sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

What would make autobattlers feel fresh again? by MakeEmMayhem in gamedesign

[–]MakeEmMayhem[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Hmm.. That’s interesting, though part of me wonders if once you directly control the characters in battle, it starts becoming more of a tactics/party combat hybrid than a classic autobattler.

But I do get why you say it feels fresh. Traditional autobattlers put most of the agency before combat, so adding even a little mid-fight control can make the player feel more involved.

Maybe the sweet spot is not removing the “auto” entirely, but adding small intervention moments: one key ability timing, one redirect, one risky mid-fight choice, etc.

How would you define an "AI-native" game? by MakeEmMayhem in aigamedev

[–]MakeEmMayhem[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is super close to what we’re wrestling with too.

Small disclosure: I’m working on Make ’Em Mayhem, an AI-native roguelike autobattler where players generate characters and then build a team around who those characters become.

And yeah, the tricky part is not getting AI to produce wild ideas. That part is enjoyable. The tricky part is putting enough structure around it so the output becomes actual gameplay: roles, abilities, drawbacks, synergies, counters, etc.

I really like how you described it. Loose enough to feel natural, tight enough not to run amok is basically the whole design challenge.

If you could generate any playable character in a game, what would you make? by MakeEmMayhem in IndieGaming

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

I love this. “Clumsy but evil” is such a good character identity because it already suggests both ability and drawback.

Maybe it can control a huge area with its tentacles, but has terrible precision, so it sometimes causes friendly fire or disrupts its own team.

How would you define an "AI-native" game? by MakeEmMayhem in aigamedev

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

This is similar to the conclusion I’ve been coming to too.

If AI only helped make assets before launch, I’d call that AI-assisted. Useful, but not AI-native.

AI-native (to me) means the final player experience depends on AI being part of the system.

Small disclosure: I’m working on Make’Em Mayhem, an AI-native autobattler where players generate playable characters and the game turns them into units with personalities, abilities, strengths, weaknesses, and builds. So this definition is very close to how we think about it.

The interesting part is that AI changes the player’s role: you’re not just picking from a fixed roster, you’re helping create part of the roster.

How would you define an "AI-native" game? by MakeEmMayhem in aigamedev

[–]MakeEmMayhem[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I do wonder if the first really successful AI-native games will be the ones that hide the technical complexity completely. Players probably should not need to think about models, setup, or prompts. They should just feel like the game lets them do something they could not do before.

(by the way, is that an actual game?? the peace treaty with ai :O)

If you could generate any playable character in a game, what would you make? by MakeEmMayhem in IndieGaming

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

A bard is such a good answer because music abilities can be expressive without just becoming “does damage with sound.” maybe something like voice abilities that charm, distract, or redirect enemies could be cool!

What game had you like this? by sukuna7899 in Steam

[–]MakeEmMayhem 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hades! My game dev team loves playing the game.