New account registration is temporarily disabled.

TAKE MY BREATH AWAY.

Posts

Pages: 1
Just now I was replaying Call of Duty 4 for the first time in a while. Partly because Modern Warfare 2 is out and I wanted to just ease myself into it, and partly because why the hell not? Call of Duty 4 is the shit.

Anywho, some of you may be familiar with the mission 'One Shot, One Kill', where long story short, you and your injured commanding officer (who can shoot, but is restricted to wherever you carry and put him down at) end up cornered, waiting for extraction in abandoned, radiation laden Prypiat, while what has to be at least around a hundred heavily armed enemies are after your head. Needless to say, this can be excruciatingly difficult, and things can get pretty down to the wire, especially considering that the number of enemies seem to grow proportional to the distance counter that shows how close your extraction is.

But wait! The helicopter that's gonna bail you and your partner's ass out arrives, and you take the opportunity to clear a path though the rest of the enemies that I remind you, keep coming. BUT WAIT! The helicopter pilot throws you a curve ball' "We're at bingo fuel, you got thirty seconds!" Oh, shit. You kick it into overdrive, run back to pick up your commanding officer, and carry him into the 'copter while you're still being fired at. The feeling that comes over you when you're finally lifting off into the air while the dozens of enemies fruitlessly fire at you is nothing less than exhilarating, especially on higher difficulty levels. This is considered one of the most challenging levels of CoD 4, and the rewarding feeling that comes with completing this mission is incredible.

This example above is a first person shooter example of the type of feeling I want to replicate when making my own games, and the type of feeling I love to experience when playing other games, regardless of genre (which is why I used a FPS example of all things). That down to the wire, balls to the walls feeling of a difficult boss fight, a hard as shit dungeon, or even a precarious platforming level, and the feeling of reward (and hopefully actual reward) and 'phew' that comes after you cleared such an area. Dangling the players survival on a string in front of him and making him run the treadmill for a while before you take the wheels off and toss it to him after he's danced around a bit?

Nowadays a lot of people say games are easy, and RPGs definitely can fall into the 'too easy' trap. But where's the line drawn between legitimate difficulty and 'fake' difficulty that requires excessive grinding, cheap shots, and obscure strategy? How willing are you to program this sort of experience into your game? On the other hand, how willing are you to play through a boss fight/dungeon/level in another game that has you dying over and over again until you figure it out?

Kaempfer put it oh so well.

The best dungeons are ones where, as you approach the exit, you are short on items, low on HP, and out of MP. If anyone has ever said "THANK CHRIST" out loud when they see that exit onto the worldmap at the end of some dungeons, you'll know what I mean.


DISCUSS
I think everyone likes to have this feeling. The trouble for me is wondering how to accomplish it in an RM game, besides super bosses or optional puzzle dungeons (or both) being part of it. I never really feel to much for the scenes in RM, because they don't engage the player. They play out in front of you, and then thats it.
I never really feel to much for the scenes in RM, because they don't engage the player. They play out in front of you, and then thats it.


Of course, which is the case for any genre/program/console with non interactive scenes. That's not a bad thing or anything, but you're right; what we're discussing here is a gameplay related thing.
I've played through the campaign on CoD4, and I've played through MW2's campaign. Twice.

I know exactly how you feel. And it's not just the rush you get from having to jump into a helicopter in less than thirty seconds. The events that occur right in front of you are powerful, and merges beautifully with gameplay. It's rare that I make audible gasps while playing games, but this one elicited them in spades.

RPG's don't lend themselves well to action elements, obviously. There's the occasional timer to get through a certain area, but with battles the way they are, you know that you usually are given more than enough time (and should be unless the events which take you to the exit are VERY controlled).

I think part of what drives you in those action FPS sequences is that you feel challenged with the skill and dexterity you've gained thus far via the game's core gameplay mechanic. You're still moving and shooting like you've been doing, however you know that you need to move faster and shoot better to make your goal. You make on-the-fly decisions about which direction to take because all you have is instinct instead of the time you normally have to make an informed choice.

In an RPG, the core gameplay mechanic is very different. You can use action and event-based elements for that scene, but it will never draw someone in as much as it does for other games where that comprises the core gameplay element. It just kinda becomes a mini-game at that point (like the highway chase in FFVII). To best pull off this kind of exhilaration, I think you need to have a firm grasp on battle progression, then implement elements that make the player be aware that these battles aren't for experience. Anticipate the things they rely on, such as using the strongest attacks available or button mashing, and throw it back at them with a new twist.

Also, I would consider the competency of the plot and the impact of what's at stake. That is, be sure the danger is very real, the reward for succeeding absolutely essential, and the consequence of losing dire (beyond just the character's own lives, which are presumably always at stake anyway).

Heart-thumping music and great event-based choreography never hurt either =) It's a shame it's not really practical to have dialogue of people shouting for dear life.
This is one of the hardest things to do really. Because it's easy to make it too difficult. Once you've died a couple of times in a situation that had you made would have been awesome. You start to see the metagame behind it all. ("alright I've cleared this corridor, next they'll be running in through this door. If I mine it beforehand it'll give me a couple more seconds")

so actually:
On the other hand, how willing are you to play through a boss fight/dungeon/level in another game that has you dying over and over again until you figure it out?
I don't agree with at all.

Trial and error gameplay is not the same as the "FUCK YEAH I MADE IT"-feeling. One example I tend to bring up a lot in the whole fuck yeah is the Resident Evil games. They have a bunch of quite ridiculous bosses that it's always frightening to meet up with (usually because of 1) a scary cutscene beforehand and 2) some heavy buildup) but in the end it's fairly rarely that you actually die against them. Instead you get thrown around a room and hit with all manner of weird special attacks until you manage to kill it.

I hardly ever feel anything else than "finally that was over. let's get back to the real game now" after something that has taken far too many attempts to accomplish.

You could compare it to movies and books. The sense of thrill and scare even though if you were to look at it from an objective standpoint you know that the main character is going to pull through. In a game the feeling should be similar you know that you're going to pull through and the second the "game over, you died" screen pops up the illusion is completely broken.


All this said. Those "near miss" moments are the best ones. And the problem is to make them near misses for all kinds of players. (That's where difficulty levels come in. Though it's still easy to pick the wrong one by mistake) The illusion of a near miss can easily be done with the Resident Evil method though. Having a huge buildup and lots of explosions in (preferably interactive) cutscenes. Running a character through a linear path during an artillery bombardment that will not actually hurt the player as long as he follows the obvious path. That's thrilling and unless you're a metagamer it will also be exciting.
I don't agree with at all.

Trial and error gameplay is not the same as the "FUCK YEAH I MADE IT"-feeling. One example I tend to bring up a lot in the whole fuck yeah is the Resident Evil games. They have a bunch of quite ridiculous bosses that it's always frightening to meet up with (usually because of 1) a scary cutscene beforehand and 2) some heavy buildup) but in the end it's fairly rarely that you actually die against them. Instead you get thrown around a room and hit with all manner of weird special attacks until you manage to kill it.

Whoa there.

I don't mean dying over and over again to a boss because of some cheap moveset or whatever. But there is something incredibly cathartic about getting your ass kicked by a boss or a level or whatever until you finally figure out the strategy required to beat it. Case in point, the two (separate at different points of the game) bosses of Death and Sariun in Romancing Saga for the PS2. Both of these bosses kicked the SHIT out of me when I first went head to head with them. I died over and over again until I figured out the most badass strategy ever and finally WON.

I don't mind losing/dying over and over if it means that every loss puts more experience under my belt or fuels a new strategy. Yes, cheap bosses and cheap levels that show me the 'load' screen are infuriating, but I'm not afraid of the Game Over/Load screen. I can't see why people are so turned off by it. That's half the reason you save in the first place.

RPG's don't lend themselves well to action elements, obviously. There's the occasional timer to get through a certain area, but with battles the way they are, you know that you usually are given more than enough time (and should be unless the events which take you to the exit are VERY controlled).

It doesn't have to be an action thing, though! To quote Kaempfer, again;

The best dungeons are ones where, as you approach the exit, you are short on items, low on HP, and out of MP. If anyone has ever said "THANK CHRIST" out loud when they see that exit onto the worldmap at the end of some dungeons, you'll know what I mean.

To achieve what I'm talking about in an RPG doesn't require an action sequence or button pressing or a minigame. The example outlined above in CoD 4 would translate to a difficult boss fight or a to the nails dungeon in an RPG.
I really enjoyed that mission in CoD4. It's not just that part, though. You are literally holding your breath throughout that entire level, staying prone and taking out enemies, and even going under trucks to hide. The buildup to that final moment is really really incredible.

How they do it is different than how most RPGs create that moment. When you die in Call of Duty, it starts you off right before the place you died. I mean it starts you literally SECONDS before the moment you died. It creates that addiction of knowing that you will eventually pass that roadblock and continue with the game. You can't do this in most RPGs. You can't make checkpoints that go a few seconds back in time, because how well you do is based on how well the player prepared for the encounter. You have to take into account the last 15-30 minutes rather than those last 60 seconds in Call of Duty.

So yeah, the best dungeons and encounters are when you are literally dragging your feet across the exit. Some great ways to create this moment is by taking away privileges the player is used to having. A good example would be an arena in an RPG, where you are limited to the items the arena gives you before you start your battle run. It's up to you how you manage those items, and arenas in general are good at creating those tense moments. Another good example is creating a dungeon that's 20 floors deep, where checkpoints are every 5 floors and there is some great loot the deeper you progress. So if you exit the dungeon or die, you'll have to start from the last checkpoint and attempt to pass those next 5 floors again. It's those moments of "Hm, I could progess to the next level of the dungeon, but if I die, my progress will be for nothing." that are really great in RPGs.

This thread is really making me question how I want to do my encounters. I was going to have them so each battle nearly kills you, but you heal afterwards, to avoid the frustration mentioned in this thread. But that also takes away that sense of accomplishment, doesn't it?

So, I want some thoughts.

Which of these would you prefer?

-You heal after each battle. The battles can be much harder, and you get that small "I did it" feeling after each battle. Probably wouldn't have potions for balance's sake. But it would take away that great rush at the end where you just scrape through to the end, since you'd leave on full health.

-You don't heal after each battle. Each battle would be easier, but it would add up to a greater challenge. You get that sense of accomplishment, but to the latter end of a dungeon, the player will start skipping battles.

-A compromise. You heal a bit of HP at the start of each battle. This would be better for balance's sake, but it might take away the large and small feeling to some extent. Or would it allow both? It would take some fine balancing, and it would mean that each player would either love or hate the battles.

I don't want to derail this topic, but I think healing styles are an important topic in getting nail-biting battles.
Craze
why would i heal when i could equip a morningstar
15170
Diablocide is all about this. You get fourteen characters and a restoration point (usually in the form of a boss that heals you before and after battle) every two point five floors. Static encounters, party synergy and harlots add up to create normal-but-interesting encounters leading up to a moderately difficult mini-boss (or bedroom!?) and then a Demon. Capital "D."

The Demon battles in Diablocide are some of the most epic, nail-biting and cathartic battles in RM*, to the point where you need an entire army to take them down.

This post is quite pluggish, but, uh, this is pretty much exactly what you are asking for: EPIC in RPGs that doesn't rely on modified nostalgia.

EDIT: Also, a key point here is STATIC ENCOUNTERS. You will get x-y EXP, no more, no less (well actually there's VANGUARD EXP but whatever, I'm talking about the entire party here). This can be reached in more mainstream jRPGs with biased EXP (Suikoden/Exit Fate (same game)) or EXP based on exploration/bosses instead of normal battles.

This is why Diablocide has static amounts of encounters, Visions & Voices has no levels, and Karsu and I's current project has biased EXP. Balance is everything, and this is how we do it.
post=109978
I don't mean dying over and over again to a boss because of some cheap moveset or whatever. But there is something incredibly cathartic about getting your ass kicked by a boss or a level or whatever until you finally figure out the strategy required to beat it. Case in point, the two (separate at different points of the game) bosses of Death and Sariun in Romancing Saga for the PS2. Both of these bosses kicked the SHIT out of me when I first went head to head with them. I died over and over again until I figured out the most badass strategy ever and finally WON.

I don't mind losing/dying over and over if it means that every loss puts more experience under my belt or fuels a new strategy. Yes, cheap bosses and cheap levels that show me the 'load' screen are infuriating, but I'm not afraid of the Game Over/Load screen. I can't see why people are so turned off by it. That's half the reason you save in the first place.

I guess our views on this differs then. Because I much rather like to live in the illusion without a quicksavequickload mashing. Of course I'm a huge quicksavequickload masher anyway and I have to admit that certain very unforgiving games I still enjoy immensely. But I rarely enjoy them because they are unforgiving. I tend to enjoy them despite being unforgiving. (Mostly because unforgiving games DO give the rush in those instances where you manage something without dying every once in a while)

STALKER is a nice example. That game is horribly unforgiving and you get killed from strange directions at weird times all the time but it's very thrilling when walking around there and you're ambushed by mutants and you beat them off only just and limp your way back to a base to get healed up. But dying against those same mutants sort of suck and you reload and just wish the encounter was over.

-You heal after each battle. The battles can be much harder, and you get that small "I did it" feeling after each battle. Probably wouldn't have potions for balance's sake. But it would take away that great rush at the end where you just scrape through to the end, since you'd leave on full health.

Not every fight should be difficult (though I just talked about my love for unforgiving games above there just disregard that okay). It's better to have a bunch of easy fights so that you'll appreciate beating the hard fight more when it does happen. The sense of accomplishment will also be bigger if not every fight kicks your ass. Because when every fight kicks your ass you'll just feel as though you suck and that there must be something wrong with the game.
halibabica
RMN's Official Reviewmonger
16948
from Neophyte
Another good example is creating a dungeon that's 20 floors deep, where checkpoints are every 5 floors and there is some great loot the deeper you progress. So if you exit the dungeon or die, you'll have to start from the last checkpoint and attempt to pass those next 5 floors again. It's those moments of "Hm, I could progess to the next level of the dungeon, but if I die, my progress will be for nothing." that are really great in RPGs.

Reminds me of the "Pit of 100 Trials" Nintendo just loves to keep putting in the Paper Mario and Legend of Zelda series as of late. The dungeons use progressive difficulty and check points to make you wonder whether you really can survive those next ten floors or not.

I'm divided on this issue. There's nothing more satisfying than pulling off something crazy and feeling that rush of accomplishment, but there's also nothing more frustrating than failing to pull it off and losing lots of progress because of it. That is definitely an issue of balance, but I prefer things to be more possible than ruthless. Maybe I'm not hardcore enough.
I don't agree with at all.
Case in point, the two (separate at different points of the game) bosses of Death and Sariun in Romancing Saga for the PS2. Both of these bosses kicked the SHIT out of me when I first went head to head with them. I died over and over again until I figured out the most badass strategy ever and finally WON.

Just emphasizing what you've said here. The boss battles in Romancing SaGa really are amazing. It's too bad that the game is so much like Final Fantasy that people were expecting that kind of experience and weren't willing to give it a fair shake and understand its mechanics.

Otherwise I think you guys have mostly covered it. The best moments in games are when they are very challenging, but fair. It's a real rush to be able to see a solution, but to have to fight and work towards it. Well-balanced RPGs have an easy time of this because the mechanics are usually pretty transparent (all of your options are visible in a menu after all), and so piecing together a sophisticated strategy is a lot more logical than it is an action game when things are exploding all around you.
post=110018
The boss battles in Romancing SaGa really are amazing. It's too bad that the game is so much like Final Fantasy that people were expecting that kind of experience and weren't willing to give it a fair shake and understand its mechanics.


I would LOVE to give it a chance, but I'm afraid literally every translation I've ever found has been absolute awful shit with the menus being unreadable or the important "explanation parts" making no sense et cetera et cetera.


I absolutely loved CoD4. I've beaten MW2, but I never once got the same feeling of "whoooooo" as I did from CoD4. There's a good chance that it's because I played it on Hardened, and without the ability to lean around corners (I only have so many fuckin' flashbangs!) it is nearly impossible to finish a mission without dying around every corner first (like Shinan said, Trial-and-Error elicits nothing but a feeling of "Thank Christ the next checkpoint). Speaking of which: To anyone who has played MW2 through on Hardened, did you find the segment near the end of Loose Ends beatable? Because (EXTREMELY MINOR SPOILER I GUESS) I was killed by the mortar every single time I got down the hill. Every single time, no matter how long I waited or didn't wait, if I crawled or sprinted, if I walked around the final slope or through it... like 30 times in a row, killed by an inescapable mortar. I'm not talking about cutscenes or anything, it just literally automatically killed me 30 times in a row until I lowered the difficulty to Normal, at which point I breezed through it.

To anyone thinking of playing MW2 on Hardened: Don't. It'll remove all joy from the game. I beat CoD4 on Hardened without too much trouble and almost beat it on Veteran (The TV station and Pripyat were next to impossible, Pripyat may have been actually impossible on Veteran) but MW2 on Hardened is just not fun. You have to run blindly into every room, because the game spawns enemies behind you constantly so there is no point in doing it slowly.


BACK ON TOPIC (I just really wanted to rant about MW2 auto-killing me on that one mission because I just died over and over for an hour straight when I first got to that level): I think the absolute best way to handle this in RPG fights is to have the enemy have a few very worrying attacks that bring the player to near death. I find battles that have self-healing bosses are pretty much guaranteed awful (a few healing "bits" or whatever is fine, but a boss who just randomly tops himself up: no!), but in a fight where I just keep healing my party and bashing away at the enemy with whatever I can muster until he dies just as I run out of MP is a great boss fight, I think. I've had instances of both the best strategies going wrong and the worst working, but I've also had some great win-by-the-skin-on-my-teeth moments, too, so I know they're out there!

I think the critical difference in RPGs is that the player has a few more options at his disposal that may or may not be one-shot items. In an FPS like Call of Duty, you can only hold so many bullets and it resets your inventory at the start of each level. That means that the player uses EVERY TOOL at his disposal to finish that level, and at the end he is totally vindicated because he's won (hopefully!). In an RPG, you don't want to blow through all of your elixers in one encounter with Boss 31/50 because you know when you get to boss 32/50 you'll get your ass handed to you. I remember when I first started V&V (and this was seriously my biggest problem with it although I intend to play through it soon) it right away asked me to use up limited-use skills and items. The problem, of course, is that you can keep them for later, and I am always worried that I'll regret not having them in the future. So while I used a few elixers and I beat the boss and I am happy now, I'll never reach that "total elation" point because I feel, somewhere, that I've set myself up for regret later as I find myself really needing those elixers or . Even in Half-Life (and two), when I felt I had really kicked a hard part's ass (there aren't really any bosses, but whatever) I would often go back and do it again so that I wasn't totally out of all ammo and down to 5 health, even though I was probably going to get it back later. I am a hoarder by nature, and I don't like to expend what I've so carefully searched for. It took some of the joy of it (despite the fact that it was my own stupid fault). This problem, I think, manifests itself in a much more obvious fashion in RPGs and some games with integral RPG elements.
I would LOVE to give it a chance, but I'm afraid literally every translation I've ever found has been absolute awful shit with the menus being unreadable or the important "explanation parts" making no sense et cetera et cetera.


Get the one for PS2.
post=109991
-You don't heal after each battle. Each battle would be easier, but it would add up to a greater challenge. You get that sense of accomplishment, but to the latter end of a dungeon, the player will start skipping battles.


This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I find a version that often gets used problematic enough that I wrote an article about it. Basically, if you heal fully at the end of battle, once the player knows he can beat an easy fight he doesn't have any motivation to do better in it, making it more difficult to keep interesting.


I tend to think it's difficult if not impossible to balance a basic <can beat boss?: y/n> problem in an RPG so that most people will enjoy it, and this only gets harder when you're letting people come in with random amounts of experience, items, talent trees, and the like. One of the tools I think can help is movable goalposts. For example:

Tie Fighter missions have optional secondary objectives with no mechanical benefit. It's also notable that, because no state is carried between missions, you have unlimited replay of completed missions, so you can put something aside for a while and come back to it later if you want.
Some Super Robot Wars games attach a secondary objective (skill point) to each mission, with varying mechanical effect, though it usually includes some skill point threshold for opening up an extra-hard epilogue mission.
Disgaea or Lufia 2's item world/deep dungeon, where you can bail out if you get in trouble but you get better rewards for going deeper. (Though the long ones can be tedious if you're not careful.)
Aurora Wing's limited pool of revives has this effect to a large extent: it makes (secondary) character death something to be strongly avoided while usually not giving out a mechanical penalty for it. (If the player finds himself out of revives for a while, I hope and expect he'd do the last battle or two over or drop a difficulty level rather than risk character permadeath for a long stretch.)

All these let you aim for something without catastrophic results if you fail to achieve it (usually); players get the thrill of achievement if they make it, and if they don't, they don't feel robbed of what they did still manage and can move on if they like. You don't even necessarily have to give a mechanical reward: just track something publicly and players can make it a goal.
post=110042
I would LOVE to give it a chance, but I'm afraid literally every translation I've ever found has been absolute awful shit with the menus being unreadable or the important "explanation parts" making no sense et cetera et cetera.
Get the one for PS2.

I don't own a PS2!

edit: Also, I intend to rip graphics from this game left right and center, so... I need a good translation that ZSNES can handle!
Craze
why would i heal when i could equip a morningstar
15170
post=110034
I think the critical difference in RPGs is that the player has a few more options at his disposal that may or may not be one-shot items. In an FPS like Call of Duty, you can only hold so many bullets and it resets your inventory at the start of each level. That means that the player uses EVERY TOOL at his disposal to finish that level, and at the end he is totally vindicated because he's won (hopefully!). In an RPG, you don't want to blow through all of your elixers in one encounter with Boss 31/50 because you know when you get to boss 32/50 you'll get your ass handed to you. I remember when I first started V&V (and this was seriously my biggest problem with it although I intend to play through it soon) it right away asked me to use up limited-use skills and items. The problem, of course, is that you can keep them for later, and I am always worried that I'll regret not having them in the future. So while I used a few elixers and I beat the boss and I am happy now, I'll never reach that "total elation" point because I feel, somewhere, that I've set myself up for regret later as I find myself really needing those elixers or insertnonpurchasableitemhere. Even in Half-Life (and two), when I felt I had really kicked a hard part's ass (there aren't really any bosses, but whatever) I would often go back and do it again so that I wasn't totally out of all ammo and down to 5 health, even though I was probably going to get it back later. I am a hoarder by nature, and I don't like to expend what I've so carefully searched for. It took some of the joy of it (despite the fact that it was my own stupid fault). This problem, I think, manifests itself in a much more obvious fashion in RPGs and some games with integral RPG elements.


This is the player's fault. V&V is not meant to be Final Fantasy. It's a game about survival; you use everything you have to survive. I am a victim of the need to hoard, and I find it horribly disgusting. In that way, I am trying to break out of the constraints of an annoyingly set-in-stone genre (TWEWY is <3). Karsu and I are completely eschewing consumable items in our current game, instead having "equipment" be artifacts that achieve similar results that can be used once per battle (and also slightly raise stats, because normal equipment is also dead). We also have a fucking ITEM USE STAT dedicated to determining the power of artifacts, so yeah FUCK CONSUMABLE ITEM HOARDING FOR GREAT EFFICACY

Suck (that potion) up, Kaempfer.
The time Austria, Naples, Genoa, Venice, Aquelia, and Super France (and all their vassals), basically all my neighbors, all decided to declare war on me (as Milan owning Italy from Rome up) took my breath away. It did it so hard I paused the game, got up, and left for half an hour to decide what the fuck I was going to do. I was out manned by a ridiculous amount. I was about even troop wise with just Austria and Naples never mind the northern Italian republics and Super France joining in. I knew what was coming and I had to pull almost every trick in the book that I knew (but without exploiting stupid game mechanics, like Peace-STAB hitting) and avoid making any sort of mistake. A lost battle with France could lead to the loss of my entire army and losing all my manpower reserves. Letting the enemy control my territory for too long would cause my war exhaustion to rise and my war capacity to drop and any offensive moves without making sure my flank (every border I had except one with some HRE state) was open to an enemy seizing even more territory than I could afford. Things could not get much worse. Despite the odds piled against me, numerous setbacks and screwups, and having to deal with internal problems I played my cards right and sent each aggressor packing back home sore and defeated. I didn't get much out of that war but when I finally signed the peace treaty with a no war capacity not-so-Super France I was laughing at how I managed to turn around a horrifying scenario.

Nothing else has ever come close. I already knew the rules of the game, there aren't any crazy curveballs (Super France used 'Create 25 regiment stack! Italy loses all manpower!') so when the DoW came I had a pretty good idea how fucked I was. I had an idea how strong my opponents were (based on territory size, head count of troops, war capacity, and knowing Super France's name is not undeserved). I made use of everything I could from spies to find where my enemy's stacks were to great people to improve my army's combat prowess or to improve my country's stability and revolt risk. I had to pay close attention to how I controlled my armies to avoid attrition+war exhaustion while avoiding leaving small stacks open to routs. I payed close attention to my enemies movements, trying to find out what they were trying to do, where they were headed, and react accordingly. I had to avoid even having the potential of losing a decisive battle and give strong enemy stacks a wide berth.

It was
. I could've abused save/reload but I went through the entire war without a single non-autosave (occurs once a year, used to avoid stress when game crashes), but that wouldn't have been
Great discussion and perfect opening example (COD 4 had so many of those moments!). Oneway I've found to garner that kind of reaction in an RPG is with the occasional major boss. Basically make it a bit of an endurance match.

Crunch numbers on party supplies, HP, and generally staying power. Without making the fight too long try to get the party to use up most of their recovery items and skills. Try to get it so they run out of fighting power barely before the boss is defeated. Nothing puts me on edge in an RPG like nearly running out of options and just praying that the party outlasts the enemy!
post=110079
post=110034
It took some of the joy of it (despite the fact that it was my own stupid fault).
This is the player's fault...

... Suck (that potion) up, Kaempfer.


a) we agree
b) taunting me isn't going to make me play your game any sooner >:0
Pages: 1