Idea for first game: entirely in a large fantasy city

[darksteelhero 2]

I've been trying to come up with ideas for a generic JRPG for my first game I make with VX Ace, but realised I could only really design cities well. So I thought to myself, what if I limit the story to a single large city. I wondering if anypne else liked this general idea.

 

A game entirely in a fantasy city-state, named Reba, which is divided into 4 sectors.

 

Sectors:

Slums

Guild

Common

Noble (king lives here)

 

Plot summary:

You are a small time merc in the slums who takes whatever jobs will put food on his plate. On one of these jobs, he discovers that one of the nobles is planning to usurp the crown. You are attacked and nearly die before your mentor/father figure, Relic, comes in and saves you. After escaping, you try to prevent the coup while protecting the city from an ancient evil.

[lonequeso 1,921]

Dragon Age 2 had a lot of it's game play in a single city. There were outskirts to explore, too, but if you haven't played it, it'd be good research. 

You got the lower, middle, and upper class areas covered. I'm sure there'd be a commercial area; perhaps two (one for the rich and one for the poor) Then you got your industrial area and perhaps docks if it's by a sea or a really big lake (like Chi-Town!) I'd imagine there'd be quite a few guilds in a large city. Not every single one of them has to be part of the story, but here's some (and possibly more than one of each):

 

• Merchant's Guild
• Carpenter
• Smith
• Mining
• Tanning/Leatherwork
• Science/Historians/nerdy people
• Something something something

Having lots of little alleys and nook and crannies to explore should promote some good adventuring. Cities have tons of people so there's no issue with having NPC's to get info from and complete quests/sidequests. Some form of police/fire department would be a good idea. That or the military handles all that stuff. Either way, there's lots you can do there. My First impression is that military wold work better. The evil noble tries to get soldiers to defect and stage a coup. Something similar could be done with corrupt cops, too. Sewers are kind of cliche, but would fit perfectly for this kind of game. And old catacombs. You mentioned ancient magic. Where else would you find ancient magic? You can have a lot of fun making an entire ruined city underneath Reba. It's own lost culture and stuff.  

 

There's more than enough going on in a large city to build a game entirely around. You may want to consider adding some outlying areas. maybe a large farm or plantation if you want to keep landscapes to a minimum.

[Kayzee 4,032]

Personally I am all for it. I much rather see one big city that actually looks like a real city where thousands or tens of thousands of people live rather then a bunch of 'cities' each with no more ten 5 to 10 buildings.

[ECG Wolf 36]

It sounds like a good idea so far.  Sprawling, open worlds may seem like a lot of fun, but there is a truly ridiculous amount of work that has to be put into making that kind of world come to life.  Not every RPG needs to be about exploration, anyways.  Another advantage you'll find is that if you're limiting your set of maps you can focus more time on those maps to really make them of high quality. 

 

Aside from the examples already given, Neverwinter Nights is another example similar to your idea that worked out pretty well.  A large portion of the game has you trapped in the city of Neverwinter, which was quarantined because of the plague.  

 

Keep in mind in a game with limited maps both the availability of quests and the progression of the plot will be more event-based than site-based. This means you'll want to make sure you have a good story and setting and a clear way of progressing through it, as this will be the main force driving the player forward.  

[Kayzee 4,032]

Instead of having a huge mess of interconnected maps, you could also make a overworld map of a sort that just shows a big cityscape rather then the more zoomed out whole world map most rpgs have, marking important buildings and locations as you find out about them. There have been more then a few RPGs in the past that have done that. Travel stations and menus can also work.

[lonequeso 1,921]

Yeah. Dragon Age 2 had an overworld map. It makes everything a lot more organized. Level maps would be nice, but a lot of work. I have no idea how you would put any interactivity or active updates either. (not any that wouldn't lead to contemplating suicide.) I've only used Ace. Maybe MV could. You should be able to make an overworld map pretty easily. I'm pretty sure I've seen a plugin for it. You could also put markers above NPC's that had quests, and maybe even markers showing the player what building/area to go to. The town center could have a quest board, too. That's a pretty common thing to see in RPG's. A travel station would be cool if it's set in a modern time. Modern enough to have at least one form of mass transit anyway. Or you could use teleportation spells. Works for Zelda (and eleventy-billion other games). 

[Kayzee 4,032]

Hey, just because it's in a large city doesn't mean you have to make anything but a normal JRPG really. All this quest nonsense is besides the point. Also I really really hate that kind of soulless checklist of busywork tasks, but that's also besides the point.

[lonequeso 1,921]

I like sidequests  Especially when they let you learn more about the other characters and/or the world. 

[Kayzee 4,032]

I like sidequests too, or rather I like sidestories or events. I just hate overly formalized easily enumerated tasks that show up on a checklist somewhere and/or are given out by NPCs who's only function is to stand around like idiots with a explication point over their heads waiting for the player to give their lives meaning. Anyway, that's besides the point. My point is that quest structure has nothing to do with the setting. They can make any type of game they want.

[lonequeso 1,921]

I'm not big on shopping quests i.e. kill x enemies; collect x items, but they're okay in small doses. The former is an added bonus for level grinders. I think that's partly why they're so prevalent in MMO's. The other part feels like laziness. :/ Those types of quests do get boring pretty quickly. I prefer my NPC's to have exclamation marks over their heads or marked on a map though. Here's why:

 

There are often instances in a game where a quest only becomes available after you reach a certain point in the main arc or only between certain points in the story or something, as even when you complete a different sidequest. So if you're like me, and want to find and complete all the sidequests, you have to be constantly talking to NPCs over and over an over at different points to see if they have a quest for you. That's really annoying. 

 

Can you have all side quests that are available throughout the entirety of the game? Of course or even no side quests at all (Boo!). However that doesn't always mesh with the story. For example if there's a side quest in a town and said town is destroyed at some point in the story, no more sidequest. Or there may be a side story for a PC, but they die or betray you at some point. 

 

Quest markers just make things simpler. I'm all for exploring, but I don't want to have to talk to an NPC twenty different times to see if they have  a quest for me. Making things less cumbersome for the player is never a bad idea. 

 

Getting back to the main post, I can see the side quests taking you to lots of little secluded or hidden areas scattered about the city. There's a ton you can do in the world building department to make the city fun to explore. It's really not any different than making vast landscapes. I especially like when you can access rooftops and climb all over the place akin to Assassin's Creed. It'd probably hard (or impossible) to make everything climbable in a sprite based games, but you can make lots of stairs and ladders leading to rooftops. maybe connect them with walkways or have an auto jump feature to hop from rooftop to rooftop. 

[AzureEternal 0]

I'm a big fan of this. I don't think a game needs a huge sprawling world to be compelling.

Edited April 26, 2017 by AzureEternal

[Kayzee 4,032]

I'm not big on shopping quests i.e. kill x enemies; collect x items, but they're okay in small doses. The former is an added bonus for level grinders. I think that's partly why they're so prevalent in MMO's. The other part feels like laziness. :/ Those types of quests do get boring pretty quickly. I prefer my NPC's to have exclamation marks over their heads or marked on a map though. Here's why:

 

There are often instances in a game where a quest only becomes available after you reach a certain point in the main arc or only between certain points in the story or something, as even when you complete a different sidequest. So if you're like me, and want to find and complete all the sidequests, you have to be constantly talking to NPCs over and over an over at different points to see if they have a quest for you. That's really annoying. 

 

Can you have all side quests that are available throughout the entirety of the game? Of course or even no side quests at all (Boo!). However that doesn't always mesh with the story. For example if there's a side quest in a town and said town is destroyed at some point in the story, no more sidequest. Or there may be a side story for a PC, but they die or betray you at some point. 

 

Quest markers just make things simpler. I'm all for exploring, but I don't want to have to talk to an NPC twenty different times to see if they have  a quest for me. Making things less cumbersome for the player is never a bad idea. 

 

Getting back to the main post, I can see the side quests taking you to lots of little secluded or hidden areas scattered about the city. There's a ton you can do in the world building department to make the city fun to explore. It's really not any different than making vast landscapes. I especially like when you can access rooftops and climb all over the place akin to Assassin's Creed. It'd probably hard (or impossible) to make everything climbable in a sprite based games, but you can make lots of stairs and ladders leading to rooftops. maybe connect them with walkways or have an auto jump feature to hop from rooftop to rooftop.

 

You are missing the point. So so missing the point. It's not about little markers or staying linear. It's about the fact formalized quests make everything a formality. If you have to go around and trigger quests by talking to random NPCs that tell you do blah blah blah therefor treating each new area and/or segment as a list of 'things to do', you are doing it wrong. Just listen to yourself: "I can see the side quests taking you to lots of little secluded or hidden areas scattered about the city." As opposed to, you know, just going there and exploring?

 

Is it fun to have little optional side areas? Sure is! Is it fun to decipher hints that tell you of some neat secret or hidden interaction? Can be! Is it fun to get to know NPCs and figure out ways to make them happy? Probably! Is it fun to turn your game into a soulless husk of finding all the markers and doing whatever they tell you to see a sliver more of 'content' then repeat until all the content is exhausted? No. Not it is not. So as a personal heartfelt note to all current and future game designers: Cut it out with questgivers already, you are embarrassing me. This isn't hard you know. Just focus on making things you can do without being told, rather then things are told to do to give you busy work for a while.

 

TL;DR: if the act of simply exploring the world and flaffing about isn't engaging and/or accomplishing something and you are forced to add filler in the form of a checklist of chores, your game probably isn't as fun to play as you think.

 

... I really have to start harping on this. Okay this is my last quest ramble here. I hope.

 

Anyway, I think you are overcomplicating all this. First you are on about quest systems and now you are on about jumping around on rooftops. It's just a setting. It literally just effects the graphics and the writing. A game set in one big city doesn't functionally have to be any different mechanics wise to one set in a standard fantasy world. Doesn't mean it can't be, but it doesn't have to be.

Edited April 26, 2017 by KilloZapit

[lonequeso 1,921]

 

 

"I can see the side quests taking you to lots of little secluded or hidden areas scattered about the city." As opposed to, you know, just going there and exploring?

With big worlds, it can be easy to miss things. On many occasions, a side quest has taken me to an area I haven't explored yet and may have missed altogether. They can also be used to access areas that would normally be inaccessible to the player. I'm all for doing stuff on your own, too, but I have no issue with quest givers. The games I've enjoyed he most have a healthy mix of both. I've discovered new quests by exploring on my own just as often if not more often than a quest guiding me to a new spot. 

 

As for jumping around on rooftops, that's just fun to do

Edited April 26, 2017 by lonequeso

[Kayzee 4,032]

Sigh... You are still kinda missing my point I think. It's that 'go everywhere, do everything, consume, consume, consume' attitude quests enable that I don't like. You are basically implying the player should never be allowed to miss things and the only reward for exploring are more things to consume. But whatever.

 

Also, jumping around on rooftops can be fun sure I guess. It just doesn't strike me as a real meaningful addition to most games, and one that is hard to pull off right.

[lonequeso 1,921]

I was just talking about me really. I kind obsess over exploring every little place and doing every little quest. Not as much now because I don't have time to scour the world in search of that last piece of a collection like I used to. The formula works though. You're the first person I've talked to that had any issue with it. At worst people are indifferent to it. We live in the era of instant gratification. People want to be rewarded for every little thing. That I don't like, but at least it gives me ton of stuff to do. I'm pretty easily entertained. As long as a game is fun to play, I'll let a lot slide, and philosophizing about the principles of game design is at the top of the list. 

 

If peoples' perspective changes, and audiences begin getting turned off , you'll see studios start to stray from it too. 

Edited April 26, 2017 by lonequeso

[Kayzee 4,032]

Really? I thought complaining about soulless empty open world games was quite popular. Maybe I watch to much Yahtzee and Jim Sterling.

[lonequeso 1,921]

The shitty ones maybe   For me that's pretty much every MMO out there. Those kind of quest givers get old really fast. Far too many "kill x enemies"/collect X items quests. I could rant about those for a good while. The formula works, but only if you don't suck at executing it. It's easier said than done. The more stuff you have in a game, the harder it is to balance everything. The developer's that succeed end up with an amazing product. 

 

Of course there's nothing wrong with stripping all the frills away and making a simple, straightforward game either. Look at Minecraft. It's incredibly simple yet incredibly complex. It's one of the best examples of "go anywhere and do anything game". It also proves that you don't need cutting edge graphics to make a popular game. 

[Kayzee 4,032]

Yeah, that's something we can all agree on: MMOs are universally aweful.