Forums → Forum Games → Anyone interested in playing an Evolution RPG?

36 4948
Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

So, I have an idea for a forum RPG. It's not in any way a brilliant new idea- It's been done before. But the thing is, it hasn't been done in quite a while, as far as I've seen, so... I was thinking of bringing it back.

http://puu.sh/8WIHU.jpg

(That's not necessarily the name of the game in the image above - It's just something I made a while back that fits the theme)

Basically:

The idea is that you start as a little spit barely worthy of being called a member of a species in a vast ocean, and your job is to get up onto land (or not, whatever) and evolve into a great roaming herd of creatures - That you get to design! Well... Provided that you can make it with the options I give you. That's the thing I'm currently working on: How to really give the player freedom on what they want to become, without letting them break the game. I'm sure I'll come up with something.

Another thing is that- well, I fancy myself a bit of an artist, so... If you'd like, I can at any point give a shot at making a rendition of how I see your creature. And it doesn't stop there, I'll probably be using some illustration throughout the game to give the player a better idea of things. That said, I think the players themselves should be in charge of how they see the world inside their head, and not limited to my view of things.

But before I put in too much effort into this, I'd just like to know whether people are actually interested in playing a game such as this. If enough people say that they might be willing to give it a try, then it's settled.

I wish I could give you more info on the game, but there's still a lot to do and things are subject to change. I suppose I can tell you that the game will be multiplayer and the players will be interacting with eachother. But aside from that- oh! I almost forgot.

There's an extra special side to the game that I'm considering. It would truly add a twist to the way the game works. You see, I might make it so that the player has an option whether they play as a creature that evolves and so forth, or a HUNTER whose job is to hunt down specific creatures. How this would be balanced, I still don't know, but like I said, I'm considering it. Because it sounds pretty sweet. So, I'd especially appreciate some feedback on this aspect.

I was planning on making a more thought out post about this later, but I figured I should just make sure my work is not wasted. I'm sure you understand.

So... What do you say?

  • 36 Replies
StormDragon
offline
StormDragon
4,616 posts
Peasant

I made two games some time ago that this reminds me of because one was evolution based, with no one to interfere, and the other one had hunters coming to your home but you couldn't play as the hunters. I'm in and I'm willing to suggest ideas.

Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

I made two games some time ago that this reminds me of because one was evolution based, with no one to interfere, and the other one had hunters coming to your home but you couldn't play as the hunters. I'm in and I'm willing to suggest ideas.


Ah, StormDragon! I remember those games, they were rather good. I think I took part in one, although I must apologize if I quit soon after joining...

Anyhow, that's great news as I do need an opinion on this thing. You see, the idea of players being able to play as hunters as well would add variety, for sure. But it does come with it's problems. For instance, what are the hunters supposed to do while the creatures are still swimming around as tiny cells in a huge sea? That doesn't quite work out. Then again I have been thinking of objectives / quests for both creatures and hunters to do in order to gain extra experience and the like, so essentially this would mean that the hunters could for example be hunting npc creatures in the meanwhile. What do you think?
danwar123
offline
danwar123
3,076 posts
Blacksmith

What are the hunters-
are they other creatures that have a simply grown much biggeer than the players?hummans getting food?Please tell me.

StormDragon
offline
StormDragon
4,616 posts
Peasant

Ah, StormDragon! I remember those games, they were rather good. I think I took part in one, although I must apologize if I quit soon after joining...

Anyhow, that's great news as I do need an opinion on this thing. You see, the idea of players being able to play as hunters as well would add variety, for sure. But it does come with it's problems. For instance, what are the hunters supposed to do while the creatures are still swimming around as tiny cells in a huge sea? That doesn't quite work out. Then again I have been thinking of objectives / quests for both creatures and hunters to do in order to gain extra experience and the like, so essentially this would mean that the hunters could for example be hunting npc creatures in the meanwhile. What do you think?


It's okay cause I got too busy to keep up with the games. As for my opinion on the hunters... I like the idea of quest and I think that with enough exp you could be able to level up and therefore upgrade the hunter or creature in ways that the story might or might not have provided.
anewbeginning
offline
anewbeginning
383 posts
Nomad

So how's it working for controlling a massive population, since a big attribute that's often evolved is having tons of babies.

Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

What are the hunters-
are they other creatures that have a simply grown much biggeer than the players?hummans getting food?Please tell me.


The way I see it is that these 'Hunters' would be a superior alien race that has come to scavenge the planets of resources - Hunting creatures for food, researching on them... And so on. The hunting between creatures is also a key part of the game, but this is different to that.

It's okay cause I got too busy to keep up with the games. As for my opinion on the hunters... I like the idea of quest and I think that with enough exp you could be able to level up and therefore upgrade the hunter or creature in ways that the story might or might not have provided.


Good to see that we are on the same wavelength, my old friend! I like the idea of upgrading your hunter much like evolving your creature.

So how's it working for controlling a massive population, since a big attribute that's often evolved is having tons of babies.


Good question! I believe the best way to go about doing this would be to let things such as population be controlled automatically (by me) and the player wouldn't have to worry about it. Then again, it should be apparent that as you evolve, the population will grow with you and may even go towards overpopulation.
Voyage2
offline
Voyage2
669 posts
Nomad

Can I still join ?

Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

Can I still join ?


Absolutely!
StormDragon
offline
StormDragon
4,616 posts
Peasant

I think that if you play as a creature then you should be the leader and if you die, but your kind still lives, then you should be able to play as the next leader.

Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

I think that if you play as a creature then you should be the leader and if you die, but your kind still lives, then you should be able to play as the next leader.


Makes sense. I'll write it down.

Now, about the actual evolving. Choosing parts which to evolve and all that. At the end of the day I'll make it work the way I see fit, but while we're talking about ideas and I'm taking suggestions, how do you think I should do it exactly? You see, the way I've done it is that at level-up (or another major part of the creature's life) the player is given a list of things they can choose from that they can evolve. Things like bigger teeth, better eyes... And abilities like sneaking or sprinting, etc. Another way of doing abilities is that, say, the player evolves stronger leg muscles which actually give the player the ability of jumping or something. Now, this list also has to account for every idea that the player might have, so that they can actually create any kind of creature. If someone wanted to evolve into like a really complicated alien insect / dragon thing or something crazy like that, I'd need to come up with all the right parts and put them in that list so making something like that is possible.

You might see where I'm going with this. This list of things would be very big and complicated, and while choice isn't a bad thing, it would probably turn off some players. Naturally, not all things would be included in the list every time the creature evolves - It would fit the current situation. Also, the first evolutions will probably only be a choice of two things, before it gets complicated as time goes on, much like it should. Should the list also be specially made for every situation of every personal player that evolves? What I mean is that if a player wants to evolve wings, they would get further evolutions after the first wings, while other creatures still only have the option of basic wings. And this could also affect other things that they could or couldn't evolve, based on the route the decide to go. The answer to this would be simple, unless I wasn't planning on drawing every single of these lists myself. Because this would mean lots of work. Which I'm fine with, but you know... One has to draw the line somewhere. No pun intended.

And what if a part that the player wants to evolve is completely missing from the lists? Would it be added on player's request? What about other players that didn't have the option for that part either?

Anyway, that's enough rambling. I want your thoughts now.
Riptizoid101
offline
Riptizoid101
6,268 posts
Farmer

I think you should do a pseudo-realistic evolution progression scheme where certain evolutions are only unlocked or become available if certain requirements are met i.e. You start off as a single celled organism, and if you want to become a carnivore, plant, or herbivore, you can choose to eat bacteria, attempt to produce food yourself, or eat algae (Eventually you'll be multicelled and the option to become Omnivorous would unlock if you are either a carnivore or herbivore).

If you 'attempt' to do things, even if it doesn't work, it allocates evolutionary experience towards it so when you reach it, you unlock that evolutionary trait.

For example;

Player 1: My species attempts to crawl on land
GM: Most of your species die, but the remaining survivors gains exp towards land evolution (2/10 xp)
Player 1: My species attempts to breathe air but floating to the surface of water and try to filter out oxygen without water.
GM: Most of your species fail, but their offspring's gills slightly change as a result of such a traumatic change. (5/10 xp)

And so on, and so forth. Of course, this makes it harder for players to find the exact ways in order to try and evolve the creature the way they want, but it'll be more satisfying to do so.

Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

I think you should do a pseudo-realistic evolution progression scheme where certain evolutions are only unlocked or become available if certain requirements are met i.e. You start off as a single celled organism, and if you want to become a carnivore, plant, or herbivore, you can choose to eat bacteria, attempt to produce food yourself, or eat algae (Eventually you'll be multicelled and the option to become Omnivorous would unlock if you are either a carnivore or herbivore).

If you 'attempt' to do things, even if it doesn't work, it allocates evolutionary experience towards it so when you reach it, you unlock that evolutionary trait.

For example;

Player 1: My species attempts to crawl on land
GM: Most of your species die, but the remaining survivors gains exp towards land evolution (2/10 xp)
Player 1: My species attempts to breathe air but floating to the surface of water and try to filter out oxygen without water.
GM: Most of your species fail, but their offspring's gills slightly change as a result of such a traumatic change. (5/10 xp)

And so on, and so forth. Of course, this makes it harder for players to find the exact ways in order to try and evolve the creature the way they want, but it'll be more satisfying to do so.


Ah, very interesting ideas! I think it's sensible that you will have to reach requirements in order to evolve certain things, and this way you would know what you're trying to get even though you could fail at it. I like it.

Although, as for how the gameplay works, it will probably be more individual focused, and rpg-like (I guess what I mean by this is that it would be more detailed and adventurous or something) and instead of just "Most of your species die" as it were, dying and losing members would actually be a big thing as you'd be more attached to individuals. But still, gaining experience towards goals for attempting things and focusing on certain actions - I think it's a great idea. Thanks for the useful suggestions!

I also noticed that you haven't signed up yet, but hey, there are always spots open if you change your mind.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'm still looking to update that front page with some actual solid information about the game, so look forward to that! I've realized that working on a world map this early on is probably not a wise investment, but reading your suggestions is really making it easier for me to map out the basics of the game so keep them coming!
anewbeginning
offline
anewbeginning
383 posts
Nomad

I like that experience idea too, since it the player needs to be creative to get the evolutions they want. Then you still present some options though, like when trying to breath on the surface you choose between primitive lungs like most animals, or tiny holes in the body like bugs.

Darktroop07
offline
Darktroop07
3,614 posts
Shepherd

Loyally, you say? Well, I'm flattered. But don't make promises you can't keep! Not to bring the mood down or anything, but the game could always turn out different to what you're expecting. Thanks though!

All games that I've played I've played, and updated until it completely died out.
Tossavainen
offline
Tossavainen
402 posts
Peasant

I like that experience idea too, since it the player needs to be creative to get the evolutions they want. Then you still present some options though, like when trying to breath on the surface you choose between primitive lungs like most animals, or tiny holes in the body like bugs.


We'll have to see how the gameplay turns out. Hopefully it will still satisfy you even if it's not exact to what we discuss. But yes, the idea is rather good, I'll probably use aspects of it regardless.

All games that I've played I've played, and updated until it completely died out.


Ah, I see. That's very commendable, sir.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Any more ideas before I set up some ground rules and info on the game? Perhaps the people who haven't spoken after they joined have some ideas?

Also, I'd like all the players to answer the following question:

Would you rather play as a Creature or a Hunter?
(it doesn't have to be your final answer either, since you can only base this on the information that you have so far)
Showing 16-30 of 36

We may use cookies to help customize your experience, including performing analytics and serving ads.
Learn More

Got It!