Story / Challenge mode

[Wilbefast]

It's been too long since I've written an absurdly long post, so here my 2 cents when it comes to game-modes in Overgrowth. Your opinions, heckling and abuse are welcome as always.

• Story Mode

First up, could we call it "story" mode rather than "campaign"? Or maybe something cool like "vendetta" - just not "campaign". Not that there's any wrong with the word "campaign" - it's just that "campaigns" are for strategy games, this is an action game and I'm pedantic

World Map
I really like Lugaru's World Map - it gave you a sense of going somewhere rather than it being just an arbitrary series of levels. Something that annoyed me though was the fact that you can't replay levels you'd completed. The map makes it look like you can but you can't. This is the sort of thing that's not hard to implement but would be real worthwhile for two reasons:

• 1. You can replay your favourite levels without going through the whole story again to get to them
  
  2. If you get stuck you can replay a previous level to practice their skills and let out some frustration

Multiple Paths
Another way of helping out players who get stuck, without making the game too easy, is to give them multiple paths. Rather like in World Of Goo: if you get stuck on one branch you can go back work on the other. Whereas in Lugaru you could get stuck and have no option but to retry over and over again, this way you'd be able to come back the level later on without leaving the game frustrated (logic denotes that if a player leaves your game frustrated, they may never come back).

Of course there are two problem with this: one is multiple levels taking place in the same area, or generally the whole thing getting hopelessly tangled up and convoluted. The second is the suggestion that there be a small amount of branching story later on in the game.
Both of these issues could be solved by using multiple pages (Acts? Chapters? Parts?) each one with their own paths: a new chapter would start whenever Turner returns to a friendly city to recuperate. Or perhaps each chapter would be in a different part of the world (again, as it was in WoG). Either way, depending on your decisions throughout the game the last couple of chapters might be slightly different.



Branching Storyline
"Throughout" is the key word here. Obviously if the story branches from the beginning it becomes impossible. However, it'd be nice the eventual branching wasn't based on one event at the end but rather a accumulation of previous choices that nudge you into one ending or another. Like in Abe's Oddyssey: you're never given an explicit choice but your decisions do come back to haunt you. Likewise in Lugaru the choice whether or not to kill or merely subdue enemies, especially important characters, could have an impact later on in the game (they could perhaps be added into later levels, possibly as allies).

Hang on! So you can replay levels, yet what you do in them determines how the game ends? Won't that lead to all kinds of weird space-time paradoxes? For example, if you're fighting a boss in Chapter 3 who you spared in chapter one, can you go back to chapter one and kill him? Would this change Chapter 3?
The best solution would be "no": you can go back to Chapter 1 but it won't affect subsequent chapters - once a new Chapter has been started, choices made in previous chapters are "locked in" so to speak. You can replay those levels but it won't affect the story in any way. You could also "lock in" the first play-through of any level, but I think it's better to give the player a chance to replay the level till they're satisfied they've been as brutal/merciful as they can, and inform them that they're about to enter a new chapter with a little tooltip similar to the "start new campaign" one in Lugaru.


Better get on - might add a bit later

[Swordarm]

A well-told narrative is a must-have. That's not exactly on friendly terms with the multiple path thing. Branching yes, playing various chapters at once NO.

A world map is not a good idea too, since you already found out how bad that can turn out in Lugaru. Having this huge world map and not being able to visit possibly interesting places
Also, it's going crazy when you revisit places and revisiting places is a huge plus for believability. Imagine you would just go to the rocky hall once, now that would not sell the importance of the place, would it?

Branching paths is of course a classic and great way of adding replayability and it's a way often executed the wrong way nowadays. Just look at games like inFamous or KOTOR. Those present you with the choice of being a saint or an absolute madman and you essentially choose ONLY ONCE, since those games punish you if you have a change of heart. MassEffect or Geneforge (brilliant RPGs) are better in that regard. But the real game to look at here is WING COMMANDER. These games always had branching paths depending on the players performance and decisions while still telling an engaging, essentially linear storyline. THAT'S THE WAY TO GO!

Oh last but not least: Please make the "campaign" mode a real mode, not just some quick time killler or preperation for the challenge levels. Zeno Clash had that problem.

[Wilbefast]

Well, there's no point having an interactive World Map really if you can only play the next level, it gives you the illusion of choice when you have none. Perhaps having multiple layers of graphs where each play-through may or may not save your choices would be rather confusing - so maybe it's better not to use a World Map as a way of selecting levels.
However, what I don't want to see is:

• Fiver - Turner, what do you want do to?
  1. Cut them off at the pass
  2. Follow them in secret
  3. Let them go and play backgammon

Perhaps something like that level in Starcraft where you're given the choice between destroying Battlecruiser factories or Missile silos, and depending on your choice you get a different kind of pain in the next level. But even that choice is fairly explicit - if at all possible, choices should be made without the player even knowing they're making a choice.
However, I still think it's a good idea to let people replay levels they've already completed whenever they like: perhaps they could be unlocked in a separate "Free-play Mode" or something, so you can play your favourite levels whenever you please, in any order, just for fun.


Zeno Clash's Story mode felt like a Challenge mode - it was really a series of arena battles, only there was a narrative linking them together. Same thing with Lugaru really, minus the arenas - Challenges were the same as the story mode, minus the story. What I'd like to see when it comes to Challenge mode is, well, challenges. By this I don't just harder mean levels but rather some truly outlandish scenarios that are tricky in strange and different ways: you could, for example have race-course Challenges, or Rabbit-kick ten-pin bowling, or something - you be practising a given still, sort of like in the Worms games.

[Chainsaw man]

Hmm. heres my thoughts on Map and Campaign mode:

Rather than Levels, how about we have zones that alter with changes made by the player that may be revisited.
When you enter a zone you may leave it by Running to the edge of the map (solves on of our ongoing issues) or by completing a major objective, story progression requirements are represented by conditions met, such as destroying a particular Entity, or taking a particular Item.

When condition's are met the entire world zones are altered to go with the changes set, and the AI moves Reinforcements to a zone based off what forces in conjunction the zone, We will call this Change of Chapter/Act for a Term to use. Each zone traversed costs time, eventually leading to a day in game, and travailing to another zone may cause alterations to the current Set of ones in the Chapter, meaning the Chapter changes slightly.

This Desgine could give a player an understandable non-linear means of progressing though the game by letting the player Dive head first into the game hack and slash, or allow him to go about the game smart and obtain some useful tips and gear. It Would also offer the chance to throw in shops, and the occasional grind for gold.

With this System as well you could have the Linear ending you wanted, or you may make as many as you want.

PLEASE SCRUTINIZE THIS IDEA!

[tokage]

I like world maps. I also like them in books, for example. They provide a bigger frame, where the events in the story take place. That takes away a little bit of the imagination of the player, but I don't think in this case it is a bad thing.

And I disagree with Swordarm, that they are bad, because they create places where the player wants to go but can't. That may be true for some players, but again I don't think this is necessarily bad. If there are interesting places on the map, but the player doesn't go there in the story, there are still two options left.

• Provide these locations as challenge level locations. They are not part of the story, but they are part of the same universe and a player (not as the character of the campaign/story) can visit them. They also could be part of additional stories, provided as downloadable content or an expansion pack(some way Wolfire could make a bit of additional money).
• Let the player mod his own levels for this location (or rely on other modders), if he really wants to go there. There could be a mechanism to locate your own levels on the worldmap (like in Lugaru) and there could be forum contests for the best maps for particular locations.

Edit: Reformatted for better readability

[Kompatriot]

Boy, there's a ton of material here, so I'll add my impressions first:

Regarding Wilbefast's OP: Branching storylines are more interesting than linear ones, if nothing else because they are replayable. Now, you introduced it primarily as a method of diffusing player frustration by giving players an alternate route to go to when stuck on a particular level. I think that the primary merit of such a system is giving players choice as to how they will progress the story; "do I take on that side mission, or do I go through the main 'quest', should I save her or let her get eaten by wolves" what have you. I only believe that branching storylines weaken the narrative if they are done poorly. Considering Wolfire's track record, I think we can safely assume it will be either highly innovative or at least quite solid.

As for Swordarm's complaints about the world map and Wilbefast's response, wasn't it intended as a backdrop in Lugaru? I mean, it wasn't actually used as a mechanic, just a graphical setting to give you a sense of context. Including a more featured world map could be interesting.

Chainsaw Man's idea sounds interesting, but frankly, I'm not sure what to make of it. SCRUTINY DENIED!

[Luporum]

Why should the player be unaware that they're making a choice? Surely that defeats the point? On the other hand, it could be interesting if there was an obvious but seemingly unimportant choice that gets revealed as critical later on. An example of this would be killing vs. knocking out a guard—if you only knock him out, he might go to his leader and inform him of something which changes the storyline.

There are always basic choices, such as choosing the left or right branch of a tunnel, but given that Wolfire has already stated that there aren't going to be very many choices, the ones there are should probably be a bit more interesting than that.

Another way of having the story branch would be something like this: the player goes through a level:

Code: Select all

────────┐
  1     │
────┐   │
    │   └──
    │ 2
    └──────

At point 1, they meet an ally who tells them that an urgent message must be sent to Arthur who lives in the hills of Islington. At point 2, they meet an ally who tells them that the village of Milton Keynes is in immediate danger and needs help. When the level ends, the player returns to the world map…

Code: Select all

  1
  │
──┤
  └ 2

If the player loads option 1, Milton Keynes gets destroyed and the plot moves on. If the player loads option 2, the message doesn't get delivered and the story is irreparably altered.

However, it isn't necessary for all choices to be equal. For example, imagine the player is in a tunnel. There is a small side shaft which, if walked down, could lead to an interesting plot development. However, it is very small, and the player may not notice it, or realise that you have to crouch to walk down it. Most players won't go down this tunnel, but some will. However, this sort of thing isn't very interesting for those who don't notice it, so there should either be loads of them (already said to be unlikely) or not very many at all.

I agree with all of Wilbefast's second post. It's hard to get immersed in a game that feels text based. I also like the idea of a "free play" mode. Lego Star Wars did this, but in Overgrowth it would have to be completely separate; an option next to "Challenge" and "Campaign" (or whatever it ends up being called).

Re: the first post: I'm not sure how much World of Goo-style branching would work with the narrative. In fact, I'd imagine it would compromise it. The exception would be a group of tasks for which order does not matter, but all of which must be completed for the story to continue. "Find three items" is an example of this, but I would hope for something less clichéd.

Re: Chainsaw man's idea: I'm not entirely certain I know what he means, but if he means what I think he means, then I don't like it. For one, it sounds too much like Risk. For two (is that even an expression?), I'd rather have a proper storyline. The big, tempting positive is that is solves the edge-of-map problem, but I'm willing to compromise that if necessary.

[Wilbefast]

edit - Chainsaw man: that would be quasi open-world you see, whereas what David wants is to bring the player more or less straight to the act without too much wandering around wondering where they're meant to be.

I think it's time to punish anyone who has a 56k Internet connection for being poor

NB - "Branching Story" and "Multiple Paths" are two different things! The first means a divergence at the end, while the second means more than one way of getting from A to B. I'm not entirely sure that a "Branching Story" is a good idea, but if it is done I'd rather not have a canned good/evil "moral" decision just before the finale, which influences who the boss is and what movie you get when you beat him/her.

The reason I say decisions should not be taken consciously is because if you know you're making a decision within a video game you'll start thinking about the consequences, not the decision itself, as explain in this notoriously over-quoted video:



When I first played Abe's Oddssey I thought the Muddokens were just there for show, and to have fun killing. Okay, so I was about 8, and perhaps it's just nostalgia, but it really hit me in the gut when I won the game and this happened:



It's one of the few games that made me think about things - it's very allegorical. But that's besides the point - the decision to save or not to save the Muddokens is made in game, without really thinking about it, because nobody tells you that it's a choice and that it's going to matter later on. It has been suggested many times in other threads that your being brutal or merciful should influence how Overgrowth's story progresses - of course, everyone expects choices these days so it's better of the results of your decisions aren't quite as obvious: life isn't like Disney - being a nice guy doesn't always pay off

But back to the whole World Map thing: anyway played Dawn of War? The first game's linear, handcrafted campaign was, in my opinion, far more interesting than the newer games' attempts at non-linearity: you end up with a bunch of same-y levels that feel like filler, rather than each one being an important mission. The only really interesting missions in DOW: Dark Crusade for example were when you took the various factions' capitals:


This is something that sort of turned me off Starcraft 2 - not that I could have played it anyway. But while we're on the subject of Blizzard - Warcraft 3 used a clever technique: the loading screen before each level showed the World Map with the course you'd plotted so far marked on it, giving you a sense of spatial progression:


Movement through space is a very powerful metaphor - we talk about "getting through it", "climbing ladders" or "dodging a problem". In games especially you are often trying to get to the bottom of a Dungeon or the top of a tower - you literally "level up" sometimes. Stumbled across this really good video about all this a while ago but now I can't find it anywhere
Anyway, the two games shown above are move or less the extremes of Linearity / Non-linearity, and I've got to say: Linearity takes the cake. Then again you can replay levels in Warcraft 3, so why not have a level selection on the World Map?



I really like World of Goo: the game is separated into chapters, separated into levels, where you often have branching paths that diverge and converge, offering you multiple things to work on at any given time:



Not that this is a new idea by any means - it's be done many many times before, but there's a reason for that: it's a brilliant way of conveying a sense of travel and progression, showing the off the game-world and selecting a level - all at the same time:



Of course, none of these games have a the oft sought-after "Multiple Endings" - if you can keep replaying the levels in any order and ad-infinitum how can you keep track of the player's decisions? Which decisions are the "real" decisions and which ones are the "just for funnsies" decisions?

This is why it's probably better to have a separate "Free Play" mode for replaying levels that have been unlocked. Obviously people could always save the game at the start of each level, but I always forget to do that, and should I be punished for being absent-minded? You're supposed to say "no".

Another point is the planned cooperative gameplay. Making co-op an simply an option for the main "Story Mode" might created some problems plot-wise, especially if there is some degree of Branching. Probably simpler to do a "Co-op Mode" and/or make it possible to play the cooperatively in "Challenge Mode" - which is free of such concerns.

[Luporum]

Very interesting post. But, er, to clarify: by "non-linearity" you're referring to branching stories, right?

I just wanted to add something about challenge mode: Peggle* does this really well. Each "challenge" is a proper challenge: get a certain number of points; beat a certain number of levels continuously; win with an extreme handicap and the like.

http://grab.by/1Gat
Last Ball, where you have to win with only one ball out of the usual ten

http://grab.by/1GaB
Ten Ball Trial, where you have to complete three levels with no more than ten balls in total.

http://grab.by/1GaR
Crystal Clear, where you have to clear every peg, not just the orange ones

So, seconded on real challenges. Something nice and contrived :-)

* I bought this game, played it for a few hours and my next few days were ruined due to the Tetris effect. Good game, though.

[tokage]

Very interesting post. But, er, to clarify: by "non-linearity" you're referring to branching stories, right?

I think with non-linearity, he means the kind of game play, where you can choose your next mission freely. That doesn't necessarily involve a branching story. Maybe Super Mario World is the best known example here. There you can sometimes choose which level you want to solve next and depending on which exit you take in the levels you can unlock short cuts. But that doesn't have any effect on the story. Not that there was anything you can call much of a story to begin with.

Funny enough, DOW: Dark Crusade was also my example for non-linearity of levels, I was thinking about when reading Wil's first post. For those who haven't played it, let me explain how the campaign mode works. Maybe it gets clearer what Wilbefast meant that way.
On this map you take command of one faction and conquer territory much the same as in the table top strategy game Risk. When attacking or defending the game goes to normal RTS mode and loads a map corresponding to the current territory. Dependent on the outcome of the RTS game you win or lose territory. There are only a few special territories that have objective based maps and the rest is always a eradicate the enemy objective. Other than Wilbefast I kind of liked this approach, although it got kind of boring when you had to defend the same territory over and over again. It had the feeling that you really were the commander of an army waging war and not just some officer that only follows orders, because you could decide were to advance and were to go next. Unfortunately the story had to be sacrificed for that.

But that is strategy and hardly doable like that with Overgrowth, I guess. Now for an FPS who did non-linear levels, there is Jedi Knight : Jedi Academy as an example. They did almost the same as Wilbefast was proposing. Chapters where you could choose from 4 or 5 missions freely and after clearing most of them you would advance through a fixed story driving mission into the next chapter. It kind of worked out, but they had the already fleshed out Star Wars universe to build on. One problem was that you need a lot of maps that are the same difficulty level but don't get boring when they get too easy. Hardly doable without space travel and millions of stars to choose from.


Skip to 8:00 to see the mission choice.

I guess, this is getting too long already, so let me just briefly say what I would like to see in OG: A simple, but entertaining linear story with progress marked on a world map. Nothing too fancy. Would be totally satisfied with that and don't think all this fancy branching stuff adds that much to a game. But that is just me.

[Zhukov]

Ah, 'bout time there was another proper discussion in here.

Right then...

World Maps
I agree with Wilbefast. They help give a solid sense of progression and continuity, even in a 100% linear game. That is a very good thing.
I really can't see any disadvantages to world maps. The whole 'the-player-might-be-disappointed-if-they-miss-out-on-visiting-interesting-locations' thing seems like a complete non-issue. It could be dealt with by not including any un-visited locations on the map. Easy and simple. Alternatively, as Tokage suggested, such locations could be included on the map then featured in challenge levels. Best of both worlds.

Re-playable Story Levels
Just include them with the challenge levels. When the player completes a story level, that level is unlocked in challenge mode. Keeping them separate like this would avoid 'space-time paradoxes' in the campaign.

Explicit Choices vs Unclear Choices
On this, I strongly disagree with Wilbefast. If the player isn't aware that they are making a choice, why even bother including that choice?
In my opinion the player should always know when they are making an important decision. Otherwise they can end up getting screwed over for a choice they didn't even know they were making. Furthermore, the player should be given some general idea of the consequences their choice will have.

Allow me use a couple of examples to illustrate my point:
(Minor spoilers ahead for Deus Ex and BioShock. If you haven't played these games then do so. Right now.)

In the game Deus Ex there is a scenario where the player character (JC Denton) and his injured brother (Paul) are cornered in a hotel room by a squad of soldiers. The player can either fight their way out or escape via the window. However, the game's dialog suggests that the window is the only viable option. As a result, the player isn't made fully aware of their options. Furthermore, it turns out that using the window causes Paul to get killed while fighting causes him to survive. Unfortunately the player is given no indication of this.
This is a poorly implemented choice. One which could have been done much better with some simple adjustments to the dialogue.

So what's an example of a well-implemented choice? Well, unlike Daniel Floyd up there, I thought BioShock had a pretty good one with the Little Sisters. The player is given a clear choice between killing them in exchange for more resources or rescuing them in exchange for less. However they are also told that rescuing them will yield further rewards later on. But since they aren't told exactly what those future rewards are, the temptation to kill is still there.
This setup was by no means perfect. The moral aspect was a bit too black-and-white and the impact on the game's ending wasn't really hinted at. However, this implementation was superior to the Deus Ex one because the player knew they were making a choice and had some idea of the consequences.

What I'm trying to say is that choices should be all about consequences. Whenever I make a decision (regardless of whether it be in the real world or a game) I am not 'thinking about the decision itself'. Rather, I am weighing up the consequences. If I am unaware of the consequences then I might as well just flip a coin.
If you want to ensure that your choices really are choices and not problems (to use Mr Floyd's terms), then you do so by giving those consequences "equal or incomparable value", not by obscuring them.

...

Okay, I think I'm done. I had a whole lot more to say, but this post is already well and truly in the wall-o-text realm. I'll post the rest later.

[Chainsaw man]

Re: Chainsaw man's idea: I'm not entirely certain I know what he means, but if he means what I think he means, then I don't like it. For one, it sounds too much like Risk. For two (is that even an expression?), I'd rather have a proper storyline. The big, tempting positive is that is solves the edge-of-map problem, but I'm willing to compromise that if necessary.

Actually I thought my idea to be more like Geneforge.
Am I really that hard to decipher?

I really do think this idea is a good one and should be considered but if no ones understanding what I am saying Ill present it another way. I may have also Littered my ideas with other ideas so ill try getting he basics down.

Basics:
Act: The World map displayed of all the places a player can go to, like Lugaru, except with the possibility of a few more choices.
Zone: A Level Map built to play the game and where most of the game takes place.
Synapse/Link: A point of where the player can traverse along to move to the next game map.

Basic Map Rules: Player uses map to go to places in world, much like Lugaru. However the player has some decisions on where he goes by a similar dot system to Lugaru, but the game play gives players a choice to do what ever the developer makes available as a choice to the player. Choice includes Go to shops, go to Enemy base #, whatever the Designer of a campaign decides to implement.

The systems basics allow a Developer/Modder to put in a game of as many choices as he wants, even if it only be one or Nine Hundred Thousand. If a Developer/Modder wanted to make an interesting idea, they could make Random Encounters along the Synapse.

Am I a Little clearer?

[Wilbefast]

Am I a Little clearer?

Actually, less clear. I re-read your post several times and now I have a headache - clearly my intelligence is vastly inferior to yours' (you'll have to speak more slowly or I can't keep up). I had a look at Geneforge though:

movement through the game's environs is real-time but switches to turn-based combat in the game's playing field. The game world is divided up into 77 areas accessible through a world map. The first two areas serve as the game's tutorial; introducing players to navigation, controls and shaping creations. Clearing areas by defeating guardians or successfully traversing the terrain allows players to bypass those areas via the world map, reducing travelling time.

You talking about a sort of quick-travel feature like in Oblivion, where you can revisit areas you've already been too? Or is it something like Final Fantasy where you move around on the World Map between various levels:



I'd like to consider your idea but I'm still not entirely sure what it is - or rather I thought I understood what it was but now I'm not so sure

Explicit Choices vs Unclear Choices
On this, I strongly disagree with Wilbefast. If the player isn't aware that they are making a choice, why even bother including that choice?

Very eloquent Zhukov - I'm converted. I suppose if in Iji you weren't told something along the lines of "no action will go unnoticed" at the start you'd just play it like any other platform-shooter and kill anything that moves. If you do this though, the guy you're sent to negotiate with will immediately tell you to something along the lines of "Negotiate?! Lol - Stfu psycho-bitch!" and shoot you in the face!
If you haven't played Iji, try it right now - you haven't lived



Okay, so Iji's not perfect but it is a good example of a game that lets you make choices without ever jerking you out of the flow of the game. It's how you play, not what option you pick out of a menu, that matters. A good example of this would be Hitman - I know there are no real consequences in Hitman, but it's an epic game so I wanted to use it as an example once again, and the way you play does determine whether you're ranked "Hired Gun",



or "Silent Assassin".



The thing I really don't like is when it's too obvious, and when the game paused and you're told to make a decision. The Witcher was really hot on ambivalent moral dilemmas but since they're entirely divorced from gameplay it does make it feel a little artificial - you don't need to live by a creed, just pick the options you wanted at specific moments.
Same thing with Oblivion: you could you could spend your whole time running up to random people and punching them in the face, but if you pick the right option in the dialogue suddenly you're the saviour of the World and everybody loves you. It's like in-game actions and dialogue screens are two separate universes.
Likewise in Mass Effect you can constantly abuse a team-mate but they'll still be happy to see you next time you talk to them - and you might be constantly chatting with a certain party member, only to have them turn on you because of some arbitrary plot-point, and whether they get shot or not is a matter of picking the right answers in a dialogue screen, "Who wants to be a millionaire?" style - you're lifeline is the quick-load feature



Hilarious video actually

Anyway, it's funny that Tokage mentioned Jedi Academy - their way of linking marrying important decisions with the actual gameplay is to allow you to sheath or execute specific characters. Since you spent most of the game light-sabering people's bollocks off it made the decisions feel very natural and organic.
You could also attack random people throughout the game - it generally results in mission failure though

Coming back to Hitman though - this is an interesting example because it allows you to replay levels you've already completed, unlike any of the other games mentioned. In fact, most game with any degree of choice forego replayablity - probably because of the aforementioned "space-time paradoxes". Hitman didn't have choices, but replays do have an effect: you can get new weapons for your collection, and you can lose those that you leave behind.
On a side note: the variety of weapons and equipment you can choose at the beginning of the later missions (if you've done a good job collecting them throughout the game) make for some really interesting decisions, especially since you can only carry one rifle - oh, the agony of choice!



I'd like to see something like that in Overgrowth - Turner being able to stash whatever weapons/equipment he's carrying when he exits a level, then pick out whatever weapons he wants for the next level.
In the same way the choosing a massive sniper rifle would make you rather inconspicuous, and influence how you play the level, showing up in full-plate might make it a little difficult to sneak around (clink-clank) or perform acrobatics

[Chainsaw man]

Am I a Little clearer?

Actually, less clear. I re-read your post several times and now I have a headache - clearly my intelligence is vastly inferior to yours' (you'll have to speak more slowly or I can't keep up). I had a look at Geneforge though:

movement through the game's environs is real-time but switches to turn-based combat in the game's playing field. The game world is divided up into 77 areas accessible through a world map. The first two areas serve as the game's tutorial; introducing players to navigation, controls and shaping creations. Clearing areas by defeating guardians or successfully traversing the terrain allows players to bypass those areas via the world map, reducing travelling time.

You talking about a sort of quick-travel feature like in Oblivion, where you can revisit areas you've already been too? Or is it something like Final Fantasy where you move around on the World Map between various levels:



I'd like to consider your idea but I'm still not entirely sure what it is - or rather I thought I understood what it was but now I'm not so sure

*Head of Colicedus vs Desk and Keybord*

I Have never played Oblivion, sorry to be so oblivious. I have seen some of the FF games and would dread OG taking a turn like that so naturally, nothing like FF.

I suppose I could say the Quick Travail system is probably closest to what I'm talking about.

[dra6o0n]

When something important, like boss battles or decisive decisions are used in a stage, many games removes those elements to avoid having the player tamper with the storyline.

Demon's Souls for example, is an awesome game and the story is a bit gauntlet like...

After you kill a boss, you unlock a arch stone, which doubles as a warp point. The boss is gone but you can come and go from that warp point to explore the other ends of the levels.

So instead of world map kind of thing, what if it's a "checkpoint" kind of thing?

You enter a checkpoint, and play the game from that end of the map, rather than replay the entire mission I guess. But then that would leave the mission and story out the game, and rather give way to exploration or free roam. Maybe allowing players to specifically replay the story, or do a challenge, or just explore the map can work.