![]() |
|
Gameplay Flaws |
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
![]() |
Quote: Wait a minute, horses in your inventory? Aren't the horses very big and heavy to store there? Yes. That's why they are not in the wooden chest. Quote: You have two inventories iirc; on with fighting gear (if you have too much, you get some penalty in fights). So you have to weight how many arrows you want, and if you want a shield or not (because of the weight). Then there is the "party inventory", which is where you can keep trade goods etc, you can also keep horses here (apparently, never tried that) and that offsets the decrease in speed from carrying a lot (and i guess it helps to speed up those slow manhunters etc?).
Not quite. Jonathan: You should definitely try a horse, it's a major advantage in battle, and it increases your map speed a lot. Other factors for map speed are indeed the troops you have (footmen slow the party down, and higher-level troops move faster), and the overall party morale, which is influenced by the number of battles you have won and lost recently, and what kind of food you give them (they love meat). --- |
arrowhen
Member #8,829
July 2007
|
You can also slaughter your horses for food. |
X-G
Member #856
December 2000
![]() |
Someone has slaughtered your horses. -- |
Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
![]() |
Oh yes, i did have a horse. It's "mount and blade" after all
|
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
![]() |
Quote: You can also slaughter your horses for food. Or for fun... --- |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
![]() |
Another flaw I hate, your entire party shares an inventory. Even if two characters happen to be five hundred miles apart, they can both access the same items. It's like there's a worm hole between their backpacks. Which would be a great way to get out of a bad situation. Just hop into your backpack, slip through this weird worm hole thingy, jump out of your friends backpack, then reach though and pull your own backpack after you.
|
Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
![]() |
I cant actually recall any game where it's possible to either be that far apart or share an inventory that is not limited by distance
|
23yrold3yrold
Member #1,134
March 2001
![]() |
Well there's World of Warcraft. Access your soulbound epics instantly from any banker in the world! EDIT: Also, the Final Fantasy games. Like in IX, when your party is broken up around the world, but Princess Garnet can access the potions Zidane just bought on another continent. -- |
X-G
Member #856
December 2000
![]() |
Blarg, I was about to say just that. Indeed, FFIX does this, and I think so does FFVII at one point. I'm sure the others have too now and then. -- |
Onewing
Member #6,152
August 2005
![]() |
Yes, but is it really a gameplay flaw to have an inventory that everyone can access? Sure, it doesn't make sense. Oh, and my opinion on FFXII seems to have changed after playing it for 40 hours. Now that I have some Espers and Quickenings, big boss battles are kind of the opposite. I spam so much with this super powerful stuff it almost doesn't matter, like the GF's in FFVIII (my least favorite of the FF's). However, overall, I'm enjoying the game. ------------ |
X-G
Member #856
December 2000
![]() |
Actually I personally think that it's the lesser of two evils. Yes, striving towards some measure of realism is a good thing, but when doing it doesn't add anything to the game--when it doesn't make it any more fun--you shouldn't do it. That's why things like realistic fall damage in FPSs and strict inventory management in all but the strictest RPGs is usually a bad idea. It adds an alement of tediousness and frustration to the game that is not fun, not a part of the challenge, and simply doesn't help make the game any better. It's not a flaw so much as a conscious decision that easier inventory management will make the game more fun than having to deal with it in a more "realistic" fashion. -- |
Slartibartfast
Member #8,789
June 2007
![]() |
FFVI (or 3 depending on preference/location ---- |
Indeterminatus
Member #737
November 2000
![]() |
Oh, well, now I'll chip in my two cents. Some of you were talking about failing in the game, and that it'd be ok if it was done in interesting ways. I'm a follower of the school "give the player a fair chance", which means the designer should strive to hint traps and dangerous situations in general, and not let the player tap into it, because "he'll learn by dieing". The moment the player thinks "Oh shit! I should've known!" you won, but as soon as the player scratches his head wondering how and what, you failed as a designer. That said, for cautious players it should be possible to complete the game without dieing. _______________________________ |
Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
![]() |
A good solution imo is an "equiped inventory" (sort of like in Mount&blade), where you have your gear + any items you may want to use during a battle is. This inventory is limited and imposes penalties if you have to much (ie, a guy in full plate is slower than someone in leather armor), and the "real inventory" should be very big or unlimited (and possibly shared, centered around the party leader). Gah, i remember playing morrowind/oblivion/daggerfall and having to run to the store back and forth from a dungeon in order to sell all the loot. That is not fun. It's not even challenging. Also, if you decided to carry things with you, your stamina dropped really fast (esp. in morrowind), which meant you could not really carry any loot on you from an earlier dungeon when going to the next.
|
Trezker
Member #1,739
December 2001
![]() |
"Oh shit! I should've known!" That's something I rarely experience in DotA and Enfo in WC3. Suddenly me hero just drops dead from massive damage and I had no chance to see it coming. That's why those maps are not in my favourite list. The same thing happens in most tower defence maps, here comes the flying creeps kthxbye. |
Lupuss.Umbrae
Member #8,387
March 2007
![]() |
Possumdude0 said:
(...)Just hop into your backpack, slip through this weird worm hole thingy, jump out of your friends backpack, then reach though and pull your own backpack after you.
I would do it These tank-schoots-five-minutes-at-soldier-to-kill-him-situations in C&C were always driving me mad... -------------------------------------------------- |
Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
![]() |
I think that was suppose to simulate "small target is hard to hit with slow-firing gun", otherwise tanks would just kick ass vs. everything instantly
|
Mokkan
Member #4,355
February 2004
![]() |
Quote: These tank-schoots-five-minutes-at-soldier-to-kill-him-situations in C&C were always driving me mad...
Yeah, that always bugged me, too. Fortunately, Company of Heroes was released
|
Lupuss.Umbrae
Member #8,387
March 2007
![]() |
Well, a soldier is hard to kill, if you are using armor piercing rounds, but who would have such a mad idea to equipt tanks with AP rounds only? I'm glad, they changed it in Tiberian Wars -------------------------------------------------- |
Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
![]() |
Well, C&C is hardly a deep simulation. One could argue that they are simulating the typical case for a tank (tank vs. tank warfare, which is what all (or at least a large majority of them) are built for). If i recall correctly, C&C did not support several weapons on a single unit (so no MG), so i think they did the right thing. Weren't there smaller tanks/jeeps/something that were better vs. infantry? Anyway, it's a really old game and you don't see this that often nowadays anyway
|
Archon
Member #4,195
January 2004
![]() |
Quote: If i recall correctly, C&C did not support several weapons on a single unit (so no MG), so i think they did the right thing. The Mammoth Tank had both the twin cannons and the missiles which could take out infantry. |
bamccaig
Member #7,536
July 2006
![]() |
Possumdude0 said: Another flaw I hate, your entire party shares an inventory. Even if two characters happen to be five hundred miles apart, they can both access the same items. It's like there's a worm hole between their backpacks. Very true. This bothers me as well. On that same note, when gameplay makes sense it's easier for the player to prepare for the future. If it doesn't make sense, you don't know how to best prepare and could either come up or short or waste resources. Indeterminatus said: Oh, well, now I'll chip in my two cents. Some of you were talking about failing in the game, and that it'd be ok if it was done in interesting ways. I'm a follower of the school "give the player a fair chance", which means the designer should strive to hint traps and dangerous situations in general, and not let the player tap into it, because "he'll learn by dieing". The moment the player thinks "Oh shit! I should've known!" you won, but as soon as the player scratches his head wondering how and what, you failed as a designer. That said, for cautious players it should be possible to complete the game without dieing. I absolutely agree 100%. I'm generally a cautious player so when something springs out of nowhere and destroys me without warning it's annoying. Learning by dying should never be intended. -- acc.js | al4anim - Allegro 4 Animation library | Allegro 5 VS/NuGet Guide | Allegro.cc Mockup | Allegro.cc <code> Tag | Allegro 4 Timer Example (w/ Semaphores) | Allegro 5 "Winpkg" (MSVC readme) | Bambot | Blog | C++ STL Container Flowchart | Castopulence Software | Check Return Values | Derail? | Is This A Discussion? Flow Chart | Filesystem Hierarchy Standard | Clean Code Talks - Global State and Singletons | How To Use Header Files | GNU/Linux (Debian, Fedora, Gentoo) | rot (rot13, rot47, rotN) | Streaming |
Neil Black
Member #7,867
October 2006
![]() |
Quote: Learning by dying should never be intended. I agree too. Especially in an FPS, where, if you're careful enough and watchful enough, you can actually find a trap (say an ambush) and turn it around (attack the ambushers from behind with a sniper rifle). Those are the best moments in any game.
|
Tobias Dammers
Member #2,604
August 2002
![]() |
Here's another one that bothers me a lot: Sometimes, things that are only there to automate mind-numbing or tasks are hilariously expensive. An example is "X Beyond The Frontier", where things like the docking autopilot, or the time-thingy that allowed for faster travelling, are annoyingly expensive, yet they have no advantage at all inside the gameplay logic - they just make the interface less tedious. --- |
Jonatan Hedborg
Member #4,886
July 2004
![]() |
Tobias: yes, agree 100%. Those are the two things i hate the most in games, by far.
|
|
|