Kilshrek wrote...
But how is this reflected in a game? Or perhaps, how is this reflected in a game so as to leave the player with no doubt that there has been improvement?
Why should there be no doubt that there was an improvement?
I would like to know what that is, since it relates to my first question.
Like I said: an entirely visual system that uses uncertain cues to give a sense of progression, and scales power to interaction with the environment. An example was in MSG 2, where doing pull ups improved the length of a grip bar and how fast it was used up. There was no numerical aspect to it: the UI simulated the subjective feel of strength while gripping.
No, I wouldn't, but ninjas have skills like any other, and how then do I keep track of the many legendary skills of a ninja? Many aspects of athleticism, stealth, combat skills, evasion skills, deception skills, I argue that numbers are a way of providing the player with the necessary information without overwhelming them with having to memorise how good they are at what.
But you don't need to memorize it. You know how athletic you are based on the feats you can do that others (and past you) couldn't. You know how stealthy you are by how often & easy it is to get caught, and how often you are seen via direct LOS from a distance. You know how easily you can evade by how often you try to evade and fail. Deception skills, by how often you deceive and suceed.
Because I'm trying to not get this thread locked for being completely off-topic, and because it might be directly relevant to DA 3.
So long as DA3 isn't allowing you direct control (ala TW2 or ME1-3) it needs direct and clear statistical and numerical descriptions. But none of these are objective hallmarks of a good UI.
If you're saying it can be done just because it can be done then I have nothing to argue there, my point is how sensible is it to implement within a hypothetical game, where a hypothetical player may want to know what is going on. How then is that relevant information relayed to the player?
See above.
"Hey, look, you're this strong. You can bench press XX kgs of weight." Games being what they are these days, combat is almost guaranteed, so how does that strength "stat" then translate into combat? How does the player know what they're doing? Unless you were sat in a complete simulation, where your consciousness is in the game, I don't see why you'd want to remove the easiest form of communicating information to the player.
You use non-numerical means. I already gave you an example. For combat, you can show STR by how easily blows stagger enemies. As STR improves, even your fast & weak blows lead to massive staggers.
And bringing this back to a game, how do you measure it? If you measure it outside of the game then you're not doing it right, because the standard is in the game, not outside it. If you're doing it in the game, then how is it done?
You don't measure it outside the game. You actually do the thing you want to do in game and see how well you can do it. I'm not sure how to explain it better. You try to get from ledge A to B, but your bar runs out. So you train more, and then you see that the bar runs down noticeable more slowly after training. So you try again.
Retour en haut
