• Announcements

    • khawk

      Download the Game Design and Indie Game Marketing Freebook   07/19/17

      GameDev.net and CRC Press have teamed up to bring a free ebook of content curated from top titles published by CRC Press. The freebook, Practices of Game Design & Indie Game Marketing, includes chapters from The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, and An Architectural Approach to Level Design. The GameDev.net FreeBook is relevant to game designers, developers, and those interested in learning more about the challenges in game development. We know game development can be a tough discipline and business, so we picked several chapters from CRC Press titles that we thought would be of interest to you, the GameDev.net audience, in your journey to design, develop, and market your next game. The free ebook is available through CRC Press by clicking here. The Curated Books The Art of Game Design: A Book of Lenses, Second Edition, by Jesse Schell Presents 100+ sets of questions, or different lenses, for viewing a game’s design, encompassing diverse fields such as psychology, architecture, music, film, software engineering, theme park design, mathematics, anthropology, and more. Written by one of the world's top game designers, this book describes the deepest and most fundamental principles of game design, demonstrating how tactics used in board, card, and athletic games also work in video games. It provides practical instruction on creating world-class games that will be played again and again. View it here. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing, by Joel Dreskin Marketing is an essential but too frequently overlooked or minimized component of the release plan for indie games. A Practical Guide to Indie Game Marketing provides you with the tools needed to build visibility and sell your indie games. With special focus on those developers with small budgets and limited staff and resources, this book is packed with tangible recommendations and techniques that you can put to use immediately. As a seasoned professional of the indie game arena, author Joel Dreskin gives you insight into practical, real-world experiences of marketing numerous successful games and also provides stories of the failures. View it here. An Architectural Approach to Level Design This is one of the first books to integrate architectural and spatial design theory with the field of level design. The book presents architectural techniques and theories for level designers to use in their own work. It connects architecture and level design in different ways that address the practical elements of how designers construct space and the experiential elements of how and why humans interact with this space. Throughout the text, readers learn skills for spatial layout, evoking emotion through gamespaces, and creating better levels through architectural theory. View it here. Learn more and download the ebook by clicking here. Did you know? GameDev.net and CRC Press also recently teamed up to bring GDNet+ Members up to a 20% discount on all CRC Press books. Learn more about this and other benefits here.

spires

Members
  • Content count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

257 Neutral

About spires

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. I disagree with this week's topic. Pacing and Accessibility are 2 things that are not directly linked. Vs is for things like fast vs slow, good vs evil, male vs female. Also i think this 2 topics are both good topics that can be separately discussed. Reading through your post, i think the crux of your post is how to make jrpg more accessible to rpg newcomers. Is that so? Monster's Den (Kongregate) does not so much as make menu-based faster or more accessible; it just adapt a menu-based meant for console and adapted it for web browsers. Another similar example is The-West, a browser game from innogames. In The-West, you have only 1 character which you can pre-set your command( where you want to hit for each round). Then you just click attack on other player and the game will resolve the conflict.
  2. [quote name='Orymus3' timestamp='1342372671' post='4959304'] View Postspires, on 15 July 2012 - 02:24 PM, said: Exploring to me is walking off the beaten path. Doing things outside of the main quests. So basically, there is no exploration on the main path? That sounds restrictive. I think the player explores the game whenever they're not fighting (in fact once could argue they even explore the battle system everytime they're shown new enemies). [/quote] Restrictive? Hardly. Just defining what is the spirit of exploring in RPG to me. Take for example, you have a quest to set an npc free from prision. The main or default path will be fighting your way through. Say the game allows you to bribe the guard or set a fire as distraction. That to me is exploring; allowomg player to try different ways to solve a problem. The more unrelated to the main quest, to the core mechanics of combat the more i regard as exploring. Skyrim is a good example of it. There is a lot of things to do outside of the main quests. [quote name='Orymus3' timestamp='1342372671' post='4959304'] I like mini-games, but I can't help but feel they are a solution applied to a problem by lack of a more organic one. You see this happening when there are too many of them, or when they are too clearly minigames (Brainlord, raise your hand please). [/quote] Agreed. When mini-games are poorly implemented, they do feel lacking. There are some key points to note: 1) Mini game should be challenging. 2) There should be an appropriate reward with respect to the challenge. A good example is grand theft auto taxi mission. There are 10 levels of it. At each higher level, you need to pick up more passengers in a row and get them to their destination on time and safely. Drive too fierce and your taxi is fried. Drive too cautious and you do not make it in time. And completing 10 levels, unlocks Infinite Nitro on your taxi. A bad example will be kingdom of amalur card game. Just a variation of guessing big/small. [quote name='Orymus3' timestamp='1342372671' post='4959304'] Does the score have any impact in-game whatsoever? [/quote] I would say the score is a reward in itself. A bragging right or just an indicator of how well you do. I heard in mass effect score is used to decide the ending. You can also use the npcs you used or decision you made or whatever else affect the ending. To sum up, I would say provide good positive feedback will encourage players to explore alternative and have fun doing so.
  3. Exploring to me is walking off the beaten path. Doing things outside of the main quests. It can only be done if the level design of the game allows for multiple paths to get to where you need to go. Some ways a game can reward players for exploring can be: 1) Visual / story experience Like rushing to the aid of an enemy besieging the town. You can rush straight to the town , or go up the mountain to see the full scope of devastation. So upon travelling up the mountain, you are rewarded a cutscreen of the devastation. Or visiting a temple in a far flung location will tell you about the story of what happened in this world in the past. Or events leading to the story of the game. 2) Using mechanics to find hidden Pokeman using flying to access places otherwise unreachable. Using martial arts/ skills in chinese rpg to do the same. Or having certain npc in your party to unlock certain places. And giving items(sword of infinite truth), summons(Ifirit), .... for doing so. 3) Using mini games Demon doors in fable which requires players to guess a riddle to open the door. Card game(final fantasy series) which completed at the highest level gives the user something in return. Or grand theft auto doing 50 photoshots to gain a cache of weapons at your base. 4) Side quests Having optional side quests only available by paying attention to dialog of npcs. Best example Planescape Torment. Having certain stats or items will trigger side quests upon talking with your npc companions. 5) Achievements points Grand theft auto uses exploration mechanics to score how well a player does. +2% for completing taxi mission. +3% for finding all 50 hidden photo shots. Note that all of the above is not required to complete the game yet they reward players for not trying the most efficient path to complete the game. To explore places and mechanics.
  4. A designer knows he has achieved perfection not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away. To me, [font=times new roman,times,serif]bashing the “Fight” command is precisely that. It can be removed without reducing the game depth in it. The only reason it is there is like what others here have said to give players a way out if they run out of potions to use the other options. [/font]There are many ways to prevent users running out of potions and therefore get into a point of no return. I think the issue is bigger than just [font=times new roman,times,serif]the problem of always bashing the “Fight” command. [/font]The issue with those [font=times new roman,times,serif]Retro/Console (J) RPG[/font] i played is that [u]All Attack commands(Fight, Magic, skills, summon) or whatever you called it is [font=times new roman,times,serif]strategical [/font]irrelevant[/u]. In a roleplaying game, there are 3 components: Resource Management (getting enough hp and mana pots) Character Power(Levels, Skill power of attacks, Stats) Tactical decision in fight( Who to choose to fight who, with which attack command) The problem is that if Character Power is high enough, you can kill anything just by [font=times new roman,times,serif]bashing the “Fight”[/font] or any attack command for that matter. The solution is then to a) keep the balance between Character Power and Tactical decision in fight or b) Make them incomparables.
  5. [quote name='Sayid Ahmed' timestamp='1333972895' post='4929525'] This is always a tough one, how about: [b]Even Faction Size Mechanic[/b] [left]Allow players to have the choice of faction along with diminishing returns on the size of a faction[/left] [b]Summary[/b] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]Players can join an existing one or create their own small one. Joining a large one leads to more protection and item sharing, but limited responsibility or involvement. Roles within a faction, such as Marshall of War, or Minister of Treasury, can only be filled by one person, can go through cycles to create fairness but only really appeal to experienced players. Players who become more experienced and want an active role can create an off-shoot faction. To add more to the mix, maybe attacking larger factions reaps more rewards? Or requires more administration costs?[/size][/font][/color][/left] [b]Addressed player motivation[/b] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]To prevent player dissatisfaction; promote co-operation through real life friendship etc; preventing the creation of overly large factions and superpowers.[/size][/font][/color][/left] [b]Used in what game[/b] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]Not that I know of[/size][/font][/color][/left] [b]Predicted impact[/b] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]+Balancing the size of all factions[/size][/font][/color][/left] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]+Freedom of players to chose allegiance[/size][/font][/color][/left] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]+Opportunities for players to have significant roles[/size][/font][/color][/left] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]-Creation of many small factions; creation of coalitions and reversing the purpose of this mechanic[/size][/font][/color][/left] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]-Constant migration of players[/size][/font][/color][/left] [left][color=#282828][font=helvetica, arial, verdana, tahoma, sans-serif][size=3]-Difficult for new players to understand; may automatically join the big factions, not knowing the disadvantages[/size][/font][/color][/left] [/quote] Allowing players to create their own faction or secede from the faction is an excellent idea. I am of the idea of creating factions with npc leaders at the start.The factions will have different hierarchy structures(roman republic, middle age feudalism). As the players progressed, they may take over the faction. Players can choose[list] [*]to climb the kingdom ladder [*]secede existing town from the faction(as mayor of town) [*]create a town not related to any faction(must be in area unclaimed yet) [/list]
  6. [quote name='InvertedLlama' timestamp='1333970628' post='4929511'] Why not use human traits to balance the factions? Everyone wants to be the general, everyone wants to be the king. So how about allowing the forming of subgroups and then let them secede the faction when they've developed to a point that they can be independent. That way no faction should grow much over 2 or 3 times the seceding limit. [/quote] Human traits are the key to balance the factions. The purpose of this topic is to create game mechanics that will encourage good human traits, like desire to be at the top. And discourage bad ones like conforming (zerging). Good/bad human traits with respect to creating balanced, competitive factions. [quote name='InvertedLlama' timestamp='1333970628' post='4929511'] Out of the one's you've described 3 looks the best. 1 - Will really piss of people who are trying to play with friends as they'll want to chose whether to play cooperatively or against one another 2 - Will be seen as unfair - Will quite likely be a real pain to balance - Gives rushers a very large advantage and pretty much guaranteed win if they join the weaker faction [/quote] 1 - Can allow users to invite friends to play the game. By entering a friends code, you CAN join the faction they are in, next to their location. 2 - That is quite true. Though the incentive will most likely only be used when there is significant difference in numbers between the factions and are mainly used to overcome the disadvantage for being in the weaker faction.
  7. [b][u]Goal[/u][/b] I am trying to create a text based game based on players living in countries/factions which are in eternal conflict with each other. [b][u]Background[/u][/b] The reason for this discussion is that i feel that factions in game are inherently unbalanced. Individual player motivation may cause one faction to have vastly more resources(players) over the others. This causes unfun for the weaker factions and create unfair competition which leads to the game decline and eventual failure as players in weaker factions rage-quit. I am posting here to ask for input on game mechanics that can encourage players to spread out across the factions. To provide context, imagine that the game will be a text based game where the factions will be spread apart and that travel takes time and locations have strategical purposes. Factions have no obvious differences between them, though things like population or location(center of map/near coast) may make the difference for players. Example on what i am asking for though you do not have to follow the format. [b]Game mechanic[/b]: Name of Game mechanic [b]Summary[/b]: What the Game mechanic is about [b]Addressed player motivation[/b]: What problem or player motivation the game mechanic is supposed to solve/prevent [b]Used in what game[/b]: Game the mechanic is used on [b]Predicted impact[/b]: What is the possible outcome if Game mechanic is used [b]Game mechanic 1[/b]: Assign players automatically into factions with lesser numbers [b]Summary[/b]: Automatically place new players into factions with less players. [b]Addressed player motivation[/b]: To ensure that different factions will have roughly equivant numbers [b]Used in what game[/b]: Utopia (text-based strategy game. Auto placement based on how many players the kingdom already has; max 15) [b]Predicted impact[/b]: +Effective for balancing the numbers but not the quality as new players may try the game and quit -Can be a heavy-handed way. Player lose their player control over where they want to start -The auto-placement may also cause the bigger factions to have lesser stream of new players [b]Game mechanic 2[/b]: Reward players for joining factions with lesser numbers [b]Summary[/b]: Provide a one-time incentives like in game gold for players choosing to join a weaker faction [b]Addressed player motivation[/b]: Encourage players who are more reward / risk minded to fight a losing cause [b]Used in what game[/b]: Dota (Not directly relevant but dota gives more gold to players who choose random heroes to encourage players to try different heroes) [b]Predicted impact[/b]: +Provide a good reward / risk to encourage players to make different choices -Any reward will over time prove insignificant. May cause player regret [b]Game mechanic 3[/b]: Strength rewards for joining factions with lesser numbers [b]Summary[/b]: Provide more rewards to players in areas with lower population. For example, if many people are chopping wood in an area, the amount of wood each person gets is lesser. Or it may take longer to find the trees to chop / the trees yield lower quality wood. [b]Addressed player motivation[/b]: Encourage players to spread out [b]Used in what game[/b]: Eve(Not directly relevant but minerals in eve are more abudunt/only available in more 'dangerous areas') [b]Predicted impact[/b]: +Give players full control over risk/reward -Less intuitive; may require more explanation to new players on how it works -May cause unhappiness to players in big number factions