SHOULD A GAME BE COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT WITH ITS MECHANIC?

On the one hand, some hidden values are hidden for a reason and would get in the way of the player actually moving on with the plot/game. Especially hidden values that the player can't affect.

On the other hand, minmaxers like to mess with every mechanics.


Personally, I don't mind hidden mechanics as long as they don't affect my input to the game - that is, if they chug away in the background and aren't bullshit that will affect my choices in the game in a detrimental way.

No, not usually. For many reasons--in the case of the more mechanically complex games, just not overwhelming the player is something important to remember--a bit of opacity is a good thing. But I do think it's a good idea to at least think about issues of transparency vs. opacity during development.

The player shouldn't be guessing at the fundamental rules of how the game plays. If they want the quick and low of how to get good it should be plainly spelled to the player: Increase your STR and your melee damage increases! Increase DEX and etc. etc. . However I don't think the entire game should be transparent, there's a sense of mystery and discovery of the inner workings of the game that some players like (and like Max and Feld said you don't want to overwhelm players with information either) and I find revealing too much can bring out some bad sperging on players. Anything with probability is sure to blow up because people are a) really fucking bad at statistics and probability and b) horrible with confirmation bias. Fire Emblem learned that shit when they changed the hit formula so the reported hit% isn't the actual hit% but a number adjusted on that to bring the results of that % to what players expect.


Something I did once for a hit algorithm was make the base of the formula an arctan because I liked its curve properties. I focused on specific points on it: When hit and evade are equal the hit chance is 50% and when hit is double evade (or vice versa) the chance of hitting / evading is something like 96%. Moving away from the 1:1 point has a sharp incline too so that moving from 1:1 to 1.2:1 can significantly improve your odds. My goal here is to give the player numbers that would result in what they'd expect and can do math in their head easily. 1:1 and 2:1 are simple calculations that give what the player would expect (confirmation bias on a 50% not withstanding) and I get the joy of the arctan curve. I wouldn't reveal the algorithm to the player because it's an arctan curve with some adjustments to get the curve as I want it which can mean fractional numbers that I wouldn't expect anybody to actually bother to calculate then show them the 70% hit rate they have and have them get mad when they miss a whole three times in a row.

It probably didn't have very interesting mechanics, otherwise you'd have wanted more information.

You can beat most JRPGs without knowing anything about their mechanics, but that's just not that satisfying of a victory, is it?

On the other hand, fukken tell me what the hell your Luck stat does. "Makes stuff happen" is just code for "never invest points in this stat."

I hate how luck functions in VX Ace. I like being able to count on status effects landing or not (or at least know my chances). Fomar wrote a little scriptlet that removes luck's effect if you're interested, Liberty:

http://forums.rpgmakerweb.com/index.php?/topic/26723-aceremoving-lucks-influence-on-statedebuff-chances/?p=256191

Yanfly's extra parameters script gives you an easy way to dick with formulas, meaning you can make luck affect crit rate, among other things, so you might be interested in that one, too.

Anyway, yeah, I like most every mechanic to be clear. I think certain mechanics work better when not explained when the goal behind the mechanic is to encourage experimentation. GRS and I were talking a bit about Legend of Mana's crafting system in another thread, recently, and I think that's a good example of an intentionally obscured mechanic that works because of the experimentation element (though GRS disagrees, haha). Another good example is the skill system in a lot of SaGa games; since I didn't know the underlying reasons for when I learned a certain skill, I found normal encounters more interesting because I would constantly try different skills so that I could learn more skills (and also find new multi-character skill combos). It added a lot of variation to battles that otherwise would have been mundane.

author=LouisCyphre
On the other hand, fukken tell me what the hell your Luck stat does. "Makes stuff happen" is just code for "never invest points in this stat."

I hate Luck stats for exactly this reason.

I also hate it when a game gives you abilities that sound like they use one stat, but use a different one, like a special sword move that uses Magic instead of Strength.

Like others have said in the thread: Knowing the exact formula is unnecessary, but the description better not be needlessly vague. Needlessly vague = never used.

So in one project I was working on (and stopped because of unrelated technical issues), skills came right out and said what stats applied to it, so STR vs DEF, STR vs RES, etc.

Current project side steps that issue, since I trimmed down the stat list, so I just make it clear whether a skill bypasses defense or not.

Summary: I don't think games need to be completely transparent, but they shouldn't be opaque, either. If the player can influence something, they should at least have a solid hint of how it works.

author=Max McGee
Question for everyone...There are many a game I have actually beaten without fully understanding some of the mechanics. Is this is a good thing or a bad thing (or I guess neutral)?

I certainly wouldn't call it bad. There's lots of pieces and mechanics to game and not all of them are relevant when you're only trying to beat it. There's a step counter in FF7 that understanding how it works and how to manipulate it can help if you're trying to speed run the game but isn't relevant in a plain regular play through. The 7777 effect? I learned that it also works on enemies and affects poison damage ticks. This is used in a low level play through where you can poison the Materia Keeper and smack him twice for a pittance of damage. This puts him at 7777 HP putting him in the 7777 state which could be bad until a poison tick occurs next which does 777 damage because that's one of the things the 7777 state does. Like the step counter it isn't relevant when you just want the credits to roll but it becomes a mechanic that you can use to your advantage in a challenge run.

author=BaconAndEgg
Zidane's Thievery skill from FFIX is one of the main reason why I made this topic.

For those who don't know, the skill's damage output dependent on how many times you successfully steal from the enemy. And of course, the game hides this fact from you.

Don't get me started on Lucky 7.

How about Charge!? That's a fantastic move that I never learned to use because I had no clue how to use it (It makes all characters in yellow HP do a regular attack on Steiner's action. If the whole party is in yellow HP then everybody attacks! It has a bonus that no matter how many people attack it only provokes one counter attack too). Or abusing the ATB wait in menus during animations to freeze everybody's ATB. The game is balanced around having a horrific ATB queue but if you don't let the queue build up the game gets much easier and enemies don't get as many free actions.

Also fuck Lucky 7.

author=LouisCyphre
On the other hand, fukken tell me what the hell your Luck stat does. "Makes stuff happen" is just code for "never invest points in this stat."

Luck's a funny stat. Currently my implementation for it is "Shifts probability in your favor" which means anytime the RNG is concerned it'll change the breakpoint (or outright dis/allow certain results) of what you need based on your luck against the target's luck. Having lower luck means that 90% to hit might turn out to magically become an 80% while having a higher luck means that 10% to miss never occurs or that disintegrate attack can't disintegrate your expensive armor.

But it also is a stat you can't invest in. I stole the Wild ARMs approach where luck is a stat with various levels (Worst / Bad / Neutral / Good / Best or so) that change over time. Passives and consumables can shift it towards best. I'm not sure if it's a good approach but eh, fuck it. I'll roll the dice and see what happens.

"New Damage = Old Damage * (512 - Defense) / Defense

Why the fuck would they go with such a bafflingly obtuse formula?