61
Programming / Re: Breaking Items
« on: June 12, 2012, 08:28:59 PM »"My wand of polymorph was in a terrible huff on Wednesday and would only turn things into pink ostriches, no matter how I begged and pleaded."Nice.
Show Posts
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
62
Programming / Re: Breaking Items
« on: June 12, 2012, 08:04:54 PM »For example, if you consistently use a Wand of Fire to target enemies at a distance of 3 and rarely use it under other circumstances, the wand eventually closes its max/min range around the most frequent distance (and direction).That also sounds really good. I've recently been looking into limiting how much of an effect the RNG has on tactics and strategy, and that sounds like it would fit pretty well.
63
Programming / Re: Breaking Items
« on: June 12, 2012, 05:44:37 PM »
Seems like a good idea. Although I wouldn't want my perfectly fine Wand of Fire to start going off randomly. Maybe "Cursed" wands do that instead of sticking to you? Also, I would want some glitches to be good (or at least not "bad"). Maybe something along the lines of "If a creature comes within 10 steps of you, your Wand of Fire discharges at them." That would give you an automatic defense system, but stop you from having allies.
64
Incubator / Re: Intro to the Incubator
« on: June 12, 2012, 05:34:49 AM »
Seems like a great idea, although my project isn't far enough along to join. I'll be sure to enter sometime, maybe for next year's Annual Roguelike Release Party
65
Traditional Roguelikes (Turn Based) / Re: Announcing Brogue v1.6.3
« on: June 07, 2012, 03:55:50 PM »
Oh, no, just read the update list in more detail; eels have more defense?! The waters grow ever more dangerous...
66
Traditional Roguelikes (Turn Based) / Re: Announcing Brogue v1.6.3
« on: June 07, 2012, 04:38:05 AM »
Nice, lots of updates.
67
Temple of the Roguelike / Re: Welcome to Temple of the Roguelike Forums! (a.k.a. Introduce Yourself Thread)
« on: June 07, 2012, 04:34:01 AM »
Hi Nicole! (or N, I guess 
)
I do enjoy Brogue, and random map generation. For my own project, I'm sort of copying Brogue on its random map generator too.
)I do enjoy Brogue, and random map generation. For my own project, I'm sort of copying Brogue on its random map generator too.
68
Early Dev / Re: MicRogue
« on: June 06, 2012, 03:48:49 AM »
Well, the first thing that comes to mind when I think of that problem is a mini-forcefield around the doors, so that creatures can't go through, or stop where they will kill you. But that's just me.
69
Early Dev / Re: MicRogue
« on: June 05, 2012, 03:13:16 PM »
Wow, it's looking nice; much further along than my project. 
I guess I have to start working quicker!
I guess I have to start working quicker!
70
Programming / Re: Identify? (y/n)
« on: June 04, 2012, 02:03:14 PM »
Wow, there's a lot of posts to look at!
Okay, summarizing...
@Mariodonick, I also agree that NetHack is random and bloated and stuff.
@Krenium, I also like that NetHack philosophy, but if you look at it like that, then you'll end up trying to 'think of everything', and to me that's bad. If you want "The Dev Team Thinks of Everything," go outside and play. No lag, built-in-ultra-advanced physics, 6 billion players, etc. Unfortunately, no cheat codes. Sorry. The gamer should understand that "The Dev Team Thinks of Everything" only comes around after decades of consistent effort from a team. For a solo project, that's almost impossible.
@Mariodonick, LambdaRogue sounds cool.
@Darren Grey, I think that philosophy is a pretty good one. And for me, it seems to make things a lot easier. I have a lot of ideas in my head, but it's really hard to implement them. If I start with the core ideas, it'll be a lot easier for me.
@Holsety, Yes, Brogue is lovely, isn't it? It's one of the main inspirations for my project
Simple interface, complex item interaction, easy to play (but hard to win, of course). I'm really going for item interaction in my project. I also like your other points.
@Kraflab, I think it's a pretty cool idea, too.
@Krenium, I like identification too, I just think it's sometimes mis-used. I don't think identification should be used to add "surprise" or such as some people are saying, play a game long enough and you already have a pretty good idea of what those pink potions are, based on other clues; when you got it (in some games), how many there are (some games give more "good potions" than "bad"), how many choices are left, etc.
@Skeletor, Yeah, I like that idea too, I just thought it up when I was typing that
Okay, summarizing...
@Mariodonick, I also agree that NetHack is random and bloated and stuff.
@Krenium, I also like that NetHack philosophy, but if you look at it like that, then you'll end up trying to 'think of everything', and to me that's bad. If you want "The Dev Team Thinks of Everything," go outside and play. No lag, built-in-ultra-advanced physics, 6 billion players, etc. Unfortunately, no cheat codes. Sorry. The gamer should understand that "The Dev Team Thinks of Everything" only comes around after decades of consistent effort from a team. For a solo project, that's almost impossible.
@Mariodonick, LambdaRogue sounds cool.
@Darren Grey, I think that philosophy is a pretty good one. And for me, it seems to make things a lot easier. I have a lot of ideas in my head, but it's really hard to implement them. If I start with the core ideas, it'll be a lot easier for me.
@Holsety, Yes, Brogue is lovely, isn't it? It's one of the main inspirations for my project
Simple interface, complex item interaction, easy to play (but hard to win, of course). I'm really going for item interaction in my project. I also like your other points. @Kraflab, I think it's a pretty cool idea, too.
@Krenium, I like identification too, I just think it's sometimes mis-used. I don't think identification should be used to add "surprise" or such as some people are saying, play a game long enough and you already have a pretty good idea of what those pink potions are, based on other clues; when you got it (in some games), how many there are (some games give more "good potions" than "bad"), how many choices are left, etc.
@Skeletor, Yeah, I like that idea too, I just thought it up when I was typing that
71
Programming / Re: Identify? (y/n)
« on: June 04, 2012, 02:37:46 AM »Well, thanks for that, you made my day when I saw thatAlso, who voted for "Remember to Explain Your Answer"? I thought that it would be obvious that's not a real choice.
That would be me. I just couldn't resist when I saw it listed as one of the alternatives
It's about the sake of "beating the game".What if all scrolls (for example) had a "bad" and "good" side effect (this is a no-id game I'm talking about)? The player would assume that the "bad" side effect is for balancing (maybe because there is no id). However, the "Mac Gyver Effect" (nice term, by the way) comes in when they realize the "bad" side effect may be just as useful as the "good" side effect, just not as obvious.
In the non-id scenario, useless scroll are there already identified so the player knows that they're there for a positive purpose and the devs thinked about a good use even for them. So no Mac Gyver effect!
An important thing is not to just copy what other games have done. There are always new ways of doing things.There's something I wholeheartedly agree with.
72
Programming / Re: Identify? (y/n)
« on: June 03, 2012, 09:16:35 PM »Of course the identify-minigame will be done and obsolete by endgame.Honestly, I don't think you lose anything. Take Brogue, for example. I pick up a spear. But, being the cautious guy I am, I don't equip it. I then find out its cursed, and throw it in the nearest lava pit. I might as well never had it, since I didn't use it anyway. Or a cursed ring. I don't put things on unless I know that they aren't cursed, but when I find out that ring is useless to me, i trash it. There's no point to keeping it, unless I want to waste enchantments bringing it up to +-something.
But you lose so much by removing it!
Also, I don't agree with your point about offensive (or negative, as you put it) potions. I can kill a bloat in Brogue (they release combustible poison gas), then throw an Potion of Incineration in the mix. Boom. Instant wildfire. Or, I can throw some Deadly Spore Potions to take out a pack of jackals, then Incinerate the poison fungus when it's done its work.
73
Programming / Re: Identify? (y/n)
« on: June 03, 2012, 02:52:33 AM »It's not integral. You might want to listen to this roguelike radio episode which is about identification systems and makes a good case against item identification (imo), it convinced me that item identification is not a good feature. I no longer plan to have that feature in my game. If only because it's benefits seem marginal compared to having to implement the feature. Id rather implement a more useful, perhaps more original feature.Thanks for the link. Sounds cool, though I haven't had a chance to listen to it.
http://roguelikeradio.blogspot.co.uk/2012/04/episode-30-identification-systems.html
Identify systems are one of the major blunders of the roguelike genre. They introduce tedium and chance at the expense of strategy at the beginning of a game. At the end of a game they no longer exist. So what exactly is the benefit? That is for consumables. In terms of equipment I am completely on board with needing to wear your armor or use your sword to learn its effect etc, assuming you have identify scrolls or something for important items and they do not have asinine effects.Thanks, you gave me some interesting points to think about.
Also, who voted for "Remember to Explain Your Answer"? I thought that it would be obvious that's not a real choice.
74
Programming / Identify? (y/n)
« on: June 02, 2012, 11:12:40 PM »
Hi, I another question here. Do you think that a game with a limited item set can make no-identification work? For example, if the only items in the dungeon are potions, would it be interesting if the potions were all identified, or if you still had to identify them. Just brainstorming here, feel free to leave comments/votes/rants/etc. Is identification integral to a rogue-like?
75
Classic Roguelikes / Re: Do you guys think it's worth playing vanilla ADOM and angband?
« on: May 31, 2012, 08:50:56 PM »
Although I haven't personally played them, I think it's worth it to play any rogue-like that's been around that long.