test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Does lack of combat put players off?
uberadiant88
Member Posts: 0 Arc User
Hi,
I've been working on my first mission for a while now, the story is all fleshed out and I've been watching tutorial videos and all that jazz. I've hit a major bump, though. It was only today that I discovered that there was a limit to the number of objects you can place in a project when I was reading stuff on UGC. Then about 20 minutes later...I hit the limit
I now have two options - cut down on the number of objects, or split the mission into two. Now, this mission is going to eventually be part of a 3-mission story arc. So realistically I would now be looking at a 6-mission arc. To be honest, this would be my preferred option. My maps have a lot of stuff in them because they add to the atmosphere of the story. If I cut down on anything, the immersion just won't be there.
The problem this presents is that these "mini-missions" (the first part in particular) won't be combat-heavy in any way. The missions will be pretty dialogue-heavy, not like walls of text, but quite involved. I've made it so that every piece of text either progresses the story or provides more background, so I don't really want to cut this down either. A lot of my dialogue has an option to cut to the end, giving the player the opportunity to move the story forward without reading much (although as I say they would be missing out!).
So basically, my question is - if I make these mini-missions, will anyone actually play them? I would be releasing the first two parts simultaneously so they could be played in sequence, but would the (relative) lack of combat and dialogue-heavy nature of the first part put people off playing the second? If it helps, part 2 would be really heavy in combat.
Thanks!
I've been working on my first mission for a while now, the story is all fleshed out and I've been watching tutorial videos and all that jazz. I've hit a major bump, though. It was only today that I discovered that there was a limit to the number of objects you can place in a project when I was reading stuff on UGC. Then about 20 minutes later...I hit the limit
I now have two options - cut down on the number of objects, or split the mission into two. Now, this mission is going to eventually be part of a 3-mission story arc. So realistically I would now be looking at a 6-mission arc. To be honest, this would be my preferred option. My maps have a lot of stuff in them because they add to the atmosphere of the story. If I cut down on anything, the immersion just won't be there.
The problem this presents is that these "mini-missions" (the first part in particular) won't be combat-heavy in any way. The missions will be pretty dialogue-heavy, not like walls of text, but quite involved. I've made it so that every piece of text either progresses the story or provides more background, so I don't really want to cut this down either. A lot of my dialogue has an option to cut to the end, giving the player the opportunity to move the story forward without reading much (although as I say they would be missing out!).
So basically, my question is - if I make these mini-missions, will anyone actually play them? I would be releasing the first two parts simultaneously so they could be played in sequence, but would the (relative) lack of combat and dialogue-heavy nature of the first part put people off playing the second? If it helps, part 2 would be really heavy in combat.
Thanks!
Post edited by uberadiant88 on
0
Comments
Object limit is per map, not per mission, unless you are talking about the limit of maps. So, if you hit 475 on one map, another map is still a blank slate.
On the diplomacy/non-combat stuff, I have two missions that are entirely non-combat. They are challenging to make, but I think a lot of people enjoy them, so long as the description makes it clear. I use this:
"Warning! The is a purely diplomatic and non-combat mission. Expect lots of text."
There are a lot of positive comments and reviews. If you want to see examples of how players respond to those non-combat missions, search for "The Return to Terra Nova" and "The Needs of the Few."
A gooed story certainly doesn't put players off
IF you want people to play your mission, advertise. And advertise a bit more.
I call it, the Stoutes paradox.
Ah, thanks for that. This presents a similar problem though - I assume the map limit is still 10? To make the first complete part of my arc I would need 14...I'm very aware of the impact that a lot of loading screens would have on the enjoyment of the mission, but I'm hoping the story itself would keeps players hanging around.
Also, when the limit post is talking about "contacts" I assume it's referring to general number of NPC's rather than actual contacts with dialogue? Again, that's a small issue as two of my maps would benefit from a limit of double that number to make them feel "alive".
I call it, the Stoutes paradox.
Yeah, those numbers refer to number of people on a map, not number of dialogues. If I recall, there is something like a limit of 100 dialogues in a single branching dialogue.
Also, players really hate loading screens, especially Foundry ones, which are long. There are a lot of ways to avoid them. Nobody likes waiting for a map to load, and only find one objective of beaming down to a planet. There are also ways to do the following all on one map:
scan a planet, go to warp, scan a different planet, go to warp, fight enemies, etc.
Yeah, this may have changed. It's easy enough to investigate. I'll do that now.
Edit: New limit seems to be 15. It would not let me duplicate a 16th, but with 15 maps in the story board, I saw no errors preventing publishing.
Thank you for testing that out
I call it, the Stoutes paradox.
I assume there's absolutely no way around this at all?
Anyways, if the story has no use for combat then there's really no point in adding it.
Sure, most players like loot, but, ultimately you're not gonna get much loot out of a normal Foundry mission. So it doesn't make much difference there.
My character Tsin'xing
Needless to say friendly mobs can't be talked to without trickery involved. But if all you want is a few dozen more bar patrons to fill the back ground that shouldn't be an issue.
My character Tsin'xing
Thank you!!
If anything i don't think there are enough of them, thats not to say i dislike combat, but I have been finding myself getting RPG combat fatigue, usually to do with the way combat comes in waves of increasing difficulty, specially on the gorund
though i like it when an author takes me by surprise with combat
whats your mission called by the way? I'd love to play another diplomacy-ish mission when its published
I think that is a key element, trying to do something different. Combat is very hard to do differently and seems to rapidly tie people down to conventions. I think for most people here non-combat is either perfectly okay or a positive so long as it has strength in the story. I think the key to using combat is to use it how the show would use it, not how cryptic would use it. Would Riker be running around a Romulan base killing Romulans in groups of 5 while interacting with consoles at different ends of the base? Would Kirk have a brawl with a single set of Klingon's in a bar as part of the overall story line and then bluff his way out of a space combat?
Also, less combat you use seems to make it more meaningful when you do have it so "combat-lite" is also an option. But as mentioned before, you have to make it very clear what the nature of the mission is. And at the top of the notice - from my experience not everyone bothers to read to the bottom of anything. I wouldn't worry about what the click-straight-to-combat folks think (as if you're making a story mission, they are not your target audience) but you do need to watch them bringing down your ratings by not understanding.
Watching a non combat ST episode is not the same than reading wall of text after walls of text. Sometimes, there are so many talking I feel like reading a fan fiction, instead of playing a game. And I loose focus. My mind wander, and I don't really care anymore about what I'm reading. Good story or not, it doesn't matter.
The combat help to remind the player he is in charge of the mission (it's not true, but nobody like when they face the truth). It help them to remind them it's a game. And also, it is a welcome break when you just spent half an hour reading walls of texts.
I wish there were some tools to make story telling better. Most of them are impossible to add, sadly. For example complete voice over (impossible), dynamic discussions (IE like Mass effect/SWTOR dialogues, when someone talk, and still move and act), or choices that affect the story (possible, but they don't want to do that), etc...
No matter what we do, the Foundry is just that, a mission creator in STO. I wish I had a full dev team dedicated to make a game from my ideas, and a lot of money to make sure it's the way I want to, but it's not true.
Also, videogames are not movies. They are different, and you can't make them the same way. Riker wouldn't roam a romulan base and using consoles. He would send Geordi to do that. In a game, we can't send Geordi, have a blackscreen to show we move forward in time, and come back with Geordi talking to Riker about what he did.
There are a lot of things you can't do, no matter what game and what tools you have, and a lot of things you can do.
* Follow-that-ship (Beneath the Skin) and even follow-that-alien (Wibbly Wobbly Timey Wimey)
* Puzzles via the dialogue system, of course - you can make a surprisingly good thing of this (Black Boxes, Spirits of Ramok Nor)
* Mazes (Beneath the Skin, Inner Space)
* Race tracks (You don't know when it's real)
When (if) I get started on writing a Foundry mission, the first thing I'm going to do is try out every kind of non-combat task that I can think of within the limits of the Foundry. Might put them all together and make a demo mission.
some of these are great, I have included two ideas of this list in my missions, A puzzle that will result in the death of a crewman if you fail ( peril is fun ) and a warp speed pursuit that bridges the gap between maps transitions nice and smoothly
In "Darkness between the Stars"(Fed), you are sent on a scientific investigation and have a long series of tasks to complete as part of the investigation.
In "Diplomacy in the Gamma Quadrant"(KDF), you have to tak to a lot of people as part of the diplomatic relations.
Both have some combat, but in both cases there's combat on one map and only one.
My character Tsin'xing
As I said, there's a lot of dialogue in my story. I've tried to do three things to limit "text fatigue" -
1. Most dialogue has at least two response options to fit different character personalities. The options tend not to just link back to the same dialogue that comes next, they will illicit different responses from the NPC you are talking to. Hopefully allowing the player to make a conscious choice about their reply will encourage them to actually read and take in what the NPC is saying. The (teeny weeny) downside to this is that depending on player reply choices, there's dialogue they won't ever get to read. On the plus side, if they like the mission they can play it again and choose different replies! I just wish it had an effect on the story itself...maybe one day!
2. Each and every dialogue box will either progress the story/provide background/develop the personality character the player is talking to/provide subtle hints as to what's coming later on. There is practically no meaningless text at all.
3. If there is about to be a lengthy conversation with an NPC, one of the reply options will always allow the player to skip the conversation. They'll be missing out on the development of the story, but at least they'll have the option.
I'm hoping that these things will be enough to keep the player hooked, I suppose I'll just have to wait and see. With a bit of luck I'll be publishing in a week or so. I want to take my time and make the sets and dialogue just right.
You mentioned dialogue the player may never get to see based on their choices, I have a section in my Wrok in progress missions where if you fail the puzzle, the NPC will die, and that NPC has valuable knowledge you will miss out on ( consequences are good i think, increases replayability)
On the topic of varying dialogue choices, One thing i like to do is write all my major choices, that will make big changes ( ones that have state transitions or major branches of dialogue) , and before i publish, i will go through and add multiple minor ones, most of which will take the player on a mirror branch, with different moods for the NPC, so if you insult the NPC, they respond accordingly , but mosre or less the same dialogue
My aim is to give an option that would cover each of the main species avalible to us, vulcans have a logic option, Klingons and Telerites have a slightly more agressive/rude option etc etc
I hope this improves the immersion factor for some, but i also think that having multiple options at every/most dialoge box will encourage the player to get into character and think about what they are saying, so that when a option comes up that will change something in the mission that effects the stroy, they will not always notice , so that major changes can be made based on seemingly normal dialogue, which i would hope makes things more naturally flowing
So for example, insulting a NPC ship captain by being sarcastic, may just be humorus diversion in some scenarios, but a similar sarcastic come back might cause a different alien to become hostile towards you, this might cause combat to take place, or more sneakily, this will trigger dialogue prompt reached status changes that hide options later for the NPC to come to your aid
the trick i think is not to make it obvious, so that the player doesn't even know that that playing field has changed because of it this is one example of a way roleplaying can become more intergrated into game play( of course this takes considorable effort on the part of the author, potentially for little or no recognition from players, but i take pride in doign all that i can to improve missions i make )
this i think is cool, i like it when the player is chaging things without him knowing , sometimes the best game mechanics happen without you knowing it
( not sure if any of that makes sense but i think it does)
My character Tsin'xing
I guess its just neater presentation wise to limit whats in a box to read
My character Tsin'xing
It's the other way around for me; I keep messing up my basic grammer due to combining dutch/english grammer. I tend to write English the Dutch way..
This makes it rather difficult for me to create walls of text which might show in my missions, unfortunatly.
I call it, the Stoutes paradox.
1) Breaks monotonous long period of nothing but talking.
2) Adds to the story and isn't excessive.
I'm going to pull out an example here (don't be mad ashkrik
Anyway, to get back to the topic, it depends. Lack of combat puts me off when I feel like there wasn't any reason to exclude it from the story. It folds both ways, though: the presence of combat where it didn't need to be (or if there's simply too much) draws out the mission and adds very little. Use your judgement and learn yourself.