If this is the case, then what led you to make statements like the ones you made?
Indivisible: Lab Zero's Action-RPG! (General Discussion)
- Thread starter TechPowah
- Start date
Broken Loose
Costumed Adventurer
Correction-- bosses in most Final Fantasies don't give experience! FF7 was actually the first game to do so, and it makes doing low-level playthroughs a goddamn pain in the ass.
The Dave
Well-Known Member
That's an interesting distinction. Out of curiosity, what do you consider XP vs Skill Points vs Tech Points, etc? I always thought them as the same mechanic, but on different meters for different gains (like money and Adam in Bioshock both being currency). I never realized Chrono Trigger didn't have XP. After all, my party was advancing in power after killing things...
Thanks!
CT does have experience, I guess that was bad phrasing. I meant - even if it didn't have XP, you still tech Tech points, which are separate and advance your characters in meaningful ways that do not add HP or defense.
Maybe this'll help?
In general, experience in RPGs is used to increase stats like attack power/HP/defense(/magic power/magic defense), which serve to make the game easier by rewarding you with the ability to survive longer or deal more damage. This lowers the difficulty of existing fights without increasing player skill. It allows you to get past tough or poorly-balanced fights by investing time into easier fights. Gear in RPGs and MMOs accomplishes a similar function.
My main problem with experience (and gear!) used in this way is that it drastically decreases the difficulty of boss fights, by making a 1-hit kill attack no longer kill you, etc etc. It doesn't require you to change your strategy or learn, just to acquire enough XP(/the right gear) to be able to tank the fight with your existing strategy.*
I'd like to use experience in Indivisible to advance stats that have nothing to do with attack power or defense. You might get a SMALL amount of HP for lots of leveling up, but experience would mostly do things like grant you extra attacks with your current weapon (proficiency), extra speed (faster bar filling), extra meter gain, or lower meter expenditure for meter-using moves.
These things all serve to make battles easier ONLY with application of player skill - you will still die in the same amount of hits and you still deal the same amount of damage per hit, so you need to improve your strategy to make use of the bonuses experience gets you.
It also means that grinding is nowhere near as important, because you won't turn that one-hit kill into a survivable attack - you still have to figure out how to win.
* This is somewhat oversimplified but is true in the vast majority of cases. It's also one of the main reasons I find fighting games to be much more fun than MMOs.
Mini rant:
In fighting games, the characters are static and what improves is your OWN SKILL, whereas in MMOs you get better items and do not have to improve as a player, except for max-level PvP or whatnot, and indeed you CANNOT improve as a player enough to, say, be able to beat the L99 Demon Lord as a Lv1 Farmer.
Fighting games reward you for getting better at the game, and only that; MMOs reward time spent, and require much of that same time to be spent even if your player skill is already higher than average. I kinda...hate that.
However, the fact that MMOs do indeed NOT REQUIRE much of an increase in player skill if enough time is spent on them...is what makes them so popular with the vast majority of people. And it's what will keep fighting games "niche", no matter how much you simplify inputs or whatever else, because fighting games require players to increase in skill to progress further. Unfortunately.
North888
Yo thats sick!
I'm afraid I don't understand? I stated that I think a game needs to offer either some sort of reward or incentive in order to get the player to participate in battles, whether is XP, buffs, bonuses, what have you. I don't get what you're asking.
Squire Grooktook
The wind blew all day long
Are you saying Super Metroid would be turn based if they didn't mind the extra work? I'm sure "we already have a platforming engine" helped the decision, but I think a lot of these games were probably meant to be action based regardless.
No, but you said "most Metroidvanias" or something. I am sure lots of them were going to be action based anyway, but if you discount that it's less work (or that "other games are like this") then you haven't been in game development. :^P I'm sure there are several where combat would have been markedly different if they'd had extra resources.
::leaves thread for now::
The Dave
Well-Known Member
I think so, thanks! So, if I understand it, new tools and tactics are good rewards, but "performance enhancing buffs" that make bad strategy viable aren't? Okay, I can see this, although I will admit to being one of "those people" who grinds to tank hits and deal max damage. Even when the system itself discourages it.
(Final Fantasy 8 thinks it can balance enemy encounters against my party? Ha! I'll show it! Max levels for everyone, and then we're killing the optional superboss!)
Still curious (sorry), what would you think of grinding to unlock new tools, in hopes of discovering an easier to perform strategy instead of practicing a harder but technically viable plan with fewer tools? IE "I can try parrying these low attacks, or, if I kill a bunch of slimes, my character will learn a cheap combat-only Float spell." Also, are you thinking of giving Indivisible a training room?
Thanks!
Not-So-Saint
Reports of my death are GREATLY exaggerated!
Speaking for myself, I for the most part tend to overgrind stuff and just facetank through challenges instead of solving them properly, if I'm given the opportunity. Case in point: game called Volgarr the Viking. It's a platformer without progression. You can only pick gear with upgrades on the level but you lose those on hit. So you're encouraged to come up with plans that allow you to not get hit and then work on execution to do it. Compare this to Shovel Knight where you can find and buy ability-granting items which you cannot lose. Those consume mana, maximum amount of which you can increase by spending money. Same goes for max health. This creates much more leeway for taking damage and using abilities in which case you're not encouraged to play clean because you can just force your way through challenges with those resources instead of refining your skills. Which I did. That makes me like Volgarr more cause it actually made me better by not giving a chance to slack.
Last edited:
Zidiane
Doing my best
Won't making attacks do more hits or making the meter fill faster sorta serve the same purpose as increasing attack, though? You're dealing more damage over time, even if you just mash a specific attack sequence without alternating, right?
Last edited:
Kit Ballard
Well-Known Member
Kind of reminds me of Dust's XP progress system (though it has a slot for HP gaining, if I remember right)
baldulf
New Member
Maybe its a bit early since we have not seen the specials or "super" attacks but it could be safe guessing that those are going to be chainable as in Valkyrie Profile.
But is there going to be special team attacks? Special moves that could be done only with certain characters in the party and if some conditions are met. I loved the vortex attacks on Romancing Saga Minstrel Song, it would be nice to see something like that again.
But is there going to be special team attacks? Special moves that could be done only with certain characters in the party and if some conditions are met. I loved the vortex attacks on Romancing Saga Minstrel Song, it would be nice to see something like that again.
Rakurin
That guy that's always kinda around.
Oh, I don't know if this has been answered but I checked the thread quickly and didn't see anything about it. So question for the devs;
With the release of the battle system came a new enemy type, and a rather gross... terrifying looking one at that. Do you have any idea what rating you'd be shooting for for this game? I know you had to restrict yourselves when it came to the Teen rating for Skullgirls so I'm just curious.
With the release of the battle system came a new enemy type, and a rather gross... terrifying looking one at that. Do you have any idea what rating you'd be shooting for for this game? I know you had to restrict yourselves when it came to the Teen rating for Skullgirls so I'm just curious.
It doesn't help you die less unless you approach the fight differently, is the thing. You're dealing more damage, but only slightly more, and it's mostly the tanking part that makes difficult bits much easier.
So does everyone. So do I. Because it IS the easiest way to advance in games which allow you to do it. Learning is always more difficult than investing time without learning.
So, I choose to try to make an RPG that's more like a fighting game or platformer, in that you must learn.
Same problem, it rewards time spent rather than any kind of progression. It requires use of the new spell but I still I wouldn't do it in Indiv.
Maybe, VP had one.
Definitely not for the prototype, possible for the real game depending on whether we feel like we can. I never really liked those because they arbitrarily make certain combinations of characters better, though. Same with like...only certain characters even HAVE Lv3s in MvC3, or something.
Teen, I think. Different descriptors from SG, though.
Kawalorn
Aka Oni
I remember L0 saying a LONG time ago that lower rating does give noticable boost in sales.
Or something like that.
MysteriousJ
No.1 Skullgirls player in Idaho
A lot of parents do actually pay attention to ratings, and let's face it, the aesthetics of both skullgirls and indivisible are magnets for fourteen year olds
Fedora_Ninja
Never asked for this.
Teen markets to a larger audience.
Besides, M for Mature = Content is generally suitable for ages 17 and up. May contain intense violence, blood and gore, sexual content and/or strong language.
We already know hype ass combos =/= intense violence (for some reason), I don't imagine this game including cute monsters drawing intense gory deaths (all that extra work), fan service was confirmed toned down, and I don't see FUCK/SHIT/BITCH/ASSHOLE necessary in RPG dialogue.
TheMightyBox
All We Have Are Raisins!
Since ratings generally dictate in terms of "everything over", the lower it is the higher your consumer base.
Tank
I argue till I'm wrong or right
yet to be seen in indivisible. unless a completely form covering dress rustles your jimmies.
Sotherius
Pure Platinum!
it depends on the audience, really. But in general, it is that way.
Or you sell your product as something friendly to almost all audiences, or you do the complete opposite and try to gather the full mature audience, that will cover some 14 years olds with parents that don't care.
Or you sell your product as something friendly to almost all audiences, or you do the complete opposite and try to gather the full mature audience, that will cover some 14 years olds with parents that don't care.
SanoBaron
Delicious chewable Hubba-Bella
more people can buy your game, and parents won't have problems buying it for their kids.
plain and simple.
ArgonBern
Dhar is love, Dhar is life.
Yeah but SG never really had a physical distribution. If it was physical then the parents would buy it for them but in digital the consumer can just grab the credit card and even buy Killing Floor if you have parents that don't really care (or can't because maybe they can't into technology nowadays) about what you do on your PC or PS3/xbox. Consoles they might still notice stuff if you're playing in the living room right in their faces.
None of this means anything if you don't have advertisement (which SG had though)
Well if we're really taking it there ethnicity and awkward girls can rustle the jimmies even with zero fanservice.
I'm really glad of the soft FS compared to SG.
Me thinks:
Maybe it's a past thing by now but how come COD was associated with bratty kids this whole time? (Might be different now with Activision not going so well)
Kids liked well-known brands like COD and Minecraft and that's something that helped these games sell like fuck gravity, and now that Activision is losing monny either FPSes are FINALLY losing appeal or we haven't looked at other "lol gunz XD" games on the market like Battlefield.
My point is not about FPS games today but what genre and style of videogames appeal to specific ranges of audiences; because you can either get the open kid that is into anime and RPGs or the bratty little shit popular a school that likes c00l gr4phc2 and that always wants gun games and Minecraft because guns and Minecraft are/were a trend.
This is not a direction devs should take personally though: it's a plague.
That's just to say that the little rating square on the corner of the game has been plain ignored in the past; you put a guy in the shadows with a couple of pistols on the cover and mothers say "mkay", but put a zombie and blood and they go all "hell no" for the right reasons.
Oh yes, you should also make the back a bit vague about the contents if the parents are clever enough to flip the case and see more things.
Maybe stuff changed now and parents are now more careful about what they buy to their children but who can always (and I mean in any moment in time) tell? That's one reason why marketing researches are a thing.
I'm all out for pushing parents to look at that goddamn little rating box on the corner of the cover of the games they buy, but know that for a time (that might still be even now) the thing wasn't even noticed and was all about genre, presentation and... ugh... graphix...
This is not to say one should completely and mindlessly adapt to trends, else the quality and your identity goes to shit. Personally I think one has to think of where a project takes you and what you want to do, but I have no experience in that. Money too.
tl;dr one should also and always consider how a genre of a game and its presentation appeal to a set demographic/range of audiences and take current trends into consideration. The rating is very important still but I don't think it's all there.
Suggest reading the statement above the tl;dr.
Yeah that's a long ass tl;dr. I'm open for anyone with experience to get me rekt, especially from Lab Zero.
No I'm not daring to challenge anyone. I hope I didn't get anyone to hate me for sounding like scolding. Ain't scolding anyone, just my 2 cents.
Sotherius
Pure Platinum!
Idk what you are talking about, i am just saying that even if a product is made towards the mature audience, a lot of teenagers get access to that content, sometimes their parents think it is fine, sometimes they do without their parents knowing. This is something bound to happen.
But in general, the idea that your game is friendtly towards teens, and kids, is good from the marketing stand point. And i don't think indivisible is meant to be a game with a specific public, so, having a lower rating is good.
Skullgirls is already niche enough having a T rating, imagine if it had a M rating...
ArgonBern
Dhar is love, Dhar is life.
Yeah, reading it again and I think I generalized too much on some aspects.
Obviously. I can't see Skullgirls and Indiv with an higher rating.
Cheesedragon
I like to eat cake while excruciating.
At this rate i'm hoping the next edition is called "Indivisible: Lab Zero's Valkyrie Profile Remake!"
Last edited:
About the rating:
We're aiming for Teen because we don't WANT the game to HAVE any of the things that Mature signifies. We don't need super blood and gore, nudity, or a huge amount of cursing. Reading anything else into this is weird.
Why? Because the combat's designed to be fun for the player, and the AI doesn't care if it is also having fun, which generally means the game is massively unfair in the player's favor. Having both people be players is generally not enjoyable in that setting.
IF it for some reason turns out to be fun as VS, then yes. But it probably won't be...
We're aiming for Teen because we don't WANT the game to HAVE any of the things that Mature signifies. We don't need super blood and gore, nudity, or a huge amount of cursing. Reading anything else into this is weird.
VS mode is generally pretty crap in games of this type. It was even crap in Shaolin Monks and that game has EXCELLENT combat.
Why? Because the combat's designed to be fun for the player, and the AI doesn't care if it is also having fun, which generally means the game is massively unfair in the player's favor. Having both people be players is generally not enjoyable in that setting.
IF it for some reason turns out to be fun as VS, then yes. But it probably won't be...
Why remake a game that doesn't exist? :^P
Squire Grooktook
The wind blew all day long
I've done a few low-level runs. In general though I try to restrict myself to a level where winning feels possible without taking the challenge out.
Cheesedragon
I like to eat cake while excruciating.
I was in a hurry...
You are atypical, as if you needed that confirmed further. :^)
Squire Grooktook
The wind blew all day long
Ha ha, I'd sig that, but touting that statement might look pretentious lol. Plus it's not necessarily a compliment lol.
TheMightyBox
All We Have Are Raisins!
One of two enemies we've seen thus far is a set of disembowled organs under a mop of hair 0:
Or does it not count since they weren't in something to begin with?
Demifiend
Active Member
Team attacks like in Chrono Trigger may work, every single combination was quite flashy and they were all useful, like the Cyclone Fire Attack (Lucca + Crono) or the X Blade attack (Frog + Crono), but this could potentially make the game easier than intended (Since i bet almost everybody will use Team Attacks rather than the single attack command)
Squire Grooktook
The wind blew all day long
For a good metric, look at what Symphony of The Night got away with. Some of the stuff in there is a lot nastier then what I've seen in most actual m-rated games. Always find it interesting that it made it with a T.
Balance my friend, balance.
SanoBaron
Delicious chewable Hubba-Bella
organs are probably fine so long as they're not shown still attached to a skeleton and it's flesh prison.
The ESRB ratings system is intricate. For example, in Teen you can light someone on fire, but if they scream "Ow ow ow I'm on fire ow!'' then it's Mature. etc etc.
There is a difference between "blood is onscreen" (Ms. Fortune) and "hurting someone causes them to bleed from their injuries".
How about I just say "No team junk" right now so you and others don't waste pages speculating, and then are surprised if they show up and not disappointed if they don't.
They will not be in the prototype, regardless.
Now to your actual statement....
FIRST of all, not even CLOSE to "all" the team attacks are useful in CT. Over 50% of them are quite useless compared to using two single techs, but they had to be animated anyway. There is a decent amount of wasted work for those in CT.
Secondly, remember how you can attack with your whole team at once, already, in Indivisible? You can't do that in CT, which is why they have team stuff. If there were to be team things in Indivisible, they'd use super meter and you wouldn't be replacing regular attacks with them anyway. Plus they would probably delay those characters' next turns by a huge amount.
Immortails
Wants a damn burrito, damn it.
M-M-Muh techs though
So, kind of like South Park Stick of Truth, how you can use an ability and still use your regular attack, but with a turn meter as opposed to a set amount of actions.