[project1dev] Re: almost completely on topic... :P

  • From: Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:58:02 -0700

Yeah, that sounds good.  Fewer but better fights is very fun.

On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 5:38 PM,  <figarus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Well one of the founding ideas of the game is fewer but more epic fights. 
>  Resource management won't really be an issue as much in this game as others 
> really because the goal will be to not really take damage  plus with swapping 
> out party members and the health system we talked about, there essentially 
> isn't resources.
> Sent via BlackBerry from T-Mobile
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Riccobono <crysalim@xxxxxxxxx>
> Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 17:30:05
> To: <project1dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: [project1dev] Re: almost completely on topic... :P
> Resource management + attrition need to be balanced, I think every
> game at least tries to do this, but doesn't always succeed.
> Dragon Quest for example is way biased towards attrition, having to
> conserve mp in dungeons against ranbats and save your resources for
> the bosses/tough enemies.  This is the oldschool style of rpgs, and is
> kinda boring compared to what is possible now.
> A game like Kingdom Hearts is much more biased towards short term
> management, since everything you kill regenerates bits of hp and mp,
> so you can pretty much pump out all of your mana in one fight.  I
> understand that the player can procure a bit of a thrill by being deep
> in a dungeon with almost no mana or hp left, but this isn't as fun as
> being able to have many options in every fight you enter, imo.
> Getting rid of ranbats is the first goal which we have already done,
> but beyond that, you really just need small but clever tweaks to take
> care of regen, such as hp/mp restoration spots placed through
> dungeons, an attribute (such as Guts or Stamina) that restores a tiny
> bit of hp/mp per fight, gear that gives you regen per step, or other
> things.
> A game I really enjoyed gave you items that would heal you and never
> disappear, but you could only use them every 120 seconds or so (or
> about 500 steps in game).  Basically it was an item with a cooldown
> that never disappeared.
> In short, I agree with Kent (more meaningful battles, and easier regeneration)
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 10:43 AM, Alan Wolfe <alan.wolfe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> "Many traditional RPGs have finite non-regenerating resources that are
>> restored only at particular points (such as inns, etc.). Resource management
>> is of long-term relevance, but rarely relevant within a single regular
>> combat. This allows for less challenging battles to have meaningful
>> consequences (consumption of resources), but often encourages a
>> (subjectively) boring degree of resource conservation (eg: magic-users who
>> avoid using any magic at all if they can help it)
>> In RPGs with rapidly regenerating (but smaller) resource pools, resource
>> management is of short-term relevance only. This may allow for greater
>> tactical depth within a single combat since the player can be expected to
>> use a range of abilities, rather than conserve them, and running dry during
>> a single fight is plausible and must be managed. However, if resources
>> regenerate between battles, any fight which does not present a reasonable
>> chance of outright defeating the player is effectively just taking up time.
>> Attrition is not possible. Moreover, I think you lose a significant degree
>> of dramatic tension that can come from being deep in dangerous territory,
>> and running low on resources. In such a system, no matter how many battles
>> you slog through, you're still effectively as fresh as when you set out.
>> Is it possible to design an RPG where resource management is relevant both
>> in the short-term and long-term? Where excessive conservatism is not
>> encouraged, but moderate-difficulty battles are not made irrelevant?
>> What are some of your opinions are on the subject of resource management and
>> attrition in RPGs (or even more generally)? How do you feel about systems
>> with/without significant attrition? Are there any games that you think have
>> done it unusually well?"
>> More as well as other people responding at...
>> http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/topic.asp?topic_id=533360

Other related posts: