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)
WANTING TO MAKE YOUR GAME DIFFICULT.
Posts
Clest
0
Clest
View playlists
CloseYes and No, for free RM games really most ppl who play are the ones who also make games and generally are good at it at best, but nowadays we get the comercial RM games and according to some of my clients, most ppl who comment and buy their games are kids or wives who actually want an easy game that looks relatively good and has a nice story.
And I believe that some of this public may eventually find out that there are games in pair or even better than some of the games they buy, but tottally free.
Also it goes related to your game characteristics too, in my case, I know my main target audience are fans of sci fi anime, giant robots in general and those guys are used to moderate games but always complain it is not hard enough. However I got lots of other elements besides mechs which might attract ppl who like other stuff too, so I will add the easy thing for then to still enjoy it if they like :)
And I believe that some of this public may eventually find out that there are games in pair or even better than some of the games they buy, but tottally free.
Also it goes related to your game characteristics too, in my case, I know my main target audience are fans of sci fi anime, giant robots in general and those guys are used to moderate games but always complain it is not hard enough. However I got lots of other elements besides mechs which might attract ppl who like other stuff too, so I will add the easy thing for then to still enjoy it if they like :)
I personally like difficulty to vary. Sometimes it is fun to obliterate guys like when you get a new spell. If it wasn't then I wouldn't find myself grinding even in games where I don't have to. But I like the challenge too. Especially when you have a deep bag of tricks and tactics for different situations.
And Clest, I like your idea of balance for your game!
And Clest, I like your idea of balance for your game!
Clest
0
Thanks XD just hope it works well in practice, if not will tweak it until it does somehow :P
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
Multiple difficulty settings are generally a way better way to manage different types of users in an RPG than optional content. It gives people a game that they want to play, instead of a game that's largely unwelcome with a few bits in the middle or near the end that they want to play. Also, it makes people who like easy games not feel like they're missing out on part of the game, and makes people who like hard games not feel like their extra efforts are just making the rest of the game too easy (since the optional content normally gives some kind of power-up as a reward).
However, in RPGs there's often no reward for handling the fights better. Giving the characters the right equipment selection and other out of battle adjustment usually gives you advantages, but being clever during the battles is pointless.
This is a problem that needs a solution. But it's not something you can fix with one single solution. You have to solve it for each ability and tactic you add to your game. You have to make it so being smart is either necessary or helpful in each and every case. If you can only solve this problem for some abilities, people won't use the others. If you can't solve it at all, you will end up making a really boring button-masher RPG. I've played a lot of really boring RPGs that had this problem.
This is something I'm having fun with in my mini-RPG. You only have a limited health pool, no healing spells, and few potions. The only way to heal is by sleeping, and the whole game is time-driven events (ala Majora's Mask) so sleeping isn't cost-free. Thus, you have a limited number of battles you can risk fighting, and the better you fight, the less HP you lose and the more battles you can continue fighting. You can go all-out offensively and just try and burn down the enemies before you take damage, or you can play defensively and slowly defeat your enemies while taking only minor damage yourself.
The Tales games always had fun with "Grade", which you would get for every battle based on how long you took, how much you got hit, and the difficulty of the enemy. It was only used for New Game+, which is a little lame but since the games usually have multiple story options there is some replay value. It'd be sweet if games started handing out extra cash or EXP for better fighting - People might be more enticed to spam something besides attack.
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
post=slashphoenix
The Tales games always had fun with "Grade", which you would get for every battle based on how long you took, how much you got hit, and the difficulty of the enemy. It was only used for New Game+, which is a little lame but since the games usually have multiple story options there is some replay value. It'd be sweet if games started handing out extra cash or EXP for better fighting - People might be more enticed to spam something besides attack.
Final Fantasy 13 does the same thing. It affects your XP and the chance of item drops. However it still rewards speed over anything else - which is a bit silly since even in the absence of difficulty, speed is its own reward. Rewarding you for not taking damage seems better. Either way it's better than nothing, though.
Valkyrie Profile 2 and Shadow Hearts 2: Covenant both scale rewards based on performance.
Re: FFXIII, not taking damage (hello Sentinel/Medic) is measured by "did your lead character die y/n;" speed is better because it's a GO anyway if you take too much damage. Also, fun fact: if you really, really suck at battles, it gives you -sol items. I... I know this from experience (and NeoGAF).
Also, FFXIII recharges your TP bar based on your performance. Both unleashing a full ATB bar of actions and getting a higher score adds TP.
Re: FFXIII, not taking damage (hello Sentinel/Medic) is measured by "did your lead character die y/n;" speed is better because it's a GO anyway if you take too much damage. Also, fun fact: if you really, really suck at battles, it gives you -sol items. I... I know this from experience (and NeoGAF).
Also, FFXIII recharges your TP bar based on your performance. Both unleashing a full ATB bar of actions and getting a higher score adds TP.
jamesr2
50
Xenosaga 3 had a "finish strike" system where if you got your boost to level 2 and finished an enemy with a special you got more exp and money and a better item drop rate. I found myself saving boost for nearly every battle to take advantage of it.
Kaempfer
1932
If you are playing an RPG right (taking advantage of elements/enemy weaknesses/possibly allied synergies) the game SHOULD be easy. Most "hard" RPGs FORCE you to use these things or you die. The game should be hard if you're playing it wrong and easy if you're doing it right; ie taking advantage of all the things the game gives you.
This is akin to platformers that are so hard you have to be outstanding at them to get past the second level. sure, these ultra-hard games are fun now and again, but a game should never be unplayably difficult!
This is akin to platformers that are so hard you have to be outstanding at them to get past the second level. sure, these ultra-hard games are fun now and again, but a game should never be unplayably difficult!
Clest
0
post=LockeZ
Multiple difficulty settings are generally a way better way to manage different types of users in an RPG than optional content. It gives people a game that they want to play, instead of a game that's largely unwelcome with a few bits in the middle or near the end that they want to play. Also, it makes people who like easy games not feel like they're missing out on part of the game, and makes people who like hard games not feel like their extra efforts are just making the rest of the game too easy (since the optional content normally gives some kind of power-up as a reward).
Actually, as long as the content for hard mode is not related to plot and not too strong (just slightly so player can still use it but won´t be able to abuse, maybe a powerful spell with high mp cost in a game where mp is hard to refil).
But maybe a dificulty setting change in the middle might be cool :) So I can still have dificulty fluctuating but more in the control of the player.
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
Actually, as long as the content for hard mode is not related to plot and not too strong (just slightly so player can still use it but won´t be able to abuse, maybe a powerful spell with high mp cost in a game where mp is hard to refil).Still defeats the purpose. Hard mode shouldn't make the game easier. End of story.
If you want a "reward" for optional harder content, the "reward" should be to make the main content harder. One of the best examples I've heard of is... one of the Persona games, I think. If you beat the super-hard optional dungeon, a new harder final boss is added to the end of the game. Since if you beat the optional content, then obviously you want things to be harder than the main content makes them, so it's not like you're going to complain. You're going to think that harder enemies are cool. Otherwise you wouldn't have done that.
I'll note that this effect should be spelled out for the player, though. Don't surprise them with it. Make sure they know that doing something will make the game harder *before* they do it. Then let them make the choice.
Clest
0
Actually that is a valid point indeed for giving out new enemies/dungeon areas.
Now about making the game easier it all depends on a relation between how much anything else gets harder and how much this benefit makes things easier. So simplifying it: lets say game overall gets 10 times harder but what you give is just sabout 2 times easier, you still get plenty of problems to solve there.
Also another way it can be done is: Easy mode optional stuff is just a straight foward power up which can be easily used by just doing what you did so far.
Gard mode optional stuff is something powerfulonly if used correctly or in certain situations, meaning, it is a strategic advantage acting along with the additional obstacles.
Now about making the game easier it all depends on a relation between how much anything else gets harder and how much this benefit makes things easier. So simplifying it: lets say game overall gets 10 times harder but what you give is just sabout 2 times easier, you still get plenty of problems to solve there.
Also another way it can be done is: Easy mode optional stuff is just a straight foward power up which can be easily used by just doing what you did so far.
Gard mode optional stuff is something powerfulonly if used correctly or in certain situations, meaning, it is a strategic advantage acting along with the additional obstacles.
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
So it makes the game more interesting in addition to being easier, instead of just easier. That's better, obviously. But it still has the same problem.
I still think a simpler and more effective method is to just let the player choose easy or hard mode when they first start the game.
I still think a simpler and more effective method is to just let the player choose easy or hard mode when they first start the game.
Clest
0
Well for rpogs I think that if player can just set dificulty, it should be able to set anytime. Chosing the wrong dificulty might be frustrating when you are far in the game.
As for diferent content: What I had planned, being precise, is that if I went with only one dificulty, at a given point in the game, you got certain new equipments or upgrades or even a new mech.
The dificulty would just affect the specific reqard you got. So on getting a new upgrade set for a mech, the easy mode gives you a general booster armor which enhances both speed, defense and hp with a strong damage attack.
The hard mode would give you some sort of tactical armor unir which has only basic defense as inate bonus, but gives you skills that work for around 3 turns to boost either speed, or defense and it gives you about 2 new attacks that aren´t much better than your average stuff, just with diferent attributes.
So hard mode is not getting something more than easy, just something diferent from what would eventually be given anyway :)
As for diferent content: What I had planned, being precise, is that if I went with only one dificulty, at a given point in the game, you got certain new equipments or upgrades or even a new mech.
The dificulty would just affect the specific reqard you got. So on getting a new upgrade set for a mech, the easy mode gives you a general booster armor which enhances both speed, defense and hp with a strong damage attack.
The hard mode would give you some sort of tactical armor unir which has only basic defense as inate bonus, but gives you skills that work for around 3 turns to boost either speed, or defense and it gives you about 2 new attacks that aren´t much better than your average stuff, just with diferent attributes.
So hard mode is not getting something more than easy, just something diferent from what would eventually be given anyway :)
Since I am using a touch encounter system, I have different enemy sprites to represent how difficult an enemy is. I also give the player items that can help them avoid enemies (like stunning the enemy's touch sprite). Should work pretty well. And also if you die it isn't game over, just a setback, so that even if content gets a little rough the player is still making progress even if they die.
-CM
-CM
Easy and Hard mode in an RPG almost has to be changeable at any time, because "Easy" and "Hard" are subjective, and you don't want to screw over someone on Hard Mode 4 hours into a game because they will be pissed at you. I realize FPSes do this too but that doesn't make it okay. I suppose if you included descriptions of Easy/Hard it would be okay.
Yoshio
774
Games are meant to be beaten. I'd rather have the vast majority of people be able to complete the game than provide a satisfying chalenege to the hardcore rpg crowd anyday. Even if a game is a cakewalk for them they will stil be happy if it has good mapping, story, or character interactions. As a fairely casual gamer (I'm alot better at RPGs than platformers and such things) I can safely say it doesn't matter how good a game is, if it is too hard for me to be abe to beat than I will just get angry and stop playing
basically if it's too easy it may be a bit boring but there can be alot of other things that are really good and make you keep going. If you can't progress in the game due to difficulty than that's pretty much it for you, so if I had to choose one, I'd rather my game be too easy than too challenging
than again, I am always getting complaints about my game being too hard. oh well! :P
basically if it's too easy it may be a bit boring but there can be alot of other things that are really good and make you keep going. If you can't progress in the game due to difficulty than that's pretty much it for you, so if I had to choose one, I'd rather my game be too easy than too challenging
than again, I am always getting complaints about my game being too hard. oh well! :P
LightningLord2
230
I agree with this - The special content in games whose drawback is being too hard can't make up for that disadvantage, as the content might be never available to the player. It WILL be reachable by someone who plays a game that's too easy, though.
WolfCoder
3554
I really hate those games that start out too easy and get mildly inconveniencing at the end, it's those kinds of games you play and then stop after a little while feeling this zombie-like urge to play it again later for the sake of just completing it even though it's boring.
These games are usually accompanied by a bland story which doesn't make it any better.
These games are usually accompanied by a bland story which doesn't make it any better.
