 |
Castle Paradox
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 1:18 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Um, it's intentional game design that the game doesn't have a story. It's not that I was too lazy or anything. A story doesn't make a game necessarily good or bad actually in my opinion. For examples some Tales of... games I'd probably enjoy more if they only consisted out of battles and dungeon exploring and buying in shops and didn't have a story.
It's also intentional that you need to figure out what to do before even being able to win a battle effectively (although if you lose a battle in the first room, you must be a pretty bad player). Giving hints isn't really needed. At the beginning you only have 2 options, attack or pickup, I don't see how this can be too hard to figure out.
If a new enemy type or complicated battle formation comes you might lose too much HP because it takes you too long to figure out an effective solution, however you can save at any time, so if you think you lost too much HP in the battle you can easily load your save state before the last battle again.
Healing potions are clearly set to "Heal instead of Harm" and I know some people including me where it works, so it must be an OHRRPGCE bug, I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
RedMaverickZero
Three pointed, red disaster!
Halloween 2006 Creativity Winner
Joined: 12 Jul 2003
Posts: 1459
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well I think it's a crap game, and you can make up any excuses you want to try and justify it not needing certain things that make games good. It doesn't need a story, necessarily, but it needs enough to answer the player's main questions. Like who the hell is the main character, and what the fuck is he doing in this maze? Did somebody trap him? Is he saving someone? I wasted an hour on this game, and I still don't have answers to any of these questions.
And even if you were focusing just on battles, you could at least not be so lazy to create one backdrop for the entire game instead of making it blank.
I mean, did you think before you made this game at all? Or did you intentionally make it this shitty?
_________________
---------------Projects----
Mr.Triangle's Maze: 70%
Takoyaki Surprise: 70% |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 4:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
The only reason why the guy is in a maze is because so the player can play the game, there's no background story to it and even if you finish the game your questions won't be answered.
There's no need to answer these questions, because you should play a game because you enjoy it and not because you wanna save a princess or survive or something like that. If you don't enjoy the game then don't play it, I'm totally okay with that.
For me games that I don't enjoy and I just keep playing to know how the story continues are really disturbing, that's why I eliminated any reason for playing the game other than enjoying it.
There's also a reason why there's only a blank battle backdrop, first, this gives the monsters the main focus on the screen (and also make them and the hero look better), second, any backdrop I could draw at my current state isn't better than a fully blank backdrop (at least in my opinion I think a fully black backdrop actually looks neat) and third, only having one backdrop has the advantage that you can mix previous formations into new formation sets without having to worry that the backdrop doesn't fit to the location where they appear.
To answer your last question, no I didn't really plan this game before I made it at all. In this case I'm a lot like White Owl and developed the game ideas while making it without any planning before. I made the game so that I personally enjoy it a lot when playing it. I'm aware that people with a different taste than me probably won't enjoy it and that's okay, because I didn't really expect too many other people to enjoy it to begin with.
What motivated me to upload the game at all was because there was this attitude on the forums like "If you complain about other people's game, at least make a game yourself that you'd like more than those." and also because TMC (and Stewie later) actually found it interesting and convinced me to upload it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TwinHamster
♫ Furious souls, burn eternally! ♫
Joined: 07 Mar 2004
Posts: 1352
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't think that the game's entirely bad.
You captured some interesting concepts, but your execution didn't really cut it for me.
In one of the first battles (?) results in everyone dealing 1 damage to each other within two seconds of the fight.
In general, defense is boring.
Hitting 1's is even worse.
Making the player hold down the space-bar for five minutes (?) in order to continuously hit 1's isn't the same thing as having a good fight.
However, the graphics aren't terrible compared to some of the other newer games released and..I guess I don't really have anything else to say about that.
However, being easily bored, I couldn't even get past my first fight.
So could someone tell me if it gets better after that? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually the situation where you only hit 1 HP damage each hit shouldn't even occur if you do it right. First walk around in the room you start in until the first battles occurs. This battle will only have slimes and you can steal power rods from them, those will give you 10 more damage and they stack as well. Pick up enough of them, gain your first level, and then you are ready to start exploring the dungeon. Even if a battle with only bats comes and they cast defense so often you only do 1 HP damage anymore, you can always use another power rod to do 10 HP damage again. Also there are only very few battles that have bats only actually. Often there's a slime in the battle as well, so as long as you don't mess up and kill the slime without having any power rods left, you can win those fast.
The tactical aspect of the battles raises the more different types of mobs come.
Edit: Oh also if your first battle is against bats only you can also run away by keeping the ESC key pressed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pepsi Ranger
Reality TV Host
Joined: 05 Feb 2003
Posts: 493
Location: South Florida
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Rya wrote: | | Um, it's intentional game design that the game doesn't have a story. It's not that I was too lazy or anything. A story doesn't make a game necessarily good or bad actually in my opinion. For examples some Tales of... games I'd probably enjoy more if they only consisted out of battles and dungeon exploring and buying in shops and didn't have a story. |
While it's true a game doesn't have to contain a story to be good or bad, you gotta remember that a lot of the people in this community didn't grow up in the '80s, and are thus spoiled with the notion of having (detailed) stories in games. So, yes, a game can be good without a story, but you'll find nowadays that people don't enjoy them as much (especially if it's an adventure game or RPG). Even games like Bejeweled 2 seem to come packaged with a story these days--which I must admit is very weird, but then I grew up in the '80s, so I'm used to playing games without plots, or at least intricate ones--so you gotta understand what you're up against should you decide to omit one.
Bottom line: it's okay that you don't implement a story for this type of game, but it will put its enjoyment factor on thin ice.
| Rya wrote: | | To answer your last question, no I didn't really plan this game before I made it at all. In this case I'm a lot like White Owl and developed the game ideas while making it without any planning before. I made the game so that I personally enjoy it a lot when playing it. I'm aware that people with a different taste than me probably won't enjoy it and that's okay, because I didn't really expect too many other people to enjoy it to begin with. |
Someone got through the HamsterSpeak #12 mega feature I see, or at least through Part Five. I think the biggest problem with adventure/RPG games these days (in this community and abroad) is that there is too much planning going into it. While some is okay (it helps to know the character at least), planning everything can overwhelm the developer, underwhelm the experience (emotion is generally detached or forced at this point), and ruin the game's overall enjoyment. The fact that some people can still wing it and not feel bad about themselves later (believing they're a lazy designer for not writing everything down ahead of time) is encouraging.
However, the last line of your comment nullifies most everything said in the lines above it. You should never go into a release (whether official or just for testing purposes) with the admission of people not liking it ahead of time. While it's okay to expect it (you'd be an egomaniac if you didn't), don't actually tell people that. If they go into the game at all after that, they'll expect to be disappointed. Let the reviewer ruin the experience for them, not you. Your job is to let people know it's there.
_________________
Progress Report:
The Adventures of Powerstick Man: Extended Edition
Currently Updating: General sweep of the game world and dialogue boxes. Adding extended maps.
Tightfloss Maiden
Currently Updating: Chapter 2 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Minnek
Conjurer
Joined: 03 Jun 2003
Posts: 430
Location: Somewhere
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:26 am Post subject: Hrm. |
|
|
Saw the link to this thread, and got interested, so I'll take a swing at the game. I'll report back after I try it, but I do want to comment on one thing a few things, Rya:
| Quote: | | There's no need to answer these questions, because you should play a game because you enjoy it and not because you wanna save a princess or survive or something like that. If you don't enjoy the game then don't play it, I'm totally okay with that. |
I can understand this; a game without any storyline or semblance of one can be entertaining. (I haven't seen a storyline behind Rogue - not that I've looked for one, heh - and it's still been enjoyable, albeit frustrating when a hobgoblin kills you on the first floor.) Granted, it's a nice touch to at least give a starting point and ending point for the player, so they aren't left drifting - the player has an entry point into the world and can better immerse themself as opposed to having their brain itching for answers. It has less to do with "not" enjoying it, but rather enjoying it "less".
Your argument was thus:
| Quote: | | For me games that I don't enjoy and I just keep playing to know how the story continues are really disturbing, that's why I eliminated any reason for playing the game other than enjoying it. |
You just said previously you don't care if the player doesn't enjoy the game, so why are you worried if the player plays it for the storyline? (And thus, why comment on it?) By removing a storyline for this sole purpose, to make a pure game, it appeals to you - that's understandable - but it seems very strange that you'd have to disguise it behind a flimsy attempt at controlling your audience: "I'll make you not play it for the storyline." Why alienate your audience with your commentary?
I've yet to play, of course, but the one other thing that bothers me is:
| Quote: | It's also intentional that you need to figure out what to do before even being able to win a battle effectively (although if you lose a battle in the first room, you must be a pretty bad player). Giving hints isn't really needed. At the beginning you only have 2 options, attack or pickup, I don't see how this can be too hard to figure out.
If a new enemy type or complicated battle formation comes you might lose too much HP because it takes you too long to figure out an effective solution, however you can save at any time, so if you think you lost too much HP in the battle you can easily load your save state before the last battle again. |
Where am I supposed to figure out how to play this? Trial and error? This will be the first pure game I've played where I haven't had any idea what to do before starting. Even Chess has obvious tips from the get-go: The Queen has the biggest range of movement, don't let the King get checkmated, and etc. Checkers, too - a kinged piece is more valuable than a regular piece, but is difficult to get.
I suppose the idea of being dropped blindly into a pitch black room and figuring out how to play from repeated failures and restarts may appeal to you, which I'm not going to try to argue against, but put objectively, that's no way to design a game for the public. It obliterates most chance a young player or novice player is going to stick around to play more than a few battles/rooms/what have you in, and it even frustrates many veteran/experienced players.
As you've repeatedly stated, you don't care about whether the end player enjoys it or not, but if you're going to design games and argue why someone else's game sucks/needs improvement/has issues, then make a game from the standpoint of "I want the end player to actually enjoy it". That's what they mean when they say to release a game of your own that shows what you enjoy. The (general) target objective of this community in regards to game making, unless it's changed drastically from the last time I regularly read posts/reviews/etc, is to share and enjoy making games and releasing them to the public for their enjoyment, as well.
My point is, if this game was released in order to give you grounds to tell other people why their games are bad, I think already - without even playing it - it's going to fall short of the bar. If this game was released to interest anyone but yourself and a few choice people who enjoy the idea, then you've more than likely alienated half the audience if not more. RMZ seems to have voiced this part fairly well so I'll step back from that. If you released it for an ego boost, more power to you.
Anyway, I'll attempt an objective report on this once I've played through it.
Edit: Wrote more than I intended to at first, so altered the start of the post to reflect the extra content.
_________________
* SDHawk has joined #Minnek
SDHawk> AAAAAAAAAAAAAUUUUUUUUUGH
* SDHawk has left #Minnek (Leaving) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie_Power
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 8:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | While it's true a game doesn't have to contain a story to be good or bad, you gotta remember that a lot of the people in this community didn't grow up in the '80s |
This got me thinking... I think even back then games would make up excuses to have a goal. Even a game like Tetris, while having little story, does reward the player with rocket displays and Russian Dances for completing harder difficulties, and later puzzle games for the NES would have very simple stories to give a player a goal (Adventures of Lolo and Fire & Ice come to mind. Even Dr. Mario has the goal of clearing viruses). So while we may take goals for granted, it has to be there in some way.
I can't say this for most Atari games (since a vast amount are movie licensed), but I believe their game manuals presented the gameplay itself as the story, though it ends up pretty corny. High Scores were mostly the goal since games rarely ended (which I know Adventure is the exception. Adventure was an actual adventure game that I have had the glee to play).
_________________
TheGiz> Am I the only one who likes to imagine that Elijah Wood's character in Back to the Future 2, the kid at the Wild Gunman machine in the Cafe 80's, is some future descendant of the AVGN? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hm I see you didn't really understand that one line I wrote the way I wanted to express it.
See I made this game in the philosophy "at least I should like it myself", so I designed it so that I enjoy it without thinking "Hm what would the OHR community like most?" at all. So in this case I can say "I made the game enjoyable" and "I don't expect people to like it" at the same time without being contradictionary.
But I guess Pepsi Ranger is correct that I shouldn't say that even if it's true. I was just talking to RMZ there and he already expressed his hate about the game, so there wasn't really much I could ruin for him by saying that I don't expect him to like it. ^^'
Sorry anyways.
| Pepsi Ranger wrote: | | Someone got through the HamsterSpeak #12 mega feature I see, or at least through Part Five. I think the biggest problem with adventure/RPG games these days (in this community and abroad) is that there is too much planning going into it. While some is okay (it helps to know the character at least), planning everything can overwhelm the developer, underwhelm the experience (emotion is generally detached or forced at this point), and ruin the game's overall enjoyment. The fact that some people can still wing it and not feel bad about themselves later (believing they're a lazy designer for not writing everything down ahead of time) is encouraging. |
Actually I'm not sure if I read that article, although I read some. It's more personal experience that lets me work like that. I found out that if instead of planning the whole story, just planning out the characters (good and evil) is way better. Instead of following your fixed plot you keep thinking "Hm, not that this happened, what would that evil guy do and what would the good guys do next?" which is quite helpful for developing a good story. But I'm not always even thinking this far. Sometimes I just feel like playing a game but can't find one I like so I just do some RPG with some random dungeons myself without really thinking about reasons why something happens or why that sidekick character joins the hero and stuff like that.
@Minnek
I'm pretty sure everyone can figure out the game easily without knowing anything before.
Also I think making the game so you as the creator enjoy it, is the only correct way to make a game. Making it for other people might apply if you plan to make a lot of money with the game, which isn't the case here. I could never make a game for just for other people, when I don't enjoy it at all.
Last edited by Rya.Reisender on Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:59 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie_Power
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 9:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
You see... Game Developers, while they have visions, they have to adjust it so that others can like it as well.
I know I've been lazy on Untitled, and there's barely any gameplay, but one may have been seen me be pretty critical about my own game since there is barely any strategy involved in the first part of the game. While I can say this is okay, because the characters haven't learned any abilities yet, it is not okay because it is not fun for others.
_________________
TheGiz> Am I the only one who likes to imagine that Elijah Wood's character in Back to the Future 2, the kid at the Wild Gunman machine in the Cafe 80's, is some future descendant of the AVGN? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
@Newbie
But then I wouldn't even enjoy it myself if there are no skills. ^^'
Obligatory mention, that when Squaresoft made Final Fantasy 1 they actually only made it for themselves. They knew if that game wasn't successful they'd have to drop the company, so instead of their first game (King's Quest I think?) which they tried to make for others, in Final Fantasy 1 they just make the game so they enjoy it themselves, so even if it wasn't successful they would still have a game they could play themselves and enjoy it. In the end it ended up being extremely successful compared to their first game.
If you don't believe just search for "Why has Final Fantasy the name Final Fantasy?" or something like that and you'll find an interview where they say that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie_Power
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Obligatory mention, that when Squaresoft made Final Fantasy 1 they actually only made it for themselves. They knew if that game wasn't successful they'd have to drop the company, so instead of their first game (King's Quest I think?) which they tried to make for others, in Final Fantasy 1 they just make the game so they enjoy it themselves, so even if it wasn't successful they would still have a game they could play themselves and enjoy it. In the end it ended up being extremely successful compared to their first game. |
I know FF1's story, but I am speaking from strictly a game design standpoint. The fact that people liked RPGs was likely the reason FF1 was created in the first place, which is fitting for an attempt at a last ditch effort. While they had their creative juices, it also had to be something people would know how to play at the same time.
_________________
TheGiz> Am I the only one who likes to imagine that Elijah Wood's character in Back to the Future 2, the kid at the Wild Gunman machine in the Cafe 80's, is some future descendant of the AVGN?
Last edited by Newbie_Power on Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:31 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Um, yeah, insult, sure. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie_Power
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
I read that as "Then there wouldn't be any skills", making me think that adjusting the game to the people would somehow make it easy.
_________________
TheGiz> Am I the only one who likes to imagine that Elijah Wood's character in Back to the Future 2, the kid at the Wild Gunman machine in the Cafe 80's, is some future descendant of the AVGN? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 06, 2008 10:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Well just make it as you enjoy it yourself I guess. I'll still try it when you tell me it's complete enough to try it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
