Hey guys I wanted to discuss the mantra in the GDD. I noticed the GDD has gone over a few changes and there was mention that Tim ruswick at Game dev underground reviewed it as well. So i wanted to go over the changes and look into whats new. A few things popped out at me with the mantra though and i felt it was at least worth bringing it up to your guy's attention.
Im a little nervous over the fact that tim looked over the GDD and didnt point it out because Im almost certain I first heard this from him. But unfortunately since that time he has had so much more content i was unable to locate the footage maybe one of you may have watched it and will recall what im saying.
The current mantra is as follows "A real time strategy (RTS) game similar to Rise Of Nation that is semi realistic / arcadish but has a cartoonist low poly look and we are trying to gear this towards causal and hardcore player by using ranked vs normal area divided. This game will be a continuous content feature driven game that we will continue to support going forward."
So Im sorry i really tried to find better information to show you guys the information i myself have come across and i was unable to hopefully either you guys have heard it too and you get what im saying or maybe its actually not as big of a deal either. But to be honest nothing in the mantra gives rise of nations context. I know what it means. I played the game and took part in discussing the territory implication into armament. But i also never heard of rise of nations nor this concept before even having that discussion. So many different people are going to hear the mantra so its important. Maybe your pitching to a publisher with an backround in RTS games. Well he may have heard of rise of nations. He may also not have liked it. But what about the random person youll meet at an event? How can we grab a persons attention unless we can concisely explain to them what we have to offer over the other distracting events. Someone did a study on it and i think collectivly the average person walking by a booth will look at your stand for about 8 seconds on average. and in that 8 seconds we describe our game with something they dont know or like. We lose that person and they walk off. So i feel its important to not be vauge or open to misinterpretation.
On the topic of misinterpretation I am a little confused on something. "we are trying to gear this towards causal and hardcore player by using ranked vs normal area divided." What exactly does this statement mean? I think it means ranked mode and casual mode but its really vague and hard to understand. I feel like mention a ranked vs casual game mode could be simplified waaay down with out damaging the structure of the mantra. I Also dont think its necessary to express our concern to appeal to both the core player and the casual player. Unless we are trying to make one or the other then of course we want to appeal to as broad of a market as we can. The more people playing our game the better after all. I feel like its obvious and could be replace with something else that would make our game stand out above other titles and would sell the point to play our game rather than the other options.
That is of course the officers. I remember discussing it with everyone when we looked at the article why RTS dies. And i noticed its in the GDD now as well so that means it going to be a feature.
This is huge. This idea is an innovation in of its own and should be recognized for its ambition as well as risk that come with it. This should be in the mantra. This almost above all else. I think if i were to say the three things we should convey to the listener as most important would be the officer system, the real time out of combat(If im understanding it correctly) Territory system and the fact that your going to be interacting with other commanders in a free to play environment. Be clear and able to be understood by a distracted customer or producer. We have to pull in someone and prove to them why our game is better and more deserving of your time.
I personally feel like the Mantra is essential to the GDD not the other way around. The mantra is not a summery of the GDD but the GDD is an extension and reiteration of the mantra.
Im not trying to be overly critical but i was signed on as a game designer so i feel some responsibility with the GDD. I feel strongly enough on this i felt it would have been doing a disservice to the team not to air my concerns despite how critical they may seem. I was just worried because you never know who you might be standing next to in an elevator or whatever and i wasnt sure how much longer before adjusting the mantra was simply to late.
Of course im not going to criticize without offering a solution. A simple idea taking in everything ive learned and by no means perfect but "Take control of officer personnel who give organic and fluid commands to their units to fight in a chaotic and cartoon environment. where you take control over territory and influence over the land in a this free to play online multiplayer from game modes such as ranked an casual play. where you rise up and take command over your army.
Far from perfect. Just trying to give context.
I hope everything is readable if anything is confusing or needs better context ask and i will reiterate best i can
Im actaully working on getting some decent images for you to put up with the website. I see youve got some placeholders from various screenshots. Im working on rendering a few landscape scenery which shouldnt take me to terribly long im hoping to have that one done in a few days.
Ive got a project that ends in a few days so its going to take a little longer than normal. I plan on modeling some good looking trees and render the image in blender probably. I know its not as important but i watched a speech where someone mentioned one or two really good art is better than a bunch of bad art. So I dont want to spend to much on detail because its super early in devolpment but I do want them to have a more appealing look than a blender Screenshot im sure im not the only one thinking that.
That being said I want to make sure that what i do work on gives a good clear impressions of the things we want to relay. Given the limited reasources available to me at this time with what we do have and what we can do i think we can still get really creative.
@tessa
Do you have any suggestions or things you would like to see? Im sure you have a better understanding of what needs to be displayed and I would value you input before i get started?
Okay first of all i didnt mean to spur on a conversation on marketing an i apologize for that. I was confused and now i understand a little better.
However i did learn a TON on marketing making this forum :D And one thing i did hear about is the idea that you always start with a verb. Instead of "In a world thats bleak you take control of a renegade...." You would say "Take control of the renegade in a bleak world...." Sorry just wanted to make an example.
Im not exactly equipped with the best backround for the RTS genre either but im more than willing to do anything that will be helpful
@Jonathan
I'm really glad that you brought this up because it is something that I've been thinking about too as far as how to successfully market the game and describe it in a consumer-friendly fashion. I absolutely agree that we should not be comparing Armament (or any of its story, music, mechanics, etc.) to anything other than Armament. I don't want to mention any other game, book, movie, etc., by name unless we are legally obligated to do so. We need to make the game its own entity.
I also completely agree that the officers need to be mentioned in the explanation of the game. Any aspect that makes Armament stand out from other RTS games should be mentioned. I will be the first person to say that I am NOT even REMOTELY close to an expert on RTS games. So on that note, I think it would be a good idea if we work together to adapt the description on this page http://www.thoucurator.com/projects?id=8 to make it more consumer friendly and condensed description for this page http://www.armament-rts.com/.
“In this cartoon environment, you will issue orders to your officers who will give organic and fluid commands to their units and manage personnel. Officers will be the right hand of the player character who fights in a chaotic multiplayer free-to-play online environment to take control over territory and influence locals. Use the pre-made configurations or customize your own for more personalized gameplay. Ranked sessions are available for the serious gamers.”
The above paragraph is also far from perfect but something to work with to move forward.
What other features do we need to be sure people know about to stand out?
Okay sorry james everywhere ive heard mantra has been in a scenerio of something you work on to help your core design but also to help communicate that design to someone else. So i literally thought you were going to start pitching the mantra to whoever and that concerned me. Sorry for the misunderstanding. Of course the GDD should remain private. At no point will i be confused on that matter.
As for what mantra would i make? Well honestly again i thought that you were going to start pitching those sentences to others so since thats not the case its fine i understand it just fine if everyone else does. I was just worried how someone on the outside would react to that description of our design. If i were to create a mantra under those pretense i would spend hours nailing it just right.
So is my understanding of mantra flawed or did i just jump the gun to early in our pro Because on of the reasons i felt so strongly on my position was because i actually thought i understood "mantra" really well. Ive made a few of my own following the guidelines i listed above