if I were to hypothetically make another blade runner game, what would be the best way to apply the tension of discerning if someone was human or not:
1. Randomizing like the original game maintaining the tension in every playthrough.
Or
2. Make it predetermined enhancing the authoral detail, but risking the spoiler leaking and raping any hope of replay value.
Also, feel free to talk about the game if anyone played it.
Make everyone a human.
And add the ability of classifying them as replicants.
Randomization would make the most sense, but it would require more work for the writing to be equally strong across all possible "routes". It would add the most 'replayability' though.
Also what said, in a sense. Rather than just having a few people be human and a few not, let it go wild. Have it possible for every possible skinjob to be human at once, or non-human at once. That way even experienced players who learn the "tells" of when a certain character is a human can still be caught off guard.
...
Make it ambiguous, then you craft a good story and leave people guessing every time they play.
Multiplayer
You foul creature
predetermined tbh
better experience > all
Are you suggesting "Terror in Terrorist Town" as standalone game?
...
Are you suggesting a "find-a-target-and-kill'em" game with The Sims in mind? And without detective?
3. Put authoral detail into each randomized scenario and . Also
>Blade Runner sold well, but due to high development costs, the profit margin was low. According to Louis Castle, "The mere fact it was four CDs made it a very expensive game. And the deal we had with the Blade Runner Partnership meant it was not terribly profitable. It didn't do as well as you might think." Although Virgin were interested in doing a sequel, if a sequel were approved, the Blade Runner Partnership intended to increase the licensing fee. Ultimately, Westwood and Virgin concluded the cost of producing a game to top the original, coupled with the increased cost for licensing, made the prospect of a sequel economically untenable, as such a sequel would have to sell several million units to generate what would be considered an acceptable profit. In 2009, the Blade Runner Partnership offered Gearbox Software the rights to the franchise, but production costs were estimated at $35 million and the project was scrapped.
I was wrong.
Randomization, by far. What said.
Although in the Blade Runner game once you get good at it, you can tell from early clues who got randomized as a replicant.
No, that's just fucking ugly. A novel might do that because it's a static piece of text, but games have more capacity to adjust the experience based on the playthrough.
That sounds like it'll be a bit mafia-esque (I mean the party game Mafia). Not sure you can work it well when the detective is supposed to weed out the replicants from the civilians.
Personally, I'd just take a page from ye olde point and click games and create 6-10 different storylines, and randomized which one occurs. The characters stay the same, but the events and who's a replicant changes, as does character motivations.
If done well, you get some deep insight on different characters, two or three exceptional storylines, and plenty of replay value.
Doft Fort mod
Never played LA Noir but I think Blade Runner would be a great setting for a similar game.
Have tons of different starting points and use aggressive controlling methods to force a network connection, don't tell anyone it's actually multiplayer.
Never played that game and now I'm wondering why you said "if I were". Are you the author?
Talk about the game here, please.
Also, if your problem is replayability but you want hand-crafted content, then you simply have to make everyone have 2 versions of themselves, a human and a replicant.
The story should progress and people should talk taking either side into account depending on what happens.
At the beginning of the game, it should pick a random number of people to be replicants between a reasonable interval then switch the lucky ones around and let the game unfold from there.
If the issue is narrative cohesion between people, you might want to make a net out of it where every person is only aware of maybe 3-5 other people personnaly, everything else is just "Hey did you heard? X was killed for being a replicant when he wasn't!"
An interesting example of this is the Rosethorn Mansion quest in Oblivion (maybe I got the name wrong).
You're an assassin sent to kill everyone attending a party and everyone's locked in there till it's over. You have several targets to dispatch and depending on the order you take them, the story unfolds in different ways, like keeping the big orc till near the end where he's paranoid enough to kill someone on his own, or convince people to split up, etc. Every possible route is taken into account and plays out differently.
That is honestly brilliant. Would play 10/10.
Oh right, another thing.
Keep a "replicant panic var" that the player can't see. Whenever you kill people, it goes up, if you kill a replicant it goes up even further and it also rises over time.
When it reaches an high enough value, one of the replicants will try something, which might just be sabotage (but you're gonna be blamed for it for allowing them to roam free long enough for that) or they might try to kill you.
The more replicants you catch, the more said var increases with everything mentioned so the last sections of the game see replicants reacting very fast to your moves and being careless, stalking or killing the wrong target means exposing yourself to a real threat but doing nothing and waiting is also bound to eventually not work out for you either.
It's a constant invisible threat that the player can't see, but if he is informed about it (especially through subtle means with storytelling) it's quite opressive on him and also acts as a sort of soft time limit too.
Hasn't made me want to replay.
And make a decent Clue vidya while you're at it.
make it a porn game
Do it like The Thing game did.
The first half, the second half throws it all the way and becomes some stupid action game without the tension.
Then there wouldn't be any tension whatsoever after the first playthrough, you dumb nigger.
That must be a bug because when I played it I was able to get thirteen different endings (eventually) without anything like that happening.
...
Is the game any good? I dug the movie, one of my favorites.
Interesting, I'll hypothetically note this.
This is basically the premise of the Blade Runner game, he was just a few generations earlier. I would dig an k.dickian open world investigation though.
Fascinating, but I hypothetically don't have them hacka skills. I really hope someone
Nope.
That was kind of the idea from the start, although I didn't went into detail, the absence of randomization wouldn't only be less work, but more focus in developing each character. kinda of summed it up. Randomization still seems the best
I didn't even consider this, I thought of the replicants being isolated and each having their own unique storyline and setting, but a network of 'em would make more sense, and even more with the novel. I'll ruminate on this.
I really wanted to play this, but I have a natural repulsion towards newer elder scrolls.
Ok, this is good stuff, noted.
I'll play it.
motherfucked how did you know
This game was a genuine master-piece. RIP Westwood.
What? Have you even seen the movie? There's probably more tension in the second half.
your alpha layer has some specks on it