 |
Castle Paradox
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Moogle1
Scourge of the Seas
Halloween 2006 Creativity Winner
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 3377
Location: Seattle, WA
|
 Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 12:05 pm Post subject: Petty bickering with Rya |
 |
|
(split from the contest thread)
| Rya.Reisender wrote: | | The only reason not to give the player creative control is if it's too hard for the player to understand or too much work for the player to be enjoyable (otherwise the OHRRPGCE itself would be the perfect game). |
Or if you want the game to tell a story, or have an emotional impact, or a dozen other reasons. A game is by definition interactive, and interaction is a two-way thing. The player shouldn't be the one to define the game, just like you don't expect to be asked what kind of movie you want to watch when you start up a DVD.
Moreover, if your story calls for a character to die, then who is the player to decide otherwise? If your game calls for the player to be responsible for people's lives, then a player who is uncomfortable doing that should find a game better suited to his interests.
| Quote: | | The only reason that talks against it is that it makes the game less skill-dependent, however I think that reason is already nullified if you add the possibility to save in your game (i.e. pure skill-dependence is only something for games without saving aka roguelikes and arcade-likes). |
I think you're missing the point of the SRPG genre. If you think it's too hard, play it at an easier difficulty and be glad you're not playing Tactics Ogre.
| Quote: | | It's sad that you think this way, because that basically disables you from making games many people enjoy. |
Many people have enjoyed the game. I'm not trying to make a game that everyone and their grandma will enjoy, I'm trying to make a SRPG for people who enjoy SRPGs. I'd rather play a game that caters to my interests than one designed to offend as few players' sensibilities as possible.
_________________
Last edited by Moogle1 on Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:46 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 1:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Or if you want the game to tell a story, or have an emotional impact, or a dozen other reasons. A game is by definition interactive, and interaction is a two-way thing. The player shouldn't be the one to define the game, just like you don't expect to be asked what kind of movie you want to watch when you start up a DVD. |
The difference is that as you said a game is supposed to be interactive while a DVD should not. If someone plays a game he wants interact with it as much as possible, if he watches a DVD he just wants to sit and relax without having to do decisions.
But the main criticism lies here:
| Quote: | | If your game calls for the player to be responsible for people's lives, then a player who is uncomfortable doing that should find a game better suited to his interests. |
| Quote: | | I'm not trying to make a game that everyone and their grandma will enjoy |
| Quote: | | I'd rather play a game that caters to my interests than one designed to offend as few players' sensibilities as possible. |
Instead of trying to make the game enjoyable for a specific audience that actually went and told you about them you just go ahead and tell them in the fact "If you don't like it, then don't play it". Why not leave some room for improvements if you get the chance?
I mean sure you can't make a game designed for everyone because that's just not possible with such a high variety of opinions, but people who played the game and liked it and tell you what they didn't like should have some meaning to you. I mean I didn't suggest to add the option to play the game as a first person shooter, I just suggested things that are still within the game's possible audience.
Saying that the creator alone should have control over the gameplay just seems so wrong (I mean that's not even the case in phantom tactics as you already offer a difficulty setting which is a really good thing).
See right now the game is not a game for everyone that loves SRPGs. Right now it's a game for everyone that loves the Ogre games and Fire Emblem. People who don't like Fire Emblem at all but like Shining Force would probably give the same suggestions as me and you never played Shining Force so you probably don't know how its quality in gaming experience is created.
| Quote: | | If you think it's too hard, play it at an easier difficulty and be glad you're not playing Tactics Ogre. |
See, it's not that I want to play it on a lower difficulty, I'd rather have a higher difficulty but without perma-death because as you said the removal of that would make the game considerably easier and only other difficulty adjustments could balance that out.
Also the thread title isn't a really good way to start a design discussion. If you think it's stupid from beginning why even bother replying to it? In the end it will just end in flaming because a person feels offended.
I discuss a game if I think it's good and not if I think it's stupid. What's the point really.
_________________
Snippy:
"curt or sharp, esp. in a condescending way" (Oxford American Dictionary)
"fault-finding, snappish, sharp" (Concise Oxford Dictionary, UK)
1. short-tempered, snappish, 2. unduly brief or curt (Merriam-Webster Dictionary) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moogle1
Scourge of the Seas
Halloween 2006 Creativity Winner
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 3377
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 2:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Rya.Reisender wrote: | | The difference is that as you said a game is supposed to be interactive while a DVD should not. If someone plays a game he wants interact with it as much as possible, if he watches a DVD he just wants to sit and relax without having to do decisions. |
Your definition of "interactive" is wrong, then. By your definition, Play-Doh is the ultimate interactive experience, since you can make of it whatever you want.
But that's not interactivity! Interaction requires a response. It's a two-way thing.
| Quote: | | Saying that the creator alone should have control over the gameplay just seems so wrong |
But it feels so right
| Quote: | | See right now the game is not a game for everyone that loves SRPGs. Right now it's a game for everyone that loves the Ogre games and Fire Emblem. People who don't like Fire Emblem at all but like Shining Force would probably give the same suggestions as me and you never played Shining Force so you probably don't know how its quality in gaming experience is created. |
You're at least mostly right in your assumption that I never played the Shining Force series. I've played about ten minutes of it. However, I've played at least a dozen other games in the genre with widely varying mechanics, more than enough to make a strategy game for strategy fans. I unfortunately can't make a strategy game for Shining Force fans, but that's a niche inside of a niche.
| Quote: | | See, it's not that I want to play it on a lower difficulty, I'd rather have a higher difficulty but without perma-death because as you said the removal of that would make the game considerably easier and only other difficulty adjustments could balance that out. |
You want to play it on a higher difficulty, but you want it to be easier.
Here's why I'm not going to remove permadeath at any difficulty level above Easy:
- It defeats the purpose of higher difficulty levels. Turning off permadeath means you don't have to carefully consider your actions. If you want to breeze through the game, do it on Easy. The other difficulty levels are there to challenge players. It's disingenuous to call it Hard when you're able to easily remove a large part of what makes it hard. You're asking for the ability to play an easy version of Hard mode. Think about that for a bit.
- It circumvents the game's design. I'm not talking about gameplay here, a word you like to throw around, I'm talking about the effect the game has on the player. Even if the player can buy replacements for everyone, losing half your army is something that should make you stop and consider the worth of your men's lives. There's no such thing as a Pyrrhic victory when there are no losses; there's no emotional impact on the player when no death is permanent. The player's only consideration is who wins the battle, which is no way to lead an army.
- People don't come back from the dead to keep fighting for you. Video games blah blah realism blah blah and all, but really now, there's no in-universe reason for your units to return to life.
| Quote: | Also the thread title isn't a really good way to start a design discussion. If you think it's stupid from beginning why even bother replying to it? In the end it will just end in flaming because a person feels offended.
I discuss a game if I think it's good and not if I think it's stupid. What's the point really. |
Changed
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bob the Hamster
OHRRPGCE Developer
Joined: 22 Feb 2003
Posts: 2526
Location: Hamster Republic (Southern California Enclave)
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Moogle1 wrote: | | Rya.Reisender wrote: | | The difference is that as you said a game is supposed to be interactive while a DVD should not. If someone plays a game he wants interact with it as much as possible, if he watches a DVD he just wants to sit and relax without having to do decisions. |
Your definition of "interactive" is wrong, then. By your definition, Play-Doh is the ultimate interactive experience, since you can make of it whatever you want.
But that's not interactivity! Interaction requires a response. It's a two-way thing. |
The idea of Play-Doh that responds is frankly quite terrifying. I am going to have nightmares about that now, thank you very much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moogle1
Scourge of the Seas
Halloween 2006 Creativity Winner
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 3377
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Fantastic.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
binoal
Joined: 20 Jun 2009
Posts: 123
Location: My Own Little World
|
| Posted: Fri Sep 04, 2009 5:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James Paige wrote: | | Moogle1 wrote: | | Rya.Reisender wrote: | | The difference is that as you said a game is supposed to be interactive while a DVD should not. If someone plays a game he wants interact with it as much as possible, if he watches a DVD he just wants to sit and relax without having to do decisions. |
Your definition of "interactive" is wrong, then. By your definition, Play-Doh is the ultimate interactive experience, since you can make of it whatever you want.
But that's not interactivity! Interaction requires a response. It's a two-way thing. |
The idea of Play-Doh that responds is frankly quite terrifying. I am going to have nightmares about that now, thank you very much. |
did that inspire your new avatar? hahaha
_________________
Resident Evil RPG Demo
http://www.castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=963
Legend Of Zelda: Reptilian Warlord Demo
http://www.castleparadox.com/gamelist-display.php?game=961 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Rya.Reisender
Snippy
Joined: 18 Jan 2008
Posts: 821
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 5:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
James is pretty talented in loosing up dangerous discussions.
| Quote: | | You're asking for the ability to play an easy version of Hard mode. Think about that for a bit. |
I hope you are aware, that it's something different. Removing permadeath on super hard isn't equal to normal mode. It's a mode with normal difficulty but with completely different strategy from normal mode. You could call it zombie mode and make it unlockable or something. If nothing else it will at least increase the replay value a lot.
_________________
Snippy:
"curt or sharp, esp. in a condescending way" (Oxford American Dictionary)
"fault-finding, snappish, sharp" (Concise Oxford Dictionary, UK)
1. short-tempered, snappish, 2. unduly brief or curt (Merriam-Webster Dictionary) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie_Power
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It's a mode with normal difficulty but with completely different strategy from normal mode. |
Which is suiciding certain units with no regard to their safety in order to weaken some enemies and keep your main units fresh because you know they'll come back in the next chapter to be used as meat shields again.
_________________
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: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
Exactly.
_________________
Snippy:
"curt or sharp, esp. in a condescending way" (Oxford American Dictionary)
"fault-finding, snappish, sharp" (Concise Oxford Dictionary, UK)
1. short-tempered, snappish, 2. unduly brief or curt (Merriam-Webster Dictionary) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Newbie_Power
Joined: 04 Sep 2006
Posts: 1762
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeeeeah, I'd rather not, unless it were an easy mode specific feature (even then you would probably have to *try* to get your dudes killed, unless I'm underestimating what easy is like).
Players should adapt to the game and realize they need to protect their characters, rather than allow the game to adapt for them. Difficulty modes exist so that it's easier for them to adapt. This type of feature more or less belongs as a cheat code.
_________________
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: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah that's why the game is too easy on easy mode and that's why I really would like to have this feature on harder modes, I wouldn't mind if it was through a cheat code. If revival of characters is possible then the enemy should at least deal 50% damage per battle so it's challenging.
_________________
Snippy:
"curt or sharp, esp. in a condescending way" (Oxford American Dictionary)
"fault-finding, snappish, sharp" (Concise Oxford Dictionary, UK)
1. short-tempered, snappish, 2. unduly brief or curt (Merriam-Webster Dictionary) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moogle1
Scourge of the Seas
Halloween 2006 Creativity Winner
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 3377
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Removing permadeath on super hard isn't equal to normal mode. |
Well, it's sure not equal to super hard mode, either.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raekuul
Delicious!
Joined: 31 Mar 2004
Posts: 641
Location: Nowhere
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
Rya - I'm running an RP of sorts on another board, where you do get 1 XP if you make an action and miss your target. This is supposed to be an enticement for people to actually act, since in the first battle we had two people who didn't even bother to look at the thread. That, and you should be able to improve abilities by simply using them.
It's just that being effective is a lot easier than spamming arrows. Especially since the level thresholds are (Previous Threshold) + (Next Level * 100) experience, with the first levelup being at 100 XP.
Granted, an XP-By-Interaction is a lot harder to code than it is to figure out by hand.
Moogle1 - Elsa Alliance would be Super Happy Funtime Land by your definiton of "Awarding you just for showing up". However, the enemies are almost always scaled to the level of the strongest party member, so "just showing up" is a good way to become "cannon fodder".
_________________
A broken clock is still right twice a day. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Moogle1
Scourge of the Seas
Halloween 2006 Creativity Winner
Joined: 15 Jul 2004
Posts: 3377
Location: Seattle, WA
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you're going to aggressively advertise your thing, you might as well at least link to it.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Raekuul
Delicious!
Joined: 31 Mar 2004
Posts: 641
Location: Nowhere
|
| Posted: Thu Sep 10, 2009 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Do you seriously want me to link to the forums for I Wanna Be The Guy?
_________________
A broken clock is still right twice a day. |
|
| 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
