Nice video, Mark! Small correction though, in XCOM:EW Meld self-destruct timer is always ticking. When you spot the canister, it reveals the timer value, but Meld can expire even if you never seen it, so you are always encouraged to move as long as there is Meld on the map.
@magicmanscott40k
7 жыл бұрын
NowIaNewMaster yeah I was about to say the same thing. Great game. One of my top 10 games I played. He was right by saying they added junk. The meld upgrades are nice but u can beat the game without them. I love that u can get meld using run and gun. I use run and gun just for meld or the bombs.
@baudsp
7 жыл бұрын
Nice is an understatement for flamethrowers, rocket punches, rocket boots, unlimited invisibility and squad boosting.
@jacobanderson6551
6 жыл бұрын
NowIaNewMaster they took it out for xcom 2 which hurt the game
@derrinerrow4369
6 жыл бұрын
also if you complete the mission before the canisters self-destruct, you will automatically secure them even if you haven't seen them.
@TheManofthecross
5 жыл бұрын
@@derrinerrow4369 wonder how that works logically clear the mission and yet have the time to find them post mission to get them? even if not found? how does that work?
@ProfessorBear404
7 жыл бұрын
I think that one of the best examples of this is Fire Emblem. Here’s the scenario: Yes, It’d be so much safer to just “turtle” and move super slowly, but here’s the catch, all the way on the other side of the map is a chest, and an enemy thief is moving towards it, effectively starting a timer until the extremely useful item in the chest is lost to you forever, very effectively speeding up play. Fire Emblem games do this a lot, replacing the chest with an ally who will die, or something like that. I really enjoy this because it provides a challenging scenario for me to overcome, and the rewards help you do better from then on out, almost to the extent that not getting it is a punishment, instead of getting it being a reward.
@ArchSageDragonlord
7 жыл бұрын
Glad I found this comment without having to scroll down too far, otherwise, I'd have mentioned it. With the ally dying it, there's actually 2 ways they can handle it: either have an enemy that will inevitably reach the ally unless you stop them or have the ally be a complete fool and rush straight into enemy territory. I believe either Roy's or Eliwood's game does the former at some point while Radiant Dawn does the latter with the chapter where Elincia is an unarmed green other unit who slowly but surely heads towards the boss that is equipped with a Silver Bow. Radiant Dawn also rewards faster gameplay by giving extra bonus experience if a chapter is beaten within a certain number of turns. From what I've played of the series, it doesn't seem to often throw the 'do x in y amount of turns or you fail' sorta thing at you
@ProfessorBear404
7 жыл бұрын
Sometimes you have to survive for a certain amount of turns, but the only turn limited mission I can think of is the one with all the medicine pots in Fates.
@kinokochan
7 жыл бұрын
Came to say the same thing! Fire Emblem makes each battle feel like a puzzle that you are encouraged to solve in the way that's most optimal for your play style. Awakening was my first Fire Emblem, and I was so motivated to recruit some of the optional characters (more characters = more marriage options = more children, who typically have way better stats than their parents) that I ended up playing the difficult battles multiple times in riskier ways than usual, looking for different approaches that would get me the right win condition. If earning that loot or character ends up being too difficult, I can still win the battle without them and progress. FE also does an excellent job establishing a narrative for allies and party members intermixed with the combat, which further compels me to save and recruit them.
@Soroboruo
3 жыл бұрын
The experience system also works in that - sure, you COULD send the nuclear option in, but there's a solid chance that character is either already overleveled if not an outright exp sink (Jeigan types, etc.). That forces the player to think more strategically about how to handle the situation from the start, too. And making the map (minus reinforcements) usually visible prior to starting gives information without solving the problem for you. Plus the thieves are so natural to the gameplay that I honestly hadn't thought about their pressure value until watching this video.
@amrotamro
7 жыл бұрын
I think Dungeon of the Endless is also a nice example. It's a turn based rogue-like tower defense game that has you take turns exploring rooms in a level to find the exit and then carry a power crystal (which is in your starting room and acts as your "base" for the tower defense aspect) to said exit. It has a mechanic where you can power up rooms using "Dust", which is a limited resource that you may find while exploring. This lights up the room and allows you to build towers/resource nodes in it. On some levels though you may not find enough Dust to light up all rooms. When you open a door to a room there's a chance of enemies spawning in it as well as a chance of waves of them spawning in unlit rooms across the level, so you may end up overwhelmed depending on how many rooms you've opened and left unlit. The turn timer comes in the form of the risk and reward of racking up the tension to explore and gather more and more resources/items/upgrades to help you combat the levels to come versus just gunning for the exit as soon as you find it.
@ThunderRazorYT
7 жыл бұрын
Yay bonus vid. Also mentioning Steamworld Heist again. Great timer system that pushes the player forward and makes the game more fun.
@AdamQuigley
7 жыл бұрын
Literally seconds before you presented the first example I was thinking to myself, "Invisible Inc addressed this issue perfectly. I wonder if he'll show-" GMTK: "Let's start with Invisible Inc..." You never disappoint.
@AntonQvarfordt
7 жыл бұрын
Have an obsevation about this: I think a lot of people were so fond of conservative play in XCOM: Enemy Unknown in large part due to how satisfying it was to do this (largely sniper powered) strategy of "overwatch advancement". Where you'd advance half the movement potential per turn with one or two heavily armored characters while the rest stayed behind on overwatch (instant attack on spotted enemies, especially powerful with snipers). It just felt really cool to do that, it was immersive. Dismantling and perhaps retrofitting the core of the enjoyment found in that might help to provide really potent solutions for how to combat the negative sides of conservative play for enjoyment. I havn't done it... But I think it's probably pretty fertile soil to to dig into when looking for more options.
@demondevilmon980
7 жыл бұрын
somehow funny that all turn based games have this timermechanic ;) maybe some rpgs have that timerthing in bossbattles? great video Mark :D
@YohnTheViking
7 жыл бұрын
XCOM 2 actually already has a thematic approach to the turn timer, through a mod. This mod does something rather interesting: The turn timer only starts once the concealment on a squad member is broken. I personally really like this approach, you get to start off slow and learn what types of enemies you are likely to face and the layout of the map, so that you can start properly planning what to do when the timer starts up and the mad dash begins. In addition there is that thematic element to it. It never really made sense that the Advent would already have started to shut things down practically before you even touch down, when they are not aware of you at the start of the mission. With this mod it makes a lot more sense; Advent sees the XCOM guerilla force, so start shutting down the neural network node/send in gunships to make extraction impossible/etc. Doesn't work for all mission types of course (then again the extended turn timer option in War of the Chosen doesn't apply to all mission types either), but it is one of those easy fixes similar to switching it from "Alarm" to "Security Level" in Invisible Inc. that may make the pill easier to thematically swallow.
@loganreed23
7 жыл бұрын
Originally XCOM 2 timers was going to start only after detection. But players that were testing the game constantly were trying to complete every mission in stealth and re-loaded their saves until they have succeeded. Because of that developers had to do this change.
@saintkupo7164
7 жыл бұрын
Xcom 2 in playtesting had its turn timer not start until a member of your team was revealed. Unfortunately focus testing (yay, focus testing!) groups would try to just play the whole mission in stealth and would constantly load a save if they got detected. The War of the Chosen expansion adds this timer behavior as an optional perk you can unlock during the game.
@OhNoTheFace
6 жыл бұрын
So they designed levels poorly if you could get to an objective like that
@memk
7 жыл бұрын
Well in XCOM2 WoTC there is a option to enable permanent dark event. That is a good way to force people rush to ending because some dark event are DEADLY, yet not a plain "You lose" situation.
@That_Ifrit_Guy
7 жыл бұрын
Also the dropped loot from XCom 2 But overall very interesting set of videos, will have to check out some of ya other videos
@jakoblindstrmjensen6821
6 жыл бұрын
The "security level timer" from invisible inc. could also have been introduced to Xcom so easily. Instead of the timer insta-failing your mission, and effectively killing anyone you haven't pulled out, the game would instead just start throwing more and more reinforcements after you. This theme of guerrilla warfare that they were trying to make would have been so much better. Using too much time, and then getting your entire squad pinned down somewhere. Yes, this could kill your entire team, but i would personally prefer to see my guys go down fighting instead of just getting "deleted" by a timer.
@sirdiealot7805
7 жыл бұрын
Another example that does it similar to Invisible Inc. is Steamworld Heist.
@jackg6887
7 жыл бұрын
It's not a turn timer but an actual timer but Heat Signature. it has a very grounded reason for a timer and gives the player multiple ways to stop the timer/alarm
@KaiserAfini
7 жыл бұрын
I am generally not a fan of timers, I would rather play the game at my own pace, which is methodical, because how I think the experience is most fun to might not match what the designers want to steamroll me into doing. The timer in Invisible Inc truly annoys me, the one in The Swindle is just fine, because it pushes me to take risks and keep moving forward without dictating my playstyle. I would rather always have the option to turn on such a system when I want some new challenges in the run, not have it forced upon me like in XCOM2.
@Soumein
6 жыл бұрын
The last one for Xcom enemy within, The system would be better in my eyes if the aliens were able to take it as well. Then, not only do you lose the opportunity of upgrades and power, but the enemy could even get harder as well. Okay maybe not the last part, but it makes more sense that you lost it because the enemy aliens took it, versus them just self-destructing.
@FlameRat_YehLon
6 жыл бұрын
In FFXIII-2, many enemy would wound you, aka dropping your max health for the current battle, which is kinda a soft timer since lower max health means you would have to spend more turns in healing and if things go uncontrolled you would have to use the expensive potion to heal the wounds. Another example would be FFXIV (or maybe so does every MMO similar to WoW), in that game, even though post endgame bosses have a timer that would kill everyone if you don't kill it fast enough (never been to endgame myself so I'm not 100% sure), but even for normal dungeons, the soft limit would be the white mage's mana point, since that thing is never enough, and if enough MP is spent to recover the team's mistake (or the white mage overheal a lot), the whole session would be doomed. And the revival skill would put debuff on revived characters.
@SheezyBites
7 жыл бұрын
I forgot all about Mario + Rabbids turn timer being a thing, that game's flat 50 and destructable cover makes defensive play so much less effective than hyper-agression on it's own that the timer almost feels pointless as a result.
@Julia-lg8dt
3 жыл бұрын
I like the "missed opportunity" system, but I have to admit that I am generally not the biggest fan of time in games in general. I like playing them at my own speed, without any pressure. A day and night cycle is fine, but only if it doesn't force me to do anything. My opinion, of course.
@RamHoot
7 жыл бұрын
An example of a non-xcom-like is the law and perk system in the Final Fantasy Tactics series
@DeathlyDrained
2 жыл бұрын
Me watching these to help speed up combat and make it more interesting in dnd
@sweetlil1096
7 жыл бұрын
Invisible inc is the freaking best.man
@jasongarrett768
7 жыл бұрын
I think I might actually be a bit in love with Invisible Inc's approach. Gradually ratcheting up the tension sounds perfect, especially for that game's theme.
@screamingcactus1753
7 жыл бұрын
And it would have worked so well with how Xcom 2 wanted to do things. Instead of just rigging their own supplies to explode, wouldn't it be more reasonable if the aliens called in extra reinforcements every few turns? That way you would have to make the choice whether to rush so you don't have to face as many enemies, but potentially put your squad in danger, or to play it slow and and never put any of your squad in a vulnerable position, but risk being overrun by pure numbers.
@SuperKillerpickle
7 жыл бұрын
Patrick Johnson Honestly, I never thought about that, but yeah sounds great!
@nodmusic7293
7 жыл бұрын
This is kind of like the banner saga, enemies can call in reinforcements over time, but they take a couple turns to come into affect so if you rush to take down the enemy who is calling it in you can stop having to face extra forces but put yourself at risk.
@czarkusa2018
7 жыл бұрын
The extra reinforcements idea is what I thought they were talking about with turn timers the whole time, up until release :/ It would at least be semi-reasonable if the timer only started when you were detected (within proper context of course so not on every concealment mission)
@scottcourtney8581
6 жыл бұрын
Yes, yes, yes. I don't mind time pressure elements so much if they are gradual and balanced, and more importantly if they feel they are part of the story/lore rather than being an obvious game mechanic that shatters the fourth wall. Some of the missions in XCOM 2 do have reinforcements arriving at the end, and there were many missions where I pushed just hard enough to evac out my last soldier and leave freshly-arrived alien reinforcements sucking wind at their LZ. Those are fun moments!
@MrVovoda
7 жыл бұрын
As Mark Rosewater says : "Make the fun way to play the correct way to win." And of course : "Don't confuse interesting with fun."
@qikink1
7 жыл бұрын
Just to be clear, this was one of the clearest points in *favor* of XCOM 2 from my point of view. I was never especially fond of painstakingly moving one person at a time, then overwatching the whole squad, but strategically that was almost always the right move in XCOM 1 - meld or no meld. Maybe that puts me in the minority, but it points out the issue with Rosewater's quote, because the fun way to play is subjective, while the correct way to win often isn't.
@OhNoTheFace
6 жыл бұрын
MELD did this perfectly. Guess what? Playing fast was fun because it gave you super soldiers and Sectopod punching MECs
@Simon-ow6td
6 жыл бұрын
JB Problem is that players will, as the quote goes: "optimize the fun out of an experience." So if one playstyle is time-consuming, griny and boring, but safe and as valid for beating the game as a playstyle that inclues risktaking, alternative costs, loads of choices etc. Way more players will do the first one than would enjoy it because humans are riskaverse by nature. So we have to make players take risks in games. Another great example of this is the shields in dark souls. I had a (comparatively) misarable time with DS hiding behind constant blocking. I didnt play the more fun way with loads of dodging and parrying because it looked risky and hard in an already hard game. By the time blood born came around From software had just thrown out the shield when they realized players were playing the game incorrectly for them to enjoy it. And once I got trained on BB, the other souls games were much more fun!
@Mersak168
6 жыл бұрын
But Simon, if players are having fun being safe, where's the problem behind it? Don't get me wrong, but there're the right and the wrong way to punish/reward players for good/bad decision making. Throwing the instalosing screen for playing the way you aren't supposed to be playing is wrong, ramping up the difficulty level of the said mission is right. There's missions where the clock will be your enemy(like bomb ones) and that's fine, it'll take you from the confort zone from time to time, but when EVERY FUCKING MISSION have a timer, you'll taking too much risks, thus it'll be a routine, and finally the player will realize that being safe is the only real risk you'll be taking, because that leads to a LOSING SCREEN instead of a proper punishment, and that sucks. And Dark Souls worked differently. You've used a shield, i proceeded to use it only when strictly neccessary. Dodge, Parrying and Backstabbing all day long my friend. Is the easiest way to do it, but until you get a grip of it, is the riskier way too. But you have the option to play it safe and there's no problem on doing so. And TBF, it gets old pretty fast when you dominated it. You take the "risks" knowing that the "risks" aren't real risks y'know... You get fucked until you learn the pattern or until you learn that the devs are shouting "TRY ANOTHER WAY, BRO!". After you realize those things, there aren't too many risks, using a shield or parrying/dodging everything.
@TyrannisUmbra
6 жыл бұрын
The biggest issue I had with XCom 2's turn timers was that the game itself is designed to punish unnecessary risks, which is why the 'safe' strategies came to the forefront in the first place. So adding the turn timers in XCom 2 simply felt like playing the game was lose-lose. If you played it slow and minimized risks, you'd succeed at avoiding the risk punishment, but get punished by the turn timer. If you played it fast and risky, you'd succeed at avoiding the turn timer punishment, but you'd get punished by your risky plays. There was simply no incentive to play risky at all, and on the same note, the game provided you with very few tools to play fast without getting punished. A good example of this is the way the game handles untriggered enemy groups. Namely, it forces them to patrol into your path, forcing you to eventually fight them all -- and usually if you tried to move through a mission fast, you'd end up triggering multiple enemy groups at the same time, sometimes all of the enemies left on the map in particularly egregious offenders. So as a player, if the game forces you to play slower to avoid getting completely destroyed by combat system and enemy encounter design, while at the exact same time forcing you to play faster or you lose instantly... yeah, you can see why most people vehemently hated the system. You can punish a player for playing too fast, or punish them for playing too slow, but when you do both at once, you just make the player feel like they're being kicked when they're down.
@aceous99
6 жыл бұрын
yeah man well said, I guess the only thing you could do to counter activing mobs is to have a team of snipers and just 1 assault guy running around scouting with a heavy as crowd control eh ? heh
@aidangame
6 жыл бұрын
I think a good example of incentives certain play styles is Phantom Doctrine another XCOM inspired game that has a greater emphasis on stealth like Invisible Inc. What Phantom Doctrine allows players to choose whether they play stealth or loud with each having their own pro's and con's. stealth keeps injuries to a minimum and can get you a greater amount of free gear but can be more boring and less experience for your agents, while combat is more interesting, gets you more experience but increase the likelihood of injuries and mean you might get less gear. So you can play either style freely as it doesn't restrict them barring the Occasional mission.
@sungleong
5 жыл бұрын
yes, it is basically a damn if you do and damn if you don't scenario, you get your ass kicked no matter what.
@BonkLoud
5 жыл бұрын
TyrannisUmbra I was okay with the turn timers, I just wish they gave you a couple extra turns because I felt there wasn’t enough time to deal with OP enemies and a timer
@lilchinesekidchen
5 жыл бұрын
well the way i see it, is xcom 2 isn’t supposed to be a power fantasy game like many other strategy games. it’s actually leaning hard into the rogue-like genre. where the gratification comes from just surviving and being able to finish such a punishing game (like FTL or Teleglitch, or even the original xcom). like, in many situations i was force to make risky decisions/sacrifice one soldier in order to finish the mission. or in some cases, fail a mission in order to save my squad. and a failed mission isn’t a failed campaign, it’s just a set back in the larger campaign that I have to work around. I don’t know of many other turn based strategies that have forced me to do that. and i actually appreciate games where failure is not an end, and has consequences for the larger game. not many games do that. like the dark souls/ blood borne/ sekiro brand of games does this and it’s super interesting
@Blackthornprod
7 жыл бұрын
This is truly a brilliant channel that always fills me with love for the art of game design. Your channel is one of the main factors that got me so motivated to start my own channel on game making :) ! Cheers Mark !
@HelperWesley
3 жыл бұрын
Same here. Most of the things I know about game development I've learned from GMTK and a handful of others.
@equinn4840
3 жыл бұрын
@@HelperWesley Could you give some examples of others? I've been starved for more content/resources like this channel
@HelperWesley
3 жыл бұрын
@@equinn4840 Adam Millard is the closest direct comparison I have to GMTK. But I also learned a tonne from early Extra credits videos.
@equinn4840
3 жыл бұрын
@@HelperWesley Awesome, thank you for the suggestions. If you don't mind me asking, why specifically early Extra Credits vids? I've heard of the channel but never poked into them myself Edit: Also, do you have any more examples of game development resources that aren't necessarily a direct comparison to GMTK?
@HelperWesley
3 жыл бұрын
@@equinn4840 Oh, they started branching out and doing mythology and history videos. When they first started they did purely video game related videos. That's all.
@Drecon84
7 жыл бұрын
I think the main problem XCOM has is that it's so incredibly punishing for making mistakes. While I do love the turn timers, I think the developers make a mistake if they think you can both encourage players to take risks and punish them harshly for making mistakes at the same time.
@Xandros999
3 жыл бұрын
I think the problem the way it is set up in both games, advancing is always a tactical error because there is no advantage to be had. In XCOM, moving is the thing you do to bait enemies; Not to outflank, surprise, or reconnoiter. Movement's only reward is more enemies.
@Soroboruo
3 жыл бұрын
@@Xandros999 Man that reminds me of playing Darkest Dungeon. I do love the game and it looks cool as hell, but it can be a downer to do well in a dungeon and then your entire team gets bad traits and someone contracts Rabies. There's just too many chances for things to go wrong and go wrong BADLY...
@hemangchauhan2864
7 жыл бұрын
I think "missing the opportunity" concept works well.
@dddmemaybe
7 жыл бұрын
It's so dualistically great. Conservative players will usually be ok with ignoring bonuses to focus on preserving party members all together, while risky players will run it down to replace anything they lose on a miss-play. It's so perfectly adaptable to both playstyles. If the math and trade-offs are done well, it really is a solid conceptual basis for avoiding overly-enforced playstyles -when attempting to protect players from themselves, as Mark Brown probably got inspiration from.
@OhNoTheFace
6 жыл бұрын
It's wonderful because it's not one or the other sometimes. I normally go for Meld but occasionally a mission is so crazy you decide for the one mission to go super safe. It allows a decision of risk/reward, which is interesting
@cupriferouscatalyst3708
5 жыл бұрын
I don't like it, but that's just my personal opinion. I like practicing the game until I am good enough to pass the challenge presented by the developers (usually finishing the level). If the game allows you to win easily by being slow and not taking risks, then you can end up beating the whole game and still not have a very good grasp on the games mechanics. That's why, if a game gives you bonus rewards for beating the level "better", then I'm going to assume that that's the most rewarding way to play the game. Because of that I feel the need to restart the level until I can master it, i.e. getting the highest rank/collecting all the things/killing all the bad guys, before moving on to the next one. I prefer multiple difficulty settings for that reason; that way I know for sure that the developer intended the game to be played in more than one way, by allowing players with more or less gaming experience a fair challenge each. That way I don't have to feel like an idiot for not playing on the hardest difficulty, it's meant for the best players after all. TLDR: I don't want to see the end credits until I feel like I've overcome the whole challenge.
@PanglossWasWrong
5 жыл бұрын
@@cupriferouscatalyst3708 in a way, you've described the option to play slower or faster as an alternate difficulty level choice. If slower is easier, that's like picking Easy mode. And then faster would be Hard mode. It's rather like games that add or slightly change things in higher difficulty settings. But there are benefits too, like allowing players to react in the way they naturally would - potentially making players feel more connected to the game since they can express themselves through play style. Another benefit would be greater novelty in replayability. Giving players an opportunity to mix things up can keep things fresh, and thus keep players playing. TLDR, options can help keep things interesting and allow difficulty selection in real time
@Crowbar
7 жыл бұрын
another example: Demon's Souls vs Dark Souls 3. The health system is almost exactly the same, but in Demon's Souls when you die, your max health gets reduced by 50% and you need to use an item you restore it to its default state. In Dark Souls 3 there is an item that increases your maximum health until you die. It's basically the same system, but in the player's mind one is a punishment and the other is a temporary upgrade (and a reward for beating bosses).
@Kysgarq
7 жыл бұрын
I have a friend who thinks that losing usable items on death is bad game design. (I don't agree with this friend, but he uses it as a slam against Dark Souls which he really doesn't like.)
@Crowbar
7 жыл бұрын
I can understand him, but I wouldn't make that statement so generally. But there are a lot of consumable items in the dark souls games that give you a buff of something for a minute or so and when you die it's "wasted". Because of that I never use these items, because "you never know when you might REALLY need them" (never). The embers in Dark Souls 3 are not that kind of item though, definitly not.
@DWFTW
7 жыл бұрын
Depends on your take of it, to me Embers were that kind of item 100% (temp buff items, not badly designed items). I only ever used them if I needed a full heal mid-boss fight, or needed a heal without any estus left. Actually all the Souls games I played without using those items much, So Demon's Souls and Dark Souls 2's penalties were always in effect (short of having just killed a boss in DeS) and Dark Souls 3's bonus was also only in effect post-boss.
@Mordalon
7 жыл бұрын
Kygsgarq the key difference I see is that in Souls games, all of your deaths have continuity. In most games, dying causes you to basically go back in time, we’re as in Souls games dying and coming back to life is part of the world, not just a game mechanic, so it makes sense that a consumable would stay consumed.
@billypersistent6127
7 жыл бұрын
Wow, not one gut gud!
@MrTokesu
7 жыл бұрын
Another one. Fire emblem. Lots of pressuring methods: 1. Thieves going for the treasure chests so you will lose treasure. 2.Pirates going for villages losing you characters and items. 3.Enemy reinforcements. Strong enemy's appear behind you forcing you forwards. 4.enemies attacking neutral/allied soldiers forcing you to save them. 5. Possible recruitable characters leaving if you aren't fast enough.
@velnard8540
7 жыл бұрын
A youtube channel If you wanna add something more I remember that in the sacred stones you have that chapter in Eirika's route where you can recruit Amelia but she flees if you take too long
@MrTokesu
7 жыл бұрын
Jesus Mendoza oh yea true and FE 6 had that chapter where Percival would leave if you weren't fast enough.
@laggalot1012
7 жыл бұрын
Fire Emblem Path of Radiance and Radiant Dawn will frequently reward the player Bonus Experience that they can freely distribute among their units by meeting certain conditions on each map. There's almost always a Speed Bonus to be earned.
@MrTokesu
7 жыл бұрын
Laggalot101 oh cool those are the 2 games I still haven't played from the series. Is emulation fine for them or should I go and invest my life savings on them?
@IliyaMoroumetz
7 жыл бұрын
Now these I could get behind.
@Captain1nsaneo
7 жыл бұрын
Protecting the player from themselves reminds me of a comment from a dev giving a GDC talk. The comment summed to: "If the player isn't playing the game the way we intended then they're exploiting and should be punished." I know it's not a one to one with the theme of the video but it's close enough for a broadside. My favorite games have only gotten more enjoyable when they've been played outside of the intended ways. Dota 2's history is full of exploits that when discovered were codified into the game itself and added depth. e.g. stacking and pulling. So please be careful on removing ways of play; patches to boardlands 2 that fixed exploits years after release turned the game from enjoyable to a waste of time.
@JimPanzeeEsq
7 жыл бұрын
Options in games are great. Not everybody is the same skill level, has as much free time or the ability to give a game 100% of their attention. As a father working 40 hour weeks & most days can't sit down to play until after 8pm, I crave easier difficulties. My brain is just about ready to shut down after a full day of work & fathering, I don't often look for the challenges I did as a single man. Something like the xcom 2 timer is a real turn off to me because if I've just wasted all that time only to hit a fail state, I'm not going to want to come back & waste my limited time doing the same thing. There's too many great games available these days at ridiculously cheap prices. I'm going to go where the fun is.
@pfeilspitze
3 жыл бұрын
And this is a huge advantage of being single player! In a MMORPG you have to balance things, but in single player you can leave in weird things. Skyrim doesn't have to patch out the bow of oneshot Dragon slaying. Celeste can allow infinite boost. Yes, devs should pick reasonable defaults, but they shouldn't let that keep people from having fun.
@termitreter6545
7 жыл бұрын
To me, most of this is missing the core problem when it comes to XCOM2 and the trouble with aggressive approaches. I felt the underlying issue is rather that the inherent game mechanics itself heavily punish conservative play. Mostly, the Pod system, how you trigger enemy groups, who instantly have ~3 enemies spring into action. Purely line of sight, randomly catching a glimpse of an enemy through 3 windows and past 2 buildings will suddenly make your day much worse. There is no accounting for that. So you are encouraged to move as little as possible, actively limiting that line of sight, and to never flank. Because if you wanna aggresively flank an enemy, which is clearly an intended part of the game, you usually run into risk of suddenly having the soldier himself being flanked by a bunch of enemies and get murdered instantly. Made worse by the inclusion of powerful abilities like the snake-grab. This becomes worse because the battles have very little strategical options, you almost always just make decisions from one turn to another, while there is little overarching choices or strategies. And, all of that together... the game heavily punishing aggressiveness, then also punishing conservative play via timers, but also not giving you tools to effectively mitigate that risk with skill and experience... to me, that just results in a game that feels frustrating und unfair. I like hard tactic games, but I want to have choices and the ability to fix problems myself, not just pushed along by very narrow, counterproductive design principles. XCOM2 has some great stuff I really like, but it just feels frustrating to me.
@rickpgriffin
7 жыл бұрын
Termitreter I wonder if this is because of the legacy systems from the original XCOM. In the original you had up to 14 soldiers on a field I think, so you had a lot more movement potential every turn, and you could also split up while keeping your "buddy system" in play. The whole point of the battle system is to realize you're probably going to be ambushed and take steps to mitigate the damage that will occur. In the new XCOM, that results in a much narrower path because you can't have as many soldiers on the field at a time, so you can only take one or two paths at best if you want to have a chance of staying safe. And staying safe is important because, y'know, permadeath. Of course you're gonna play conservatively when mistakes are punished heavily and you have no way to mitigate those mistakes by moving faster. And I say this as someone who likes playing tactical games patiently. I feel like that's kinda part of the point.
@qikink1
7 жыл бұрын
XCOM 2 does have some pretty neat options for flanking, but it's almost always a calculated risk. Reapers are perfect for this, as they can get in position unseen, but run and gun rangers also do a solid job of the same thing, once pods are triggered.
@sigma6656
6 жыл бұрын
I was never a heavily conservative player, I would move my squad towards the objective or what looked like a tactically viable position deliberately, but almost always in heavy cover. I definitely wouldn't sprint someone out unless I knew the area I was sending them to was safe however. What I hated about Xcom2's stupid timer is that it was totally counterproductive. Instead of becoming more risky and playing more quickly, I had to play METICULOUSLY. A single turn after concealment could take me as much as 10 minutes! Never in my life have I played a strategy game as arbitrarily tedious as Xcom2. I gave up after about 20 hours, compared to the hundreds and thousands spent playing other Xcoms or Xcom-likes. I did like the somewhat randomized maps though.
@dragonslair951167
6 жыл бұрын
+Reilly Miller On the higher difficulties, if you trigger a pod unnecessarily, your team is usually finished. Flanking is just not worth it unless you know for certain that it won't bring more enemies down upon you. I still like XCOM 2 though.
@Golden_Spider666
4 жыл бұрын
My biggest problem with xcom 2s turn timers is that with the whole “concealed” mechanic and making the game more like a rugged guerrilla warfare type the timers just seems to ignore that completely you start the mission concealed with lets you set up good ambushes and such. But the turn timers ignore that completely. That’s why I never play without the mod that pauses the timers while in concealment
@TalkingVidya
7 жыл бұрын
Yes! You talked about Enemy Whitin! I love you Mark
@Seven-we1ks
3 жыл бұрын
I love you too Mark
@Ciber2k
7 жыл бұрын
Wasn't the name of this extra episodes Downloadable Comment?
@pluransart1795
7 жыл бұрын
Would be a bit misleading
@GMTK
7 жыл бұрын
People got confused, so I decided to make it more obvious :P
@zoeyferrin1622
7 жыл бұрын
That's too bad, Downloadable Comment was a great name for a video series
@raymondv.m4230
7 жыл бұрын
Mark Brown You should just make it a title right? Downloadable comment: Other turn timers. If you ever decide to make this a little mini series. Probably need a snippy introduction too like "Downloadable comment is where I take inspiration from you, the GMTK community, to expand on the concepts of previously discussed topics. So without further adieu, Here is the community created DLC for (place episode here)."
@Vinemaple
7 жыл бұрын
The "downloadable content" for XCOM: Enemy Unknown was called "Enemy Within."
@Kapenguin448
7 жыл бұрын
The way I see it, insta-fail states in games like this are bad across the board.
@randomguy6679
6 жыл бұрын
Even roguelikes?
@11clocky
6 жыл бұрын
@@randomguy6679 Especially roguelikes. Losing hours of progress because "oops you slipped" is not a good time. This is why I hated Spelunky, where half of the obstacles are insta-fail.
@propheinx2250
4 жыл бұрын
I can't stand Nioh because of the egregious one hit kills being too prevalent.
@abijo5052
3 жыл бұрын
@@11clocky and why dead cells is awesome. Getting to restock health after every zone, and having quite a lot of healing power, and comparatively weak enemies means you're unlikely to die from one slip up. Instead, you're going to die from not playing tactically, from not knowing the enemies your facing, from not pacing your health throughout the level, from not judging the benefit of power ups Vs harder enemies better. I love that game. Haven't tried spelunky though
@sock2828
3 жыл бұрын
@@randomguy6679 The only fail condition for almost all roguelikes (like most games) is death, and very few roguelikes will ever instantly kill you. You will almost always have hit points of one kind or another, because otherwise the game probably won't be fun. Unless it's specifically designed around having no hit points and if generating new random levels is quick or something. So yeah, most roguelikes don't have insta-failure conditions even though death is permanent. Instant failure conditions are usually a sign of poorly designed games or laziness in my expirence.
@lvkeyne
7 жыл бұрын
For me personally XCOM Enemy Within's Meld Canisters ARE indeed plainly better than XCOM2's timed missions.
@Caitlin_TheGreat
7 жыл бұрын
Undoubtedly. They give you a choice of how to play rather than force you to play a certain way, and there's a very clear trade-off of resources in a game where resources are a big deal.
@hungrypasta
7 жыл бұрын
But you don't HAVE to complete the objective in any of XCOM 2's missions, it just means you don't get the reward. You don't lose anything from failing missions, you just don't gain anything.
@RaithSienar
7 жыл бұрын
Oliver Morris shhhh, let the Overwatch Crawl babies cry about how they can't get all the things while only advancing 2 squares a turn before panicking and slapping the whole squad in overwatch.
@OhNoTheFace
6 жыл бұрын
Thank you for being the garbage human being in an otherwise intelligent conversation . . .
@samamies88
6 жыл бұрын
Oliver Morris How much have you played xcom2? Failing missions do affect to the areas you control and failing constantly means you lose the area and you need to get more resources to get towers back up and to open next area for the places where you do more missions, gather intel, heal/build faster or find black market from. Also in the DLC not having connection to some area can mean that the map-timer goes down since you can't prevent it from progressing so you will have to do extra mission (and if you fail it i guess it's then game over... haven't failed those myself nor seen anyone else fail so not sure what happens then). Also failing missions constantly means lack of resources which will mean you will be behind in technology and equipment which can lead into missions you only can lose because aliens don't stop developing to wait you to catch up.
@TamTroll
5 жыл бұрын
I like Invisible Inc's alarm system mechanic, though i did feel like it should only start counting up when someone in the facility knows you're there. Thus giving you incentive to go true-stealth and never be seen, and either never hurt anyone, or make sure that those you do hurt don't wake up until you're long gone. luckily there was a mod that let me have that option at a reasonable price of the loss of one of your starting program slots. So i took that option and had a ton of fun, getting in and out without being seen.
@timothymclean
7 жыл бұрын
Did anyone else initially misread the title as Three Other Approaches to Time Turners?
@frogman1
7 жыл бұрын
yep. i got excited for a second, realized it read turn timers, and got excited again
@KaliTakumi
7 жыл бұрын
You're drunk mate
@VideoGameStoryTime
7 жыл бұрын
I was kind of looking forward to learning about time travel solutions in video games...
@timothymclean
7 жыл бұрын
Kali Takumi I didn't say I misread it that way for long.
@woodhorder9692
7 жыл бұрын
Timothy McLean lol
@brapmaster
7 жыл бұрын
Steamworld Heist (another turn-based game quite similar to XCOM) has its own system similar to those used in XCOM 2 and Invisible Inc. In the game I believe it's referred to as "threat level" and with each passing turn the threat level increases either increasing the number of enemies that will spawn in periodically or activating turrets. In some missions there is also a self-destruct sequence which puts a hard limit on the number of turns you can make before you reach the end with the added extra bit of challenge being that to get a full three star rating, as well as get a chance at collecting rare loot, you have to deviate from the main objective to collect additional "swag" (the game's loot) which in some cases can leave you exposed to enemy gunfire or a "wasted" turn that could have been used to shoot any enemy or edge further towards the escape pod.
@erikhagberg1500
7 жыл бұрын
Saw Invisible, Inc. in the thumbnail, instant click.
@pinksnake7584
7 жыл бұрын
I thought that the meld countdown started at the start of the mission and not when you spotted the canister...I've played the game quite a long time ago so I'm not sure, but I remember losing a couple canisters without eve nspotting them, correct me if I'm wrong! As always, excellent videos
@ganaham9144
7 жыл бұрын
It's a bit of both. The meld countdown does start at the beginning of the mission, but is hidden from you. The countdown is revealed once you find the meld.
@RaptorsVevo
7 жыл бұрын
Darkest dungeon has a good turn timer. The stall timer starts as soon as there is 1 enemy left, and excluding bosses, 2 size enemies and the octopus enemies in the cove. As long as there are 2 or more enemies the stall timer will not kick in no matter how long you take or how little damage you do. Once the stall timer starts, you have 2 full turns where you won't get any stress - on the 3rd turn you will get stress, and on the 4th turn reinforcements will appear. It's a neat system to avoid players leaving just one enemy alive and then healing the party using moves (Which are free to use and unlimited), instead of items while out of combat.
@Mincecroft
6 жыл бұрын
I really enjoy Invisible Inc's security system. I keeps you moving as it ticks up every turn but it also encourages you to plan your actions and not get spotted since being seen raises the alarm a level even if you eliminate what saw you. Also it gets progressively harder in what the alarm adds to the map. At first it's only more cameras but they can sometimes help since now these are things you can hack to see through. Then it increases the amount of firewalls you need to break to hack something and then it adds real risks with new guards (that are generally stronger than those normally in the level) and eventually it will mark out your agents to the enemy allowing them to track you. This makes it so even though it is always ticking up and the final parts of it are very hard to survive through, it gives you plenty of time before then (especially if you don't get spotted by guards) and the slowly increasing difficulty encourages you to move on and escape but if you are confident enough you can endure for more loot.
@JanTuts
4 жыл бұрын
I just recently started playing XCOM 2, and up till now the turn timers are still OK (I do reload the mission when I fail though, since for me XCOM is more like a tactical puzzle: "how do I succeed the objective, without losing any soldiers?"). But I'm now in this mission where I need to steal data from a cache on a train within X rounds. And so I decided to evade all the enemies and stay concealed, setup my squad in a defendable position, hack the cache, fall back under cover fire, and extract the team. Perfect heist! Aaaand *"MISSION FAILED, you didn't kill all the enemies"*. Wait, WHAT? I successfully extracted the VITAL DATA that the resistance needs, so who cares that I didn't massacre the train's security detail in the process?! I haven't picked the game back for a week now...
@LB_
7 жыл бұрын
In Duskers, the longer you take, the more likely a bad random even will happen, such as incoming asteroids, broken doors, pipe bursts, and failing airlocks. It's not turn-based but it's very similar in the way it creates a time pressure without failing the whole mission, and it's subtle enough that players don't realize there's an incentive to go faster until they start paying closer attention.
@mintagenart
7 жыл бұрын
Gee! Invisible inc looks good, I keep finding interesting games in these videos.
@Cyberboy-jd5ek
7 жыл бұрын
Hi, I'm an Invisible, Inc. modder and I thought I'd mention that we have a Discord: discordapp.com/invite/aQrXEse, we are a small but tightly knit community, so feel free to come and discuss anything Invisible, Inc. related.
@erikhagberg1500
7 жыл бұрын
Cool
@Largentina.
7 жыл бұрын
PaperMint It's a rad little game. Definitely check it out! Favorite tactical turn based game in years.
@bluto212
5 жыл бұрын
Truly one of the best games I've ever played.
@anintendofankindaguy1368
7 жыл бұрын
I have an idea- you should make an episode of Game Maker's Toolkit that specifically points out BAD game design. That'd be interesting.
@AtotehZ
7 жыл бұрын
Mission failure timers are ok for a few levels in the game, as long as they're not nearly the norm. Then there are levels that give the enemy chances to get reinforcements if you don't do things snappy. And finally there are games that *reward you for being careful/stealthy*. The timed loot like "meld" isn't a bad idea either. None of these should be neglected. They could all fit in XCOM. I don't remember which game this was, but I remember playing a game where in a specific mission the enemy army was moving supplies out of an area. The faster you completed it, the more supplies would be left for you to intercept and take over. Unavoidable alarms on the map that gives you X amount of turns to get to and disable to avoid a punishment aren't bad either.
@mvmlego1212
4 жыл бұрын
Well-said. X-COM 2's major expansion, War of the Chosen, does a good job of varying the pressure mechanisms. It still uses some straightforward turn timers, but other levels have the sort of thing that you describe (completing it faster gives you more supplies), and some even have a security level system like Invisible, Inc.
@onatgz
6 жыл бұрын
this makes me wanna play xcom. also, "missed opportunity" was the best way to go for xcom imho. great channel by the way. love it!
@guymcaulay8996
7 жыл бұрын
I think it's worth mention how the Fire Emblem series does this usually. Typically a map will have a village or a treasure chest that's being threatened by thieves or bandits- if they reach it before you, you lose the goodies, but not the mission entirely. Another example is that some entries have side chapters you can go to if you fulfill side objectives in the preceeding chapter- clearing in a certain turn limit, keeping NPCs alive, visiting a village, etc. Again, in your words in this video, it's just a missed opportunity, not a totally failed mission. The Fire Emblem games also tend to provide enemy reinforcements, oftentimes behind you, to push you to play faster, again in your own words, making it more challenging, but not an auto-fail. The execution of this idea isn't always great in Fire Emblem, but it's almost always there in some form or another. I love this series personally and it'd be pretty cool to see you break down how some of its entries go about crafting certain experiences- specific entries I'd recommend personally to look at here would be ones such as Thracia 776 on SFC, Blazing Blade (simply known as Fire Emblem on GBA outside Japan), or even Awakening on 3DS. Keep doing what you do man, love your videos.
@Soroboruo
3 жыл бұрын
FE3H/FE16 did something really interesting with reinforcements on the sprawling new maps - some reinforcements are now conditionally triggered when a player unit moves into range. Thanks to the rewind system, this isn't strictly punishing - you can pull back and prevent them from popping out. But you have a limited number of rewind charges, so it pays to not move vulnerable units on their own if you can help it - there's a difference between an isolated healer running ahead to Physic someone across the map vs several varied units moving up at roughly the same pace. The way it handles Monsters also makes it much harder to fling a few overpowered units onto a field and call it a day, since it's nigh-impossible to break the shield (garnering extremely valuable resources) with only one or two attackers, and the shield regenerates - plus the Monsters have multiple health bars (even if you can smash through with pure power, losing those ores HURTS). It even incentivizes the player to really think about who gets what companies, since company attacks are guaranteed to draw a Monster's fire if it isn't stunned, making glass cannons much more situational.
@Afrohawk512
7 жыл бұрын
I got giddy seeing Mario + Rabbids come up, I was thinking about this the second I saw the video so I was pleasantly surprised to see it. It's a great game and I enjoy the timer a lot because it's an invisible one, removing any pressure from less interesting players while making the perfectionist players take risks and play fast to get the best rating. It's a pleasant surprise beating the par time rather than a constant threat looming over your head. And when you fail that time, I can almost always think back to fight and remember why it took so long and how I can improve that time. Glad the game lets me replay the stage later for those bonus coins. I also enjoy how the timer is used in its unique challenge missions. Many challenges impose a somewhat short time to force the player to think fast but others have a 1 turn limit, making the battle more of a puzzle based on the unique mechanics of your characters, the enemy, and your environment. It's pretty cool to be able to respec on the fly to meet the needs of a puzzle. And beating them is well worth it, netting you extra money and experience points to make the next levels easier. Definitely a great use of the timer, can't wait to see how they use it in the DLC.
@Chadius
7 жыл бұрын
I also like Mario + Rabbid's escort missions. To get par time Toad needs to move every turn towards the exit, and you have to take risks protecting him or sending out bait so the enemy shoots the bait instead of Toad. Rabbid Peach is a godsend for those missions thanks to her sentries and heals.
@dddmemaybe
7 жыл бұрын
@Afrohawk weirdly related to your profile picture, the 2d Sonic games included one design philosophy similar to that of the Mario + Rabbids where there is little-to-no punishment for exploring and taking your time, while replay value is shot-up -and exciting playstyles are also rewarded for possible perfectionist and high-tension gameplay scenarios.
@CameronWoodard
5 жыл бұрын
oh wait i just got it Invisible Inc. Invisible INK
@Narlaw1199
7 жыл бұрын
I would have expected a Fire Emblem example, with timed bonus objectives, recruitement conditions, or villages to save for extra rewards.
@Goombalove3000
7 жыл бұрын
For me personally, I think fire emblem does a really bad job at this. The more melee-focused gameplay of FE normally means running in will get you surrounded and killed, so you have to normally keep everyone but your most tanky soldiers out of range of attacks, wait for the enemy to hit your tanks in a choke point, then take them out. This is slow, quite boring and VERY repetitive (especially with awakening's very repetitive story missions). It can be somewhat avoided by having a character with high evasion and damage for counterattacks, but then it basically becomes the same idea where one unit does both the damage blocking and enemy killing. This is mitigated somewhat in the later game when flying units get involved, but they die so fast to archers you still can't zip around anywhere or play hit-and-run because it costs too many actions to keep pairing up and splitting up. There are almost no missions that encourage any other playstyle than 'ball your units into a wedge with tanks at the front, then slowly move forward until everything dies', and the permadeath means you're unlikely to deviate from this strategy. The timed conditions just mean you have to attach your tanks to faster units, then have them speed in and switch. The strategy doesn't change, you just move faster. In XCOM moving faster is more interesting because you have to manage cover, which doesn't exist in FE games. Some ideas to fix this: an 'attack of opportunity' feature that lets everyone hit enemies who walk past them, meaning you can position your damage dealers more aggressively to look for openings whilst being protected by the tanks, and more missions where the party is split up and you have to attack/defend on multiple fronts at once, juggling the speeds of two different balls of units. Anyway, just some thoughts, I'd be interested to hear your opinion (for the record I've played about half of FE awakening)
@chaosmiles07
7 жыл бұрын
Goombalove3000 The topic was on turn timers. Not gameplay balancing.
@chaosmiles07
7 жыл бұрын
Narlaw1199 In which case, if Mark wanted to dive into the nostalgia bank, Famicom Wars and Advance Wars had similar turn-based enhancements, I do believe.
@DuskMindAbyss
7 жыл бұрын
Goombalove3000 Bravo! You put it very clearly. Many FE missions have unpreictable ambush spawns, stupid NPCs AI that you need to take into consideration for extra rewards and basically every game punishes you if you want to use fliers to gain ground quickly. Of course, not every game and not every mission is like this, but this is constantly present on the game. What is the point of a Pegasus Knight to reach villages if the map is filled with archers? And bs reinforcements that move on the same turn that they spawn still give me nightmares to this day...
@laggalot1012
7 жыл бұрын
I think the point is balanced gameplay. Fliers are weak to arrows, yes, but what do they get in return? The greatest mobility in the game, between the highest movement range and being unhindered by terrain entirely. That mobility can be a huge asset. If there's so many archers that your fliers can't function, then you should probably reconsider your unit selection for said map. Rely more on cavalry if there's objectives you need to reach hastily, for instance. Ambush spawns are a pretty controversial feature in the series as a whole. Only a few games feature them (Shadow Dragon, Awakening, the Japan-only Binding Blade...), and typically - but not always - only on Hard difficulty or above, but when they're there, people frequently don't like them. I'd argue Awakening is worse with these kinds of map features than most FE games are. Awakening does a lot right... but I think map design isn't particularly one of them...
@losalfajoresok
7 жыл бұрын
Hi Mark, I just to thank you again for giving me constant material for my video game design classes. I used your videos constantly to give examples of some topics. Thank you thank you so much!!
@GMTK
7 жыл бұрын
Awesome! Glad to be of service!
@losalfajoresok
7 жыл бұрын
As a token of gratitude, I'm trying to translate to spanish some of your videos. I hope one day translate them all!
@IndigoWraithe
7 жыл бұрын
Great video, Mark. All I want to say is that for me, part of what I loved about X-COM: EU was the fact that it rewarded you for being tactical, for playing smart and not rushing. It felt rewarding and gratifying to bring all your people home, because you played carefully and didn't rush or get too aggressive. It was still a challenge, it still felt action-packed and exhilarating, even at that slower pace. So if the devs think that the game is at its best when you're rushing through and making poor decisions or trying to make do because you don't have the time you need to have a good strategy, that's BS to me. Instead of trying to dictate their vision of X-COM, they should've embraced their audience and made room for differing play styles. X-COM was always a game about time management, but the turn counter made the game about time management to its own detriment. I'm going to steal this statement from another video, but I think it's apt. If the number one thing your players mod (or want to mod) about your game is to remove a key part of the game, you missed the mark.
@qikink1
7 жыл бұрын
But XCOM 1 wasn't about time management at all. The optimal playstyle was nearly always moving a single soldier at a time, then overwatching the entire squad. There was no decision to make, except whether you were feeling patient that day or not. I'm not going to argue that patience isn't an interesting notion to make an important part of your gameplay, but if there's no in-game tension, no pressure on that patience other than your own mindset, things get ugly.
@IndigoWraithe
7 жыл бұрын
Reilly Miller well, I was thinking more along the lines of the overarching game and making sure you completed major objectives in a timely manner. Whereas XCOM 2 made even your sorties all about time management. The game play you describe is not my experience of XCOM 1 at all, but I'm sure people exploited boring strategies, because that is human nature. Still, I'd rather that than not have any strategy at all because I have to run halfway across the world in 12 turns or fail. XCOM 2 is by no means a bad game, but it isn't without it's flaws. The turn counter was poorly implemented. I didn't exploit overwatch in XCOM and I had a blast and took my fair share of risks. Had plenty of close calls. No timer required. So it comes off as patronizing for a game dev to try and tell me that I was having fun wrong. XCOM 2 is an excellent game but the complaints over the turn timer is a valid one.
@lens_of_truth
7 жыл бұрын
I don't mean to sound like an old fogey, but wouldn't the easiest way for the developers to encourage more risk-taking in XCOM be to make enemies more powerful the longer the battle goes on? Like if enemy units take adjacent positions, they can execute some super attack. Or maybe reinforcements arrive in a certain number of turns. Or maybe there's some giant laser cannon that needs to recharge, and letting it hit you isn't insta-death, but very crippling.
@MrKeotan
7 жыл бұрын
God no. Why does everyone want so much to punish players for playing the game? People don't take risks in XCom because risks carry little reward and a lot of punishment if you fail. You want to ramp up punishment both for taking risks and averting them? That just results in a frustrating game, which XCom 2 is.
@lens_of_truth
7 жыл бұрын
MrKeotan I've never played an XCOM game, but it seems like there's a disconnect between the game they wanted to make and the genre they chose. They made a turn based strategy game that many loved, but wanted to make a fast-paced action game. I wonder what people would've thought about XCOM 2 if XCOM didn't come before it.
@RobinHearts
7 жыл бұрын
This video is great but I'm sad you didn't stick with the "Downloadable Comment" naming. :(
@WillYum97
7 жыл бұрын
I love Invisible Inc. :)
@brianfeeney2042
7 жыл бұрын
Great stuff. Long time viewer and a fan of your work. I'm a designer on League of Legends, which is an online MOBA and encouraging players to take the more interesting (and often aggressive) action it's an issue we grapple with all the time. This is true across a number of layers, ranging from within a character's abilities themselves (using all your skills instead of just spamming the most 'efficient' one), to encouraging players to take more niche or situational but interesting options instead of taking the most generalist option to mitigate risk. In a PVP game, I would argue this concept is even more than important than in a PvE experience as you need to keep an eye on the opponent's experience as well. Typically really passive safe strategies are extremely boring at best and keyboard breaking levels of infuriating at worst. When players opt into these strategies they don't just make the game worse for themselves they make it worse for their opponents as well. This makes the costs of those types of mistakes from a design perspective incredibly high.
@GMTK
7 жыл бұрын
Hey Brian, thanks for sharing!
@spudacusgaming8561
6 жыл бұрын
invisible inc. has a great system because more skilled players will be able to handle greater difficulty and stay in the mission for longer.
@HistoricaHungarica
7 жыл бұрын
What about the Command & Conquer: Tiberian Sun approach? There are some levels with time limits but those are optional and if you beat them on time your other mission will be a bit easier. Although if you fail the mission by losing all units you have to start over but you can fail the missions as in you run out of time in which case nothing dramatic happens. Or the Risk Of Rain method: The more time it takes you to find the exit the more enemies and more powerful enemies spawn into the level. Sometimes tho it's way better to just turtle up in that game. :)
@pkmntrainermann4476
6 жыл бұрын
What about reinforcement units from the fire emblem games? I thought that was a good idea, tell the player after a few turns that more enemies are on the way, and they are coming from behind, making the player want to speed up
@McDenis09
7 жыл бұрын
Hey Mark. You forgot to mention that the turn timers in X2 imply that XCOM gets overrun by ADVENT/Aliens. And if that's true, then X2 should show XCOM being overrun, by having 2+ reinforcements dropping every turn after the timer expires. The way Jake Solomon implemented timers was lazy and felt like Jake didn't really give it as much thought as the rest of the game
@Caitlin_TheGreat
7 жыл бұрын
Hold on, you can turn off the security turn timers in Invisible? I played one level of the game, hated the turn timer thing and never touched it again. I might pick it back up now... I still outright hate strict turn timers. Even in Invisible it became clear to me that the game was expecting some degree of optimized play, and as I'd already misunderstood some of the tutorial instructions (maybe it was the phrasing or just my expectations based on other games I'd played) I just was turned off by the more strict _puzzle_ element over a more open _strategic_ element. The difference being that puzzles usually have a single solution, but a strategies can come in many flavors. Also, the Meld turn system in the previous XCom is absolutely better than XCom 2's. It's not as punitive, and instead offers a CHOICE. That's in all caps because I sometimes think many designers are anti-choice. But that's the best part of a game is making a choice, a real choice, one that isn't right-or-wrong but has different consequences. If you rush for the Meld you can get a much needed reward, but risk taking damage and potentially losses. If you don't rush for the Meld you'll almost certainly miss out on it and be weaker in upcoming fights. That's _precisely_ the sort of risk/reward that should be in such a game. And I reiterate my point from my comment on the other video, developers have to stop thinking that they need to _force_ players to play their game one way and one way only. That's just awful and unwise. There was a time when _immergent_ gameplay was what some were chasing, and I think a number of developers could benefit from adopting part of that attitude. Be more inclusive and less exclusive, and don't get fooled into thinking a game should have only one right way of playing it.
@MrSpeakerCone
6 жыл бұрын
I honestly prefer a game where defensive, careful play is rewarded but slipping up or rushing in too early gets you killed pretty quick. It's the reason both XCOM and Dark Souls are among my favourite games. The problem I had with XCOM 2 was that it limited my tactical options. In XCOM 1 I could decide to do things like fall back to lure enemies to an advantageous location, or set up an overwatch trap, or scout the area refining my strategy each time map tiles were revealed. In XCOM 2 the only tactical decision I had was to advance a little or advance a lot. I found this a lot less interesting so I stopped playing after 10 hours or so and haven't looked back.
@beardphantom
7 жыл бұрын
I'd love to see an episode about customizable campaign/difficulty modes. I feel like a lot of games just make enemies bullet sponges. There are a few games, like Crysis, that actually make the enemies speak in English if you played on a lower difficulty setting. There are other games that let you fully customize what makes the experience difficult. XCOM itself has options to facilitate this.
@PyroMancer2k
3 жыл бұрын
X-COM 2 was typical example of Devs not understanding their own game. The original series had throw away soldiers because you were expected to take loses in the brutal war against the aliens. In the new series you have RPG Hero characters that level up and get cool abilities. This is a major problem because new recruits are effectively level 1 characters and as any RPG player knows you don't take a bunch of level 1s off to fight the end game boss. Except that's what X-COM expects you to do where if you loss your whole team a couple missions before the end your completely screwed as your team is not strong enough to take on future missions. You need some of those heavy hitting abilities to turn the tide in later fights. You can scrap through with your B team if you have been leveling two teams rotating out injuried squad mates but not a new team. Because of this harsh system people play carefully because they don't want to lose their entire campaign on a risky move in one battle. X-COM design actively discourages run and gun play. So putting a timer in to force run and gun play is a BAD idea which should have been obvious to anyone who actually understood the core of the game mechanics and their actually effect on players. I mean the aliens get a free turn in the middle of your turn if you move to a place where you can see them. This means you want aliens to reveal themselves on their turns so you don't want to open doors and explore you want to wait for them to come out. Nearly every aspect of the new X-COM punishes players for being too aggressive. EDIT: As a side note the original games didn't have this problem because your abilities were linked more to the gear you made and not the soldiers themselves so losing some was not that bad. But in the new game they made equipment into skills like the rocket launcher is a skill instead of something you equip. If the new series wanted to keep the leveling system they should have done like Darkest Dungeon where you upgrade your base and it allows you to recruit similar level heroes to what you have so you are not more than a level or two behind if your characters die, compared to starting over at square one.
@mlucc5
7 жыл бұрын
I just watched his very popular video that he just made, and wow this channel is amazing and I just love it so much.
@QuestionableMorality
2 жыл бұрын
I know this is an old video, but I just need to say that I am definitely among those who hate Invisible Inc's security level. Sure, I understand why it's important, but... it's ridiculously frustrating.
@mohanlei.design
4 жыл бұрын
Invisible inc is so beautifully designed in both gameplay and visually that it easily becomes one of my favourite
@efai
2 жыл бұрын
X-COM: Enemy within: canister's timer was great solution for "forcing" players to rush mission, because it was a bonus, not an objective..
@aFewBitsShort
7 жыл бұрын
Just give meld for completing the level under a certain amount of turns as a bonus. Or you could say it's something from each of the alien bodies that decomposes over time (reducing meld eventually to 0) but only scientists can collect it in hazmat suits as the bodies become radioactive or somesuch. If you want to maximise your meld either complete in a low time or stealth through the level and try to take out as many aliens at once at the end to maximise your profit. Perhaps some levels you could replace a soldier with a scientist, making the game harder but allowing you to collect the meld yourself - of course the scientist is weak and does in 1-2 hits or something so exposing him to collect would be a risk. Similar to the self destruct but less stupid and more of a sliding scale than a 1/0 and doesn't feel "tacked on" like the exploding canister.
@Buglin_Burger7878
5 жыл бұрын
On higher difficulties there are more enemies, which means more meld. This means they would have to up meld costs to be fair... but in turn more enemies means more lost meld as they have more health, but if you could get a few mines and lower all enemies to 1 health if not kill them you get a massive amount of meld. One scientist on higher difficulties would mean an insane amount of meld... except you can't push ahead without spawning enemies which in turn means you can't go collect the meld making the mechanic worthless as they no longer fill their role and you lack damage. It would feel very imbalanced because of how difficulties work, you get too much it essentially becomes mandatory or so little that it is worthless to try.
@TheJokerscene
6 жыл бұрын
There is no need for turn timers at all. Every player is different and every player has preferences. If one player enjoys timers, good for them. However, that doesn't mean all players should be forced to deal with it. It's the same as "Time Attack" modes in games. Some enjoy playing the game in a speed-run fashion, others prefer to take their times and be more elaborate about their playstyles. Games with any type of "time limit" incursion should first consider how vital that set-piece is to the game and rather they can't simply make it an extra option. For instance: Resident Evil 4 was normally a game where you could move at your own pace. However, it did include two different game modes: one features you playing as Ada, and in this game mode it's more about moving quickly and avoiding unnecessary conflicts while trying to complete an objective. The feel of the game is one of true survival as enemies are abundant and you don't have enough ammo for them all, forcing you to make decisions to fight or flee. Another mode puts a timer on the screen and tasks you with killing as many enemies as fast as possible, giving ample ammo to do so but adding the timer to encourage fast movement - Mercenaries. I HATED the Ada mission because I disliked the concept of running away and the survival. However, I LOVED the Mercenaries because of how fast I had to act to ensure I could get max amount of kills in time. One focused on defense, the other on offense but both had timers. It was simply the execution that made the difference. Time constraints don't work with certain aspects and not everyone enjoys them. Just like escort missions. Thus should be optional if not absolutely vital to the story. Here is an interesting concept: instead of Xcom being a douche and giving US a constant timer to play by. Why didn't they ever implicate a system where both we and the enemy had timers to follow? If the enemy ran out of time they suffered some sort of penalty and were thus made more aggressive. It would have made for interesting AI conflicts and wouldn't have felt like it was us who always had to deal with the BS handicap.
@TheManofthecross
5 жыл бұрын
true but to do it would require time more code and testing.
@Xevirous
7 жыл бұрын
Your the best mark! :) are we having another game jam soon.
@MadmanEpic
6 жыл бұрын
I liked the Meld system in Enemy Within, but I actually enjoyed XCOM 2's timers quite a bit more after installing either True Concealment or War of the Chosen, which includes said mod's options in the settings. With those mods, which changes the missions in which you start with Concealment to have shorter timers that only begin once you exit it, either via firing off shots or being spotted by enemies. It encourages a less rush-happy approach, with more emphasis on setting up ambushes to eliminate lots of enemies at once, and just opening up many more options beyond that, such as sneaking in and completing the objective entirely unseen where it doesn't necessarily require any overt actions. One mission had me setting up an ambush using the abilities of every soldier in my squad across a city with lots of height variation, placing Sharpshooters on rooftops with EMP rounds to eliminate the tough robots and placing Rangers in position to finish the job, plus a Specialist to use the robots closer to the objective to my advantage. When all of the elements of the game come together like this, the feeling of being the commander of an underground rebellion striking where ADVENT doesn't expect in increased tenfold, and frankly, I'm shocked that it wasn't in the base game. It makes it a far better game.
@YellYeahGames
7 жыл бұрын
See, when you said Mario + Rabbids, I thought you were going to talk about how the reinforcement systems in games like this and Fire Emblem give you more pressure to get the objective done so you don't need to deal with more enemies. I feel the pressure more in fire Emblem because of the Permadeath aspect of that game, but it's definitely there in M+R (With Escort Toad levels the most). When you started talking about the ranking system instead, I was really bummed that you didn't mention this really simple design element that enhances the game a lot in the Reach Area and Kill X Enemies missions. It also helps, believe it or not, in the Kill ALL Enemies levels because you think you're over with it, then some more reinforcements pop up out of nowhere and maybe surprise you or make you really want to get your units to a better spot. Of course, both of these games allow you time (It's one turn in both games where you know they're there but they won't do anything that turn) to react to the situation and get to a good spot. All in all, reinforcement systems are simple and really good in Tactical RPGs to provide tension and surprise the player, as well as to incentivise them to play more aggressively.
@GreenflameExplains
7 жыл бұрын
Except in the Fire Emblem games where the reinforcements move on the turn they appear. Which is generally regarded as... not fun. Or if the reinforcements continue to show up every turn for way too long and drag the scenario out. When done right, though, I absolutely agree.
@TAYLOR22211
4 жыл бұрын
Hearing about the concern over XCOM 2's turn timers kept me from buying the game for quite a while. When I finally picked it up on sale, I discovered that this design choice was absolutely the right move. XCOM 2 is FAR superior to it's predecessor and every other game in the genre, in part thanks to the added pressure and punishments for failure. In XCOM 1, I would play extremely slowly in order to avoid any potential risk of losing my squad members. In XCOM 2, I am often forced to play quickly and riskily, and thus forced to endure the punishments the game throws at you. These punishments make the game so much more interesting from a strategic perspective.
@filipzoric6881
7 жыл бұрын
In the game Pit People (an early acces turn based-RPG, a bit similar to XCOM but it's cartoony) there is a mission where you have to save 2 hostages from 2 bombs. If you don't save them, they die. However, if you manage to save them, they actually become your party members for the next battle. I thought that was cool. And this video was cool. Good job, Mark!
@csidesummit
4 жыл бұрын
Just as an aside, I like how Into the Breach inverts the turn timer. Instead of desperately trying to finish before it runs out, you're trying to hold the line and hoping it runs out. Instead of assertive play the risks come from how you manage the battle. Do you block a Vek's entrance and risk being at low health for the next round? Do you burn a one-off ability to save a building and risk needing it for something bigger next time? Instead of "When the timer runs out, hell breaks loose" it's "Keep hell from breaking loose until the timer runs out."
@pervognsen_bitwise
5 жыл бұрын
A slightly older example: Valkyria Chronicles gave you a percentage XP bonus based on how many turns you finished a mission in, and nothing else really mattered in comparison. Combined with the CP system letting you give multiple orders to the same units on a single turn (albeit with diminishing movement distance with each successive order to the same unit), this overemphasized scout rush tactics on several mission types; scouts were the fastest unit type and one of the story characters is a super powerful scout. So it's both an example of how to reward fast, aggressive play but also a cautionary tale of how doing so can overemphasize certain unit types and strategies if you don't balance out the other incentives: on those missions, scout rushing was always the fastest, safest and most rewarding option.
@badmanjones179
5 жыл бұрын
do not be.. mean to the . rabids.... thank u
@OdeeOz
6 жыл бұрын
_XCOM-2,_ replaced the Meld concept, with _Timed Loot Drops._ Where you kill an enemy, and random treasure/loot item(s) are generated, with a _3 Turn Countdown,_ for you to collect it. All while in the middle of a firefight. While I miss Meld, I think the dropping of expirable loot was genius! 👍👍
@PJokerLP
6 жыл бұрын
A similar thing as in "XCOM enemy within: is done in "Fire Emblem awakening". In later levels a certain type of enemy spawns: the thief. The thief does take a turn every time it's the enemy's turn. He'll move closer and closer to the edge of the playing field until he escapes. If you fight and kill the thief before he is able to escape you'll get the treasure he stole (Most often some gold, which is needed to buy weapons and consumables). Thanks for this awesome episode of GMTK. I hope everyone who reads this comment does have an awesome day. Greetings from Germany. Marcel
@mathieupr6391
7 жыл бұрын
As a console player (without mods I mean), I can't even imagine playing XCOM 2 without timers. I don't know, it's the salt of the experience, like having limited Estus flask in a Souls, stuff like that. Mainly because, past a certain point, the game become a bit "easier" with the equipement and soldiers, and by the end of the game, currency is.... well, not useless, but almost, so the only reward needed is to finish the mission without injuring our majors, captains, etc... I know people are mad at this system, and I think I understand why, but I just can't imagine the game being the same without it.... It's a "good" type of pressure, aliens won, we're the resistance, we can't just wait in Overwatch in every missions, we HAVE to go fast, and timers help in that regard, because, just like the resistance can't afford to sit on their hands, we, players, are forced to think like them. One thing I will agree on with a few comments I saw, though, is that timers should not be engaged until concealment is broken. That could've been a great compromise.
@QwertyCaesar
7 жыл бұрын
I commented on the other video before seein this one but I'll just say it here. XCOM 2's best mod is an adjustment of the timers that doesn't get rid of them. Instead it makes it so that the timer only begins when the new mechanic Concealment is broken. It makes sense within the game world sincr aliens aren't alarmed and start evacuating VIPs until they're given a cause for alarm. It also matches the theme of bein a guerilla fighter, as you can lay incredibly effective ambushes and sneaking is what a ragtag group does, not charge im head first like an army. This mod also puts more value into concealment and everything associated with. Certain weapons, skills and classes become more valuable. Enemies with high vision ranges become more dangerous. Civilians that alarm aliens and break your concealment are now a genuine concern. On top of all of that it adds a new layer of risk vs reward. It puts you in close quarters with melee enemies sooner, it clusters your allies and makes it easier for the aliens to wipe.your squad. Before you would have this big open field when discovered but if you try to go in hard and fail you'll be crushed. It fits with the concealment mechanic so well that somebody who hasn't played XCOM 2 would think that it was part of the base game. I don't find it easy to abuse but I find the strategy more successful than not. That's because the game wasn't made wit it in mind. Thats why I modded my own and made mutons more common. Vast improvement. I hope Firaxis incorporates it in the future and finds better ways to balance it.
@dlfon99
7 жыл бұрын
Hey Mark Brown, how much control should a player have over their experience? From custom controls to choosing between frame rate and resolution in FE Warriors to various difficulty settings- at what point does it stop being beneficial to a game's experience? When does it get in the way of things?
@Secret0zv
3 жыл бұрын
Me: You want me to rush in? XCOM 2: Yes Me: Do I get buffs for doing so? X2: No. Me: Then what happens? X2: You die. Me: What happens if I don't rush? X2: You still die.
@goffe2282
Ай бұрын
Meld timers start when the missions start, not when they are spotted. They were my least favourite part of EU, but I very much enjoy Invisible Inc. It can be done well. What I hope from an XCom 3 is the turn mechanics of Chimera squad.... and then remove everything else from Chimera squad because the game wasn't that great (imho) but I very much enjoyed that teams actions were interspersed with each other, and not this one team goes first and wipe out the other one before they have a chance to respond.
@panedrop
7 жыл бұрын
I enjoyed both of these videos. I really like that you're presenting a controversial issue and addressing it in a positive way by showing why those mechanics went into play and how other developers have dealt with similar issues? Great stuff, keep it up.
@MrCactuar13
7 жыл бұрын
Surprised Valkyria Chronicles didn't make it. Like Mario & Rabbids, it rewards players with fast clear times by offering bonus EXP and money for upgrading your army. However, you can always go grind at side missions to compensate for any EXP and money that more cautious players would otherwise miss out on. Even still, faster players will be rewarded with powerful equipment for their army if they maintain high mission ranks. Tactically lining up your shock troopers to mow down incoming enemies is perhaps the safest and easiest way to play, but players who take their scouts to the extreme to capture enemy points will be rewarded handsomely. My only complaint with this system is that it is based purely on clear speed and no other factors. I think if Sega was more lax with the turn timer and in turn scored players on enemies defeated, outposts obtained, and special enemies defeated (tanks, leaders, etc.) then they could have made a very robust grading system that rewards all types of play.
@linkonair
7 жыл бұрын
One thing I like that the Fire Emblem games do to put a sort of time pressure on you is placing side objectives, like the destruction of buildings or attacks on secondary/civilian characters. Incentivizing you to play more offensively if you want to save them and get new units or items. I'm a bit surprised times optional objective wasn't brought up, unless I just spaced out when it was mentioned or something. Conversely one of my issues with FE Awakening and Fates is how they like to drop in enemy units mid skirmish without warning which can completely screw you over and throw you into a panicked defensive play. And the appearance of these units won't stop even if the enemy leader is defeated assuming the objective is "rout the enemy"
@Nintendan95
7 жыл бұрын
I play a lot of Fire Emblem, with my favourites being the GBA games. While I think they still have their fair share of stall-y play issues (I often find myself playing quite slowly), there are some very clever things that some chapters do to make you really go aggressive with some of your units. Pair this with the perma-death system (any character that dies in a battle dies for good - you can't ever use them again) and you get some really scary and tense situations. One way it speeds up the game are villages. Villages are small towns that you can visit with a unit that takes up their turn, but you get something in return like a hint from an NPC about the enemy forces or a cool weapon or item. However, in many chapters an extra enemy force sometimes appears, these being bandits. The bandit A.I. is specifically rigged to target villages unless they can attack in in their range, and if a bandit reaches a village, they destroy the village removing all rewards you could get from there away from you. If you reach a village and visit it however, the village will lock their gates, preventing any bandits from reaching them and removing them from their village checklist so to speak. It's a very small but cool way to get you moving but doesn't punish you much for it. If you really want these rare items and weapons earlier, you'll have to balance your movement with your safety as you trek your units along to the village, racing against the bandits while fending off the enemy forces. Another way the game promotes faster play styles is through the use of on-field NPCs. In some chapters, NPCs appear for a few turns. If you reach them fast enough before they leave the field, you get rewarded with these fun little dialogues between the characters. However one of Fire Emblem's primary ways to give the player new characters is by interacting with NPCs (some who are actually fighting for the bad guys) on the battlefield and sometimes if you aren't fast enough, they'll leave, so you get this interesting dance of 'I need to get close to lure in the enemy but not too close that I lure in the character I want to recruit'. New characters are like the key items of Zelda, they are a big reward when you get them and it feels great to find these characters. Sometimes, they are at a village and you'll need to get to it before bandits do, so not only does the bandit-village system remove items and weapons but in some chapters it can remove your chances of recruiting a new ally! Long comment but I thought I'd share. They're some great games and I think these methods work quite well on me when I play on chapters that use them.
@ajerqureshi6411
5 жыл бұрын
I think what XCOM should have done with the time-turner was that instead of having the mission fail if you don't complete the objective in time, have the number of turns it takes to complete a mission tie in to your score. So if the mission says you had to complete it in 10 turns, but you took 12 turns, your score will get penalized slightly from you getting your perfect score. That actually would have been a better system, as it would encourage players to play fast for better scores, but still be forgiving for players who want to take things slow. Plus, scores and grade systems can incite multiple playthroughs as players return to try and get the perfect score.
@manamaster6
7 жыл бұрын
I'm designing a TRPG for my Master's degree thesis that I'd like to release in the future and videos like yours are quite useful. As it is based on real historical battles I'm using the moral of the soldiers and how easily they are to command as a way to put pressure on the player. The player uses the "underdog" rebels. For example, the final battle of the game is going to be one in which 100,000 rebels (agriculture workers, miners, etc) attacked a fortress defended by less than 6,000 professional soldiers (spoilers: historically the soldiers won the battle by destroying the resources of the rebels with cannon fire). The longer the battle takes the more units there will be in the battlefield but the less they'll listen to commands, forcing the player to finish the battle as soon as possible, the longer it takes, the more units he'll have but the less effective the strategy will become.
@kkme7
6 жыл бұрын
What I don't like about the Invisibility Inc. pressure system, is that they keep increasing security measures for no reason. If none of my enemies notice anything, what are they alarmed about?! The great thing about Mark of the Ninja was that you could take out everyone without killing and without them noticing. I preferred that.
@randomguy6679
6 жыл бұрын
Well the security measures do increase faster if the enemies notice you
@luisvillarroel3543
7 жыл бұрын
Thank you so much for this mid week present ❤
@ajerqureshi6411
4 жыл бұрын
I think what XCOM 2 should have done is probably base the turn timer on a sort of "on par" system similar to golf, where succeeding in a mission with fewer turns can lead to some neat benefits. Or if not that, then probably doing a system similar to Invisible Inc. If the player takes longer than the recommended turns, the game will throw in an extra complication for the player to deal with (more enemy reinforcements, a sudden new objective, a debuff effect in a certain area, that kind of stuff), and the more turns they take, the higher in intensity the new complications get. While this may seem like punishing a player for taking too long, this method I think can still work to create exciting gameplay, as long as the new complications feel unexpected and are manageable enough for the players to not completely fail.
@bersi
7 жыл бұрын
The only problem with those optional rewards is, that it often feels like I failed, when I don't get them. It's unsatisfying to miss a bonus by one square. Most of the time I redo the missions until I get everything. Personally I think it's a wonderful thing when players can do missions however they want to. Being forced into a fast playstyle when you want to take a turn-based strategy game slow feels weird and out of place. In my eyes a game should reward different playstyles with different progression paths. Like if you hacked X amount of security cameras give the players the option to hack them faster, or at a decreased cost, or more at once. Developers should not force a certain playstyle on players but rather give interestinge and balanced opportunities to craft your own.
Пікірлер: 730