Forums » Feature Wishing Well » Read Thread

Hey, how about a feature that allows people to go back to the last page they were in, in a chapter.  It would be helpful for people who might want to put in a book in there game or possibly a universal shop thing?  Anyways, it would make things a whole lot interesting.

How might that work?  Well, simply put somebody puts a goto-chapter link to BANK.  Then that somebody does it a few more times.  Instead of working with varibles he puts in a Previous Chapter link and ding ding ding.  He's back at whatever town he was at without even noticing he left it.

Another use is for having a two way link system.  In chapter House person makes the only link to chapter Journol.  Then at chapter journol person adds a Previous Chapter and now you don't have to make those items and varibles or get stuck at the begining of chapter House everytime you leave the journol.

The two way system could also make it so that chapter Journol is only acessable by an item.  Now you can get there from whereever and still be able to get back.  It's like your own little save spot.

The idea I'm stating is saying that you should be allowed to use an item such as a book that brings you to a new chapter could be used on one page.

Oh, and when it comes to if a person uses two previous chapter links w/o changing chapters then they don't go back to the third chapter.

Come on, think about this:

Little Scripting Needed
Big Payoff!

1.  Can make a full book that you can read anywhere.

2.  Can make a "phone system"

3.  Can create a common bank, store, ect.

4.  Can create a backpack system.

There are countless more but those are some of the one's I've had trouble with.

1. Can do with pages.  Books arnt games, put it on one page (done in SW Episode A)
2. Do they carry a phone around in there inventory?  Otherwise you woulkd have to have certain links that go to that, right?  Use Variables to switch between these links.
3. Same as No. 2
4. Backpack is inventory which is built into editor.

Problem solved.

1.  Books could be a journal which you carry around.  I have a chapter set out just for one book which holds the entire history of the player.

2.  Yes, they carry a phone around.  It'd be easier to just make the phone call and then come back to where you last were without any hesitation.

3.  Yes true, but this way offers way less work.

4.  Not quite, does a backpack hold unlimited amount of space?  I didn't think so.  Think about all the possibilities.

5.  Another variation of 1+2 combined would be to carry a PDA with you.

6.  Make one chapter set out just for battles.  This makes it a lot easier on me if I can have battles in one chapter instead of making one per each chapter.  Also, it allows the game to work so that it's do something-battle-get back to doing something without resetting  your point.

1. Use hidden text.
2. Do it Alexp's way in the proposal.
3. Not really, Alex has to put in work.
4. Dont give them infinate items.
5. PDA?
6. You trying to pussy out?  Its not about easy, put in the work like everyone else.

5.  Mabey it was a different acronym.
4.  Infinite is spelled wrong; I could have more items in the game than the player is allowed to hold.  (Imagine holding a million swords)
1.  I have to many pages of info to do that.
2.  My game's not actually using that but that way is for games that are linear.
6.  How many battles does a normal game on here have? Not many, My system would increase battles by 10 fold;
3.  The work will become less as time goes on.

This is the perfect idea for a non-linear way of making a game where they actually have interactivity.  It works out fine.

Also, if scripting was aloud I could use them together to make the perfect non-linear RPG game! 

1. No, your just too lazy.
2. not really.
3. Wat the hell?  That makes no sense.
4. Then make a variable on every page when ever they pick up an item.  When it gets above the maximum layer it ransports them to a page.  They can use any item on that page and it would take them to a dump that item page.  Of course your probably to lazy to take the time.
5. Maybe.
6. Maybe thats a bad thing.  I have scores of battles on Mattias and I didn't need your system.

Also if we wanna mess with spelling then Aloud means out loud.  Allowed is to have permission.  Neither are right for the sentance, permitted or included would be better words.

1.  Yah, I'm real lazy.  I'll debate on about anything including this and I'm lazy.

2.  Yes really.  I could make a different game that uses a phone system that you don't carry around.  It's a small example and yes, I could do it with varibles but I don't really want to.

3.  Can't remember what I said.

4.  What if there are different types of items and ways to get rid of items.  It wouldn't really work.

5.  No comment.

6.  Yah, but the battles are different.  My battles would be 10X more complex.

Yes, but look at it this way:  You can make a place just for changes without having the player mess with a ton of links and stuff and at the same time, it puts a lot less work on the builder of the game.  That means that efficiency goes up, one of the main things needed for more games, which we need right now.

I can argue with you all day but let me just make a point.

• He He, a point.  Anyways, look below.
• You are efficient.  In fact, you are the most efficient person on the site.  You don't really need this feature because it wouldn't make a real difference in your style of making games.  Others on the other hand, (Jdog, Leon, Miccy, and me;) would benifit greatly from this.  We would make way more complex systems that are easier to understand (think about how that works) faster than the way we do it now.  This means that effiency goes up while workload goes down.  Do you see how this works?
• My second point would be length (sp?).  I would be able to make some really long games quicker than I would with this system.  That means that I can work a lot better w/o sacrificing some of my quality to setting up each system individually.  I could have each and every system connected in one chapter and be done with it.  Also, most of that legnth that you don't want (Go back, Go back, Go back, Go back, Go back, ect. could be taken out.  You see how unwanted length could go down and wanted length could go up.
• My third and final point would be quality.  Will the second point mentioning that unwanted length can go down and wanted legnth could go up means a definite increase in quality.  More times than naught, a longer game will be better than a short one.  I take Miccy as an example for this.  His game School Daze wasn't that great and it wasn't that long.  It's the same with DZD 1.  In DZD 2 it's a little longer and is way more fun to play.  I mean sure it's linear but it's still fun to play.  Than there is DZD 3!  Woah!  That game is so long and so fun.  A bunch of zombie bashing goodness.  Finally, there is Become a Supervillan, (New Games) which I think is awsome.  Instead of making a sequal though, he should just add on to it.

1. Do they suck... ... or were they just made without the proper tools?  I can make a sample battle that gives choice and isn't bad.  Also, not all battles have to be the same.  Some could be different.  Second with that, not all battles have to have the same links.  Some could just as easily have special links for example, a message might say that in a battle in a desert there is a rock formation directly over your oponents' heads.  That rock formation could than become a target of yours.  In fact, I already have an idea for a spell that would be very useful to those who have it.  It's called crumble.  I don't want to get into the basis of it in a suggestion area but oh was it one of my smarter ideas for spells.
2. Unwanted length not for the calculation but for the play itself.  People with slow connections hate having a million go back buttons.
3. Your right there, but the average would be longer.  Also, may I mention that the games on this site are pretty short.  People don't take there time and effort into making there masterpiece.
4. I know you like the compliment but didn't you say you were making 3 games that go with the Mattias world?
5. Half agreement.
6. Agreement  but not really a part of the argument.

I quess we agree on some things but not all of them.  Also, you misunderstood me on number 2.