Be the guard mode then Escapist 2, multiplayer prison life.

[MMNXXXXFFDMA]

YES / no ?

[Megu]

to be fair guard mode would be boring and it wouldn't make sense as the game is called The Escapists not The Guardists

[Princess Lithus!]

Like i said in the offical Thread.

Guards aren't much fun in an escaping game.
many would want to just be an escapist if there was multiplayer servers.

I dont see why we cant just use steam invitations and if another friend joins,
He'll just take a random prisoners Desk/Bed/Room.

[MMNXXXXFFDMA]

Creeper107 a écrit :

to be fair guard mode would be boring and it wouldn't make sense as the game is called The Escapists not The Guardists

Thanks for sharing your opinion. The game could still be Escapist as the objective is to stop the prisoner from escaping.

[MMNXXXXFFDMA]

I Dont Remember My Name... a écrit :

Like i said in the offical Thread.

Guards aren't much fun in an escaping game.
many would want to just be an escapist if there was multiplayer servers.

I dont see why we cant just use steam invitations and if another friend joins,
He'll just take a random prisoners Desk/Bed/Room.

I think there are a lot of people confused with the idea of mandatory assignment as a guard. Nobody would force you to play as a guard this is something you would have control over. What I was suggesting was a toggle to permit human guards to join without an in-game prompt. Just so were on the same page, a toggle is a user adjustable setting meaning you can opt in or opt out.

You are in control as to whether these suggested options are going to affect you.

[Hackie P4ckie]

THOMPSON a écrit :

I mentioned ratio's with a bias towards more prisoners to guards. The guard-centric bias is lost beyond a 1:1 prisoner to guard ratio.

2 prisoners : 1 guard would make it interesting enough, while a guard may focus 100% of his attention on a single prisoner the other would have to only deal with existing AI guards while managing the escape plan.

While that is true, there's still the random beat ups and the general abuse. I don't think it'd be very fun to escape from prison with one specific guard constantly chasing you around and preventing you from doing anything while someone else worked on a plan. It's not entertaining from a game perspective.

Secondly, with more regards to the actual escape, there is no longer "Gaps in patrols". Guards patrol along any path they want, and within one hour, they can have scanned the entire perimeter of the prison and spotted any escapists.

The current AI state of the guards means that they'll just enter the prison at random times to say, check the canteen. Their patrol tells them to go there, and as such, they go there, even if it's a long, long path. A non NPC guard could simply walk the perimeter constantly and spot you before you even managed to dig two tiles of a tunnel, not to mention interference from random rocks and such.

Sure, you could have another prisoner with you that would watch out for guards like this, but this opens the game to even more abuse. You'd expect that two prisoners would be able to take down a guard before he could do anything, and sure, that's true, but then it opens the game to Skype cheaters. Two guards patrol the perimeter at night, searching for escapists. If the escapists attempt to take on that one guard so that he won't call for help, he has Skype at his disposal. He could simply say "I just got beaten up, there's two escapists over on the western side."

Suddenly, there's another guard coming, and of course, if this is multiplayer, there's gotta be a system in place for the guards to communicate.

As I previously mentioned, there would be very little action for the guards, and so they'd remain vigilant, looking for any kind of trouble because it's the only entertainment they get. As soon as one person finds out (likely through skype) that there's two escapists trying to break out, they can broadcast it through chat, and then suddenly every guard on the map knows that, and they're all eager to get over there and find those escapists. I'm sure the escapists can handle one guard, but having the entire guard force come at them at once, they have no chance. Thus, pretty much any attempt at digging underneath the wall is futile, and that's the most commonly used escape method. Assuming, of course, guards cannot patrol the roof, then escapists can use that to their advantage, as there are certain methods of putting yourself on the other side of the prison wall using the roof, and with no patrols on the roof, you're free to go.

But what good is that when you still can't dig? In a game about allowing you choice to escape whichever way you want, is restricting certain types of escapes really a good thing to do?

[MMNXXXXFFDMA]

Keeping the human prisoner : human guard ratio in mind with bias towards prisoners.

The scenario with one guard focusing 100% or close to that amount of time on a single prisoner will result in an easier escape for the prisoners. Every other point you brought up is negated by a human guards obssession with one prisoner.

In the scenario where the human guard (amongst AI guards) is managing 2+ human prisoners. The ratio can be adjusted as a user option to increase/decrease the difficulty for the prisoners/guards.

Using Skype is a matter of convenience. Skype will not stop a guard from patrolling an area if they have made the decision to do so already as a discussion between prisoners will not influence this directly.

The addition of players is supposed to increase the challenges for an escape. The AI is the training wheels if this multiplayer mode existed and players would have to evolve and be more creative in how they carry out the escape plan. For those that want the empowerment that playing against the AI offers, it will still be there for the players that need that.

The movie Escape from Alcatraz portrayed Clint Eastwood as a convict who managed to, in the film escape from the facility. He didn't just do this overnight, it took some time. While I'm not suggesting games to take as long as the film depicted the challenge would be a refreshing experience for those that played through and can manage an escape against AI without much effort.

[Hackie P4ckie]

THOMPSON a écrit :

Keeping the human prisoner : human guard ratio in mind with bias towards prisoners.

The scenario with one guard focusing 100% or close to that amount of time on a single prisoner will result in an easier escape for the prisoners. Every other point you brought up is negated by a human guards obssession with one prisoner.

In the scenario where the human guard (amongst AI guards) is managing 2+ human prisoners. The ratio can be adjusted as a user option to increase/decrease the difficulty for the prisoners/guards.

Using Skype is a matter of convenience. Skype will not stop a guard from patrolling an area if they have made the decision to do so already as a discussion between prisoners will not influence this directly.

The addition of players is supposed to increase the challenges for an escape. The AI is the training wheels if this multiplayer mode existed and players would have to evolve and be more creative in how they carry out the escape plan. For those that want the empowerment that playing against the AI offers, it will still be there for the players that need that.

The movie Escape from Alcatraz portrayed Clint Eastwood as a convict who managed to, in the film escape from the facility. He didn't just do this overnight, it took some time. While I'm not suggesting games to take as long as the film depicted the challenge would be a refreshing experience for those that played through and can manage an escape against AI without much effort.

As I've already said, from a game perspective, would that be very fun? Would you like to be the prisoner subject to random beat ups all the time, or would you like to be that prisoner who is constantly watched at night so they couldn't ever get up to do anything illegal? No. I would assume not.

As for skype, that still opens the game to abuse, no matter how you look at it. I think you misunderstood exactly who was talking over Skype in this case. Imagine, for example, a guard is patrolling and spots two prisoners out of their cell during the night. Sure, the two prisoenrs could easily take down that guard and continue on (especially seeing as knockouts last longer in multiplayer, I would assume?) with their escape. The problem is that external programs leave the game wide open to abuse. Since these two guards are talking over Skype, one of them can simply tell the other about where the two escapists are with word of mouth. Now that a still conscious guard has that info, he can inform every other guard, and the escape is essentially ruined.

Consider this too. You spend days, possibly even a month trying to gather all the necessary materials for an escape. You've been planning, plotting and trying to work everything out, then, on the night of the escape, before you even leave your cell, you're foiled by a human guard simply deciding to sit next to you for the night.

Sure, the ratio of guards to prisoners would mean that the other non NPC prisoner is free to do whatever they need to, but they can't continue with the escape, as all the tools and materials are in the other prisoners desk. They need both prisoners to escape at the same time. For starters, all the tools can't be accessed, as the unwatched prisoner can't access the watched prisoners desk. Secondly, the watched prisoner can't leave. If he lifts up his desk to reveal a hole, he's busted. If he leaves through his cell door, busted. If he tries to go through the vent? Guess what? Busted.

This means you will be spending considerable amounts of time attempting to predict these unpredictable non NPC guards so you can escape, but your entire escape can be postponed, or even ruined, just because one guard had a grudge against you...

In this game, every move counts. If you forget one piece of equipment on an escape, you're busted. If you misinterpret where a zipline will take you, you're busted. With everything being so pivotal in your escape, losing one piece of equipment or having to make one improvisation could postpone your escape even further, once again, because a guard has a grudge against you, and essentially wants to see you lose.

Does that sound fun from a game perspective? Do you want to spend hours upon hours recovering from wounds brought about by abusive guards? With everything hinging on one piece of equipment, or one specific escape route, are you really willing to have those hours of work taken away from you because one person, somewhere across the other side of the world, didn't like you?

[MMNXXXXFFDMA]

The scenario's you describe are 100% correct if the specific conditions you describe occur. However it isn't the only outcome, and the multiplayer aspect would be optional.

From a financial perspective its a simple game.

Single player > make money
Single player with multiplayer option > make more money

As the actions in SP and MP do not influence one another the company would only produce a higher gross income.

[Hackie P4ckie]

THOMPSON a écrit :

The scenario's you describe are 100% correct if the specific conditions you describe occur. However it isn't the only outcome, and the multiplayer aspect would be optional.

From a financial perspective its a simple game.

Single player > make money
Single player with multiplayer option > make more money

As the actions in SP and MP do not influence one another the company would only produce a higher gross income.

So, essentially, you're saying that it doesn't matter if they produce a broken game, as long as they make money. I'm sure that's how games like "Accidental Runner" are made.

http://store.steampowered.com/app/361660/

Take a look at this horror. While it is terrible, it makes money.

Please tell me you're not insinuating that the devs do this...

[Flip]

I think they should first make multiplayer mode, everyone wants that ;P

[Flip]

also I think guard mode would be fun the first seconds, but after a while, it's just every day the same and if you do multiplayer it will be abuse, and if you do it singleplayer only, de dev will need to make very, very hard AI's (for the newbies, a AI is how a NPC (non-person) plays)

[Flip]

Captain Hatless a écrit :

Flip a écrit :

I think they should first make multiplayer mode, everyone wants that ;P

This mode would be easier than multiplayer

I disagree for every word, a new AI to NPC's would be WAY more harder to make, then just a simple multiplayer mode, because with the guard mode, you will need to make a HOLE new game, on the other hand multiplayer mode is more requested and it's stays with the same game, only with more players

[Flip]

Ehm, Multiplayer is always funnier, because you can then interact to other people + play with my other friends on LAN, if the game will be for ever singleplayer, it isn't gonna grow, can you give me ONE good game that isn't multiplayer ?, no, and a guard mode is just (in my opinion) mostly anti-abuse and way to complicated AI's, it is still 'the escapist' right ?

[Hackie P4ckie]

Captain Hatless a écrit :

Flip a écrit :

Ehm, Multiplayer is always funnier, because you can then interact to other people + play with my other friends on LAN, if the game will be for ever singleplayer, it isn't gonna grow, can you give me ONE good game that isn't multiplayer ?, no, and a guard mode is just (in my opinion) mostly anti-abuse and way to complicated AI's, it is still 'the escapist' right ?

No game grows with one concept. Five night at freddy's for example. He was awesome for a time, but no one played it anymore. Then they added Fnaf 2, That have another way of surviving. I actually think fthe guard gamemode need to be created first, and then multiplayer, because the two modes on multiplayer would make be game very enjoyable. I sincerelly dont care much about if the devs are working hard or not, because one day they will do it, then even if they arent even thinking about doing it- one day it will exist.

I don't think some kind of "Authority simulator" is a good idea. I recommend multiplayer first, but of course, not online multiplayer. It would either be done on private servers or over LAN. Believe me when I say that a guard mode completely defeats the purpose of the game, which is to escape. Generally most games don't release new gamemodes which completely alternate the main game, because the main game is already adapted to one specific role, fighting against the other.

I think it'd be way too much work for an extra singleplayer guard gamemode. Multiplayer on the other hand, is something that people would like to play, and would genuinely make some money. There are people waiting to buy this game just for multiplayer.

[Hackie P4ckie]

Captain Hatless a écrit :

Grizzly a écrit :

I don't think some kind of "Authority simulator" is a good idea. I recommend multiplayer first, but of course, not online multiplayer. It would either be done on private servers or over LAN. Believe me when I say that a guard mode completely defeats the purpose of the game, which is to escape. Generally most games don't release new gamemodes which completely alternate the main game, because the main game is already adapted to one specific role, fighting against the other.

I think it'd be way too much work for an extra singleplayer guard gamemode. Multiplayer on the other hand, is something that people would like to play, and would genuinely make some money. There are people waiting to buy this game just for multiplayer.

Maybe they add the multiplayer, and in the same update, the gamemode? This would be a huge and great update.

I'm sure it would, but considering the amount of time it takes to make even one of those, I don't think a guard gamemode would be the best thing to spend time on.