Slippery slopes and intuitive games - Page 12

Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Discuss game development here, from a distinct game project to an accessible third-party mutator, down to the interaction and design of individual units if you like.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Sleksa
Posts: 1604
Joined: 04 Feb 2006, 20:58

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Sleksa »

HUGE WALL OF TEXT
I'm pretty sure even the most hard core player will agree that some extremely effective things just aren't right and should not be done.
Yes this was quite obvious, but the carrier/transport abuse is a good example. Its extremely effective(it makes the human player unable to attack nelf player's army, unless he went AM+elemental) , its not right(ie you have practically invulnerable army), but in the end people learnt to cope with this "imba" , and like you said:
so that even if the game is poorly balanced, it can find an own balance that isn't too dull.
IE the thing wasnt intended, and after the initial IMBA cries people got to know it as a interesting game strat.

For instance, playing with a hacked exe that makes all my units invicible, or see-through-walls hacks in FPS. Now that more and more game use helping external application (like better GUI thingies for MMO), the line is getting a bit blurry though. For instance I was once suprised to see that bright skin mods are considered ok by some pro tournamenter.
I think that any modifications to the game are bannable (ie wall/speedhacks) BUT
BTW, what's would be your view on a hack exe that removed fog of war for Spring sleska? And what do you think about LUA widgets?
I dislike LUA, but when a game lets everyone use LUA, i try to exploit it to the fullest.

For example when i played world of warcraft i had a phletora of LUA addons that autocasted certain spells that can only be used after parries/dodges, making the micro in combats a lot easier, giving me time to look at the combat situation . Or addons that showed me where to get certain quest items to level up faster compared to people who had to seek for the quest items through hazy quest descriptions.

Blizz said that LUA is ok, so im going to use it. Had they said it is not ok, i wouldnt have.
Also, drugs in sports, ok or not?
Which drugs? Theoretically you could be as strict as you can and ban energy drinks and caffeine since they might give the other player a edge over the other player.
In an ideal world, dev would only release perfectly playtested games with no exploits left. But reality isn't ideal. I do not believe having a rigid dev vision of how the game should be played, and have it enforced by "fixing" any "sploits" is the right way.
Yes.
I quite like the way TA was balanced upon: Give loads of units, a rich environnement with countless means of interaction and differentiation, so that even if the game is poorly balanced, it can find an own balance that isn't too dull. Well, TA still too often starts with the same flash rush then samson swarm, but at least in can ends in many ways. Despite highly skilled players trying their best for 11 years, there isn't one single way of playing TA.
Agree. TA really lives up to its name as a "really cool wargame"

BUT TO GET BACK TO TOPIC.

1) EXPLOITS

gamedev(s) shouldnt automatically seek to fix the exploits he/they, But rather look wheter the exploit makes the gameplay deeper (linebombing) , or whether the exploit makes the game really imbalanced ( last aa vsn jeffies)

2) SUPERWEAPONS

The bertha is one of the most beautiful concepts of superweapons that i know. It doesnt automatically give you a win, but unless the enemy doesnt respond to it he's slowly going to get shelled down.

It also creates a psychological effect, "that dude can already afford a bertha, im done for" or "omg he has t2 AND A BERTHA already. This is rather unique since not many computergames have this kind of psychological weapons.

It also shows that superweapons dont always need to be nukes.

3) COMMANDERS
As for comm napping, I'd just remove the commander. Starting the game with such a powerful mobile unit is prone to open alot of abuse, and indeed it does, and then creat lots of drama about whether or not comm rushing is fair or not, and where does the blurry line end. For comm napping, making commander untransportable is so simple (a single FBI tag!) it could be fixed that way, but there's still the problem of being given the unit with the most powerful weapon (DGUN) and the most powerful death explosion right at the start. There's a reason other RTS start with harmless construction unit and not the most powerful unit.
On this i disagree, if the commander feature had been such a bad thing, there would've been more mods on OTA to remove this. But instead during the course of 11 years not that many people have whined about it (compared to the amount of people whining about flash :P)

4) PREBUILT BASES

I dont like this concept since the initial game-phase would just become a more dull experience. To have prebuilt defences would make raiding not as favoured strategy (for example to have 2 cannons, 2 pylons and a gateway in starcraft for protoss around the minerals/nexus)

Whereas in games like wc3 the build-up phase is very important (making "walls" out of farms, building the base so tight the enemy cannot come to kill your goldpeons, yet having room to expand your base)

All of this would become nullified by the prebuilt bases at the expense of prolonging the already decided game.

Like you said, A game might be already decided before it begins, so why create a illusion for the newbie that he has chances?

I'd rather have him squished fast so that he can do another game faster, propably against a player of an equal skill, which brings me to the next part:

5) NEWBIES VS PROS:

To avoid such pro vs newbie games from happening, there are a few choices open.

One would be to scale up single player missions so that the first few missions are easy, the middle would be "hard" and the last missions would be almost multiplayerlike. How to do this i dont know, since im not a gamdev, but @least it sounds like a nice concept to me. Currently, Most rts games have a VERY clear difference between single and multiplayers.

The other is a more simple solution, A matchmaking system with win/lose/rank stats like battle.net
User avatar
Pxtl
Posts: 6112
Joined: 23 Oct 2004, 01:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Pxtl »

Comparing prebuilt TA to prebuilt StarCraft isn't fair. StarCraft's resources are inside the base, so prebuilt defenses means porc. TA's resources are outside of the base, so prebuilt just means you avoid early elimination (you still have to go out and cap mexes) - which is both an advantage and a disadvantage... it could result in the game becoming "moribund" (good word, whoever suggested it) but also means that both players are focussed on expansion (for both) instead of their home bases. And since early expansion would be proportionally small in resource-power compared to the home base, an early loss in the expansion phase wouldn't be a game-ender. The player would have to lose repeatedly and get boxed into his prebuild before he'd be properly fscked.

Of course, yeah, that could create the "moribund" thing.
User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14650
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Forboding Angel »

In an reply to Sleksa I would like to point out some things...

Exploits are generally thigns the noobs don't know about is is rather difficult to find out..

Other games have this, but once again I'm going to refer to Evolution as an example:

Everyone new cries to high heaven about the EMP towers. The thing is, Evolution uses luadefs, and my naming convention is VERY easy to follow and does not require a brain to figure out, so those two things combined make it really easy to look up unit stats for the random dumbass (no to mention there is a help menu in the game that will retrieve all that for you...).

I had a little conversation with a certain someone last night about them. BAW BAW BAW, what drives me crazy is there are 50 freaking way to get rid of them utilizing almost no effort.

Artillery <<< Cheap as hell
Bombers <<< also very cheap
Emp Silo <<< Prolly the cheapest solution of them all
Attack more than one side of it
Attack with heavy units
etc, etc

The thing that people do not understand...

The EMP tower has 6 different weapons. They are not slaved to one another. Individually they do crap damage, when focused they can keep a decent sized force immobile. The reload time of the emp weapons is 5, the paralyze time is 3. That means that if it does not hit the same spot continually with enough damage to maintain the paralysis, then the tanks become unparalyzed enough to shoot the tower.

The emp tower has all of 1000 hp. 2.3 seconds of fire from just one light tank will destroy it. .25 seconds of fire from a terra heavytank is plenty to take it down.

However, this is what happens. Random dumbass doesn't bother to line up his forces and sends all in one mob, which means that the majority end up frozen. Regardless of how many easy and overtly effective methods there are to destroy it, they many times will spam lighttanks (with a grand total health of 400) and rinse repeat. At some point during this method the tower with get brute forced just by numerical superiority, and then proceed to whine about how imba they are. No they aren't imba, it just takes half a brain to fight them (actually if the unit is selected and unit help button is hit, it tells you all this info, but no matter, that's far too simple). Scouting is also rewarded in this way, cause if you know where it is, then you can avoid it or (god forbid) plan ahead for it. The scout plane costs i think about 80 metal and builds in about 4 seconds, and is built using the regular factory.

Is the player that knows using an exploit? No, because that's the way I designed it and the fact that I designed it that way for a reason, so you would need to use your noodle at least to some extent to play the game, and people who do a little looking and research, and use the help texts that I have provided for them do gain an advantage. It's not exploitation tho because the knowledge is there for everyone to grasp. If they never looked, then that is their fault.

What I am saying here is that gameplay "Features" and exploits aren't always so far apart. The thing that makes an exploitation bad is the fact that the knowledge generally isn't there for people unless they attempt to use exploits as well.

Another example of this is people playing terra. Somehow or another they fail to notice that some of the most powerful terra tanks are the most vulnerable when running away, which is why they are so maneuverable (nimble might be a better word). Most notably, the heavytank and the omega.

Most people do not even have an inkling of how complex Evolution is, and that is the way I prefer to keep it. New users can easily drown in a sea of information, so it is not force-fed to them, however, that same information is easily available, generally by simply clicking a button.

Which brings me to my second point which is: A game can be very complex, have many in/outs while not relying on developer oversights and general retardation (on the part of the players AND the Dev(s) to make the game interesting.


In my opinion OTA relied on both. There were many flaws in TA that could have been relatively easily fixed, and introduced in other ways as new features. For whatever reason the devs of OTA decided to leave them in, which makes it a very noob unfriendly game.

Many people like noob unfriendly games, cause it makes the feel good/important that they have waded through so much crap to have the knowledge that they do, so now they deserve the advantages that they have, which is jsut sad and is also a self perpetuating cycle.
User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14650
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Forboding Angel »

Sleksa wrote: 5) NEWBIES VS PROS:

To avoid such pro vs newbie games from happening, there are a few choices open.

One would be to scale up single player missions so that the first few missions are easy, the middle would be "hard" and the last missions would be almost multiplayerlike. How to do this i dont know, since im not a gamdev, but @least it sounds like a nice concept to me. Currently, Most rts games have a VERY clear difference between single and multiplayers.

The other is a more simple solution, A matchmaking system with win/lose/rank stats like battle.net
I agree with this wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, we don't really have the ability to make missions though. We do, but the interface is... Heh.

Nor do we have control over the lobby, so on this front, we get stuck between a rock and a hard place.
User avatar
emmanuel
Posts: 952
Joined: 28 May 2005, 22:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by emmanuel »

i answer before reading the already writed or solved:
im firstly interested by the player side that i know so little in spring but i played many others game and always same logic :
more man win more man ll win ,more man loose more man ll lose ;
i suddently remind that since the start of the discovert of spring i solved the problem better than in totala that is so special for his corpses blocking the path and incresing the move dificulty at each assault !
is anyone have already agreed when im cryed for the map maker set hardness wind tidanl and gravity to 99 ?
no ? none asked why ?
never anyone have thinked to found a sens in the ask of a foul ?
never...continue
:roll:
User avatar
Evil4Zerggin
Posts: 557
Joined: 16 May 2007, 06:34

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Evil4Zerggin »

Forboding Angel wrote:I agree with this wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, we don't really have the ability to make missions though. We do, but the interface is... Heh.
Is the current mission system still essentially handwritten gadget + mod option?
Lancefighter
Posts: 31
Joined: 23 Jan 2009, 22:25

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Lancefighter »

What is that smell...
Oh wait.
Its the YEAR OLD THREAD you just necroed.
>.>

Are you trying to troll, or just doing it by nature?
User avatar
emmanuel
Posts: 952
Joined: 28 May 2005, 22:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by emmanuel »

Lancefighter wrote:What is that smell...
Oh wait.
Its the YEAR OLD THREAD you just necroed.
Lancefighter Joined: 23 Jan 2009
Lancefighter wrote:Are you trying to troll, or just doing it by nature?
Post subject: Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive
trolling by nature ?

Post subject: Re: Convince me to play your mod.
play evo rts.
Its not *a.
There, have i convinced you?
User avatar
DavetheBrave
Posts: 281
Joined: 22 Jun 2005, 02:52

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by DavetheBrave »

you made evo rts huh emmanuel?
User avatar
emmanuel
Posts: 952
Joined: 28 May 2005, 22:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by emmanuel »

DavetheBrave wrote:you made evo rts huh emmanuel?
Emmanuel Very Original mods
EVO feature all that im not able to make :
good balance and good interface and good game rules and excremental design
User avatar
Forboding Angel
Evolution RTS Developer
Posts: 14650
Joined: 17 Nov 2005, 02:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by Forboding Angel »

Excremental? :oops:

Pardon me while I go cry in the closet and cut myself now :lol:
User avatar
emmanuel
Posts: 952
Joined: 28 May 2005, 22:43

Re: Slippery slopes and intuitive games

Post by emmanuel »

alls: cum inside :http://spring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtop ... =9&t=18033
Forboding Angel wrote:Excremental? :oops:
Pardon me while I go cry in the closet and cut myself now :lol:
dont do nasty : try my mod for understand the meaning of life ,
and use the model if yu can sustain this indecent wonderfullness:
dont joke with me i understand better than anyone the mapcrushing as the holly corpses and dragon teeth usage
i raise again : corpses is a atari ip !
Post Reply

Return to “Game Development”