Messages

1

Design / Re: Zelda roguelike

« on: March 29, 2014, 08:38:53 AM »

Yeah, better than I expected. I still don't like it. Could be because I don't know Zelda 1 that well (and therefore suck at it), could be because the controls are not suited for a german qwertz keyboard (y and z are swapped). Could also be, that the emulator is so basic, that many of the graphics don't work properly.

Maybe it's better on a smartphone, I didn't try.
How do you use that emulator on a phone anyway? Does it only work on an iPhone? Does it work on Android? Do you have to jailbreak/root them?

At least I didn't play about equally bad in real time and "turn based". (I still wouldn't call it that)

I don't really like that the game continues for a second, until it finally stops, when you do nothing. Sure, that way you can block the shots of octorocs and the like, but it seems to be more complicated, han it needs to be.
I think it would be better, if it stopped immediately, or if it just stayed real time, like it was designed to.

As for the bet, I would call it a draw, until more people show me, that it's just my personal bias.

2

Design / Re: Zelda roguelike

« on: March 28, 2014, 03:46:05 PM »

LazyCat, I wish you good luck. Maybe we really don't understand, what you try to accomplish. But I'm still betting against you.

Anyway, why bother with halting gameplay at all, if it's just going in realtime, as long as you push a button? Could it still be considered turn based? I wouldn't.

In Baldurs Gate combat was real time, but you could pause at any time to give new commands.
In a similar vein in the RTS series Warlords Battlecry you could also pause the game in single player at any time to give commands.
The only difference to your suggestion would be, that in yours the game stops automatically without input. Not a very big difference imo.

I still wouldn't call either series turn based.

3

Design / Re: Zelda roguelike

« on: March 28, 2014, 08:35:49 AM »

Come on man, I shouldn't have to explain this.

There is nothing to explain, just point out some specific difference you think would make turn based Zelda any worse than turn based roguelike. I don't even know what is your objection about.

a.) You think it would not translate well due to some technical reason

b.) You think it would make the game too easy and boring

The difference is that the game you propose would be some kind of broken version of a zelda game. The 2d zelda games have essentially nothing in common with roguelikes mechanically, except a top view-ish perspective (and it's debatable whether roguelikes are really top view vs. just an abstract map layout). Your bastardized version of zelda has the same issues, except it has some hacked up approximation to turn based play (which obviously wouldn't work right, but whatever).

You again fail to point out even a single specific thing. What is the difference, exactly?

The biggest technical/gameplay problem is precision, I think.

If I understand you correctly, you just want to stop a standard Zelda game every second or so, in which the player can make an input - which is then performed in the next second.
So, let's say, you stand just outside of reach with your sword, maybe even a bit to the side of it, so you can't just move straight up to it. So you press diagonally on the D-pad. But what do the monsters do? Do they stand there? Do they move in some random direction? Do they start an attack, just the moment after the game pauses? You don't know! You might as well bump into one - which damages you! - as well as being in no better position to attack than before. Swords would probably be utterly useless.
In regular roguelikes, when you bump into a monster you attack them automatically. That has a reason! Zelda is not made to be played turn-by-turn, it's purely designed to be real-time!
So why don't we just make the intervall shorter? How short? When will it become too tedious? And if we have to drop to an inpt every frame, or maybe even every second or third frame, why don't we just spare ourselves the agony and just play, like it was intended?

I don't know RedRogue, but I'm pretty sure if it can handle both turn-based and realtime gameplay, it was designed that way from the get-go. Zelda just wasn't!

4

Early Dev / Re: KeeperRL (formerly Zagadka)

« on: March 26, 2014, 03:16:57 PM »

Very fun game! I was especially surprised about the speed of the gameplay. [and death of keepers  ] 

One thing that annoyed me, was that the Keeperopedia (was that the name) couldn't be easily controlled with the mouse. I tried to click on "traps" for infos, but it always slipped away. There is not much info there yet, but when there is, it should be fixed.

Speaking of traps: I was expecting the stone traps to be working like in dwarf fortress. Instead they work like in Indiana Jones. Caught me off guard and got me wondering, why half my fortress was standing in my trap passage. (hint: they all got deadlocked by a not completed stone trap)
How the web traps and gas traps work is obvious, and I guess, when an alarm trap is triggered the whole fortress is called to that spot.
But what do the surprise traps do? I'm guessing it's a surprise for everyone. But what kind of effects can you expect?

I love this game, but I still have a lot to learn in how to play it. I haven't tried Adventure mode yet, but Keper mode is awesome!