From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) (clbullar_at_ingr.com)
Date: 20 November 1998
The other way is to isolate a character that misbehaves, somewhat
the way people do. IOW, if a character keeps moving away from the
center of action in a situation, they get fewer and fewer clues and
cannot present the text or control tokens that cause the other
characters to react. This can be done by software using token
currencies of different types or as Stephen suggests, by human
intervention, or some combination of these which I suggest for
multiplayer, is the way to go just as simulators for training have
both built in controls and simulation directors who present
problems to the trainee.
Developing standard visual metaphors as story devices become part of the style of the story teller or director, and the software which enables these become nicely marketable products or a whole section of protos for the VAN.
Len Bullard
Intergraph Public Safety
clbullar_at_ingr.com
Ekam sat.h, Vipraah bahudhaa vadanti.
Daamyata. Datta. Dayadhvam.h
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Miriam English [SMTP:miriam_at_werple.net.au]
> I was helping develop an open-ended multi-character game a little while
> back. The other people in the development group favored the user playing
> the character directly, but I felt the only way to execute the kind of
> scenarios they wanted was to have the user direct and advise a
> near-autonomous character. They didn't like the fact that that made the
> user's experience one step removed from the game, but I saw this as the
> best way to ensure they can't go outside the character limitations.
>
> - Miriam
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.8 : 28 November 2004 CST