Time Based Events
 

We have implemented something we call TBE, time based events. This means that the world is evolving while you are playing, so if you arrive at a place at different times different things would happen.

So for example if you arrive at the museum it might be that the diamond is already stolen, or you could arrive before it was stolen, or you could arrive at the time of the theft.

How do you guys think about this kind of time based events? any ideas of cool such a events?

A cool concept, but probably not very easy to implement. I think it would be most interesting in open world games, where you could influence the timing and details of various "big events" that drive the main story forward with the quests you play. Let's take Oblivions setting as an example . But this time, by default, an actual first invasion wave will happen after 20 game days, that will overrun a major city, killing most NPCs there. Unless you manage to infiltrate a certain Oblivion pocket and kill a Daedra general, which will gain you an extra 5 days. Or you successfully manage to stage a diversion in another city, which will give you 2 more days, and will reduce the number of attackers. Getting more days will allow you to complete quests that will improve the fortification of the city, and to bring in reinforcments. However, it will also trigger a new quest with a traitor that begins to operate within the city if there is no invasion on day 20. Etc. If the game allows you to join the evil side, you could do quests that allow the invasion to start earlier…

I've just written a dialogue/ consequence sequence for the first part of a time based event. If you don't reach a particular place in time, you won't see the dialogue and options I just wrote, but one of two possible other options I'm still working on. If you come late to the party, your choices will be severely limited. Everything has consequences and stopping to do a side quest might mean you miss out on choices affecting the main quest.

Time restrictions are not usually too popular. Remember how people complained about it in Fallout 1.

I'm ok with time based events as long as it's clear of when things are going to happen, so it's my choice to be there on time or not. I would hate it if I'm just playing normally my game smelling the flowers and come here and read that someone found a nice item or spell or skill in New Sanctorium, and when I get there I find I can't get it anymore.

If it only makes things harder or easier, it's ok, like in GG's example, if the diamond is not in the museum when I get there, then it'll take me longer to get it since I have to track it down, but I'm not missing on anything in the long run.

Generally not a fan of those. I don't like having to drop everything to focus on a timed quest. Besides, it tends to railroad the player since they get boxed into doing things in the order the designer plans or risk missing some "appointment".

Basically the game will play differently depending on what you choose to do, to get to a certain place at a certain time may or may not be a disadvantage for different events, they will just happen in a variety of ways.

There are two reasons I wanted these events. The first reason is ( of course this might just be me ) that I really get tired of games where everyone is saying like…. OOO the world is ending it is a great urgency, and then the PC chars goes to the inn and drinks coffee and sleeps for 30 days to recover from everyting.

The seconds reason is replayability and strategical choices… do I stay to save my lieutenant risking to be late to the kings party and losing my face to the king?

The benefit is I still have my lietenant which can help me later in the game, but I lose face with the king…. which work to my disadvantage…

I know from the other thread though you guys prefer a linar long game, over this kind of game. I am hoping when you try it out you'll change your opinion… because I really think this sort of thing is great fun!

You're killin' me, GG. ;)

The good news is that I'm getting more and more convinced that gamers don't really know what they want anymore. And that includes me. We want replayability, but we never replay. We want non-linear plots as long as there aren't any branches. We want choice-n-consequence as long as it doesn't keep us from doing what we want. We want 100+ hour epics as long as they don't take too long. We want interesting NPCs but we don't want to read NPC dialog. We want a free form sandbox but it has to have structured quests. We want extensive evil options, but our first (and generally only) playthru will be good.

So, in the end, build your game as you see fit. If it's a good game, I doubt too many people will get hung up if it doesn't match exactly what we say we want.

Dte, I love your summary of gamers. It's SPOT on and should be published somewhere!! :)

I wanted to work in something like, "We demand hard core games, but we've beaten Plants Vs. Zombies three times." but I figured I'd already made my point. And I really like PvZ, dammit.

I'm generally not a big fan of timed events either. It's just another way for the developer to railroad the player down their linear path. If a crpg is too linear, I try to stay away. Divinity II was great fun in the open Broken Arrow area. Once the developers started railroading the player down the storyline it became a bore. They even had a nagging voice that constantly harped at you to get on with the book.

As far as GG's idea for a game, who knows? Build your engine, your combat and magic pieces, your inventory, alchemy, rest/heal etc. Until you have that, your story and quests are meaningless. If these have already been coded, forgive me. Nearly anyone with a little imagination can tell a story. Until the programming has been done, there's nothing to hang the story on anyway. It's more important to answer whether you can build a game before worrying about whether you can tell a tale. Have you created a timing system (day/night, hours/minutes weeks/months/years?) in your gameworld? If not, your question is premature.

Í really like the feedback, I get from you guys, this post was pure brilliance. Basically I think what everyone does when they make games is brainstorming a lot, and after that they add the best stuffs. That's what Larian did, that's what Lionhead did that's what Ultima guys did.

I don't really think there is another way to make a new and somewhat unique game… otherwise you'll just copy what other people already got.

I think DTE hit it spot on. Acctually I think that as long as the game is really good the gamers will not care whatever it is linar, open, closed, three-headed or whatever else :P They'll play it because it is fun.

If you have any fun ideas for time based events just spill them out, and I'll see what I can do GhanBuriGhan is the one to come up with something constructive so far!

Of course it is in the core of this game that time passes. At the night fighting it'll be real dark, but the option to summon really cool looking flares are already there :P

To be honest, I can't recall ever playing a game with timed events such as this. Yes, there are plenty with timed events, like the Death Snares in Bard's Tale 2. But you DIE if you run out of time there, or in other games simply fail.

I had a similar idea, but abandoned it simply because of (amusingly) time constraints. It takes a lot more to develop properly. But then, I'm solo, and you have a team. I just hope Corwin doesn't develop and write like he plays DDO. (Where are you at? I went down the wrong way. AH! a spider is killing me, oh I'm dead. Someone get my soulstone.) ;) j/king

For the stolen diamond example, you have several options you have to consider:
Showing up before the theft, but leaving. This gives the thief someone to frame.
Showing up before the theft, and stealing it. You still get blamed, fairly though.
Showing up before the theft, and staying until the thief gets there. From here, you can either stop the thief, or steal the diamond and set him up to take the fall.
Showing up shortly afterward, and using clues left to track the thief down. This can branch into you returning the diamond, or hocking it. It can also branch by killing vs turning in the thief.
Finally showing up long afterward, when all the clues have been trampled by inpept inspectors, and you have to go on less information. Which either leads to failure to find the thief, or the above two options.

5 main options, three of which have 2 or more branches (and two which can lead to multiple branches in the main branches). Then you have to consider the end effects (party reputation, quests given later or not given later, being chased by dogs and grues, etc).

I wish you well on it, since I want to see how it'll turn out. And DTE nailed it perfectly. Just look at the firestorm Sonic 4 is getting. First return to decent platforming and the series roots, and they're mad because his eyes are GREEN. And the rings are too big. And the BBEG is named Eggman instead of Robotnik.

So make your game how you want to make it. Do your best, and fully expect to be criticized over incredibly stupid things.

An interesting idea.

In my opinion I think it would be fun to make hints towards the player's character that something indeed is depending on what you do in time. ;)
Other things might perhaps not be so obvious and act rather as some kind of surprise or even "easter egg" for when the player plays through the game a second or a third time. ;)

On a side-note, this might give dialogues much more lif, too. Something like "I didn't expect you so early" or "our new wares haven't arrived yet" perhaps combined with an "but we are expecting them to be here tomorrow".

Other events could be some kind of games … Like football, for example : "How's been the match ? Did I miss it ? How did they play ?"

Or even something like : "You're too late: Our wine has become vinegar !" :lol:

Well you may know my opinion on deadlines in games from the other thread.

I don't like them.

I like the idea of a living world that dynamically changes over time, but I strongly dislike having the game choose for me the order in which to do things.

It's not choosing the order you do things, just saying that world events will continue to happen, with or without you. Think about it:- There's an enemy army marching towards your city and it's 2 days away. Your forces march out to meet it and YOU are supposed to be the person co-ordinating the troops. NOW, if you decide to do a few other things which take 3 days of game time isn't it reasonable to assume that you have MISSED the battle you were supposed to direct? The troops wouldn't wait for you in the real world and they don't wait in this one. If you're not there ontime, the battle still takes place without you and the consequences of your not being there will have to be worn!!

Could you guys name some great timed quests that you've played and what made the time-limitation special? Let's make sure that your answers come from crpgs only. I'm really trying to come up with a game that had a fun, timed quest. If you can't come up with some good ones, then I'd stay away from the idea. I certainly wouldn't make it a common theme. Well, unless you really don't want anyone playing your game. One badly implemented idea can completely kill a game. Beyond Divinity is a prime example. Divinity 2 blundered as well, but the devs were bound and determined to go away from what works and try something different. Have you heard anyone say that their favorite part of D2 is the dragon combat? I didn't think so.

I prefer fun over realism (in my games, at least), but that's just me. ;)

Depth of Peril and it worked well many people considered it fun part of the game. It has a lot of these quests, like kidnappings, towns be attacked etc. I appriciate the critisicms though, it is at least as valuable as ideas and praise!

I agree with you, however I think a living world where the time passes are more fun than a static boring worlds ( That might just be me ) :D

We'll have to wait and see how you guys will think about these things. But the TBE stays they are too fun to remove :P

Well, I happen to know that for Divinity 2 the devs where thinking wow it would be really cool if the main char turned into a dragon… and after that they tried it and it looked so cool when he turned into a dragon that they decided it has to be there. However they did not put enough consideration into the gameplay and development costs aspects, so the dragon part kind of become a negative to the game instead.

The TDE game "Blade Of Destiny" has such a thing : You'll have to chase away the Orcs, or they'll come and run over Thorwal … Game over, then …

The quest of chasing them away is the great, big main theme of the game. However, the time frame is so good, so wide that the party is able to do everything - including research - without having to hurry too much.

Blades of Avernum has some bundled scenario and one is related to time event. It gets many negative comments in forums. For me it's been my favorite of those bundled.

In this scenario, you start knowing there's a day limit, you have to help an outpost. To reach it in time you'll have to travel through an unexplored land. Resting in the game cost time and travel time depends of some parameters. Also during your travels there are multiple events that can make you lost or win time.

Myself the first time I played it I arrived one day too late, but I didn't really lost the scenario as there was an ending in this case too and even a final battle.

I take back a save and replayed it an believed fail again but arrived the day before the limit and get an alternate ending with a successful outpost saving.

It's been thrilling fun, but well the player is very dependent of some events not easy to control precisely. For example a skill could help you not lost but there's a random part in how many day you lost if you get lost. By searching help you could find some shortcut making you save a lot of travel time, but you could also explore deeply some area and lost a significant time in travel and resting for no result for help your travel speed.

The fastest way aren't straight forward travels but it's not easy to find the better choices, even if you get some hints. One you know better the scenario its then very easy to arrive in time.

Yes there's two reason to implement alternate options, for offering choices to player, for diversifying a replay.

For player choices I think the key point would be to offer choices that the player look at only alternative and not as if there's a choice better than the other. It's not that easy to present to the player the time choice and achieve give him this balanced feeling.

For diversifying a replay, if you don't inform the player, there's a strong chance that most will use a time frame you didn't expect and will be in time or too late for all their replay. If you inform the player once the event is done to give him a hint for a replay, a danger is to make some players reload old save too often if he gets the feeling it didn't get something or lost some opportunity.

If time event is to put a time pressure on the player then this have to be made with care. The problem is that CRPG players are used to take their time, and that some game rules can have time consequences a bit extreme. For example a simple rest could be a lot of time travel lost in many CRPG. Or get back to a shop for byuing a stuff forgotten can be a major time lost, the problem is that CRPG players aren't used to such pressure.

A last note is that if time is important in some way in the game then I think that all the game design should be designed with that in mind.

Well, I don't like if the entire game is time-based and this will not happen… you'll never lose the game just because you don't arrive on time… the game will just play differently depending on what time you arrive at different places.

That's fine.

Personally, I think games with time limits suck, and I avoid them like the plague.

Out of curiosity, Thrasher, how many games have you played with a dynamic time limit? Not just "stand around and protect the crate for 5 mins" or have a flat time limit to finish a level, but one where the more time you take changes what you see later on, as events pass you by?

I'll be honest, I can't recall one. I wouldn't want to have to write for one either; you would have a ton of work making it happen and not seem arbitrary.

I remember one Infocom game, Suspected I think or something, where you are a detective and had to figure out some murder, but things happened in the game and you had to be there to see it or you'd miss it. Can't say I liked that, almost required you to play several times just so you knew where to be at the proper times to get the information needed to correctly solve the case.

Well, that is again, a case of you have to match a time based events to be able to compelte the game which I don't like.

Given how most games have trained us to ignore time as a factor even in face of the most urgent world-threatening events, I think it is very important that you take pains to make it clear to the player that the time limits are indeed real and that missing them has consequences. I also agree that those consequences should be such that they are interesting and ultimately redeemable. Racing against a game-over screen is indeed not fun.

i like a dynamic world, but I don't like time limits that need to be met to win a game…

I think, Return to Krondor had time based events, too. For example a burning Inn …

Again, from what I understand GG's design to be, you're missing the entire point. You miss the deadline for x event, you don't lose the game. You can win the game by ignoring the time, but things change as you do. So going fast or slow you miss out on some aspect of the story. Not just racing against the clock and a game over screen.

Don't make me start hitting the abandonware sites… :D

Really, am I? Perhaps you're entirely failing to understand me? Let me say it more clearly…

Since I am a completist, what you are describing is a failure to complete the game. So I will not like it. Is that clear?

I'd be fine with it, as long as all rewards you can possibly get are about equal in value and you get alternate quest lines of about the same size, no matter which path you choose or whether or not you miss a deadline.

Take path A and lock out path B or vice versa = OK.
Completely miss out on path A without a real path B = not OK.

Chrono Cross had some of such time based and/or choice based events. Was fine, even for a completist such as me -- the important part is that it was always clear that I was making a choice. One example:

"Hurry, you need to save her!"

- path A: get to her as quickly as possible. She survives and gives you a reward.
- path B: waste time by picking fights with lots of enemies on the way. You come to late, she dies, but you get a different reward from someone else (I think) and the story continues slightly differently.

That's fine. Parallel exclusive paths are one thing. Missing something because of a hidden timer or super hard timer challenge is not fun for me…

So you absolutely despise exclusive paths because it means you can't complete a game, but on the other hand you don't mind exclusive paths?

Use of time is just another way in the same vein as using quests that block off access to other quests, having reputation systems in effect that affect who you can get missions from, having to decide between two or more factions, and a myriad of other options to make a story more dynamic than a simple book. You'll never be able to do everything, and I don't think you should. Rather, you do what you can, and deal with the consequences of what you did, who you supported, and where you went.

Makes for a far more interesting and varied game. You usually (or should) know you do have a choice in these matters. It's the end conclusion that isn't obvious.

Wow. You really have a hard time understanding a simple concept….

I like roleplaying choices, not an inadvertent choice because of a hidden timer or a time-based challenge …

That's what I meant (and Thrasher too, from what I can tell). I need to know when I'm making a choice. This is also possible with time based events (see my example above) and the choice should IMHO always be made clear, and preferably be exclusive.

Another example (sort of) from Chrono Cross: "Hey, we need to catch the bad guys, but one of your friends needs help. Do you want to get the medicine, which could mean the bad guys have time to escape, or do you let others try to help your friend and go after your enemies immediately?"

What can be a little uncool, at least from a completist's perspective, is when you go about your business and suddenly at some point in time a quest line becomes unavailable, because, well, time passed. That's not making a choice, that's … I don't know what it is. Life? ;)

Well said Arhu. That's what I think as well.

I probably didn't explained well, if you arrived too late you didn't save in time the outpost but also didn't lost the game. The story continue a bit after and you made alternate actions. You was getting a more sad last part but no game lost. For sure a quest lost but not much more.

It's not really s time based event but more alternate choice based on a time explanation. The problem of time in CRPG is that the global game design hasn't much control over it and you don't have an evaluation of what time means.