• Add Review
  • Subscribe
  • Nominate
  • Submit Media
  • RSS

Design Musings and Inquiries...mostly Musings.

Right, so...

I haven't been able to work on this as much as I'd like due to everything life has had to throw at me. But all the time, I've been thinking about where to go next with the project. The story itself is all decided, so I'm not at any sort of conundrum there. The problem lies in the gameplay design itself.

Which brings me here, writing a meandering blog entry about it.

Battle Accessibility

First and foremost; the issue of battle accessibility. According to multiple accounts, the battle system is too confusing, having everything piled on all at once. I tried to remedy this initially by locking out certain battle features till certain points, such as the first boss battle, or the beginning of the second dungeon. But there needs to be more done on that account.

Which is why I've devised my next solution; The Vanguard Handbook.

It's essentially a custom menu filled with image tutorials that the player can access explaining all the tiny, basic nuances of the battle system all the way up to key features such as Chains, Burst, Spells, Command Skills, Link Arts, etc. It sounds simple in theory, but I'm actually kind of dreading it due to the volume of information and imagery that needs to be divided up into sections to be explained.

But the alternative is even worse; and that's no one understanding the system. I don't plan to hold people's hands and tell them everything they need to do. But at the very least, people need to know what they're doing at the basic level, right?

Right.

Besides, if people can understand games like Mana Khemia and Record of Agarest War 2, then there's no reason why SEM would be any different. But it's my job to explain the basics, again.

Does this sort of thing sound like it would work? I'm not going to force players into elaborate tutorials, but let them know that they can access more in depth information later on.

Okay, moving on.

Field Interaction

I'm going to be frank; I'm thinking about making dungeons walkable areas again instead of the pseudo-tabletop system it happens to be right now. But that's about as far as it goes.

The Symbol Map system was an amalgamation of ideas derived from Riviera: The Promised Land, and Record of Agarest War 2. You progress through a grid of nodes corresponding to battle, traps, rewards, and events. And all the while, the player spent TP in order to make it easier to progress at the their leisure.

This system also existed for one express purpose; to circumvent mapping. Not because I'm bad at mapping, I'm no faroz_flare, but I think I can manage to make areas look interesting enough. But rather; because I don't think I can make areas mechanically engaging. What's the point of walking through a 'dungeon' where the only obstacle is choosing the right way to go? Sounds pretty boring, right?

Well couple that with my meager puzzle design capabilities, and you can see why I chose the Symbol Map system.

But again; I am considering reverting for a few reasons and with a few catches. Reasons being that Symbol Maps simply aren't mechanically engaging. I personally think they're just engaging enough, but apparently I'm the minority. But I don't want SEM to be boring in an important aspect such as field interaction; which is my conundrum.

Now, catches to reverting back to maps would be that dungeons simply would not be as large as they were in my previous efforts where they spanned 40+ winding maps. Instead, that number would be cut by at least half or more. Secondly, I wouldn't be trying to wrack my brain trying to come up with obstacles on the level of Golden Sun. Because I just can't do that. I have dreams, but I know my limits as well. Of course there would be simple roadblocks to contend with, but nothing crazy like refracting light off of mirrors or something equally as absurd.

Basically it will all be scaled down to a point where it's manageable. But I worry dungeons would be shorter for it. Which brings things right back around to map numbers.

Okay I'm just rambling incoherently now, so I'll leave this section as it is and end with a question.

How do you feel about the Symbol Map System? Does it work? Is it acceptable? Or would walkable dungeons be better, despite the intended downsizing of scale?

Other Stuff

Beware technical jargon rambling ahead.

Currently there are eight playable characters. That number won't change and I still need to complete work on the 8th. But while that work is stalled, I've been thinking about how to better balance the battle system and change the damage emphasis between various mechanics.

As it is right now, Chains are the weakest skills, Ether Spells are next in level of strength, and then Burst skills are the highest. Now logically the progression of usage should go Chains/Ether Spells --> Burst Skill when available. However I've noticed that in most playthroughs I've seen, it's been Chains --> Chains --> Chains --> Occasional Ether Spell.

This is kind of off putting really as players are wasting their time using the weakest forms of damage available to them over and over. Why is this the case? The cynical part of me simply wants to say that it's the case because 'Chains look cool!', but there must be a deeper reasoning that even the player doesn't seem to realize. Eventually I did come to a reasonable and logical conclusion. And a simple one.

The Combo Chain count.

This system rewards building large combos by adding the hit count of the combo directly to the damage being done. Thus, damage escalates rather quickly, especially when characters act back to back. This system also applies to Ether and Burst skills, but it's more readily accessible if one simply uses Chains back to back.

So I thought of a solution to this issue; amend the combo chain system to boost the reward of using Ether and Burst skills in relation to Chains. How to do that? Simple. When using an Ether or Burst skill, take a percentage of the total damage count of the current combo and add it to the damage of the skill being used. For Ether Spells, it's 25%. For Burst Skills, it's 50%, and for EX Limits, Link Arts, SW, it'll be 100%.

I think this is a pretty logical evolution to the system and one that rewards timing and planning your actions rather than acting all willy nilly, only to find yourself interrupted by the enemy and your combo count lost.

And that's about all I have to say on this front.




...Wow. Look at all that rambling. Better leave off with a visual to make up for it.

Have this. It's a design for Patchoulli that I drew long after SEM got well underway. Safe to say it won't be used in this project.

Posts

Pages: 1
I did play some of the demo (up to the first boss), so a few of my thoughts on this

1) forced tutorials can be a pain, so an in game book of some sort would be great, plus it'd give players a chance to brush up on things, if for whatever reason they need to. Also, maybe an optional dummy/test/tutorial battle may serve some use.

2)While the table style dungeon is interesting, for some reason, I still prefer moving characters around in an area, but that's just me.
The game book seems just a passive way to teach the player and only works for some learners who like to read manuals top to bottom to get every rule. Introducing the game mechanics one by one and perhaps even requiring the player to progress with them is a direct way for everyone. A manual thing only proves to be a safety net and not the end all to the problem.

I haven't played the game yet though, is the current version still in the game mechanic piled up thing?
Yes. in the current version, all basic battle mechanics are explained in a single wall of text boxes in the first battle you get into, and then never again. And when you choose commands for the first time, there's an explanation that's never repeated.

So yes, it's kind of a problem at the moment. I honestly wouldn't recommend playing this version due to how much info dump the tutorials currently are.
This is why I also suggested the dummy battle; it could be utilized for tutorials as well as getting a feel for the system or even trying out new things; give the player a chance to experiment if you will.
Yes, that is a good idea. I'm remembering that Resonance of Fate had the tutorial arena where you could practice individual aspects of the battle system. That might be something worth doing. It could also circumvent the need for a massive codex if this so-called Tutorial Arena could be repeated over and over.
I'm thinking about making dungeons walkable areas again instead of the pseudo-tabletop system it happens to be right now.


- OH SWEET JEBUS, YES!

I thought that for the original Sacred Earth Bonds that your overall dungeon design & layout wasn’t all too bad. Hell, I even enjoyed some of the puzzles you tried to implement in each of the floors as it was rather fun and clever. I’m not saying that it was entirely picture perfect, but it’s still much better than nothing, right?

I still haven’t played the demo. But I did watch Link_2112’s little “Let’s Play” about the game some while back and saw completely first hand the whole “Symbol Map System” and...it just didn’t seem that much fun to me – even on my side of the end. It just didn’t seem so...engaging and entertaining, even as a spectator looking onwards. I don’t really mind if you keep the towns and cutscenes the exact same way. But the dungeons should be fully explorable and overhead similar to the original game.

The Vanguard Handbook.


Pretty pictures showcasing what certain battle strategies and commands do are MUCH better than just a quick text dump and a tutorial battle to along with it that just completely overwhelms the player upon first glance. Or, another idea I have is to just SLOWLY introduce each new mechanic after a couple of battles when the player is starting to get used to the system, as it's almost like giving a gentle push for each new experience but not entirely holding his or her hand all the way.

I also really like Emirpoen's suggestion of using a test dummy for sort of a tutorial setup. (It actually would be pretty funny if you could design the test dummy as looking like one of the main characters as you beat up on the dummy and watch their general reactions to it, lol.)

Other than that - I think the project is just fine. This is almost a great example of adding too much to an already good thing. You've been working on this game for a long time and I think you're starting to overthink a bit too much (similar to what I do at times) and go backwards and sideways on the whole matter. Just do the best you can and try and finish this game and move on to something else, all right? :)

(Also, if you could, I still wouldn't mind seeing the original game get re-released here.) ^^
(...Please, with a cherry on top?)
Regarding the whole map scenario, you might want to consider a middle ground solution. As in, having fully designed dungeon maps while keeping in line with the node travel system.

In that case scenario, you should be able to pull something like that off without some damn bug getting in the way this time.

Also, as I probably mentioned before, that intro scene where Gunnar faces off against that long white hair guy (anime-style androgyny for the win) is practically a tutorial fight waiting to happen.
@Addit Haha, thanks. I still think Bonds' implementation of puzzles left a ton to be desired, but it was an attempt. Maybe I can get away with something similar to that again. I'll have to try stuff out.

As for releasing Bonds on RMN...that's not likely. I wouldn't willingly release that abomination unless I rebalanced the battles, fixed the dialogue, and improved some systems...Which is what SEM is.

@DBAce9Aura It's been suggested that I try for a middle ground. But I'm still trying to figure out how that would really work out. The closest I can think of would be something similar to Angelic Awakening's system, but that also takes control away from the player again. But in return, there would be more dialogue...Hmn. Battles would also be sparser and more dangerous to compensate...

The other suggestion was something similar to Dissidia in which the player can both move around maps and contend with node clusters both. I need to theorize and visualize before I can come up with a definite answer.

As for the intro scene, that's actually a good idea. ...But that's actually been cut from the game. Now, there just isn't an intro. The game just starts off from the point in which Gunnar and Veili need to leave in the morning.
Pages: 1