Live data from Hacker News

Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

gamedeveloper.com

51–60 of 62 posts

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#51
post #24

Some thoughts; note it's not my intention if some sound mildly antagonistic: What other examples of "friction" are there in this game besides that some organs in your inventory may eat other organs? That's just a single example but I don't see anything else mentioned. What's the difference between "friction" and just challenges in a game (or good old plain "difficulty"). I understand many casual click-and-wait games…

>What's the difference between "friction" and just challenges in a game (or good old plain "difficulty")

The first example that comes to my mind would be Witcher 2 and the use of potions. You are a bit squishy and the beneficial effects from potions are impactful. However, it is a bit of a slog to prepare and consume the potions before an encounter.

In contrast, Witcher 3 simplified the mechanic to such a degree that it might as well be Diablo where you are chugging potions mid-battle.

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#52
post #20

Since I care about memorable stories that emerge through play, convenience is not king. It’s a difficulty balance to strike, as we all have different frustration tolerance and different reasons for playing games in the first place. I’ve always been an explorer in games, and I used to care more about being powerful. Now what little free time I spend in games is less about the (illusion of the) end goal and more about…

>Since I care about memorable stories that emerge through play, convenience is not king. As an example, I think the biggest mistake Blizzard made with World of Warcraft is a) adding flight, and b) making flying so easy. a) devalues the hard work developers and artists put into gorgeous scenery, because those flying high overhead will miss much of it. b) destroys much of the gameplay when outdoors (where most flying o…

Imo the original WoW flight paths were the best. Allowed you to travel far within reasonable time, while not giving you a drop point in nevery nook and cranny. You had to actively think about which way to choose to get from anywhere to anywhere: "Is it faster if I go a little back and fly closer to my destination, walking the rest? Or do I run directly?". I think it was Cataclysm that placed gryphon masters everywhere, what a shame that was..

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#53
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have examples of good F2P games? I'd like to take a look. To me, a bad pattern -- usually done by F2P games, but I don't think it's mandatory for them to use it -- is both the mindless grind ("am I having fun with this, or just clicking stuff?") and the pay-to-skip aspect. To me the latter is the worst, an admission by the game developers that their game is boring and the only way to get to the "good parts" is…

Some notables from the Big Names: * Call of Duty Mobile * Alto's Odyssey (personally prefer Alto's Adventure) * Genshin Impact is pretty polished * League of Legends: Wild Rift * Hearthstone/Legends of Runeterra * SoulKnight * My Friend Pedro Minor plug for UnCiv being FOSS

CoD mobile pits you against bots and low-elo folks until you're invested, which is definitely a dark pattern and not at all skill-based.

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#54
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you have examples of good F2P games? I'd like to take a look. To me, a bad pattern -- usually done by F2P games, but I don't think it's mandatory for them to use it -- is both the mindless grind ("am I having fun with this, or just clicking stuff?") and the pay-to-skip aspect. To me the latter is the worst, an admission by the game developers that their game is boring and the only way to get to the "good parts" is…

I have had a lot of fun with Brawl Stars. Supercell got a bad wrap because Clash of Clans was so frequently mimicked, but they clearly have some passionate designers.

Clash Royale is also a superb game.

Skill is the majority component in the game (given that top players can take a level 1 account all the way to legendary level) and it is so generous handing out in game currency to level up cards you can happily never spend a penny on the game.

So surprising given it comes from the same people as Clash of Clans.

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#55
post #28
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and roguelikes will bring you back to the beginning I think the best roguelikes are the ones who let you fail and then proceed limping. Or maybe the best games in general, since I'm not sure if Rimworld counts as a roguelike. Either way, to start from the beginning in a good roguelike means to have made a chain of bad decisions.

That's more a quality of the "rogue lite" subgenre, no? Which I do personally prefer to the traditional kind. Though "fail but keep going" can go very wrong, in the case of something like FTL, where you can easily have "lost" by the end of the first or second area due to a bad roll, but still manage to limp all the way to the end (with no hope whatsoever of winning). An early "game over" would be preferable there to…

In FTL, losing is part of the fun.

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#56
post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some notables from the Big Names: * Call of Duty Mobile * Alto's Odyssey (personally prefer Alto's Adventure) * Genshin Impact is pretty polished * League of Legends: Wild Rift * Hearthstone/Legends of Runeterra * SoulKnight * My Friend Pedro Minor plug for UnCiv being FOSS

CoD mobile pits you against bots and low-elo folks until you're invested, which is definitely a dark pattern and not at all skill-based.

I think bots are just handy to train people/ to have fun against rather than get obliterated….

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#57
post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have had a lot of fun with Brawl Stars. Supercell got a bad wrap because Clash of Clans was so frequently mimicked, but they clearly have some passionate designers.

Clash Royale is also a superb game. Skill is the majority component in the game (given that top players can take a level 1 account all the way to legendary level) and it is so generous handing out in game currency to level up cards you can happily never spend a penny on the game. So surprising given it comes from the same people as Clash of Clans.

> So surprising given it comes from the same people as Clash of Clans.

I suspect a lot of devs and etc are just trying to find a revenue source and not committed to dark patterns or etc.

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#58
post #9

The way he describes friction reminds of the book Anathem by Neal Stephenson. Good book with a giant obstacle of tons of made up vocabulary. I read that a long time ago, and now I'm not sure how much I enjoyed the story/characters and how much of it was just a different level of immersion and satisfaction from getting through the friction.

Loved Anathem both for the language and for the ideas in it. Rationalist monasticism has such a weird draw for me, despite being something I'll never do.

If you like books with their own language, Hannu Rajaniemi's Jean le Flambeur trilogy does it more and better than anything else I've read (https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/7562764-the-quantum-thie...). It actually makes me question my interaction with regular language, since there's so many words that you can barely grasp in there... but I wasn't super bothered and thought I understood it sort of ok. But I doubt I could really explain them if pressed too, they just sort of felt well defined based on context that I accumulated.

It made me think that my brain just doesn't go very in depth with words and is pleased with a shallow contextual understanding of what they mean. Sort of like the protagonist(such as he is, more like primary victim) of Blindsight by Peter Watts(he's a science communicator that can sort of get the shape of concepts at a shallow level, but never really understands them).

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#59
post #49
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's more a quality of the "rogue lite" subgenre, no? Which I do personally prefer to the traditional kind. Though "fail but keep going" can go very wrong, in the case of something like FTL, where you can easily have "lost" by the end of the first or second area due to a bad roll, but still manage to limp all the way to the end (with no hope whatsoever of winning). An early "game over" would be preferable there to…

Your observation about FTL sounds about right. Though, if you are an experienced player and playing on a lower difficulty, there's many scenarios that you can turn around that might look lost? I am not sure if FTL is the best example here? FTL is slightly unusual because it has a turn-limit, because you always have to move forward, and you might not have enough time left to recover. By contrast, in Nethack there are…

Yeah FTL's problem is that once you fall behind in the game's economy, if you will, there's only very limited ability to take it easy and try to catch up, but it lets you avoid a lot of combat so it's possible to limp along almost-losing all the way to the end (or damn close) and reach the boss in such a state that you can hardly scratch it. The trouble is that if you aren't able to handle encounters, you're already toast, because you need to be handily winning most encounters to stay ahead in the game-economy. If you're avoiding fights out of necessity, you're likely doomed—which is part of what I meant about playing-to-limp-as-far-as-possible and playing-to-win looking very different, so the former not even being very useful practice for the latter.

IIRC (it's been a while) the luck component in it is also largely negative, in that bad things can randomly happen to you but (substantial) good random effects are minor and unusual, so you can't even luck your way into enough resources to have a hope of winning, as in something like Nethack where a desperate prayer or drink at a fountain or something might totally turn your game around. If you're more than very slightly behind, the game's not going to hand you enough to salvage your run, period.

I think part of the trouble is the illusion-of-choice map system. In reality, you have to be taking certain routes to do well, by deliberately seeking encounters, et c. The illusion is that you can take an easy route through an area and still be on a path to victory. IMO the maps are kinda pointless in that game, given how the mechanics work, basically just providing an opportunity to fuck up without knowing it, and also permitting the limping-to-the-end-but-long-ago-doomed effect.

I find FTL frustrating because I like some aspects of it but IMO it makes some major mistakes in terms of game mechanics, to a degree that I find it hard to appreciate the things I like (mainly the tactical combat minigame). I get what they were trying to do with the rest of it—the time pressure cutting off options and forcing choices, et c—but it doesn't all come together correctly. Needed one more conceptual pass to make it all fit properly, which is even more frustrating when it's not that complex a game. All that effort to finish it, but fundamental flaws left in place throughout.

Re: Inside Space Warlord Organ Trading Simulator’s deliberately designed friction

#60
post #59
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your observation about FTL sounds about right. Though, if you are an experienced player and playing on a lower difficulty, there's many scenarios that you can turn around that might look lost? I am not sure if FTL is the best example here? FTL is slightly unusual because it has a turn-limit, because you always have to move forward, and you might not have enough time left to recover. By contrast, in Nethack there are…

Yeah FTL's problem is that once you fall behind in the game's economy, if you will, there's only very limited ability to take it easy and try to catch up, but it lets you avoid a lot of combat so it's possible to limp along almost-losing all the way to the end (or damn close) and reach the boss in such a state that you can hardly scratch it. The trouble is that if you aren't able to handle encounters, you're already…

I broadly agree.

One saving grace is that a game of FTL doesn't really last that long. So even if you limp along, you didn't waste that much time.

I never really went into limping mode, though. I usually tried to turn my games around by staying aggressive; but eg burning through my missiles and drones faster when the run goes badly. In some sense, if you have missiles left when you die, you didn't use enough missiles.

There's some strokes of good luck in FTL, like the scrap collector or the long range scanner. But they tend to increase your longer term average, they don't provide an immediate bonus. (Exactly as you say.)

Post reply on HN