Not another boring Wand of +7 Instant Death OR --> How can we make more powerful items, which in their use will add *interest*, *tension*, *drama*, possibly occasional humourous reactions and excitement to a game. As opposed to making the game increasingly boring. This quote raises an interesting issue !!! Wavinator, Quote :" you have the choice between a top quality food maker or a cheap one. Maybe some crew might complain ("Protein paste again!?")" This raises the issue of player upgrades, surely the more powerful items that you get in games should make them more interesting ie. Conflicts, humour etc. Think about it, if the crew complaining designed so that it isn't an annoyance but a way of expressing the Crew's personalities, if you upgrade the food dispenser to one which doesn't leak, smell or make badly replicated beetle burgers, instead having a top-notch one the game will be less interesting as unless you have designed in more reactions to this new item, there will be LESS PERSONALITY + HUMOUR ! So each item in a game where there are Non Player Character who may react to the item, should have interesting things which happen around them. This is an explanation of why standard "more damage" weapons are less interesting, and not an explanation of how to implement reactions to items; if anything it is an example of how the gameplay for a player controlled item can be used to add drama, tension and new events to a game. If in an Elite-Like Game you have a bad laser which makes it hard to kill enemy ships (but thus more exciting in combat), if you then upgrade to a military laser which kills in one shot, then the game has become LESS INTERESTING. If instead you make it so that it rips a wing engine of the enemy and leaves them smoking and trying to struggle with their controls to attack you, it will compensate a bit for the fact that you have made combat easier and less dramatic. The prevalent way in which game designers nowadays try to make new items interesting is with Economic Conflict, where each item is too expensive to maintain. But this isn't really that fun a way of doing this. So you should aim to have a game where each new item gained adds interest, drama, fun and gameplay this way the players will want to keep playing to get something which adds even more fun to their gameplay! Edited by - Ketchaval on 9/30/00 3:10:19 PM

I like the idea of items having more character. Worms did this very well. But most items are just that "items". I don''t think that for most games going overboard with this idea would be a good idea. You know how things can have toooo much personality that it gets on your nerves quite easily. But i can appriecate the train of thought you''re on Ketchaval, it sounds promising.

I love Game Design and it loves me back.

Our Goal is "Fun"!

Oh No more exploding sheep ! God I hated Worms 1 (twee voices bad graphics, unpleasant gameplay), but the Worms Armageddon Demo was fun (Cartoonier graphics, slightly-deeper voices, improved gameplay?).

I don't mean giving weapons / items cheesy personalities or effects !

I mean that the game should

1. Have the improvement in the items keep the gameplay balanced,
ie. No instant kill weapons, unless they have high drawbacks, disadvantages etc. -But that these drawbacks DON'T effect all the other weapons, ie. you can use the mega-ton laser (and buy it), but buying it a. Doesn't stop you having other weapons because you are so poor. b. Doesn't stop you using all other weapons

Thus it has limitations like can only be used when charged with a comet's ice trails, or can only be used three times a day( long recharge time).

2. Items have interesting effects, ie. the crew complain about it every other month, or it smells, or the top-quality fridge has a tendancy to have rats in. These aren't overused to the extent where they become repetitive, or to the extent that they adversely affect gameplay (ie. you don't need to get a rat catcher every month to avoid space-plague / food-poisoning).

3. Maybe these effects / special incidents could slowly change over a long period of gametime, ie. instead of rats, you would find that your milk went sour or what have you. (Okay these examples about the fridge aren't really GAMEPLAY related, but I hope you can think of some ideas which are + add character.)

4. Maybe the higher power weapons could have a long(er) learning curve ? So that whilst you can pick up and play from with the cheap'nasty Laser, to use the nuclear chaingun you would need to learn more about how to control it ? (Although this would get rid of the Feeling of Supremacy over the enemies that the quick fix weapons of mass destruction give? Also the medium range weapons would have to have a learning curve too or else the player would be baffled and feel cheated by having point'n'click weapons at first, and then getting "Flight Simulation learning curve weapons".

This way the gameworld will not become more STERILE as you get better / Powermax .

Edited by - Ketchaval on September 30, 2000 2:20:06 PM

Off-topic: Here''s just one odd & funny thing that happened to me in worms 1:
I threw a perfect grande and killed the last enemy worm. I won. Then the replay comes. But in the replay my granade hits a nearby wall and bounces back and I DIED. And I lost the game becase of that replay!!


And yes Worms had quite personal weapons, but if you wanted to implement anything like that in a cRPG or FPS, you''d have to have a very strange world in that game. Maybe in a game like MDK those odd items work. And it has those. But looking at the player amount in Counter-Strike, many people want realism and not some smelly odd-bouncing 3 hour reload -weapons.

Anonymous Poster, I think that you missed the implications of the original post, and of it''s follow up. From the title +7 Wand of Instant death, I would have hoped that people got the impression that this was aimed at RPGs, ((( also RTS, or Maxis style games (predominantly single-player experiences)))). The idea is that you have a game which takes a long time to play, and that you are slowly getting better items in the course of play. What I am suggesting is that these items should make the game more interesting to play, because of their inherent nature.

As opposed to wow I killed a goblin in one shot, 2 hours later what is the point of playing this boring game, I can kick everything''s a** and the wand doesn''t do anything anyway.

I am not talking about "wacky" side-effects to things, or even computer game comedy, just about the concept that these items should have something about them that adds something new to the game...

Also I am talking about single player games as opposed to Multiplayer combat based quick games (ie. not counterstrike or worms).

-----------------------------------------------------------------

There is a guy in the South village called Tony, he's a Ninja.

My answer to this? Glad you asked (or not)...

If making all-powerful weapons in RPGs is boring, then what you need to do is change the combat some so that the all-powerful weapons aren''t the end-all-be-all of fighting. My idea is to(and this is kinda abstract) tone down the weapons some, still make then get more powerful, but not +7 wands of death, and implement other things in the game. Like placement of characters in the battle field and surprise and stuff like that. I can see it now...

----------------------------------------------------------
Long Time Player: Ha, I finally got my +24 sword

Newbie sneaks up behind Long Time Player with a -2 dagger.

Newbie catches Long Time Player by surprise and kills him.

Newbie: Ohhhh look. A +24 sword!

Newbie walks off with the sword.
------------------------------------------------------------

Basically, to make the game interesting, make the game more than "DBZ fighting". And by that I mean,

"Hi there, I rule all! I have a power of 24,000"

"Ha, you weakling, I have a power of 37,000"

"You both suck! I have a power of 1,000,000!"

And that about describes the show. I still like it though

-Blackstream
----------------------------------------------------------------

"I hearby post and copyright this message so that no more people can post messages in message boards.... anywhere"

-[fake]Quote from the Hasbro CEO

-Blackstream

"See you later, I'm going to go grab a few Bytes. I'm so thirsty, I could drink a whole data stream."

Of course this doesn't just extend to Weapons, it includes any available commodity in a game, whether it is arable land or a new dishwasher, or a better trained athlete, or a more reliable troop transport Helicoptor, a trophy for killing goblins, or a bear-skin hat... etc.

OFF TOPIC.

Nice example, it reminds me of the (awesome Robert Heinlein's) book "Tunnel in the sky" (Hole??).

SPOILER SPOILER
In this the main character is advised to only take a knife with him when he goes on his survival test, because a rifle will only make him complacent. Sure enough one of the first things he finds when he goes through is one of the other people taking the test, unfortunately they are dead and their rifle is missing.

Edited by - Ketchaval on September 30, 2000 6:42:13 PM

Excellent points, Ketchaval. It''s important to keep the challenge on in a game where the core gameplay is growth. If growth just means ease of challenge, then you''ve got a game that''s going to become too easy soon.

I agree that growth should lead to more interesting interactions. Maybe powerful weapons make your crew / RPG party a bit more brave, or more cocky. (Heck, I''d be a bit more likely to go down the long, dark corridor where the growling noises are coming from if I had a BFG!!! )

Let''s look at what growth and change does: What happens if you get more money, or a better physique, or influential friends? How do people react to you?

How would folks react to you if you walked down mainstreet with an M-60 machine gun? How would your foes react? (Remember the Terminator, when he steps out of his ratty hotel room: People move to the side, and one guy even exclaims: "Gawwwwwwwwwd d@mn!!!!!!!")

In this case, the +7 wand of instant death summons the mage guild and entire royal guard!!!! So you have to hide it! Or leave lure your enemy out so you can use it in the empty deserts! But what if he won''t go?

If, btw, you want to take on group interactions like I''m proposing in the Sims / TNG thread, then consider all the interesting interactions you can get from growth within your own party! What''s the effect of lavishing rewards and goodies on only one member? Will he be envied? Or admired? Will he become arrogant, or more protective of the weaker guys?

This is why I''m a fan, btw, of modeling "systems." What I describe above is a social system that''s reacting to danger. But it requires more than just a 1-sided environ of monsters.

--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

What is the answer to the question:

"Which is more powerful, a +7 Wand of Instant Death or a +8 wand of Instant Death ? "

I''m aiming towards giving rough ideas which could lead to people working out ways to make games far more Dramatic, Interesting, Intruiging and Fun. Via the Gameplay, with a mixture of things emerging from a system and seamlessly interwoven predesigned "cool stuff".

-----------------------------------------------------------------
I''m looking for a paradigm so I can pass it on.

Just a quick thought : what if certain weapons were no better than others, but because of their appearance instilled fear, or at least doubt, in the enemies which it is being used to deal with ?

So you may have a brittle bronze pike, but it has a huge blade and a pitch black handle, infused with a sickly green glow ... it make be weak and quite sucky, but it looks bad-ass, and so ppl are weary of it, and avoid a fight just because it might be a wicked weapon ...

And as to DBZ, I quite like the idea of Saiyan physiology ... if an enemy doesn''t finish you off (or vice-versa) you come back stronger ... and emotions (eg anger) enhance your abilities ...