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)
REMOVING DEAD ENDS IN GAMES
Posts
Milennin
2060
Milennin
View playlists
Closeauthor=LockeZ
No they're fucking not. RPGs figured out a long time ago not to fucking do that, and there hasn't been a game that had shit hidden in random objects in a decade.
Lol, I've never seen anyone complaining about hidden items in RPGs.
author=LockeZ
You're absolutely insane if you think making the player press A on every tile in the game is a good idea. It hasn't been done since the early PS1 for a really good goddamn reason: people figured out how to design video games better. Today no publisher would allow that, and no player would stomach that. Video game developers figured out a long fucking time ago to make that shit sparkle.
Having to press A on every tile in the game to find hidden items is a bad way of doing hidden items. They need consistency to them in order to work - only one or a couple of type of objects in the game ever have a chance of containing hidden items, or invisible spots that look suspicious (Pokémon Emerald did it really well, it was easy finding hidden items even though they were hidden on normal looking tiles).
author=LockeZ
Today no publisher would allow that, and no player would stomach that. Video game developers figured out a long fucking time ago to make that shit sparkle.
Making it sparkle takes away the hidden part from hidden items. Might as well put down a treasure chest, then.
Dead ends are...eh. Now, you can definitely afford to be creative and to bend; a 'thing' at a dead end doesn't have to be treasure. It can be a plot element, a dialogue box, a person, a note to read, or something that's designed to draw the player's attention in some way. Dead ends with nothing end them are a good way to disrespect a player's time, but they don't have to contain treasure perse.
Eh, it's contextual. Sparkle doesn't always mean 'hidden'. Some things 'to find' wouldn't make sense in a treasure chest. Sparkles for 'things to notice' also work fine in cases like that.
author=Mil
Making it sparkle takes away the hidden part from hidden items. Might as well put down a treasure chest, then.
author=Sated
Making them sparkle means they're no longer hidden, which completely defeats the point.
Eh, it's contextual. Sparkle doesn't always mean 'hidden'. Some things 'to find' wouldn't make sense in a treasure chest. Sparkles for 'things to notice' also work fine in cases like that.
I don't mind completely too much personally, as long as it's not too frequent.
Though, I must admit that there are pretty much no dead ends at all in my current game. Exploration is of course a rather big part of the gameplay, and I want to give gameplay reasons for players to wander and explore my maps and reward those who do (I must admit, it can be a lot of extra work, but oh well).
It's important to note that not all of my treasures are Megalixirs and Holo Shield Generators. Some chests have regular antidotes inside them. I do try to make the rarer items more harder to find/reach.
I also try to make my choice of treasure relevant to the area the player is currently in. But that's a whole different topic.
About the hidden items/sparkles: all sparkles don't have to be THAT easy to notice. Some sparkles could be trickier to see than others.
Though, I must admit that there are pretty much no dead ends at all in my current game. Exploration is of course a rather big part of the gameplay, and I want to give gameplay reasons for players to wander and explore my maps and reward those who do (I must admit, it can be a lot of extra work, but oh well).
It's important to note that not all of my treasures are Megalixirs and Holo Shield Generators. Some chests have regular antidotes inside them. I do try to make the rarer items more harder to find/reach.
I also try to make my choice of treasure relevant to the area the player is currently in. But that's a whole different topic.
About the hidden items/sparkles: all sparkles don't have to be THAT easy to notice. Some sparkles could be trickier to see than others.
Rine
1378
Personally, I liked how EBF4 handled it. There were hidden items, where you would have to click on a certain tile on the map.
A) Some of them were in regular locations. Almost every time you saw a big flower, it had items in it.
B) Since the game had mouse support, if your cursor turned to a 'you can interact with this' symbol, you knew there was something there if you moused over it.
C) If all else failed, the items on the screen would occasionally sparkle, but you have to watch for it.
A) Some of them were in regular locations. Almost every time you saw a big flower, it had items in it.
B) Since the game had mouse support, if your cursor turned to a 'you can interact with this' symbol, you knew there was something there if you moused over it.
C) If all else failed, the items on the screen would occasionally sparkle, but you have to watch for it.
Desertopa
775
author=LockeZ
You're absolutely insane if you think making the player press A on every tile in the game is a good idea. It hasn't been done since the early PS1 for a really good goddamn reason: people figured out how to design video games better. Today no publisher would allow that, and no player would stomach that. Video game developers figured out a long fucking time ago to make that shit sparkle.
The most recent game I've played which used this was Golden Sun: Dark Dawn (released late 2010,) and although I never played it, considering it was a staple of the series in every preceding title, I suspect Dragon Quest IX also used it.
That's not to say I don't think it's a terrible idea. It drives me absolutely bonkers. Most of the Dragon Quest games manage to make it even worse by forcing you to use more than one button press in order to inspect random objects. But somehow, people kept, not just tolerating those games, but buying them in huge numbers (at least in Japan.) So I guess there must be a bunch of people out there who don't hate it that much.
Rather than making items sparkle or otherwise stand out, my favorite solution is to make a large portion of all objects inspectable, with interesting text on examination, with items occasionally hidden among those. It's a lot more work than just making items visually distinct, so it's really only appropriate for games with a heavy writing focus, but that's where my preferences lie in any case.
Pretty sure the PRESS X TO CHECK YOUR SPOT thing is over and done with in the DQ franchise. Searching wardrobes and stuff, though - I love me some of dat.
If you're going to have stuff that is hidden in various places (like plants that you can pick and whatnot) then do make sure there's some way that the player can find them. I like Wild ARMs use of the radar system - press a button and a radar pops out highlighting any hidden items in the area (it was a fairly large area - about the size of the screen) for a short amount of time. Easy and it fit with the overall on-map-tool gameplay of the game. ^.^
But yeah, either teach your player that they can expect most logs to have mushrooms to pick in them or let them have a way to figure out that an item is in that log in particular, whether it be a discolour/actual sprite of a mushroom/sparkle/beeping when you get close/other.
Another thing I like to use dead ends for are shortcuts. You hit a switch at the end of the dungeon and suddenly the wall over the other side of the room moves, letting you access a midway point in the dungeon. Click another switch and another wall moves, giving you a fast retreat option. You have to find the switches (or maybe they're in the dead end in question) and trigger it, but once done you can travel back and forth fast and easily and suddenly that dead end became a lot more useful.
If you're going to have stuff that is hidden in various places (like plants that you can pick and whatnot) then do make sure there's some way that the player can find them. I like Wild ARMs use of the radar system - press a button and a radar pops out highlighting any hidden items in the area (it was a fairly large area - about the size of the screen) for a short amount of time. Easy and it fit with the overall on-map-tool gameplay of the game. ^.^
But yeah, either teach your player that they can expect most logs to have mushrooms to pick in them or let them have a way to figure out that an item is in that log in particular, whether it be a discolour/actual sprite of a mushroom/sparkle/beeping when you get close/other.
Another thing I like to use dead ends for are shortcuts. You hit a switch at the end of the dungeon and suddenly the wall over the other side of the room moves, letting you access a midway point in the dungeon. Click another switch and another wall moves, giving you a fast retreat option. You have to find the switches (or maybe they're in the dead end in question) and trigger it, but once done you can travel back and forth fast and easily and suddenly that dead end became a lot more useful.
author=SatedNo they're fucking not. RPGs figured out a long time ago not to fucking do that, and there hasn't been a game that had shit hidden in random objects in a decade.I guess the Pokémon games don't exist.
Having to press a button on every single tile would be stupid, but there's nothing wrong with hiding items in obvious places such as pots/barrels/crates or whatever. Making them sparkle means they're no longer hidden, which completely defeats the point.
Neither do Diablo games, or Torchlight games, or any hack n' slash RPG ever.
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
Diablo 3 highlights every interactable object, you putz. Pokemon at least gives you a really annoying and cumbersome radar to find the invisible bullshit. I think the only games that still have anything hidden like that are direct sequels to 20 year old games that have changed very little over that time period. I also think we've exhausted the off-topic discussion for now, though if someone wants to start a dedicated topic, I'll rage about it all week.
Back on topic: Here's the second half of the Narshe Mines with all the dead ends marked in red. If you think that removing all of the red areas from the map would improve the game, I think you might be insane and I would love to hear your reasoning.
Back on topic: Here's the second half of the Narshe Mines with all the dead ends marked in red. If you think that removing all of the red areas from the map would improve the game, I think you might be insane and I would love to hear your reasoning.
emmych
817
Most of those dead ends you marked out are clearly visible before the player goes down them. That is the difference between decoration and a dead end, imo: if I go all the way down a path only to find nothing, I get miffed. If I can see there is nothing, then alright it's some cool cave variation and adds to the environment.
Rine
1378
A few of those areas you marked aren't dead ends either. The bottom left one has the switch in it, and the top left one is part of a large four part cavern. The rest are definitely more decoration than an actual separate path that dead ends. You'll walk right by them without going down them, so like emmych said, they are their for variation and aesthetics.
RedMask
1139
Yeah I agree with emmych and Rine, I see most of those spots you highlighted in Narshe Mines as decorative areas to make the cave look nicer. Only a couple of those could be seen as dead ends but they are all very short so no big deal.
The one you highlighted on the bottom right seems the most dead-end-esq to me and one could argue that sure it wouldn't hurt to throw in a treasure chest there with a tonic or something. But it's still short enough for that to just be decorative as well.
The one you highlighted on the bottom right seems the most dead-end-esq to me and one could argue that sure it wouldn't hurt to throw in a treasure chest there with a tonic or something. But it's still short enough for that to just be decorative as well.
One of my own maps as reference. It's okay to have dead ends as long as you can easily see they're a dead end and don't have to travel too far to get to said end.
Red is dead end, blue is treasure, green is teleport, black is cutout. Cutouts can serve as deadends. They're basically inaccessible parts of the map that show variation/decoration. They add a bit more feeling of 'bigger areas' and can help make a map seem bigger/more connected to other places than they really are.
Here's another example of handling dead ends. Each square is a room (default size). Bones are encounters, gems are treasure, ground is empty, book is save, crystal is special event, bed is inn, sign is entrance, light is exit and grave is boss. As you can see, a few spots are dead ends (I should probably swap them around a little and make maybe one more). You won't see that map layout in-game (it's just a reference for me so I know what to put where). This is from my lesbian dating game. Yes. I have a lesbian dating RPG.
Mysticphoenix
411
author=JosephSeraph
FFVI's clock elixirs were amazing
edit:author=Mysticphoenix
If you don't want to put treasure in dead ends, then put something interesting to see, such as notes, nice room, more clues, footsteps, broken vase, bloods, pertified monsters.
PUT A GAME OVER
Or endless dialogues popped up to torment the player's soul
To be fair, replaying FFXIII isn't bad. You no longer expect the usual Final Fantasy formula so you aren't as bummed about the lack of exploration in the story. It's still fast-tracked, but it's not as bad.
LightningLord2
230
Well, the exploration slightly makes up for the lack of challenge, but if a Final Fantasy game has neither...
