inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 4, 2018 16:15:38 GMT -6
Hi guys! I've got some ideas relating to the equipment in the game, and the character's attributes. I'm going to try to walk you all through my thought process, and how each suggestion begets the next. Try to keep up! Stop me if you have questions. Okay, so when I picked up a new item in Bloodstained, I compared it to the item I was using. I'd see, for example, that the new item increased my MND by 2, but lowered my INT by 2 and LCK by 1. Which means that I'd have a bit more MP at the cost of my shard damage and a little bit of Magic Find. I made the choice to equip the item or not, and got back to the action. Fantastic! I love it. I really do. There's nothing wrong with it! But what if we added another wrinkle? What if we added a little puzzle element to it to make the appraisal of a new item a tiny bit more interesting? Older games used to have a stat on items that has by-and-large been completely abandoned in most games: hit rating. And for good cause! Hit chance sucks. But there was something that I found to be pretty fun about hit rating in those old games: for one game in particular, you had to "cap" your hit rating by getting enough of it on your gear. Once you did, you never missed a shot. So at a certain level, you were trying your best to get your hit rating capped, but if you went over the cap, then it was a wasted stat. You see, hit rating was part of an item's budget; you'd get it in place of something like Critical Strike. So if all your gear had hit rating on it and nothing else, you'd be way above the cap for hit rating and no longer benefit from it, and you'd be missing out on rounding out some other stat that would then be more helpful. So for example, when I picked up a new helmet that was better than the one I had on, I would have to check if my old helm had hit rating on it, and if equipping my new, better helmet would bring me below the hit cap, I'd need to make up for it somewhere else. I'd take a look at what other boots or chest pieces I had in my inventory to see if they'd have some more hit rating than the boots or chest that I had on, because even if they dropped my STR or INT, my stat priority was hit rating. You had to cap it to maximize your damage, and make sure you got as close to the cap without going too far over. So I'd start wearing an older pair of boots that dropped my DEF and Haste down a bit, but boosted my Hit Chance back safely above the cap. The damage I lost on the boots was more than made up for by the new helmet: I'd solved the puzzle! The developer of that game removed hit rating later on, and they were right to do it, because it caused a lot of issues. But that puzzle element was kinda fun, and I've wanted to find a way to bring it back without causing any of the issues it came with before. Imagine if you will, that Miriam's level determined a cap on all your attributes. Say that at level 15, no attribute (STR, INT, et all) could be effective beyond 20. Just as an example. So now you're cruising along and find a great new chest piece that increases your DEF from 17 to 23. That'd be awesome, except now 3 points of DEF wouldn't count, as it would go over the cap and be wasted. So it's just a straight increase of 3, rather than 6. Until you gain a level, that is, which will raise the attribute cap slightly, and allow you to take advantage of stronger items. Some of that DEF is wasted, yes, but now you can choose to solve a puzzle to min/max your gear! You have 3 points of DEF that you can play with. See if you have another item in another slot that gives you less DEF than your current equipment. If an item of similar power level has less of one thing, it should have more of another. Ah, here's a pair of sunglasses in your inventory that does 5 less DEF than the helmet you had on, but it gives you 5 INT. Equipping it would bring your DEF down to 18--just below the cap--and boost your INT by 5. Cool! Now you're a more well-rounded character. That new chest piece you found didn't have INT on it, but since you put it on and adjusted some other things, you've got both more DEF and INT than before. Presenting this information to the player quickly and easily is key to making these puzzles fun, so we could turn the Status page into something like this: And when you put your cursor over another item in your inventory: Do you see what I mean? You should be able to rapidly scroll through your inventory and quickly see the effects your other items will have, relative to the cap. Basically, you'll be trying to balance out each bar in the graph, and keep any one of them from going too high. As you find new items, you'll find better combinations that let you get each of the bars as high as possible. By the end of the game, the cap will be really high, but the items you'll find will be super powerful, so it should be a system that lasts from start to finish. The cap should push the player into making more interesting decisions by getting them to look at all their gear, holistically. There's a danger that it could become too complex, and slow the game down too much. If that turns out to be the case, we could always pare down the number of attributes. Kill off MND and CON, for example; I don't know how attached to those you guys are. Or kill off one of the Accessory equipment slots. Or abandon the whole idea completely. But none of that would necessarily be necessary, and I'm confident that they'd be able to tune everything to the point where it'd be nothing but fun. Do you guys like the concept, or do you think it's too weird?
|
|
inherit
1650
0
Oct 10, 2018 17:39:30 GMT -6
38
yoshi9048
58
Jul 3, 2016 14:07:34 GMT -6
July 2016
yoshi9048
|
Post by yoshi9048 on Jul 5, 2018 0:23:53 GMT -6
It seems really fun for min/maxers and an absolute chore/nightmare for casual/purists. While I personally appreciate the concept, and would otherwise love the concept; it's just not one that I personally would want to see in an ARPG. At least not until super-late game.
Let's take for example one of my great loves, Rune Factory 4. For most of the game, randomly found gear is what you strive for. It's what you live for. If attack or defense is higher, you equip it unless a specific condition said otherwise. When you complete end-game; then forge slaving and min-maxing takes the forefront. But it's still a chore you do to achieve statistical perfection.
In a game about castle exploration, relishing art, and seeking upgrades; this system would add enough to distract away from it's frankly well-deserved selling points.
So yes, I'm a fan of it, no I don't think it belong in Bloodstained.
|
|
Astaroth
Fifty Storms
What a wonderful night to have a curse...
Posts: 1,213
inherit
57
0
Jan 4, 2022 11:47:39 GMT -6
1,368
Astaroth
What a wonderful night to have a curse...
1,213
Jun 10, 2015 20:22:05 GMT -6
June 2015
astaroth
|
Post by Astaroth on Jul 5, 2018 1:45:56 GMT -6
the problem with this system is unlike an rpg with action elements where positioning is largely 'am i close enough for autoattack' (xenoblade2, ff14), or doesnt matter at all (nearly every turn based rpg ever) a miss chance mechanic rightly plays more to the tabletop dice rolls of its birth IGAs games are way more action with a dash of rpg elements, if something falls within a hitbox, it is hit, and the complexity comes from the interplay of stats, bonuses, attack properties and resistances, and even if an enemys defense is so high you would do no damage from a purely mathematical sense, you still always deal 1 damage to prevent a total lockout like iron golems in DoS (if you want to see what this 0 damage system can do to gameplay, see ys1 or crystalis)
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 5, 2018 11:57:27 GMT -6
the problem with this system is unlike an rpg with action elements where positioning is largely 'am i close enough for autoattack' (xenoblade2, ff14), or doesnt matter at all (nearly every turn based rpg ever) a miss chance mechanic rightly plays more to the tabletop dice rolls of its birth IGAs games are way more action with a dash of rpg elements, if something falls within a hitbox, it is hit, and the complexity comes from the interplay of stats, bonuses, attack properties and resistances, and even if an enemys defense is so high you would do no damage from a purely mathematical sense, you still always deal 1 damage to prevent a total lockout like iron golems in DoS (if you want to see what this 0 damage system can do to gameplay, see ys1 or crystalis) Please don't take this the wrong way, but this is my least favorite form of feedback ever. I know I wrote a lot, and it's asking a lot from people to take the time to read and understand it all, but I don't understand the impulse to read less than a quarter of it, presume the rest, and then actually go on to write a response, critiquing what you thought my post was about. I'm not offended or mad or anything, and I swear I won't hold it against you, it's just that the conversation I wanted to have with you failed to launch, because you refuted something that I didn't propose. I even said, "hit chance sucks," but it sounds like you stopped when I said the words "hit rating," and went straight to writing a reply. I'd still love to hear what you think of my actual idea, if you'd be willing to read it.
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 5, 2018 12:19:42 GMT -6
It seems really fun for min/maxers and an absolute chore/nightmare for casual/purists. While I personally appreciate the concept, and would otherwise love the concept; it's just not one that I personally would want to see in an ARPG. At least not until super-late game. Let's take for example one of my great loves, Rune Factory 4. For most of the game, randomly found gear is what you strive for. It's what you live for. If attack or defense is higher, you equip it unless a specific condition said otherwise. When you complete end-game; then forge slaving and min-maxing takes the forefront. But it's still a chore you do to achieve statistical perfection. In a game about castle exploration, relishing art, and seeking upgrades; this system would add enough to distract away from it's frankly well-deserved selling points. So yes, I'm a fan of it, no I don't think it belong in Bloodstained. Good points, good points. It is indeed a system that lends itself to the psyches of min/maxers, but I still believe it could be fun for those who are less inclined, should the puzzles take sufficiently little time to solve. I mean, the game is already an ARPG, and its fans will all have a certain tolerance--and even love--for evaluating new items as they are acquired. To an extent, of course. There's already an amount of appraisal time in the game as it is, and I'm not even suggesting that it take much longer than it already does; I want to make sure that the game doesn't just stop for 30 minutes every time an enemy drops something; that would certainly be overbearing. That's why I wanted a clear and responsive UI to go along with it. Plus, depending on what number to which the cap is set at any given level, this might not even come up very often. It could be tweaked so that it's a pretty rare occurrence, which would mean that the game would be largely unchanged, except for when you approach the endgame, for example. And if it really only came into play at endgame, it'd be pretty optional, and therefore could (if we wanted it to,) take longer to sort out, because only more hardcore min/maxers would need to bother. And I think it would be pretty rewarding for those types of people. How about that, then? It all comes down to how it's tuned. I'd love to prototype the system and see how it feels. Again, I would make certain that it doesn't bog down the flow of the game. I want to keep the A in ARPG. I do like what you're saying, though. I think you've convinced me that the system needs to be somewhat invisible in the early stages of the game, and only come to prominence occasionally in the mid-game, and really have it shine in late-game. I think that would ease players into it, and the game wouldn't need to be balanced around it so much, in case you were the sort of person who cares more about getting back to the action. I mean, like I said, its impact on the game can be tuned pretty easily, which is one of the things I like about it. If I do say so, myself.
|
|
Astaroth
Fifty Storms
What a wonderful night to have a curse...
Posts: 1,213
inherit
57
0
Jan 4, 2022 11:47:39 GMT -6
1,368
Astaroth
What a wonderful night to have a curse...
1,213
Jun 10, 2015 20:22:05 GMT -6
June 2015
astaroth
|
Post by Astaroth on Jul 5, 2018 12:54:15 GMT -6
the issue still stands, soft or hard caps on abilities tied to level is a very rpg thing, even moreso an mmo thing where you have to be able to balance a high level person with high ilevel gear going through low level content with other people (ff14s content sync system), all it does in an IGAvania is hamstring the player who braves a high level area early (whether intentionally or not) to get a really great item early on or the speedrunner who naturally will be very low level most of their run because any stopping to grind is a time loss that can potentially be avoided with the right strategy and equipment, or the person whos played through the game and (if its in) starts a lvl 1 only run, this cap system would destroy that difficulty setting because not only have you removed the getting better through levelling, youve now capped the bonuses you can get through gear as well (well why dont you disable it for that difficulty? i say then whats the point of having it in the first place?)
theres another unintended consequence of caps, and you see it in games like dark souls (you even allude to it with the well rounded character observation), at a certain level diminishing returns means eventually every character becomes an everyman. you soft cap dex? well you can either keep pumping 20 points into dex for 1 damage to keep your rp build (or you amass millions of souls you could lose in an instant cause you stop levelling entirely if youre a purist), or you start putting stats into stuff that give you bonuses, and by the end of the playthrough (ng+ this gets even more obvious) you have 30s to 40s in all your stats, can wear the heaviest armor and wield the heaviest weapons but still have all the mobility of a naked char, this approaches it from the opposite end but has the same endpoint, instead of specializing say an int char you reach the cap either too quickly and everyman your stats to make up the difference or you never reach the cap and so why have this cap system in place anyway?
this could be a great system IF the game is built entirely around it, like level sync in ff14 keeping low level content relevant to higher level players while not diminishing the experience for lower level players (this sidesteps the everyman issue through having set classes), but IGAvanias are neither mmos or rpgs, and so this system of stat caps would either unduly hinder a players playstyle, force grinding just to raise the stat caps, or be ineffectual cause the caps are too high (also this game has permanent boosts due to food buffs, are those counted too in your calculations?)
|
|
inherit
2733
0
Mar 10, 2020 20:44:37 GMT -6
24
Carnack Ketral
[TI0]
83
Jun 29, 2018 18:17:31 GMT -6
June 2018
carnackketral
|
Post by Carnack Ketral on Jul 5, 2018 21:11:50 GMT -6
What Astaroth said. Nails down the specific problems with such a system. Especially in this type of game, too much RPG, not enough A.
Personally, I Abhor stat capping of any kind. I love the feeling of overpowering my character in whatever stat I choose for them. Be it strength, defense, speed. etc.
One of my most memorable scenarios comes from a TRPG, Final Fantasy Tactics. It is the best type of game to abuse stats and stat gains. Especially speed. My MC has a speed stat of 14(average for most end game chars is 8-10). Plus, he can constantly boost it with skills through the fight. While he does that, one of my other characters is constantly reducing the enemies speed. By the time I get around to actually crushing the enemy, if I felt like enjoying my godly state for too long, I have a speed stat of 30+, whilst they all have a speed stat of 1. My MC literally turns 25-30 times for their 1.
Fair? hell, no! Glorious? Most indubitably(yes that is an actual word). But such things would not be capable if there were any kind of stat capping. Although, that game was all about breaking itself like that.
In Games like Bloodstained, or other Iga's, it just simply is not palatable for most people who like this type of game. The speed/low level runners and explorers. mostly because the former would be too too restricted, being forced to do little to no damage by end game. Literally dealing 1 damage a whack to final bosses would destroy any concept of a speed run. The latter would not notice/care until end game, as they would be leveling up and gaining stat ups with out the gear to really match it.
Again, stat capping of any kind is just bollocks.
|
|
Astaroth
Fifty Storms
What a wonderful night to have a curse...
Posts: 1,213
inherit
57
0
Jan 4, 2022 11:47:39 GMT -6
1,368
Astaroth
What a wonderful night to have a curse...
1,213
Jun 10, 2015 20:22:05 GMT -6
June 2015
astaroth
|
Post by Astaroth on Jul 5, 2018 22:40:25 GMT -6
it has its uses, and some genres could revel in it, but like starting out with a twitch shooter and adding point and click adventure elements, it either has to be on point all the time or the conflicting speeds and concepts can very quickly tear both concepts apart, and that kind of planning has to be made from the concept doc stages
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 5, 2018 23:16:32 GMT -6
the issue still stands, soft or hard caps on abilities tied to level is a very rpg thing, even moreso an mmo thing where you have to be able to balance a high level person with high ilevel gear going through low level content with other people (ff14s content sync system), all it does in an IGAvania is hamstring the player who braves a high level area early (whether intentionally or not) to get a really great item early on or the speedrunner who naturally will be very low level most of their run because any stopping to grind is a time loss that can potentially be avoided with the right strategy and equipment, or the person whos played through the game and (if its in) starts a lvl 1 only run, this cap system would destroy that difficulty setting because not only have you removed the getting better through levelling, youve now capped the bonuses you can get through gear as well (well why dont you disable it for that difficulty? i say then whats the point of having it in the first place?) theres another unintended consequence of caps, and you see it in games like dark souls (you even allude to it with the well rounded character observation), at a certain level diminishing returns means eventually every character becomes an everyman. you soft cap dex? well you can either keep pumping 20 points into dex for 1 damage to keep your rp build (or you amass millions of souls you could lose in an instant cause you stop levelling entirely if youre a purist), or you start putting stats into stuff that give you bonuses, and by the end of the playthrough (ng+ this gets even more obvious) you have 30s to 40s in all your stats, can wear the heaviest armor and wield the heaviest weapons but still have all the mobility of a naked char, this approaches it from the opposite end but has the same endpoint, instead of specializing say an int char you reach the cap either too quickly and everyman your stats to make up the difference or you never reach the cap and so why have this cap system in place anyway? this could be a great system IF the game is built entirely around it, like level sync in ff14 keeping low level content relevant to higher level players while not diminishing the experience for lower level players (this sidesteps the everyman issue through having set classes), but IGAvanias are neither mmos or rpgs, and so this system of stat caps would either unduly hinder a players playstyle, force grinding just to raise the stat caps, or be ineffectual cause the caps are too high (also this game has permanent boosts due to food buffs, are those counted too in your calculations?) You're making some good points! I'm trying to remember if I ever entered a high-level area and walked away with a super powerful item in a past Igavania game. With all the gating in place, I struggle to imagine it. But you're right that doing something like that would be less rewarding, as it would surely put you above the cap. However, it would still be an item that would be far better than anything you'd be normally getting, in theory, so even if you couldn't make use of every point of STR or whatever, it would still cap you out, which would otherwise be hard to do, especially early on (were the cap tuned to be super high at low levels). I didn't think about the effect it would have on low-level speed runs, and I've never tried to do one myself, but it sounds like it'd be super tough, either way. Without the caps, you'd skillfully navigate to gear with great stats, but you'd still be low-level; does the gear alone make up for that? Or is it primarily the weapon damage values that allow for that to work? I didn't include ATK values in with the caps, seeing as how only one equipment slot can give you that, so there wouldn't be anything interesting to do with a cap on ATK. Leaving ATK uncapped would certainly allow for low-level runs to remain viable, no? You'd be missing out on a lot of the STR-based damage boost that you'd get if you picked up some high-level STR gear during the run, but I don't know the formula for how STR adds to your damage output, so I don't know how significant of a loss that would be. I've always seen ATK as the stat that truly matters in these games, in my experience, so whatever percentage you'd be missing out on could very well not be enough to prevent runs like that from being viable. It would be more difficult than it would be otherwise, sure, but difficulty does come with the territory on such a run, and as long as it's still doable, then I think we're okay. I see how the idea of a well-rounded character who, at the end of the game, is a master of all trades, could be a turnoff from a role-playing standpoint. I don't mean to discount it, but that is a bit more RP and a little less A. I'd love to allow for it still, but the idea of a "build" is pretty foreign to Igavanias, anyway. There are no talent trees, and you don't distribute attribute points as you level up, so the only specialization comes from the gear you pick up, use, and replace when you find something better. Also, the game isn't designed for you to use only physical weapons or shards, it's designed for you to use both, all the time. If you plan to play through the game using purely one or the other, I'd say you're simply playing it wrong, if you know what I mean. Especially given the fact that enemies have elemental weaknesses, which reward you for mixing up your attacks. With that in mind, it's pretty clear that the games have never been designed to reward specialization in one or the other, but to encourage the player to gear themselves to be well-rounded. I believe that's the case with the game as it is right now, in fact. And having established that, I don't think that a system designed to get players to figure out how to round out their gear can be called ill-suited to the Igavania series! Lastly, a quick note on the food buffs: I forgot about those! But I don't see a problem with them. If it boosts your STR and that takes you over the cap, then solve your gear puzzle to bring yourself back down. Now that you have a higher base STR, you'll be as strong as before, while needing less STR from items, so you can move to prioritize INT for the next few upgrades. And by then, depending on what you find, and if you level up, who knows what stat you'll be on the lookout for. Sounds good to me!
|
|
inherit
1650
0
Oct 10, 2018 17:39:30 GMT -6
38
yoshi9048
58
Jul 3, 2016 14:07:34 GMT -6
July 2016
yoshi9048
|
Post by yoshi9048 on Jul 6, 2018 3:21:59 GMT -6
If you're going to do stat caps, they should be reasonable and rational caps that are difficult to max meaning that the puzzle is simply because you hit a peak.
Let's say that lev 99 has 500 as a stat cap. But the gear and stats you can normally get can push as high as a 750 point theoretical cap. Under rational play, you will have 300 or 350 points in that stat and actually have to go out of your way to get more than that.
Hitting that 500 cap would actually be disappointing for people in that position. They spent all their time and energy maxing their character toward a specific stat. Their math checks out, they can get past that barrier, but the game sets this arbitrary limit and even though their math says they can; the game says they can't... because... reasons.
Granted, 500 cap is still generous given my example, but this may be a major turn off toward late game; and even if it's effectively impossible due to theoretical gear limits to be an everyman as Astaroth said, you're still forced to play outside a build because the developer has explicitly told you you're playing the game wrong, even though, up until that point, you've been encouraged to play it that way.
So, I fear people may not see it as a fun puzzle but just as a disappointing "feature" to demand a specific style of play; which feels against the heart of Bloodstained with the prevalence of weapon types and shards you can combine into unique play styles.
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 6, 2018 19:44:53 GMT -6
If you're going to do stat caps, they should be reasonable and rational caps that are difficult to max meaning that the puzzle is simply because you hit a peak. Let's say that lev 99 has 500 as a stat cap. But the gear and stats you can normally get can push as high as a 750 point theoretical cap. Under rational play, you will have 300 or 350 points in that stat and actually have to go out of your way to get more than that. Hitting that 500 cap would actually be disappointing for people in that position. They spent all their time and energy maxing their character toward a specific stat. Their math checks out, they can get past that barrier, but the game sets this arbitrary limit and even though their math says they can; the game says they can't... because... reasons. Granted, 500 cap is still generous given my example, but this may be a major turn off toward late game; and even if it's effectively impossible due to theoretical gear limits to be an everyman as Astaroth said, you're still forced to play outside a build because the developer has explicitly told you you're playing the game wrong, even though, up until that point, you've been encouraged to play it that way. So, I fear people may not see it as a fun puzzle but just as a disappointing "feature" to demand a specific style of play; which feels against the heart of Bloodstained with the prevalence of weapon types and shards you can combine into unique play styles. With the way the game works, there's not a lot of energy or math involved in maxing out any given stat via your gear. It's just a quick process of going through your items and equipping the one item in each of the four slots that has the most of the stat you're looking for. So there's not much room to build disappointment, especially if you see the cap coming closer as you equip each successive item. And then what do you do when you hit the cap? You rethink your gear choices. More interesting choices are what I'm interested in bringing to the game with this system, because having to make interesting choices is fun! That's what games are, at the atomic level. Choices are defined just as much by what you can do as by what you can't do. "You can't have that much of that stat; what are you going to choose to do now?" It's more interesting and fun to get to the end of a maze by finding a path around the walls than it would be to just walk to the end in a straight line. And again about this idea that you have a character "build" in Igavanias: when you boot up Bloodstained, you're not picking between a Barbarian or a Wizard, with different skill sets and talent trees that decide how you play. You get one skill set with Miriam, and you're expected to use it. If you want to RP the game as a Miriam who forsakes her Shardbinder powers and never uses shards through the whole game, be my guest. Just know that you're going against the grain, and the game isn't designed for you to have a "build" like that. It's designed to have a combat system that is more interesting and complex than one comprised of a single button. The combat system in the game is deliberately designed to encourage the player to make use of weapons and shards in equal measure. If there were talent trees that required you to commit to either physical attacks at the expense of your magic powers or vice versa, then you'd be right in saying that this system of caps infringes upon min/maxing certain builds. But that's not this game. It's never been any Igavania game. Portrait of Ruin, actually, is specially-built to ensure that you're balancing weapons and magic as best you can, even if you don't realize that's what you're doing. So yes, my cap system would prevent you from quadrupling-down on any one stat with all four of your equipped items, but that's already something that the game actively discourages. It already doesn't benefit you to do that. Giving players visual feedback in the Status Menu via stat caps will even help players avoid that pitfall. Should the game be restructured to include classes and/or talent trees, so that players can experiment with a variety of builds that change how you play through the game? I'd be into it. I'd support the idea, should anyone be willing to suggest it. But until the game is redesigned that way, stat caps would infringe upon nothing not already discouraged, and still provide fun puzzles to solve when appraising new, powerful items. Have I made good counterpoints?
|
|
inherit
2733
0
Mar 10, 2020 20:44:37 GMT -6
24
Carnack Ketral
[TI0]
83
Jun 29, 2018 18:17:31 GMT -6
June 2018
carnackketral
|
Post by Carnack Ketral on Jul 6, 2018 21:04:11 GMT -6
Actually, it is precisely because the game does not have any classes, stat caps or skill tree systems, that you can build Miriam any way you choose. It does not force you to do anything in equal portions.
The gear gives specific stat bonuses, not a flat across the board boost to everything. So you can spec for a STR focused build, or an INT focused if you want. Or even a luck focus.
You want to focus on just weapons? go ahead! Shards only? do it up!
If I ever hit a stat cap, I would go "The fuck is this? Why can I not keep going? This is stupid." This is why you never see stat capping in RPGs. By having a restriction like that the game forces you to build/equip/spec a single way and no other way. There would only be the one end game build, and once someone finds it, everyone will just do that. no variants, no alternatives, nothing.
|
|
Torabi
New Blood
[TI0]
Posts: 29
inherit
1216
0
Jul 11, 2022 23:06:58 GMT -6
21
Torabi
[TI0]
29
Mar 5, 2016 6:00:41 GMT -6
March 2016
torabi
|
Post by Torabi on Jul 6, 2018 22:28:46 GMT -6
And then what do you do when you hit the cap? You rethink your gear choices. More interesting choices are what I'm interested in bringing to the game with this system, because having to make interesting choices is fun! That's what games are, at the atomic level. Choices are defined just as much by what you can do as by what you can't do. "You can't have that much of that stat; what are you going to choose to do now?" It's more interesting and fun to get to the end of a maze by finding a path around the walls than it would be to just walk to the end in a straight line. I agree with you in principle, but I don't think the system you're designing does. If you can mathematically determine the correct answer, then it's not a choice at all, just a puzzle with a limited set of solutions. Choice is when you have multiple options that are of similar objective value, but different subjective value. Sacrificing one stat in order to focus on another can be a choice, but capping stats to keep players within "appropriate" values and forcing them to swap gear to maximize their stats within those caps exchanges choice for calculation. What you're proposing is a system that punishes the player for preferring not to carry around extra gear, do math, and fiddle with menus whenever they get something new, with the only reward being that you've solved a puzzle the developer created for the answer they intended. It homogenizes the experience, though whether that is a good or bad thing in and of itself is another question. To apply this to your maze metaphor, choice is when there are multiple paths through the maze. The maze may be more fun than the open field, but the maze with multiple paths is probably more interesting to explore than the one with only a single correct path, and many dead ends.
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 7, 2018 11:06:54 GMT -6
Actually, it is precisely because the game does not have any classes, stat caps or skill tree systems, that you can build Miriam any way you choose. It does not force you to do anything in equal portions. The gear gives specific stat bonuses, not a flat across the board boost to everything. So you can spec for a STR focused build, or an INT focused if you want. Or even a luck focus. You want to focus on just weapons? go ahead! Shards only? do it up! If I ever hit a stat cap, I would go "The fuck is this? Why can I not keep going? This is stupid." This is why you never see stat capping in RPGs. By having a restriction like that the game forces you to build/equip/spec a single way and no other way. There would only be the one end game build, and once someone finds it, everyone will just do that. no variants, no alternatives, nothing. How do you figure that the whole series hasn't already been like that? Isn't it true that the enemies have varied resistances and weaknesses? Playing Bloodstained with only weapons or only magic... is like playing Halo using only the Assault Rife, even against shielded enemies. That's not a "build," that's just being stubborn. What do you do when you run into one of those giant knights with craploads of armor, and each of your weapon attacks only deals 1 point of damage? Too bad you've neglected your INT and MND, because now the game is literally punishing you for doing that. You'll be scratching at it for ages, because your magic didn't do as much damage as it should have, and you're already out of MP. Those knights were teaching us all a lesson in how the series expects us to gear: value all of your attributes, because the game will require them all. Fail to do so, and you'll only hurt yourself. Neglect half of your toolkit at your own peril. Can you really look at that example and tell me it's the game saying "go ahead," and "do it up"? There has always ever been only one build in Igavanias. There have never been equal variants, or equal alternatives. If an alternative has been viable, it's because the game wasn't so difficult as to require you to be optimal. But I believe I have showed you how any such alternate build you're talking about is inherently sub-optimal, by design. Once we recognize that, the issue at hand regarding my stat cap idea becomes moot! Clearly, the series' lessons on that have gone largely unlearned, and so the problem with the caps is really just an issue of player expectation. I can see why people would feel like the game has changed to no longer support alternate builds, even though those have never been supported. So I wonder, what would I do, as a designer? Rather than drop a fun little system because of players' misconceptions, I feel the best thing to do is clear up those misconceptions the way I've been trying to do here. If it came from the developer themselves as part of a Q&A session or blog post, I feel it would have gravitas I could never match by my lonesome, and people might be willing to accept it and give it a fair shake. I say that, because I feel Blizzard has successfully made a lot of radical changes to World of Warcraft over the years by coming out with their logic and reasoning behind each change well in advance of them, knowing that players would, in the absence of that context, freak out. Of course, many still do freak out, but I, for one, am made to understand, and then I am able to embrace the changes and appreciate them on a deeper level because of that understanding.
|
|
inherit
2754
0
Jul 17, 2018 12:41:45 GMT -6
9
tekrelm
34
Jun 30, 2018 15:40:47 GMT -6
June 2018
tekrelm
|
Post by tekrelm on Jul 7, 2018 11:45:29 GMT -6
And then what do you do when you hit the cap? You rethink your gear choices. More interesting choices are what I'm interested in bringing to the game with this system, because having to make interesting choices is fun! That's what games are, at the atomic level. Choices are defined just as much by what you can do as by what you can't do. "You can't have that much of that stat; what are you going to choose to do now?" It's more interesting and fun to get to the end of a maze by finding a path around the walls than it would be to just walk to the end in a straight line. I agree with you in principle, but I don't think the system you're designing does. If you can mathematically determine the correct answer, then it's not a choice at all, just a puzzle with a limited set of solutions. Choice is when you have multiple options that are of similar objective value, but different subjective value. Sacrificing one stat in order to focus on another can be a choice, but capping stats to keep players within "appropriate" values and forcing them to swap gear to maximize their stats within those caps exchanges choice for calculation. What you're proposing is a system that punishes the player for preferring not to carry around extra gear, do math, and fiddle with menus whenever they get something new, with the only reward being that you've solved a puzzle the developer created for the answer they intended. It homogenizes the experience, though whether that is a good or bad thing in and of itself is another question. To apply this to your maze metaphor, choice is when there are multiple paths through the maze. The maze may be more fun than the open field, but the maze with multiple paths is probably more interesting to explore than the one with only a single correct path, and many dead ends. I don't think you can mathematically determine the correct answer, though. It is still a choice between viable solutions. If you cap STR with a new chest piece, then you go to your boots that have a lot of STR on them, and swap them out for either boots that have INT, or boots that have DEF, or boots that have CON, or boots that have MND, or boots that have LCK, or boots that have some of a few of those. And any one of those choices would solve the puzzle. It's up to the player to decide which of those stats they want to have most. Any selection is viable, so the choices are legitimate. In contrast, let's look at the way the game currently works, without this system of caps: You pick up a new item. You compare it with the one you have equipped in that slot. Does it have more STR? If so, equip it. Done. I know that's being a bit unfair; there's a little more to the thought process if you're weighing a loss of a point or two in some other stat. Still, my point is that if you're going to say that my system doesn't provide the player with choices, the system that is currently in place offers even fewer, because you're only ever dealing with one item at a time, in a vacuum, and never considering any of your other equipment slots. Hey, when I think about it, am I not actually just suggesting that the item appraisal mechanism be multiplied? Appraise the new item, and then appraise each of your other three equipment slots against each item in your inventory. It's the same mechanism that's already in the game, but applied multiple times when you pick up a strong item that pushes some stat high enough. The player's choices have the potential to increase significantly! And most of the time, when a new item doesn't bring you over any cap, especially in the early game, the choices the player has are limited to the choices they currently have in the game as it is today. What's the downside?
|
|
inherit
2733
0
Mar 10, 2020 20:44:37 GMT -6
24
Carnack Ketral
[TI0]
83
Jun 29, 2018 18:17:31 GMT -6
June 2018
carnackketral
|
Post by Carnack Ketral on Jul 7, 2018 14:23:35 GMT -6
tekrelm So why would the developer choose to restrict what the player wants most? I have never seen any video game that openly restricts a player in such a way.
Like I said, If I want to run a pure STR build, I should not be punished for it. Like going through Halo with only the assault rifle, I can do that, as it is my choice and the game does not punish for it. It would still take the same amount of damage output for other guns to do the same work. Halo's guns are actually balanced to be pretty much identical, even rockets and power weapons. but that is a different argument that we shall not go into.
Even if I ran into some physical resistant enemy(of which I have never seen in these games) I could just equip an elemental weapon. That is why we have so many different choices in gear. Do I want a flame whip for fire damage? how about poison with the stinger? I am still able to use my full STR only build without suffering from a magic deficiency.
On a counterpoint, what if you get a new piece of gear, but all your stats are already capped? Now what? Is it just a piece of trash to forget about? wasted development?
The mere fact that you are restricting players choices in what they want to do.
|
|
Torabi
New Blood
[TI0]
Posts: 29
inherit
1216
0
Jul 11, 2022 23:06:58 GMT -6
21
Torabi
[TI0]
29
Mar 5, 2016 6:00:41 GMT -6
March 2016
torabi
|
Post by Torabi on Jul 7, 2018 16:09:55 GMT -6
In contrast, let's look at the way the game currently works, without this system of caps: You pick up a new item. You compare it with the one you have equipped in that slot. Does it have more STR? If so, equip it. Done. I know that's being a bit unfair; there's a little more to the thought process if you're weighing a loss of a point or two in some other stat. Still, my point is that if you're going to say that my system doesn't provide the player with choices, the system that is currently in place offers even fewer, because you're only ever dealing with one item at a time, in a vacuum, and never considering any of your other equipment slots. I would suggest that past Igavanias regularly encouraged you to switch up your entire set of gear and abilities to face particular enemies or room layouts. DoS and OoE even have a mechanism for storing multiple builds and quickly switching between them! In general, most builds focus on one stat to the exclusion of others, based on the needs of the situation, which a capping system would limit. Do you need physical damage, or magical? A particular element? Are you trying to clear an area, beat a boss, trying to level up, or trying to collect a rare item? Capping stats would limit the player's ability to optimize for each goal, reducing the diversity of builds, replacing situational optimization or strategic choice with calculation. Hey, when I think about it, am I not actually just suggesting that the item appraisal mechanism be multiplied? Appraise the new item, and then appraise each of your other three equipment slots against each item in your inventory. It's the same mechanism that's already in the game, but applied multiple times when you pick up a strong item that pushes some stat high enough. The player's choices have the potential to increase significantly! Yes, that's exactly what you're doing, and it's not something most people would enjoy. You're presenting the player with a computationally expensive knapsacking problem, asking them to compare every possible combination against every other. You're multiplying the number of decisions the player must make in order to avoid being punished, not providing them with new and interesting choices to make. Compare this with something like the Cowboy Hat or Gunslinger Scarf in the beta (though they don't appear to work at present): there are items that interact with other items, and that could prompt the player to reconsider what they have equipped. Could the increased damage or firing rate outweigh the stats provided by other equipment? They may have to reconsider multiple slots, and there may be multiple items in each slot worth considering, but each can be considered on its own merits, or its impact on the whole, and not in competition with every other item or slot. It's also the player chasing after a bonus, not running away from a penalty. They can be mathematically the same, and it's possible to reorganize a system to turn one into the other, but there's a huge difference in player perception and motivation.
|
|
inherit
1650
0
Oct 10, 2018 17:39:30 GMT -6
38
yoshi9048
58
Jul 3, 2016 14:07:34 GMT -6
July 2016
yoshi9048
|
Post by yoshi9048 on Jul 7, 2018 19:24:16 GMT -6
> Have I made good counterpoints? So very nearly. You've explained your preferences, but perhaps it's best if I tackle a few of em. > With the way the game works, there's not a lot of energy or math involved in maxing out any given stat via your gear. It's just a quick process of going through your items and equipping the one item in each of the four slots that has the most of the stat you're looking for. So there's not much room to build disappointment, especially if you see the cap coming closer as you equip each successive item.There isn't much of a problem, there. To be honest. The game doesn't balance by item, but by category. There is a reason to equip a sword/spear/2-h and these choices aren't numeric. They're effectively playstyle. I don't want to know why the partisan is subjectively weaker than a spear in some instances, but stronger in others. I want to know that an upgrade is strictly speaking an upgrade. Obviously, element types play with this a bit (you'll want to have an ice brand over a fire brand, even if one is statistically superior by a small amount depending on area.) > And then what do you do when you hit the cap? You rethink your gear choices. More interesting choices are what I'm interested in bringing to the game with this system, because having to make interesting choices is fun! That's what games are, at the atomic level. Choices are defined just as much by what you can do as by what you can't do. "You can't have that much of that stat; what are you going to choose to do now?" It's more interesting and fun to get to the end of a maze by finding a path around the walls than it would be to just walk to the end in a straight line.OR! You get frustrated because you can't play the game the way you want to play it; but because a game that tells you in every design choice that you have complete freedom to develop your protaganist anyway you see fit given the tools you're provided that you don't have complete freedom. You're placed in a sandbox that you uniquely own, but are told, you can't use the last 30% of your box because we think it won't be fun. It's not up to the developers to tell me what I think is fun or not. It's their objective to make a game THEY think is fun and hope I agree. > And again about this idea that you have a character "build" in Igavanias: when you boot up Bloodstained, you're not picking between a Barbarian or a Wizard, with different skill sets and talent trees that decide how you play. You get one skill set with Miriam, and you're expected to use it. If you want to RP the game as a Miriam who forsakes her Shardbinder powers and never uses shards through the whole game, be my guest. Just know that you're going against the grain, and the game isn't designed for you to have a "build" like that. It's designed to have a combat system that is more interesting and complex than one comprised of a single button.When I boot up Bloodstained, the first thing I'm presented with is a choice between two weapons. A dagger or boots. Each with their own benefits, hit boxes, attack speeds, and effects. This alludes to the design choice being between world effects, and not statistical variance. > The combat system in the game is deliberately designed to encourage the player to make use of weapons and shards in equal measure. If there were talent trees that required you to commit to either physical attacks at the expense of your magic powers or vice versa, then you'd be right in saying that this system of caps infringes upon min/maxing certain builds. But that's not this game. It's never been any Igavania game. Portrait of Ruin, actually, is specially-built to ensure that you're balancing weapons and magic as best you can, even if you don't realize that's what you're doing.
Uhmm.... no it's not. There is so much weapon variance that often there's nothing you actually need to use shards for that weapons can't handle it. Shards are sub weapons; that is, companion weapons that you use to supplement or complement your primary weapon. This isn't to say that shards aren't useful and preferable in certain situations; but you're not explicitly encouraged to use both. In many ways, the game is simply encouraging you to have a full complement of weapon types and to use each on in their own situation. > So yes, my cap system would prevent you from quadrupling-down on any one stat with all four of your equipped items, but that's already something that the game actively discourages. It already doesn't benefit you to do that. Giving players visual feedback in the Status Menu via stat caps will even help players avoid that pitfall.
A major hallmark of any igavania or metroidvania is adventure and exploration. As a developer, I want to encourage my players in this genre to explore the world. Leave no stone unturned. Let's say you have "armor of the tortoise" with an intentionally absurdly high DEF of 200 (in an area where your best armor has 35). You go to equip it (since it's along your path and intentionally placed anyway) and LOL JK, u haz cap of 50 LMAO. What is that horse crap? Now, I as a player, am disappointed and feeling spurned against exploration. Why bother exploring? You're better off just maingaming and being done with a single session? Or, maybe... The cap rises as you gain levels, each level you get +15 to your stat cap which means you only have to stop exploring and start treadmilling to get the bonus. because we ALL KNOW how fun treadmilling in an RPG is.
|
|
inherit
2733
0
Mar 10, 2020 20:44:37 GMT -6
24
Carnack Ketral
[TI0]
83
Jun 29, 2018 18:17:31 GMT -6
June 2018
carnackketral
|
Post by Carnack Ketral on Jul 8, 2018 9:12:49 GMT -6
As a side question, when did grinding become known as treadmilling?
|
|
inherit
1627
0
Oct 16, 2019 23:16:52 GMT -6
38
Hertzila
46
Jun 30, 2016 16:04:35 GMT -6
June 2016
hertzila
|
Post by Hertzila on Jul 11, 2018 15:04:54 GMT -6
I am not seeing the benefit from including hard-caps or even soft-caps for any stats. The only value I could see for caps is to either force diverse stats in character building for either balance or gating purposes, or to force viability in an otherwise freeform leveling system. Neither applies here, from what I see.
The issue is that a cap system would seriously get in the way of the most core ideology in a metroidvania: exploration. Part of the thrill of exploration is finding a hole in the wall that leads to a chest with an great piece of gear inside. It seriously diminishes the value of exploration if the item actually cannot increase stats because the devs thought that the player should be discouraged from enjoying the benefits of loot. This goes double for any absurd loot, like a suit of platinum armor that makes you nigh-immune to physical damage but stops you from jumping. What use would Def 500 be if the artificial cap is 127?
Neither are there any worries about viability here. The player should absolutely be capable of going ham on a single stat for whatever purpose they want. "Respeccing" Miriam is only a visit to the inventory away, and if the Order of Ecclesia quick switch system or Dawn of Sorrow's dopplegänger returns, not even that. If they want to make Miriam the strongest or luckiest girl alive, why shouldn't they? Freedom of exploration is a core value for the genre, even in the form of "Can I beat the game with only the starting shoes?" or "What if I just had an insane amount of Int?". Speedrunners would be hit especially hard, since a cap would completely ruin a gear-based strategy.
Even worse, though, is that I think both the diversity of builds and a practical "cap" would come up naturally. Any sort of quick switch would allow for situational stats to come into use, to speak nothing of inventory sets for, say, shard or loot farming, fast exploration or surviving. You'd be rocking a pretty diverse build in effect. In most areas you would also hit a practical Attack cap as well, since one- or two-shotting enemies is in effect a damage cap that factors into gear choice. A good gear set for a room full of weaklings or a few very strong or a few very defensive baddies should look very different, with absolutely no actual caps required.
|
|