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)
HOUSES WITH NOT MUCH IN VS LOCKED HOUSES.
Posts
Nightowl
View playlists
CloseIn my game, houses or other buildings in towns, cities and such can only be entered if they're important to plot, are shops or are playable character's houses, you get it.
It doesn't anyways make sense when you can "chat with the strangers like you were old neighbors as you head back out with family heirlooms under your arm" like it's stated in Grand List of Console RPG Cliches.
To avoid annoyance and confusion on which house can be entered, I added arrows to show which places can be entered.
It doesn't anyways make sense when you can "chat with the strangers like you were old neighbors as you head back out with family heirlooms under your arm" like it's stated in Grand List of Console RPG Cliches.
To avoid annoyance and confusion on which house can be entered, I added arrows to show which places can be entered.
I'll count:
"Aorta" has 1 town and 1 village.
The village has 3 houses which you can enter which are filled with people.
The town has 8 houses, 5 able to enter, but 3 of them empty, so 3 houses locked.
Still I designed some houses with nothing relevant inside or at least one or another room with nothing relevant inside. Don't know why. But I did it this way and I will leave it this way.
For my next game though it will be quite important and interesting to be able to enter each house and every single one will be filled. Also there will be more towns. It is more like a gam in which you have to travel a little bit.
"Aorta" has 1 town and 1 village.
The village has 3 houses which you can enter which are filled with people.
The town has 8 houses, 5 able to enter, but 3 of them empty, so 3 houses locked.
Still I designed some houses with nothing relevant inside or at least one or another room with nothing relevant inside. Don't know why. But I did it this way and I will leave it this way.
For my next game though it will be quite important and interesting to be able to enter each house and every single one will be filled. Also there will be more towns. It is more like a gam in which you have to travel a little bit.
obsorber
50
Why not just let the player figure it out. Have some houses that are locked and some that aren't. The whole point of playing an rpg is to figure things out and explore whilst engaging with characters and npc's. After checking a house you'll know it's locked for the next time. I guess it can be annoying when trying to figure where to go but then again there are many annoying things about rpg's. Houses are good for engaging npc's who have good things to say that let you understand the setting and what's happening. You can find items and also engage in quests because you meet npc's who need something doing. I think it depends on what you want accessible in your game. If you want quests, have some quests only available by entering and speaking to npc's in houses. If you want the player to find things, then leave some houses unlocked so you can just loot a house. Also like someone already said before, it's realistic to assume that not every house in the city will be unlocked I guess. Sometimes an indication is good. Many of the houses in my own game have npc's in front of the door or something blocking access if I don't want the player assuming they can enter. And a few houses are locked that don't have this. I think you should just mix and match.
Darken
3952
author=obsorber
I guess it can be annoying when trying to figure where to go but then again there are many annoying things about rpg's
yeah great logic lets just try not to evolve at all from our common chains.
obsorber
50
Nice sarcastic post there. The point of that comment is to say that it is pretty much impossible to make a perfect game whether you like it or not. I was simply adding my own thoughts and solutions but you don't have to take it in if you don't want to. I'm not forcing you to but I don't like pathetic sarcasm.
Darken
3952
no the whole point of that comment was to provide no real good reason as to why the "doors that are locked look locked, while doors that are unlocked look unlocked" method should be ignored. Also you seem really offended by a harmless quip.
author=obsorber
but then again there are many annoying things about rpg's
The truth can't hurt, and you have to admit a rpg with nothing annoying in it is practically unheard of or extremely rare. Even if it does sound pessimistic, it's the truth, and at least it's obsorber's experience with rpgs, I don't see any point in running away from it...
This said, as for locked houses, I find going in every single house looking for stuff very annoying ( like talking to every single npc, or having random battles every five steps) and I really appreciate it when the houses are locked, or when it's obvious there's nothing interesting for the game inside, then I do feel like entering some of them freely. I think the main source of annoyance in rpgs is the lack of freedom, the less you're going to have routine and imposed stuff, the more enjoyable it'll be, at least, for me.
Darken
3952
I have more problem with the "meh whatever" attitude displayed when trying to conquer a problem. "all RPGs have you spam attack, so i cannot be bothered to improve upon that..." is similar to what I'm hearing here.
Verincia
366
In my first RPG I ended up mapping just about every single house, and when you have as many houses as I put inside my towns and cities, not to mention the number of cities, it got really tedious really quickly, but at the time I was under the impression that all the houses had to be mapped, and so I did. Then I learned otherwise. In this next game I'm making, I am trying to stay away from that, and that means only as I need them, and truth be told, there are so few that are needed. For the maker it's also a matter of the work, I am only working on my second or third game, so I still need to figure out the medium. As a maker, I should think, what we need to do is choose a method, and stick with it, even if it isn't practical. Maybe when it comes to the NPCs, if there is one that we should or need to talk to, or if not need, at least have something more to talk about than the town or the weather, we could give some kind of signal for that character.
I rather have locked houses than dozens of houses I can enter in and wonder if any of these have some sort of significance to the game...also helps a lot to know where I'm going next I guess.
I always preferred MARKERS on the map to indicate if I should go to this place etc.
I always preferred MARKERS on the map to indicate if I should go to this place etc.
obsorber
50
I agree that markers and showing that the doors are locked are also good ways too. Most good games usually place an emphasis on going into houses anyway whether it be for quests, obtaining items or to learn more about the setting of the game through dialogue. I think this will save time. However if you want players to learn themselves which doors are locked and which aren't then I don't mind this either as long as there are not a dozen houses I have to scroll past...
DorianDawes
106
I always find it slightly comical when you can enter random people's houses and loot through their belongings. Yes, this man is a great hero and all and fights for the people, while helping himself to their shit. Though I do enjoy a bit of exploration. I think the best way to probably get around the silliness of entering in random houses at will would be to find a way to work the gameplay mechanics into the storyline.
Also, I'm not too sure if I like the idea of coloring all entry doors a certain way and giving the player that code, it detracts from the immersion level, and reminds you that you are indeed playing a game. Sometimes, it's just better not knowing. Yes, it may be inconvenient to the player, but life is inconvenient. We don't always know which doors we're allowed to randomly break in, now do we? We just have to barge in and try it.
Now that would be interesting, make a game where when you break into someone else's house, you actually get arrested for it.
Also, I'm not too sure if I like the idea of coloring all entry doors a certain way and giving the player that code, it detracts from the immersion level, and reminds you that you are indeed playing a game. Sometimes, it's just better not knowing. Yes, it may be inconvenient to the player, but life is inconvenient. We don't always know which doors we're allowed to randomly break in, now do we? We just have to barge in and try it.
Now that would be interesting, make a game where when you break into someone else's house, you actually get arrested for it.
Pokemaniac
3559
I'd prefer the house wasn't there at all to it being locked. If I'm playing a game, and tons of things that I can normally do can't be done, then it really makes the experience shallow; you start off feeling that there's a large world to explore, when in fact there's next to nothing.
On the flip-side, exploring tons of houses is boring shit. Unless you're doing something with extraordinary writing(tempted to cite Earthbound here despite never having played it...), which you probably think you're doing regardless of whether you are or not, then I can bare it. Certainly have as many relevant locations as you like, and have locked doors if they'll one day be open, but otherwise, another solution's really needed.
I like the idea of colour-coding ala LA Noire, if you can be bothered putting the time in. But that game had a massive and atmospheric world, which I doubt your standard RPG town is going to match. It literally was Los Angeles. So maybe the real answer is to just make towns smaller; although if you end up with only one location because of it then you have a problem. Another solution is to just leave doors off houses(I only skim-read, did anyone else suggest this), which is perfect so long as you can do it without it looking weird.
EDIT: Yes, Blitzen said it first.
On the flip-side, exploring tons of houses is boring shit. Unless you're doing something with extraordinary writing(tempted to cite Earthbound here despite never having played it...), which you probably think you're doing regardless of whether you are or not, then I can bare it. Certainly have as many relevant locations as you like, and have locked doors if they'll one day be open, but otherwise, another solution's really needed.
I like the idea of colour-coding ala LA Noire, if you can be bothered putting the time in. But that game had a massive and atmospheric world, which I doubt your standard RPG town is going to match. It literally was Los Angeles. So maybe the real answer is to just make towns smaller; although if you end up with only one location because of it then you have a problem. Another solution is to just leave doors off houses(I only skim-read, did anyone else suggest this), which is perfect so long as you can do it without it looking weird.
EDIT: Yes, Blitzen said it first.
author=DorianDawesMenus and bars, small characters with SNES graphics, and numbers don't detract from the immersion level, but a simple way for the player to instantly tell if a door is locked or not will? I don't think it's necessarily how "realistic" it is for it to be immersive. I guess if you paint neon green on the doors then it would, but not if you're just adhering to strict rules about how the game works. If a door is dark brown, it can't be opened. If it's light brown, it can be, for a small example. That way, if you just always 100% keep to that rule, the player will never have to think about it again, unless they're curious and want to make sure that rule always holds. You don't even have to tell them that it's a rule, just put a mandatory area where those 2 door types are present and they'll figure it out soon, as long as again you never break that rule. I would go even further and have like a chain lock or something so they don't even have to wonder. It's not even the only way to do it, it's just an example of something you can do to have players easily recognize what you can/can't enter without having to waste their time. You can have it set up so the door graphic looks faded and blended into the background be locked, and some doors that really pop out be openable too perhaps.
I always find it slightly comical when you can enter random people's houses and loot through their belongings. Yes, this man is a great hero and all and fights for the people, while helping himself to their shit. Though I do enjoy a bit of exploration. I think the best way to probably get around the silliness of entering in random houses at will would be to find a way to work the gameplay mechanics into the storyline.
Also, I'm not too sure if I like the idea of coloring all entry doors a certain way and giving the player that code, it detracts from the immersion level, and reminds you that you are indeed playing a game. Sometimes, it's just better not knowing. Yes, it may be inconvenient to the player, but life is inconvenient. We don't always know which doors we're allowed to randomly break in, now do we? We just have to barge in and try it.
Now that would be interesting, make a game where when you break into someone else's house, you actually get arrested for it.
Games are built on rules. This is why players get frustrated if a developer breaks one. For example, this bird hurts you, and you avoid all birds from then on. Then, you have one bird that looks just like it much later on and it's never hinted at being special, but suddenly that bird you need to touch to teleport to the next area. Or another one, where desks never have anything in them, and suddenly the game without a clue given to you, expects you to search an ordinary desk in some other house in another town for a key. That will get players stuck for quite a while.
I disagree on the houses not having doors at all if they aren't to be entered. Not strongly, but just somewhat. Sometimes it really is just there to show that this town has more than 3 shops and a mayors house in it. Make houses/doors inaccessible is fine, make some doors not visible is fine, but you do that too much and players might instead wonder how NPCs get inside their own houses. "What, do they enter from the window or something?". I guess it's also a fault for those who make their towns 300x300 and just plop the player there and tell them to look for x house without any way of knowing where it is. Or you can make towns pretty small and have the player explore all of it and have something, at least interesting NPCs/some items reward for doing so.
author=PokemaniacAmazing, I disagree on every single point you made, not oversurprised, knowing how differently your mind works from mine after a very long discussion (where we sort of managed to agree!). exept on this: "On the flip-side, exploring tons of houses is boring shit".
I'd prefer the house wasn't there at all to it being locked. If I'm playing a game, and tons of things that I can normally do can't be done, then it really makes the experience shallow; you start off feeling that there's a large world to explore, when in fact there's next to nothing.
On the flip-side, exploring tons of houses is boring shit. Unless you're doing something with extraordinary writing(tempted to cite Earthbound here despite never having played it...), which you probably think you're doing regardless of whether you are or not, then I can bare it. Certainly have as many relevant locations as you like, and have locked doors if they'll one day be open, but otherwise, another solution's really needed.
I like the idea of colour-coding ala LA Noire, if you can be bothered putting the time in. But that game had a massive and atmospheric world, which I doubt your standard RPG town is going to match. It literally was Los Angeles. So maybe the real answer is to just make towns smaller; although if you end up with only one location because of it then you have a problem. Another solution is to just leave doors off houses(I only skim-read, did anyone else suggest this), which is perfect so long as you can do it without it looking weird.
EDIT: Yes, Blitzen said it first.
Pokemaniac
3559
Feeling kind of stupid, but which long discussion? I guess I've had one too many of those in my RPG Making days :P
oh, a long time ago about (got it, had to do a little research myself) : "The myth of games as escapism". Remember?
Pokemaniac
3559
I do, although I don't remember any parts of the argument or the participants :P
EDIT: But, uh, back on topic...
EDIT: But, uh, back on topic...
Well the topic is : I really don't mind locked doors (i actually find that an improvment) I hate houses without doors, I have the feeling I'm being cheated on, and I would hate to have coloured doors , like arrows forbidden to step aside of (except in some exceptionnal case, I can imagine that) and I really, really can't take towns with 3 houses, but not at all.
Ashes of Emerald
2573
In my project I used a battle animation. When the player touches anything that can be interacted with, the animation shows up and says something in context to the situation. Like if a door's locked, the animation says "check" if it's unlocked, then it says "open" or if the player has a key it changes to "unlock" then to "open". I feel that a map shouldn't just be there for filler. Even if there's nothing in it but a npc with something interestin to say. Every map should have a reason to be explored.
