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)
GOOD IDEA? BAD IDEA?
Posts
Pages:
1
unity
View playlists
CloseHello everyone! I thought I'd make a general "Is this a good idea in an RPG" thread, as I often have ideas that, honestly, might not be as good as I think they are, and feedback on them would really help me.
My idea: I have a game that is relatively grind-free, as just battling the enemies presented as you go along will generally give you the levels you need. However, I'm planning the endgame to ramp up the difficulty, so I thought I'd have an area right before the difficulty spike where players could grind if they wish.
In this area is a machine that spits out enemies (the game works on touch-encounters), and each enemy party works kind of like the Veldt in FF6, where there are monsters from all over the game (except beefed up for optimal grinding). Every time you beat an enemy party, the machine pops another one out that you can fight, so there's no wandering around necessary.
So, I ask. Is this a good idea or a bad idea?
And, as an add-on, if this is a decent idea, should I have an NPC that counts how many enemy parties you've beaten and gives out prizes when you reach a certain number? I'm iffy on this idea, as it might make players who don't wanna grind feel like they're missing out on stuff.
Let me know what you think, and if you want to share your own idea for feedback but aren't sure if it's enough for it's own thread, feel free to post it here, too ^_^
My idea: I have a game that is relatively grind-free, as just battling the enemies presented as you go along will generally give you the levels you need. However, I'm planning the endgame to ramp up the difficulty, so I thought I'd have an area right before the difficulty spike where players could grind if they wish.
In this area is a machine that spits out enemies (the game works on touch-encounters), and each enemy party works kind of like the Veldt in FF6, where there are monsters from all over the game (except beefed up for optimal grinding). Every time you beat an enemy party, the machine pops another one out that you can fight, so there's no wandering around necessary.
So, I ask. Is this a good idea or a bad idea?
And, as an add-on, if this is a decent idea, should I have an NPC that counts how many enemy parties you've beaten and gives out prizes when you reach a certain number? I'm iffy on this idea, as it might make players who don't wanna grind feel like they're missing out on stuff.
Let me know what you think, and if you want to share your own idea for feedback but aren't sure if it's enough for it's own thread, feel free to post it here, too ^_^
I'm a bit interested in the processing in how monsters re-appear on the map. Is it a case of activating a self-switch after they are dealt with, and, after a certain amount of time, the self-switch deactivates itself?
As for the idea, itself, the thing I'd be least certain about is the NPC that gives out goodies based on number of fights. The point about some players feeling like they could be missing out on something is valid, especially since part of the plan is that the game hasn't required players to grind until up to a certain point. I dunno. I guess it would depend on how fun the combat is with how players would react to that situation. If combat is fun, for example, then, players might grind anyway, and there might be no perceived loss when they meet that NPC.
As for the idea, itself, the thing I'd be least certain about is the NPC that gives out goodies based on number of fights. The point about some players feeling like they could be missing out on something is valid, especially since part of the plan is that the game hasn't required players to grind until up to a certain point. I dunno. I guess it would depend on how fun the combat is with how players would react to that situation. If combat is fun, for example, then, players might grind anyway, and there might be no perceived loss when they meet that NPC.
Desertopa
775
Well, if the player has had no need to grind for the entire game so far, and is suddenly encouraged to do so at the end of the game, I think it would be liable to mess with the pacing. Also, unless there's a clear in-story reason for this monster machine to be there, it may hurt the player's sense of immersion. Even if there is an in-story reason, if it's not sufficiently compelling, it might smack too strongly of contrivance.
For the NPC who counts battles and rewards you, I think it does have the potential to make players who don't want to grind feel like they're missing out. In general, I think it's better not to offer rewards for the player doing something they won't enjoy, because a lot of players will do stuff for the reward, but it won't make it fun.
Some players do like to grind (I'm one of them, I find it relaxing, and like knowing I'm ahead of the level the game expects me to be at,) but most probably don't, so if you're going to find a way to accommodate the ones who do, it's probably better to find a way where the rest don't feel pushed into it.
For the NPC who counts battles and rewards you, I think it does have the potential to make players who don't want to grind feel like they're missing out. In general, I think it's better not to offer rewards for the player doing something they won't enjoy, because a lot of players will do stuff for the reward, but it won't make it fun.
Some players do like to grind (I'm one of them, I find it relaxing, and like knowing I'm ahead of the level the game expects me to be at,) but most probably don't, so if you're going to find a way to accommodate the ones who do, it's probably better to find a way where the rest don't feel pushed into it.
How are you going to communicate that change in game feel to the players? By that I mean you can tell early on in a game if grinding is going to be part of the success dynamic, and if the entire game up until this point has made it obvious that you set it up to be a minimalistic landscape in regard to combat what method are you going to use to justify the change in feel?
In regard to the actual idea I do like the idea of giving players the ability to combat the difficulty spike via this method if they choose to rather than the way I would given the apparent world build you'd previously set up, which is simply to modify my tactics until I hit the one that worked. However the NPC gift giving really wouldn't work too well in that scenario. I believe if the players thought that was the only way to gain whatever reward the NPC offered they'd feel forced into grinding even if their playstyle doesn't match that scenario.
In regard to the actual idea I do like the idea of giving players the ability to combat the difficulty spike via this method if they choose to rather than the way I would given the apparent world build you'd previously set up, which is simply to modify my tactics until I hit the one that worked. However the NPC gift giving really wouldn't work too well in that scenario. I believe if the players thought that was the only way to gain whatever reward the NPC offered they'd feel forced into grinding even if their playstyle doesn't match that scenario.
Housekeeping
3571
I think it's a good idea, unity, but I'd make sure the machine is explained as a machine with a never-ending supply of enemies via sign, npc, etc. The reason being: if I knew the entire game that once I killed an enemy, they stayed dead, then I would think, "I bet if I bash up a lot of enemies from that machine, I'll get something nice." I'm also a bit worried about the veldt idea; if there's a big variance between the early mooks and the later mooks in xp, then that might be an annoying grinding option. And, yeah, don't attach a prize to it unless you want everyone to do it.
author=Marrend
I'm a bit interested in the processing in how monsters re-appear on the map. Is it a case of activating a self-switch after they are dealt with, and, after a certain amount of time, the self-switch deactivates itself?
Yeah, self-switch after the monster is defeated, then "Set event location" to the end of the machine and turn the self switch off and add in a sound effect to give the impression that a new monster popped out of the machine.
author=nhubi
How are you going to communicate that change in game feel to the players? By that I mean you can tell early on in a game if grinding is going to be part of the success dynamic, and if the entire game up until this point has made it obvious that you set it up to be a minimalistic landscape in regard to combat what method are you going to use to justify the change in feel?
I honestly didn't have anything in mind, rather than putting this in it's own place and labeling it as such. It's not going to be a part of a normal dungeon or anything.
author=Desertopa
Well, if the player has had no need to grind for the entire game so far, and is suddenly encouraged to do so at the end of the game, I think it would be liable to mess with the pacing. Also, unless there's a clear in-story reason for this monster machine to be there, it may hurt the player's sense of immersion. Even if there is an in-story reason, if it's not sufficiently compelling, it might smack too strongly of contrivance.
That's a good point. The only in-story explanation, really, is that a seer set it up to aid the hero if they wish to train for the upcoming encounter. I guess whether or not that's sufficient justification will depend on the player's preference.
author=Housekeeping
I think it's a good idea, unity, but I'd make sure the machine is explained as a machine with a never-ending supply of enemies via sign, npc, etc. The reason being: if I knew the entire game that once I killed an enemy, they stayed dead, then I would think, "I bet if I bash up a lot of enemies from that machine, I'll get something nice." I'm also a bit worried about the veldt idea; if there's a big variance between the early mooks and the later mooks in xp, then that might be an annoying grinding option.
Good point; I'll make sure it's clearly marked before the player even sees the machine. Also, I'll be beefing up the early mooks' stats and EXP rewards; the variance is there just to keep the grinding more engaging with a large variety of encounters possible.
author=Marrend
As for the idea, itself, the thing I'd be least certain about is the NPC that gives out goodies based on number of fights. The point about some players feeling like they could be missing out on something is valid, especially since part of the plan is that the game hasn't required players to grind until up to a certain point. I dunno. I guess it would depend on how fun the combat is with how players would react to that situation. If combat is fun, for example, then, players might grind anyway, and there might be no perceived loss when they meet that NPC.
author=Desertopa
For the NPC who counts battles and rewards you, I think it does have the potential to make players who don't want to grind feel like they're missing out. In general, I think it's better not to offer rewards for the player doing something they won't enjoy, because a lot of players will do stuff for the reward, but it won't make it fun.
author=nhubi
In regard to the actual idea I do like the idea of giving players the ability to combat the difficulty spike via this method if they choose to rather than the way I would given the apparent world build you'd previously set up, which is simply to modify my tactics until I hit the one that worked. However the NPC gift giving really wouldn't work too well in that scenario. I believe if the players thought that was the only way to gain whatever reward the NPC offered they'd feel forced into grinding even if their playstyle doesn't match that scenario.
author=Housekeeping
And, yeah, don't attach a prize to it unless you want everyone to do it.
Yeah, the prizes seem like a bad idea in light of this. I'll be nixing them.
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
This idea seems to be a perfect example of badly preparing the player.
It's not that the player is likely to be confused by what's happening. But the game communicates, early and repeatedly and consistently, that the player will have neither the need nor the ability to grind in this game. That is the kind of thing that attracts a lot of players, and turns off others. It's a major aspect of the gameplay style, and once you've clearly conveyed that this is what the game is going to be, you shouldn't turn around at the last moment and do something different. Players who were enjoying the game up until this point will be disappointed that the game abandoned its gameplay premise at the eleventh hour instead of bringing it to a climax.
The fact that you feel the need for something like this speaks to the existance of a larger problem - that you're concerned, perhaps subconsciously, that your game's difficulty curve is bad. I submit that simply smoothing out the curve, so that the difficulty increases gradually rather than suddenly, would prevent this kind of ham-fisted bandaid from being needed in the first place.
It's not that the player is likely to be confused by what's happening. But the game communicates, early and repeatedly and consistently, that the player will have neither the need nor the ability to grind in this game. That is the kind of thing that attracts a lot of players, and turns off others. It's a major aspect of the gameplay style, and once you've clearly conveyed that this is what the game is going to be, you shouldn't turn around at the last moment and do something different. Players who were enjoying the game up until this point will be disappointed that the game abandoned its gameplay premise at the eleventh hour instead of bringing it to a climax.
The fact that you feel the need for something like this speaks to the existance of a larger problem - that you're concerned, perhaps subconsciously, that your game's difficulty curve is bad. I submit that simply smoothing out the curve, so that the difficulty increases gradually rather than suddenly, would prevent this kind of ham-fisted bandaid from being needed in the first place.
author=LockeZ
This idea seems to be a perfect example of badly preparing the player.
It's not that the player is likely to be confused by what's happening. But the game communicates, early and repeatedly and consistently, that the player will have neither the need nor the ability to grind in this game. That is the kind of thing that attracts a lot of players, and turns off others. It's a major aspect of the gameplay style, and once you've clearly conveyed that this is what the game is going to be, you shouldn't turn around at the last moment and do something different. Players who were enjoying the game up until this point will be disappointed that the game abandoned its gameplay premise at the eleventh hour instead of bringing it to a climax.
The fact that you feel the need for something like this speaks to the existance of a larger problem - that you're concerned, perhaps subconsciously, that your game's difficulty curve is bad. I submit that simply smoothing out the curve, so that the difficulty increases gradually rather than suddenly, would prevent this kind of ham-fisted bandaid from being needed in the first place.
A valid point. Hmmm. I would like to add that if you leave a dungeon in this game and come back, the enemies will return, so it's not impossible to grind before now. That still doesn't change your point, however. Perhaps me wanting to implement this feature is me doing too much hand-holding. I already added difficulty modes, after all. I guess I just worry because it seems like there are always people who find things too hard.
Other people also mentioned the shift in tone that this represents. I'll think on this. Perhaps this is an idea best saved for a game that actually encourages grinding throughout, and shouldn't be in this game.
author=LockeZ
This idea seems to be a perfect example of badly preparing the player.
It's not that the player is likely to be confused by what's happening. But the game communicates, early and repeatedly and consistently, that the player will have neither the need nor the ability to grind in this game. That is the kind of thing that attracts a lot of players, and turns off others. It's a major aspect of the gameplay style, and once you've clearly conveyed that this is what the game is going to be, you shouldn't turn around at the last moment and do something different. Players who were enjoying the game up until this point will be disappointed that the game abandoned its gameplay premise at the eleventh hour instead of bringing it to a climax.
The fact that you feel the need for something like this speaks to the existance of a larger problem - that you're concerned, perhaps subconsciously, that your game's difficulty curve is bad. I submit that simply smoothing out the curve, so that the difficulty increases gradually rather than suddenly, would prevent this kind of ham-fisted bandaid from being needed in the first place.
I second this.
In addition, I really despise the whole war between grind vs. no grind. I adamantly believe that if the battles you encounter are engaging enough, or at least promises something more valuable than extra gold and experience as with the Pokemon games, the player wouldn't mind seeking out encounters. In my experience at least, it's only when there is an extremely repetitive, difficult, or unrewarding aspect of the encounters within an area does grinding ever get under my skin.
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 don't think you'd be attempting to put a bandaid over a spike in your game's difficulty curve like this if it were fixed as easily as smoothing out enemy stats. I suspect that something you're trying to do in the gameplay in the endgame is creating the perceived difficulty spike. Can you pinpoint what, exactly? New features that you're not sure the player will understand? Features that have been there all along but that you plan on suddenly requiring the use of, while the game was winnable without them up until now?
Well, at this point, this is planning for the endgame which hasn't been made yet, (I tend to like to get feedback on ideas a good deal of time before implementing them to get this sort of valuable feedback ^_^) so this was for planning that rather than to fix a problem that already exists. I think that I wanted to jack up the difficulty suddenly at the end, and the correct method should be to do that in a consistent curve rather than a sudden jump (that the player would have to grind to overcome if they aren't skilled).
As for previous complaints, they mostly come from friends who aren't skilled at RPGs. Those that are more familiar have been more favorable to the difficulty curve.
As for previous complaints, they mostly come from friends who aren't skilled at RPGs. Those that are more familiar have been more favorable to the difficulty curve.
Pages:
1
