eytanz
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2708
Registered: 02-05-2003
IP: Logged

But Dungeon, unlike DROD, is a resource manipulation puzzle - and lack of information means that you don't know if you're spending your resources wisely. DGM's decision to make everything visible will allow for very tightly woven puzzles where every decision must be measured carefully. It's hardly the only way to design a game like this, but I think it's an interesting decision that will enable puzzles otherwise inaccessible. Sure, there's a cost, but it might well be worth it.

____________________________
I got my avatar back! Yay!

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

eytanz wrote:
But Dungeon, unlike DROD, is a resource manipulation puzzle

Whereas DROD is a resource elimination puzzle. I understand now.

eytanz
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2708
Registered: 02-05-2003
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:

eytanz wrote:
But Dungeon, unlike DROD, is a resource manipulation puzzle

Whereas DROD is a resource elimination puzzle. I understand now.

Uh, I don't. What do you mean by that?

____________________________
I got my avatar back! Yay!

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

eytanz wrote:

NiroZ wrote:

eytanz wrote:
But Dungeon, unlike DROD, is a resource manipulation puzzle

Whereas DROD is a resource elimination puzzle. I understand now.

Uh, I don't. What do you mean by that?

I mean I see your point of view.

silver
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 915
Registered: 01-18-2005
IP: Logged

eytanz wrote:

NiroZ wrote:

eytanz wrote:
But Dungeon, unlike DROD, is a resource manipulation puzzle

Whereas DROD is a resource elimination puzzle. I understand now.

Uh, I don't. What do you mean by that?

he was making a joke, see... Beethro smites everything, eliminating them from the board.


____________________________

zonhin
Level: Delver

Rank Points: 99
Registered: 10-18-2005
IP: Logged

DGM wrote:

zonhin wrote:
Why not? can't you just have multiple combats going on at the same time? If you can't, for whatever reason, maybe you could impliment it somehow?

Nothing moves or reacts independantly except for the player. How would you get into multiple fights at once? And more importantly, how would that improve the game?

EDIT: Actually, scratch that. I've thought of a way it could be done. But it would be a feature to add in a future upgrade, not something that would be in the initial release.

Thank you for the idea.

What I mean is that the combats will both be initiated at the same time. By the player, attacking the same monster. One combat will do HP damage, the other MP. To the player it'll look like one fight. Sorry I wasn't clear enough.

____________________________
I looked at the world through apple eyes
And cut myself a slice of sunshine pie
I danced with the peanut butterflies
Till time went and told me to say hello but wave goodbye

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

zonhin wrote:
What I mean is that the combats will both be initiated at the same time. By the player, attacking the same monster. One combat will do HP damage, the other MP. To the player it'll look like one fight. Sorry I wasn't clear enough.

Ah. Well, the main problem with this is that I would have to make the conflict system more complex. As it is, the conflict ends when someone's reserve runs out. But what happens if there are two reserves involved and one runs out before the other? I have to address such issues. And I don't even see yet what this would add to the game.

This might be worth looking into down the road, but for now I'm happy with the complexity-to-versatility ratio. Remember that I want to start things simple and add to it later, not dump everything on new players at once.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

---

[Last edited by DGM at 04-30-2007 08:53 PM]

Sillyman
Level: Smiter

Rank Points: 339
Registered: 09-08-2006
IP: Logged

If there are two reserves involved, when one runs out, that half of the combat is over and the effects of losing apply. I am assuming that you will have combats that are safely losable?

____________________________
Who, me?
FNORD

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

Some stats (like reputation with a faction) can be allowed to go negative, others (like life) can't. If a conflict would reduce the first kind below zero, then the player can't really lose; the conflict goes on until the encounter's reserve is reduced below zero. Eventual victory is guarenteed, it's just a question of price. For the second kind, the player just won't be allowed to start a conflict unless he could win.

However, I still don't see any major puzzle potential of having two conflicts go on at once.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

---

[Last edited by DGM at 05-02-2007 01:00 PM]

eytanz
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2708
Registered: 02-05-2003
IP: Logged

DGM wrote:
However, I still don't see any major puzzle potential of having two conflicts go on at once.

Well, the main use would be to create a situation where you need to control the level of two stats at once. There's no real other way of doing so - sequential encounters will allow for the possibility of first winning one encounter, then manipulating stats again elsewhere, then returning for the other encounter.

That's unless you have the equivalent of a force arrow or trapdoor, allowing you to enter an area but not return the way you came. Not sure if you are planning on those, though.

____________________________
I got my avatar back! Yay!

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

eytanz wrote:
Well, the main use would be to create a situation where you need to control the level of two stats at once. There's no real other way of doing so

Yes there is. As I said, you can have fixed stat checks/changes in any interaction, with or without a conflict. You're allowed more than one of those.


____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

mrimer
Level: Legendary Smitemaster

Rank Points: 5056
Registered: 02-04-2003
IP: Logged

I'll add my voice to the camp that wouldn't like to be able to view all of the rooms in a dungeon from the outset. Adding editor options for the architect to selectively provide relevant information to the player at different times sounds useful.

____________________________
Gandalf? Yes... That's what they used to call me.
Gandalf the Grey. That was my name.
I am Gandalf the White.
And I come back to you now at the turn of the tide.

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

mrimer wrote:
I'll add my voice to the camp that wouldn't like to be able to view all of the rooms in a dungeon from the outset. Adding editor options for the architect to selectively provide relevant information to the player at different times sounds useful.

As I said, I don't have a problem with an optional "exploration mode." But given the basic nature of the game (the entire dungeon is a single puzzle) I just don't see how I can pull the "see everything" option (let's call that "puzzle mode") entirely without being unfair. What's wrong with letting each player decide for himself which way he enjoys the game more?

And besides, puzzle mode would be useful for those who have already completed a dungeon and want to optimize (I have a scoring mechanism planned).

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

---

[Last edited by DGM at 05-05-2007 07:46 PM]

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

DGM wrote:
As I said, I don't have a problem with an optional "exploration mode."

This is one of those things which you can't 'make optional'. If you have it optional, who in their right mind will turn it off?

But given the basic nature of the game (the entire dungeon is a single puzzle) I just don't see how I can pull the "see everything" option (let's call that "puzzle mode") entirely without being unfair.

The problem is that then the hold turns into one long equation. I don't know about you, but if I wanted to do maths, I'd do maths. Playing computer games is for when I want to relax, or have fun solving puzzles.

Besides, if you don't have a 'reveal all' function, the game is more replayable.

---

[Last edited by NiroZ at 05-06-2007 12:27 AM]

zonhin
Level: Delver

Rank Points: 99
Registered: 10-18-2005
IP: Logged

I agree with the points made by NiroZ. The map will make the game too difficult if you rely on the function it was made for. (To turn the dungeon into one big puzzle). It would make the game too difficult. And if you use it only lightly (relatively few puzzles rely on it.) Then it will ruin part of the charm of the game (Exploration was really fun even in just ten levels. I really don't want to get rid of that.)

____________________________
I looked at the world through apple eyes
And cut myself a slice of sunshine pie
I danced with the peanut butterflies
Till time went and told me to say hello but wave goodbye

---

[Last edited by zonhin at 05-06-2007 12:58 AM]

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:
This is one of those things which you can't 'make optional'. If you have it optional, who in their right mind will turn it off?

I think you mean "turn it on." And the answer is: "anyone who finds more fun in the exploration aspect of the game." Like you, apparently. If you know you want to discover the dungeon level by level, what's to keep you from using exploration mode?

As for who would turn exploration mode off, the answer is: "Eytanz, for one."

The problem is that then the hold turns into one long equation.

Only if you want to play it that way. DROD doesn't force you to sit there and completely solve the entire room before making a single move, either.

No one's trying to railroad you into a particular style of play. The information about unexplored levels is not going to be forced down your throat.

Besides, if you don't have a 'reveal all' function, the game is more replayable.

How so? You can play through in exploration mode as many times as you like.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

---

[Last edited by DGM at 05-06-2007 06:33 PM]

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

zonhin wrote:
I agree with the points made by NiroZ. The map will make the game too difficult if you rely on the function it was made for. (To turn the dungeon into one big puzzle). It would make the game too difficult. And if you use it only lightly (relatively few puzzles rely on it.) Then it will ruin part of the charm of the game (Exploration was really fun even in just ten levels. I really don't want to get rid of that.)

You can make dungeons designed for either style of play.

Also, one person's "hard" is another's "easy." I'd rather give the end-users the freedom to experiment than assume I know up front what the perfect balance is and railroad everyone into that.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

DGM wrote:

NiroZ wrote:
This is one of those things which you can't 'make optional'. If you have it optional, who in their right mind will turn it off?

I think you mean "turn it on." And the answer is: "anyone who finds more fun in the exploration aspect of the game." Like you, apparently. If you know you want to discover the dungeon level by level, what's to keep you from using exploration mode?

If DROD made it so that pressing CTRL annihilated all creatures in the direction that the sword was facing, I'd use it. But I would still strongly advocate against it. Why would I want to disadvantage myself?

How so? You can play through in exploration mode as many times as you like.

But why would I want to? I've seen everything, tried everything out already.

eytanz
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2708
Registered: 02-05-2003
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:
But why would I want to? I've seen everything, tried everything out already.

Have you seen the thread with people replaying The Tower of the Sorceror over and over just to get one more hit point in the end? Or for that matter, high-score optimizers in DROD? I think you're either seriously underestimating the appeal this type of gameplay has, or else you are seriously overestimating how useful full information will be.

____________________________
I got my avatar back! Yay!

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:
If DROD made it so that pressing CTRL annihilated all creatures in the direction that the sword was facing, I'd use it. But I would still strongly advocate against it. Why would I want to disadvantage myself?

Does this page answer your question?

Also, I would ask what standard you're measuring "advantage" and "disadvantage" by. Your ultimate goal in playing a game is to have fun. If you find the most fun in playing competitively, then yes, exploration mode is a disadvantage. But if you find that you have more fun in exploration and discovery, then by that measure puzzle mode is a disadvantage.

Make up your mind what style of play you prefer, and then you'll know which mode is advantageous for you.

How so? You can play through in exploration mode as many times as you like.

But why would I want to? I've seen everything, tried everything out already.

Now you're trying to have it both ways. You yourself said:

Besides, if you don't have a 'reveal all' function, the game is more replayable.

Playing in exploration mode is playing without the "reveal all" function. How is there a difference in replayability between not having the function and not using it? How is it not the same gameplay experience?


What you're essentially asking for here is not just the option to play the game the way you want (which I already offered as soon as you first complained), but for me to take away from everyone else the option to play it differently. I don't see why people like Eytanz should have to play it your way any more than you should be forced to play it his.

What's more, you're asking me to throw out the fundamental design principle of the game - to be a completely fair puzzle game - and change to a puzzle/exploration hybrid design.

If I'm going to do that, you need to offer me an extremely good reason. And so far your arguments basically seem to come down to you not having any willpower. That's just not a good enough reason to punish other players by taking their options away.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

---

[Last edited by DGM at 05-07-2007 05:20 AM]

zonhin
Level: Delver

Rank Points: 99
Registered: 10-18-2005
IP: Logged

All right then, this is degenerating into an argument. I think we should just let DGM do whatever he wants. It's his game after all, and he's pretty adamant in his position. We're not going to change anything. The game's still going to be fun whether or not it's included.

____________________________
I looked at the world through apple eyes
And cut myself a slice of sunshine pie
I danced with the peanut butterflies
Till time went and told me to say hello but wave goodbye

NiroZ
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1302
Registered: 02-12-2006
IP: Logged

Don't be confused, the downmod was by Maurog, for the excessive amount of quotes. Ironically, he was the one who requested this feature in the first place.

DGM wrote:

How so? You can play through in exploration mode as many times as you like.

But why would I want to? I've seen everything, tried everything out already.

Now you're trying to have it both ways. You yourself said:

Besides, if you don't have a 'reveal all' function, the game is more replayable.

Playing in exploration mode is playing without the "reveal all" function. How is there a difference in replayability between not having the function and not using it? How is it not the same gameplay experience?

If a feature is implemented, I would assume that the Game creator wants me to use it, that that is the experience that the game creator wants me to enjoy.

zonhin wrote:All right then, this is degenerating into an argument. I think we should just let DGM do whatever he wants. It's his game after all, and he's pretty adamant in his position. We're not going to change anything. The game's still going to be fun whether or not it's included.

True, but on the other hand, DGM directly requested for feedback and discussion. Or at least, that what I thought he said.

---

[Last edited by NiroZ at 05-10-2007 12:57 PM]

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

NiroZ wrote:
If a feature is implemented, I would assume that the Game creator wants me to use it, that that is the experience that the game creator wants me to enjoy.

I'll be explicit about my intentions, then.

But that still doesn't answer the question. How does not having the power to see ahead give more replayability than having the power but never using it?

True, but on the other hand, DGM directly requested for feedback and discussion. Or at least, that what I thought he said.

No, you're correct. I do want feedback and some of it is influencing the game design.

But I don't automatically throw something in just because someone asks for it. Adding features uncritically is a good way to ruin a game. I have to see how a feature enhances the game instead of watering it down, and when the benefit of your suggestion is not immediately obvious to me then I have to challenge you to justify it.

Adding an exploration mode is easy to implement and gives another way to play without compromising the core gameplay. But it is an extra, not the intended way to play. Taking away puzzle mode, OTOH, changes the basic nature of the game. I need a better reason than you just not wanting it there, especially when you already have the option to simply not use it.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

---

[Last edited by DGM at 05-07-2007 08:05 AM]

eytanz
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 2708
Registered: 02-05-2003
IP: Logged

One important additional consideration about discussing this feature, by the way, is that this is the sort of thing that can relatively easily be changed during beta-testing, at least from a design point of view (I can't speak for coding). It's just a toggle - feature on vs. feature off, which doesn't require tweaking a value or complex interactions with other features.

In other words, I find arguing about it now rather pointless. Lets see until we actually have something at hand which we can play, and judge for ourselves whether full information disclosure makes for positive, negative, or no impact on the enjoyment of the game.

At the moment this is a debate about the game NiroZ is imagining vs. the game DGM is imagining and there's no objective way to see who is a better imaginer (though a priori I'm inclined to side with DGM since he's the one actually implementing his vision, so it will be closer to reality).

____________________________
I got my avatar back! Yay!

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

This is odd... Why did this topic get bumped when there's no new post here?

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

Znirk
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 613
Registered: 07-28-2005
IP: Logged

Probably someone replied, then deleted the reply.

Doom
Level: Smitemaster

Rank Points: 3226
Registered: 07-05-2004
IP: Logged

There was, but the author has since deleted it. It wasn't anything special, just a generic 'bump' for whatever reason.

I'm still following this, by the way, but there hasn't been a lot to post about lately. I think I agree with togglable explore-mode. The ability to see everything makes planning different routes on a replay easier rather than reducing the potential, in my opinion. If you've played through a dungeon, there's typically nothing you wouldn't have seen already. I'm fairly sure I'd explore first playthroughs without such feature, though.

DGM
Level: Master Delver
Rank Points: 202
Registered: 06-16-2006
IP: Logged

Doom wrote:
I'm still following this, by the way, but there hasn't been a lot to post about lately.

I still have to get familiar with Game Builder, and I've been busy enough lately that I just haven't gotten around to that yet. So it will be a bit longer.

I'm fairly sure I'd explore first playthroughs without such feature, though.

I probably will too.

____________________________
My gaming blog is at http://dungeon-games.com/blog/

BeefontheBone
Level: Master Delver

Rank Points: 184
Registered: 05-11-2006
IP: Logged

Most likely someone posted then deleted one.

____________________________
Braindead's Mordor Site - Dungeon crawling having nothing whatsoever to do with LotR. Plus a freeware remake in-progress, featuring descriptive text written by yours truly!

Beef Row wrote: Actually, it doesn't really matter because the soap is a lye.

zonhin
Level: Delver

Rank Points: 99
Registered: 10-18-2005
IP: Logged

Just a quick question, how is development going along?

____________________________
I looked at the world through apple eyes
And cut myself a slice of sunshine pie
I danced with the peanut butterflies
Till time went and told me to say hello but wave goodbye