Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration.

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.

user:
pass:
register,


                                         

Nietzsche: The Art of Fighting

Beyond Good and Evil
  (+14, -2)(+14, -2)
(+14, -2)
  [vote for,
against]

So this would be like a street-fighter clone in which every blow you land on your opponent either kills him or makes him stronger.
ywong, Jan 19 2005

[link]






       Heh. Can I play as Superman?
calum, Jan 19 2005
  

       I'd want to play as God, but i hear he's dead in this game.
[ sctld ], Jan 19 2005
  

       A common idea in horror movies.
ldischler, Jan 19 2005
  

       The main character/hero of this videogame should be Zaratustra, who always manages to kill priests, monks, Popes and catholic people of all sorts.
Pericles, Jan 19 2005
  

       Nietzsche and Darwin should get together.
FarmerJohn, Jan 19 2005
  

       At the end of the game is the winner determined to be right?
cuckoointherye, Jan 20 2005
  

       That's a tag team wrestling partnership I'd love to see, FJ.
lostdog, Jan 20 2005
  

       Doesn't sound very fun.
contracts, Jan 20 2005
  

       The game would be practical if every blow landed against the opponent drained "life" but increased his strength (life taken away from opponent per blow). However, the way the author wrote this up he is instead proposing a game of chance with two outcomes. Immediate death, or increased strength. One has to question his intent, as what does strength matter if each blow is potentially either lethal or empowering?
cuckoointherye, Jan 20 2005
  

       The stronger one is, the less chance there is of the next punch killing you. This would mean that the game gets harder the more hits you make.
[ sctld ], Jan 21 2005
  

       (cuckoo), Are you unfamiliar with the famous quote behind this halfbake?
gardnertoo, Jan 21 2005
  

       sctld, that's not how the idea is written. the way the idea is written suggests that EVERY punch, for instance, will have one of two outcomes. Killing the opponent, or making him or her stronger. My previous annotation suggested that strength, and whatever measure that's put in place to determine life and death shouldn't be the same. //"every blow you land on your opponent either kills him or makes him stronger"// Perhaps he meant "every blow that is landed on your opponent that doesn't kill him will increase his strength until his life is completely decreased." For this to be the case, the fighters in the game would require a bar that measures life which would be reduced by every punch. And a bar that measures strength that would be increased with every punch.
cuckoointherye, Jan 21 2005
  

       Golly gee, the one time someone decides not to use brackets around someone's name, it happens to be [sctld]'s. What's this world coming to?   

       I agree with [contracts] on this idea.
Machiavelli, Jan 21 2005
  

       //You weren't around when [ sctld ] used to have a hissy fit // Well, thank goodness for small miracles.
Machiavelli, Jan 21 2005
  

       Surely it should be [[ sctld ]].
stupop, Jan 21 2005
  

       An adaption of this for the Street Fighter video games would be that the same attack would not hurt your opponent twice. You would need to be able to use a variety of attacks to keep hitting with something different every time.
bungston, Jan 21 2005
  

       That would make a great training mode for beat-em-up games.
wagster, Jan 21 2005
  

       Has anyone here played Bushido Blade? It only takes one hit to kill someone. If the character got faster every time they sucessfully parried a blow, this could actually be fun.   

       I think other games have a "rage" meter or something like that, which build up in various ways.
tiromancer, Jan 22 2005
  

       This would make for an intersting game though. It would be down to reflexes. Blocking constantly, stopping only to make quick attacks before scuttling back to defending.
hidden truths, Apr 18 2005
  

       It would be interesting if every increment of "strength" the opponent gained meant successively more impressive and powerful-looking attacks, which nevertheless have the same probability of killing the other opponent.   

       They could add a sliding probability-of-death meter so that interested players could wind up throwing galaxies at each other and imploding the universe at the very end of it.
qt75rx1, Mar 09 2008
  
      
[annotate]
  


 

back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle