PlanetCrap 6.0!
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
T O P I C
A solution to all of our problems.
June 6th 2002, 00:03 CEST by bishop

Choices.

We all agree that the player should have more, but I'd like to specify exactly what I want to choose from.

I'd like to see FPS games come with a new menu.

Difficulty Options.

Some games have five, some games have three, others have less or more or none, but I don't want to choose the entire difficulty of the game through this, I want choices.

Saves. You get to pick between Unlimited Save Anywhere, Limited Save Anywhere (and you can specify the number), or Save Between Levels.

AI. I'd like a toggled checklist that lets you pick and choose what the enemy does. Things like setting everyone to charge forth blindly firing with a selectable range of accuracy, or just a constanst steady percent selection. I'd also like the Tactics themselves to be selectable. You can have your enemies never retreat, to use some tactics, but not others.

Respawning. I'd like to be able to choose the amount of respawning, if any, the enemy does.

Cheat toggle, on or off, or you can enable certain cheats and not others (example: noclip, but not god).

There are more things I want to put here, but I haven't thought through them enough.

If this is a menu somewhere, and the game comes with the standard three or five difficulty levels, it works out for the common good. Joe can buy the game and never play with the difficulty menu, while all the hardcore can configure it to their tastes and fuck themselves when they don't like the way the game plays.

Also, since there'd tend to be a lot of toggling and selecting going on, you can save the custom settings as one of ten or so easy selectible difficulty settings.

Some things in this that would work in one game wouldn't be right for another, but hey, it needs to be edited to fit the game without reducing usability.

I think the final thing that I'd really like to see with this is it not be a feature, I want it standard.

I don't want Raven's next new hit to be advertised with "a difficulty system you've never seen nor will again!!"

I just want them or someone else to do it, quietly. Sure, mention it, but as soon as it becomes the selling point in the game, the game itself will start lacking.

(by the way, I know this kind of resembles the custom setting with SOF1, but that was rather limited compared to this, and it wasn't implemented that greatly.)
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: A solution to all of our problems.

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
#1 by jafd
2002-06-06 00:06:11
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
SoF2 has custom difficulty settings, and it's a great step forward.

More options for the user == Good.

Bored now.
#2 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:08:40
I disagree.  I don't think giving the user such fine grained choices is the solution.

Besides, anyone who is 'hardcore' plays on the equivalent of nightmare mode on every game, or else he or she is a huge pussy.

Smashing!
#3 by Creole Ned
2002-06-06 00:08:55
Um, how did this go from the topic bin to front page so quickly? This system stinks! New topic on topic bin shenanigans! EOD!!

P.S. Being able to customize the enemy AI before playing effectively kills much of the surprise and discovery one gets in a single player game.

I found a new friend underneath my pillow.
#4 by jafd
2002-06-06 00:09:15
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
No one gives a shit if you agree or disagree. Fu.

Bored now.
#5 by jafd
2002-06-06 00:09:28
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
Not you, Ned. :)

Bored now.
#6 by Creole Ned
2002-06-06 00:11:06
"Fu" always looks like "foo" to me. It's cute, but not very cutting. Now, F.U. leaves no doubt, plus it has a somewhat scholarly ring what with the association with universities it suggests.

I found a new friend underneath my pillow.
#7 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:13:06
I don't give a shit if anyone gives a shit if I agree or disagree.  This is the Internet, I'll post my opinions anyway!

Smashing!
#8 by Frijoles
2002-06-06 00:13:08
I disagree.
#9 by Max Diablos
2002-06-06 00:14:15
The problem with IT is it allows too many idiots to fiddle.

No helter skelter. No over the rainbow bad trip apocalypse. Just us and this moment now. This is how it ends.
#10 by jafd
2002-06-06 00:15:54
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
Now, F.U. leaves no doubt,

Ambiguity is my watchword!

Bored now.
#11 by Scrozzy
2002-06-06 00:18:27
And this somehow will solve all our problems? Riiiight.

... Options? Surely if there's one thing modern gaming has taught us, it's that less == more.
#12 by Matt Perkins
2002-06-06 00:21:27
wizardque@yahoo.com http://whatwouldmattdo.com/
More Options != better

Each game is different, having more options in SOF2 wouldn't have fixed the single player...

I did not change my name...morn did.
#13 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:22:47
This is only really relevant to FPS games (and linear ones at that).  Most games, allowing the user to set these low-level options has the potential to totally wreck large portions of the game, with the user maybe not even realizing that "the suck" is due to their own stupid choices on the option menu.

I think a lot of the issues people have with games are actually solved, though few games incorporate all the good solutions.  If game developers would bother to look and see what other developers are doing and would have the common sense to copy what works rather than trying to "innovate" at every step, or have some unique marketing bullet points that translate into crappy game, games would suck a lot less.

Of course there are pathological cases where things are still mostly kludge-work (AI), and that can't be fixed in this manner, but things such as optimal save systems can be...

The industry needs something like "Design Patterns" for..uh...design.  Game design, that is; not just code design.  Yes games should be original, but many low-level concepts could be reused all over the place and just presented in a unique way to avoid the tedium of all games being the same.

Smashing!
#14 by LPMiller
2002-06-06 00:27:06
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
I would just be happy if during the in engine cut scenes, they turned off the direct sound. When it's the camera panning, and not me personally, I don't need the important story bits wandering between ears/speakers for no reason. It is distracting and annoying. Otherwise, I totally disagree with bishop, because I dislike religious figures.

I believe I can fly......urk.
#15 by Warren Marshall
2002-06-06 00:27:19
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
You don't want to inundate users with options.  Easy, Medium and Hard are simple to select from the menu and get going.  Nobody wants to sit there and make 30 decisions before starting to play the game.

"It's pretty common for pussies, dumbasses, and their families to blame their problems on vague influences like the media and society. The truth is, fuck you."
#16 by Matt Perkins
2002-06-06 00:28:15
wizardque@yahoo.com http://whatwouldmattdo.com/
Mister Nutty

Apparently you the game developer leet expert man...  the industry needs a lot of things and needs to be doing a lot of things...  stupid developers not listening to Mister Nutty!!!!

(I could just be cranky, just got off a long day)

I did not change my name...morn did.
#17 by jafd
2002-06-06 00:30:06
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
The SoF2 SP is decent, for what it is... the trouble is, for me, with the inconsistencies.

I got really pissed during Seaward Star. I wanted to stealth the whole way through, but figuring out the stupid rules the game follows became unfun.

1) If I take one running step while too close to a goon, alarms sound immediately.

2) If I knife a guy in the back, and he dies while letting out a BLOODCURDLING WAIL, even though there are goons nearby, the alarms don't sound.

3) If I sneak up on someone and shoot them with a silenced pistol, if they don't die immediately, they still sit there. And bleed. I shot this one guy six times in the leg with a slienced pistol before he "died," and the whole time, he just sat there.

It's shit like this that makes people say "Bad AI." It might be the shiznit from a coding and mathematical persepctive, but if the illusion of intelligence breaks down at any point, it's automatically "bad."

I will return to SoF2 SP after a patch. It's fun, as a whole, but the little bits that jar me out of the game are annoying enough that I don't care to deal with them. Meanwhile, the MP is more fun than I thought it would be, so that's okay.

Now... if I could get into a config GUI, that let me adjust the AI's stealth detection settings, that'd be fine. I don't mind playing by the rules, as long as the rules are figure-outable and/or configurable.

Maybe more options wouldn't fix things, but I don't see how having more options would hurt.

Bored now.
#18 by jafd
2002-06-06 00:31:03
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1000033180
Nobody wants to sit there and make 30 decisions before starting to play the game.

So, you make them optional. Uhm... duh?

Bored now.
#19 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:31:15

Apparently you the game developer leet expert man...  the industry needs a lot of things and needs to be doing a lot of things...


Matt,

  I couldn't agree with you more.


stupid developers not listening to Mister Nutty!!!!


Actually I'm glad they don't, because the short-sightedness (and childish need to imprint their 'vision') of most designers makes it makes it easier to compete in the industry.

Smashing!
#20 by Shadarr
2002-06-06 00:32:31
shadarr@yahoo.com http://digital-luddite.com
I don't think the problem with the enemy AI is lack of prefs settings.  The problem is that some companies <cough> Raven <cough> don't bother writing good AI.  You can't turn on something that isn't there, you can only turn off optionss to make a game easier.   Why would we want to do that?

What we really want is somebody to write bots which don't have to cheat or come in waves of 60 to be challenging.

Some of the other points are worthwhile, however.  Other games like Civ and AOE have had cheat mode toggles.  Some games have limitted saves.  The noclip setting shouldn't be implemented--just fix the damn bug that makes it necessary.
#21 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:35:29
jafd, the problem is more options wouldn't really help you there (with dumb AI).

If the AI is dumb, there's unlikely to be an option to make it "less dumb".  If that could be done, it would have been the default!

Sometimes things suck because they are badly designed, sometimes they suck because the developer ran out of time, in most cases no amount of options will fix bad game design.

In short, I disagree!

Smashing!
#22 by LPMiller
2002-06-06 00:35:55
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
You don't want to inundate users with options.  Easy, Medium and Hard are simple to select from the menu and get going.  Nobody wants to sit there and make 30 decisions before starting to play the game.


Agreed, to a point. Depends on the game...didn't many of the Ultima's have like 50 questions at the start. I know people who loved that.

I believe I can fly......urk.
#23 by Warren Marshall
2002-06-06 00:36:14
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
jafd
So, you make them optional. Uhm... duh?

Yes, that would be why they're called "options".  Sure, you can provide default values for all that stuff but eventually the player will need to look at them and decide what kind of game they want to play.  It's overkill IMO.  Besides all of that, I can't imagine how a game could be designed that would work well under the weight of all of those options.  Designers are paid good money for a reason.

"It's pretty common for pussies, dumbasses, and their families to blame their problems on vague influences like the media and society. The truth is, fuck you."
#24 by LPMiller
2002-06-06 00:37:23
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
Because they are idea men!

I believe I can fly......urk.
#25 by Warren Marshall
2002-06-06 00:37:27
http://www.wantonhubris.com/
LPMiller
Agreed, to a point. Depends on the game...didn't many of the Ultima's have like 50 questions at the start. I know people who loved that.

Wasn't 50, and it was only Ultima 4.  It was done to establish where your character would start in the world and what his basic alignment would be.  It was a hook unique to that game, which was cool.

"It's pretty common for pussies, dumbasses, and their families to blame their problems on vague influences like the media and society. The truth is, fuck you."
#26 by LPMiller
2002-06-06 00:37:45
lpmiller@gotapex.com http://www.gotapex.com
kidding....

I believe I can fly......urk.
#27 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:37:49

didn't many of the Ultima's have like 50 questions at the start. I know people who loved that.


CRPG players aren't people...They are CRPG players.

Smashing!
#28 by Hugin
2002-06-06 00:47:21
lmccain@nber.org
For games like Alpha Centauri or Moo2, I really like a ton of options.  I get to build the game universe I like before I step into it.
#29 by jjohnsen
2002-06-06 00:55:09
http://www.johnsenclan.com
#7 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 00:13:06
  
 I don't give a shit if anyone gives a shit if I agree or disagree.  This is the Internet, I'll post my opinions anyway!
 


While on the subject of options, Morn we're still hoping for an ignore feature in the 'crap.

#0

I'd be happy with a cheat on/off toggle, difficulty level and save choices.  The rest would probably make the game un-codable wouldn't it?  You'd have to practically re-build the AI for each setting choice.
#30 by bishop
2002-06-06 00:55:52
http://www.darkintel.org/00FF00/
Warren:
You don't want to inundate users with options.  Easy, Medium and Hard are simple to select from the menu and get going.  Nobody wants to sit there and make 30 decisions before starting to play the game.


I'm not saying to get rid of easy medium and hard, but why not let them choose if they want to?

As to AI, I think it comes down to what someone said previously, it's about aritificial stupidity.

The ultimate goal I suppose is to give the player the choice between fighting wave after wave of zbots or have the entire enemy army consist of ten or eleven idiots.

Warren:
Besides all of that, I can't imagine how a game could be designed that would work well under the weight of all of those options.


That's exactly the point, I don't WANT the games to be designed around it, I want it to be a feature, something that can be done.

I don't see it being such a big deal, if you spend most of your time shooting things, why shouldn't you decide how they shoot back?

Ned:
Being able to customize the enemy AI before playing effectively kills much of the surprise and discovery one gets in a single player game.


Alright, you have a point there.
I disagree with it, but I can see it being a problem for people.

I don't know though, what discovery is there, really?

If you turn off the enemies ability to use grenades, does it really ruin the game?
On the other hand, if it's left on (or not touched to begin with), does the enemy throwing a grenade make a surprise that could ruin the game if left out?

Also, I'm not talking about scripted sequences, or anything of the ilk, just the standard, wave after wave of enemy that you normally fight in games.

May the end of the world be warm and smoldering.
At least for some of you.
#31 by bishop
2002-06-06 00:57:44
http://www.darkintel.org/00FF00/
jjohnsen:
You'd have to practically re-build the AI for each setting choice


I don't know, I'm thinking that it's not that difficult to have a toggle that says "no enemy can throw grenades" and enforce it through the game.

May the end of the world be warm and smoldering.
At least for some of you.
#32 by Shadarr
2002-06-06 00:59:05
shadarr@yahoo.com http://digital-luddite.com
I get to build the game universe I like before I step into it.


That sounds more like map generator options, which would also be good.  I think it makes more sense to have a lot of gameplay options in a strategy setting than FPS.

If you had a great FPS that had almost humanlike AI, would you actually use a checkbox that says "make opponents stupid but have lots of them"?  If you want that, there are a helluva lot of games already on your shelf.
#33 by bishop
2002-06-06 01:05:57
http://www.darkintel.org/00FF00/
Shadarr:
If you had a great FPS that had almost humanlike AI, would you actually use a checkbox that says "make opponents stupid but have lots of them"?


I don't think so.

I don't WANT humanlike AI.

I don't want my hundreds of enemies to be smart, I want them to be STUPID.

Not complete idiots, but not zbots either.

Does this mean a damn to you? No, because with this method, you'll be able to configure it the way you want it.

Also, I should mention that if done the way I have in mind, you'd be able to get the over-all difficulty of the game higher than "Hard" by setting the accuracy up rather high on enemy aiming or use of accessories (grenades and such).

It all depends on the game though, that's why I can't really give an exact answer on any of this, it's all going to change from game to game, but the core of it could be there and working.

May the end of the world be warm and smoldering.
At least for some of you.
#34 by crash
2002-06-06 01:08:52
Warren:

Nobody wants to sit there and make 30 decisions before starting to play the game.

you might actually be surprised.

but customizable difficulty levels? if you're going to do that, please do it in a text file, not the GUI. those are gettin cluttered up enough as it is.

Whoops, sorry, was my common sense showing again? -HoseWater
#35 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 01:09:20
Options, smoptions.  I'd be happy with games that were smart enough not to reload an entire level just because I changed the video settings.  Yeah sure, maybe you need to flush the texture cache but why the fuck are you reloading the BSP and all of the model geometry? HUH QUAKE3 ENGINE?? WHY?? WHY THE FUCK!?  To be fair to the Quake3 engine, this seems to be quite common amongst other game engines.  FUCKIN FUCK!

Smashing!
#36 by bishop
2002-06-06 01:11:32
http://www.darkintel.org/00FF00/
Ok, you do have a point there, but I was thinking more along the lines of something anyone can use, digging through a text file isn't the best way to do that.

You do have a very valid point about GUI's though.

May the end of the world be warm and smoldering.
At least for some of you.
#37 by crash
2002-06-06 01:13:29
bishop:

Ok, you do have a point there, but I was thinking more along the lines of something anyone can use, digging through a text file isn't the best way to do that.

casual users won't use it or care. hardcore won't mind a text file. everyone wins.

Whoops, sorry, was my common sense showing again? -HoseWater
#38 by _Fury_
2002-06-06 01:14:14
ajhill@wi.rr.com
I don't want those choices of save options. I want Halo's save system, in every FPS from here on out. Anything less is uncivilized.

Research has been shown to cause cancer in laboratory rats.
#39 by HiredGoons
2002-06-06 01:15:00
Creole Ned #3


 Um, how did this go from the topic bin to front page so quickly? This system stinks! New topic on topic bin shenanigans! EOD!!


I voted "Yes" for your topic, Ned.
#40 by bishop
2002-06-06 01:17:26
http://www.darkintel.org/00FF00/
crash, but I'm not hardcore, nore am I casual.

I think we seem to be dismissing an entire segment of the gaming population, people who are in between the two leagues.

I could probably work my way around a text file if I had to, but I don't think I'd enjoy that very much.

On the other hand, I do want theese changes available.

Fury, that's more of an impossibility than my idea, sadly.

May the end of the world be warm and smoldering.
At least for some of you.
#41 by Shadarr
2002-06-06 01:17:45
shadarr@yahoo.com http://digital-luddite.com
For those of us without an XBox, please explain Halo's save system.
#42 by HoseWater
2002-06-06 01:18:23
barneyque@hotmail.com
I keep hearing rumors about a Ned topic, but I've yet to see one.  

Who keeps stuffing Ned's topics, and what does he want to talk about?
#43 by bishop
2002-06-06 01:18:26
http://www.darkintel.org/00FF00/
Checkpoints before and after every major battle, I think.

May the end of the world be warm and smoldering.
At least for some of you.
#44 by Scrozzy
2002-06-06 01:26:02
Where does one draw the line with all these options? Just to satisfy everyone, there should be an option you can enable so one can sit back and watch the computer play the game for you.
#45 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 01:28:50
IMO, being the "game developer leet expert man" (thanks, Matt), I believe the solution to saving in single player games (FPS or otherwise) is clearly to have many optional checkpoints.  Allows for tension without too much frustration.  Don't want to use the save/checkpoints? Don't.  Want to use them? Go ahead.

Best example: Baldur's Gate, Dark Alliance for PS2.

Smashing!
#46 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 01:29:31

Just to satisfy everyone, there should be an option you can enable so one can sit back and watch the computer play the game for you.


That's why we have Metal Gear Solid 2 and every Final Fantasy game since FF7.

Smashing!
#47 by HoseWater
2002-06-06 01:33:23
barneyque@hotmail.com
So much for being a 'game developer leet expert man', your solution to the problem would immediately strike any game you had a say in from my purchase list.
#48 by Max Diablos
2002-06-06 01:42:02
#30 by bishop

That's exactly the point, I don't WANT the games to be designed around it, I want it to be a feature, something that can be done. I don't see it being such a big deal, if you spend most of your time shooting things, why shouldn't you decide how they shoot back?


I have one philosophical nitpick with this. You have to ask yourself what the nature of the game is, and what the nature of this feature is. What does it add? What does it change? What does it take away? Its inclusion or exclusion comes at a price. What is that price?

I view it in the same way as I would the ultimate DVD movie. At what point does it become illegitimate to insert yourself between the director and the movie? I have a natural dislike for anything that allows someone to have such a fine grained level of control of pre-fabricated art that they acquire the mistaken belief they're also a director.

Life is full of options. In many respects we have too many. Instead of dealing with the game as created by the developer you want to start modifying it in ways that best suit you. While this isn't a bad thing in itself begins to enquire as to how much of this is desireable. The value of a piece of art is in how we measure ourselves to it not how it measures itself to us.

If you don't like it write your own.

No helter skelter. No over the rainbow bad trip apocalypse. Just us and this moment now. This is how it ends.
#49 by Mister Nutty
2002-06-06 01:45:22
That's fine HoseWater.  I don't develop games for PlanetCrap users, I develop them for real people.

Smashing!
#50 by HoseWater
2002-06-06 01:48:43
barneyque@hotmail.com
Oh, well that's different then, real people certainly don't have other demands in their life prompting them to ever want to save.


The interesting thing about the 'save problem', is that it is never a problem untill some clever developer decides to screw around with it.
C O M M E N T S
Home » Topic: A solution to all of our problems.

|«« - Previous Page - Next Page - »»|
P O S T   A   C O M M E N T

You need to be logged in to post a comment here. If you don't have an account yet, you can create one here. Registration is free.
C R A P T A G S
Simple formatting: [b]bold[/b], [i]italic[/i], [u]underline[/u]
Web Links: [url=www.mans.de]Cool Site[/url], [url]www.mans.de[/url]
Email Links: [email=some@email.com]Email me[/email], [email]some@email.com[/email]
Simple formatting: Quoted text: [quote]Yadda yadda[/quote]
Front Page (ATOM) • Submission Bin (1) • ArchivesUsersLoginCreate Account
You are currently not logged in.
There are currently 0 people browsing this site. [Details]