It's all in your head, Part 18
-
SchlauFuchs2
- level0
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue Feb 23, 2010 1:19 am
For years I'm waiting for something that comes close to the fun I had with Sid Meyers "Covert Action" (http://www.allgame.com/game.php?id=20219&tab=review). I would like to have some conspiracy elements in that, like uncovering the secret plans of an enemy organization, detecting the current activities, finding the criminals, taking them out of business, tapping phones, computers...
tell you what, after I heard the news about Subversion I downloaded the classic game at CGN and I'm playing that now for days. And when I'm sick of it I will reinstall Evil Genius on my disk. And after that I'll check my sources for The Clou! (http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin ... 83304.html) and maybe I find a copy of the C64 game "They stole a million" (http://www.c64-wiki.de/index.php/They_Stole_a_Million) that runs on my emulator.
And then I come back to see Subversion becoming a Best-Of of these games!
tell you what, after I heard the news about Subversion I downloaded the classic game at CGN and I'm playing that now for days. And when I'm sick of it I will reinstall Evil Genius on my disk. And after that I'll check my sources for The Clou! (http://www.gamefaqs.com/computer/doswin ... 83304.html) and maybe I find a copy of the C64 game "They stole a million" (http://www.c64-wiki.de/index.php/They_Stole_a_Million) that runs on my emulator.
And then I come back to see Subversion becoming a Best-Of of these games!
-
ScifiSpirit
- level0
- Posts: 4
- Joined: Sun Feb 28, 2010 7:55 pm
I just hope that the hacking part (and other similar parts) are not like in Uplink, where player uses ready-written programs to hack systems, and abstract modules to disable security. Most of all i hope that hacking and such are not just skills of operatives that you order them to use on particular objects.
I hope that it's more concrete, that players are allowed to modify the actual programs that run these systems (on the fly, perhaps Lua scripts). Or perhaps better would be some kind of abstraction layer that represents the logic and programming of a particular system that player could modify. In detail, but maybe simplified from the actual program. This could allow for simulated crashing of the target system, or triggering of some simulated fail-safe systems that enable some additional security elsewhere, and lock up the system for example.
I don't mean players should start doing complicated (and often somewhat boring
) programming in the middle of the game. But something along the lines of the switch activated bomb with 30 second timer and other systems (in part 17 of Subversion development diary), except from programming perspective, and a bit more complicated.
Waiting for more info on how the hacking and disarming bomb style things are done in the game...
I hope that it's more concrete, that players are allowed to modify the actual programs that run these systems (on the fly, perhaps Lua scripts). Or perhaps better would be some kind of abstraction layer that represents the logic and programming of a particular system that player could modify. In detail, but maybe simplified from the actual program. This could allow for simulated crashing of the target system, or triggering of some simulated fail-safe systems that enable some additional security elsewhere, and lock up the system for example.
I don't mean players should start doing complicated (and often somewhat boring
) programming in the middle of the game. But something along the lines of the switch activated bomb with 30 second timer and other systems (in part 17 of Subversion development diary), except from programming perspective, and a bit more complicated.
Waiting for more info on how the hacking and disarming bomb style things are done in the game...
Leverage
This is awesome...sounds exactly like playing an episode of the TV show Leverage.
Not sure if that's on in the UK or not, and you've probably been working on Subversion since well before that show came out, but it's eerily similar.
The premise of that show is that they're a team of thieves who work for the poor and disenfranchised. Maybe some rich property developer is trying to level an orphanage or something, and they'll go in and stop it. They've got a mastermind who runs the jobs, a thief who does the acrobatics, safe cracking and whatnot, a hacker, a grifter and a dude who hits people a lot.
Great show. Highly recommend it.
Not sure if that's on in the UK or not, and you've probably been working on Subversion since well before that show came out, but it's eerily similar.
The premise of that show is that they're a team of thieves who work for the poor and disenfranchised. Maybe some rich property developer is trying to level an orphanage or something, and they'll go in and stop it. They've got a mastermind who runs the jobs, a thief who does the acrobatics, safe cracking and whatnot, a hacker, a grifter and a dude who hits people a lot.
Great show. Highly recommend it.
-
freeknowledge
- level0
- Posts: 1
- Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2010 3:11 pm
- Contact:
)
Chris (Part 1) wrote:Now I don’t mind admitting that I’m a little apprehensive about this developer diary. Part of me would love to openly discuss our next game with the world, to shout from the rooftops about this grand idea that has been waiting in line since Darwinia took its place in 2003. But another less reckless part of me knows that bad things can happen when developers disappoint gamers, and gamers need few excuses to feel disappointed. This comes directly from my bitter firsthand experience on both sides of the fence. Several games developers who are far more experienced than us have fallen into the trap of enthusiastically promising the world during production, and ending up with a mob of pitch-fork wielding hardcore outside their offices threatening to burn the building to the ground unless their demands are immediately satisfied. We wish to avoid this.
Now we know enough to justify this!
Looks like it's probably going to turn out really well.
-
Phrage
- level3
- Posts: 276
- Joined: Sun Sep 25, 2005 8:45 pm
- Location: With a nuclear warhead aimed at Washington from my super secret Nuclear Bunker at 22 Pimpleton Ave
- Contact:
And from a long absence I once again return to the forums. I apologise IV fans that I only grace you with my presence in the run up to a new IV game and not during the long dry absences in between. Subversion sounds amazing! I remember the post Uplink days when we speculated what Uplink 2 would be like. If this is the "spiritual sequel" to Uplink then this should be the best IV game yet.
^^Another amazing comment/statement/question/answer/joke/insult/compliment^^
(delete as appropriate)
(delete as appropriate)
-
Flamekebab
- level5
- Posts: 2988
- Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2002 5:39 pm
- Location: Carmarthen, UK
- Contact:
-
orientalhero
- level0
- Posts: 3
- Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:39 am
Reminds me of the plans in Rainbowsix series
The image displayed at the beginning of this blog entry is quite similar to the planning/mapping in Rainbow Six.
You were able to split six operative (or was it 8?) into as many as 4 coloured teams.
Each team(of up to 4 operatives) was able to be given engagement levels as well as speed of travel and waypoints and things to do like cover/snipe that direction, throw flashbang, or breach a door. But you could also issue go points which meant you could get all the teams to stop at go code 1 outside the main building to order them to simultaneously continue. You were allowed up to 4 go codes I think.
So I wonder how in Introversion we'll handle the operatives and what control if any we have over their actions. I know we've got the uplink heritage which means like in Max Headroom, we'll be assisting the operatives on the ground.
Of course with Rainbow Six the game was a FPS and you could dive into each team's lead character as you wanted to so you could steer them through the more difficult parts of the level or just to have all the "fun". But it was possible just to sit back and watch 4 teams wend their way to an embassy building's exterior to go code Alpha. On Alpha, one team would engage a sentry whilst the other teams breached and flashbanged. Then at blitz speed with full engagement, the main team would secure the hostages whilst the other teams cleared the area of hostiles. I always couldn't resist taking over though! Oh and either my plans sucked or the AI was crap as quite often your team would walk like ants into a deathzone.
You were able to split six operative (or was it 8?) into as many as 4 coloured teams.
Each team(of up to 4 operatives) was able to be given engagement levels as well as speed of travel and waypoints and things to do like cover/snipe that direction, throw flashbang, or breach a door. But you could also issue go points which meant you could get all the teams to stop at go code 1 outside the main building to order them to simultaneously continue. You were allowed up to 4 go codes I think.
So I wonder how in Introversion we'll handle the operatives and what control if any we have over their actions. I know we've got the uplink heritage which means like in Max Headroom, we'll be assisting the operatives on the ground.
Of course with Rainbow Six the game was a FPS and you could dive into each team's lead character as you wanted to so you could steer them through the more difficult parts of the level or just to have all the "fun". But it was possible just to sit back and watch 4 teams wend their way to an embassy building's exterior to go code Alpha. On Alpha, one team would engage a sentry whilst the other teams breached and flashbanged. Then at blitz speed with full engagement, the main team would secure the hostages whilst the other teams cleared the area of hostiles. I always couldn't resist taking over though! Oh and either my plans sucked or the AI was crap as quite often your team would walk like ants into a deathzone.
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 24 guests