Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Design Doc Discussion

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Originally posted by 1zaza1 View Post
    Your church will take over the private lives of its flock; with spy cameras, a system of informants, chastity belts and spanking confessionals. You'll fix marriages with recalcitrant wives and reassure parents that their darling daughters are safe from corrupting influences. .
    Can't you just picture America's daughters looking forward to their first chastity belt the way they look forward to training bras now? The father of the bride ceremoniously handing physical keys over to the groom during the wedding ceremony? The traditional Mongol wedding used to include the woman kneeling and placing the groom's foot on her head. We should use that and make the traditional gift a strap or paddle. "Love, honor, obey, correct, punish, silence, and control."

    Comment


      #17
      Umm i think this is something that bears emphasis; this makes intuitive sense to me (and selecta, i think, but assumptions are dangerous, let's just call it a clarification for everybody's sake), and my position will make more sense.
      In real tangible terms, our game will only contain however much stuff we can design in X amount of time. For the sake of convenience, let's call this stuff a big stack of individual encounters where the player will have decisions to make based on their stats and resources; so far we can all agree to this.

      What we are discussing is HOW this stack of encounters should be arranged.
      If we follow MaxDS proposal to the letter, we would end up stringing/balling some of these events together to create a series of "encounter clumps", which in the narrative world will be "towns". The player will have a limited amount of turns to do w/e before having to move to the next ball of events (i.e. town). The "win condition" of the game was never designed in the document, so that's open to interpretation.

      The alternative i proposed was
      Have all the encounter clumps located in a single narrative space (the same town), but be distinct to some degree (narratively defined as organizations), which potentially lets us do cool stuff, like having the organisations interact with each other, and having decisions made in one organisation have spill over effects on the other. This also allows us to give more value to each encounter we design, because they have lingering effects in a persistent universe; as mackaie points out, the more open-worldy the game is, the harder it is for each individual encounter to be meaningful. The only way to achieve something similar is allowing you to "carry over" some followers (which was in the orignal proposal).
      However, if we are going to go down that route why not have a singular "town". Note that all narrative demarcations are very elastic. For example, i've said "have one town" where 3 organisations (a Cult, a Town Hall and a Big Ranch) co-exist. from a mechanical standpoint, everything i propose (organisations that interact with each other, spill over effect, persistent NPCs) can narratively being in "different towns". All it takes is to switch the background for a single town to that of a small area-wide map; this might introduce driving from place to place as a potential time wasting mechanic, but for the most part, the game would play exactly the same way.
      What's interesting about this proposal is that it allows us to realise the original vision to a large degree (a road trip style adventure in the boonies), that will also feel like a more intimitate experience, because you'll get to revisit certain areas; this, in the strict mechanical sense, is in fact the real divergence i'm proposing from the original proposal by max i.e. the ability to RETURN to certain towns (as opposed to Max's more linear experience).

      It's not ALL advantages though; for one thing, going by Max's original proposal would have had us moving through a chain on increasingly bigger encounter pools, with the proverbial climatic showdown at the end. However, my concern is that we just can't build enough pool of encounters to make each "town" feel satisfying in its own right.
      This in turn led me to think; if incrementally bigger towns isn't an option, how about having 2-3 well fleshed out towns instead.... but the issue is that then, it doesn't really feel much like a road trip. So... why not make it a "circuit" instead; this is, btw VERY consistent with american history; many small towns couldn't afford to have their own church, judges, law enforcement... for a significant period of time, people who worked as these would run "the circuit", moving from town to town to, in the case of priests, officiate weddings, baptize childrens, etc, etc. This is still done to some degree, albeit for different reasons (e.g. the Pastors of many of the smaller faiths don't have enough followers in smaller towns to run their own church, so Pastors basically move from town to tend to their flock).

      What selecta and @1zazza1 are proposing.

      Scattering our pool of encounters across a wider map, with bigger clumps of encounter the closer we get to the center. The outer clumps would be towns, the inner clump would be the city, the win condition being to seize control of the central clumps (presumably). In board game terms, if SotU was about seizing the queen in the center of the board, this one will be of a similar board-gamey nature, only difference being you win by "moving your king (PC) to the center of the board". I will also like the stress the emphasis on "scale" SC and zazza's proposal are both aimed at an end-game where you "control the entire board", which may not be consistent with the end-game Max had in mind.
      My concern is about "not having enough stuff to do justice to any one encounter" is further amplified here; Coming fresh from reading a post complaining about how SotU was "watered down" and S2S was even more "watered down", this road can potentially lead us down an even MORE watered down world, which for a theme who's primary merit is how deeply it touches individuals, would be a mistake imo.

      Now (and i cackle with glee as i type this). Max. You need to read all of this. Very. Carefully. Because, according to forum rules, which you uphold... as the person who proposed the idea, the responsibility of deciding what best realises your vision falls up to you. Me and Selecta, we can just sit here tossing game design artillery shots at each all day. And thanks to the extended game design time that YOU YOURSELF PROPOSED, we can do this for a VERY LONG TIME. But it's up to YOU to decide which way we go. No pressure right?

      Comment


      #18
      So various... (great discussion btw-- this is EXACTLY what should happen before we proceed-- this is the stage of deciding what dish to cook; the design doc is more like the actual recipe)

      With deference to original proposal-- suggest this uncovered a great theme-- religion-- but the circuit preacher makes for better IFiction than a game imho. Frankly it is too big a concept to relegate to simply pulling off scams and seducing the farmer's daughters. It is a big bold concept that requires a big scale approach! It introduces yet another elemental motivator that can be suborned to adult entertainment purposes.

      Big issue that is emerging is how to balance this macro scale with outcomes that satisfy on a micro level. To do that, let me suggest first to visualise the map. I see a beautifully commissioned map (see https://www.cartographersguild.com/content.php) that is a modern realistic looking regional map composed of a couple big 'rival' cities (think NYC and LA) with smaller cities and town scattered between them, as well as rural areas. Your player mission is to explore and begin building on the fringes. The 'build' phase would begin with finding 'unbelievers' and converting them in these locales. Like any cult, this will be easier with those on the margins. The least populated, least affluent will be easier targets to convert. Conversion is in levels (unbeliever, convert, initiate, adept). Big cities will have perhaps 10 personalities, abandoned rural villages only 1. Once you have a convert, you can build a CELL. This represents your 'parishioners' led by the original convert and generates wealth and faith. You can grow your CELL into a FOLLOWING, a SECT and finally a DIOCESE, each representing a more powerful base throwing off more and more opportunities (and opps to build altars, temples and other enhancements in your area). Early game is getting a few loyal converts. Mid game is expanding into tougher challenges in the cosmopolitan towns and cities and late game is consolidating your cult into the dominant spiritual authority and instituting inquisitions, etc. By end of game, you can see a growing network of your influence spread throughout, depending on how successful you've been. This is the macro scale.

      I see each map location as explorable in mini map mode. Each location contains different personalities and missions that allow for intimate encounters, shaped by their environment. So a rural village that contains your farmer's daughter, with an opportunity to do basic things and others depending on the tenets your faith has revealed. Or a posh city nightclub used to conduct after party rites of submission. Or a small town church subverted and infused with terrible new demands upon the worshippers. I also see other missions such as instituting festivals, mass weddings, relic hunting/making and other crazy cult stuff that reward with additional resources, etc. This is the micro scale.

      This is 'watered down' only in the sense in that it is a compromise that unlocks the proposal potential. It may fail as a compromise and deliver neither. My ambition would be that we infuse enough of the micro encounters with unique and memorable decisions to make and outcomes to savour. Religion (like politics) provides plenty of scope to do that. The tenets themselves, once worked out, provide the player with playing pieces begging to be played with... the Epiphany of Polygamy tenet that allows you to command a husband in a small town to swear to the Oath of Cuckoldry or the Venus Instinct tenet that can be exercised as the Order of Chastity...and so on. I also think this could be delivered by using webcam models in short scenes that offer prayers, strip to display their obeisance, etc (as little speaking and acting as possible). This would be relatively inexpensive but uneven quality would be an issue of course.

      As far as the Female Lead, if you don't like the guardian spirit, we could go with the Adversary (Zara in SOTU)-- a secular female 'pope' type that fights you like Zara did by arresting your followers, shutting down your temples and siccing the civil authorities on you...until she herself must become a slave priestess that must worship her new master or face eternal scourging.

      I'd say this aims for something between S2S and SOTU-- half tactical/half strategic.

      Always working behind the scenes

      Comment


      • MaxDS
        MaxDS commented
        Editing a comment
        I believe in having a challenge... Bring on the opposing mother hen. Would like to request POV facial while I'm at it.

      #19
      Originally posted by Selectacorp View Post
      This is 'watered down' only in the sense in that it is a compromise that unlocks the proposal potential. It may fail as a compromise and deliver neither.
      This can't be overstated enough. Depending on how you feel about Murphy's law...

      Originally posted by Selectacorp View Post
      My ambition would be that we infuse enough of the micro encounters with unique and memorable decisions to make and outcomes to savour. Religion (like politics) provides plenty of scope to do that. The tenets themselves, once worked out, provide the player with playing pieces begging to be played with... the Epiphany of Polygamy tenet that allows you to command a husband in a small town to swear to the Oath of Cuckoldry or the Venus Instinct tenet that can be exercised as the Order of Chastity...and so on. I also think this could be delivered by using webcam models in short scenes that offer prayers, strip to display their obeisance, etc (as little speaking and acting as possible). This would be relatively inexpensive but uneven quality would be an issue of course.
      I don't think we innately have the scale to do it. Unless there's HEAVY community involvement, the most we can expect out of SC operating on his own is SotU levels of infusion/memorability; which means ... not a whole lot. Also, important to stress, the bigger the game is, the less time SC will have to do "non programming things", like layering the narrative and what not. The only "story" i remember from SotU was the police officer you could acquire and sell her to the mafia, whereby an audio blurb more than hinted at her fate. That was well done, but it was the ONLY such instance in the whole game.

      I think the S2S custom ending is a good example of how reliable our community is when in comes to contributing content;
      There was an initial upsurge of interest, but this waned as time went by; finalizing the whole thing is now at the discretion/whims/time constraint of a single member. By the time that finally gets done (today hopefully, but don't quote me on that), a single dedicated user will have contributed almost half of the custom written content for the game. While a few people have expressed writing interest in this title, whether or not this will translate into a willingness to go through the "production grind" that a game on the scale that selectacorp is proposing... Honestly, I wouldn't bet on it. The narrative challenge of creating something extremely compelling in a few words is trying enough, but having to build that for every encounter in the game... look, knowing myself, i might do a few that catch my fancy, but it's too much of a drain that I would do any more than that.
      That's not even going into the issues of uneven quality and style across various many contributors...
      Bottom line, i strongly believe we CANNOT infuse enough of the micro encounters with unique and memorable decisions to make and outcomes to savour, so this WILL fail as a compromise and deliver neither. Note: if we didn't have CU in the backburner, this isn't an objection I would raise - the risk of having TWO titles in development hell because they over-reached isn't something i think we should open ourselves to.

      Originally posted by Selectacorp View Post
      As far as the Female Lead, if you don't like the guardian spirit, we could go with the Adversary (Zara in SOTU)-- a secular female 'pope' type that fights you like Zara did by arresting your followers, shutting down your temples and siccing the civil authorities on you...until she herself must become a slave priestess that must worship her new master or face eternal scourging.
      I'd say this aims for something between S2S and SOTU-- half tactical/half strategic.
      3 games in a row? Is this our new calling card? Because it's beginning to look like it. Not saying that's necessarily wrong, but just want you to be aware of this.
      Honestly, i'm in favor of a design challenge too, and a tripling down just feels lazy from a design standpoint. Also, my reasons for objecting otherwise hasn't changed; the adversary relies on the quality of the model's acting and how far she is willing to go in terms of T&A. Unless there's a way to guarantee this level of quality (a webcam model who's willing to pre-record a scene or two for demo, for example)... maybe.
      Regardless, i'd like to see some effort to do something slightly different here. Competing forces come to mind, that spend the early game fighting each other; then as the PC becomes more relevant, start fighting him. Alternatively (or concurrently), it would be nice to have "frienemies"; e.g. a Priestess that you initially colloborate with because you both want a society under god, but later compete with for control of the faith.


      Originally posted by Selectacorp View Post
      With deference to original proposal-- suggest this uncovered a great theme-- religion-- but the circuit preacher makes for better IFiction than a game imho. Frankly it is too big a concept to relegate to simply pulling off scams and seducing the farmer's daughters. It is a big bold concept that requires a big scale approach! It introduces yet another elemental motivator that can be suborned to adult entertainment purposes.
      Regardless of HOW you construct the argument for it, we are STILL going down the SotU route, and the proposed SotU variants (sci-fi and fantasy) polled at ~6%. To be clear, i don't think this IS a democracy OR that it should behave like one, but...
      I do not think pulling off scams and seducing the farmer's daughters is a relegation of the concept; one of the most satisfying experiences i had in an adult game was "donna the empty nester" in wife trainer, and that was just me seducing the proverbial farmer's wife, but with just a few tweaks and narrative possibilities, made it really compelling.
      I don't think the game REQUIRES a big scale approach either. While i object to the "the PC is the instrument of the devil" opening blurb (not saying it can't be a possibility, but i would prefer if there was a choice), I honestly think Max's original proposal is
      1. Easy to execute - Game design for example; whereas we have the nebulous challenge of mechanizing far reaching societal change with the SotU route
      2. Because it's easy to execute, it's easy to execute well; All we would need to think about is how to make each individual encounter as compelling as possible.
      3. What most people want to see right now; Seriously, from a business standpoint, people who just want intimate access to christian bewbs are a sizeable enough market in and of their own right. Nothing wrong with pandering to that market.

      You say a small-ish game doesn't do justice to the concept; I'd argue that no singular game, however well structured, can do justice to the concept. Furthermore, i think this game very much runs the risk of getting pulled in too many directions to meet too many different interests. Which is why CU ended up the way it is, btw. As such, for the same reason i proposed breaking down CU...

      Why don't we just make this a trilogy of small-medium sized games.

      1. The early years of the faith (Max's proposal, graduating from a backpacking preacher on a motor bike to the leader of a chatauqua) Small-game, 2-3 arcanas worth of length backed by decent game mechanics and persistent choices. Think of it as a teaser prequel that we can churn out relatively quickly to get in the narrative and mechanical groove.
      2. The first town (My proposal, this is the story of how the PC gained control of his first seat of power), Medium-ish size game, CR-esque experience of taking over institutions.
      3. SotU: Church edition - which abstracts a lot of the specifics covered in the preceding title, and details how the PC turned his regional sect into an all powerful state religion under Papal control (the pope being him or his agent) (you know what kind of game this is).

      Note 1: this approach fixes a lot of the issues that SotU: Church would have on its own - It sets the context, and provides us with a wider window in which to build encounters for the end-product. I can also see a good deal of asset recycling here; In game 1, the "antagonists" are figures you hear about/are teased at in the news. Also lets us justify commissioning quality content, because it will be applied across multiple games... Bottom line is, if you have two other games to build up to it, the third one practically writes itself (as the people who made CR1-3, you're better placed than most to know this).
      Note 2: this can be its own franchised universe, distinct from the SC one, and we can make arcanas set in it with a darker religious spin, as opposed to corporate sexploitation one.

      Comment


      • Selectacorp
        Selectacorp commented
        Editing a comment
        OK, so various...

        "I don't think we innately have the scale to do it." Depends on what the expectations are. Using the endings for S2S is a good example-- most of those endings will never be experienced by casual players. They are extensions that are nice but not essential to the gameplay. Every game I've worked on has demanded a review of every NPC's motivations. This wouldn't be any different. As for how much content is developed, I'd point to CK2's increased handling of the player's personal activities-- so much can be conveyed with just a few well chosen words and visuals!

        "if we didn't have CU in the backburner" Regardless of your opinion of this game, can we please address it as a separate topic? I've acknowledged it should be addressed and tbh I'm getting tired of having it held up as a reason for doing (or not doing) X, Y or Z.

        "3 games in a row? Is this our new calling card?" I'm not sure what you mean by this?

        "we are STILL going down the SotU route" I'm proposing an execution similar in scale, not using SOTU as a template for sci fi/fantasy

        " I'd argue that no singular game, however well structured, can do justice to the concept." Perhaps-- but there are actually numerous games out there tackling the cult theme in development or already out there (researched them so there's no overlap or unintended plagiarism). And games tackle big themes all the time! Why is this theme any different?

        "people who just want intimate access" Maybe, but what motivates me more than commercial success is compelling game design. I may fall far short of my mark but I'd rather try and fail than plow old ground I can't engage with. My decision to open up new game projects for voting was based on tapping topics that fans wanted addressed. That said, I have never signed on for just taking the original proposal on its own merits and executing on that basis alone. I don't think fans want that either.

        "Why don't we just make this a trilogy of small-medium sized games." To be honest, this seems like a LOT more work than just 1 mid sized game.

      • Le_Wang
        Le_Wang commented
        Editing a comment
        @Selectacorp

        On scale: It's very difficult to judge what other people have in mind w/o an actual thing to look at. So far, your language has tended on the bombastic. There's been talk of a map-wide campaign of sorts, and far sweeping changes, enacting multiple tenets, open worlds... while, from a game design standpoint, I know this can be smoke and mirrored within the confines of a smaller game. In practice though, i will tend to make the more intuitive assumption i.e. if something is described as big, it actually IS big from a game design sense.

        On CU: My intuition is that CU happened because nobody wanted to put the brakes on an increasingly ambitious project. With the benefit of hindsight, using CU itself to illustrate that point in the current context was... definitely uninspired. I apologize for any offense given. I will refrain from making any comments on the project until resolution has been formally reached.

        On calling card: I meant literally. As in, having an antagonistic NPC who interacts with the PC by way of RNG events every turn has been in the both S2S and SotU, and the possibility is now being raised for the third title in a row with church. This is me legitimately asking if this is to be a standard feature of our games (as a point of information) Note that i don't have a problem that with per se (see my post on the competing religion thread), i'd just like to see us iterate on it better each time, rather than just rehashing the same concept.

        On SotU route: Noted, but do appreciate that the few lines offered on the subject make the finer execution details difficult to intuit.

        On a singular game: This was more a leading argument for my next one.

        On people who just want intimate access: My point here is that I'm seeing the possibility to meet the needs of these people in a way that is both original from a design standpoint (how does successfully implement a road trip adventure in a persistent universe?) and compelling; I felt that shifting the discussion straight to a "bigger scale/table top conquest" was a bit hasty. In fact, every post i have made has generally been to the effect; here's a bunch of potentially interesting, "non-table top conquest" (which i described as SotU for convenience) venues that we could explore before we get to the point, all of which do not quite reach that sense of scale, but have merits in their own right.

        On taking on more than the original proposal: While there is merit to trying to achieve intimacy and scale, design clarity advocates you endeavor to do either one really well; as such, it's one thing to try and do one thing really well and fail (which is unfortunate and acceptable), and another to attempt a tightrope balancing act and fail (which is expected and avoidable). Not to say challenging ourselves isn't fun, but it's important for everyone to understand the implications of that.

        On trilogy of games: Again, leading argument for my proposal on Arcanas. In real terms, what i'm proposing is the Super Arcana (where we explore a few of new features we are discussing here; i'm thinking the origin story as a starting point) + either an institutional take over (CR style) game/or a conquest came (SotU style) with the "3rd" title being developed in a subsequent quarter (possibly with it's own accompanying Arcana).

      • Selectacorp
        Selectacorp commented
        Editing a comment
        various on various!

        You're quite right-- I've been half working on the design doc in the background and think to forward the discussion that I need to work that out in more detail and share it as soon as possible so as to avoid issues around interpretation. But the comments here have already been quite helpful in shaping that. Once we have a document to whack around, it will be much easier to spot any issues that need addressing (there will be many I have no doubt)

        Your point on CU is valid-- I'm confident we can sort it in other channels-- I will need as much help and guidance as I can get there!

        On calling card-- ah, now I get it! No, I don't think we should be wedded to this approach. It was just an idea because I think fans like using commissioned talent.

        The scale issue is a tricky one for me. I gather you're a much bigger RPG fan than I am (I admit I'm not) and that informs your thinking in part. I come from the other end of the spectrum, which informs mine. I look for scenarios where big frameworks give permission for otherwise unacceptable behaviour. I think this framework is paramount and the rewards are secondary, which is why I tend to focus on the world building so much and from a top-down perspective. I see the intimate rewards emerging from those bigger scale sweeps. A game of linked reward moments doesn't work for me conceptually-- I need the big back draft to give it value. Thus in previous games, the rewards occur in context of the bigger things happening in the background, which the PC is actually engineering. I think most fans like the slow transformation aspect more than anything else-- even 'winning'-- thus all the focus on process. Doing a real personality interaction model is incredibly hard and the challenge is abstracting that interaction enough so it will satisfy is the big challenge. I dunno where I'm going here except... hard.

        Agree on the risks of aiming too high but I tend to be a 'go big or go home' type. I think the very discussion we're all having right now is one way to mitigate that risk and why I'm so grateful for the honesty and creative thinking going on here.

        I like your Arcana idea a lot. Once the world is developed, this should be easy and fun. You're quite rightly trying to break up a big challenge into smaller ones-- makes sense. Let's play with the big picture (in the form of further discussion around a draft design doc to come shortly) to get our grounding and go from there?

      #20
      I do share the concern that by trying to do an open world but with enough intimacy, we get into the "does a bit of everything well, satisfy none", I think rotating between a intimate and a open world game is a route forward long term so those that prefer one more then the other will know that "ok this one might not be for you, the next one however is going to be your kind of thing". In terms of the two routes offered, that is up to Max.

      I'm willing to help in a go through the slides for errors (though I believe Jefferson has stronger record on that) or if told "we have a police card, I want a investigate, success, fail, a seduce/whore/support" (or whatever the equivalent is for this), I can try to help with the writing for that.

      The big lady: If not going for "win one of three-five circuits and it's leading lady" but one big female who isn't an adversary, 1) a local religious adviser (selectacorp ideas with the mystic I think) who is used for certain tasks and works alongside you to help you. Maybe each turn you get a free "do something with her" to help build that intimacy but it would require a lot of options and written stuff, maybe sometimes she doesn't help you as she disagrees with your path enough that it is justifies the "unhappy" endings. At end, you no longer need her so what do you do with her? 2) A neutral figure. Could be a religious leader/thinker trying to keep out of the strife, could be a political figure for the area or a local celeb, sometimes they help you (a small boost), sometimes they hinder you. Unless spending time with them, not sure on how intimate your going to get before the ending though. At end, your powerful enough to either sway them onside in some way or discredit/ruin them.

      Comment


        #21

        Building on the topic that Le_Wang started in the board meeting room, and reining in back to my original idea which never was fully formed here on the forum. As a compromise to my slightly ambitious idea...

        I think TWO ideas make it to the show, the Arcana intro that describes the Elmer Gentry story without the need for open world, bouncing from town to town, showing an interaction with a lady or two and or a foil, then ending as he enters "the town" that will make or break him.

        This leads to the second idea of a single town with 3 or so major characters (CR style, significant interaction, moderate writing) and 5 or so minor characters (SoW style, minimal interaction, description, mostly nice eye candy photos and clips). In this case I'd be against a major foil (unless it's simplified a la CR3 style).
        you get to mix and match the big three outcomes (no more than 3 different ways, let's not get crazy here) and use the minors as pawns in the epilogue.

        ​​​​​
        #CufflinksForever



        Avatar: Kloe Kane

        Comment


          #22
          I believe separating the game ideas that have shown up in two or three different small projects could be a great option. It would be useful for testing new concepts for story and gameplay, and it would also make the project less resource consuming. Plus, the project that won sold itself as Spoils of War-like, and Spoils of War remake is also a somewhat popular concept (10% or so of the votes) that seems unlikely to actually win the polls by itself anytime soon, yet using a SotU-like or a CR-like ideas might be best for sequel games.

          Moreover, I believe a major issue in Spoils of War was that you hardly got any porn when playing it because the Brothel Management side was completely secundary to the combat side. I mean, I like the idea of brutal warlords kidnapping Jennifer Aniston for sex slavery, but I didn't really get anything out of it after the image saying she was captured and asking me what to do with her. The Good News is that the Church of Selecta game could change things in the structure of Spoils of War:
          For example, rather than "Combat" you are making some kind of "Public Show". Possibly involving the woman you want to kidnap. This would allow you to build her up as a character and then confronting her before going "and then she was sold off for X money". I picture our cult leader inviting the figurehead of some kind of feminist group to the stage, debating her (with RNG and stat help), maybe humiliating her with the help of magical SelectaCorp technology, before finally making her admit that she is wrong and she should join this bizarre cult of female submission to atone for it... and then some text saying "and then she was sold off for X money some weeks later" can show up.
          And of course, later in the game you could have your own convent, reeducation camp or rehab center, where you can send your new captives for further training. Maybe even personal training, that could allow you to sell them off for even more money.

          Also, commenting on other stuff mentioned in the thread:

          I would propose making the MC a celebrity of some kind. Not necessarily a movie star, but maybe a famous scientist, a writer or a singer. This way he can start out with "followers".

          I don't think you need to stay away from Christianity necessarily, as long as you make it clear that the Church of Selecta is using a twisted, heretical brand, like the cults with leaders who claim to be descendants/reincarnations of Jesus.

          I personally think that some kind of "Postmodernist Spiritualism" akin to Scientology or the guys behind the "What the *Bleep* do we know?" video might be easiest to use to target the single 20-something-30-something women that SelectaCorp could be interested in. That said, the Church of Selecta should allow itself to incorporate any kind of tool to gain converts. If the goal of the operation is kidnapping women for sex trade operations, it would be important to appeal to single moms curious about using hypnosis sessions "to remember past lives", as well as gaining control over fundamentalist "Rehabilitation" institutions for drug users, lesbians, and just "troublesome" girls.

          A hired model isn't necessary for every game, but you could always make a Church of Selecta "Arcana Tie-In" for a major character in the game that is decided by Patreons, so it doesn't become an obtrusive aspect of the game direction, yet Patreons don't feel cheated out of that content either.

          Comment


          • Selectacorp
            Selectacorp commented
            Editing a comment
            Good thoughts here. I want to stay away from super secret tech stuff and go with 'visions' as the way to unlock the beliefs. Good ideas on transitions and activities-- keep 'em coming! : )

          #23
          As a fan of your games, I can say from a personal point of view that comissioned content is very much something I am in favour of.

          So what if it didn't work out. I am not in favour of using generic content. There are tons and tons of game creators/developers who are doing this. I don't want us to be one of 'those'.

          Yes, it is expensive.

          I think one thing that will help us improve in this facet is experience. The more you know, the more you develop and the more you can fine tune what is needed. We are a niche, so getting the right model with the right temperament and the right level of nudity/explicit content will take time. We, I feel, must venture to conquer this facet. Our games will be much the better for it. I do feel strongly about it. I do think one of our Unique Selling Points is our comissioned content and just because the expectation may not have been met last time does not mean we should draw back from it now. I for one would be disappointed if this does happen.

          Sorry, for my long post. But I felt I must speak up about this.

          Long may Selecta deliver the goods.

          Comment


          • Selectacorp
            Selectacorp commented
            Editing a comment
            Thanks for saying this. I also believe it is a real differentiator and we ARE learning together on this crazy trip. I'm a pain in the ass contrarian by nature (must be my Scots-Irish genes) and I'd rather try new things and fail than do what everyone else is doing. Plus I DO think a lot of the commissioned work came off well.

            Like I mentioned elsewhere-- "The food is terrible-- and such small portions!"-- sums up a lot of the (mostly positive) criticisms. That's ok-- it all comes from a desire to improve, improve, improve

          • Sharkey
            Sharkey commented
            Editing a comment
            This is also a reason why, even though I have minimal income at the moment (read none), that I am still continuing with my support at Director level for Selecta. Hopefully, my employment situation will improve. I would not be such a supporter if I did not believe in that pioneering spirit.

          • Selectacorp
            Selectacorp commented
            Editing a comment
            Sharkey, you need to focus on the important things. I'll pm you on this!

          #24
          Just an update on design doc. I'm making good progress on it and should have something ready this week- some elements clicked into place in the last few days (some based on ideas shared here). It won't be complete and all the math will be far from worked out-- but it should give a general sense of gameplay.
          Always working behind the scenes

          Comment


            #25
            OK, so here it is:

            http://www.mediafire.com/file/49ui98..._Draft_v2.docx

            I'm not married to any of it and open to all your ideas, suggestions, guidance, etc. Feel free to edit the doc or share your ideas freeform here. Let's really kick it around-- this is the time to settle on what you want and knock it into shape!
            Always working behind the scenes

            Comment


              #26
              Please provide feedback for this version of the doc at https://www.selectacorp.com/forum/pr...n-doc-feedback
              #CufflinksForever



              Avatar: Kloe Kane

              Comment

              Working...
              X