Forums of the Megaverse®

Zer0 Kay wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:No, PB should not itself create a video game. Nor Hire someone to.

If some game company wants to license the Rifts setting for a video game...sure, fine, whatever.

Best option. (stamp)

The only problem with the best option is that it does not give people something to argue over.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:No, PB should not itself create a video game. Nor Hire someone to.

If some game company wants to license the Rifts setting for a video game...sure, fine, whatever.

Best option. (stamp)

The only problem with the best option is that it does not give people something to argue over.

That's more along the lines of what I was thinking. Though, showing them a good beta would be a good basis from which they can expand.

I'm trying to come up with a really good computer game company that actively licenses other people's *non-movie based* IP for its really good games.

The only three I can think of are CD Projekt Red (in Poland) that does the Witcher series (and is now starting to work on an RPG based on the P+P RPG Cyberpunk, which excites me beyond reason).

Bioware does the D+D stuff.

Relic does Warhammer 40k RTS and Action games.

Can anyone think of others?


There are more for comic book IPs (fighting games and action/adventure games mostly) of course. I think, however, in the case of comic books, the IP proved itself through movies and television first (maybe I'm wrong, but, in general, the video games seem to follow hollywood in their interpretations of the characters).

Most great computer game IP is home brewed. Cyberpunk is the biggest risk I can think of a game company taking, as far as using someone else's IP (D+D and Warhammer are obviously much more popular).

Zer0 Kay wrote:

Nox Equites wrote:An RTS can deal with the unbalanced nature of the the RPG. Treat it like Dawn of War and none of the sides are really good or bad.

Yup, said that already. Too bad THQ is gone, not that they'd show interest.

I personally love unbalanced games - which is probably the reason I love RIFTS so much. I love the ability to walk down the road and either get attacked by a group of low level bandits or an insanely high level ancient dragon. Or just run into some epic god who's just visiting again. If somebody wants a dragon that's blocking their path out of the way they should go ask for help or find a way around.
I don't think a RTS game is the best for a first game. I would prefer to just wander around as I please, as in Skyrim. For people just being introduced, this is also great advertisement. I'm not a MMO player, I'd rather the world to myself. As I stated before, a world like Watchdogs were there is a very limited number of people on the same server gives players the space they want without being crowded by thousands of other players. Or they could go form a party and adventure together if they so choose.

Okay so if Palladium doesn't make or pay to get a game made...

It should at least put together some kind of promotional material and pitch the setting to the various major gaming companies to see if they're interested. People just may be ignorant of the potential it offers to make a game.

Perhaps KS could send a free digital copy of key books to the president of the top 5 gaming companies, or some kind of key excerpt to show off the look / function of things?

The type of game I'd like to see would be a Rifts Fallout3/NV/Oblivion/Skyrim type FPS/RPG I would never play a game where you have to keep paying to play the game or to get weapons, armor or gear because that is nothing more then a blanet BS money grab.

Having the option for people to pay money to get unique classes or gear is fine to me, so long as free2play guys can still compete with them.

Funny you mention Skyrim... it has expansions like Dawnguard/Hearthfire/Dragonborn where you're basically paying extra to get more stuff in the game.

Tor wrote:Having the option for people to pay money to get unique classes or gear is fine to me, so long as free2play guys can still compete with them.

Funny you mention Skyrim... it has expansions like Dawnguard/Hearthfire/Dragonborn where you're basically paying extra to get more stuff in the game.

True but with the DLCs they had more story line to them besides flaming boradswords from hell, from what I have seen of pay for item games you pay money for equipment and armor and what not but there is very little in the way from plot, story line add ons as far as I can tell.

True, I'd prefer if you could buy a plot/gear combo rather than just gear. I'd pay for more plot but not only for items.

Kargan3033 wrote:The type of game I'd like to see would be a Rifts Fallout3/NV/Oblivion/Skyrim type FPS/RPG I would never play a game where you have to keep paying to play the game or to get weapons, armor or gear because that is nothing more then a blanet BS money grab.

just like buying the next world book eh? thats all it is.

Tor wrote:True, I'd prefer if you could buy a plot/gear combo rather than just gear. I'd pay for more plot but not only for items.

That's the point I'm trying to make when it comes to a Rifts video game.

Kagashi wrote:

Kargan3033 wrote:The type of game I'd like to see would be a Rifts Fallout3/NV/Oblivion/Skyrim type FPS/RPG I would never play a game where you have to keep paying to play the game or to get weapons, armor or gear because that is nothing more then a blanet BS money grab.

just like buying the next world book eh? thats all it is.

The point I'm trying to make is from what I understand of Pay to Play games is that you are shelling for items without anything added to the game plotwise, if there is to a be a Rifts video game with DLCs based on the game books with all that are in the game books and just jest iems I'd have no problem with it but if you are shelling out money for a Rifts's set of amoror in one of the main/world books but nothing else I woul be very angry and disapointed because one of the things that keeps me collecting the Rifts book is the story line as well as intresting bits of fluff as well as the cool gear.

Making a Rifts free to play game is one of the first things I'd get going if I was rich. I want to make it so when you die your character is dead unless you can get a hold of something like a white rose. The game would be free to play but only if you start out as a City Rat, Rogue Scholar, Vagabound etc. (You can still buy jucier/mom/cybernetics) Starting out as a dragon or whatever would cost extra. I also want to have a seperate experience bar for the player which would let you unlock things like quickflex as a RCC the longer you keep a character alive.

Would be interesting if they could tie XP into challenge level, so not only would you need more if you were stronger, but you'd less if you were stronger.

Would also be neat if playing a rogue scholar would let you get XP by teaching vagabonds how to do first aid or farm.

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:

Zer0 Kay wrote:

drewkitty ~..~ wrote:No, PB should not itself create a video game. Nor Hire someone to.

If some game company wants to license the Rifts setting for a video game...sure, fine, whatever.

Best option. (stamp)

The only problem with the best option is that it does not give people something to argue over.

That's the point create consensus on an idea.and push the idea.