A self-indulgent musing from Chris.

[kasnavada]

Have you played Dungeon Keeper 2 perchance?
Or the newer revival...uh...War for the Overworld.

War for the overworld did quite nail the dk2 feeling for me, but at the same time, it's not DK3.

Dungeons I didn't play, but dungeons 2 is nicely done, if you're into a dumber-done warcraft where your base is made by trying to follow base-building in Dungeon Keeper games. I enjoyed the story though =). But if you're looking for DK2, hum, it's not that. I think of it as standard RTS with alternate base building...

[kasnavada]

This wouldn't solve any grand problem or be part of the core gameplay loop at all, or indeed accomplish ANYTHING in the main game.  So from an actual main-game standpoint this is utterly pointless.  Just like walking around your city in City Life.

But man I still liked the ability to do that every so often.

It wouldn't impact Keith's code at all, I wouldn't add it for a while, and it would only take me a couple of days at most to get the simplified version of it in there.  I'm curious how folks react to the idea of this bit of self-indulgence, though, because that's ultimately what it is.

You'd probably get sidetracked and plan to make a tetris / zelda / FTL mixed game out of it, in 3d.

[PokerChen]

> Minigame
Eh sure, why not? You could hide it like in Excel 97.

> Dungeon Keeper II successor.
I tried playing War for the Overworld. Totally did not hook me - maybe that kind of sim-city isn't for me.

[Captain Jack]

This wouldn't solve any grand problem or be part of the core gameplay loop at all, or indeed accomplish ANYTHING in the main game.  So from an actual main-game standpoint this is utterly pointless.  Just like walking around your city in City Life.

But man I still liked the ability to do that every so often.

It wouldn't impact Keith's code at all, I wouldn't add it for a while, and it would only take me a couple of days at most to get the simplified version of it in there.  I'm curious how folks react to the idea of this bit of self-indulgence, though, because that's ultimately what it is.

You'd probably get sidetracked and plan to make a tetris / zelda / FTL mixed game out of it, in 3d.

Isn't that Tetrisphere?  >D

[Mánagarmr]

Is War for the Overworld any good?

Short answer: No.
Long answer: It's not DK2. It's not even a clone. It's at the core the same type of game, but it's cheaply made with horrid controls and clunky interface. It's decent I suppose but I still haven't bothered with it because of it's clearly rushed release.

[Tridus]

Guess it's up to me to drag this thing back on topic.

Prime stretch goal material and should be handled as such.

I disagree with that entirely. As a stretch goal, this is lousy. Why?

It has nothing to do with playing AI War. Chris made that pretty explicit with comments like "not your actual ships", "not network synced", "shoot enemies (not your real enemies)".

Stretch goals should be about adding things to the game itself. I can see some negative feedback coming about a stretch goal that is "make an unrelated game and cram it into the base game".

That said. If he wants to do it? Go ahead. Easter Eggs can be fun. But do not make it a stretch goal.

[Mánagarmr]

I see this as similar to the tank-artillery game you could "cheat code" your way to in Tyrian 2000. Completely irrelevant for the rest of the game. Just a fun thing.

[Aklyon]

Is War for the Overworld any good?

Short answer: No.
Long answer: It's not DK2. It's not even a clone. It's at the core the same type of game, but it's cheaply made with horrid controls and clunky interface. It's decent I suppose but I still haven't bothered with it because of it's clearly rushed release.

Have you played it since the release? That sounds a lot like what I'd heard when people were saying to wait on it, not what I'd heard recently.

[x4000]

That tank minigame was the most enduring part of Tyrian, for me.

Agreed on not making this a Kickstarter stretch goal, because that would be really off of the beaten track.  Not to mention I wouldn't invest nearly that much time and energy into making this.

I suppose the reason for asking about reactions to this as a minor easter egg sort of thing is that at this point I'd be using the funds from other people, not myself, to be self-indulgent.  Aka, I could see some backers saying "you used the money I kickstarted for WHAT??"  So obviously it would have to be small in scope and just a fun little thingie, and if it gets any larger then it's on my own personal time.

If it were to get too large past a certain point I'd just want to spin it off into its own game anyhow, and a game in that genre is something I want to do anyway, at some point.  So there's an inherent scope limit here, which is nice.

The reason for not making it so you can control one of your actual ships and destroy actual enemy ships is that then this can cease to be a strategy game by accident.  Suddenly skill at this little minigame might become accidentally important for "optimal play."  That... would be very very bad. 

[PokerChen]

Haha, well as one indulging in academic research, I believe people's salaries and stuff should go towards both on-topic activities and associated extensions too, regardless of the stated goals. Easter eggs are a feature that IMO most older gamers are nostalgic of, and I trust you to make judgements on how much effort is directed towards adding secret delights.

Besides, what you're proposing isn't that different from the ship cam in Homeworld. People don't generally get to see the graphical artistry up close.

[x4000]

That's a good point!  There are a few precedents.  And as one from academia, I can definitely understand your mentality there -- in the best sense.

[Tridus]

Not really the same idea - but a ship combat camera ala Endless Space would be pretty entertaining. See those ships up close fighting with turrets and such. Pure eye candy watching those fights.

[Draco18s]

Call it the "Aerial Ace Cool Cam"

[x4000]

Not really the same idea - but a ship combat camera ala Endless Space would be pretty entertaining. See those ships up close fighting with turrets and such. Pure eye candy watching those fights.

I am planning to make a camera mode where you can just get down and watch what's going on, for sure.  Possibly if you just keep zooming down enough it will bend the view forward, then let you rotate around.  It's something I've been experimenting with the last couple of days, actually, and it's an easy way to get down and low in what is happening.

[Coppermantis]

As an easter egg, this would be fine. I'm not sure it would be something you'd want to even mention on the store page or kickstarter (stretch goal or otherwise) at all, lest people mistake it for a major feature - I've seen RTS games before that were marketed with the ability to go down and directly control a unit as a core gameplay element. Some people skimming the page might buy it thinking it's like those games. Just a note in-game saying that you can do this would be fine.

But just for funsies, sure. Could be a neat little add-on.