Interaction beyond just "click the glowwie"

53 posts / 0 new
Last post
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Interaction beyond just "click the glowwie"

In GW2, which I just started playing, there are objects you can pick up, carry around, throw at people, and use in various ways. Maybe it's a rock. You can pick it up, walk around with it, then set it down someplace else. While carrying it, you can throw it at a target. Maybe when you do that it shatters upon contact, or maybe it ends up on the ground over there. Maybe more of them spawn on the rock pile over time. Maybe you need to use it to plug a hole or weigh down a pressure plate on the floor.

Or maybe it's a gun that you can shoot. Maybe it's a sniper rifle set up in a fixed position on a perch you have to get to and you can't move it from where it is, but it has long enough range and good enough damage to be useful in the fight you're in.

Just having objects that can be interacted with beyond the "click the glowwie" is, I think, a huge bit of tech to have access to in a game when designing it. I would hope that CoT will be able to do stuff like this, because it opens up a wide range of possibilities.

Another good one is dialog boxes with options. You click the glowwie, it pops up a thing that gives you options. You have to select the correct options in the right order to make it work and defuse the time bomb or lower the forcefield, etc.

Can CoT do this?

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
I thought interacting with

I thought interacting with world objects like rocks, bottles, tools, weapons, etc., in GW2 made the world more interesting, but rarely did I ever need or even want to use them, and so I wonder if they were worth the capability. On the other hand, like you said Radiac, the use of interactable objects in a mission were a brilliant upgrade from the old-school click on the glowie. Maybe ArenaNet put the capability in there for the missions first, and then realized it was a negligible effort to throw random things around the world, too.

I am all for giving us things to play with. And I like the idea of using the contents of the mission area to accomplish the mission. And there was another thread (http://cityoftitans.com/forum/fabricator-power-set-origin-specific-crafting-power) that could really use this!


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Thanks fr the mention,

Thanks fr the mention, Huckleberry. I also thought of that while readin this thread, and I've wondered how possible it would be to make a power set which enables you to use improvised weapons as clickable glowies all the time - so while glowies may appear to any players as a specific part of a mission, one power set would let you see them al the time (in some visually non-intrusive fashion). It would therefor let you interact with the environment to pick up random objects and use them offensively as well as bits of debris and maybe pick up ot grab the weapons of mooks and carry them around, at least as far as the rest of the mission or instance map.
Maybe there could be an environment interactive movement set as well, styled as parkour, with elements of overlap.
This could be used to simulate improvised weapons and environment interactions such as you get in sequences like this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xk4dUq4zE_o&t=2m23s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_i42V390bMQ&t=0m9s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNfWlt69WKI&t=1m55s

Villain version: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAiNKxTKjzQ&t=0m16s

"TRUST ME."

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
I should point out that GW2

I should point out that GW2 has a different setup for using powers (or skills, or spells, or whatever you want to call them) then CoX had. In GW2, your health indicator is a red orb in the bottom center of the screen, and there are 5 powers in a row on the left, forming a row of square icons numbered 1-5 and five more on the right of the HP indicator numbered 6-0. Generally, the 1-5 powers are attacks, the 6 power is your self-heal, and the 7-0 powers are "utility skills" that can do just about anything based on what your class is.

Sometimes, when you click on an object, you just end up harvesting some currency that goes into your inventory. Like you might have to go out and collect eggs from the nests, so when you click on a nest, you get an egg that goes into your inventory, then you have to give those eggs to the NPC that gave you the quest and you get progress towards completing the quest. In this case the eggs are otherwise not a thing that can be sold or traded in any way, and if you dont give them back to the NPC, you'll be carrying them forever unless you just decide to drop them outright.

Sometimes, you might click on an object so as to harvest valuable resources from it, i.e. mining or chopping wood, etc. In this case the objects you get can be sold on the market. Looting corpses works like this. You press "f" to interact with objects, loot corpses, and res other players and downed NPCs.

Sometimes, when you click on an object, it simply actuates the object's one and only function, not unlike a glowwie. But here the object might do something in the map you're on. You might click on the control lever and interact with it, and then the gate will swing open, etc.

Sometimes, when you click on an object, it brings up a dialog box, like an NPC would. You might have to make choices and go through a flow chart of different options to arrive at what you want.

Sometimes, when you click on an object, you pick up the object and since you're no longer wielding your weapon(s), your 1-5 slot powers get replaced with a new set based on the object you're now holding. The 1-5 powers being attached, fundamentally, to which weapon(s) you are wielding is a mechanic the game uses and always adheres to. So if you're carrying a rock, not wielding your staff, you get the rock's set of attacks for your 1-5 slots instead of your usual spells. For instance, in this one dungeon, you have to wield this magic hammer to ring a series of magic gongs to free a titan. The hammer has powers for the 1-3 slots, and the 4 slot attack, which is the "ring the gong with the hammer" attack, only appears when you have "charged up" the hammer by defeating enough mobs with it. It has no 5-slot attack as far as I know.

So this "your weapon dictates your powers" approach is not something I would want for CoX, and I really dislike losing half my powers when I pick up an object, because I feel like it ought to be a free action to drop the object and go back to using my usual spells, but I think it would be useful, in CoT, to at least have objects that can be picked up, moved, maybe give you one or more temp powers that are appropriate for what the object does, etc. It opens up a huge set of possibilities.

Another example from GW2: in one dungeon, you have to keep the 5 campfires lit so you can weaken the ice elemental to the point where it can be defeated. There are 5 fires set up in a ring around the ice elemental, which doesn't move, and which throws AoE and ranged attacks around while you try to defeat it. So to defeat the ice guy, you have to go out and find objects scattered around called "fire wood", then bring them to these other objects called "fire place". When you pick up "fire wood" by interacting with it, you are now carrying the fire wood and your 1-5 powers consist of "Throw fire wood" in the 1 slot and a "hurry" power that increases your foot speed a little at the 2 slot, and nothing else. The "throw firewood" attack hurls the fire wood to a targeted AoE you designate in the usual way (it has a preview circle etc when you click it) and then when you throw the wood into the fire place, presumably the fire in the fire place now has more health bar or HP or whatever, and will burn for a while before eventually exhausting itself and needing more fire wood later. The game also gives you a special "light fire" power when you're close enough to the fire places to light them. That ability doesn't overwrite your other spells, and doesn't require you to be carrying wood, but the fire has to have wood to burn in the first place to get it started.

So in that event, some people have to run around trying to keep the fires lit while others attack the ice elemental. It's definitely more challenging than just clicking glowwies, and you can do it faster by trying to do it faster, unlike clicking glowwies, which always had a set timer in CoX. That said, sometimes interacting with objects does have a timer. Oh and the Ice Elemental's attacks slow you, and there are other minions in there that give you static too. So the whole thing is this frantic running around tending the 5 fires you have to keep going while trying to avoid attacks that slow you (which is a lot of "avoid the AoE stuff" if you remember that from CoX) and then trying to get some damage done to the Ice Elemental in the meantime.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
This is taken from another

This is taken from another thread, but I think it is germane to what you just discussed:

Tannim222 wrote:

I do hope to include a wide range of temporary crafted powers. Each of these may be customizable as well. We discussed the possibility of a specific temp power action bar but decided by providing multiple action bars and allowing players to place powers in them as they see fit, one wasn't necessary.
We do plan to have a specific hot bar for specifc temp powers if they're part of a mission requirement so it is easy for players to locate the power.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Yeah, that. Thanks Huck.

Yeah, that. Thanks Huck.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

desviper
desviper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 3 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
I'd wish for minigames like

I'd wish for minigames like difusing bombs or hacking, but that's probably not worth the dev time.

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad"

Please have Scaling decals!

Avatar by MikeNovember

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
desviper wrote:
desviper wrote:

I'd wish for minigames like difusing bombs or hacking, but that's probably not worth the dev time.

Minigames like that might not be worth the extra effort for the game's launch but they might be added as updates later on. *shrugs*

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

desviper wrote:
I'd wish for minigames like difusing bombs or hacking, but that's probably not worth the dev time.
Minigames like that might not be worth the extra effort for the game's launch but they might be added as updates later on. *shrugs*

I would certainly hope that tasks like that are a standard feature in content using puzzle-mechanisms like variations of quicktime events, rather than a separate minigame.

"TRUST ME."

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gluke wrote:
Gluke wrote:

I would certainly hope that tasks like that are a standard feature in content using puzzle-mechanisms like variations of quicktime events, rather than a separate minigame.

I guess it depends on what your definition of a "minigame" is. I'm assuming desviper meant activities that would be embedded in the "general flow" of the main game (like lockpicking in ESO) as opposed to completely standalone apps that would effectively "pull you out" of the context of the main game (like letting you play a digital version of Monopoly inside CoT).

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Starhammer
Starhammer's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 months 2 days ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/14/2014 - 20:58
Yup, the lockpicking in ESO

Yup, the lockpicking in ESO is a wonderful example of the kind of minigames I enjoy in my MMOs. STO has some good ones too (and also some I don't care for, but that might just be because I'm not very good at them, so I won't judge). I really like the idea of having various stuff to interact with that "may or may not" be immediately relevant to beating a bad guy or completing a quest. I'd also love if many of these things, or at least the ability to interact with them, were dynamically instanced depending on skills, abilities, or other circumstances of the character. Some characters might get more options out of a computer they find for instance, such as if they have more technical skills/abilities, than a primarily magic based character (who would probably be able to do interesting things with a Druid's circle than some hacker or soldier could).

desviper
desviper's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 hours 3 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/10/2014 - 00:55
Yeah, i was talking

Yeah, i was talking lockpicking, hacking, that kind of thing.

It might be possible to do KOTOR-esque puzzles, if the dialog system is complex enough.

"A delayed game is eventually good, but a rushed game is forever bad"

Please have Scaling decals!

Avatar by MikeNovember

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Gluke wrote:
I would certainly hope that tasks like that are a standard feature in content using puzzle-mechanisms like variations of quicktime events, rather than a separate minigame.
I guess it depends on what your definition of a "minigame" is. I'm assuming desviper meant activities that would be embedded in the "general flow" of the main game (like lockpicking in ESO) as opposed to completely standalone apps that would effectively "pull you out" of the context of the main game (like letting you play a digital version of Monopoly inside CoT).

Yeah, by minigame I meant the second one, where the minigame is the whole or main object of the instance, and it is generally unrelated to any mission arcs. I thought that is what desviper meant, since the alternative would be the first one, ie a small task you do during a mission such as hack computers or whatever, and I hope that appears a lot in content.

"TRUST ME."

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Theoretically, even if all

Theoretically, even if all you had was the ability to pick objects up, walk around with them, and drop them in a different place, you could play chess, checkers, mah-jong, etc if you really wanted to code it up. The pieces would be big, and the characters would be moving them around a big room like G.I. Joes playing chess with a human sized chess set, but it would only require the "there are objects, you can move them" mechanic to work. So the puzzle doesn't need to be it's own little window that pops up and has code like a mini game of pinball, you could just place objects in various places and make the players have to rearrange them or whatever.

Diffusing a bomb could be done with dialog boxes and flow charts. The first popup box tells you "The blue wire is connected to the red port. The red wire is connected to the green port. The green wire is currently loose and the blue port is currently empty" At that point you have options of "unplug the blue wire" and "plug the green wire to the blue port" and "do nothing", based on ehat you click, your next popup box gives you new options and so forth until the bmob explodes or your defuse it successfully.

Here's an idea:

You spend an early part of a trial on a map fighting aliens, and there are alien power cells strewn about the place. Only one power cell still has any energy left in it, and not very much. You need to find that one cell with some energy still in it, because you need it to power up the device in the next room. The device in the next room is basically a high tech alien version of a "libra" balance that will allow you to weigh something on the left pan and right pan in a "which is heavier" comparison. There are a number of "alien crystals" or whatever, and you know all but one of them is fake, and the genuine one is slightly lighter than the fakes. The scale only has enough power from the cell you found to weigh stuff three times, then it dies. You can place one or more crystals in the left pan of the balance and one or more in the right pan, so you have to figure out a way to sort the crystals using the balance such that you'll know which one's the real one after at most three uses. There are a total of 10 crystals, and they all look the same to the players, but they are numbered or otherwise unique and distinguishable as far as the game software is concerned, and they start the puzzle in random places.

The power cell is an object you pick up, and if it has any juice left in it, you can interact with the libra scale device and it will light up, dimly. Maybe you can tell whether or not the power cell has any power left in it before you try it, maybe not (difficulty setting). The crystals are objects that you can pick up , walk around with, and set down. You can set them down on a thingy on the floor which is the left pan of the scale, and there's another spot for the right pan. When you are "ready to measure" you click on the libra scale's control panel (an object built into the wall to something) and it brings up a dialog box that has, as an option "weigh objects on scale now" and when you do, it indicates, in some visible way, what the result is.

Then once you've found the one real crystal, you can use it to advance to the next part of the trial, or defeat the boss with it, or whatever.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

The device in the next room is basically a high tech alien version of a "libra" balance that will allow you to weigh something on the left pan and right pan in a "which is heavier" comparison. There are a number of "alien crystals" or whatever, and you know all but one of them is fake, and the genuine one is slightly lighter than the fakes. The scale only has enough power from the cell you found to weigh stuff three times, then it dies. You can place one or more crystals in the left pan of the balance and one or more in the right pan, so you have to figure out a way to sort the crystals using the balance such that you'll know which one's the real one after at most three uses. There are a total of 10 crystals, and they all look the same to the players, but they are numbered or otherwise unique and distinguishable as far as the game software is concerned, and they start the puzzle in random places.
The power cell is an object you pick up, and if it has any juice left in it, you can interact with the libra scale device and it will light up, dimly. Maybe you can tell whether or not the power cell has any power left in it before you try it, maybe not (difficulty setting). The crystals are objects that you can pick up , walk around with, and set down. You can set them down on a thingy on the floor which is the left pan of the scale, and there's another spot for the right pan. When you are "ready to measure" you click on the libra scale's control panel (an object built into the wall to something) and it brings up a dialog box that has, as an option "weigh objects on scale now" and when you do, it indicates, in some visible way, what the result is.
Then once you've found the one real crystal, you can use it to advance to the next part of the trial, or defeat the boss with it, or whatever.

1st measure: put crystals #1 through 5 in the left pan and #6 through 10 in the right pan.
whichever group of 5 is lighter goes on to the 2nd measure. Let's say it is #1-5

2nd measure: put crystals #1 and #2 in the left pan and crystal #3 and #4 in the right pan
whichever pair of crystals is lighter goes on to the 3rd measure. If they are both the same then you know crystal #5 is the one you are looking for, stop measuring, and move on to the next room.

3rd measure: put one crystal in the left pan and one in the right pan.
whichever is lighter is the crystal you are looking for.

Yay!


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
CORRECT! One thing I like

CORRECT! One thing I like about this puzzle is that you have to actually solve it every time, there's no shortcut or cheaty way to do it, assuming the crystals are sufficiently psuedo randomized. You could make it harder by hiding the power cells and or crystals in harder to find places too, etc.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 2 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
Recently had to move boulders

Recently had to move boulders to a dispersed set of platforms, so as to open a gate. I wouldn't call it thrilling, but it was different.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 24 min ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
I'd have gone with two sets

I'd have gone with two sets of three, to start with, so as to reduce the time spent moving the crystals onto the scales. Then either two of the lighter trio (which would find the light crystal in two weighings if it was one of the first six) or the two pairs of the remaining quartet get compared, and if necessary the lighter pair of the quartet. ^_^

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
Avatar courtesy of Satellite Nine.
If you can't see an image I've posted, please let me know!

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
On "harder" mode there are 13

On "harder" mode there are 13 crystals...

:)

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Foradain
Foradain's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 24 min ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/25/2013 - 21:06
1-4 v. 5-8;

1-4 v. 5-8;
if equal 9-10 v.11-12, else lighter group in pair v. pair;
If equal, 13; else lighter pair one on one.
^_^

Foradain, Mage of Phoenix Rising.
Foradain's Character Conclave
Avatar courtesy of Satellite Nine.
If you can't see an image I've posted, please let me know!

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
I think we could go up to 27

I think we could go up to 27 crystals with that game.
#1) 9v9, with 9 remaining
#2) 3v3, with 3 remaining
#3) 1v1, with 1 remaining
such that if the weights are equal, the light crystal is in the remaining group.

Overall a cool use of interactable objects.

In the recent thread on super strength, there is a discusson about picking up things. One person mentioned summoning things out of thin air to throw, kind of like how CoX did it with telekinesis. I prefer the use of objects found in the world so that a superstrong character can throw an average rock she found on the ground hard enough to knock over an opponent in a mobile armor suit, or pick up and throw a car off the street (hopefully after the driver has gotten out!) or use a fallen tree like a club.

I'm not sure if we want to go so far as to break the tree first. Are we going to have a destructable environment? There would be no forests left in this world if player characters smashed trees down every time they used a power. On the other hand, what better source of rocks to thrown than smashing and collapsing that old office building?... and if you get a couple extra corpses to throw from it, that's just more entertaining ammunition.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
I was about to ask what the

I was about to ask what the theoretical maximum is, and you got it. Since every measurement is actually comparing THREE things (left pan, right pan and the set left off) the scale can reliably knock your total down to one third of what you started with in each measurement, so with a total of three measurements, you could sort up to 3x3x3 = 27 objects. With more than that, there's always a chance you'l find the real crystal, but there's no guarantee you'll be able to narrow it down, so you might have to blindly guess after the last measurement.

When you have an odd number of crystals, you must divide them into three piles in order to use the scale to compare piles that are expected to be alike. One approach is to make the piles as even as possible, the other is to divide the whole into roughly half, rounding down, and then set the lone "odd man out" to the side. The "roughly thirds" approach reduces the remaining choices the most in each case, whereas the "roughly halves" approach has the possibility of finding "the one" very early, but you have to get really lucky to do it, and if you don't, which is the most likely thing, you're left with more remaining choices than the other approach at that point. So you have to decide whether you want to try to narrow it down to the smallest set possible by the end, or hope to get lucky in the meantime and nail it exactly at random.

I'm trying to decide now which approach is better, statistically, and I think "thirds" will still win since it narrows the remaining choices down the most in each iteration, could still find the one by the end in some cases, and will leave you with the best odds when you eventually have to guess in others.

Edit: Assuming the "roughly thirds" approach is the most efficient, another thing you could do in the design of the trial is to reward teams for doing it the "wrong" way by giving out large treasure/IGC bonuses to teams that finish the trial successfully while only using the scale once (larger bonus) or twice (not so large bonus, but still better than using it three times). Depending on the sizes of the bonuses, you might get people to do the trial over and over using the "roughly halves" approach every time, despite the fact that it's not as good, just because they get a chance at MOAR LOOTZ that way.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
If you are going to put in

If you are going to put in bonuses for using the scale fewer than 3 times, then your best starting number of crystals for the rewards is 11. With 11, you can try a 5-5-1 split on the first iteration, then when that leaves you with 5 left, you can do a 2-2-1 split on round 2 and still hope for the "2 uses" bonus, and when you don't get that, you can still finish successfully after doing the third one anyway. 15 crystals would also work, but there are more of them to have to find and manipulate, so it would probably taker longer. The other thing you could do is make the number of crystals and the rewards for number of uses scale in some way with difficulty settings. So like, the lucky ducks that start with 27 crystals and manage to get super lucky and hit the jackpot on that first 13-13-1 split can then retire to their own private islands with all the fat rewards they get.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 1 min ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

If you are going to put in bonuses for using the scale fewer than 3 times, then your best starting number of crystals for the rewards is 11. With 11, you can try a 5-5-1 split on the first iteration, then when that leaves you with 5 left, you can do a 2-2-1 split on round 2 and still hope for the "2 uses" bonus, and when you don't get that, you can still finish successfully after doing the third one anyway. 15 crystals would also work, but there are more of them to have to find and manipulate, so it would probably taker longer. The other thing you could do is make the number of crystals and the rewards for number of uses scale in some way with difficulty settings. So like, the lucky ducks that start with 27 crystals and manage to get super lucky and hit the jackpot on that first 13-13-1 split can then retire to their own private islands with all the fat rewards they get.

Personally I have a problem with having such extra rewards being given based on purely random chance. It would like having a 0.1% chance (or something) of insta-killing a boss when engaging it and getting a bigger reward for it.

Now if there was something different with that one crystal that the player could perceive, like a barely perceivable color change, then it would be another matter and the extra reward would based more off of skill. Sure you still have the random chance but one can make an "informed" decision if ones puts the effort behind it.

Interdictor
Interdictor's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 hour 25 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 08/22/2013 - 05:26
Starhammer wrote:
Starhammer wrote:

Yup, the lockpicking in ESO is a wonderful example of the kind of minigames I enjoy in my MMOs. STO has some good ones too (and also some I don't care for, but that might just be because I'm not very good at them, so I won't judge).

Yes - those are both good examples of mini-games that are both contextual within the game world and not too difficult. I find they draw you in more to the gameplay and they do not harshly punish you if you fail - things might be a tad more difficult/you receive less reward, but you don't feel like you have to re-start the mission if you fail. Another one I liked was the hacking in Deus Ex Human Revolution.

Quote:

I really like the idea of having various stuff to interact with that "may or may not" be immediately relevant to beating a bad guy or completing a quest. I'd also love if many of these things, or at least the ability to interact with them, were dynamically instanced depending on skills, abilities, or other circumstances of the character. Some characters might get more options out of a computer they find for instance, such as if they have more technical skills/abilities, than a primarily magic based character (who would probably be able to do interesting things with a Druid's circle than some hacker or soldier could).

I think there was talk of POSSIBLY having non-combat abilities for our characters that would aid in such things. Not sure if that still being worked out, or if it's been scrapped, or put on the back burner. The main challenge I would assume is actually implementing them in a way that would be both fair to the players and relevant to the gameplay.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
blacke4dawn wrote:
blacke4dawn wrote:

Radiac wrote:
If you are going to put in bonuses for using the scale fewer than 3 times, then your best starting number of crystals for the rewards is 11. With 11, you can try a 5-5-1 split on the first iteration, then when that leaves you with 5 left, you can do a 2-2-1 split on round 2 and still hope for the "2 uses" bonus, and when you don't get that, you can still finish successfully after doing the third one anyway. 15 crystals would also work, but there are more of them to have to find and manipulate, so it would probably taker longer. The other thing you could do is make the number of crystals and the rewards for number of uses scale in some way with difficulty settings. So like, the lucky ducks that start with 27 crystals and manage to get super lucky and hit the jackpot on that first 13-13-1 split can then retire to their own private islands with all the fat rewards they get.
Personally I have a problem with having such extra rewards being given based on purely random chance. It would like having a 0.1% chance (or something) of insta-killing a boss when engaging it and getting a bigger reward for it.
Now if there was something different with that one crystal that the player could perceive, like a barely perceivable color change, then it would be another matter and the extra reward would based more off of skill. Sure you still have the random chance but one can make an "informed" decision if ones puts the effort behind it.

It's just an idea. That said, the idea that how one chooses to progress through content might affect the rewards is not new, nor is pseudo-random treasure selection at the end. The new wrinkle here is the risk involved. Assuming you set it to 27 crystals, and then try to get "the one" on the first try (using a 13-13-1 split and crossing your fingers), most people would do that knowing full well that their chances of getting the "one scale use" reward are not good. That, in and of itself, doesn't really bother me and I doubt anyone in the gaming community would be bothered by it, per se. What IS a problem, as I see it, is that in that case, you're left with most likely 13 crystals left and only 2 scale uses. In that case, you likely will not figure out which crystal is "the one" by the time your scale uses run out and you'll have to guess, possibly failing the trial if and when that happens. I could see THAT being a thing that causes a lot of finger pointing and unrest among teams, in cases where the communication isn't good or people disagree over what to do.

As far as having a cheaty way to determine the right crystal, I personally would not do that under any circumstances. To do that totally defeats the purpose of giving out more treasure for using the scale fewer times, because once you learn the cheat, you use the scale ZERO times every time you do the content. That kind of thing ends up in the wiki before long and then people NEVER weight anything. Makes the whole trial a rote script that you work off of instead of a fun puzzle.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Something dawned on me. Even

Something dawned on me. Even having an added reward for using the scale only once would not actually cause people to necessarily do a 13-13-1 split, per se. Assuming the mechanics of the trial were such that you could insert the crystal of your choice into the "is it the real one, if so you win" slot, people would often gain less out of doing a 13-13-1 split than they would out of doing a 9-9-9 split. If you do a 13-13-1 split, sometimes you find the one and know it right away, but more often you narrow it down to 1 of 13 possible crystals. On the other hand, if you do a 9-9-9 split, you never get the one right away, but you end up narrowing it down to a 1 in 9 chance after the first pass.

I'm trying to figure out now what would be the best single use of the scale in the case of only being able to use it once, and then trying to make the crystal you pick from the set you narrowed it down to work. The options of how to split up the crystals for the first (and in this case only) measurement are:

13-13-1
12-12-3
11-11-5
10-10-7
9-9-9
8-8-11
7-7-13
6-6-15
5-5-17
4-4-19
3-3-21
2-2-23
1-1-25

Of these, it's not immediately clear to me that the overall odds of ultimately finding the real crystal are any better or worse in any one case. I need to think about that a little first. Of course, depending on the setup of the trial, the 13-13-1 split will POSSIBLY result in you finding the real crystal before you have to do anything with it, as would the 1-1-25, whereas the other methods always leave you having to guess, so there is that too.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
If you just tried to pick the

If you just tried to pick the one out of a pile of 27, you would have a 3.7% chance of picking it on the first try. However, by my math if you were to divide it into 3 groups, you would have an 11.1% chance of guessing it after you weighed it once, which is exactly three times the chance. The interesting thing is that it would be 11.1% chance no matter which of the 61 possible combinations of three groups you choose.

Radiac, your insight into how people would purposely sink the mission in order to attempt to get it on the first try seems like something a lot of people would do, especially if the reward was something you could only get that way. I would see people restarting the mission over and over until they guessed it right and then went on. That does not seem to be healthy behavior for the game and community, and it turns a puzzle into an RNG.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
The different methods of

The different methods of trying to find the one using only one measurement all result in the same odds of ultimately finding it, those being a 1 in 9 chance (11.111... percent) as Huckleberry has already said. We agree on that.

Given this, the only real question facing the team that's running the content is "Do we care whether or not we finish WITHOUT getting the 1-scale-use bonus?" because if doing the TF to successful completion only gives rewards that many seasoned veterans aren't terribly interested in, or if the odds of getting a really highly-sought after ultra rare reward make that 1 in 9 chance more attractive than just using the scale 3 times and completing the thing successfully, then some people will likely still occasionally want to roll that 9-sided die and take their chances, in some cases.

Different people will have different reasons for wanting to run the TF different ways. For example, people would probably do the 1-measure thing to the point that they risk failing the TF many many times just to get the badge for finding the one on a single measurement, if such a badge existed.

Whether or not you, as a game designer, want to put that particular proposition in front of the players is another question. I agree that it can cause frustration, but the players will play the game by the letter of the rules you enforce in the game code, and will do so in a way that maximizes whatever result they're looking for. If getting the badge is all they want, there are some people who'll run TFs over and over until they get that badge then stop. This can be a problem for latecomers who want to be competitive in badge collecting in the sense that the "badge run" of the TF will be less popular as the first generation of players get the badge and then stop running it that way, largely.

If there's an ultra rare that you can only get when you successfully do the 1-measure thing then people will likely run it that way a few times here and there, especially on toons that are already totally built to the nines, just get more awesome gear for their other toons or whatever.

I personally like it when the thing can be strategized, which is to say I like having meaningful choices to make, and I think adding in an element of risk can make it more fun. You get that angsty moment of "Come onnnnn...." followed usually by "Awwww, not a winner." then the OCCASIONAL "YOU WIN!!!!!" which I like. Some people would claim that they're being "punished" by not being given treasure on the occasions when they don't win. I personally think those people are just risk averse, and that they're confusing disappointment with punishment, but then disappointment is no fun either, I get that. Those people will likely just not want to do that content, or at least not do it that way. On the other hand, if that's the most efficient way to get the ultra rare you want, then you might want to do it that way and take your chances.

And the overall odds of finding the one given a singe use of the scale can be affected by the number of crystals you have to choose from. If there are only 9, it becomes a 1 in 3 chance. I think, depending on the value of the ultra rare in question, people would run that content a LOT and might drive the street price of the ultra rare in question down too much if it were that easy to get. At that point the ease of the TF causes the ultra are in question to lose value and as such it's poorly designed from that standpoint. So t becomes a question of finding the right number of crystals to set up the right odds to ensure that the TF gets run and is popular, but the rewards are still valuable on the market. Is there a sweet spot in there, and if so, what's the best number of crystals? I think only data mining and trial and error would tell you that, and it may well depend on the number of active players you have.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Radiac, you've taken this

Radiac, you've taken this thread way off its original course, with no lack of assistance from me I might add. And if I were the forum police, I would be blowing my whistle and directing you back on topic. However, I think this is a very interesting place we are in now; and I would like to stay here for a bit before we head back.

On the subject of randomness in gaming. Random became a 4-letter word in the late 90's up to today. People wanted predictible results. They didn't want the battle to be decided by the RNG, but rather by skill alone.

I understand this. If someone spends hundreds of hours optimizing their build to provide and extra 0.1 damage per second, they want it to mean something. With randomization, that meaning can be lost with just a single roll of the dice.

I understand it, but I don't agree with it. Sure there may be times when the dice rolls poorly for you. But there will also be times when it rolls well. To paraphrase my bipolar friend, in the end the highs are worth the lows.

There is a class in Dofus called the Ecaflip. It is a class that relies heavily on randomness. It is one of the most fun, rewarding and frustrating classes an MMO has ever included. Their biggest attack could be devastating or be just a whimper. The class wasn't for everyone; but for people who played it, it generated an outlook on life and the game that was worth every moment. But over time, a lot of the randomness was taken out of that class. Dofus has been around since 2005 and that is enough time for the complainers to level off the randomness. But reducing the lows has to reduce the highs too, and in my opinion the enjoyment. Be careful what you ask for.

So back to our scenario. Maybe we could make it so that you can only use one crystal in the next room, for whatever reason, and if it is the wrong one you have to fight the boss with a constant AoE poison effect upon you. Then, if you comlete the content with the poison effect you can actually get the "Roadhouse Badge" with the quote from character Dalton played by Patric Swayze in the movie Roadhouse (1989) when he says "Pain Don't Hurt"

Or maybe guessing the correct crystal merely opens up a secret passage to the back of the throne room for the group to get to the boss without fighting through a bunch of security guards at the front of the chamber.

SWTOR actually does have a mini game like this. it is in the Kuat Drive Yards tactical Flashpoint mission. In it, there are some engineering notes on a table and if you read them, it will give you just enough clues to be able to assemble a prototype starfighter. If you assemble it correctly, you get a mission bonus. If you fail to assemble it correctly, a bunch of guards come in and you have to fight them. But either way, it doesn't affect your ability to complete the mission.

Thoughts?


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

On the subject of randomness in gaming. Random became a 4-letter word in the late 90's up to today. People wanted predictible results. They didn't want the battle to be decided by the RNG, but rather by skill alone.

That's why God created FPS games and their kin. I have nothing for or against games that require the real-life physical skill/dexerity of the actual player but I do accept that some games should rely squarely on that and others shouldn't. There's no law out there that says ALL computer-based games must be based on the physical skill of real life players.

That said I cut my proverbial gaming-teeth playing D&D in the 70s so I will always accept/enjoy any game based on randomness via dice or RNG. Like I implied if you somehow can't deal with a game fundamentally based on randomness there are other games out there made just for you.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
I'm all for whatever causes

I'm all for whatever causes the content to appeal to players and gets them to enjoy running it not just to turn the crank and get the rewards, but for the enjoyment of the content itself, if that's possible. No bit of content is for everyone, and I think the point is not to try to make a one-size-fits-all solution but to have multiple different things in the game and give as many players as possible something they enjoy.

On the more general topic, this stuff is often in the form of a non-mob-fighting activity or task that has to be performed before, during, or after the fighting is happening, making it a team exercise to organize who is doing what and when. I think this kind of thing adds fun and depth to this sort of content and would like to see more of it than CoH had in the early years. Later, the Incarnate stuff had a fair amount.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

That's why God created FPS games and their kin.

Those various early game designers indeed deserve our thanks, their hard work paved the way for a lot of future developments, including those of THIS game.

Lothic wrote:

I have nothing for or against games that require the real-life physical skill/dexerity of the actual player but I do accept that some games should rely squarely on that and others shouldn't. There's no law out there that says ALL computer-based games must be based on the physical skill of real life players.
That said I cut my proverbial gaming-teeth playing D&D in the 70s so I will always accept/enjoy any game based on randomness via dice or RNG. Like I implied if you somehow can't deal with a game fundamentally based on randomness there are other games out there made just for you.

There is a middle ground between the "real-life physical dexterity" required for FPS (and fighting games) and random number generation, and that is tactical thinking, which in MMO's generally involves your toons' build and how you use it. I hope that the mechanics of this game will reward strategic foresight in that way, and not rely on blind luck.

"TRUST ME."

Fireheart
Fireheart's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 hours 2 min ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/05/2013 - 13:45
CoH often rewarded a certain

CoH often rewarded a certain level of tactical and strategic thinking. Avoiding aggro and catching the aggro you wanted, at the time and place that you wanted it, was one secret to success. Of course, the other was releasing the blood-maddened Scrappers and following along to clean up the remains.

Be Well!
Fireheart

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gluke wrote:
Gluke wrote:

There is a middle ground between the "real-life physical dexterity" required for FPS (and fighting games) and random number generation, and that is tactical thinking, which in MMO's generally involves your toons' build and how you use it. I hope that the mechanics of this game will reward strategic foresight in that way, and not rely on blind luck.

Obviously a game like CoT (and practically every other MMO ever made) will be based on strategic build planning and tactical combat situations that will combine to affect what happens once the RNG is finally applied to the situation. If games like this ONLY relied on blind luck we might as well spend our time flipping coins instead of playing sophisticated computer games.

Sadly though the people who actually bother to "complain" about games which are fundamentally based on randomness tend to forget that despite min/maxing themselves to the n-th degree they're still subject to fate of the final die roll. Their whining is like spitting into the wind... it’s mostly pointless. Again if it bothers them that much they can always go play a FPS...

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
But you can still make a game

But you can still make a game RNG-free without requiring twitch skills like you alluded to with the reference to FPS games.

Lets take a typical basic attack. Rather than make the attack do 12-24 hit points of damage, you change it to be 20 points of damage every time. Damage mitigation associated with the armor of the target is a constant 10%, reducing the damage taken to 18 points. The target has a dodge evasion coefficient of 20% that could be interpreted as dodging 20% of attacks, or represented as a flat 20% damage reduction overall interpreted as a glancing attack mitigation. The latter option does away with any randomness, so we apply it. That's another 4 points reduced for a resultant 14 damage, every time, for that attack, from that attacker against that defender.

Do we want that amount of transparency in the numbers?

My personal opinion is no, and I have several reasons why. The biggest reason I don't like that level of transparency in the numbers is that it turns the game into a numbers game instead of a 'let me play my character my way' game.

But to what extent DO we want to use the RNG? Look at Black Desert Online as an example of how the RNG for weapon improvement drives the gameplay into being a grind. What about the crystals example Radiac put forth. To what level do we want the RNG to affect mission completion?

My opinion is that RNG should be implemented to an extent that it provides diversity of experience, without effecting the ability to accomplish game objectives at all.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

But you can still make a game RNG-free without requiring twitch skills like you alluded to with the reference to FPS games.
Lets take a typical basic attack. Rather than make the attack do 12-24 hit points of damage, you change it to be 20 points of damage every time. Damage mitigation associated with the armor of the target is a constant 10%, reducing the damage taken to 18 points. The target has a dodge evasion coefficient of 20% that could be interpreted as dodging 20% of attacks, or represented as a flat 20% damage reduction overall interpreted as a glancing attack mitigation. The latter option does away with any randomness, so we apply it. That's another 4 points reduced for a resultant 14 damage, every time, for that attack, from that attacker against that defender.
Do we want that amount of transparency in the numbers?
My personal opinion is no, and I have several reasons why. The biggest reason I don't like that level of transparency in the numbers is that it turns the game into a numbers game instead of a 'let me play my character my way' game.
But to what extent DO we want to use the RNG? Look at Black Desert Online as an example of how the RNG for weapon improvement drives the gameplay into being a grind. What about the crystals example Radiac put forth. To what level do we want the RNG to affect mission completion?
My opinion is that RNG should be implemented to an extent that it provides diversity of experience, without effecting the ability to accomplish game objectives at all.

My opinion is that random is random. While it's obviously true you can design a game with any degree of "randomness" you want it's not ever worth being upset that a given game ultimately relies on some random factors to determine outcomes. Again if any amount of randomness bothers you could always go off and play a nice game of chess instead. I just think it’s silly when people "complain" that all their hard work pre-planning build strategies becomes "meaningless" because occasionally you have a bad die roll (and/or result from an RNG).

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Lothic wrote:
Lothic wrote:

Huckleberry wrote:
But you can still make a game RNG-free without requiring twitch skills like you alluded to with the reference to FPS games.
Lets take a typical basic attack. Rather than make the attack do 12-24 hit points of damage, you change it to be 20 points of damage every time. Damage mitigation associated with the armor of the target is a constant 10%, reducing the damage taken to 18 points. The target has a dodge evasion coefficient of 20% that could be interpreted as dodging 20% of attacks, or represented as a flat 20% damage reduction overall interpreted as a glancing attack mitigation. The latter option does away with any randomness, so we apply it. That's another 4 points reduced for a resultant 14 damage, every time, for that attack, from that attacker against that defender.
Do we want that amount of transparency in the numbers?
My personal opinion is no, and I have several reasons why. The biggest reason I don't like that level of transparency in the numbers is that it turns the game into a numbers game instead of a 'let me play my character my way' game.
But to what extent DO we want to use the RNG? Look at Black Desert Online as an example of how the RNG for weapon improvement drives the gameplay into being a grind. What about the crystals example Radiac put forth. To what level do we want the RNG to affect mission completion?
My opinion is that RNG should be implemented to an extent that it provides diversity of experience, without effecting the ability to accomplish game objectives at all.
My opinion is that random is random. While it's obviously true you can design a game with any degree of "randomness" you want it's not ever worth being upset that a given game ultimately relies on some random factors to determine outcomes. Again if any amount of randomness bothers you could always go off and play a nice game of chess instead. I just think it’s silly when people "complain" that all their hard work pre-planning build strategies becomes "meaningless" because occasionally you have a bad die roll (and/or result from an RNG).

Are you accusing Huckleberry and/or me of the "whining" and "spitting in the wind" you had a problem with earlier? I have to say I don't appreciate the evident issue you have with people disagreeing with you, you inability to listen to reason and the more than slightly beligerent, passive-agreesive way you have of confronting them over your disagreement, and personally knowing you've driven at least one contributing member of the forum away with this, I think you need to work on it. Big time.

"TRUST ME."

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gluke wrote:
Gluke wrote:

Are you accusing Huckleberry and/or me of the "whining" and "spitting in the wind" you had a problem with earlier? I have to say I don't appreciate the evident issue you have with people disagreeing with you, you inability to listen to reason and the more than slightly beligerent, passive-agreesive way you have of confronting them over your disagreement, and personally knowing you've driven at least one contributing member of the forum away with this, I think you need to work on it. Big time.

LoL actually no I wasn't implying that you or Huckleberry were the ones "complaining" about randomness in games at all. I thought the context of these posts were clearly of a purely "people in general" nature. But based on the recent disagreements of opinion we've had on these forums I can almost see how you might have mistaken what I was saying here in abstract to be aimed at you specifically. For what's it worth I'm sorry you were confused by the fact that I didn't name anyone in particular but you decided to take it personally anyway.

As for your specific ranting that I've been "belligerent", "passive-aggressive" and "the specific reason why at least one contributing member of the forum" has realized that literally none of his arguments could pass any muster against some reasonable constructive criticism from anyone (not just me) I suppose I'll stand guilty as charged. But for your sake you might want pump the brakes on the overtly personal pseudo-attacks because no matter how inane some your positions on this forum have been I continue to assume you're probably a lovely enough person IRL regardless. Big time.

Lothic wrote:

That's why God created FPS games and their kin.

Gluke wrote:

Those various early game designers indeed deserve our thanks, their hard work paved the way for a lot of future developments, including those of THIS game.

BTW, I was not implying anything about "early game designers" with this at all. Not really sure where you got that from. I was just talking about the difference between games that rely on randomness (i.e. MMOs) and games that don't (i.e. FPSs) regardless of when they were created. *shrugs*

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Huckleberry
Huckleberry's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
Joined: 01/03/2016 - 08:39
Yeah, I didn't interpret it

Yeah, I didn't interpret it as belligerant either. (repetitive yes, belligerant no) I interpreted Lothic's use of the word "you" in the rhetorical sense rather than the accusatory sense. But then, I wanted discussion on this so even if Lothic was argumentative, I wouldn't mind being thrown under the bus once in a while for the greater good of a thread.


I like to take your ideas and supersize them. This isn't criticism, it is flattery. I come with nothing but good will and a spirit of team-building. If you take what I write any other way, that is probably just because I wasn't very clear.
Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Yeah, I didn't interpret it as belligerant either. (repetitive yes, belligerant no) I interpreted Lothic's use of the word "you" in the rhetorical sense rather than the accusatory sense. But then, I wanted discussion on this so even if Lothic was argumentative, wouldn't mind being thrown under the bus once in a while for the greater good of a thread.

Always remember no matter what I only argue against ideas on this forum, not people. If you happen to be so married to your ideas that you start to take what I say personally that's going to be at least 83% your fault... for the sake of fairness I'll accept the govenment mandated 17% of the blame in those cases.

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Huckleberry wrote:
Huckleberry wrote:

Yeah, I didn't interpret it as belligerant either. (repetitive yes, belligerant no) I interpreted Lothic's use of the word "you" in the rhetorical sense rather than the accusatory sense. But then, I wanted discussion on this so even if Lothic was argumentative, wouldn't mind being thrown under the bus once in a while for the greater good of a thread.

You could be right, but even so, that level of needless scathing isn't helpful, much less when it's a frequent habit. What I said needed to be said, IMO.

"TRUST ME."

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gluke wrote:
Gluke wrote:

What I said needed to be said, IMO.

Thanks for the constructive criticism. Apparently I can listen to "reason" afterall...

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Going back to how much

Going back to how much randomless is ideal (for me) and other things, a few thoughts:

1. Some versions of DnD (on paper) required you to roll for hit points at every new level. If there are randomized rewards for leveling up, I would hope they take the form of random gear of a specific rarity and level, not just "Your toon now has slightly fewer hit points than the average for your class forever because you rolled ONE die roll poorly when it counted" like that. I'm fine with the damage I do on an attack being somewhat random within a set of upper and lower limits, even if such range is fairly broad, because in most "boss fight" type encounters, you'll probably attack enough times for it to average out.

2. On the subject of manual dexterity, I'm mostly against it as a main theme or requirement of the game, but I will say that in GW2, which I'm playing now, the "double-tap the movement button to dodge" mechanic is nice. It gives different classes different stuff to leverage it or not, as builds permit. My Elementalist has one attack that basically replaces dodge, whereas Fighters have a thing that causes them to do damage when dodging. I wouldn't hate that, if it were included in CoT, as long as CoT is not then a total twitch-or-die game as a result. Also, I'd make it a power (or an included movement and defense buff part of one or more different powers) in a primary or secondary set or something, not an inherent mechanic that everyone just gets.

3. It's common for me (and Lothic, and Redlynne, and others) to sometimes refer to the nebula of random "people" who might or might not have leveled complaints about various things in the past either on here or in other places, or even just verbally in real life just to explain what point of view we're disagreeing with in an effort to clarify our own. I can say that when I do it, I sometimes even use quotation marks around the boiled-down, sound byte form of the argument at hand so that I can then posit my disagreement with whatever "they" said. In most cases the "they" is not a defined person, and the quote is not anything anyone actually ever typed. It's possibly not even anything anyone ever actually said out loud, just a general point of view I've maybe felt expressed in other places among gamers I know. I've been accused of straw man-ism for this, and I understand the objection to it, so I feel like I can see both sides of the "stop hating on me!" and "I hate the idea, not the person..." discussion. As far as I care, it's an internet forum, so I just assume everyone except me is trolling and leave it at that ;)

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Gluke
Gluke's picture
Offline
Last seen: 5 months 3 weeks ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/05/2014 - 06:36
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

3. It's common for me (and Lothic, and Redlynne, and others) to sometimes refer to the nebula of random "people" who might or might not have leveled complaints about various things in the past either on here or in other places, or even just verbally in real life just to explain what point of view we're disagreeing with in an effort to clarify our own. I can say that when I do it, I sometimes even use quotation marks around the boiled-down, sound byte form of the argument at hand so that I can then posit my disagreement with whatever "they" said. In most cases the "they" is not a defined person, and the quote is not anything anyone actually ever typed. It's possibly not even anything anyone ever actually said out loud, just a general point of view I've maybe felt expressed in other places among gamers I know. I've been accused of straw man-ism for this, and I understand the objection to it, so I feel like I can see both sides of the "stop hating on me!" and "I hate the idea, not the person..." discussion. As far as I care, it's an internet forum, so I just assume everyone except me is trolling and leave it at that ;)

There's a difference between using hypotheticals and continuous inflammatory bitching for the sake of it. I've said all I've got to say on this.

"TRUST ME."

Lothic
Lothic's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 weeks 1 day ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/02/2013 - 00:27
Gluke wrote:
Gluke wrote:

There's a difference between using hypotheticals and continuous inflammatory bitching for the sake of it. I've said all I've got to say on this.

Yet you've said "all" you "needed" to say on this nitpicking point at least twice now.
So much for "continuous inflammatory bitching for the sake of it".
Pot calling kettle black...

CoH player from April 25, 2004 to November 30, 2012

dreamcatcher
dreamcatcher's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/03/2013 - 17:12
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

The different methods of trying to find the one using only one measurement all result in the same odds of ultimately finding it, those being a 1 in 9 chance (11.111... percent) as Huckleberry has already said. We agree on that.
Given this, the only real question facing the team that's running the content is "Do we care whether or not we finish WITHOUT getting the 1-scale-use bonus?" because if doing the TF to successful completion only gives rewards that many seasoned veterans aren't terribly interested in, or if the odds of getting a really highly-sought after ultra rare reward make that 1 in 9 chance more attractive than just using the scale 3 times and completing the thing successfully, then some people will likely still occasionally want to roll that 9-sided die and take their chances, in some cases.
Different people will have different reasons for wanting to run the TF different ways. For example, people would probably do the 1-measure thing to the point that they risk failing the TF many many times just to get the badge for finding the one on a single measurement, if such a badge existed.
Whether or not you, as a game designer, want to put that particular proposition in front of the players is another question. I agree that it can cause frustration, but the players will play the game by the letter of the rules you enforce in the game code, and will do so in a way that maximizes whatever result they're looking for. If getting the badge is all they want, there are some people who'll run TFs over and over until they get that badge then stop. This can be a problem for latecomers who want to be competitive in badge collecting in the sense that the "badge run" of the TF will be less popular as the first generation of players get the badge and then stop running it that way, largely.
If there's an ultra rare that you can only get when you successfully do the 1-measure thing then people will likely run it that way a few times here and there, especially on toons that are already totally built to the nines, just get more awesome gear for their other toons or whatever.
I personally like it when the thing can be strategized, which is to say I like having meaningful choices to make, and I think adding in an element of risk can make it more fun. You get that angsty moment of "Come onnnnn...." followed usually by "Awwww, not a winner." then the OCCASIONAL "YOU WIN!!!!!" which I like. Some people would claim that they're being "punished" by not being given treasure on the occasions when they don't win. I personally think those people are just risk averse, and that they're confusing disappointment with punishment, but then disappointment is no fun either, I get that. Those people will likely just not want to do that content, or at least not do it that way. On the other hand, if that's the most efficient way to get the ultra rare you want, then you might want to do it that way and take your chances.
And the overall odds of finding the one given a singe use of the scale can be affected by the number of crystals you have to choose from. If there are only 9, it becomes a 1 in 3 chance. I think, depending on the value of the ultra rare in question, people would run that content a LOT and might drive the street price of the ultra rare in question down too much if it were that easy to get. At that point the ease of the TF causes the ultra are in question to lose value and as such it's poorly designed from that standpoint. So t becomes a question of finding the right number of crystals to set up the right odds to ensure that the TF gets run and is popular, but the rewards are still valuable on the market. Is there a sweet spot in there, and if so, what's the best number of crystals? I think only data mining and trial and error would tell you that, and it may well depend on the number of active players you have.

Except the TF won't be popular; only the rare. Groups will farm up to that point and no further, and new players who do know to know the optimal way to get to that puzzle will not be welcome. Anyone other than the designated farmers who interact with the puzzle will be kicked. Any randomers needed to start the TF because of numeric requirements, will be kicked... And so it will go on. It's sad, but self-interest and greed most often win out. I don't know about the rest of you, I don't want this in my superhero game.

of Phoenix Rising
Am I

blacke4dawn
blacke4dawn's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 1 min ago
Joined: 03/28/2015 - 03:02
dreamcatcher wrote:
dreamcatcher wrote:

Except the TF won't be popular; only the rare. Groups will farm up to that point and no further, and new players who do know to know the optimal way to get to that puzzle will not be welcome. Anyone other than the designated farmers who interact with the puzzle will be kicked. Any randomers needed to start the TF because of numeric requirements, will be kicked... And so it will go on. It's sad, but self-interest and greed most often win out. I don't know about the rest of you, I don't want this in my superhero game.

So... those who are kicked in this "scenario" can't make a group of their own? What magic will only allow farmers to make groups for TF runs?

Personally I don't think (and certainly hope) that "pure farmers" won't be that big part of the game so that "puzzle heavy" TF's become very difficult to complete.

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
I personally like the idea of

I personally like the idea of being able to run the same trial or TF in multiple different ways in order to get different badges, unlocks, etc for doing it each way. I remember when CoX was on it's last legs, after they announced the shutdown a bunch of us on Triumph tried once a week to get the "The REALLY Hard Way" badge on the Magisterium Trial (or whatever it was claled, the one with the giant-sized Tyrant at the end). We failed the trial many times, and failed to get the badge while succeeding the trial a few times, and eventually got that badge on the one run (we had help from some really well-built ringers for another server that night though).

Anyway, I think having different ways to run a bit of content is good and though it may lead to disagreements, those that disagree can form their own TF group or not do that particular run and go do something else for that hour of their lives.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

Empyrean
Empyrean's picture
Offline
Last seen: 34 min 15 sec ago
11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 03/16/2014 - 07:51
Fireheart wrote:
Fireheart wrote:

CoH often rewarded a certain level of tactical and strategic thinking. Avoiding aggro and catching the aggro you wanted, at the time and place that you wanted it, was one secret to success. Of course, the other was releasing the blood-maddened Scrappers and following along to clean up the remains.
Be Well!
Fireheart

I just got around to catching up on this thread (on vacation), and though it's so far back it's borderline necro, I just have to +1 this post.

The way that CoH was strategic and tactical and felt action packed due to movement and physics without having to be twitch/eye hand based was really something special.

And then there was scrapperlock :D

FIGHT EVIL! (or go cause trouble so the Heroes have something to do.)

dreamcatcher
dreamcatcher's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/03/2013 - 17:12
blacke4dawn wrote:
blacke4dawn wrote:

So... those who are kicked in this "scenario" can't make a group of their own? What magic will only allow farmers to make groups for TF runs?

Of course they can, but I feel like you're missing the point. It's an extremely negative and anti-social experience and, depending on how far into the TF such a thing can be found, also a potential waste of time, which would compound the negative experience... and nothing I've read above, of the 'value' this would add, makes me feel it's worth the trade-off. A puzzle mini-game is only ever going to appeal to a minority (myself included), and very quickly people will learn how to game the system, for the sake of efficiency if nothing else, and then there will be no real point in the puzzle being there.

blacke4dawn wrote:

Personally I don't think (and certainly hope) that "pure farmers" won't be that big part of the game so that "puzzle heavy" TF's become very difficult to complete.

While I echo your hope, there has not been 1 MMO that I have played in the last 19 years, where pure farmers have not been a thing, and have not in some way impacted the ability of other players to complete content. Knowing this, why would we encourage it?

Finally, even were I completely onboard with this idea, the puzzle types being proposed (above) are incredibly simplistic, and more like games of chance. Would I be open to real puzzles in this game? Hell, yes. Do I feel it would be cool content? Very much so. Do I believe that personal viewpoint should encourage the devs to include niche content in the game? Only if the majority of players clearly want it (so it's no longer niche), and only if it is divorced from other content, so that those players who do not want to do puzzles don't have to.

of Phoenix Rising
Am I

Radiac
Radiac's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 days 7 hours ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 10/19/2013 - 15:12
Getting back to the original

Getting back to the original point of this post, you might be able to make a better mini-game than I can to satisfy your desire for a Trial or TF that works the way you'd like it to, but that's not going to be possible if the only technology you have at your disposal is "Find and click on the glowie" like CoX had. My original point was that just adding in objects that can be picked up, carried, set back down again, thrown a short distance, fired (if they're guns), activated, given to an NPC, used to activate a second object, etc is a powerful tool to have. How you design content to use it is up to the designers, and could be really fun stuff, if done right. Even if all you have is the ability to pick up and move rocks, you could use them to play a full game of chess, for example. CoX never really had that, GW2 does and has some much more fun and interesting stuff to do as a result, in my opinion.

Another example from GW2: in the Octovine event, there are 4 areas where the Octovine has covered one of the entrances to the lost city of Tarir and you have to have 4 teams, on on each entrance, working to defeat the Octovine such that they all defeat it at the same time, or else it regenerates (not new, I know, hear me out).

So, on the South entrance, the Octovine there has 15 layers of protective slime ton it and you have to remove them before you can attack it directly. In order to remove the slime layers, you have this NPC who creates a big time bomb (object) which the players then have to maneuver into position up against the Octovine so that when it's timer runs out, it explodes (which by the way one-shots any players that are too close to it at the time) and removes like 5 layers of slime per bomb. You can only move the bomb using attack powers that do knockback, so you need people with those skills in that area to be able to defeat the Octovine. Meanwile, everyone is getting attacked by giant frogs, plant people, etc. The event also has pre-events that lead up to it which allow some people to get special armor that gives you special attacks (not a lot of knockback though) So the drill is, three or 4 people get the armors and try to distract the plant people and frogs, the rest try to avoid the AoE attacks and push the bombs up from the end of the road to the Octovine door, then after they've gotten 3 bombs , the slime layers are gone and you can attack the Octovine for a few seconds until it regenerates slime and you have to rinse repeat until you get it defeated, BUT you have to make sure the other 3 doors are all ready to do the big finish first, because you have to defeat all 4 vines within 2 min of each other. The other 3 doors have different games you yhave to play to defeat the Octovines there, and some are easier and some are harder.

R.S.O. of Phoenix Rising

dreamcatcher
dreamcatcher's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 week 2 days ago
kickstarter11th Anniversary Badge
Joined: 11/03/2013 - 17:12
Radiac wrote:
Radiac wrote:

My original point was that just adding in objects that can be picked up, carried, set back down again, thrown a short distance, fired (if they're guns), activated, given to an NPC, used to activate a second object, etc is a powerful tool to have. How you design content to use it is up to the designers, and could be really fun stuff, if done right. Even if all you have is the ability to pick up and move rocks, you could use them to play a full game of chess, for example. CoX never really had that, GW2 does and has some much more fun and interesting stuff to do as a result, in my opinion.

Agreed, and I fully support implementing something in this vein (and anything similar that the devs can come up with). I think we're all of the opinion that "click a glowie" was really only fun up to a point, and alternatives would have been greeted with much enthusiasm.

of Phoenix Rising
Am I