RPG collaboration

Well we all laughed at FV's strategy game colloboration Velox et Astrum, but take a look at this. You may have heard of the RPG series known as ``Broken Sword''. And a small team of ~15 people managed to make a sequel to Broken Sword 2.

http://brokensword25.com/news/news.htm

Just think what we can accomplish instead of making poitnless spam threads.

>>162
the main thing in a JRPG is always content.
The main thing in a JRPG is always the combat system.

Anyway,  I had been thinking about making a RPG myself lately, my ideas are somewhat like this:

* Touhou theme so we can skip backgrounds and everything.  Has a non-zero chance of having music and graphics made for us.
* Traditional overhead view, etc. etc., like Dragon Quest 1.
* Traditional turn-based combat system.  Romancing SaGa concepts can be imported to make the combat fun.

And here are the aces which will make the game fun to play:
* Epick Rogue-like dungeon crawls.
* Epick boss fights.
* Epick Rogue-like amount of loot from enemies (like Angband).

I have not yet figured out how to make such amounts of loot play with a classic JRPG turn-based combat system.

>>173
I wish I knew what any of that meant.

>>172
Yes another RPGMaker because it's easy and, you know, possible for a bunch of disorganized anons to get it working.

A rogue-like is crazy in my opinion. A huge advantage of doing a JRPG is that combat and exploration are completely disjoint, so it lends itself well to splitting up work.

Also, who cares about quality content? Just grab a simple CC tileset and character sprite, and make up a random world map. That's plenty good enough to call a game.

I very much agree with >>173-chan. A rich magic item system is easy and fun to write, and can give even the shittiest game a lot of depth. Let's do that.

Also we still haven't figured out a language yet. Python?

>>176
ONE WORD THE FORCED INDENTATION OF CODE THREAD OVER

Ruby is much more kawaii desu

I'm doing my bits in Go.  You guys can do the rest in Ruby if you want.

Ruby is not portable. Use C.

>>179
If people aren't too stupid to write conformant & portable C then I would like to contribute.

>>179
Use C.
U MENA HASKAL???

Just use the damn Python.  It's your best shot at getting anything (portable, GUI-oriented) off the ground before /prog/ completely forgets about this next week.

>>182
[quote]GUI-oriented[/quote]
Oh gosh. Op, don't you ever listen to anyone from this kind.

>>183
[quote]
Oh gosh. Op, don't you ever listen to anyone from this kind.

>>180
Longtime C coder here, it's not a matter of stupid; it's a matter of time. I know it takes me a lot longer to get things done in C than in Python. There's just no point in doing it in C.

>>185
Yes but some people are clueless and write horribly non-conformant and unportable code just because they have never even thought of it.

>>182
>Python
>best

what the fuck am I reading