Full Games List
Featured Games
New Games
Reviews
Media
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
Getting Noticed; Updated Demo
There didn't seem to be much skill involved despite it being action battle system. You just walk towards an enemy and hit C until stamina is depleted. Then you either spam skills or do nothing. There doesn't seem to be a good way to dodge enemy attacks, you can withdraw, but chance is they just gang up on your AI allies instead. Basically, there's to few ways to manipulate the battle.
Often when I want to attack my enemy, it has already decided to move towards an AI ally. Once it collides with my character, it will then move sideways. This results in my attacks missing. I think the problem is that once a character begins moving, it's considered to already be on the new square.
Often when I want to attack my enemy, it has already decided to move towards an AI ally. Once it collides with my character, it will then move sideways. This results in my attacks missing. I think the problem is that once a character begins moving, it's considered to already be on the new square.
Getting Noticed; Updated Demo
I played the demo.
+Great character interaction. I really liked the dialogs.
-Battles feel stiff and not very action-y at all.
+Great character interaction. I really liked the dialogs.
-Battles feel stiff and not very action-y at all.
[Poll] Why some people think FF8 was the best FF ever?
author=alterego
I choose option 2, the game mechanics are very customizable, very flexible. People complain the game is broken but it's not, it's just very exploitable once you know what you're doing, but if you play that way that's your fault. You can always aim for a low-level run, no-draw run, no limit-breaks run, etc. The game gives you options... Well, I guess this bleeds a little over option 1, but I still choose 2.
"Very exploitable" sounds a lot like broken to me. Also, I do not accept the idea that it's the player's job to keep the difficulty at the right level. You can ask the player to cooperate, such as not running from 70% of the fights or running in circles to get extra levels, but it's the game designers who has to do the balancing. Imagine that in a more traditional RPG, the player has refrain from using the latest armor upgrade and instead use the second latest armor upgrade to make the game balanced. If players don't do that and then complain the game is to easy, then it's the game designers who screwed up, not the players.
[Poll] How Much “Planning” Or “Prepping” Do You Do Before Starting Your Game(s)?
I get some basic planning done before i start, such as the skeleton of the story, characters and how I want resources to work. I do however need to start soon because I have found out that I quickly lose interest unless I actually get anywhere. Also, when I get working I always find problems I didn't predict, so too much planning can end up wasted if it turns out it cannot be put into practice.
XP battle even timing
author=MakoInfused
Yeah in VX it's called before and after, sort of-- only one is called depending on the state of the "End of Turn"/"When the end of turn" checkbox. This way you can have one for before the turn and one for after...pretty awesome.
As for XP. The method you're looking for is named "setup_battle_event". I can try to whip something up later, if someone doesn't beat me to it.
Thank you, I managed to solve the problem with your help. Or I think I have since I haven't had time to test if there's any bug with my solution. If anyone else wonders, I can post the exact solution.
XP battle even timing
Battle events in XP set to "Turn" triggers after commands have been selected, but before they are carried out. This is the worst possible time for them to trigger since that means the player can't react to what happens. Is there a way to change when they run? Either before commands are selected or after all actions are carried out would be great.
Treasure cheat, or no treasure chest, that is the question.
I prefer to have things laying around in dungeons, but ideally in packages that makes some sense. Mine-able ores and corpses has been mentioned. In a world with monsters, it makes sense that there's valuables laying around that hasn't been retrieved.
That said, it doesn't matter that much to me. I just want there to be something useful at least occasionally. There has been games where I stopped going for chests that looked even slightly complicated to get because I learned that chests never contains anything I can't buy already anyway.
That said, it doesn't matter that much to me. I just want there to be something useful at least occasionally. There has been games where I stopped going for chests that looked even slightly complicated to get because I learned that chests never contains anything I can't buy already anyway.
Oh yeah? Whaddya gonna do about it?
When it comes to non bosses, the biggest challenge is usually not to come up with counters, rather it is to convince the player to even bother. Most RPGs have status effects that can shut down randoms, but nobody cares to use them. I have a person experience where I designed a blindness spell that hits all enemies, has a 100% accuracy and lowers the enemy chance to hit to 0%. When I tested my game, I found out that the player was still better of not using it. Eventually I did manage to make my blindness spell useful in a satisfying way by fiddling with a lot of different numbers.
Speaking of satisfying, that would be the second challenge. It's easy to make a boss who spends one turn charging up a strong attack and then casts it the second turn so the player has to defend. However, there's no thinking involved, the game tells you "Defend!" and you obey. If you want there to be any brain activity involved, it gets trickier.
Anyway, I earlier stated that I did manage to make my blindness spell useful fiddling with numbers. This is also what I want to try first and foremost, getting the numbers to support counters rather than relying on clever methods. Basically, the player has an arsenal of skills that counters various enemy attacks. If the player don't use counters, the heroes will take too much damage and either get overwhelmed or run out of healing. If the player overuses counters (say tanking and casting blindness and keeping the blind immune enemies stunned and casting a fire ward spell) then the heroes will instead run out of MP because they are spending too many actions on the counters and too few on actually killing the enemies.
As for tricks, one that I've got to work at least when I test ran the battle, is a boss that summons help, but the twist is that the rate of reinforcements is reversible proportional to the number of already existing minions. So, if you kill all minions during one turn, the boss may summon two new at once while if there's four alive, the same boss may need two turn to summon just one. This forces the player to make a judgment call on how many actions should be allocated on killing the minions.
A trick I haven't tried yet, but want to try with human bosses is to give them much less HP than monster bosses, but they will heal themselves with potions. The first heal will maybe come once it's down to 75% HP, the second at 65% HP and so on. The player is then encouraged to exploit that mechanic fully. When the threshold is at 75%, you can't really prevent the boss from healing itself since you won't be able to remove 75% of it's max HP in one turn. However, you can use that mechanic to force the boss to heal instead of attacking. Later when the threshold is much lower, this method is no longer effective, but now you may be able to counter the healing. Bring it down to as close to threshold as you dare and then remove the remaining HP in one turn.
Speaking of satisfying, that would be the second challenge. It's easy to make a boss who spends one turn charging up a strong attack and then casts it the second turn so the player has to defend. However, there's no thinking involved, the game tells you "Defend!" and you obey. If you want there to be any brain activity involved, it gets trickier.
Anyway, I earlier stated that I did manage to make my blindness spell useful fiddling with numbers. This is also what I want to try first and foremost, getting the numbers to support counters rather than relying on clever methods. Basically, the player has an arsenal of skills that counters various enemy attacks. If the player don't use counters, the heroes will take too much damage and either get overwhelmed or run out of healing. If the player overuses counters (say tanking and casting blindness and keeping the blind immune enemies stunned and casting a fire ward spell) then the heroes will instead run out of MP because they are spending too many actions on the counters and too few on actually killing the enemies.
As for tricks, one that I've got to work at least when I test ran the battle, is a boss that summons help, but the twist is that the rate of reinforcements is reversible proportional to the number of already existing minions. So, if you kill all minions during one turn, the boss may summon two new at once while if there's four alive, the same boss may need two turn to summon just one. This forces the player to make a judgment call on how many actions should be allocated on killing the minions.
A trick I haven't tried yet, but want to try with human bosses is to give them much less HP than monster bosses, but they will heal themselves with potions. The first heal will maybe come once it's down to 75% HP, the second at 65% HP and so on. The player is then encouraged to exploit that mechanic fully. When the threshold is at 75%, you can't really prevent the boss from healing itself since you won't be able to remove 75% of it's max HP in one turn. However, you can use that mechanic to force the boss to heal instead of attacking. Later when the threshold is much lower, this method is no longer effective, but now you may be able to counter the healing. Bring it down to as close to threshold as you dare and then remove the remaining HP in one turn.
NewStatusScene.png
Immersion vs. Game Mechanics
I consider gameplay more important than immersion, but immersion is still not unimportant. You can make small gameplay sacrifices for large immersion gains, but if you make huge gameplay sacrifices, you're doing something wrong.
That said, usually when there's a gamplay vs something else conflict that harms immersion it's a totally unnecessary conflict. Example, the heroes surrender to soldiers who they could have beaten had the game entered combat mode. In this case, you can have maybe five times as many soldiers appear than what the player usually fights in combat and that way make surrendering more logical. If the player isn't convinced that 20 soldiers is to much even though she/he normally only fights 4 of them at a time, chance is you made combat to easy.
That said, usually when there's a gamplay vs something else conflict that harms immersion it's a totally unnecessary conflict. Example, the heroes surrender to soldiers who they could have beaten had the game entered combat mode. In this case, you can have maybe five times as many soldiers appear than what the player usually fights in combat and that way make surrendering more logical. If the player isn't convinced that 20 soldiers is to much even though she/he normally only fights 4 of them at a time, chance is you made combat to easy.
Games - Tester
Games - Other
