Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Post History
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
SKIPPABLE COMBAT?
Posts
Versalia
View playlists
Closeauthor=LockeZ
@versalia: Uh, that's not a hyperbole on my part, that's the point of the article and the idea.
author=kentona
(It's not an all or nothing thing here... This isn't a "Should there be a Skip to the end button?" discussion)
also
author=LockeZ
I think if you intentionally lead people to an option that most of them won't find fun you're going to be called a bad game designer.
I don't think people would be "intentionally led" to skip combat. If combat is what you enjoy about the game, then you don't HAVE to skip it. No player will purposely take the option that isn't fun if they know it isn't fun to them. Hence option. Your argument basically boils down to "design the perfect game that is fun to every individual's play style, or you're a flawed developer."
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=Versalia
No player will purposely take the option that isn't fun if they know it isn't fun to them.
But they don't know it isn't as fun to them. They're the player, not the designer; they probably don't ever think about what is and isn't fun, beyond turning on the game. You do when you play games, because you have the mind of a game designer. But a normal person doesn't. They just try to beat the game.
I think you just have way more faith in players than I do.
author=LockeZThat's a little exaggerated, no? People who play games want to have fun and know very well what's fun or not, I'd even say they're the experts in that field, and, as game goes, it's on the contrary the ONLY thing they think about.
they probably don't ever think about what is and isn't fun
lockez stop belittling everybody and telling the world it's stupid
you're stupid
let's actually talk about interesting things
BUT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S INTERESTING
you're stupid
***
let's actually talk about interesting things
CrazenarcodisI haven't read the rest of the topic yet (though I plan to), but I have to stop, drop and roll at this.
It seems especially weird to allow skippable content in an RPG, where the game is geared around progression, leveling, building your character, etc.
Leveling is the basic reason why people get stuck in a traditional RPG. This is why I, uh, don't really use levels - or if I do, they're significantly different than traditional levels.
If you can't possibly be five levels under the boss, then you can progress - and if not, it's because you're missing something crucial and less arbitrary than "levels." In Edifice: Frozen Torment, there is a ton of progression without levels, and you can pretty clearly say "I'm taking a ridiculous amount of Water damage from this boss. I should look for some gear that will help protect me from Water - say, wasn't there another hallway in this dungeon?" And then you find the piece of equipment that grants you a party-wide Water resistance buff, helping you defeat the boss and any future Water-abusing foes.
That sounds about 50x better than "...shit, am I too low-level? Or do I just suck? Huh." It's why Visions & Voices didn't have levels; it's a non-linear survival RPG, where sometimes the best choice was to completely avoid battles.
ftr I think levels are dumb and passe in most cases. Games that do levels well:
-League of Legends L1-18 (the cap) in forty minutes! Good thing games last thirty-sixty minutes (or Dominion games last ~fifteen-twenty minutes but you gain XP passively over time as well as from kills, so you will still get high-level unless you're constantly dead).
-Dissidia 012 There are an utterly insane amount of aspects that I'd have to explain to make this understandable, so just know this: it does them well, and is incredibly flexible (you can change your level from 1 to your current max at almost any point, you can set foes to be different levels, you get nice rewards for fighting underleveled...)
-The World Ends With You Change your level from 1 to your current max at any time; lower levels increase rewards from battle. This is completely optional and nonessential, but lots of fun. Levels also change nothing but your maximum HP - your equipment determines your damage/defense.
-Umm... that's all I can think of. Levels are stupid. Funny how none of those games are traditional RPGs. =3***
As for the concept of skippable combat itself, I think it's a swell idea for a lot of games. I agree completely that it's not going to hurt you to know that somebody out there skipped a fight. Butthurt basement dwellers are butthurt basement dwellers.
I personally will probably keep my games like Visions & Voices: touch encounters that you're not really forced into fighting most of the time. To beat V&V, you only ever need to fight two battles, even to get the true super-powered-up final boss ending. Both are tough bosses, yes, but you can lockpick, trap, forage and dodge your way to getting the gear you need to survive.
No levels, no need to force combat.
BUT PEOPLE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S INTERESTING
author=chanaauthor=LockeZThat's a little exaggerated, no? People who play games want to have fun and know very well what's fun or not, I'd even say they're the experts in that field, and, as game goes, it's on the contrary the ONLY thing they think about.
they probably don't ever think about what is and isn't fun
EXACTLY. Even if you've never played a game before, within a few attempts at something (combat, crafting, puzzles...) you are already forming an opinion of whether you like it or not.
You form opinions about what you are experiencing very rapidly. You could have only fought 5 battles in the beginning of the game and already be on your way to deciding if you like or hate the battle system. If combat is tedious and you can skip it, you will. If skipping combat bores you, you won't. This is interaction design 101.
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
I like being thin and attractive, but I still eat cookies if they're in front of me because I have no self control and they will be delicious for a brief moment.
Players like feeling the immense satisfaction of having fully completed a game through their own power, but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
Players like feeling the immense satisfaction of having fully completed a game through their own power, but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
author=LockeZ
Players like feeling the immense satisfaction of having fully completed a game through their own power, but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
what?
... what???
author=LockeZ
I like being thin and attractive, but I still eat cookies if they're in front of me because I have no self control and they will be delicious for a brief moment.
Players like feeling the immense satisfaction of having fully completed a game through their own power, but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
yes, this is why there are no skinny people anywhere. and this is also why no one has ever made a 100% run of super metroid, super mario world, and why no one has ever bothered trying to get every materia in final fantasy 7, and why no one ever bothered getting all the characters in suikoden, and why no one has ever bothered trying to beat ikaruga without dying, and why no one has ever bothered trying to beat zelda without dying (or hell, without using a sword)... because people are automatic with zero self control and nothing challenging has ever been done ever in the history of forever.
SOUND ARGUMENT
author=LockeZ
but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
(citation needed)
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
author=Melkinoauthor=LockeZ(citation needed)
but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
'We remove discriminative stimuli when we turn away from a stimulus which induces aversive action. We may forcibly look away from a wallpaper design which evokes the compulsive behavior of tracing geometrical patterns. We may close doors or draw curtains to eliminate distracting stimuli or achieve the same effect by closing our eyes or putting our fingers in our ears. We may put a box of candy out of sight to avoid overeating. This sort of self-control is described as "avoiding temptation," especially when the aversive consequences have been arranged by society. It is the principle of "Get thee behind me, Satan.'
Skinner, B.F. Science and Human Behavior, Chapter XV p. 233
author=LockeZauthor=Melkino'We remove discriminative stimuli when we turn away from a stimulus which induces aversive action. We may forcibly look away from a wallpaper design which evokes the compulsive behavior of tracing geometrical patterns. We may close doors or draw curtains to eliminate distracting stimuli or achieve the same effect by closing our eyes or putting our fingers in our ears. We may put a box of candy out of sight to avoid overeating. This sort of self-control is described as "avoiding temptation," especially when the aversive consequences have been arranged by society. It is the principle of "Get thee behind me, Satan.'author=LockeZ(citation needed)
but they still will skip battles if there's a "skip battle" option, because they have no self control and it will be more enjoyable for a brief moment.
Skinner, B.F. Science and Human Behavior, Chapter XV p. 233
That doesn't actually back up your point. It proves the opposite of your point - that you would actually go put the cookies away to avoid eating them. Try not shooting yourself in the foot with your next citation, mmmkay?
LockeZ
I'd really like to get rid of LockeZ. His play style is way too unpredictable. He's always like this too. If he ran a country, he'd just kill and imprison people at random until crime stopped.
5958
What it proves is that when you put the option to skip the battle right in front of the player, when they can do it via a single button press built into the game, they're more likely to give up their self-control and take that option than if they have to download a walkthrough or use an external cheat device.
author=LockeZ
What it proves is that when you put the option to skip the battle right in front of the player, when they can do it via a single button press built into the game, they're more likely to give up their self-control and take that option than if they have to download a walkthrough or use an external cheat device.
I think more likely the choice is they'll stop playing altogether if they're frustrated with the battles or find a certain part of the game boring, which is the greater problem to worry about.
can we please just ignore lockez and talk about interesting things, this is obviously going nowhere and is pointless?
prexus
309
LockeZ has a point. Build it and they will come, as it were. If you put the feature in, people will use it.
I have an opinion on this but was unable to properly defend it on IRC earlier as I was typing on my phone and at work, so I am writing up a big whole thing on it and hopefully it will properly articulate my position on the situation and someone can get some sense out of it.
But to be perfectly clear, this is a debate on a whether a feature should be used, shouldn't be used, and its merits. There has been no research on this, and the use of the feature is limited. There is no correct answer to it. We have opinions, and we are debating the validity of them. Frankly, I am tired of people saying other's opinions are wrong and shouldn't be listened to.
If you don't want to debate the topic, and feel your opinion can't be swayed one way or another, don't post here. I haven't heard the more active people in this thread ADD anything to the debate in a while, only knock down the ideas of people who are trying to discuss the topic.
I have an opinion on this but was unable to properly defend it on IRC earlier as I was typing on my phone and at work, so I am writing up a big whole thing on it and hopefully it will properly articulate my position on the situation and someone can get some sense out of it.
But to be perfectly clear, this is a debate on a whether a feature should be used, shouldn't be used, and its merits. There has been no research on this, and the use of the feature is limited. There is no correct answer to it. We have opinions, and we are debating the validity of them. Frankly, I am tired of people saying other's opinions are wrong and shouldn't be listened to.
If you don't want to debate the topic, and feel your opinion can't be swayed one way or another, don't post here. I haven't heard the more active people in this thread ADD anything to the debate in a while, only knock down the ideas of people who are trying to discuss the topic.
Avee
5794
All players who use the feature will have their own reasons, as I said earlier:
All three scenarios will undeniably happen for a game that has the feature. Arguments like "but they don't have to use it" or "I just want to play/watch a specific part of the game" or "it mocks the point of a game" don't move this discussion forward because they each account for only one of the three scenarios.
In my opinion, a more useful discussion should consider and weight all three scenarios together, and foresee the effects of the feature from both a player and a developer's points of view.
(Not that I did earlier but hey :P)
author=Avee
A) Some players won't skip battles. They prefer to play the game in its entirety.
B) Some players will use the fight skip feature to play specific parts of the game. That's fine with me. But there are already numerous ways to satisfy these players.
C) Some players will be lazy and skip battles instead of trying to win them. As a game developer, I don't want that.
All three scenarios will undeniably happen for a game that has the feature. Arguments like "but they don't have to use it" or "I just want to play/watch a specific part of the game" or "it mocks the point of a game" don't move this discussion forward because they each account for only one of the three scenarios.
In my opinion, a more useful discussion should consider and weight all three scenarios together, and foresee the effects of the feature from both a player and a developer's points of view.
(Not that I did earlier but hey :P)
prexus
LockeZ has a point. Build it and they will come, as it were. If you put the feature in, people will use it.
how fucking dare they
author=narcodis
I think more likely the choice is they'll stop playing altogether if they're frustrated with the battles or find a certain part of the game boring, which is the greater problem to worry about.
This is the point. There could be other elements to the game they'd rather be playing or experiencing, and certain portions of the game are just a bother.
@Avee
That original C.) wasn't valid. If the game developer lets you skip battles, then by nature it's not cheating. Cheating would be doing something the game developer did not intend. Like opening the editor and giving your character max level and max money.
At the end of the day, it's all up to the dev how they want their game to be played. Usually, it's to let the gamer skip something even the dev doesn't think is all that important. Like a mission briefing before a bullet hell type game. It's there if you want to see it, but you can skip it to get to the real action, it's not that big a deal.
