Keeping people from abusing a ingame utility

[AngelGrace]

Wait, you deleted the Save option and you add a CD to the city where you can save ?

I hope I didn't get it right. That would be unplayable.

No, he's using Save Points in cities and in certain areas of the Dungeon.

Despite the negative reactions in this thread, I'm for save points and would be using them in Witch Quest if it wasn't meant to be a game of Bad Ends. Played right, it can add a certain tension to the game; you see a save point in a room by itself? You know somethings about to go down.

Note, though, if played wrong, it becomes very frustrating for the player. If I'm thrown back to town after losing a boss fight and I lose all my progress because I wasn't offered a chance to save, I'm likely going to put that game away and never play it again.

Read this page. Learn it. Love it.

 

[Mike]

I prefer to focus more on the AI complexity rather than constraining what the player may do since players enjoy their games more often when they can execute their ideas into the game because we let them to do so. : P And if I put constrain to what the player may do, I'd build a quest or chain of quests which would reward them the chance to remove that constraint (for ex: warp portal, training house, movement boost, and so on).

And so, in term of save location, I'd prefer to create a chain of auto-saves (at least 5 slots) for the player to go back couple step behind in case they want to undo their movement, but I'll also give them the chance to play as 'realistic', where you can only have 1 save slot and auto-save is always on just for self-satisfaction.

If you want to let the player knows about the incoming events (map boss, team changing), you don't necessarily need save points to overshadow those events. Overshadowing can be done in multiple ways. What you need for 'clear overshadowing' is 'consistent change in pattern'.

Above all, it's all about what type of audience you want to catch with your game.

Developing your game to be 'more' dynamic will give the players more options, and players, who prefer to make their own rules, tend to enjoy customizing their gameplay, while developing your game to be 'more' static will let the players, who prefer to work within defined rules boundaries, to get familiar with the game much faster.

If you're going for the 'more' dynamic path, then you should overlook overused methods. Some players will always be using overused methods because it 'works' for them, and they would rather focus on developing other methods on different area. Players usually would challenge themselves by increasing the difficulty when they feel that they're familiar enough with the game engine, and think that they might be able to beat the next level of difficulty.

My suggestion would be that you give the players the option of what kind of save system they would like to use, and how to customize it, also give them a recommendation and short detail of what each of them would do. Give the players more benefits when they try to challenge themselves, players tend to be more motivated to play on higher difficulty when it gives them a better reward. If they don't like the reward, they can disable it.

 

[Zoltor]

No, he's using Save Points in cities and in certain areas of the Dungeon.

Despite the negative reactions in this thread, I'm for save points and would be using them in Witch Quest if it wasn't meant to be a game of Bad Ends. Played right, it can add a certain tension to the game; you see a save point in a room by itself? You know somethings about to go down.

Note, though, if played wrong, it becomes very frustrating for the player. If I'm thrown back to town after losing a boss fight and I lose all my progress because I wasn't offered a chance to save, I'm likely going to put that game away and never play it again.

Read this page. Learn it. Love it.

^This.cabfe.

To ksjp:  Perhaps, not yet though(I'll do that when there's enough for a demo)

you're confused, hanholding is the worst thing to happen to "game design" in general, the #1 mistake in RM games, there's a difference.

 

[Kes]

you're confused, hanholding is the worst thing to happen to "game design" in general, the #1 mistake in RM games, there's a difference.

Not sure that I am confused - in different threads you have pronounced a range of things as "the worst thing to happen..."  As for handholding, that is a highly subjective statement, and I think needs to be tempered by an acknowledgement that different devs are making different games for different audiences.  if everyone is going to be obliged to only make games which confirm to a highly constricted model of what constitutes "good" design, then sure, a handful of players are going to be very pleased, but a lot of others will not be.  Simple as that.  You want to make a game for a niche market - great!  I'm all for every niche being catered for.  But I don't think trying to turn a niche into a rigid template for everyone to conform to is going to be good for the genre.  And denouncing everything that is different as "poor", "lazy", "******ed", "bad", (all descriptions you have used) is perhaps to elevate one model beyond its capacity to generate creativity.  If other models have developed, it's because there is now a much wider range of people who want to play, and I personally see no compelling reason why they should not have games that they can enjoy too.

 

[Milennin]

A 1 hour and 40 minute recharge on an item would make me forget it even exists once it goes on cooldown. By the time I could use it again and if I was somehow reminded I still had this item in my inventory I probably wouldn't care to use it again. Because if I can go that long without the item, then I might as well go the entire game without it.

Maybe if we were talking about an MMORPG where I spend several 100 hours playing I could see it working. But in your average amateur's RPGMaker game I really don't care for an item with such a ridiculous cooldown on it.

 

[Zoltor]

Not sure that I am confused - in different threads you have pronounced a range of things as "the worst thing to happen..."  As for handholding, that is a highly subjective statement, and I think needs to be tempered by an acknowledgement that different devs are making different games for different audiences.  if everyone is going to be obliged to only make games which confirm to a highly constricted model of what constitutes "good" design, then sure, a handful of players are going to be very pleased, but a lot of others will not be.  Simple as that.  You want to make a game for a niche market - great!  I'm all for every niche being catered for.  But I don't think trying to turn a niche into a rigid template for everyone to conform to is going to be good for the genre.  And denouncing everything that is different as "poor", "lazy", "******ed", "bad", (all descriptions you have used) is perhaps to elevate one model beyond its capacity to generate creativity.  If other models have developed, it's because there is now a much wider range of people who want to play, and I personally see no compelling reason why they should not have games that they can enjoy too.

Wrong, in most threads I have stated many things as bad game design, that's not the same as saying It's the worst.

As for the #1 mistakes made in RM games, many people list a ton of mistakes instead of just 1, so I just followed the new direction of the thread, opposed to the title.

 

[cabfe]

Zoltor

"If you can save anywhere, there's no danger, if there's no danger, the journey has no meaning"

I want to say:

If you die and have to redo your last 30+ minutes of play, there is no fun. If there is no fun, there is no game.

 

[Zoltor]

I want to say:

If you die and have to redo your last 30+ minutes of play, there is no fun. If there is no fun, there is no game.

Then you must hate every RPG ever made(30min is not bad at all, but perhaps it will atleast make sure you're less careless next time).

"There needs to be a risk, for something to be rewarding."

Lol I'm on a role today, need to add this to my sig as well.

 

[cabfe]

Then you must hate every RPG ever made

I love Baldur's Gate, Planescape Torment, Fallout, the Elder Scrolls series...

We're not talking the same RPG, I guess.

 

[Zoltor]

I love Baldur's Gate, Planescape Torment, Fallout, the Elder Scrolls series...

We're not talking the same RPG, I guess.

Those aren't RPGs, and in the case of Elder Scrolls especially, I wouldn't even call it a Action/RPG.

Most of those are Diablo Clones, which is a take on the Action/RPG genre,  There's a big difference.

 

[cabfe]

Not RPGs?

You're digging your own grave here

 

[AngelGrace]

Then you must hate every RPG ever made(30min is not bad at all, but perhaps it will atleast make sure you're less careless next time).

"There needs to be a risk, for something to be rewarding."

Lol I'm on a role today, need to add this to my sig as well.

But you have to make sure the risk-reward balance is appropriate.

I said it before; if lose half an hour of gameplay because of one mistake, I'm more likely to put the game away and never think about it again.

You're moving out of design and into marketing now; there are people who will play your game even with the fake difficulty you're putting in, and enjoy it for it; they'll see it as a challenge and a hark back to NES days. 

The majority of people will be pissed off and abandon the game before they have a chance to really experience it.

Take for example World of Warcraft; I played from release to MOP and there was a marked change in how quests were presented. At release, you talked to the questgiver, and you had to pay attention to what they said. Lots of fun, but very frustrating when the writing was unclear. As patch after patch came, they added more detail to the questing system (Clearly outlining goals in the log, then marking the area on your map...then clearly marking the things you need to kill. They went a bit overboard.) That's part of the reason WoW is so successful (The largest reason, of course, being it's a perfectly executed Skinners Box), they see what the masses want and they adapt to it.

No, the Modern Gamer isn't going to have patience to go back to town every time they want to save, or to replay hours of content (Including cutscenes) because they lost a boss fight. If you want to make that part of the game, that's your call, your game. Just don't be surprised when it's seen as more of a frustration to get around than a feature that's celebrated.

 

[Zoltor]

But you have to make sure the risk-reward balance is appropriate.

I said it before; if lose half an hour of gameplay because of one mistake, I'm more likely to put the game away and never think about it again.

You're moving out of design and into marketing now; there are people who will play your game even with the fake difficulty you're putting in, and enjoy it for it; they'll see it as a challenge and a hark back to NES days. 

The majority of people will be pissed off and abandon the game before they have a chance to really experience it.

Take for example World of Warcraft; I played from release to MOP and there was a marked change in how quests were presented. At release, you talked to the questgiver, and you had to pay attention to what they said. Lots of fun, but very frustrating when the writing was unclear. As patch after patch came, they added more detail to the questing system (Clearly outlining goals in the log, then marking the area on your map...then clearly marking the things you need to kill. They went a bit overboard.) That's part of the reason WoW is so successful (The largest reason, of course, being it's a perfectly executed Skinners Box), they see what the masses want and they adapt to it.

No, the Modern Gamer isn't going to have patience to go back to town every time they want to save, or to replay hours of content (Including cutscenes) because they lost a boss fight. If you want to make that part of the game, that's your call, your game. Just don't be surprised when it's seen as more of a frustration to get around than a feature that's celebrated.

Um yea ofcourse, the higher the risk, the greater the rewards, It's a staple in quality game design in general, nomatter what genre its in.

Then good, my RPGs, are for serious RPG fans, not fans of interactive movies or self playing games.

That explains why people are making the same mistakes here, as the commercial game companies, by god damn handholding. They don't care if the game turns out as a utter POS, as long as It's accessible. It's the biggest problem with the industry, finding good games is slim pickings these days, to say the least(thankfully we still have ATLUS, and Chunsoft making great games one after another)

Lol WoW is not something to be using as an example of good game design/the developers improving things, there are so many major issues, that the poorly written texts, are the least of that games problems(how about every quest basically being the same thing, having the most useless minimap mechanic ever created, having to buy skills, when silver, gold or whatnot is super hard to come by, possibly the worst mapping in MMO history, ect). Yea, pick a better example, please.

 

[Ksi]

How about making it recharge after you complete a dungeon? That way it'd be dependant on actual progress through the game than actual time (which can be messed with by simply leaving a game on if one really wanted). It also gives a handy flag to the player - complete dungeon, item recharged. They know it's usable then, and don't have to calculate times and whatnot. Simple is usually best when it comes to games.

As for no-saving? If it's done right - if there are enough save points around that the players can save if they need to, when they need to, then that shouldn't be a problem. You could probably even give them an item that acts as an emergency save point if they are going to be away from a save for a longer period. Frankly, 15 minutes should be the most amount of time a player should be left with no chance to save. It's enough time for them to progress through a decent amount of game area, but not enough to drive them crazy if they lose power/have to leave/miss a save point/die/etc.

Ultimately you want people to play and finish your game. You have a story to tell, yes? Something you want the player to experience? Then don't punish them so much that they don't want to play. Why does a game exist? Why does your game exist? To provide fun for the player? That's usually the case when it comes to smaller games, but for most RPGs it's to tell a story, and overly punishing your players will cause them to quit... and then what reason is there for the game to exist? A game is meant to be played. You want a player to go from start to finish and enjoy the experience so much that they recommend it to other players, that they look up your other games (if you have any) in the hopes of playing something they think is cool.

Balance your punishments. Having to run through 30 minutes of lost game over and again - especially in a non-commercial, hobby game - is a big punishment. A very big one - it was bad enough that time I hadn't saved when the power went out one time whilst playing a hard cave area (and just making it through to a cutscene, being unable to save and thus losing all my fricking progress ;.; ) in Legend of Dragoon (a fricking top game in a lot of ways) but I can't imagine ever wanting to redo something like that in an RM game unless it was stupendously awesome. Hell, I didn't even want to do it for one of my favourite RM games one time where I forgot to save then died and lost an hour of progress! And that was one that I've played more than once!

Think on this - time is a precious commodity. No-one wants to spend more time on a story-heavy game doing the same thing over and over again. They want the meat, the story and character interactions and world lore. In that you shouldn't punish the player too harshly. Even Etrian Oddysey gives the player the chance to save in the middle of a dungeon - there's the suspend save and the new crystals (not sure if they're in the older ones, but they are in IV), and that game is more punishing than a game should be, imo. :/

Just keep the balance in mind - time + frustration + repetition. Those three things can combine to make an Alt+F4 situation - and as a game creator and story teller you do not want that. You want the audience to stay in their seats and watch your act to the end, not leave halfway through.

 

[Zoltor]

I thought of that, but I'm not to fond of that, since all you have to do it beat a dungeon, you would basically get to use it any time, it would be very abuseable, when traveling to the next area.

If I were gonna go with a recharge function, I would make it so it can only be recharged at certain special out of the way places in the game.

I haven't tried saving, but I don't think it could be bypassed that way, as I have a variable that remembers the timer.

I was thinking about adding Dragon Potions to the game(for those that don't know, metal Babbles drop them in DW 2, they're expedable, and allow you to save literally anywhere), but they would either be super, ultra rare drops or a secret hidden crafting recipe, which requires very rare/hard to get items to make). You need to be very careful in making such a item though, because if they are too easy to get, It's just as bad as being allowed to save anywere you want, at any time.

Yes, but a RPG Isnt "just" about the story. If players dont want to be punished, It's very simple, don't rush into things. Know your party's limits, and restock/heal when need be, then return when you're prepared again.

The odds are(unless It's a very small dungeons) if you can mapout, and beat a dungeon on your first expedition through the dungeon, then that's a poorly designed dungeon in general. People are forgetting on this site, that in a RPG, you're suppose to be traveling back to town or whatnot to beginwith for various reasons, you might as well save when you're there. Also it should be noted the 2nd trip to a dungeon, is always considerably easier then the last(you know where to go, you're better equiped, you're a higher lv, ect)

Seriously if the player is so brain dead, they can't learn from their mistakes(thus the reason they keep losing progress over and over again), they deserve what they get. 

Um I'm pretty sure the babies on this site would be throwing a fit if I went the Etrian Odyssey route, one save point every 4 complex dungeon floors, yea lol that wouldn't be liked much here either(infact, save points will probally be more common in my game, depending on how complex the floors are in a given dungeon). I just don't want people to beable to save wherever they want.

The Suspend data is a different thing, It's technically not saving in a sense, just another type of pause(perse) feature.

Suspending game features is fine, as It's not abusable, It's basically a glorifies pause system, if you die, you don't start at the place you suspended the game, you go back to the place you actually saved.

Perhaps I'll add a suspended game data option, atleast it will stop people from using the what if X natural disaster happens reasoning for wanting to be allowed to save everywhere.

 

[amerk]

The big problem I see is this:

I use this item and now I must wait 1 hour and 40 minutes before I can use it again. I go through a Dungeon within 20 minutes and then decide I'd like to go back to this town and complete some side quests.

Damn, I have to wait another 1 hour before I can. May as well walk back there (assuming I can access the town through traditional means of walking). But wait, I can teleport anywhere else, so why not here?

You have this item that allows you to teleport into a town, but want to limit the user's ability to use this because of the potential of making this a carry-on package of sorts. How is that any different from actual teleporting to other towns? If this is the only way to access this town (with this item) then not only do you prevent the player from getting there when he/she wants to, you also limit the time he/she can complete the side quests there.

Personally, I'd just remove the timer completely. Add in a gate keeper that charges the player a fee whenever the player decides to get into this town (call it an entertainment tax), and make the shops and inns there expensive. Maybe offer some rare items at very high cost. That way the player has some incentive to shop there, but for everyday items and healing, they'd be encouraged to go elsewhere.

 

[Zoltor]

The big problem I see is this:

I use this item and now I must wait 1 hour and 40 minutes before I can use it again. I go through a Dungeon within 20 minutes and then decide I'd like to go back to this town and complete some side quests.

Damn, I have to wait another 1 hour before I can. May as well walk back there (assuming I can access the town through traditional means of walking). But wait, I can teleport anywhere else, so why not here?

You have this item that allows you to teleport into a town, but want to limit the user's ability to use this because of the potential of making this a carry-on package of sorts. How is that any different from actual teleporting to other towns? If this is the only way to access this town (with this item) then not only do you prevent the player from getting there when he/she wants to, you also limit the time he/she can complete the side quests there.

Personally, I'd just remove the timer completely. Add in a gate keeper that charges the player a fee whenever the player decides to get into this town (call it an entertainment tax), and make the shops and inns there expensive. Maybe offer some rare items at very high cost. That way the player has some incentive to shop there, but for everyday items and healing, they'd be encouraged to go elsewhere.

Seeing how I'm making the town its self upgradeable as well(and not have a save option "when entered through the use of the item"), I was thinking I might lower it to around 45m or so(when more of the game is made, I'm gonna have to test it out)

No you can't walk to that town by foot, as It's in a different dimension then the party for most of the game, so that's why you can't just use a normal teleport spell to get there.

How it differs from a reg teleport spell, is when you're done at the town, and step back through the portal, you end up back at the exact place, you used the item.

Lmao um no, a gold charge has never stopped someone from abusing a feature, unless it costs "a lot", and I don't want to turn the act of just entering the town into a Gold sink(that's what the Casino is for)

 

[TSED]

What do you consider an RPG, Zoltor?

It sounds to me like you're taking a particularly narrow and uncharitable view of the genre that is really closer to roguelikes.  I think you think that an RPG is defined as "carefully managing resources."  You know - you need to keep your hp up without bankrupting yourself on potions, you need to keep your mana high so that when the boss fight at the end comes along you can take it down before you lose, etc. etc.

That is where a lot of difficulty for early RPGs came from (A Bard's Tale, the goldbox games, Wizardry, earlier Might & Magics, various classic JRPGs, etc. etc.).

Is this correct?  This will help you explain yourself to people, as I have noticed you frequently get into arguments over what an RPG is.  If you can articulate the "resource management" approach to game design that you want to take, you will not have nearly as many arguments with both sides rolling their eyes.

Also, saying BG and PS:T aren't RPGs is not a good way to make people take you seriously.  They were RTWP RPGs, they are now more or less the gold standard of what an RPG is, and if you consider them to be something else you need to adjust your opinion because you are flat out wrong.  Just because they're not the kind of RPG you prefer doesn't mean they're not RPGs.  That's simply not how genres work.  A quick quotation from wikipedia to help you remember this:

Genre (/ˈʒɒnrə/ or /ˈdʒɒnrə/; from French, genre French pronunciation: ​[ʒɑ̃ʁ], "kind" or "sort", from Latin: genus (stem gener-), Greek: genos, γένος) is the term for any category of literature or other forms of art or entertainment, e.g. music, whether written or spoken, audial or visual, based on some set of stylistic criteria. Genres are formed by conventions that change over time as new genres are invented and the use of old ones are discontinued.

SO, MOVING ON to the game design bit: assuming you want it to be about careful resource management.  Well, doesn't that just solve your problem right there?  Make it a non-purchasable resource of some sort and the player will use it when needed, but be very hesitant to use it willy-nilly.  What that resource is can be all kinds of things.  Maybe you need 67% of your mana and it sucks it all away (a bad example because you can get ethers).  Maybe it's a worldwide but rare drop, so you can expect to get them slower than you'd generally want them but not so slowly that you'll hoard them "just in case."  So on and so forth.

 

[Kyutaru]

Limited resources are great.  Suppose the only way to bring someone back from the dead was by making a wish on the Dragonballs.  Problem is that there only eight dragonballs in existence.  Also, you need eight Dragonballs just to make one wish.

Can you say scarce?  Note to Party: Never die.

 

[Zoltor]

What do you consider an RPG, Zoltor?

It sounds to me like you're taking a particularly narrow and uncharitable view of the genre that is really closer to roguelikes.  I think you think that an RPG is defined as "carefully managing resources."  You know - you need to keep your hp up without bankrupting yourself on potions, you need to keep your mana high so that when the boss fight at the end comes along you can take it down before you lose, etc. etc.

That is where a lot of difficulty for early RPGs came from (A Bard's Tale, the goldbox games, Wizardry, earlier Might & Magics, various classic JRPGs, etc. etc.).

Is this correct?  This will help you explain yourself to people, as I have noticed you frequently get into arguments over what an RPG is.  If you can articulate the "resource management" approach to game design that you want to take, you will not have nearly as many arguments with both sides rolling their eyes.

Also, saying BG and PS:T aren't RPGs is not a good way to make people take you seriously.  They were RTWP RPGs, they are now more or less the gold standard of what an RPG is, and if you consider them to be something else you need to adjust your opinion because you are flat out wrong.  Just because they're not the kind of RPG you prefer doesn't mean they're not RPGs.  That's simply not how genres work.  A quick quotation from wikipedia to help you remember this:

SO, MOVING ON to the game design bit: assuming you want it to be about careful resource management.  Well, doesn't that just solve your problem right there?  Make it a non-purchasable resource of some sort and the player will use it when needed, but be very hesitant to use it willy-nilly.  What that resource is can be all kinds of things.  Maybe you need 67% of your mana and it sucks it all away (a bad example because you can get ethers).  Maybe it's a worldwide but rare drop, so you can expect to get them slower than you'd generally want them but not so slowly that you'll hoard them "just in case."  So on and so forth.

WTF is it with the RPG Maker community.

It's not a Rogue-like, and "This Isn't the only city in the game, It's a special city"[/b) Why can't people grasp the concept of a special map/city that "Isn't always" availabe?

 

Between that and omg I can't save everywhere I want, so It's the end of the world(and don't give me that I have a life crap either, most people haves lives, but only people in the RPG maker community whines over not being able to save everywhere)., I doubt many people in the RPG community are willing to play hardly any RPGs at all.

 

Management of resources is a important aspect of any type of RPG(It's part of journeying, if you don't need to be careful, news flash, the balance of your game sucks(It's way too easy).

 

If such a argument started on another forum(a non-RPG Maker Community heavy forum), yea sure, but on this forum(a forum where people flip out if you don't allow them to save everywhere), I doubt it.

 

People here want to be hand fed everything, and if they don't have unlimited access to "every" feature in the game, they form a angry mob.

 

It makes you wonder if the people here care more about being handfed, then quality game design.

 

If those are the "gold" standard of game design, then It's a sad day for RPGs in general.

 

There's a reason why the item in question Isn't expendable, because then access to it would be way too limited, for something that is suppose to act as a Side Quest hub(not every side quest is picked up/done there, but a lot are), that's why sticking a timer on it works so well. This way It's not based on luck, people can access it throughout the game on a reg basis(well if they do the side quest to get the stone in the first place, however It's not gonna be a hard side quest to find/do).

 

Also I want people to want to farm enemies for legitimate treasure hunting purposes, but making such a item like that drop, would be more along the lines of "forcing" to player to farm for a specific super rare constantly, which would not be a fun activity for the player(it would be = to FF 8 forcing players to draw magic from enemies, and we all know how much that system is hated. It's a awesome game, but that one system keeps it from being a Great).

 

Yea, making it expendable would be a bad idea. Like I said earlier, if I wasn't gonna keep the timer, I would go the need to recharge it route(at special out of the way recharge locations), but the timer seems to be the better of the two options(this way the player doesn't have to constantly recharge the thing, it basically does that all by its self).