Ah! I see what you meant by first person now. I also use second person in quite a bit of it -- switched around too much.
For the genre, I wasn't sure what it would be called, so I was suggesting possibilities for the name. None of what I had quite made felt right, and I still haven't found something I like. For that matter, I went poking through what was listed as Tower Defense on Steam and the tag there seems to cover way more than I'd have thought.
Thanks again!
I haven't played Kingdom Rush or Clash Royale much (though I did for quite testing purposes -- one of the companies I worked for used those two as inspiration for their own art style). I have sunk many hours into Bloons.
I wanted to allow for people to create their own paths to defend as it's another avenue for possible strategic thinking. Do I do long stretches to maximize distance, do I do lots of cut backs to give towers more chances to hit the same attacker, etc.
I didn't realize how lacking the detail was on how the paths were built until I saw the feedback on it, and then, when I thought about it, realized I didn't really know myself. If I'd taken a few minutes to draw a simple sketch, I'd probably have picked it up.
Flight was the power that made me decide both players would see the other's attacker-waves being built, so you'd know you might need something that was anti-air. However, I think if I were to pursue creating this game, flight and other 'rule-breaking' abilities would not be in an MVP or even a version one. I love the complexity of some TD games and would like to include stealth, lane-hopping, flight, de-powering defenders, etc., as they force you to think about defense differently.
> What kinds of map design features will prevent a player from just building "the shortest path" to the base each match to make sure their troops consistently get there first?
You're building the path to your own base, so you don't want the shortest path. If that wasn't clear, I definitely need to improve that part of the document.
You first decide what kind of pathing you want to build, to hinder the enemy attackers. Then you see the path they've built for you on their territory and they see the one you built. Then you start choosing attacker-units and defender units.
"Oh, he has lots of long straight-a-ways, I should use the attackers that speed up when going straight."
"Oh, he's got the big tanky attackers, I need to get a tower that reduces armor or ignores it or something, let's see what I have ..."
You place your towers, while trying to keep an eye on what the opponent is building, both for attackers and defenders, and adjusting accordingly. I don't think I want to allow for undoing a choice once made, or we'll have people who's entire strategy is to swap out things in the last second.
After I submitted, I was thinking some tutorial maps may have a preset path, to help explain those strategies (long paths are good for x, windy ones for y, etc.). But the build-your-own-path could be optional overall.
I can see lots of room for later evolution in a game like this. Attackers that stun Defenders (and vice versa), special abilities that players can use during the battle (though it'd be a bit less of an auto-battler then) like bombs or damage and speed boosts for units.
Thanks for the feedback!
I agree that PvP Tower Defense was not very much a new genre, though that wasn't clear when I submitted -- after submitting I went investigating more and found quite a few of these, but none quite like I had. I honestly didn't think to define the genre myself. I was thinking that I'd propose the idea and we'd discover if it was a new genre. Even now, I'm not sure how I'd define it.
I definitely should have had some simple sketches to better illustrate the ideas and should have cut down on the unneeded sections of the template.
Thanks for the feedback and the eagerness to play -- I want to play this too!
Hi Nine,
Thanks for the feedback. The mood board was added at the last minute, partly to get some content that showed the idea of how the "characters" could vary and partly so I had another reason to play with Midjourney. However, as Gwen mentioned, they don't actually match the art scheme for the game (top-down) and so probably would have been better left out. I should have booted up one of my many tower defense games and grabbed some screens.
I was already thinking of something to add more interactivity between streamers and viewers, a more social and less passive connection, and this GDD theme forced me to sit and think about it instead of just idly wondering what I could do.
I agree that the document was too long, and I adhered to the template too much. As I've said over in the Discord, I'm frustrated I didn't take the time to add a few simple diagrams (especially since I required them from my students).
When you mentioned the actual genre, do you mean I should have tried to define it in text?
I'm not following the comment about first person. Can you elaborate?
Thanks!
Hi Gwen!
Thanks for this feedback. I think you're right and my attempt to follow the template overburdened the document.
I did a few quick runs in Midjourney and couldn't get a good top down, but wanted something that gave the idea of lots of random types of "characters" for the attackers and defenders, so I tossed them in at the end. However, I can see how they might have just been confusing at that point. Also, it's not like I don't own quite a few tower defense games that I could have screenshot ...
My hope is that you're right and the basic TD element doesn't get stale because there is enough other things happening in that meta-play outside the main game (quests, collections, events, etc).
Thanks again!
I thought this was very evocative. There was an ancient game, Paradroid, where you would take over hostile androids and use them to get around a ship you were invading and this reminded me of that a bit (though note, I last played it more than 30 years ago).
I liked the twist, but wanted more game play. Now that you know, what will you do?
I thought this was very evocative. There was an ancient game, Paradroid, where you would take over hostile androids and use them to get around a ship you were invading and this reminded me of that a bit (though note, I last played it more than 30 years ago).
I liked the twist, but wanted more game play. Now that you know, what will you do?
I also liked the write up about how it's genre defining, though it's a little like cheating by telling us how it's a new genre. :)
I also wanted more -- somehow this felt incomplete, though I'm not sure why.
I'm curious about the AI usage. How will you program the character AIs? Would each have unique aspects or all the same algorithm?
I also liked the write up about how it's genre defining, though it's a little like cheating by telling us how it's a new genre. :)
I also wanted more -- somehow this felt incomplete, though I'm not sure why.
I'm curious about the AI usage. How will you program the character AIs? Would each have unique aspects or all the same algorithm?
Love it -- want to play.
I feel like you've got the start of a great idea, but I feel like you only touched the surface. Instead of the same place being remodeled, the ghost could be trying to clear out an apartment building, and you could have it so that each person the ghost is trying to scare off has different triggers. Some are easy and will flee at the first moving mug, others might take a lot of effort to get rid of, etc.
This felt a bit unfinished (and I don't mean the missing pieces), like you have not yet decided on much about the game.
There are also some odd sentences, which are probably just typos (“and she found himself alone”).
That said, it sounds like a cute game.
Also, “dogs and cats living together — mass hysteria!”
I think Gwen has covered a lot of my feedback.
I like the idea of “oops, I broke it — better fix it” …
I thought all the detail about the different eras was great.
There was some strange, almost contradictory text - why would the power to manipulate time be a time-travel device gone awry? That kind of seems like what you want in a time-travel device.
"Adaptive difficulty system" and "singular difficulty level" was confusing as well.
Oh sure, Gwen, just name drop your critically-acclaimed short story! 🙂
“structured deduction as a game genre” - immediately made me think of some sort of narrative game where you’re retroactively building the chain of events that somehow led to the current situation and I may have to try this in one of my ttrpg sessions.
Concept reminded me of https://store.steampowered.com/app/599610/Lost_Words_Beyond_the_Page/ and https://store.steampowered.com/app/1624540/Storyteller/ a bit
Loved the backstory and main plot — though I was a bit confused by “the male surrealists flee” followed by “Raymond occupies the house”.
Is the Plot progression chronological? IE, does each exhibit represent it’s place in the timeline chronologically? Is it always “and what happens next” or is there “how did they get from there to here” opportunities. IE, exhibit 2 might be about the occupied house. However, this may spoil some of the surprises, so linear may be better (and easier)
Raymond sucks.
The presentation was very evocative. I feel like I can see some of the game already.
Oh sure, Gwen, just name drop your critically-acclaimed short story! 🙂
“structured deduction as a game genre” - immediately made me think of some sort of narrative game where you’re retroactively building the chain of events that somehow led to the current situation and I may have to try this in one of my ttrpg sessions.
Concept reminded me of https://store.steampowered.com/app/599610/Lost_Words_Beyond_the_Page/ and https://store.steampowered.com/app/1624540/Storyteller/ a bit
Loved the backstory and main plot — though I was a bit confused by “the male surrealists flee” followed by “Raymond occupies the house”.
Is the Plot progression chronological? IE, does each exhibit represent it’s place in the timeline chronologically? Is it always “and what happens next” or is there “how did they get from there to here” opportunities. IE, exhibit 2 might be about the occupied house. However, this may spoil some of the surprises, so linear may be better (and easier)
Raymond sucks.
The presentation was very evocative. I feel like I can see some of the game already.
