33 replies to this topic

[Milcho]

Ok, my choice of words may have been poor, though you really took that too personally. I didn't call your game ridiculous, I just think that having 300-500 types of resources is going to be overwhelming. I would honestly think that anything above 50 or so would be out of hand for the majority of players, but again, and I don't want to repeat this every post, this is just my opinion.

 

 

Going by what hpdvs2 said - Civ V's diverse selection of resources were used for a lot of stuff. The resource view where I could see what resource was where was helpful, but unlike Civ 4 where you only had to have at least 1 resource of that type to produce units that needed it, Civ V required you to keep count of exactly how much you had. Leikaru, you didn't specify how your resources would work - the thing is with so much production going on, unit movements and city management, I just never could micromanage my resources in that game. Most of them were acquired automatically by automated workers, and I was often surprised of what I had. 

 

I honestly don't know how to improve it. Going with my experience of Settlers VI, while there were a lot of resources, you worked up to using them gradually - at first only caring about wood, stone and food. Then gradually as you advanced in title (the title of your knight, but it's just an advancement of your entire city) the needs of your citizens and the types of resources you had to gather increased. I guess the difference there is that I wasn't thrown into a world where there's a ton of stuff to manage at once, but instead was gradually introduced to new things I could do.

 

Again, since you say you're working on your idea, I don't know what your idea is. Based solely on you saying that you'll have 300 - 500 resources, I don't think there's a good way to make the learning curve easy enough. At best you'll be spending a lot of time introducing these resources and their function, and at worse, you'll just throw them at once at the user. 

This is also based on the fact that Civ V is probably the game with most resource management, and like I said, I never did get the hang of that completely. 

[Leikaru]

You didn't call it ridiculous. That's funny, because that's what you posted. I didn't take it personally whatsoever, I just said that the kind of posts that base a game idea of a game that has actually been released it quite frustrating to me, because it put's me off making game ideas, because I think that the next time I have an idea, I'm going to get a negative remark. The thing is, I know your offering help, but so far I haven't seen any praise, which is kind of saddening, and off-putting. At the start, you don't need to worry about the sheer amount of resources there are. Some resources are only there to help you choose the path to success. Example, Tungsten Ore can be used to make Recurporation Factories, which basically are huge factories used to design very large buildings. You don't need that. You just might want it. Feel free to ask questions on this, and I'll answer them the best I can.

[Milcho]

You didn't call it ridiculous. That's funny, because that's what you posted.

I said the idea of having 300-500 resources sounds ridiculous - to me. Not your game. I didn't think that was the entirety of your game, and I still don't know how all of your game will function, so how can I call it ridiculous?

 

I didn't take it personally whatsoever, I just said that the kind of posts that base a game idea of a game that has actually been released it quite frustrating to me, because it put's me off making game ideas, because I think that the next time I have an idea, I'm going to get a negative remark.

Since there wasn't specifics on your game idea, the best I could do is think of an approximation of an existing game which I've played that had a lot of resources. That would be Civ V, and hence my comparison. Also, someone having criticism towards a game idea is probably inevitable - you yourself said that you can't make a game that appeals to everyone. Maybe the game you're making isn't going to appeal to people like me. So don't let one person's comments stop you from coming up with game ideas. But at least in my experience, coming up with an idea and the process of refining it down to specific game mechanics usually involves criticism on some parts. Like having 300-500 resources.

 

The thing is, I know your offering help, but so far I haven't seen any praise, which is kind of saddening, and off-putting.

Praise for what though? You haven't given any specifics. I do think that a lot of resources can be done, as I was describing earlier, but I can't think of a way to introduce that many resources to a player without a rather steep curve, and you haven't given some details on how your resources will be handled. So far it really has been hard for me to figure out your ideas from your posts, and maybe you'll have some great ideas that I can't think of. Remember, what we see in our head and what we describe rarely matches. It's hard to transcribe your vision of a game onto paper, let alone in such a manner that most other people understand exactly what you meant.

 

At the start, you don't need to worry about the sheer amount of resources there are. Some resources are only there to help you choose the path to success. Example, Tungsten Ore can be used to make Recurporation Factories, which basically are huge factories used to design very large buildings. You don't need that. You just might want it. Feel free to ask questions on this, and I'll answer them the best I can.

You should describe your resource system more thoroughly. Having a lot of resources and a lot of different requirements for each building may make it hard for a player to see how the building progression might happen. Usually there's an implied (meaning, non-explicitly specified) system where you need to have certain buildings to make other buildings or units (think how starcraft has it) - but with a ton of different resources it will be incredibly more complex. Even if some resources are only there to help you, it may not be immidiately obvious and it still adds to the complexity of a game. Tungsten Ore's only use may be for Recurporation Factories, but unless you state that explicitly, the player may see it as a building requirement, assume it's important and proceed to gather a lot of it. Or alternatively, it may be a vital resource, but the player doesn't realize that and fails to gather it, leaving her/him in a bind.

 

That's one of the other things in most games - resources were usually specific to a certain type of production. After months of Empire Earth II, I was able to figure out most of them (they have around 7 resources). Food is mostly used for units, Stone was for towers/walls and most buildings. Gold was required for certain units, while others required saltpeter. Based on how I wanted to play, I knew how to allocate my resource management - which resources I needed to focus on, and which to not care about much. And that was after months of play, with seven resources. I hope you see why I think having 300-500 types of resources may be overwhelming. And if you can think of an intuitive or easy to understand enough system, more power to you.

[Leikaru]

You didn't call it ridiculous. That's funny, because that's what you posted.

I said the idea of having 300-500 resources sounds ridiculous - to me. Not your game. I didn't think that was the entirety of your game, and I still don't know how all of your game will function, so how can I call it ridiculous?

 

I didn't take it personally whatsoever, I just said that the kind of posts that base a game idea of a game that has actually been released it quite frustrating to me, because it put's me off making game ideas, because I think that the next time I have an idea, I'm going to get a negative remark.

Since there wasn't specifics on your game idea, the best I could do is think of an approximation of an existing game which I've played that had a lot of resources. That would be Civ V, and hence my comparison. Also, someone having criticism towards a game idea is probably inevitable - you yourself said that you can't make a game that appeals to everyone. Maybe the game you're making isn't going to appeal to people like me. So don't let one person's comments stop you from coming up with game ideas. But at least in my experience, coming up with an idea and the process of refining it down to specific game mechanics usually involves criticism on some parts. Like having 300-500 resources.

 

The thing is, I know your offering help, but so far I haven't seen any praise, which is kind of saddening, and off-putting.

Praise for what though? You haven't given any specifics. I do think that a lot of resources can be done, as I was describing earlier, but I can't think of a way to introduce that many resources to a player without a rather steep curve, and you haven't given some details on how your resources will be handled. So far it really has been hard for me to figure out your ideas from your posts, and maybe you'll have some great ideas that I can't think of. Remember, what we see in our head and what we describe rarely matches. It's hard to transcribe your vision of a game onto paper, let alone in such a manner that most other people understand exactly what you meant.

 

At the start, you don't need to worry about the sheer amount of resources there are. Some resources are only there to help you choose the path to success. Example, Tungsten Ore can be used to make Recurporation Factories, which basically are huge factories used to design very large buildings. You don't need that. You just might want it. Feel free to ask questions on this, and I'll answer them the best I can.

You should describe your resource system more thoroughly. Having a lot of resources and a lot of different requirements for each building may make it hard for a player to see how the building progression might happen. Usually there's an implied (meaning, non-explicitly specified) system where you need to have certain buildings to make other buildings or units (think how starcraft has it) - but with a ton of different resources it will be incredibly more complex. Even if some resources are only there to help you, it may not be immidiately obvious and it still adds to the complexity of a game. Tungsten Ore's only use may be for Recurporation Factories, but unless you state that explicitly, the player may see it as a building requirement, assume it's important and proceed to gather a lot of it. Or alternatively, it may be a vital resource, but the player doesn't realize that and fails to gather it, leaving her/him in a bind.

 

That's one of the other things in most games - resources were usually specific to a certain type of production. After months of Empire Earth II, I was able to figure out most of them (they have around 7 resources). Food is mostly used for units, Stone was for towers/walls and most buildings. Gold was required for certain units, while others required saltpeter. Based on how I wanted to play, I knew how to allocate my resource management - which resources I needed to focus on, and which to not care about much. And that was after months of play, with seven resources. I hope you see why I think having 300-500 types of resources may be overwhelming. And if you can think of an intuitive or easy to understand enough system, more power to you.

 

 

Too be honest, you called a part of my game ridiculous. You don't like the game, don't come an post on it. You like the game, but have a few suggestions, post on it. End it there. Not the thread, just this boring argument. Don't boss my game. That's my job.

[thade]

I have some questions for the OP.

 

By "300-500 resources", do you mean hundreds of types of resources? How do you define these types? Metals like iron and copper? Lumber like oak and elm? EVE Online actually has a great many resources (likely numbering in the hundreds) for the manufacturing side of its game; that's something you might check out to see how one team put this idea into  practice. (I admit that I did not enjoy that aspect of the game, though I tried it for a handful of months, gathering and selling refined resources to make money...not very fun for me personally, but I wanted to try it.)

 

What will be done with the resources? What is their to build? What will be fun about gathering the resources? What about spending them? How much time do you envision it taking to gather enough resources to manufacture, say, a sword? A horse cart? A manor house? How much time will it take to make those things? Once they are made, what can do they do for you?

 

How do you envision the gathering of resources taking place? Active gathering, like Minecraft or Terraria? Passive gathering, like SWG or EVE Online?

[Leikaru]

I have some questions for the OP.

By "300-500 resources", do you mean hundreds of types of resources? How do you define these types? Metals like iron and copper? Lumber like oak and elm? EVE Online actually has a great many resources (likely numbering in the hundreds) for the manufacturing side of its game; that's something you might check out to see how one team put this idea into practice. (I admit that I did not enjoy that aspect of the game, though I tried it for a handful of months, gathering and selling refined resources to make money...not very fun for me personally, but I wanted to try it.)

What will be done with the resources? What is their to build? What will be fun about gathering the resources? What about spending them? How much time do you envision it taking to gather enough resources to manufacture, say, a sword? A horse cart? A manor house? How much time will it take to make those things? Once they are made, what can do they do for you?

How do you envision the gathering of resources taking place? Active gathering, like Minecraft or Terraria? Passive gathering, like SWG or EVE Online?

Yeah, there are different metals, not just "Metal", and "Wood", there is Oak, Birch, Maple, Juniper, Pine, all used for different things. I'll check the thing out, forgotten what it was. Anyway, I'll answer the other questions the best I can.

Resources are used to craft buildings, equipment. All offer different things, eg. Crafting 2000 swords for all of your guards will increase their attack strength. There is much to build, small houses, large houses, flats, Work-stations, Guard-Houses, Factories. Different things take a different amount of time, also, it depends on the amount of builders allocated to the build.

The resource gathering is quite simple. You simply recruit people who want work, and they can gather all the resource for you. Simple as that. Then, once they have full bags, you just get the resources. Simple.

Also, please don't minus my post. Sure, you might think I was being rude, but still, I was making a point, and if you negate this post as well, then I really will be quite annoyed and will lock this thread, and see after a while if the person has become more mature and decided that simply replying isn't a bad thing.

Edited by Leikaru, 16 January 2013 - 12:51 PM.

[kseh]

If you haven't already, I'd recommend giving Dwarf Fortress a try and see what sort of game play behaviors you exhibit if you deny yourself a specific resource. Then think about how similar situations might come up in your game and how you might want to resolve them. It's obviously going to be different from your game idea but it involves a significant number of resources and it sounds like initial stages of resource gathering and structure building might be similar to your game.

[Leikaru]

Great idea, thanks, I'll have a look at it. +1 Rep.

[thade]

I am still curious as to what the game play is intended to be? You have some number of 'peasants' and you allocate them to gather specific resources; after some amount of time has passed, they gather them and you can allocate some number of 'peasants' to build a thing. Does the gameplay boil down to moving some sliders around and responding to dialog boxes? Interestingly enough, Crusader Kings 2 is very dialog-box driven; there is combat but it's extremely simplistic...more about the consequences of committing resources (soldiers, money, and time) to locations than the combat itself. Something you might consider checking out, insofar as the dialog stuff. (In fact, there are tactical reasons in the game to try and throw people into your dungeon via dialog boxes.)

 

You mention guards; have you considered "levels" for peasants? Maybe the player could elect to spend resources building various training facilities (many games do this, from Starcraft to Civ) that transform a peasant into a specialized unit, or enhance/add to their ability sets.

 

Also, please don't minus my post. Sure, you might think I was being rude, but still, I was making a point, and if you negate this post as well, then I really will be quite annoyed and will lock this thread, and see after a while if the person has become more mature and decided that simply replying isn't a bad thing.

 

To be honest and fair with you, I minus'd that post because it contributed nothing to the conversation; it seemed geared towards picking a fight. When you post an idea on this board, it's an open request for feed back, which is not restricted to praise. People at times will not like your idea or will see potential flaws in it. When they point them out, the idea is to respond constructively. Treat criticism here academically: take it as an attack on the idea and not upon yourself.

 

It's all rather clearly spelled out in the Game Design FAQ for this board.

[Milcho]

Too be honest, you called a part of my game ridiculous. You don't like the game, don't come an post on it. You like the game, but have a few suggestions, post on it. End it there. Not the thread, just this boring argument. Don't boss my game. That's my job.

 

I understand negative reactions towards your idea are not easy to take. 

Please take a second to read my post again though - I didn't just say that I didn't like the idea, I told you why I didn't like it. A good way of taking criticism (at least for me has been) to take that 'why doesn't this person like it?' part and see if you can't use it to improve your idea further. 

serratemplar's post says it pretty well, really.

 

Alternatively, if you don't really think my opinion will be shared by many, or if I don't sound like your target audience then there's no reason to really take it into consideration,

 

I'm really not trying to boss your game, I was trying to be helpful.

[Leikaru]

Too be honest, you called a part of my game ridiculous. You don't like the game, don't come an post on it. You like the game, but have a few suggestions, post on it. End it there. Not the thread, just this boring argument. Don't boss my game. That's my job.

I understand negative reactions towards your idea are not easy to take.
Please take a second to read my post again though - I didn't just say that I didn't like the idea, I told you why I didn't like it. A good way of taking criticism (at least for me has been) to take that 'why doesn't this person like it?' part and see if you can't use it to improve your idea further.
serratemplar's post says it pretty well, really.

Alternatively, if you don't really think my opinion will be shared by many, or if I don't sound like your target audience then there's no reason to really take it into consideration,

I'm really not trying to boss your game, I was trying to be helpful.

Not really that helpful is it? Doesn't improve the game situation at all. I was going to release a test version which introduces you to the basic, core features of the game, but really? Should I? People who just want to shout about how bad this game is aren't exactly helpful. They just think they are. That post was rather useless. Yes, this post was too, but still, it's a bit silly to post negative things without backing yourself up with detailed facts about the game. Lots of people that posts those kind of comments are the people that want to see their name in the credits screen once the game is complete. Those people make me laugh hard.

Edited by Leikaru, 17 January 2013 - 03:40 AM.

[Leikaru]

I am still curious as to what the game play is intended to be? You have some number of 'peasants' and you allocate them to gather specific resources; after some amount of time has passed, they gather them and you can allocate some number of 'peasants' to build a thing. Does the gameplay boil down to moving some sliders around and responding to dialog boxes? Interestingly enough, Crusader Kings 2 is very dialog-box driven; there is combat but it's extremely simplistic...more about the consequences of committing resources (soldiers, money, and time) to locations than the combat itself. Something you might consider checking out, insofar as the dialog stuff. (In fact, there are tactical reasons in the game to try and throw people into your dungeon via dialog boxes.)

You mention guards; have you considered "levels" for peasants? Maybe the player could elect to spend resources building various training facilities (many games do this, from Starcraft to Civ) that transform a peasant into a specialized unit, or enhance/add to their ability sets.

Also, please don't minus my post. Sure, you might think I was being rude, but still, I was making a point, and if you negate this post as well, then I really will be quite annoyed and will lock this thread, and see after a while if the person has become more mature and decided that simply replying isn't a bad thing.

To be honest and fair with you, I minus'd that post because it contributed nothing to the conversation; it seemed geared towards picking a fight. When you post an idea on this board, it's an open request for feed back, which is not restricted to praise. People at times will not like your idea or will see potential flaws in it. When they point them out, the idea is to respond constructively. Treat criticism here academically: take it as an attack on the idea and not upon yourself.

It's all rather clearly spelled out in the Game Design FAQ for this board.

Too be honest, currently them kind of features are not questionable currently, because I have some features that could be asked about a lot.

Yes, Peasants have levels as well.

Posting the fact the you negated my post doesn't really improve the conversation either. Looks like your trying to pick a fight. I have read the FAQ, amazingly, I can read, but some people obviously doubt that.

Edited by Leikaru, 17 January 2013 - 03:43 AM.

[thade]

Too be honest, currently them kind of features are not questionable currently, because I have some features that could be asked about a lot.

What does that mean? I can't ask you questions about those features, because there are other features that "can be asked about"? Do you mean that features you haven't given thought to are not on the table?

Yes, Peasants have levels as well.

Okay. What do those levels represent? What in-game effect will a higher level have?

Posting the fact the you negated my post doesn't really improve the conversation either.

You did this. You pointed out that I down-voted you, which is what I responded to. It kind of sounds like you're saying "Only I can meta this conversation."

Looks like your trying to pick a fight. I have read the FAQ, amazingly, I can read, but some people obviously doubt that.

Respectfully, had you read the FAQ and taken it to heart, this conversation would not be trending this way. You respond very aggressively to feedback; if that's the case, why did you post here in the first place?

[Tom Sloper]

Closing this thread; there's too much anger and not enough calm discussion.