Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
Images
Blogs
Game Updates
Images Feedback Summary
Game Design Highlights
Tutorials
Articles
Scripts
Utilities / Plugins
Resources
Engines
Engine Bulletins
What is Makerscore?
Past Events
Achievements
Misaos
Forums
Chat
New to RMN?
Full Store List
RMN Music Pack (free)
Profile
Locker
Play ListsCRYSTALGATE'S PROFILE
Crystalgate
694
CloseSearch
Filter
All
Game Pages
User Statuses
Penalties for leveling up
The whole problem with not knowing how strong enemies are in a sandbox game comes mostly from the game makers not keeping things consistent. For example, in Skyrim you kill dragons near beginning of the game. Meanwhile, giants tend to one-shot you if you fight them early on. However, chance is the giants aren't supposed to be superior too dragons story wise. Even if they are, dragons are usually supposed to be high end enemies and letting the player kill them near beginning absolutely destroys any kind of intuitive way of gaging enemy strength.
If a game follows a "enemies who look stronger also are stronger" logic and keep relative enemy/soldier strengths consistent between story and gameplay, there will be very little confusion.
If a game follows a "enemies who look stronger also are stronger" logic and keep relative enemy/soldier strengths consistent between story and gameplay, there will be very little confusion.
Nutshells: Ashen
Summoner Tsundere?
Anyway, gameplay wise, she looks like a red mage. Passable attack and both offensive and healing spells.
Anyway, gameplay wise, she looks like a red mage. Passable attack and both offensive and healing spells.
Is this story too cliche?
Clichés are not necessarily bad, but there are some traps you can easily fall into.
You can accidentally add a cliché into a story simple because you're familiar with it. This can very well happen even if a better option is available. Often when I play an RPG, I end up thinking "wouldn't it have been cooler if the game had done X instead?" where X is more original than whatever the game went with. Sure, maybe the writer simple disagreed, but I bet in many cases X didn't even appear on the writer's radar because his/her mind was drawn towards a cliché.
Ever heard the argument that clichés gives the reader a familiar ground? Well, that can have it's disadvantages too. How many times haven't you called a plot twist in advance not because of logic, but because the plot twist in question is a cliché and you spotted familiar events that usually leads up to that cliché? If you genuinely want your audience to be surprised, clichés are a minefield.
I do not however think that the path to success is to avoid clichés. Rather, it's independent writing. You write what works best for your story regardless of whether or not it's a cliché.
You can accidentally add a cliché into a story simple because you're familiar with it. This can very well happen even if a better option is available. Often when I play an RPG, I end up thinking "wouldn't it have been cooler if the game had done X instead?" where X is more original than whatever the game went with. Sure, maybe the writer simple disagreed, but I bet in many cases X didn't even appear on the writer's radar because his/her mind was drawn towards a cliché.
Ever heard the argument that clichés gives the reader a familiar ground? Well, that can have it's disadvantages too. How many times haven't you called a plot twist in advance not because of logic, but because the plot twist in question is a cliché and you spotted familiar events that usually leads up to that cliché? If you genuinely want your audience to be surprised, clichés are a minefield.
I do not however think that the path to success is to avoid clichés. Rather, it's independent writing. You write what works best for your story regardless of whether or not it's a cliché.
Light, Medium, and Heavy Armor: A Conundrum
This is also why high end magical swords usually are made out of wood and other non metallic materials. Ignoring that, if metal truly is hard to enchant, I'd use leather rather than a robe. Assuming leather doesn't work either and you really need some cloth, I'd rather wear shirt and pants than an awkward robe. Robes must be the worst armor possible, soft and hinders movement at least five times as much as full plate. Well, a robe that leaves most of the leg uncovered could work though.
Trying to justify something will sometimes just cause the player to notice even more holes. When it comes to characters wearing awkward robes, you're probably better of not trying to justify it and hope the player doesn't care. This seems to be what most RPGs does.
Anyway, I earlier mentioned the payer being able to more actively take advantage of the armor. I figured out something else that may work. That would be if the enemy composition together with your armor setup changed how you have to approach battles. You encounter three physical enemies and the light armor wearing guys are now in danger while the heavy armor guys are pretty safe. Another time you encounter three magical enemies and now instead it's your heavy armor guys you have to watch.
Often the player simple heals whenever it feels it's time to do so. It's rather rare that the player is truly encouraged to pay attention to who has what defenses.
In any case, my feeling on this matter is that making different armor interesting is more a matter of how you balance them and if you have mechanics that supplement them rather than how creative you are. Still, creative is better than not creative.
Trying to justify something will sometimes just cause the player to notice even more holes. When it comes to characters wearing awkward robes, you're probably better of not trying to justify it and hope the player doesn't care. This seems to be what most RPGs does.
Anyway, I earlier mentioned the payer being able to more actively take advantage of the armor. I figured out something else that may work. That would be if the enemy composition together with your armor setup changed how you have to approach battles. You encounter three physical enemies and the light armor wearing guys are now in danger while the heavy armor guys are pretty safe. Another time you encounter three magical enemies and now instead it's your heavy armor guys you have to watch.
Often the player simple heals whenever it feels it's time to do so. It's rather rare that the player is truly encouraged to pay attention to who has what defenses.
In any case, my feeling on this matter is that making different armor interesting is more a matter of how you balance them and if you have mechanics that supplement them rather than how creative you are. Still, creative is better than not creative.
Light, Medium, and Heavy Armor: A Conundrum
I think that in order to make different armors interesting, you must allow the player to somehow take advantage of it. Let's look at the standard example of light armor having less defense and more resistance than heavy armor. If it boils down to just luck who the enemies target, then it's not going to be very interesting. Sometimes you will be lucky and the enemies will hit whoever you want them to hit while other times they will hit someone who has the wrong armor type for that attack.
However, if the characters can use aggro moves, you can manipulate who the enemies will hit. Were you to encounter three physical enemies and one magical one, you could have a heavy armor user draw aggro while the rest start with attacking the mage and if you encounter the opposite, you also do the opposite.
You don't necessarily need an aggro system, but I do think that the key to making different armor types interesting is to allow the player to actively take advantage of the various bonuses and not just passively hope that things work out advantageously.
However, if the characters can use aggro moves, you can manipulate who the enemies will hit. Were you to encounter three physical enemies and one magical one, you could have a heavy armor user draw aggro while the rest start with attacking the mage and if you encounter the opposite, you also do the opposite.
You don't necessarily need an aggro system, but I do think that the key to making different armor types interesting is to allow the player to actively take advantage of the various bonuses and not just passively hope that things work out advantageously.
Is this story too cliche?
Wikipedia defined cliché as following: A cliché or cliche is an expression, idea, or element of an artistic work which has become overused to the point of losing its original meaning, or effect, and even, to the point of being trite or irritating, especially when at some earlier time it was considered meaningful or novel.
That seems about right. I can give an example, "the church is evil."
Having a plot twist where it turns out that the church is evil is a cliché. Very few will react with shock or outrage or anything like that. More likely they will react with a sigh. This does not mean that revealing that the church is evil is necessarily a bad device, you could in theory put an interesting twist to it. However, by itself that idea has lost the impact it originally may have had.
That seems about right. I can give an example, "the church is evil."
Having a plot twist where it turns out that the church is evil is a cliché. Very few will react with shock or outrage or anything like that. More likely they will react with a sigh. This does not mean that revealing that the church is evil is necessarily a bad device, you could in theory put an interesting twist to it. However, by itself that idea has lost the impact it originally may have had.
Accepting Criticism
author=mawk
it's really lazy and disingenuous to dismiss negative criticism as a manifestation of mental illness, crystalgate.
I dismissed destructive criticism, not negative criticism. Those two are not the same. Check my first post in this topic, I explicitly stated that not all negative criticism should be dismissed.
I never told what I meant with destructive criticism, but considering my three examples, a reasonable guess would be criticism done with the purpose to go down hard on a game rather than informing. I'd also include criticism done with the purpose to mislead among destructive criticism.
Accepting Criticism
What's going to drive someone to write destructive criticism is easy, it's his/her own psychological issues. I will however note that such people are likely to choose a lower effort route, the destructive criticism will probably come in the form of a mean post rather than a review.
A game could contain sexism, feminism, be too much pro/against religion, imply that a certain political stance is wrong or in other ways tick people off. Alternatively, the game could simple give a person who has problems an opportunity to do some alpha-maling.
A game could contain sexism, feminism, be too much pro/against religion, imply that a certain political stance is wrong or in other ways tick people off. Alternatively, the game could simple give a person who has problems an opportunity to do some alpha-maling.
Is this story too cliche?
Well, the people in your story seems smarter than in the average otherizing story. When they started killing each other, their idea was "Let's put some distance between us" instead of the "let's kill each other some more" idea that's usually employed.
Legionwood 2: Rise of the Eternal's Realm
I got an accessory that lets you attack twice and I also got access to the barbarian class. I wanted to combine Craze with the double attack to attack twice with a 2x attack power, but it seems you only get one attack under Craze. Probably for the best since that combination otherwise would have demolished bosses. Doesn't stop me from searching for powerful combinations though.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
