CRYSTALGATE'S PROFILE

Alas, the last boss was to strong for me to keep Plush alive. It would often get two turns between my turns and it could two hit kill Plush. I suppose Plush is just another tragic death in this game.

Anyway, I beat it. Great game. I think I'll write a review.

One very common, and often also bad design flaw, is giving the player tools that are based on flavor, but lacks functionality.

Imagine a sniper rifle in an FPS where you never face enemies from a great range. That would be rather bad. This one error isn't very common, heck I can't even think of a single example of an FPS that gets this part wrong. However, if we move on to RPGs this problem becomes almost a rule rather than an exception.

Let's look at a sleep spell. The problem that spell solves (if it works) is enemies being able to do something. However, in most RPGs I've played, you can just go on an offense and heal up whatever damage you take. That means enemies being able to do stuff isn't really a problem and consequently, the situation the sleep spell is designed to solve isn't a problem. It shouldn't come to anyone's surprise that few are using skills that solves non-problematic situations, but apparently it does.

It's not only RPGs that suffers from this design flaw. The Megaman series for example, is more often than not also hit. Usually Megaman will get at least one weapon which is almost useless outside of hitting a boss' weakness. What I think RPGs and the Megaman series has in common is that the tools given to the player are decided before anyone has looked at which problems the player will face. RPGs often hands the player skills based on the idea that those skills simple should exist or based on a character concept. The Megaman series has a self imposed rule of giving the player at least eight weapons from bosses as well as other self imposed rules based on what weapons existed in previous Megaman games.

author=Strangeluv
@Crystalgate:
That's really weird and unfortunate =( When I tried it just now, this didn't happen, so idk... Unfortunate too because the end of the game is very near after that.

How near? If there isn't much left, it may be worth finishing the game anyway.

BTW, I think you set the game up so that F1 would restore movement speed in case that somehow got screwed up. Is it possible to make F1 remove direction fix as well in case someone else has this problem in the future?

If you don't balance battles correctly, then there's very little to think about. If a boss can hit for more than a healer can heal, what's going through a player's mind? If a boss can perform two actions in a turn and do AoE damage, the player is going prioritize who's getting the best heals and who get the scraps.

I suppose you could do that. That takes some very tight balancing to pull of though and I can't remember seeing that happening. In fact, the only fights I can recall I had to decide who gets healed and who can do without until the next turn, is fight where I have multiple potential healers, like the Dhoulmagus battle in DQ VIII.

With a dedicated healer, you told me that there's no strategy involved. When there's strategy involved, it's better to put in more strategy? I don't think players like being tested too much.

I think I told you that with a dedicated healer, the healing part becomes trivial. I don't think I said that you can't get strategy elsewhere. As for the player being tested to much, are we anywhere near that problem? Most JRPGs offers plenty of strategy prior to battles, like how you spend money and how you set up your character. However, once the battles start, it's rather obvious what action you should input for the characters.

The game becomes easy when party members can do everything. It's also hard to design and balance battles to maintain a good level of difficulty. Having a dedicated healer gives you a leg up on how a player is going to react and what actions they're going to take based on what you have designed.

Giving more than one character the ability to heal hardly means the characters can do everything. You can give the characters the ability to play multiple roles and still have multiple roles they cannot play.

author=Pladough
Battles are setup in a way that you need a healer for a turn. Someone is bound to be low on HP and they need a way to recover. One member is going to use up their turn to do so. It's just inevitable. You can't help that aspect of the game unless you fundamentally change the way battling works or how your game is going to be played.

That being said, there's nothing wrong with having a dedicated healer. If someone has to sacrifice their turn, it might as well be the priest or the doctor of the group. Having a dedicated healer just makes things simpler for everyone.

True, but this is a case where I don't think simpler is a good thing.

In order for a battle to require strategy, there has to be a question of what you should do. If it's obvious what you should do, then there's practically no thinking required, or even encouraged, from the player. With more than one character who can do the healing, the player has to decide who should give up one turn for healing. With one dedicated healer, the decision becomes trivial. Trivial decisions offers no intellectual stimulation whatsoever.