Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Mario meets Pareto

mayerowitz.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 184 posts

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#171

Post by sizzle »

goostavos wrote: post #160
sizzle wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s why my go-to Mario kart is the N64 version. No bs just pick a character and go

Nah, Mario Kart 8 is great. You don't _need_ to min/max every stat. Actually, you specifically have to press a specific button to even see the stats at all. Otherwise, everything just appears to be cosmetic. For the most part, once you've got your kart dialed it. It is still "pick your character and go". It's one of my goto games for "I want to do something for a few minutes to unwind" (which usually ends up with me…

yeah but the new go-kart dynamics are all strange to me with the glider sails and other new gameplay stuff it makes it feel way different then the simplistic N64 version

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#172

Post by xanderlewis »

cout wrote: post #144
xanderlewis wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure, but it kind of makes sense as a choice, since acceleration and speed should be negatively correlated and since Bowser and Wario are both massive they should accelerate more slowly than others (given constant force). So they get to have the highest top speeds to compensate.

In a real kart a heavier driver would have lower top speed and acceleration, in exchange for better handling (more body weight means you can more easily shift weight to the wheels that need more traction, unlike a car where the driver's weight is insignificant). But they seem to have ignored kart physics and made it more like a car, where bigger cars might accelerate slower but can accommodate a more powerful engine.

Why would the top speed be lower? Because of increased friction with the ground due to the weight? Ignoring friction, I think what I said would be true.

I hadn’t actually thought about it before but as an incredibly skinny person what you said lines up with my experience in a kart. I could seemingly go slightly faster than others but more easily span off and lost control.

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#173

Post by cout »

xanderlewis wrote: post #172
cout wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In a real kart a heavier driver would have lower top speed and acceleration, in exchange for better handling (more body weight means you can more easily shift weight to the wheels that need more traction, unlike a car where the driver's weight is insignificant). But they seem to have ignored kart physics and made it more like a car, where bigger cars might accelerate slower but can accommodate a more powerful engine.

Why would the top speed be lower? Because of increased friction with the ground due to the weight? Ignoring friction, I think what I said would be true. I hadn’t actually thought about it before but as an incredibly skinny person what you said lines up with my experience in a kart. I could seemingly go slightly faster than others but more easily span off and lost control.

Given two equal karts I guess top speed would be the same but most courses don't have long enough straights to let you reach full speed.

When I wrote that comment I was thinking one might tune the kart for the driver to make up for lack of acceleration which would reduce top speed.

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#174

Post by Too »

In reality, the number of dimensions will always be more than 2, often several magnitudes more. Is there a good way to visualize the Pareto front for higher dimensions?

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#175

Post by Too »

davemp wrote: post #131

This great visualization/article highlights one of my pet peeves with current game design--options for the sake of options. I feel like the common trap for designers is to put too much stock in tag lines like "Over 700,000 different builds!" You're dumping a combinatorial explosion of overhead onto players. If all those choices don't significantly enhance the core game experience, you as a designer as wasting people'…

A game like mario cart should have two modes. Party mode, where everybody is playing on the same terms. Expert mode, where macro plays a bigger role.

Even during parties, the properties of choosing different characters do make the game more dynamic which in the end means more fun. What sucks is when one of the players have spent the whole week before plugging all the numbers into Excel and knows how beat everyone else optimally. But where do you draw the line? Is this more unfair than practicing driving one track a whole week?

One have to accept that games can not be always fair. Same thing in sports, try playing tennis vs someone who has competed before, a casual player will not stand a chance to even hit a single ball, even if you give the pro a much worse racket.

Balancing a game to allow casual and pro players to compete on equal terms is extremely difficult and can often backfire into making the game extremely trivial, only depending on roll of dice. Knowing if you are playing an excel-game or a reflex-game should be presented clearly to makes things a bit more fair.

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#176

Post by bogdan »

pphysch wrote: post #152
davemp wrote: post #131

This great visualization/article highlights one of my pet peeves with current game design--options for the sake of options. I feel like the common trap for designers is to put too much stock in tag lines like "Over 700,000 different builds!" You're dumping a combinatorial explosion of overhead onto players. If all those choices don't significantly enhance the core game experience, you as a designer as wasting people'…

In the ARPG/Diablo genre, Path of Exile is one of the worst offenders. Each character progresses through a 2D locally-connected graph of over 1300 passive skill nodes, of which you only get to pick about 100, where the "undo" action is expensive or impossible. That said, the sheer amount of options leads to a class of expert players and build-makers that normal players can rely on. I just wish the game itself provide…

Path of exile is my favourite game and I've played it thousands of hours and have multiple 40/40 leagues, mirrors, and lvl 100 characters. My point, without elaborating, is there are people like me who enjoy the complexity of the game, it's totally fine if you don't but the joy of having almost unlimited things to discover and get over roadblocks is what makes poe amazing to me. It's a game that you're meant to dedicate a lot of you're time to it and it's totally fine if you don't like that, just wish people wouldn't yuck someone else's yum. Lastly, I'm likely not representative of the poe's general population but the game becoming more popular league by league should be a useful indicator that whatever they're doing is working.

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#177

Post by sas41 »

atomicUpdate wrote: post #161
james_a_craig wrote: post #90

A dissenting opinion on the design - for me, this presentation was like watching a video to find information; too slow paced, and it made me impatient the whole time. The original notebook format was far better in that regard. The layout within each section is beautiful, but the animation and the scroll-sensitive layout (vs. just having a series of static diagrams) makes it unpleasant for me to read. The content's ex…

> the animation and the scroll-sensitive layout (vs. just having a series of static diagrams) makes it unpleasant for me to read. I totally agree; I don't understand the fascination HN has with these types of sites. It all feels like extraneous design just for the sake of it, rather than actually making anything easier or better to understand.

I think sites/pages like this hold an important role, presenting information to people who have trouble visualizing concepts or need visual aid to better assimilate information is important and sometimes, a simple 2D rendering or a dry graph just isn't enough.

And if you need a 3d graph, you're only a handful of lines away from smoothing out your presentation, so why not?

There's also the more subjective aspect, I think adding the effort to make something look nice and slick, animated well, could be both an interesting challenge and a relaxing pass-time. It's pleasing both to make and digest, in a way, it sits in an intersection of design, art and technique and as an added bonus, could help capture the attention of someone who struggles with short attention spans even better!

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#178

Post by xanderlewis »

cout wrote: post #173
xanderlewis wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would the top speed be lower? Because of increased friction with the ground due to the weight? Ignoring friction, I think what I said would be true. I hadn’t actually thought about it before but as an incredibly skinny person what you said lines up with my experience in a kart. I could seemingly go slightly faster than others but more easily span off and lost control.

Given two equal karts I guess top speed would be the same but most courses don't have long enough straights to let you reach full speed. When I wrote that comment I was thinking one might tune the kart for the driver to make up for lack of acceleration which would reduce top speed.

Actually, I'm talking rubbish since without friction there wouldn't even be a top speed. It's true that having a high top speed is only useful if you have enough time to accelerate up to it!

Re: Mario meets Pareto

#179

Post by lupire »

Too wrote: post #175
davemp wrote: post #131

This great visualization/article highlights one of my pet peeves with current game design--options for the sake of options. I feel like the common trap for designers is to put too much stock in tag lines like "Over 700,000 different builds!" You're dumping a combinatorial explosion of overhead onto players. If all those choices don't significantly enhance the core game experience, you as a designer as wasting people'…

A game like mario cart should have two modes. Party mode, where everybody is playing on the same terms. Expert mode, where macro plays a bigger role. Even during parties, the properties of choosing different characters do make the game more dynamic which in the end means more fun. What sucks is when one of the players have spent the whole week before plugging all the numbers into Excel and knows how beat everyone els…

It's certainly possible to build a racket that can nerf a pro.

Anything with large bumps will do.

Post reply on HN