D game (that is, 3D models that look like they are 2D sprites, but aren't).

Why? Because currently you've only got me as an artist. (But of course, once we have money and interests, we could get more, and the whole deal will change for the better.)

Not to sound condescending, but I'm just trying to help you all make the most of our available resources, rather than making castles in the sky. But in any regard, I'll leave you all to decide then.


EDIT: Just wanted to mention, Boo. Take your time reading through the threads. I think you might agree with my concerns in previous posts.

[alfadorredux]

Thing is, tushantin, by the same logic, I could push one engine or the other by virtue of being the only programmer participating. But I really do think Boo is right, and making such a selection is premature. We need the "what" before we can move to the "how".

(Re: Blender, it looks like it has a split licensing scheme, and I wasn't aware of the second license; also, the GPL may not have been intended to be viral to the artwork in this case. Mea culpa.)

[tushantin]

Yeah, don't worry, I agree with the "What" too (which is why I've been trying to encourage people to "think of targets"). Again, that all depends on:

1) What we can achieve,
2) What are our obligations to specific platform. (By "Obligations", I mean "what the audience appreciates having")

So I ask every one of you: 2D or 3D? Desktop, Consoles or Mobile?

(Here, we're not gonna go with "2D should only be sprite-based", because that would be a regressing topic; we're going with the assumption of What we need to make. Aesthetics come later.)