ROBOTS!

Posts

Pages: first 12 next last
What is the consensus with robots and cyborgs regarding electricity?

Does the electricity do damage to them? Does it crit them? Or does it charge them up?

I'm curious to know your thoughts on this. If you can explain why, even better.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
Some people are allergic to peanuts. Some people eat peanuts and gain energy from them.

Some robots eat electricity. Some robots eat old people medication. It's a great, big, beautiful world out there, full of all kinds of people and all kinds of robots.
There's not going to be an objective criteria for this. However as long as it make sense on like a Breath of the Wild elements way, the better it probably is for the common player to comprehend.

Is fire really hurt by water? Technically in some cases water can evaporate due to too much heat or you need enough water and force to actually put it out. The specifics don't matter because popular culture osmosis is generally accepted as fire > water just as an object that resembles a gun is likely to fire a projectile.

Going back to electricity, I would say the scene in Avengers where Thor accidentally powers up the Iron Man suit was an unexpected twist. It could have gone either way, but the writers chose to do something that would make it so that both characters and the audience weren't expecting it. So I mean either you damage a robot by overcharging them or you give them buffs because they're charging. I mean it really depends on the overarching game design more than anything but that would be an interesting use if you can only damage a robot with electricity if they're at full health but heal them if they're below (or do it with MP instead).

Feels like there needs to be more context for the question though because it's gonna depend on the game. Any typical RPG I would play I would assume right away that I can do electric damage to a robot. Unless there's an actual type/elemental system in place that explicitly explains the contrary.
author=Darken
There's not going to be an objective criteria for this. However as long as it make sense on like a Breath of the Wild elements way, the better it probably is for the common player to comprehend.


I have not played Breath of the Wild, how do their elements make sense?

I suppose I was hoping for more of a 'at first glance' what are people's thoughts. Originally I had robots being healed and then 'charged' (doubling attack power) when electricity was used on them, but I had testers confused by this. My wish is that the player can look at an enemy and have a good idea of what might work right away instead of having to scan each and every enemy they encounter.
Marrend
Guardian of the Description Thread
21781
A part of me wants to say that a player's instincts will tell them that robots are weak to electricity, if only because that's how Final Fantasy games have done it since at least 7. Maybe other games have that association too, I don't know/remember.

Another part of me says that a player's instincts will only tell them that there's probably some kind of interaction, but, it won't be 100% known unless lightning is used on them. Or, like in Breath of Fire 3, the 'bots use it on themselves, and shows that they are powered up and/or healed by it.

*Edit: Though, to be fair, some robots in BoF3 get the "Confusion" state, on top of being dealt damage. The main point I'm trying to make here is if robots do get healed, or powered up, by lightning, having them use it on themselves might be a good way to relay that to players.
Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=Marrend
A part of me wants to say that a player's instincts will tell them that robots are weak to electricity, if only because that's how Final Fantasy games have done it since at least 7. Maybe other games have that association too, I don't know/remember.

"Instincts" don't exist in video games, there's just tropes, and "Big Franchise did it this way" is a terrible reason to do anything.

E: This is not meant to be a direct argument this is just Sooz going off because that shit annoys me.
"Instincts" don't exist in video games, there's just tropes, and "Big Franchise did it this way" is a terrible reason to do anything.

If I'm playing a game where water damage heals a fire element there better be a damn profoud reason why, and if not, I'll be pretty annoyed I wasted a turn trying a water spell on it. Instincts absolutely do exist, it eases accessibility and allows the player to feel intelligent that they figured out the thing without having to use a scan skill. Take Divinity for example, I see the oil barrels, I see the enemies standing beside, I know if I use fire it will explode causing damage and chaos around my enemies. When I do this I feel good. If I use fire on the oil and the fire fizzles out, I'll be like okay, wtf, glitch?

That's instinct in a game done right... however you are entitled to your own opinion on it. There are definitely some super lame tropes though, I'll agree with you there.
Prinny
I have not played Breath of the Wild, how do their elements make sense?


BOTW has 3 rules: 1. Elements can change a material’s state. 2. Elements can change an element’s state (water puts out fire). 3. Materials can’t change other material’s state. That's it. They do not behave realistically but they do behave in a very simple and consistent manner that allows for unexpected chemical results. Though it is fundamentally different from a typical RPG weakness thing and more of a sandbox thing.

Prinny
I suppose I was hoping for more of a 'at first glance' what are people's thoughts. Originally I had robots being healed and then 'charged' (doubling attack power) when electricity was used on them, but I had testers confused by this. My wish is that the player can look at an enemy and have a good idea of what might work right away instead of having to scan each and every enemy they encounter.


Is there a tutorial or explanation at all about elements affecting more than just extra damage or resistance? It's fairly hard to implicate rulesets through monster design I'm sorry to say (pokemon absolutely sucks at this) unless you do something really basic like "red monsters are weak to..." or small/medium/large sizes. Monster designs are ambiguously vaguely subjective. It's also not a big deal to just explicitly tell the player what they can or cannot do at any given moment, like icons next to the enemy names or being able to scan for free. Which sure, makes the strategy more guaranteed but the design is probably not very great if you're relying on: "Oh no I got punished for not... ascertaining what everyone else thinks a robot does when reacting to electricity"

It's also probably not a very interesting interaction anyway. Once the player knows robots love electricity. They're just going to... not hit it with electricity for the rest of the game. It'd be the same if it did zero damage or any other negative thing. Unless there's an interesting situation where you'd want to power up a robot it matters less what makes sense for a robot to react with and loops back to the simple "what can the player do and not do" question.
author=Darken
Is there a tutorial or explanation at all about elements affecting more than just extra damage or resistance? It's fairly hard to implicate rulesets through monster design I'm sorry to say (pokemon absolutely sucks at this) unless you do something really basic like "red monsters are weak to..." or small/medium/large sizes. Monster designs are ambiguously vaguely subjective. It's also not a big deal to just explicitly tell the player what they can or cannot do at any given moment, like icons next to the enemy names or being able to scan for free. Which sure, makes the strategy more guaranteed but the design is probably not very great if you're relying on: "Oh no I got punished for not... ascertaining what everyone else thinks a robot does when reacting to electricity"


Let's be honest, pokemon began going downhill after Gold and Silver so that's a bad example haha.

Sacanning is free, but you do lose a turn.. if the player takes a gamble and guesses right, they save a turn.. Sure there are hints here and there for what does what, but the attention span of people is very short in these times so I try to keep tutorials to the bare minimum showing things to the player slowly through gameplay (as best I can!). I like to think most people can see when things are firey or icey or made out of metal, but I certainly can't speak for everyone.

Like in a fire temple, most enemies are fire element so? You use water to get an edge.. if you see a ghost, you learn earlier they can be defeated easily by stealing all of their MP (of which they have far less of), or that almost all mechanical enemies are weak/weaker to Anti-Armor weapons and skills. If you use a sword on a tank you will do less damage than say, if you used a grenade launcher or bazooka... This also encourages the player to use a more diverse set of weapons and classes instead of just pumping ATK/INT or picking the weapon with the biggest boost.

Anyway, I only hope that the 4 or 5 players that play my game enjoy these uninteresting interactions as much as I do lol.
author=Prinny
Let's be honest, pokemon began going downhill after Gold and Silver so that's a bad example haha.


Depends, the competitive aspect is really good and compelling. The elemental weaknesses serves more as a complex compatibility meta to navigate rather than to just guess your way through. Playing the single player content for the first time however, it is a good demonstration of why elemental guess work is just not very engaging.

You're kind of avoiding the point I made that whether or not electricity heals/buffs the enemy makes no difference than say doing 0 damage (both say "don't use a certain skill"). Idk how saying a mechanic doesn't have many possibilities in isolation in means I'm criticizing the rest of the game you came up with.
author=Darken
Depends, the competitive aspect is really good and compelling. The elemental weaknesses serves more as a complex compatibility meta to navigate rather than to just guess your way through. Playing the single player content for the first time however, it is a good demonstration of why elemental guess work is just not very engaging.


Eh, well the designs have been awful for the past while.. You can tell there isn't anymore passion in pokemon, it's all for the moneyz.

Sorry, that was my attempt at self deprecating humour lol.

I'm not avoiding anything, my original question was just wishing to know people's opinions on what sits best with them. You've given me your answer which is noted and I thank you.. but I respectfully disagree, I think these mechanics do have value. When playing Divinity 1&2 I enjoyed the elemental interactions and how you could roll up to a battle and scan the area and get a good idea of what should be done and what shouldn't be. I think enemy designs in games can tell the player what will work best (Undead is healed by poison, fire slugs damage by water, etc).


You haven't acknowledged my point about how trivial it is elemental skill heals/buffs or does 0 damage to a given enemy. Meaning that the skill limitation is more interesting than the guess work or the negative consequence. I don't think guess work is interesting but telling which skills the player is allowed to do is the actual important part. Meaning I think elemental weaknesses have value, but like you keep insisting that they're all under the same umbrella.

Divinity 1+2 has actual spatial relationships to consider and are less about guess work and more about combining different skills with different properties. Like being undead, you can cast poison on yourself to heal yourself, it's clearly explained and not a mystery. That's actually interesting because you can use poison on other enemies as well, or hurt your allies depending on the AOE, but also combining it with further skills. It's much more evolved than "guess what this enemy is weak to" It's fundamentally different from a standard RPGMaker battle system (assuming that's what we're talking about).
Not sure what you want me to acknowledge man. There's gonna be guesswork sometimes, I'm just one person making a game for people to enjoy for free.. Gimme a break lol

I am working with Rm2k3, yes, there are limitations, yes.. I'm doing the best I can with the resources I have.


Okay I'm not trying to be obtuse or be condescending, here's what I said:
author=Darken
Once the player knows robots love electricity. They're just going to... not hit it with electricity for the rest of the game. It'd be the same if it did zero damage or any other negative thing.


What you originally said was:

author=Prinny
What is the consensus with robots and cyborgs regarding electricity?

Does the electricity do damage to them? Does it crit them? Or does it charge them up?


What I'm trying to get across is that regardless of what the effect is, it's going to be same result no matter what: "it's bad to target a robot with electric attacks." that's the intent. I'm not trying to be derogatory, I'm saying in a design sense there's probably no difference.

There are probably ways to work around it even in RM2K3, like maybe a gimmick fight where a robot boss says it's going to self destruct if it dies and you have to keep healing it (hitting with electric attacks intentionally) and run out a timer that ends the fight instead. I'm not saying that's what you should do, or if that's even a good idea. As an example it would at least fundamentally make healing the robot different from say a resistance.

Sooz
They told me I was mad when I said I was going to create a spidertable. Who’s laughing now!!!
5354
author=Prinnyhero
Eh, well the designs have been awful for the past while.. You can tell there isn't anymore passion in pokemon, it's all for the moneyz.


Ah, the heady days of such inspired designs as "a rock," "a bird," "a rat," and "some eggs."
Thanks for the helpful posts everyone.
I like the idea of having some be weak to electicity and others draining it for health.
Cap_H
DIGITAL IDENTITY CRISIS
6625
Yeah, it's an interesting concept to have both. Imagine weaker robots getting critical damage from electricity and then encountering stronger ones, which would heal instead. That would present an interesting twist and players would need a new strategy.
Introducing both at once would be confusing on the other hand.
Marrend
Guardian of the Description Thread
21781
I think it might be interesting if robots that were healed and/or buffed by being hit with electricity also provided better rewards. I dunno. I feel like that kind of thing would be more appropriate in a game where experimentation like that can be rewarded. That kind of system would still very much have that initial guesswork as to what things provide harder fights, but better XP if you can defeat the powered-up version, versus what things provide ways to end the battle quicker.
I'm a weirdo and I make most of my robot and mechanical enemies strong against electricity, but weak to water (i.e.: short-circuiting) and earth (grounding).

I feel like nobody really suspects this so I end up putting an NPC that mentions it.
Pages: first 12 next last