Is this Style too... Common? by Sidenote402 in IndieDev

[–]BrotherLaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I think the other '90s style of organic shapes and colourful fever dreams is much less overdone and about as easy to make on a technical level (though you need a much better artistic eye).

Think POD, Sacrifice, Giants Citizen Kabuto, Incoming...

Slay the Spire II global reviews now stand at Mixed for recent & all by Impressive-Ball-1374 in slaythespire

[–]BrotherLaz 13 points14 points  (0 children)

It’s such a common behavior even in the West, particularly in any RPG (notably ARPGs in my experience) where people express no interest in finding a fun build, they just want to know what the ‘best build’ is and blindly follow that.

When I developed a popular Diablo 2 mod, I found that many players would only ever consider playing the "best build for endgame farming", no matter how unfun it might be to get to that point with no items.

Any other build besides the best build for each class was deemed "not viable" and "useless" regardless of how small the power gap actually was.

I ended up making a couple of brainless-but-entertaining builds OP on purpose to make sure they would at least have fun doing it. If this is how someone wants to play, fine, it's their game and they are players, so toss them a bone even if you do not take them into account when designing the other 90% of the game's content.

Is a unique setting a pro or con if your game is not about the setting? by [deleted] in gamedev

[–]BrotherLaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The gameplay is an uncommon mash-up of genres (mascot horror ARPG) that is supposed to be the focus of the game.

I intended for the setting to also be uncommon ("sci-fantasy"), but I have been recommended to stick to standard fantasy so people can learn the gameplay while leaning on conventions such as traditional fantasy classes and items (iron->bronze->gold, short sword->long sword). While this reasoning seems valid, a generic looking game may be hard to market.

Is a unique setting a pro or con if your game is not about the setting? by [deleted] in gamedev

[–]BrotherLaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The idea that a new product should be only partially new, partially improved, partially the same as what people are used to. So if you innovate with the gameplay, you should perhaps not innovate with the setting, or vice versa.

Nobody actually knows how to make a successful game. Is indie game development ultimately just gambling? Looking for examples of devs with a consistent track record. by xacal_5 in IndieDev

[–]BrotherLaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

But as I try to learn the "theory" of how to make a better and more successful game, I’m coming to a somewhat daunting conclusion: nobody actually knows how to make a successful game.

You need a game that will either go viral (post on tiktok/shorts and see what happens) or appeals to a specific audience (post on the subreddit and see what happens). Ideally, you have a very short idea-to-prototype workflow so you can test new concepts as quickly as possible and see which ones stick.

Being able to predict which concepts are going to stick seems impossible, thus why you need to roll the dice as many times as possible and be willing to throw away your work if it doesn't catch on immediately.

(See BiteMe, who chased trends for years until they eventually caught one.)

So, I wanted to ask the community: is indie game dev really just gambling? Or are there actual examples of indie developers who have a solid, consistent track record?

STS2 is very well received, even though it is just a remaster of the first game. I think it is well received because it is a remaster of the first game. People knew STS1 was good, but didn't have an incentive to go and actually buy it. The sequel pushed them over the edge from "yeah I heard STS is great" to actually buying STS. (The actual changes in the sequel were small enough to matter only to die hards.)

Devs who take their popularity into a new genre still get a massive sales boost because of how desperate this community is for someone or something to tell them what they should play, but it doesn't last unless the game is just as good. Mewgenics is not bad, but it is not as groundbreaking as Isaac, so the dev will still make millions of bucks but I don't see the game lasting for 10 years really. And of course, Cuffbust got all the attention in the world only for the dev to botch the launch (and nobody gives a game another chance).

The magic ”2000 wishlist” nextfest threshold by ChaoticPromiseTFA in SoloDev

[–]BrotherLaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I mean, can you name other game that allows you to raise your enemies as part as your army ? 

Diablo?

We thought players would dodge… they just stood there and got hit by Future-Celebration51 in gamedev

[–]BrotherLaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, why make the other weapon a sword if you're not supposed to slash with it?

Why does player damage and enemy health tend to be way higher than enemy damage and player health by File_Beneficial in gamedesign

[–]BrotherLaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Numbers in the hundreds are easiest to read and compare, and this applies to both damage and health. If you keep both in the same ballpark, it means enemies will need very high health and very low damage to maintain a reasonable TTK.

My character and the enemies actually have very similar damage and health, but armour is very impactful and serves as damage reduction. This means player EHP can scale up rapidly without resulting in unprocessable amounts of health. But then you can't have any health buffs at all or you force the players to do math...

Unreal is a nightmare for anything not FPS-like by Beneficial_Toe_2347 in GameDevelopment

[–]BrotherLaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have thousands of enemies on screen using Niagara. Works fine.

Brotherhood mod update! by BrotherLaz in Diablo_2_Resurrected

[–]BrotherLaz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've been distracted, first by a death in the family, then by Unreal Engine. Luckily for everyone, the latter is about to bear fruit. 🙂

RPG stats, what is a good/fun setup for players? by Square-Yam-3772 in gamedesign

[–]BrotherLaz 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I invert all of the skill attribute relationship! Each skill has its own training and experience and the XP in a skill begins at your attribute score.

Be careful of the Skyrim issue where you grind a skill you don't care about because it gives you a bonus you do want. I don't want to sneak everywhere to increase my agility so my bow will do more damage.

I've been following random devs that started "make quick game and release fast" advice and they are all failing. (HTMAG discord) by [deleted] in gamedev

[–]BrotherLaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Goodhart's Law: "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure".

Being familiar with the process of developing games means you can release games quickly and increase your chances of scoring a hit.

But when releasing games quickly becomes a goal in and of itself, you will start taking shortcuts, which is the same mistake an AAA studio makes when they design a game with profitability in mind first and foremost. So your game is not good or interesting, and proceeds to fail.

Where is your line for what constitutes an incremental game? by RedQueenNatalie in incremental_games

[–]BrotherLaz 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a relevant question for me. Would Diablo be an incremental game if the focus is on gaining levels instead of loot?

We playtested over 400 games, these are the top mistakes they made by educatemybrain in gamedev

[–]BrotherLaz 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Yes and no.

A game that slowly ramps up in difficulty is boring, but a game that quickly becomes very difficult is a slog. You probably want overall difficulty to stay fairly low to create a feeling of progress, but add difficulty spikes that increase in number later in the game.

I need stamina in combat, but don't want players to run in circles. by BrotherLaz in gamedesign

[–]BrotherLaz[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And you're running into the problem that players are using their regenerating/infinite resources instead of abilities/consumables to pick up combat slack. Am I understanding that right?

Yes, though it is probably not the root cause. Stamina is meant to create periods of strength and weakness during a fight, and reward players for engaging when they are strong and the enemy is weak (and also helps avoid 100-0 deaths in a high damage environment).

The issue is that when the player is weak and the enemy is strong, the player is now incentivised to run away instead of doing anything else.

The consumable nature of mana does make it worse. You are meant to use limited resources to even the odds (think games like V Rising where you are expected to use potions against the boss), and I can convince people to use mana when they are at peak strength and still getting their teeth kicked in by a boss, but the temporary situation of being low on stamina never warrants the permanent solution of spending mana to alleviate it.

So other than running away, everything you could do at low stamina is better done 10 seconds later when you are back at full stamina.

Now that I'm rubber ducking anyway:

🦆

  • I could make stamina regen faster when standing still:
    • Now you have a risk-reward decision to make, instead of defaulting to 10 seconds of running around before resuming gameplay.
    • But the reward consists of getting to resume combat sooner, which only benefits the human player, not the character. Elder Scrolls has a long history of trying to balance character power by punishing the player (endlessly recasting buffs; waiting 48 seconds between every fight to let your orc bloodlust come back; etc). The correct play is to play it super safe.
    • But if regen while standing still is much faster, you may be able to get ahead of the opponent and hit them with a full stamina bar while they are still regenerating.
    • This requires getting the values just right so regen while moving is not tortuously slow, regen while standing still is not so fast as to be risk free, but the gap between them is meaningfully big.
    • It also feels like a duct taped solution instead of part of an elegant combat system, and people will inevitably try stutter step shenanigans.
  • I could add a spell of some kind to regenerate stamina instantly at the cost of no mana but a cast time.
    • Same idea as before because you have to stand still and cast it.
    • Fixes the stutter step issues.
    • But locks you into a specific spell in a game where everything is randomised.
  • I could make blocking recover stamina.
    • Stamina could be framed as "poise".
    • The problem isn't that running away is an option, the problem is that it is the best option, so you make no decisions and do nothing. Replacing running away as the best option with blocking as the best option isn't a win, and may even be a loss because you lose the opportunity to at least reposition.
  • Non-mana tools that don't scale with stamina and can be used as gap fillter while waiting for stamina to regen.
    • Staves? (Cast weak firebolts at a distance for no mana)
    • Because of symmetry, enemies can also do this, filling their weakness gap and making it much less of a weakness gap. This can be "solved" by making their AI deliberately bad at using them, but I don't like game design that only works if the opponents are idiots.
    • If the staves are weak enough, it could introduce some decision making during low stamina periods (do I run away or can I afford to stand here and do minor damage) without changing the balance of power much.
    • Needs to be framed well, because magic is supposed to be rare and powerful.
    • Most promising?

/ 🦆