ok, so i made this point ages ago, but, im gonna ask if any1 thinks if its a good idea, or if it would work but:
my idea is, what if a monster killed a player, if we gave it variables too, we could make the monster lvl up, and get stronger
would this work, i mean so, only that monster dies, and if so, would any1 play this kind of game
ID:151737
 Jun 18 2009, 7:37 am
|
|
games not made yet mate
iim just saying, what if a RPG you werre playing had NPC's that get stronger the more you play, if you loose against them obv | |
Only issue I can see with that is you'll end up sometime or later with a godly NPC who only grows in power as he slaughters innocent players. Other than that, I can't see why you would have something like that in place, other than to make an obviously already difficult monster even harder the next go around. Maybe if the game had a more in depth strategy side that revolved around a players actual ability to play the game and not so much their stats or level.
| |
well, the whole point of this system is that, only good players will be able to defeat the boss, and if there is a GOD npc, that means that the players will have to train harder, and no noobs will be able to destroy the boss them boast about it, causeing players who like to play to leave
the basic point is, that it can make a FALSE AI npc cause if i can do that with the npc, the world can evolve and a whole new RP can be built around that, for instance RP: shiniru:My fellow warriors, there is a band of bandits outside the city walls, they threaten our trade links with other citys, we must destroy them issac:but... they are growing ever stronger as we speak shiniru:thats why i need many of you to help attack, if we all join in we can defeat them tidus:i will help, i have backround info on them, i hear their strongest warrior has a level superiour to odin himself! | |
Shiniru wrote:
well, the whole point of this system is that, only good players will be able to defeat the boss, and if there is a GOD npc, that means that the players will have to train harder, and no noobs will be able to destroy the boss them boast about it, causeing players who like to play to leave Perhaps what you need is for the monster to get stronger every time it is defeated, instead of every time it defeats a player. Because, the whole defeat-player-get-stronger thing has obvious flaws. The monster will eventually reach a level where it cannot be defeated, and it will simply lose its point in the game. (No one will ever go to challenge it, and those who do only make it stronger.) If the level only changes after it's defeated, then the players can still train and reach a strong enough level to defeat it, but it will still get stronger over time. One notable thing is that having any NPC monsters gain level as time goes on is bad, because starting players may never have the chance to train against monsters if the monsters are all very high levels. So, if you include something that makes monsters get stronger, definitely don't make it true for all monsters, because then low leveled players can't even get stronger. | |
I believe the NPC leveling only works in situations where those NPCs only exist on temporary stages and are deleted once the objectives on that stage are complete. The Disgaea series, Phantom Brave, and Makai Kingdom games execute this system perfectly.
However, this won't turn out well in a permanent setting mainly because of the reasons Naokohiro has stated. | |
but how rarely does someone die against starting monsters??
not very also, if i set the increase up to derease each time it would stop any god monsters, also, if i deem any monsters to be too powerful i will reset them | |
Shiniru wrote:
but how rarely does someone die against starting monsters?? So... people die against starting monsters very often? Ignoring your flailing attempts to communicate, let's consider this situation: Bob is a jerk. Bob maek charikter. Bob intentionally dies to a bunny. Repeatedly. Bunny destroys world. | |
Monster kills player. Levels up. Monster gets stronger, kills another player. Monster levels up. Monster kills 10 more players. Monster levels up lots. Monster kills 100 players. Monster becomes unstoppable. GM kills monster.
| |
You are quite correct. Most negative replies here were quite close-minded, and assumed a monster would just be allowed to be infinitely powerful. However, you can easily implement such a feature, and still limit the maximum level that a monster could reach, for example like you've said (make the leveling progressively slower until it's meaningless) or limit a monster's maximum level to 150% or 200% of its initial strength. That way monsters will still be able to get stronger by leveling up similarly to players, but they won't be too overpowered and a Bunny will always be much weaker than a Dark Dragon. ;)
Features like this are pretty good, since they make monsters more similar to players and add variety so not every monster of every type is at the same level, which is too plain and predictable. This way a player could end up facing a stronger-than-expected Bunny, etc. Of course, you could always skip the middleman and have every monster's stats be slightly randomized (from perhaps 75% of 'normal' power to 150%), or you could even combine both methods. Just make sure that the rewards for defeating monsters are proportional to its current strength though, to be fair, so that a player that defeats a Dark Dragon that is 100% stronger than normal after a long fight doesn't get the same rewards he'd get for defeating a normal one. :P | |
This is a bad idea regardless of any extraordinary scenarios. It boils down to, quite simply, the game becoming harder where it's too hard and easier where it's too easy. It is the exact opposite of balancing a game, and is just silly.
| |
Fun example, but that would be a very stupid jerk Bob, since he most likely could have much easier and more effective ways of being a jerk without this feature. =P To carry on with the fun examples:
Bob is a jark. Bob craete charcactir. Bob kills a bunny. Repeatedly. Bob destroys warld. | |
Of course, it's always a great way to present your argument by throwing arbitrary statements without including any basis or reasoning for them in your post. That can be quite meaningless - see, I could do the same:
It boils down to, quite simply, the game becoming harder where it's too hard and easier where it's too easy. No, it doesn't, quite simply. WTFP PWND? ;) | |
I felt I did not need to elaborate any further, but apparently I do:
Point: If a portion of the game is too difficult, players will die more often. Point: If a monster is stronger, it will make its associated portion of the game more difficult. Therefore: If monsters become stronger by killing people, and a portion of the game is too difficult, then it will become more difficult. Similarly: If it is expected that monsters will kill players with any frequency, then the real average strength of monsters would take this into account. However: if a portion of the game is too easy, then players would die less often, making the average strength of monsters generally go down, making the game even easier. If you need an explanation for why it's bad to make things that are too hard harder, and too easy easier, then you need a slap in the face. | |
That makes great assumptions on a couple of things, including the kind of game this is implemented into in the first place. It also, again, assumes the designer will be dumb and will not properly take into account this feature when designing the game.
Garthor wrote: Point: If a portion of the game is too difficult, players will die more often. Only if they actually 'visit'' that portion. If it's a typical BYOND free-roam ORPG type game, players can go wherever; and as it is, there will be more difficult portions, that weaker players should avoid; adding limited monster power increases only adds variety, if you limit monsters' maximum power properly so they don't stray too far from their 'normal' power. A buffed-up Bunny won't make players die more often, because it's still a Bunny, and therefore weak. Following typical RPG leveling up rules, you could even make strong monsters level up more slowly, etc. Point: If a monster is stronger, it will make its associated portion of the game more difficult. Then don't make a portion of the game too difficult in the first place...? Besides, it will only become more difficult to a limited degree. A monster or two slowly becomes more powerful, and is eventually killed and replaced by a normal-powered monster. It is only making a "problem" that was already there slightly more pronounced. making the average strength of monsters generally go down, making the game even easier. Only because YOU made it go down, but you didn't have to. You made a portion of the game too easy, you put weaker monsters there; etc. | |
This is going to be my last attempt to explain this to you, as simply as possible:
This system would inherently make any existing difficulty problems with the game worse. That is bad. | |
But, again, that is no issue if you prevent any difficulty problems in the first place, and then this system only adds advantages such as variety and unpredictability. That is good. Of course, I doubt you'll suddenly face it as it's probably the 3rd or so time I've pointed this out, but hey, apparently that's how discussions are done: repeat the same things to death.
| |
It's like asking if anyone wants to eat this burger and just telling them that it has 2 pieces of bread