1109 réponses à ce sujet

[Pzykozis]

billy the squid wrote...

If you get a quest or you're going out into the wild, you craft traps, potions, grenades, poultices, poisons. You get tooled up before you go out into the area. You might be a witcher, but barreling in talking on 5 heavily armoured knights is a recipie for disaster. That's why the HP regen worked in TW2, it was balanced around a completely different game design. (And the traps "Arrd" sign can be laid in combat, several mission laying traps in combat is a necessity)

Nor have you addressed any of the other points regarding the similarities of the games with HP regen and without it both requiring resource management. The lack of HP regen hasn't affected any of the game designs with regards to resource management, nor did it's inclusion in TW2 have any effect either in the same vein and in terms of combat encouters. The assumption was if you didn't prepare before, you'd get your arse kicked. That's it, it didn't matter that you were at full hp or not. The combat was just as hard.

The only games that I have seen wave combat and massive HP and damage bloating are those with regenerating HP.

To be fair you don't have to do that in Witcher 2 at all, infact for me its far more fun to play it without those as they are essentially boring tasks which only serve to make the game easier. Dark mode is perfectly doable without using traps et al. But witcher is a fairly different game to DA anyway being that it has far more action orientated combat wherein you can negate or atleast offset large amounts of damage by dodging and parrying/counterattacking.

The problem with your 'the only games' example is that it doesn't really portray regenerating health as a concept as a whole it just represents arguably bad execution of the design philosophy behind that choice. Reminds me of the arguements about framed narrative and the lack of choice it gives, it's just down to implementation rather than being an inherent flaw with that story telling technique.

[Fetunche]

In both the previous games with health regen, you plan as much as you want, craft as much as want use traps, poisons, grenades whatever but you didn't HAVE to.

[Realmzmaster]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

In DA:O, you can spend ten minutes lining up traps before a fight and use them to take down a group of enemies easily. Or, conversely, you could run in and get the fight over in two minutes. Both methods wind up having you walk away with full health.

One method results in an easier combat, however, which may be all the player is looking for (their decisions and planning to have an effect on the upcoming battle).

I agree. The player is rewarded with easier combat by using traps and utilizing the rogue's non-combat abilities. The player is engaged in strategic planning and then uses the necessary tactics to execute the plan. It aids resource management when it comes to the consumption of potions and injury kits.

[AresKeith]

Fetunche wrote...

In both the previous games with health regen, you plan as much as you want, craft as much as want use traps, poisons, grenades whatever but you didn't HAVE to.

So what's the issue?

[AlanC9]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Wulfram wrote...
No you didn't have to.  You pushed the rest button.  Aside from a very few occasions the decision to go into combat with less than full strength was purely a self imposed challenge.

IN BG1 and BG2 You pushed the rest button if you were in a place to rest. So you had to acertain if the party was in a relatively safe place. That also opened the party up to the random encounters which could disrupt the rest and you had to fight at less than full strength. Still astrategic consideration to taken into account.

In my BG experience, it made more sense to just punch the rest button whenever you felt the party was a bit depleted, and then ride out the RE, or REs. Unless the party was really trashed, of course, but that isn't likely to happen at the beginning of a crawl.

And "whenever you felt the party was a bit depleted" can mean anything the player wants it to mean. You're trading off the tedium of REs for lessening the future challenge, of course, so resting efter every encounter isn't all that useful a strategy. The main resource I was managing was my own interest, not the party's spells, potions, or whatnot.

Modifié par AlanC9, 14 août 2013 - 08:24 .

[Provi-dance]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

No you didn't have to. You pushed the rest button. Aside from a very few occasions the decision to go into combat with less than full strength was purely a self imposed challenge.

This is still an important thing for some people, however (and accents the divide).

That that self-imposed challenge exists is something that others will also find appealing.

Precisely, it's an important element.

[Allan Schumacher]

So long as you are also willing to understand that for other people, it's less important (or irrelevant, or even detrimental).

Some of the options are irreconcilable, and some will like the decisions and some will not, which is pretty par for the course.

[Provi-dance]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

So long as you are also willing to understand that for other people, it's less important (or irrelevant, or even detrimental).

Some of the options are irreconcilable, and some will like the decisions and some will not, which is pretty par for the course.

Empathy for people's detrimental preferences regarding DA:I's combat mechanics isn't something I'm working on. 

Yes, I'm aware that people have different opinions.

[Clertar]

I enjoyed limping away in JE after being badly beaten in some fights xD

[Fast Jimmy]

Filament wrote...

Fetunche wrote...

In both the previous games with health regen, you plan as much as you want, craft as much as want use traps, poisons, grenades whatever but you didn't HAVE to.

No, it was pretty much pointless to do so. Now it may come with an actual benefit, but you still don't HAVE to.

 

I think that is what I was trying to say.

Setting traps was worthless in DA:O. A cool, novelty system, to be sure, but ultimately inferior in every way to direct combat. As Allan said, one could do so for the sheer enjoyment of it or to simply experiment, but there was absolutely zero in-game incentive to do so. If, however, using a traps skill (or a sneak skill, or a persuasion skill or whatever) is made more attractive than direct conflict, then they actually have a chance of being designed well and used often.

A health regen system makes that difficult (or, in the case of The Witcher, transfers it to a simple trap attack, used in combat only). After all, if the only threat to losing is a full party wipe at 100% health, then combat will always be the easiest option (unless there is a true "I Win" dialogue button, of course - a separate conversation). If, however, you need to watch the health of your party carefully and combat is a threat not just to your immediate situation, but your party's long-term survival, then options that can accomplish your goals without direct harm are worth much more than if the only time you would honestly think about using them is when you are facing full-party wipe. 

Modifié par Fast Jimmy, 14 août 2013 - 09:23 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

The problem  is that it's difficult to have any single battle actually be tough unless you've given out  a rest opportunity right before it, since the big fights have to accomdate different resource levels too.

Any fight would then have the potential to be tough, if you've previously managed your resources inadequately.

My "reward" for good performance is therefore getting easier fights later in the sequence.

As it should be.  Just like rewards in the real world.

Otherwise you'd have your boss saying "Good job, Alan.  As a reward, I'm going to cut your salary to make your life that much more of a struggle."

That would suck.  Me doing things well should make my life easier, not harder.

I find myself playing sloppier in resource-management-based games just to keep things interesting. Which I guess is pretty much what Wulfram's saying a few posts up.

I find myself roleplaying the resource management, so that my characters get the outcomes they deserve.

[Pzykozis]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

My "reward" for good performance is therefore getting easier fights later in the sequence.

As it should be.  Just like rewards in the real world.

Otherwise you'd have your boss saying "Good job, Alan.  As a reward, I'm going to cut your salary to make your life that much more of a struggle."

That would suck.  Me doing things well should make my life easier, not harder.

Slightly different if in this case difficulty or well better described as challenge is from where you derive your enjoyment from a game. Having skillful play being rewarded by the lack of need to be skillful is a slightly odd system and likely to be unfun for those players.

[Wulfram]

If poisons and traps and grenades were pointless in DA:0, then that was because those games were too easy, or those items were too weak - probably the former.  There's no real reason to think that getting rid of health regeneration would change either of those factors.

No health regen might make you more inclined to use them in minor battles, but if you didn't find 'em worthwhile vs say the arishok or the high dragon, I don't think you'd find them worth it anywhere really.

Allan Schumacher wrote...

No you didn't have to. You pushed the rest button. Aside from a very few occasions the decision to go into combat with less than full strength was purely a self imposed challenge.

This is still an important thing for some people, however (and accents the divide).

That that self-imposed challenge exists is something that others will also find appealing.

But isn't supporting a self-imposed challenge something that would be best done by a (sorry kittens) toggle?  Design the games for post battle health regen, then let people choose the extra challenge by turning off health regen.

Or, maybe more in the spirit of compromise, just make sure that post battle healing is as convenient as possible while not making it automatic so people can choose not to use it.  I'd still object on principle to what I'd find a pointless button press, but I suppose I couldn't really claim that a "rest" button that just had the character sit down for a few seconds or something would kill my enjoyment of the game.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Pzykozis wrote...

Slightly different if in this case difficulty or well better described as challenge is from where you derive your enjoyment from a game. Having skillful play being rewarded by the lack of need to be skillful is a slightly odd system and likely to be unfun for those players.

Making the game effortless cheapens the game if that effortlessness is handed to me without my having done anything.

But if I earned it, then it's an enjoyable reward.

I want me putting effort into the game to be rewarded by a reduced need for me to put effort into the game.  If the game is always a struggle, then why would I bother working at getting better?

It's the same as my argument against level scaling.

[Pzykozis]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Pzykozis wrote...

Slightly different if in this case difficulty or well better described as challenge is from where you derive your enjoyment from a game. Having skillful play being rewarded by the lack of need to be skillful is a slightly odd system and likely to be unfun for those players.

Making the game effortless cheapens the game if that effortlessness is handed to me without my having done anything.

But if I earned it, then it's an enjoyable reward.

I want me putting effort into the game to be rewarded by a reduced need for me to put effort into the game.  If the game is always a struggle, then why would I bother working at getting better?

It's the same as my argument against level scaling.

For you yes.

I don't really follow the logic behind your bothering to get better, if by your example, content gets easier you're actively willing the player to play less skillfully after each stage they are rewarded at which'd probably be hideous in terms of difficulty spikes and/or disappointing plateaus where the challenge isn't high enough because you're not expecting much of the players otherwise, even if you percieve the lessening of challenge as a reward you're rewarding them with atrophying their skills they've built up to pass the grading content (if that's even needed), whilst on the other hand having ever increasing challenge semi-forces the player to continue to improve (because otherwise game over/death really).

But well, I just disagree with you really, the challenge in content is what is fun for me (story aswell of course but that's irrelavant) lessening that as a reward or whatever you call it takes away from that and really that's all there is to it.

[AlanC9]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

The problem  is that it's difficult to have any single battle actually be tough unless you've given out  a rest opportunity right before it, since the big fights have to accomdate different resource levels too.

Any fight would then have the potential to be tough, if you've previously managed your resources inadequately.

Right. So I'm rewarded for playing badly, not for playing well. Making the game easier isn't a reward.

My "reward" for good performance is therefore getting easier fights later in the sequence.

As it should be.  Just like rewards in the real world.

Otherwise you'd have your boss saying "Good job, Alan.  As a reward, I'm going to cut your salary to make your life that much more of a struggle."

That would suck.  Me doing things well should make my life easier, not harder.

The problem is that making my PC's life easier doesn't help me. I'm better off playing incompetently so the combats are more fun. This would work for me if I liked playing incompetent characters, but I generally don't.

I suppose there's  theoretical combination of difficulty level and design that would get around this, but I have not seen it.

Modifié par AlanC9, 14 août 2013 - 11:16 .

[Maria Caliban]

I think the important question is: Can I regain heal by devouring my enemies?

[Pzykozis]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I think the important question is: Can I regain heal by devouring my enemies?

You really do have a thing for reavers don't you?

[Maria Caliban]

I am a simple woman with simple... tastes.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Intending the game to challenge the player is simply the wrong way to go about designing a roleplaying game, I think. Forcing the player to work hard at playing the game limits his character's development based on the player's ability to learn.

That's antithetical to roleplaying.

[Wulfram]

Filament wrote...

Those games weren't too easy except to the extent that you could defeat any given encounter without planning and without anyone dropping dead. Without regen means you have to consider not only if you can defeat an encounter, but how little damage you can take. Therefore using traps in those minor and/or major battles fills a strategic interest to give your party the advantage and avoid as much damage as possible. Even if you only use it in minor battles it can help win major battles later. No regen absolutely affects this.

If you just added no regen  - and we'll assume for the sake of argument that the player is unwilling or unable to just heal himself some other way - to a game that didn't have it, then yes you might provoke the player to use more consumable because the game has been made harder because you've effectively changed the victory conditions for the fights - now winning means getting through the fight with limited casualties rather than getting through the fight with one man standing.

But that's not a sensible way to see it.  If Bioware wants to make the game more difficult, they can just add some extra hitpoints or damage to the enemies.  Rather the assumption should be that the no regen game and the regen game are equal in challenge, presumably by taking some difficulty of the individual fights of the no regen fights.  And in that case, since the difficulty is equal, then the player who can get through the game without using consumables can still get through the game without using consumables.

And if you want to make the player use these consumables, then you can just increase the difficulty such that it will be more difficult to get through without consumables, and maybe give the consumables a buff too.  This solution is regen independent - it's as valid either way.  Though really, I think a lot of players just don't want to use the things, and would rather just have to reload the game a few more times to get through the fight than do so.  Hell, most people seem to barely use healing potions, going by how everyone seems to think you can't go without Anders.

Modifié par Wulfram, 14 août 2013 - 11:53 .

[Fast Jimmy]

Maria Caliban wrote...

I think the important question is: Can I regain heal by devouring my enemies?

In the Wolfenstein, you can drink blood to heal small amounts of health. Ah... simpler times.