Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Member Since 15 Feb 2012
Offline Last Active Jan 29 2013 08:45 AM

#4968397 Hacking game based around writing code

Posted by on 11 August 2012 - 06:25 AM

It could be fun if you simplify it. Instead of having to program, make up your own imaginary snippets, like "find that", "delete this" and "inject a little of this".

Basically make a short, easy to remember pretend syntax, for actions to perform on a computer. Gamers are not often programmers themselves. And someone that knows hacking good enough to play your game probably finds it more fun to hack IRL.

I probably wouldn't play a full game of it, but having it as a major mechanic in a game could be fun.

#4965993 Amusing Apps

Posted by on 03 August 2012 - 06:34 PM

If someone has an idea actually worth making they won't just give it to you.

Not absolutely true. Yes I have no doubt that some people will be quite unwilling to share or gift ideas for apps in the belief (rightly or wrongly) that they will make it themselves or somehow profit by the "idea" (though the "how they will do it" has probably frozen many ideas from becoming a reality).

But I have no doubt that there also people whom are quite willing to throw out ideas with no regard to personal enrichment beyond that of possibly seeing an app idea of theirs made into reality.

And the only app I have ever felt like having is an app that warned me of people I did not want to meet or alternatively did want to meet being in the same immediate geographical area as myself and the optional map associated with it to enable avoidance/meeting. However not really being a user of apps and having a mobile phone only as a necessity for work-related issues, I have no idea whether even such a thing exists.

Yeah you're right about that, but I thought more of like the "next Angry Birds" or something in that fashion. Based on how all his previous projects have failed he seems to be looking for something that makes him money.

I also like your idea for an app, but this would mean the person you don't want to meet has the same app, with GPS location turned on. Needs to somehow use facebook and be really big to work. Another one would be alerting when someone you do want to meet is within a 1km radius, but this also requires GPS location being constantly on and feeding the app, which drains battery.

#4965393 Amusing Apps

Posted by on 01 August 2012 - 10:14 PM

If someone has an idea actually worth making they won't just give it to you.

#4963494 Are open pvp + full loot SANDBOX mmorpg's still possible?

Posted by on 26 July 2012 - 09:06 PM

Tibia handles this sort of good. They use a skull system, where a kill gives a white skull and 15 minutes locked out of protection zones. If you kill 3 people in a day you get a red skull for a month. Anyone with a skull are free to kill for anyone (the attackers get a yellow skull allowing the skulled to protect himself without consequence).

If you die with a redskull you drop all your items when killed, so you don't want that.

I like that system, but it could be improved.

#4961881 Inventory Screens...

Posted by on 22 July 2012 - 01:23 AM

I had thougth about maybe putting a box there that would let you drag and item in there, and it would tell you how much the item was worth, and what the item was made of, so you could get a general idea of what is needed to craft that same type of item.

That's a good Idea except for the dragging part, don't overcomplicate things. Like KenjiSenpai said, leave it at hovering. An even better approach would be to toggle a floating box with the item info when hovered. But then the empty area is still empty.

Do you mind if I ask why you need that area at all? Usually you put areas, boxes, whatever because you have a use for it. What you're doing is trying to find a use for an allready existing box. What's the point?
Some kind of optimal size for the window? I would say the best thing would be to just remove the upper part, since it will look empty and misplaced when neutral, and showing item information has better solutions.

#4954690 User retention: 22%. Why is it so low?

Posted by on 01 July 2012 - 05:31 PM

I was going to try this game out, but lost my motivation in the first 5 minutes. Here is why.

First warning flag was getting 3 identical emails to activate my account, this gives a very amateur impression for such a basic feature, better to skip it entirely if you can't get it right.

Then I clicked through the intro talk to get into the game faster (some like it I don't, I got no suggestion on it). Once I got the game world, I don't see my character. I try to click and drag the map to move it, but i drag the entire viewport, or select the divs.

I expected to control my character real time, so I went back to see the video, and there aswell I get the same impression. I might just be stupid and don't understand the simplest thing about the game. But since I don't even see my character I realize this game might be complicated.

There are so many games today and keeping your customers interested is importand, I actually had big hopes for this game (have the same idea myself but not the resources to execute it). So, basically you have a good idea, but worthless execution. I don't understand shit, and you have to expect every player to be retarded, especially if you don't use mainstream mechanics that people are used too.

Since I couldn't figure it out myself, and I wasn't told what to do I gave up out of boredom, within 5 minutes, and move on to the next game.

This is meant purely as constructive criticism and not intended to demotivate you, you just have to think over the tutorial part of the game.

#4926897 RPG without classes.

Posted by on 31 March 2012 - 04:03 AM

Hi, I would like to get some feedback on this setup for an RPG. I have no team, and no intention of doing this game anytime soon.
This is strictly theoretical.

I will try to briefly explain how I would see a RPG without classes work.

Say that a player starts a character as level 1 human (or whatever races are implemented).
On this level he has a basic melee attack, nothing else. When reaching level 2, he gains 1 talent point.

This talent point will be used in a complicated talent tree, and how he chooses to spend these talents will define the "class" his character gets.
For example this first talent might be spent on the dark magic part of the talent tree (or melee if he prefers that).

Our hypothetical player chooses shadowbolt rank 1/10. This gives him a new spell to put on his actionbar. With appropriate damage to his level. And on rank 10 it will be end-game powerful.

Fast-forward to level 25, and our player kills his first boss in a dungeon. This boss drops a staff, requiring 20 talents spent on shadow (he has spent 25).
This staff comes with a new awesome shadow spell, giving our player another spell to put on his actionbar.

In the end-game there would be sets of equipement that reward awesome spells if complete.

Another way to gain spells would be looting scrolls/parchments and completing long quest-chains. But the first quest would require a certain amount of talents to be spent.

Maybe even implement extremely rare spells that seriously benefits you, imagine the feeling when looting a spell that only 2-3 other players on the server have.

Building the class system like this has many benefits, the primary one being variation in player spells, and thus a bigger variation in playstyles.
I feel the current games are too monotone in their classes, taking WoW in comparison, you are either a firemage using fireball scorch and fireblast, or you are a frost mage, spamming frostbolts etc.

It would also give a deeper feeling of building your character through quests, dungeons and equipment grinding in the end-game since you gain more than just extra health and bonus damage, you gain abilities you wouldn't have otherwise.

While this might not be everyones cup of tea I would really like to play a game with this mechanic (if it is implemented in any current or old game please let me know).

Anyway, what are your thoughts on this? Would you like to see this in a game? Do you have any improvements?

#4926710 Should pvp be glasscannon like ?

Posted by on 30 March 2012 - 09:22 AM

You are oversimplifying the RPG angle. No game with one-shot kills is going to have a 'kill button' - that would be ridiculously lacking in fun.

If you have one-shot kills, then there needs to be in general a) a degree of skill involved (primarily aim and timing a la 'skill shot'), and b) the target must have a reasonable chance of evading/blocking/countering.

That's the whole point of this discussion.
OP is advertising that PVP should be the first one to fire wins the battle, at the same time he's trying to persuade us that there would be skill involved in this.
Which is ridiculous.

#4926424 Should pvp be glasscannon like ?

Posted by on 29 March 2012 - 01:55 PM

You seem to have a thing for hating WoW and thinly dressing that hate up in stupid useless posts masquerading as discussion. Why is this?

He hates WoW because he never got any good at it. Never managing to get the enemies health down enough to kill them by using the right combos he wants instant kill spells.

#4926076 Game Economics

Posted by on 28 March 2012 - 12:15 PM

Same stuff as previous quotes.

I will make one last try to explain it as I would explain to my 4 year old little brother.

1) NPC both BUYS and SELLS copper.
2) BUYING price = 10 gold for 1 piece of copper.
3) SELLING price = 15 gold for 1 peice of copper.

This makes it useful for players with alot of copper, when the demand is low and supply is high, to STILL MAKE SOME PROFIT by selling to NPC. Mkay?
Since the NPC BUYS copper for 10 gold a piece, the player SELLING the copper wouldnt SELL for LESS than 10 gold to another player right?
Say he gets offered 9 gold from another player, this means he would lose 1 gold by selling to the player instead of going to the NPC.

Benefits: Keeps a steady lowest price for goods once they are too available, and still makes good profit for players who wants to get rid of these quick.
Call it a parachute for too much inflation.

On the other hand, the player might want to try his chances and make more profit, he might not need the money right away, so he waits until a player that has reached his daily cap of copper from the NPC (remember 15 gold per copper bar) so the player SELLING this copper can make a bigger profit, if he is patient.

This benefits both kinds of players, patient and impatient. While providing a means of controlling the economy from spinning out of control.

Next we will cover the NPC SELLING copper. We agreed on 15 gold right?
"So why does he sell it more expensive than he buys it?" you might ask.

You see my friend that is to keep a margin in between where you as a developer see the currency fit considering the mechanics you introduced in the game. (accumulation rate etc).

But remember there is a maximum amount of copper available from the NPC per player and day.

Example: Player 1 needs 5 copper bars, NPC only allows him to buy 1 each day.
This leaves our player with 2 choices, be patient and economic, and wait for five days buying 1 bar of copper every day, summing up to 5 days multiplyed by 15 gold = 75 gold.

On the other hand he could just buy 4 from another player. at the price of lets say 20 gold for the ease of multiplications. this has lost our player 20 gold, but he gained 4 days in waiting time choosing to buy from another player.
He could also wait until a player sells his copper bars for less than the npc SELL them for (not BUYS try not to mix them up this time). Which could be 14 gold.
This way BOTH players benefits from 1 single transaction, where the SELLER SELLS for MORE than he would to the NPC.
And the BUYER BUYS for LESS than he would from NPC.

Benefits of the merchant NPC: Keep a roof on the prices.

In this 1 transaction, the real resource of value is the copper. But the gold helps the players buy this copper.
What if the buyer only had oil, a crate of oil might be worth 200 copper bars. and he only needs 5. He might not want 195 copper bars lying around.
That is why currency is good. This is why we have used it for 4 thousand years.

If you don't get it this time I give up.

#4926057 Game Economics

Posted by on 28 March 2012 - 11:20 AM

How would they sell it for 11 gold? This doesn't make any sense. Why would a player pay for a big order at a rate of 11 gold and not a small order of 10 gold? Bulk orders should be cheaper if anything.

It's obvious, unless the player pays what the seller wants, the seller simply goes to an NPC. And you are the one to mention bulk, i am comparing same amount whatever the price. bulk of 10 could be 100 gold and 105 gold, it would be retarded to sell for less than what the NPC offers wouldn't it?

Why would the oil vendor give away something of less worth? They'd be losing money.

Why the hell would you have useless items in your game anyway? Look at the 3rd heading in my OP. And if coins supposedly reflect the value of those 'useless items', how in the hell does that make them more measurable than the items themselves?

Misunderstanding me again, the oil vendor might not need 14 shovels from the shovel producer just to meet the worth of HIS oil, the oilvendor doesn't give extra items to get rid of the oil obviously that would be retarded. But every item is not useful to every player, thats why economy was introduced in the first place, the first account of currency is from 2000 B.C. Do the math, why would you want to go backwards in your game?

Players need to acquire goods for whatever reason, be it war, crafting or whatever the endgame scenario is for the game. Currency can be introduced in order to allow for these goods to be exchanged more easily than bartering. Economy is good when resources are being extracted, they are crafted/converted and value is added to them, and they are being supplied to those people who demand them, in return providing other people with the resources and items that they need. Some provinces have an abundance of some materials and the other provinces have other materials. When one province gets hold of too much value of materials, war and theft can occur in order to break the imbalance. Money flows from pocket to pocket and the world is being productive and destructive.

I think the contrary will happen, players will have a difficult time getting rid of the accumulated goods without a general currency, and a economy like this is very much dependant of the community, how exactly will that community grow? dont expect to get full servers and flowing exchange in the beginning.

Anyway I don't know if you misunderstand me on purpose or are too in love with your idea to understand my points. I'm not trying to change your opinion, my last posts have been trying to explain my first post.

Let me know how successful your economy is once the game is released.

#4926049 Should pvp be glasscannon like ?

Posted by on 28 March 2012 - 11:02 AM

in wow i care only about maximizing 1vs1 pvp power. Why care about teamwork ? arathi basin, eye of the storm is all about 1vs1 pvp.
Healing others is needless in 2vs1 pvp, you outnumber the opponent, thus you will win regardless of your actions. If your teamate dies because you didnt heal, just say "good riddance", i didnt need you anyway, you were a burden, i could have won him alone.

Since you spoke about teamplay in 2vs2 if you use heal, i as a warrior would outdps you, thus your heals will be useless, and you do no damage thus you are healing your opponents not yourself because you dont do damage while casting healing spells.

From your playstyle as a feral druid i must question your mathematical skills. Why waste 3sec in doing 40% heals when you could have done 40-50% damage? Its just math, you cant heal and damage at the same time, by using healing spells you went afk to prolong the battle a few seconds, your death would come sooner or later. Damage can heal people to full if the battle ends, Heals dont kill people when your hp bar is full. Which means that damage serves both roles of "Damage dealer" and "healer", but "healer" serves only 1 role. By playing a hybrid playstyle you are gimping yourself in being "bad at everything", other specialised classes would do things better.

You haven't given me a single reason why healing spells should be in a feral druid action bar.
You cant outheal my damage, when i am on top of you, so why use it ?

Dude you have obviously never played wow as a serious player. A druid outheals most damage 1vs1, And do you know what heal over times are? A druid can outheal a warrior using only his HOTS, 3 of them available 2 from normal form 1 in bearform. Combine these and you can outheal any warrior with the same gear, and then im not counting the bigger heals, instant full healths, 1.5 second regrowts that heals half, bash the warrior (stun for 3 sec) and i fit in 2 heals, full health, and I keep healing 1k every 3 seconds thanks to heal over time generated.

I guess you are striving for a 1 hit kill game because that might be the only way to kill someone for you.

Don't say heals in wow are useless and not needed, they are the most basic parts of the pvp, and 9/10 times, if you can heal, and it's a 1vs1 duel, you will most likely be able to outheal anyone.

Priests flash heal, 1.5 second full health. Druid's aswell, paladins are imba with 6 second immunity.

#4926027 Game Economics

Posted by on 28 March 2012 - 10:21 AM

Actually, you said that it was unfair for new players who had less money than the rich ones, so yeah, you did make the assumption that this price raising would happen half-way through the game starting.

Based on this statement yes:
"As a game dev, you could counteract this by making things cost more, such as travelling, skill training, levelling up etc etc, and by doing that you are adding function to that currency and giving it more value. This doesn't apply to currency only, but any resource really."

How does that work? Why would they be selling above the NPC price in the first place? They would only be able to sell cheap, and even that's assuming they can gather that resource/item at a cheaper rate than the buying price from the NPC vendor - e.g. from the environment, loot, etc.

You're misunderstanding me. Let me explain. If the NPC buys copper for 10 gold, the player will obviously sell it for atleast 11 gold to another player or he "can just go to the NPC and sell it" commonly used in tibia and other games.

On the other hand, if the NPC sells copper for 15 gold, the player can never sell it for more than 15 gold, because then the threats to go to the NPC comes from the buyer instead. Put a maximum cap per day on the amount of resource the NPC sells to each player and you have somewhat steady prices, but still a means for players to set their own prices above those of NPC.

But me personally I wouldn't play a purely resource based economy game. Because it makes it inconvinient, sure there might be a market for it, but it's a very niche market. And it will be extremely difficult to balance.

Coins is a means to put a price on items, the players manage this very good themselfs, You can still have a resource and accumulation based economy, just that the oil vendor wont have to give away too much oil for something of less worth. In a resource based economy players are forced to trade useless items just to get the full worth of their items, while coins is more measurable.

But if noone values these coins, they become useless, so it is still resource based. This is how economy works, and there is a good reason for it. Even in the stoneage they used pieces of rock to do this.

#4925931 Game Economics

Posted by on 28 March 2012 - 03:03 AM

How does that work? If you match the money sinks with money sources then you won't get an accumulation of money in the system. You're assuming these changes are being made after the game has already started.

I don't assume anything, just answering your question. What do you mean by "money sinks"?

With regards to the NPC vendors, why would you want that to happen? You want the players who have rightfully invested in their resource extraction or production to profit greatly from it, and the ones who have lost out to react to it.

They will still profit from it, and if the demand is high enough players will buy and they wont have to sell to NPC.
However if the prices go down too much, having an NPC with fixed prices is a fallback, so the players wont have to sell too cheap and still earn good money.
And the NPC's could only sell common goods like copper etc, and only a certain amount per day/player to benefit the server.

The reason I got hooked on MMORPG's in the first place was the "living" economy, in my case tibia. If there is a certain amount of rare weapons they sink in prices, to stop them from sinking too much they implemented a travelling NPC, that bought these rare items, for good prices. This way people still earned money from an item that was in abundance on the server.

This doesn't mean everyone sell's to the NPC, since the player to player price is always higher than what the NPC gives, and this spawned a whole other unexpected trade.
Players started buying bulk, and selling to other players for profit. A real economy.

#4925768 Game Economics

Posted by on 27 March 2012 - 12:45 PM

As a game dev, you could counteract this by making things cost more, such as travelling, skill training, levelling up etc etc, and by doing that you are adding function to that currency and giving it more value. This doesn't apply to currency only, but any resource really.

I don't think increasing the cost of needed things like travelling and skill training benefits the game economy, since new players will have a more difficult time when the bar is set higher the later they enter the game.

With an economy that benefits the rich and makes it difficult for new players to get into wont help the game grow and is likely not to work in the long run.

Also NPC's have a good use, they help maintaining the economy by adjusting the prices. If you use them right they can be a great tool to maintain the servers economy.
Like the NPC selling items to keep the prices down, and buying other items to keep the prices up.