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)
SO YOU SAY YOUR GAME HAS STRATEGY
Posts
PsychoFreaX
View playlists
CloseRight I admit I didn't communicate too well there, as I just said in my previous post. But adapting alone is still kind of vague. What does it take to adapt is the question.
author=Versaliaauthor=PsychoFreaXauthor=kentonaI meant that for the latter, it's not simply getting used to but coming up with a trick to counter the boss that's the challenge."just get used to how the boss fights and you'll be okay" to "understand how the boss fights and find an appropriate counter".
this is the exact same fucking thing. getting used to the boss' strategy = learning how the boss fights
author=PsychoFreaX
Right I admit I didn't communicate too well there, as I just said in my previous post. But adapting alone is still kind of vague. What does it take to adapt is the question.
It only takes pattern recognition to adapt to the pattern you've recognized. Imagine you're beating a pointy bit of metal with a rock, until you realize it's actually a nail and you have a hammer. Does it really take that much to adapt your current strategy?
If an enemy uses a special attack every other round then how you adapt to that should be pretty obvious. Adaptation is INSTANT - the player will automatically think, the moment they realize what's going on, "okay - I should Guard every other round, and heal on the rounds I'm not guarding; I'll have this person try to Blind the sucker on the rounds we aren't Guarding; I'll have this person use Attack Down to see if that makes the damage tolerable..."
I meant that for the latter, it's not simply getting used to but coming up with a trick to counter the boss that's the challenge.I hate gimmick bosses. A boss with one exact way to beat it means you are NOT challenging players to use their skills in creative ways, or proposing a scenario with multiple solutions for the player to arrive at themselves.
cho
0
author=PsychoFreaXuh
it's not simply getting used to but coming up with a trick to counter the boss that's the challenge
all you've really said is "bosses are challenging because you have to think of a way to beat them"
game design
edit: versalia beat me to it and in a better way. i dont give a fuck tho *lights m.a.d.t.h.i.c.k. blunt*
author=Versaliaauthor=PsychoFreaXIt only takes pattern recognition to adapt to the pattern you've recognized. Imagine you're beating a pointy bit of metal with a rock, until you realize it's actually a nail and you have a hammer. Does it really take that much to adapt your current strategy?
Right I admit I didn't communicate too well there, as I just said in my previous post. But adapting alone is still kind of vague. What does it take to adapt is the question.
If an enemy uses a special attack every other round then how you adapt to that should be pretty obvious. Adaptation is INSTANT - the player will automatically think, the moment they realize what's going on, "okay - I should Guard every other round, and heal on the rounds I'm not guarding; I'll have this person try to Blind the sucker on the rounds we aren't Guarding; I'll have this person use Attack Down to see if that makes the damage tolerable..."
Well then it's not really wits if it's obvious right? What if I want to make a game where adaptation isn't simply knowing how a boss fights. But the challenge is finding a trick that can counter it? What if I want to have the eureka feeling of figuring it out?
author=Versaliaauthor=PsychoFreaXDoesn't only need to be only one way. What I do is make sure there is at LEAST one effective trick to beat a boss. Other strategies often emerge around it.I meant that for the latter, it's not simply getting used to but coming up with a trick to counter the boss that's the challenge.I hate gimmick bosses. A boss with one exact way to beat it means you are NOT challenging players to use their skills in creative ways, or proposing a scenario with multiple solutions for the player to arrive at themselves.
Because of the nature of RPGs, assuming you've given the player the tools he needs to actually beat the boss, he is usually capable of switching/adapting his fighting strategy mid-fight, or at least after dying once so he can equip the right ability/equipment/materia for the boss. Since RPGs are typically turn-based, the trick is in the discovery of a boss-defeating strategy, not the actual implementation of said strategy. Once you know a boss is weak to Fire, you use Fire.
Summary: Difficult RPG fights typically have two parts, learning and implementation.
Now, if you're looking for ways to make the implementation more difficult, well, you'd probably be better off switching to a non-turn-based genre, but let's throw around the old idea ball:
1) Characters have to use abilities that require a couple turns to charge, so the player has to think ahead and predict the bosses' attacks, heal/shield as necessary, etc.
2) Characters are pressured by a turn limit/timer, and thus have a hard limit on how many turns they can waste.
3) Maybe switching your strategy involves switching character stances, which takes a turn. Maybe they have to switch back and forth repeatedly, while healing, attacking, and the like.
Hell, I mean, there's no time limit on how much your player is allowed to think in a turn-based system. So assuming they play the boss enough and his pattern is at least a little bit predictable, they can memorize his pattern and implement it flawlessly. The skill comes in how long it takes for the player to pull that off - not unlike how if a player throws enough lives at a level in Super Meat Boy, eventually he'll get to Bandage Girl, through sheer luck/memorization.
Summary: Difficult RPG fights typically have two parts, learning and implementation.
Now, if you're looking for ways to make the implementation more difficult, well, you'd probably be better off switching to a non-turn-based genre, but let's throw around the old idea ball:
1) Characters have to use abilities that require a couple turns to charge, so the player has to think ahead and predict the bosses' attacks, heal/shield as necessary, etc.
2) Characters are pressured by a turn limit/timer, and thus have a hard limit on how many turns they can waste.
3) Maybe switching your strategy involves switching character stances, which takes a turn. Maybe they have to switch back and forth repeatedly, while healing, attacking, and the like.
Hell, I mean, there's no time limit on how much your player is allowed to think in a turn-based system. So assuming they play the boss enough and his pattern is at least a little bit predictable, they can memorize his pattern and implement it flawlessly. The skill comes in how long it takes for the player to pull that off - not unlike how if a player throws enough lives at a level in Super Meat Boy, eventually he'll get to Bandage Girl, through sheer luck/memorization.
Well then it's not really wits if it's obvious right? What if I want to make a game where adaptation isn't simply knowing how a boss fights. But the challenge is finding a trick that can counter it? What if I want to have the eureka feeling of figuring it out?
Oh, so you mean like, the example I gave where you experiment with different ways of overcoming the boss' powerful special attack - Attack Down and Blind and stuff, and suddenly discover that this megapowerful boss is in fact weak to Blind? EUREKA!!!!!!
Seriously, let's go back to the hammer-n-nail example. Hmmm, well the rock isn't working. So they think about the tools available to them. Maybe a hammer would work. EUREKA, A HAMMER BEATS NAILS EFFECTIVELY!!! Just because the player should be constantly and instantly thinking about which tools are at their disposal doesn't mean the actual solution is immediately obvious. What if this nail was Hammer Repellent? They'd have to try something else but they would still have an idea of what to try
you still have no idea what you're talking about
author=VersaliaJust because the player should be constantly and instantly thinking about which tools are at their disposal doesn't mean the actual solution is immediately obvious.Hey you're the one who said that adaptation is INSTANT in ALL C-A-P-I-T-A-L-S. Are you sure YOU know what you're talking about?
author=PsychoFreaXauthor=VersaliaJust because the player should be constantly and instantly thinking about which tools are at their disposal doesn't mean the actual solution is immediately obvious.Hey you're the one who said that adaptation is INSTANT in ALL C-A-P-I-T-A-L-S. Are you sure YOU know what you're talking about?
I am able to correctly grasp the concept of an end quote tag so I'm going to go with "probably"
(The boss uses Attack Up on itself. I immediately start thinking of ways to adapt my strategy to this turn of events. Adaptation = instant. That's all from me on this topic because now I am just beating a nail with a rock)
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
Less incoherent bitching, more bosses
A boss with minions.
Minions: Deal small acid damage, and a debuff that stacks acid vulnerability.
Boss: Deals aoe damage (multiple attacks?) as well as a huge spike of acid damage to a character every few turns.
The vulnerability is dispellable, but only on one character at a time (no aoe dispell), and you have a party of 4. You have an ability that can make one character at a time invulnerable to acid damage.
Choices: Heal, dispell debuffs, kill minions, attack boss. Who do you make invulnerable? Do you ignore removing the debuff in order to deal more damage or heal someone? Do you kill the minions first, or go right for the boss?
ALSO THEY ARE ALL SPIDERS
Minions: Deal small acid damage, and a debuff that stacks acid vulnerability.
Boss: Deals aoe damage (multiple attacks?) as well as a huge spike of acid damage to a character every few turns.
The vulnerability is dispellable, but only on one character at a time (no aoe dispell), and you have a party of 4. You have an ability that can make one character at a time invulnerable to acid damage.
Choices: Heal, dispell debuffs, kill minions, attack boss. Who do you make invulnerable? Do you ignore removing the debuff in order to deal more damage or heal someone? Do you kill the minions first, or go right for the boss?
ALSO THEY ARE ALL SPIDERS
S. F. LaValle
1069
Versalia, take it down a notch please. Craze too. The point of posting boss ideas is to receive criticism on them, and if such criticism exists, it's understood that there might be something for that person to learn. No need to drive the point any further than that.
I think you're tugging back and forth on semantics. One side seems to the other to be over-simplifying while themselves over-complicating. It does boil down to pattern-recognition, but to say it should be "instant" is deceptive. You base your initial strategy on instant conclusions when you haven't experienced the boss for several turns yet. It hits hard, you buff defense and make sure healing is under control before poking back. When you do, your first thought turns to str debuffs and statuses like stun or blind. The "instant" decisions assume immediate and thorough knowledge of your available abilities, and also depend on game design taut enough to not include fluff abilities that have limited or very specific uses.
I don't think this necessarily means that poor boss design makes the player think about their next move instead of reacting instantly. Boss patterns don't need to cycle within x number of turns, they can span several, or better yet, react to YOUR actions. Being able to choose the best course of action immediately is great, but the boss doesn't have to think so.
So that's my idea of great boss strategy. After you have applied your OWN strategy to the boss (obvious as it is), analyzed the boss's response, made adjustments to your strategy or implement an extra layer of strategy to counter the boss's reponse, then that eureka moment (for me) comes; you see the pattern repeat after having successfully made an offensive effort and mitigated the boss's response to a manageable level. When you know the boss is out of responses to your strategy, I feel good, and confident about winning.
EXCITING boss design makes that line so tight, the line between an effective offense and your ability to survive a cycle of the pattern, that you are on the edge of your seat as you continue through the fight. Then, effecting a phase change where the boss's pattern totally shifts can really screw with your mind.
Edit: Grammar
I think you're tugging back and forth on semantics. One side seems to the other to be over-simplifying while themselves over-complicating. It does boil down to pattern-recognition, but to say it should be "instant" is deceptive. You base your initial strategy on instant conclusions when you haven't experienced the boss for several turns yet. It hits hard, you buff defense and make sure healing is under control before poking back. When you do, your first thought turns to str debuffs and statuses like stun or blind. The "instant" decisions assume immediate and thorough knowledge of your available abilities, and also depend on game design taut enough to not include fluff abilities that have limited or very specific uses.
I don't think this necessarily means that poor boss design makes the player think about their next move instead of reacting instantly. Boss patterns don't need to cycle within x number of turns, they can span several, or better yet, react to YOUR actions. Being able to choose the best course of action immediately is great, but the boss doesn't have to think so.
So that's my idea of great boss strategy. After you have applied your OWN strategy to the boss (obvious as it is), analyzed the boss's response, made adjustments to your strategy or implement an extra layer of strategy to counter the boss's reponse, then that eureka moment (for me) comes; you see the pattern repeat after having successfully made an offensive effort and mitigated the boss's response to a manageable level. When you know the boss is out of responses to your strategy, I feel good, and confident about winning.
EXCITING boss design makes that line so tight, the line between an effective offense and your ability to survive a cycle of the pattern, that you are on the edge of your seat as you continue through the fight. Then, effecting a phase change where the boss's pattern totally shifts can really screw with your mind.
Edit: Grammar
I'd like to describe a scenario in which I found a particular boss fight with a recognizable pattern to be absolutely and ridiculously horrible and see what kind of feedback it evokes, because I really, really, really hated this asshole.
Etrian Odyssey 3, Fourth Stratum Boss B - Shin
Shin has a recognizable pattern. Shin will use AoE status effects over and over again - specifically Curse (your dealt damage splashes back on you) and Confusion (yeah). When Shin's HP is low, she will occasionally use Demon Kiss, hitting random members of your party something like 7 times and absorbing a multiplier of that damage. And, every so often - completely out of pattern, and extremely rare, so you can't use something like Anticold to prevent it - she blasts you with a harsh AoE cold spell.
Now, I can see the thought that went into this fight. But you know what? IT'S HORRIBLE.
Point: The game gives you lots of ways to deal with ailments.
Counterpoint: They're all completely ineffective in the face of losing all control to Confusion. The only way to really keep up with this fight is to have a Prince/ss spamming Prevent Order repeatedly.
Point: Her powerful Demon Kiss attack only happens when she's low on HP, allowing you to recognize that part of the pattern and plan for it.
Counterpoint: When a boss gets dangerous at low HP, your strategy is always going to be to set up a spike. (Spiking, for those unfamiliar, means suddenly sharply ramping up your damage. Fighting an enemy party with a white mage usually means spiking someone so they die before they can be healed.) However, you have no actual spiking options that you weren't already using - if you brought the Prince/ss for Prevent Order, you are also probably using things like Attack Order already. So the fight gets harder when she's at low HP, but the best strategies to deal lots of damage to end the fight quickly are no different and no more effective anyway.
Point: Every single one of Shin's spells is Head-based. If you use Head Bind on her, she is helpless until it wears off.
Counterpoint: ARRRRGGGGH I FREAKING HATE THIS IN BOSS FIGHTS. Exactly one trick to disabling the entire thing is just plain boring and awful. I could not have anticipated that solution. I mean, I could have - I am aware that Binds disable different kinds of skills - but I would never have expected a single type of Bind to shut her down completely. I tried Bind Legs and it didn't seem to do anything at all.
So there is an obvious strategy to this fight: Ailment mitigation, being healed up for her unpredictable or overpowered attacks, and maybe using Head Bind when it gets tough at the end there. The problem to me is twofold: There's only one effective form of ailment mitigation in this instance, and "staying at high HP" is just plain not clever strategy; the other part is that if Shin's agility is in the same range as yours, and she HAPPENS to get lucky and go a tiny bit faster than your Prince/ss, she can Confuse your entire party before you have a chance to use Prevent. Even though that's the best possible skill for the scenario. So Shin gives you a recognizable pattern, different ways of thinking about solving her obstacles, then reduces them to single-solution problems and punishes you based on bad luck. Did I mention that the AoE Cold attack has no rhyme or reason to it, adding false difficulty by purposely breaking the pattern in a way that you can't possibly anticipate? (I literally wasted all of my MP using Anticold every single round, and then she used it later.)
Worst boss ever
Etrian Odyssey 3, Fourth Stratum Boss B - Shin
Shin has a recognizable pattern. Shin will use AoE status effects over and over again - specifically Curse (your dealt damage splashes back on you) and Confusion (yeah). When Shin's HP is low, she will occasionally use Demon Kiss, hitting random members of your party something like 7 times and absorbing a multiplier of that damage. And, every so often - completely out of pattern, and extremely rare, so you can't use something like Anticold to prevent it - she blasts you with a harsh AoE cold spell.
Now, I can see the thought that went into this fight. But you know what? IT'S HORRIBLE.
Point: The game gives you lots of ways to deal with ailments.
Counterpoint: They're all completely ineffective in the face of losing all control to Confusion. The only way to really keep up with this fight is to have a Prince/ss spamming Prevent Order repeatedly.
Point: Her powerful Demon Kiss attack only happens when she's low on HP, allowing you to recognize that part of the pattern and plan for it.
Counterpoint: When a boss gets dangerous at low HP, your strategy is always going to be to set up a spike. (Spiking, for those unfamiliar, means suddenly sharply ramping up your damage. Fighting an enemy party with a white mage usually means spiking someone so they die before they can be healed.) However, you have no actual spiking options that you weren't already using - if you brought the Prince/ss for Prevent Order, you are also probably using things like Attack Order already. So the fight gets harder when she's at low HP, but the best strategies to deal lots of damage to end the fight quickly are no different and no more effective anyway.
Point: Every single one of Shin's spells is Head-based. If you use Head Bind on her, she is helpless until it wears off.
Counterpoint: ARRRRGGGGH I FREAKING HATE THIS IN BOSS FIGHTS. Exactly one trick to disabling the entire thing is just plain boring and awful. I could not have anticipated that solution. I mean, I could have - I am aware that Binds disable different kinds of skills - but I would never have expected a single type of Bind to shut her down completely. I tried Bind Legs and it didn't seem to do anything at all.
So there is an obvious strategy to this fight: Ailment mitigation, being healed up for her unpredictable or overpowered attacks, and maybe using Head Bind when it gets tough at the end there. The problem to me is twofold: There's only one effective form of ailment mitigation in this instance, and "staying at high HP" is just plain not clever strategy; the other part is that if Shin's agility is in the same range as yours, and she HAPPENS to get lucky and go a tiny bit faster than your Prince/ss, she can Confuse your entire party before you have a chance to use Prevent. Even though that's the best possible skill for the scenario. So Shin gives you a recognizable pattern, different ways of thinking about solving her obstacles, then reduces them to single-solution problems and punishes you based on bad luck. Did I mention that the AoE Cold attack has no rhyme or reason to it, adding false difficulty by purposely breaking the pattern in a way that you can't possibly anticipate? (I literally wasted all of my MP using Anticold every single round, and then she used it later.)
Worst boss 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
Cuntpasted from another thread for relevance:
On the one hand, I'm pretty sure EO3 lets you grind levels, and in fact very much expects you to - so with a high enough level and/or the right equipment you can theoretically make sure your agility is high enough that you have a 100% chance to go first. Not being high enough level can certainly qualify as doing something wrong. On the other hand, if you weren't already using a Prince, that's an utterly ridiculous amount of forced grinding for a single boss. I mean, man, if it's at the end of the fourth stratum, that's gotta be hours and hours of grinding up a single character from level 1. There's no way to predict you'll need a certain class at level 80 or whatever when you never needed one before, so that's stupid. Doesn't any equipment grant confuseproof?
author=LockeZSo yeah, I can understand your frustration.
It should never be possible for the player to die to pure random chance when he made no mistakes at all. If the player does everything flawlessly and makes optimal choices, he should never, ever still have a random chance of a game over.
On the one hand, I'm pretty sure EO3 lets you grind levels, and in fact very much expects you to - so with a high enough level and/or the right equipment you can theoretically make sure your agility is high enough that you have a 100% chance to go first. Not being high enough level can certainly qualify as doing something wrong. On the other hand, if you weren't already using a Prince, that's an utterly ridiculous amount of forced grinding for a single boss. I mean, man, if it's at the end of the fourth stratum, that's gotta be hours and hours of grinding up a single character from level 1. There's no way to predict you'll need a certain class at level 80 or whatever when you never needed one before, so that's stupid. Doesn't any equipment grant confuseproof?
S. F. LaValle
1069
author=Versalia
Worst boss ever
Haven't played Etrian Odyssey.
1) Not that I consider forcing a battle re-start good design, but is there equipment you can equip to mitigate Confusion or the Cold damage?
2) If Head Bind works without fail, and is available constantly enough to make her attacks useless most of the fight, then the only strategy involved is to identify her abilities as Head type, and attempting the bind to make sure she's not immune. Granted, it's not a very exciting strategy. What I would prefer is that the Head Bind goes up to control her ridiculous abilities (which bosses are entitled to have, since they're bosses), then SHE responds by changing up her strategy. Since her best abilities are out, she has a selection of less-effective (easier for you to manage) abilities to choose from, or perhaps chooses a more defensive stance that gives you opportunity to see how to inflict the most amount of damage to her.
I firmly believe that luck has no place in boss fights, beyond what is included with crit chance, the ramifications of which might cause you to heal sooner or with a more powerful spell than you typically would per your normal rotation. Luck can turn the tide, such as put the boss on the offensive and you on defensive, but it should NEVER have a chance of wiping you out without gross negligence on the player's part
The setup for Demon's Kiss is appropriate. You get her health down, she uses it to gain it back up. You now know this is an ability that exists that you must handle when her health gets low. Spike damage is one possible way of attempting to get by it, preparing a Bind or other unique method of cancelling it (like some sort of Zombie status) is good too. More fun yet, make that Demon's Kiss useless or even CAUSE damage to her if it's used on Cursed party members, turning that annoying status effect into a mechanic for the fight.
Based on what you described, fake difficulty combined with a "Seriously?" strategy, a fun battle does not make.
author=S. F. LaValle
1) Not that I consider forcing a battle re-start good design, but is there equipment you can equip to mitigate Confusion or the Cold damage?
There's resist items I did use on the back row who weren't under Prevent Order, but nothing for immunity, and the Cold Resist items don't seem to do very much... :< a little, but not enough.
2) If Head Bind works without fail, and is available constantly enough to make her attacks useless most of the fight, then the only strategy involved is to identify her abilities as Head type, and attempting the bind to make sure she's not immune. Granted, it's not a very exciting strategy. What I would prefer is that the Head Bind goes up to control her ridiculous abilities (which bosses are entitled to have, since they're bosses), then SHE responds by changing up her strategy. Since her best abilities are out, she has a selection of less-effective (easier for you to manage) abilities to choose from, or perhaps chooses a more defensive stance that gives you opportunity to see how to inflict the most amount of damage to her.
Head Bind definitely doesn't work without fail. It's also available to only two abilities off the top of my head - I'm sure there's more (like forging it onto a weapon and hoping it lands some time in the battle) - and I ended up spending 1 skill point in Hanging so my Buccaneer could use it over and over to try and inflict Head Bind. :B I succeeded about every fourth try on average, and it lasted at least two turns every time, so it was pretty advantageous and made me kind of mad. You're absolutely right in how the bind should restrict her but not disable her - what I expected was that her abilities would be split up between the different Binds. This goes back to an excellent point about how players absorb information from games - information is garnered from set examples. Different attacks are already demonstrated as tied to different body parts for binding, and no bosses up to that point do not have a single all-disabling weak point.
And yeah, Etrian Odyssey expects you to grind. It makes a lot of purposely punishing "old school" decisions that I disagree with (if you target an enemy who dies before your action, you retarget, but not if you're healing an ally who dies) before your action). So that one is definitely solved by "gain a level or two" but that answer still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. :<
Crystalgate
694
Let's try a boss design.
The boss has seven minions around it. The minions boosts it's defenses and if all seven minions are there, it's almost invincible. So to harm the boss, you want to first take down as many of it's minions as possible. However, if you kill a minion the boss re-summons them. First it will summon just one minion. The next turn it will summon two minions and so on. The process only resets once the boss spends a turn not having to summon minions.
The obvious strategy is to hurt every minion so that you can then take them all down in one turn, or even better, one action. However, you also want to be able to deal as much damage as you can while able to do so, so ideally you want to time it so that all offensive buffs are up and that the characters are healthy so you need to spend as little time as possible on healing. It's up to the player to figure out how to best accomplish all that.
Obviously, the minions have to deal very little damage compared to the boss since there's seven of them.
The boss has seven minions around it. The minions boosts it's defenses and if all seven minions are there, it's almost invincible. So to harm the boss, you want to first take down as many of it's minions as possible. However, if you kill a minion the boss re-summons them. First it will summon just one minion. The next turn it will summon two minions and so on. The process only resets once the boss spends a turn not having to summon minions.
The obvious strategy is to hurt every minion so that you can then take them all down in one turn, or even better, one action. However, you also want to be able to deal as much damage as you can while able to do so, so ideally you want to time it so that all offensive buffs are up and that the characters are healthy so you need to spend as little time as possible on healing. It's up to the player to figure out how to best accomplish all that.
Obviously, the minions have to deal very little damage compared to the boss since there's seven of them.
author=PsychoFreaX
Hi again, I have to say lately I've been playing a lot of RPG Maker game where the best tricks are plainly obvious impulsive laid out in front of your face. The typical buff, attack attack, heal, attack attack, heal etc and nothing more. For every enemy and even bosses. Sometimes games may seem strategic, but it's only an illusion of strategy.
So you have to ask is your game merely just that? Or are there actually clever tricks that the player can use to win fights? If so what are some examples?
People say they want this but in practice they COMPLETELY. FUCKING. HATE. IT.
Trust me on this one, bro. The best thing you can do if you want your game to be moderately popular is to make your game simple and easy, at least at the beginning. Otherwise, your game will make people feel stupid and they'll hate it. Be careful, though. If everyone hates you anyway, you can even get in trouble for your game being too easy!
author=Max McGee
Trust me on this one, bro. The best thing you can do if you want your game to be moderately popular is to make your game simple and easy, at least at the beginning. Otherwise, your game will make people feel stupid and they'll hate it. Be careful, though. If everyone hates you anyway, you can even get in trouble for your game being too easy!
He already said he doesn't care if everyone hates it, he wants it to be challenging. But I'm kind of curious now, do you have an example of this, Max? I like making challenging fights too, but I'm wondering how tricky is too tricky.
