View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
chiron Developing Poster
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 20 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 8:57 am Post subject: BIG huge eternal worldturning request, perhaps... |
|
|
I would love to have the ability to hide the missions from the list,
what I mean is that a user shouldn’t be able to go directly to a mission as it is today, he could only play certain missions if he complete the previous one in a certain way, like, if side 1 has xx units the set next mission to B or else mission C, if then mission B has xx or another xx switch set next mission to D, can go on forever...
You can of course do this today, but it would show up in the list and you could play them in any order, it wouldn’t be fair or fun to play a sequel and not have played the previous one in a certain way.
Hope you understand what I mean or else I will try to explain better.
But agree that this opens up large options to create big complex missions.
/chiron _________________ Palm|T3 + 128 Mb SD + ZLauncher 4.10 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SoLan Very Active User
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 183
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 11:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is a difficult one, chiron. Who is to decide what levels a player should be able to play and when? Should the players - who paid for the game and downloaded the mission pack - be able to play any level they like whenever they want to, or should the level creator be the one who decides?
As it is, the level creator can suggest to the player the order in which the levels in a mission pack should be played, but the player decides if he or she wants to do it that way.
There may be ways to do something like what you suggests in a way that doesn't cause any problems, but if you make levels that the player needs to complete other levels in a certain way in order to play, the player may actually never get to play all the levels he downloaded. And if you forgot to save the end of the level that you completed to get to another level (or if you deleted your saved game), you might not be able to get back to it.
A short while ago, someone asked (I think it was in the OS5/ARM beta forum) for a way to go directly to a history mission. There is a way to do that, and he needed to, in order not to have to play through all the previous levels over again.
The point I am trying to make, is that I am afraid taking away the players possibility to play the levels he wants whenever he wants to, you make the game less user friendly. I see that what you suggest would open up new possibilities for mission creators, but what about the players?
This is, however, just the way I see it now. If anyone have suggestions to how this could be done without making the game less user friendly, I want to reserve the right to change my mind! _________________ --SoLan
Palm Tungsten|T3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
drdeath2k3 Semi-frequent Poster
Joined: 16 Nov 2003 Posts: 36 Location: BC Canada
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 1:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
this then raises the possibility of campaign threading... leave it to the player to decide if he wishes to play the missions as a full campaign.. or if he just wants to screw around on the last level... _________________
Palm Zire 71
1.8MB free RAM
256MB ScanDisk SD Card
Launcher of choice: ZLauncher 4 Beta |
|
Back to top |
|
|
crakerz Mega-Poster
Joined: 17 Sep 2003 Posts: 353 Location: California Bay Area
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 4:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
There is a way to do this. Not hide the level, but a way to see if the first level has been done before level two, and so forth.
If someone wants to design that way, that is their perogative, tho it may limit the replayability factor. I mean, who really want to play the first three levels in the original campaign more than once?
Anyway, here is the way to do it. I use the switch WIN to trigger this event, and I set the pvar "rank" to something above the normal starting value:
At the end of the first level:
CONDITIONS:
Comment: Player Wins
Switch "WIN" is On
ACTIONS:
Modify persistent variable 'rank': Set 5
End Mission: Win
On Mission Load of the second level:
CONDTIONS:
Comment: Player didn't win last level
Persistent variable 'rank' is At Most 4
ACTIONS:
Ecom "Sorry, You can't play this mission until you complete the previous mission."
End Mission: Lose
If at the end of each mission you increase the rank, and then test for that value at the start of the next, you can control the play.
Another way to do this without stopping the player from playing a level is to tie certain features, like the starting credits, to the rank. For example, in my level Crossroads, if the player finishes in less than 45 minutes, they get a double promotion, and a 5000 credit bonus. Well, (once the next level is posted) at the start of the next mission, I'll test for the double promotion (two ranks) and add the 5000 credits at that time. Otherwise, the level is played normally. _________________ Why negotiate when you can just blow things up?
------------------------------------------------------ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SoLan Very Active User
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 183
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
crakerz wrote: | If someone wants to design that way, that is their perogative, tho it may limit the replayability factor. I mean, who really want to play the first three levels in the original campaign more than once? |
Of course anyone who design levels are free to use the options that are in there. I was talking mostly about changing the game so that levels are hidden from the player. Setting a level to be "unplayable" (your Ecom "Sorry, You can't play this mission until you complete the previous mission.") is very close to this, and I know I wouldn't like that.
I guess it all comes down to whether the player should be able to play the game his or her way or just the level designers way, and we are all entitled to have our own view in that matter. _________________ --SoLan
Palm Tungsten|T3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Verdagon Veteran Member
Joined: 05 Oct 2003 Posts: 1047 Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 6:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
But for a little spice let's have like one special mission that nobody can play until they beat the campaign. Just one. That would be awesome.
Just one limited mission wouldn't damage the replayability, would it?
I actually think it would encourage the players to play. _________________ [WI Moderator]
http://verdagon.net/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
crakerz Mega-Poster
Joined: 17 Sep 2003 Posts: 353 Location: California Bay Area
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So many people, so many choices......ain't it grand?
I mean, wouldn't you just hate it if there was only one brand of toothaste? Even if you liked it? Wouldn't you want something different occasionally? And, even if you didn't, wouldn't you want the choice anyway?
I say, do it any way you like it, and if nobody else does, who gives a $#!% ?
If more than one mouse
Is mice,
And more than one louse
Is lice,
Why isn't more than one spouse
Spice?
_________________ Why negotiate when you can just blow things up?
------------------------------------------------------ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SoLan Very Active User
Joined: 13 Jan 2004 Posts: 183
|
Posted: Sat Feb 28, 2004 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
crakerz wrote: | I mean, wouldn't you just hate it if there was only one brand of toothaste? Even if you liked it? Wouldn't you want something different occasionally? And, even if you didn't, wouldn't you want the choice anyway?
|
I think having a choice was exactly what I was talking about. Wouldn't the player be happy to have a choice to play it your way or his or her own way? I am all for giving the players new and different challenges, but I am not sure that I like the idea of taking away their choice in what level they want to play and when. _________________ --SoLan
Palm Tungsten|T3 |
|
Back to top |
|
|
crakerz Mega-Poster
Joined: 17 Sep 2003 Posts: 353 Location: California Bay Area
|
Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 2:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
SoLan wrote: | I am not sure that I like the idea of taking away their choice in what level they want to play and when. |
And that is their choice. As it is your choice not to play it if you don't like that method. Freedom of choice doesn't always mean the right choice, but the freedom to make the wrong choice, too. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
scottlu WI Founder
Joined: 15 Aug 2003 Posts: 1773
|
Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
We debated this same issue in-house for quite awhile. Eventually we decided that worst case it wouldn't remove game play value if people didn't arbitrarily jump over missions, and that if they did, it would be something they did, not the game.
Most importantly, the ability to jump over missions means that if people get stuck on a particular mission for whatever reason they can still make progress and have fun by skipping a mission. I've played many games where my interest runs dry when I can't get past some very hard level and the game gives me no other options. We didn't want to get bitten by that bug.
Lastly, once all the missions have been played, being able to go back and play them without relying on saved games is a very nice convenience which extends replay value.
I understand they are different opinions of what is best, but those are the reasons we chose to make all the story missions accessible. _________________ Warfare Incorporated Development Team |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Verdagon Veteran Member
Joined: 05 Oct 2003 Posts: 1047 Location: San Luis Obispo, CA
|
Posted: Sun Feb 29, 2004 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Amen to that. _________________ [WI Moderator]
http://verdagon.net/ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
crakerz Mega-Poster
Joined: 17 Sep 2003 Posts: 353 Location: California Bay Area
|
Posted: Tue Mar 02, 2004 11:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Personally, I am glad that spiffcode decided to let each level be accessed individually, and I agree with the reasons.
I do see people creating levels that must be played in order, for whatever reasons (and hey, if I can figure it out, somebody else surely will too!) and people that will enjoy playing them that way. I think that as the forum develops, we will (hopefully) see as many variations of gameplay as there are variations of gamers. Good, bad, and downright ugly. And, again hopefully, a few bright gems.
Me, I'm gonna try 'em all (And, fingers crossed, make a few that fall somewhere between good and ugly!) _________________ Why negotiate when you can just blow things up?
------------------------------------------------------ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|