Vae on 11/1/2010 at 21:31
Quote Posted by Platinumoxicity
I think this feature is a bit harsh for beginners. People who are bad at Thief get punished by getting even more challenge, and professionals who can handle any mission on expert get rewarded by less challenge? I think it's all backwards. :devil:
There would be a proportional amount of dynamic difficulty applied to each fixed difficulty level (normal, hard, expert), thereby creating a balanced effect relative to the players ability.
Remember, any difficulty that the CTL would impose on the player in a properly designed system, would be of the players own doing. This is because of the Level 0 (no affect) gap, which would be balanced by the designer(s) logic/preference according to the skill level of the player.
Your thinking is backwards because your looking at the CTL as an absolute effect, when it is not. The player would choose to commit
unnecessary violence (according to their skill level) in order for the CTL to have any serious impact on the players game. On "expert", in addition to the instant fail for killing, there would be a reaction to
excessive blackjacking...which would make "expert" proportionally more difficult to "normal" and "hard".
In any case, the player would have to
choose to commit
unnecessary excessive violence, as opposed to a certain amount of violence (Level 0 gap) that the designer would expect or tolerate in order to complete a mission.
Quote Posted by theBlackman
Too many gamers forget the basic premise for any new device or game towit: READ THE FUCKING MANUAL. Or in this case the "training" mission or ingame warnings about the results of mass murder.
Yes, I agree.
For those of you who forget to READ THE FUCKING MANUAL, there is a simple immersive solution:
When the player makes his first kill, a voice over is triggered of Garrett saying something like, "I'd better be careful, too much of this will make my life a lot harder".
There could also be a second warning and even triggered vo's when CTL thresholds are crossed.
theBlackman on 11/1/2010 at 21:54
My only comment on that VAE, is that the missions would have to be carefully designed to contain an alternate path for Garrett. If the BJ penalty is enacted, and there are more than one or two instances where that's the only way to pass that area, then G would be "stuck" in a manner of speaking.
To implement alternate paths intentionally would really cut into development time, and the possibilities of the engine to generate.
Plus, as we players have proven, the developers could never come up with as many alternates as the players have discovered.
Vae on 11/1/2010 at 23:50
Quote Posted by theBlackman
My only comment on that VAE, is that the missions would have to be carefully designed to contain an alternate path for Garrett.
Not if properly balanced.
If blackjacking were to be used as an option to affect the CTL, the appropriate balance would need to be set by the designer(s) so as not to force alternative paths.
For example:
The first three missions in a campaign are City missions, and they all happen within a relatively short period of time. Afterwords, Garrett visits the wilderness for missions 4-5. These two missions and the in between time take Garrett away from the City for several months, so when he returns back to the City, the CTL is back to 0.
Lets say that in missions 1-3 there are a total of 80 human A.I., and 18 of them are determined necessary to KO in order complete the missions, at this skill level.
So then on "expert":
Kill = FAIL
Knock out = .5 tp
Level 0 = 00-09 tp
This would maintain balance, and not force the player to take alternative paths, thereby keeping any extra development time to a minimum...:)
jtr7 on 12/1/2010 at 03:41
Since TDS is the exception to the model in mind, perhaps TMA should be used to demonstrate how it would've been with a CTL system in place. It won't be easy, but the easiest of the games to use. In this case, I'd be shoehorning it, but if it were part of the game's design, there would be less argument against continuity issues, as they would be even more accounted for than arbitrary--time willing. An overview to see how the fiction can both override and be overridden by player violence:
Running Interference:
[INDENT]Kill/No Kill: A training mission in disguise, thus, no killing allowed at all, but with the unusual objective on Expert to knock out at least 8 AIs.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Passage of Time: See Shipping... and Receiving.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Locale: Isolated among the trees, not too far removed from The City, or among a forest patch within, based on the smoggy appearance of the dark yellow glow of the cloud deck and yellowed moon, and the full mission surrounded by nothing but forest. The weather is warm, based on the chorus of crickets, tray of food in the middle of the grassy courtyard, as well as just the yellowed old trees adding to it. :p[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Next Mission Type: Garrett goes to Rampone's Dockside Shipping the same night that dirty smuggler Capt. Davidson and his pirating crew are there. These are known criminals, with dirty connections on the inside of the business (J. Osterlind), and there's the lesser-known extent they are stealing from tenants such as Gilver and the Rampone's themselves. Davidson has a key to Osterlind's office and the stash within. Garrett remains hidden, and Davidson is boldly on the scene, with witnesses to he and his crew's dealings. Easy scapegoat.[/INDENT]
Shipping... and Receiving:
[INDENT]Kill/No Kill: Another training mission in disguise. Normal, no restrictions; Hard, don't kill unarmed workers; Expert, no killing at all.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Passage of Time: Based on the slim pickings for maximum loot available in the previous mission, Garrett's inability to make rent and not having had a good haul for some time, the conversation in the next mission regarding Jenivere's disappearance, and the fact that the moon is also in the waning gibbous phase as before, and them noisy crickets, not too much time seems to have passed.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Locale: On the coast. [/INDENT]
[INDENT]Next Mission Type: Garrett's hired for a job at Shoalsgate Prison.[/INDENT]
Framed:
[INDENT]Kill/No Kill: The first real full-on mission, with a little training mixed in. Normal, no more than 5 KOs/Deaths--which already makes no sense fiction-wise, as it would be an obvious clue to something much more criminal and large going on, very sloppy; Hard, no more than 2 KOs/Deaths--better but still not good for framing Lt. Hagen; Expert, no KOs or killing at all, clean.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Passage of Time: Based on the full moon, if it's not a continuity oversight, it's been three weeks or so--or only a couple of days if the phasing is reversed. Although the crickets still chirrup, there's a cool wind and many trees are without leaves.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Locale: In some industrial area of The City, surrounded by towers with lights, factory smokestacks, and lots more electrical equipment than usual, as well as multi-storeyed apartment and office buildings. It's quite set apart, and being the Sherrif's office, Lady Rumford may or may not have gone quite a ways to make a report.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Next Mission Type: Garrett's fence rats Garrett out for gold, and as a wanted man, he must cross through this City district to his apartment, to get his special key, to get through the City gate to Shalebridge. There is no connection intended between Garrett's framing Hagen and Sammy selling Garrett out.[/INDENT]
Ambush!:
[INDENT]Kill/No Kill: Normal and Hard, no restrictions; Expert, no killing.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Passage of Time: Based on the waxing gibbous moon, if it's not a continuity oversight, it's been another three weeks or so--or only a couple of days if the phasing is reversed. The cool wind continues and many plants are browning (no evidence of the "rust-disease", though).[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Locale: It's another area surrounded by industrial areas of The City, surrounded by towers with lights, factory smokestacks, but it's more residential, though heavily fortified throughout, with a market place in the middle. It has one of the largest waterways outside of the sealed Old Quarter.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Next Mission Type: Garrett's still clueless about who would hire the Sheriff to kill him, the Keepers give him clues, and he is encouraged to overhear a meeting between the Sheriff and...as it turns out...one major new bad guy that is already paying the Sheriff tens of thousands to round street people up for ghastly purposes.[/INDENT]
Eavsedropping:
[INDENT]Kill/No Kill: Normal, no restrictions; Hard, no killing of innocents; Expert, no killing at all.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Passage of Time: Based on the waxing gibbous moon, if it's not a continuity oversight, it's been a month or a day. The cool wind continues, there are no crickets, all the trees are leafless, and the grounds are covered with a mat of dead leaves (though it could just be evidence of the "rust-disease", being right there at the Mechanist stronghold). Garrett was called upon at his Shalebridge safehouse by the Keepers, and went back there after hearing the Prophecies, going to the Eastport Mechanist Seminary the next night.[/INDENT]
[INDENT]Locale: Mostly residential, with primarily tall Victorian structures, and industrial buildings in the distance.[/INDENT]
Where in the fiction thus far is there opportunity to ramp it up to no-fun levels? It wouldn't ever get that high, and it would be subtler, as has been stated. For the biggest jump, a line in the objectives about cooling it off, and the slightly increased restriction would keep it from continuing to ramp up in the next mission after that. The fiction in a new game would be designed with the CTL in mind. In TMA's case, Garrett's already in trouble through Karras and Sammy, and fiction-wise, keeping cool in town is a good idea.
Judith on 17/1/2010 at 14:30
First of all, we're talking about master Thief "who was never seen", an extraordinary person, a hero or anti-hero, cynic or a good soul, whose abilities let him do what he wants. Empowering the player is important aspect of videogames.
While killing was never encouraged by Thief game designers, it wasn't arbitrarily punished on the "average" difficulty levels, aimed at the general public. Thief was always about freedom in both exploring the environment and choosing your style of gameplay: ghoster, manic blackjacker, careless cat burglar, thieving assassin, pick whatever you like.
Using game to "judge" your actions and punish you accordingly is a bit naive concept and any "morality system" works well only it the decision is left to the player, without any "carrot and stick system" (e.g. Bioshock failed "moral choices system").
Quote:
Too many gamers forget the basic premise for any new device or game towit: READ THE FUCKING MANUAL.
You're totally wrong here. That period is looong gone. Truly immersive games focus on guiding the player by using the environment itself, not telling you what to do or make you read manuals, whether printed or on-screen. It kills the immersion easily, even if it's justified by the plot. Any moment that you're reminded that you're just playing a game is bad for it. And it's also better when you need just a few minutes to get the controls and your abilities right, just working it out by yourself.
So how would you communicate the basic principles of that CTL system to the player, without using metagame language and doing it so simply and naturally that one may think it's perfectly normal feature of this world? That's beyond me :)
jtr7 on 17/1/2010 at 14:50
Once again, the suggestion is not as extreme as it's being made it out to be. Instead of repeating the inaccurate extreme view, how about sharing what it is that's really bothering you. Thief is a game, not a free-for-all, and this is an attempt to address existing known problems with the existing known system. If you can't see it in subtle terms, then you won't be able to address it effectively. Reading the manual is not something of the past, and not reading what's there to be read is preparing to struggle unnecessarily, and it's no one's fault but that non-reader's. There're already too many players who fail--yes, fail--to read the generous amount of cues the games give for what to do and what not to do and why. Not reading the manual is not a good thing and should not be rewarded. Dumb action and dumb inaction should always be punished, but punishment should be educational not extreme. I'm reminded of how schools have done away with the teachers' red pens for marking papers, because the red is too alarming and hurts feelings.
Judith on 17/1/2010 at 15:04
jtr7 - sorry, you seem to have no clue about tendencies in modern game design, and according to these theories games are made today. There's no reason to think T4 will be made according to principles set in 1980s. Things I stated are obvious to game designers. My views are merely a compilation of thoughts on stealth game design by Randy Smith, a former LGS/ISA employee and Thief designer plus Emil Pagliarulo, also former LGS employee/Thief designer and a lead designer on Fallout 3. You can google their articles on the subject.
Also "existing known problems" and "known system" are nonexistant. There's no continuity between implementing designs and addressing problems in Thief 1/2, TDS and the next game in the series. The technology is different, the ways of implementing might be different, the series is completely "rebooted" in therms of everything, engine, code, people working on the game, etc. Everything is made from scratch, not added to something Eidos Montreal already did, because they haven't made a Thief game yet. It might be an old gameplay problem for the players, but not "existing known design problem" for the dev team.
deathshadow on 17/1/2010 at 16:01
This assumes that you'd have the 'constantly walking back through the same area of the city' nonsense that was just one of the things that flushed TDS down the crapper.
Much akin to the "hanging out with friends" bull in GTA4.
As such, I'm increasingly less in favor of having it 'hub' based.
Judith on 17/1/2010 at 16:12
I'm not fond of citysections as well, until they appear as a part of a mission. All that sandbox elements tend to break immersion for me in many games. Only in GTA IV I liked driving through the city just to see the sunset or dawn.
Bakerman on 17/1/2010 at 22:33
Quote Posted by jtr7
Instead of repeating the inaccurate extreme view, how about sharing what it is that's really bothering you. Thief is a game, not a free-for-all, and this is an attempt to address existing known problems with the existing known system.
I think Judith was pretty clear, and wasn't being extreme at all. Pardon me if I've missed something, but I didn't think the ability to kill who you liked (at lower difficulties) was ever a 'problem' with the Thief games. Just something that Garrett wouldn't do - and it's up to the player whether they want to roleplay as Garrett or not. I'm sure Garrett wouldn't stack up crates to get on the roof, but should we implement an anti-crate-stacking metagame?
Obviously the CTL thing makes much more sense than that - it's quite good common sense. But I think Judith is getting at the idea that Thief has always allowed you to play in the style that suits you, instead of trying to dictate how you should play it.
