MERLANDESE'S PROFILE
Merlandese
3235
Placebo Love
A lonely office worker is guided by a silent Muse to solve the mystery behind his two Doppelganger Soulmates.
A lonely office worker is guided by a silent Muse to solve the mystery behind his two Doppelganger Soulmates.
Search
Filter
Any character's death = game over
In Valkyria Chronicles they had a similar idea.
Squad members would be incapacitated on the field for three turns before perma-death set deep into their frail bones. If you got any other member to their side before that "doom counter" terminated then they'd call a medic who would single-handedly hoist them out of harm's way and start working some sort of military medicine that I imagine came at the cost of morals and ethics. After a few more turns the fallen member will be brand new and ready to redeploy, super soldier serum coursing through their veins.
I added some embellishments but that's kind of what happened.
Still, it fell prey to LockeZ's first concern, which is that a Game Over state would only happen if a) the main character was incapacitated AT ALL or b) if key members didn't get picked up by the medic before the doom counter doom counted. Any other character dies and it's a perma-death, and with so many troops at your disposal you can sometimes just suicide bomb with your favorite character.
LockeZ's made a good point about how often you might have to heal/defend. I think in order to really stress that each character has the same weight while keeping a Game Over/Mission Failure option you would have to rethink how the confrontation works. In a system that is as generic as the one outlined then it would be hard to employ, but if this particular narrative turned some ideas on its ear (no heals, "Death" having other requirements, "Death" having other abilities, some benefit for the AI to NOT kill a character that quickly, etc.) it might be able to side-step it.
Squad members would be incapacitated on the field for three turns before perma-death set deep into their frail bones. If you got any other member to their side before that "doom counter" terminated then they'd call a medic who would single-handedly hoist them out of harm's way and start working some sort of military medicine that I imagine came at the cost of morals and ethics. After a few more turns the fallen member will be brand new and ready to redeploy, super soldier serum coursing through their veins.
I added some embellishments but that's kind of what happened.
Still, it fell prey to LockeZ's first concern, which is that a Game Over state would only happen if a) the main character was incapacitated AT ALL or b) if key members didn't get picked up by the medic before the doom counter doom counted. Any other character dies and it's a perma-death, and with so many troops at your disposal you can sometimes just suicide bomb with your favorite character.
LockeZ's made a good point about how often you might have to heal/defend. I think in order to really stress that each character has the same weight while keeping a Game Over/Mission Failure option you would have to rethink how the confrontation works. In a system that is as generic as the one outlined then it would be hard to employ, but if this particular narrative turned some ideas on its ear (no heals, "Death" having other requirements, "Death" having other abilities, some benefit for the AI to NOT kill a character that quickly, etc.) it might be able to side-step it.
Any character's death = game over
My worry about this isn't so much what triggers the Game Over as the Game Over itself. I like the idea of an effect happening upon character death that isn't lopsided to story characters, but I take some issue with the tangential idea of Game Over.
I think this idea would benefit from piggybacking on discussions about exciting Game Over alternatives, or how forcing a battle restart (hard force or soft, through logical incentives) is quintessentially worth the same frustration as a complete loss. If this latter problem were addressed I think the canopy effect over the whole team would be great in that it would give you real appreciation towards the NPCs. :)
I think this idea would benefit from piggybacking on discussions about exciting Game Over alternatives, or how forcing a battle restart (hard force or soft, through logical incentives) is quintessentially worth the same frustration as a complete loss. If this latter problem were addressed I think the canopy effect over the whole team would be great in that it would give you real appreciation towards the NPCs. :)
[RM2K3] Full game or Episodes?
Reinventing the (Input) Wheel
Here's an update of the system in action. It looks like garbage right now but it works like a charm!
Bare Bones Functionality
Right now it doesn't support keyboard, nor can you confirm your selection, but the Delete/Backspace/ESC erases letters and the Shift key switches between CAP and lowercase. It's also smooth and quick!
EDIT:
With a Better Sprite Font
Bare Bones Functionality
Right now it doesn't support keyboard, nor can you confirm your selection, but the Delete/Backspace/ESC erases letters and the Shift key switches between CAP and lowercase. It's also smooth and quick!
EDIT:
With a Better Sprite Font
Garden3.png
Reinventing the (Input) Wheel
I may go through my thought process about the points. I think an open-discussion blog thing on it would be interesting, whereas you first decide on the different "types" of this system and then pinpoint merits and flaws within each.
One thing I'm getting from this first impression that is especially useful for the final design is that I need to convey that a) they are wheels (or rather that they rotate as such) and b) that each "ring" rotates independently. I think the first time you start pressing buttons this will be apparent, just like with any game system of its ilk: you see something and start mashing things, then take the feedback into immediate consideration, usually figuring it out quickly. But having this context-free first glance has been very useful so far.
Alright, back to it! :)
One thing I'm getting from this first impression that is especially useful for the final design is that I need to convey that a) they are wheels (or rather that they rotate as such) and b) that each "ring" rotates independently. I think the first time you start pressing buttons this will be apparent, just like with any game system of its ilk: you see something and start mashing things, then take the feedback into immediate consideration, usually figuring it out quickly. But having this context-free first glance has been very useful so far.
Alright, back to it! :)
Reinventing the (Input) Wheel
author=Deltree
Complete first impressions without reading the thread!
Are the wheels interlocked? I'm guessing not, because the 'A' and 'h' are next to each other, but they probably should be if you're going with something "different" that could startle a player into just going AAAA to get past the screen. Which is probably what I would do!
I reckon it would be good to know the target platform, since it seems like in 95% of instances there would be a simpler way to accomplish the input. Pretty much any touch device or console system is going to bring up its own proprietary keyboard when it detects a text field or place to input a string. If it's an RPG Maker game, it's even possible to allow keyboard input with a script.
Thanks for the first impression! Good things to process. :)
This will be for Construct 2, and be primarily PC. I have no plans for mobile, but I am keeping functions in mind for it just in case. If I had plans for mobile I would just uproot the whole system as I made the port and replace it with keypad, so just pretend those blasted things don't exist for a moment.
I like that everyone is concerned that I should just rely on keyboard, but give me a little credit here! XD The point of testing new UI/UX is to improve a system in such a way that everything becomes easier and more intuitive. I (hopefully) wouldn't be trying to program this complex and possibly-flawed idea if the best UI option (keyboard) was already the top option.
What will happen is you'll be playing the game like a platformer, using either arrows, WASD, or the gamepad for directional inputs. In my experience, swapping from a controller-like functionality to a full keyboard is not excellent, but doable if all you play on is the keyboard. But if you have the gamepad in you'll need to physically change hardware. So having keyboard input is still going to be implemented if I can pull it all together, and the GUI you see will just flip automatically (outer ring) to what you're typing as you type it. But if you're using something other than a keyboard this will accommodate that better (this is my hypothesis, so "better") than other previous systems.
Ima do it, and patent it, and get famous, guys. No longer will I go by my given name. I will be Merlandolf the White!
Reinventing the (Input) Wheel
author=Marrend
Beyond Good and Evil's input system was pretty original as console input systems go. I'll give you that. Probably the best property is that the selected character shows up in the input box until you press the action button. At which point, the cursor goes to the next character, and the process repeats until players press DONE. If memory serves me right!
So, if you go with that system, I would suggest doing something similar.
Mm, yes, totally good analysis of the system. I have to agree. I think that would be the best use.
author=Zachary_Braun
Myself, I just finished programming an arcade-like belt scroll, practically identical to the old inputs that would be used to input initials for high scores. But you can do some modern things with that, like press a button to change all of the uppercase letters to lowercase. And yet, your idea above is even clearer than that.
It's cool you mention the CAPS button, because that would be the next step in making this system. Right now the outer ring shows CAPS and the middle ring shows lower-case. The biggest flaw with a ribbon of letters is scrolling through the whole thing. The letter grid used in, say, RPG Maker, has a bunch of arbitrary shortcuts to jump between sections of the alphabet, so it is superior in that sort of navigation.
What I'd like to do is have it so both the outer ring and the middle ring are the same alphabet in the same case. When you switch the CAPS it affects both rings. So you essentially make your own bridges in the alphabet. Writing a word like "Banana" would become a very quick process.













