Jump to content

Toggle this categoryToggle Message Visibility   Welcome to our Community, Guest!

Get involved and become a part of our growing community. It's absolutely free! Register an account and join us today. Already a member? Sign in!

- - - - -

Ideas: Player Names


22 replies to this topic

#1 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 30 January 2012 - 07:42 PM

 AndY, on 30 November 2011 - 11:57 PM, said:

Like Overwatch, IA! pits a team of GPs (Ground Players, playing cooperatively in first-person or third-person view) against one or more OPs (Overhead Players, commanding AI-controlled units and manipulating the environment around them from a top-down perspective). As such, you'll be playing a very different game based on what side you choose!

'Ground-Players' and 'Overhead-Players' aren't very creative names. Post your ideas/suggestions/comments below!




Personally, I like the name "MasterMind" for the Overhead-Players (OPs), though I suspect the folks at redMatter are thinking the same thing.

Any ideas for the Ground-Players?

#2 The Joker

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 30 January 2012 - 11:52 PM

 WAXT, on 30 January 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

Any ideas for the Ground-Players?

1. Assassins
2. Operatives
3. Commandos
4. Agents
5. Strike Team
6. Intruders
7. Spec Ops
8. Infilitrators

I prefer Operatives, and Spec Ops comes second.

#3 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 30 January 2012 - 11:56 PM

 The Joker, on 30 January 2012 - 11:52 PM, said:

6. Intruders

Intruders makes sense given the game title. What about "Spies" or "Undercover Officers"?

#4 rickinator9

    Zombie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 290 posts
  • LocationSchagen, The netherlands

Posted 31 January 2012 - 08:07 AM

Trespassers...

#5 leiftiger

    Headcrab

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 44 posts
  • LocationStockholm, Sweden

Posted 31 January 2012 - 10:09 AM

I agree with intruders, however I think agents would also fit. Like secret government agents that are attacking the Evil MasterMind.

#6 AndY

    Evil Bunny

  • Coordinators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 889 posts

Posted 31 January 2012 - 11:41 AM

The problem with Intruders is that it assumes that GPs will always be the ones intruding, which may not be the case (it depends on level design/game mode/objectives etc..).

Agents might make more sense, but it's a bit.. bland.

#7 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 31 January 2012 - 07:01 PM

 AndY, on 31 January 2012 - 11:41 AM, said:

The problem with Intruders is that it assumes that GPs will always be the ones intruding, which may not be the case (it depends on level design/game mode/objectives etc..).
That's a good point. I suppose 'Operatives' would work in either case but it's just as bland. How about 'Task-Force'?

Don't forget to post ideas for the Overhead-Player!

#8 The Joker

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 31 January 2012 - 11:44 PM

 WAXT, on 31 January 2012 - 07:01 PM, said:

That's a good point. I suppose 'Operatives' would work in either case but it's just as bland. How about 'Task-Force'?

Don't forget to post ideas for the Overhead-Player!

I liked Operatives because its a sexier way of saying Agents. Agents or Spies is too.... Team-Fortressy 2y. Operatives is a good, original name for the GPs.

For the OPs,

1. Security
2. Command
3. Overwatch
4. Commanders
5. Gaurd(s) or The Gaurd
6. TAC-COM(Tactical Command)
7. Field Commander
8. General(s)
9. Captains

I prefer TAC-COM(as this sums up a wide range of responsibilties for OPs, second I prefer is Commanders or something of that sort.

#9 rickinator9

    Zombie

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 290 posts
  • LocationSchagen, The netherlands

Posted 01 February 2012 - 10:23 AM

I don't like TAC-COM, reminds me of starcraft somehow.

I would like to suggest Evil Maniac, as the evil guy usually is supervising his defence himself.

#10 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 01 February 2012 - 04:32 PM

Overseer?

#11 Coppermantis

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPip
  • 136 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 07:33 PM

 rickinator9, on 01 February 2012 - 10:23 AM, said:

I don't like TAC-COM, reminds me of starcraft somehow.


Possibly the Goliaths saying "Go ahead Tac-Com"?

Overseer and Mastermind are my favorite names for the OPs so far.

#12 The Joker

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 10:30 PM

 Coppermantis, on 01 February 2012 - 07:33 PM, said:

Possibly the Goliaths saying "Go ahead Tac-Com"?

Overseer and Mastermind are my favorite names for the OPs so far.

There are more than 1 OP. That is why I use the term 'TAC-COM', stands for Tactical Command. Perhaps the Overseer or Mastermind plays a different role in this game. Say, you recieve orders from the Mastermind or Overseer, and you yourself are TAC-COM(your teammates and you, or just you).

Also putting it in the sense of Intruder Alert!, you've got:

the Operatives VS the EVIL Tac-Com(Tactical Command)

#13 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 01 February 2012 - 10:41 PM

 The Joker, on 01 February 2012 - 10:30 PM, said:

the Operatives VS the EVIL Tac-Com(Tactical Command)
The Operatives vs The Overseers/Masterminds makes just as much sense. Though I do see where you're coming from. :)

#14 AndY

    Evil Bunny

  • Coordinators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 889 posts

Posted 01 February 2012 - 11:00 PM

Not a fan of Tac-Com; this isn't Modern Warfare. :P

#15 The Joker

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 363 posts

Posted 03 February 2012 - 01:50 AM

 AndY, on 01 February 2012 - 11:00 PM, said:

Not a fan of Tac-Com; this isn't Modern Warfare. :P

Modern Warfare(and everything related) can suck my fat, greasy *%^#s. I got the reference Tac-Com from StarCraft =D

#16 Sabre

    Manhack

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts

Posted 10 February 2012 - 10:49 AM

I don't get the hate for Modern Warfare. It was a great game. It had it's flaws, sure, and it led to dozens of half arsed copy cats, but it was a good and there is stuff to be learned from it.

Personally, for startagy man, I prefer Security. It's easy to shorten Security to sec, it is evocative of an orginized force, particularly one after control, and it's not limited to one idea. Security can attack, defend, pick their noses, whatever is needed. It also allows the baddies to be army, police, or whatever other role they are needed without being pigeon holed.

#17 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 10 February 2012 - 07:00 PM

 Sabre, on 10 February 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

Personally, for startagy man, I prefer Security. It's easy to shorten Security to sec, it is evocative of an orginized force, particularly one after control, and it's not limited to one idea. Security can attack, defend, pick their noses, whatever is needed. It also allows the baddies to be army, police, or whatever other role they are needed without being pigeon holed.
Security fits in well with the game title; "Intruder Alert!" sounds like security is being called. However the name does need to work from both perspectives (attack/defend). If the GPs are defending and the OP is attacking would it make sense to call them security? It depends on the scenario I guess.

#18 Sabre

    Manhack

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 57 posts

Posted 11 February 2012 - 06:43 AM

 WAXT, on 10 February 2012 - 07:00 PM, said:

Security fits in well with the game title; "Intruder Alert!" sounds like security is being called. However the name does need to work from both perspectives (attack/defend). If the GPs are defending and the OP is attacking would it make sense to call them security? It depends on the scenario I guess.
I think so. I imagine the EVIL orginization invading GP HQ. "Evil is attacking the base!" and then, when plotting an escape rought "They have security arround X and in the Y, we will have to go through Z." Of course, if GP have their own units, I can see it being a problem. I doubt that will be the case, but still...

The other solution woulkd be to name then after the faction. EVIL and whatever the agency is called the players work for.

#19 WAXT

    CC Contributor for OW

  • Community Contributors
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 319 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 11 February 2012 - 08:42 PM

 Sabre, on 11 February 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

The other solution woulkd be to name then after the faction. EVIL and whatever the agency is called the players work for.
GOOD :P

Sooo corny. (GOOD vs EVIL) :hrhr:

#20 Kil

    Designer

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 28 posts

Posted 11 February 2012 - 10:54 PM

GOOD Agency vs EVIL Corp. Sounds good to me.

Global Order O-something Defence agency.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users