Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Rivet-the-Zombie]

Since I obtained my own railgun, I modded the UPS to not expend energy while idle.  Seriously, just having the battery available drains charge?  I changed it so that a UPS (on) only drains power when you run a machine that uses power.

You don't have to keep it on to use weapons that draw from UPS. Leave it off and just fire them like normal; as long as you have a UPS with sufficient charge in your inventory, it will draw the necessary power even if it's turned off.

[The Darkling Wolf]

In other news, voting for Rogulike of the Year is going on again, and DDA got a place this year.
Go vote for shizz, and possibly find some things you've never played before

[Girlinhat]

Since I obtained my own railgun, I modded the UPS to not expend energy while idle.  Seriously, just having the battery available drains charge?  I changed it so that a UPS (on) only drains power when you run a machine that uses power.

You don't have to keep it on to use weapons that draw from UPS. Leave it off and just fire them like normal; as long as you have a UPS with sufficient charge in your inventory, it will draw the necessary power even if it's turned off.

I'll check again, but pretty sure it complained about not having an active UPS.  Unless this got changed in the past week or so.  For that matter, why does a UPS even turn on, if it doesn't need to be on?

[GlyphGryph]

That's pretty difficult to do without being arbitrary though. There would have to be a reward that exceeded what you lost in order to compensate it, and it would have to exceed the penalty by a fair margin (And not just in getting a better weapon or having some stat improvements). Even then, it's pretty arbitrary, so it's best to have those sorts of situations be optional rather than random.

The reward would be that you didn't die.

[Mictlantecuhtli]

Real long term objectives would only be viable if the devs actually worked on NPC issues. Who wants to play forever solo? After you get all the Bionics that are useful and chug all the mutagen you find, there's not really much else to aim for in CatDDA besides grinding your skills higher.

I'd want more world interaction before we tag on silly 'you lose' fake-difficulty creating ceilings akin to Cave-of-Quds Glotrot. Though to be fair the you-lose-Glotrot has an incredibly simple cure, that is very difficult to find out about yourself.

[Mephansteras]

Yeah, NPCs will be what really lets you have a long term goal. The ability to join or help found a settlement, raise a family, all that jazz.

I'd love to see the ability to have a roving caravan of vehicles wandering the land, scavenging where they can and leaving if things get dangerous. Kind of like Resident Evil: Extinction.

That'd be challenging to code the AI for, but pretty damn awesome if you can pull it off.

[Knight of Fools]

"Not dying" isn't a reward, it's just avoiding a failure state.

Now, I don't have a problem with high-level diseases that require an epic quest to cure. The character should always have something that threatens them, and there should never be any guarantees. But the more it's based on pure luck, the more upset the player will be if they fail and the less accomplished they will feel if they succeed (If it's down to a coin toss, you aren't good or smart, you just got lucky). There should definitely be some leeway - Plenty of warning that something's wrong, enough hints to help you figure out what you need to do (Even if they're vague or intuitive - You're sick so you decide go to hospital, get tested with a machine there, which references a military base, where you find a message that gives the pass code to a previously impenetrable/hidden super laboratory, where the player finds the cure or the ingredients/gear to craft the cure), and enough time and then some to accomplish the task.

Remember, even while the player's trying to cure this disease they have a number of other things that can kill them, particularly if the disease lowers the character's capabilities. Time should only be a factor if the player ignores the problem entirely or doesn't act wisely during the course of the disease (Eating jellies and antibiotics to keep it at bay and mitigate symptoms, for example).

Once the player gets to wherever the cure is, there should be other things to keep them occupied. There could be some nifty CBMs, a stash of rare crafting materials, a robot companion NPC, a quest-line they can follow, and/or even a way to turn on "Hard Mode", like defeating the Wall of Flesh in Terraria. This gives players incentive to progress with the game by catching the disease rather than avoiding it completely, and rewards them for actually going through with it.

And the player should be immune to that particular super disease after that. It'd be silly to go through all that just to get it again.

[scrdest]

Hmm, raising families could be an interesting idea. Perhaps you could raise a child to a certain age, then you'd get a 'Send on Quest' dialogue option, which would change your player character from your current char to the child, allow you to take a set number of supplies with you, then get dropped off a major distance from your explored territory with a mission to fulfill, or in a new 'world' but with your old character's settlement becoming one of the factions.

Maybe if you kept this up for a couple generations, you could raise your faction's ranking, with the goal being 'legendary'.

[IronTomato]

Hmm, raising families could be an interesting idea. Perhaps you could raise a child to a certain age, then you'd get a 'Send on Quest' dialogue option, which would change your player character from your current char to the child, allow you to take a set number of supplies with you, then get dropped off a major distance from your explored territory with a mission to fulfill, or in a new 'world' but with your old character's settlement becoming one of the factions.

Maybe if you kept this up for a couple generations, you could raise your faction's ranking, with the goal being 'legendary'.

A legendary family of zombie-hunters, huh?

I approve.

[Rivet-the-Zombie]

I'll check again, but pretty sure it complained about not having an active UPS.  Unless this got changed in the past week or so.  For that matter, why does a UPS even turn on, if it doesn't need to be on?

Some items want a UPS that turns on and off in order to function, like the night vision goggles, optical cloak, or the rebreather mask; unless your UPS is turned on, they're just silly looking clothing.

[Kaitol]

But... its an adapter. Why does an adapter need to be on? It's.. an adapter.

[SalmonGod]

"Not dying" isn't a reward, it's just avoiding a failure state.

Now, I don't have a problem with high-level diseases that require an epic quest to cure. The character should always have something that threatens them, and there should never be any guarantees. But the more it's based on pure luck, the more upset the player will be if they fail and the less accomplished they will feel if they succeed (If it's down to a coin toss, you aren't good or smart, you just got lucky). There should definitely be some leeway - Plenty of warning that something's wrong, enough hints to help you figure out what you need to do (Even if they're vague or intuitive - You're sick so you decide go to hospital, get tested with a machine there, which references a military base, where you find a message that gives the pass code to a previously impenetrable/hidden super laboratory, where the player finds the cure or the ingredients/gear to craft the cure), and enough time and then some to accomplish the task.

Remember, even while the player's trying to cure this disease they have a number of other things that can kill them, particularly if the disease lowers the character's capabilities. Time should only be a factor if the player ignores the problem entirely or doesn't act wisely during the course of the disease (Eating jellies and antibiotics to keep it at bay and mitigate symptoms, for example).

Once the player gets to wherever the cure is, there should be other things to keep them occupied. There could be some nifty CBMs, a stash of rare crafting materials, a robot companion NPC, a quest-line they can follow, and/or even a way to turn on "Hard Mode", like defeating the Wall of Flesh in Terraria. This gives players incentive to progress with the game by catching the disease rather than avoiding it completely, and rewards them for actually going through with it.

And the player should be immune to that particular super disease after that. It'd be silly to go through all that just to get it again.

I guess this is down to personal preference.  I'm less progress/reward-driven.  I admit that I'll get addicted to and chase them like anyone else, when I'm playing a game that's designed that way.  It's just not the way I like to look at game design.  For me, it's less about obtaining goals, and more about being presented lots of interesting problems to tackle.  If the game can continually offer me situations that force me to be resourceful and keep me in suspense, then I'll stay interested. 

Going back to the example that's stuck, I don't need a reward for surviving the disease that leaves me better off than when I contracted it.  I just need the disease to force me to make interesting decisions and keep me in suspense as to whether or not I'll be able to survive it.

It's one of the best things about Dwarf Fortress.  It's very sandboxy and there's sort of a progression to it, but that sandbox is designed to present you with a unique situation every time you play and a vast range of options for tackling the challenges inherent in your situation.  Your progression is to build around maximizing use of the resources available to you, instead of simply get-best-stuff/win-game.  No matter how well you establish yourself, there are always unexpected events that can threaten you.  There is no means by which to progress to some point where these things can no longer endanger you.  And some of the best moments in the game are when your fortress gets wiped out by tantrum spiral or disease, but some survivors manage to barely scrape by and rebuild.  Or even when you suffer final defeat, but for really interesting reasons or with an epic last stand.

[Knight of Fools]

I understand where you're coming from. You're more interested in the stories that arise naturally through the course of play, and enjoy the thrill and challenge of potentially losing everything. Dying is a momentous event rather than a failure, because in your mind you see it as a story rather than an investment.


As someone who feels like he has very little control over his own life, though, gaming is often about feeling powerful in fantasy when I can't feel powerful in real life. I tend to get very invested in my characters as the source of my power trip, and if I'm not prepared to move on from a character concept I save scum or make an identical character with a few tweaks to better match my imagination.

Losing time over something arbitrary makes me feel less powerful and turns me off on the game. Even if I have the ability to cheat or save scum, the game basically rapes my ego and says, "I am the god here" whenever I die from something left completely to chance. It's demeaning and kills the fantasy. To me, a good game treats the player's ego with respect and makes them feel like the god, even when both the game and the player know who's really in charge. Not that there's no risk or challenge, but the game is fair enough to make sure the player doesn't run off to die without knowing the consequences.

I suppose the reward isn't as important as having the game recognize that I accomplished something other than living another day, even if it only says it by giving you some cool stuff.


I think a game where you're at the total mercy of a cruel, unforgiving world and must survive by your wits and limited abilities alone would be fun as long as it's honest about what it is, but it'd be a completely different direction than where DDA has been heading. A good example of almost-powerless would be Project Zomboid, which is pretty up front about how the game's entirely about events leading up to your death. I still enjoy it, just not for the same reasons I enjoy Cataclysm.

[Akhier the Dragon hearted]

   I think that part of the problem with the "end game" in CataDDA as compared to DF is that getting better doesn't have a consequence. In DF having a really tough dwarf with lots of combat training is good but it can be a balancing act as you try to keep him sane. With CataDDA you can raise all your combat skills to whatever you like and its only good. Skill rust is supposed to be there to keep your skills reasonable but a lot of people don't exactly use it as it basically means you won't be able to raise any less used skill without a book. Even the new types of skill rust don't fix it completely.
   Maybe to make the choice of raising your skills to super human levels interesting there should be an actual choice. Original D&D had level limits for non-human races, now we don't have the option of non-human choices but going off of abilities for a max skill level would work. The interesting part would be where you could raise your skills above your limits by finding some way to go beyond human limits. Seeing as we have Lovecraftian horrors in the game I can't see how that could go wrong 
   Another thing I thought of that would be interesting to add while pondering my above stuff is that we should have skill augmenting bionics. They would raise the specified skill by 1 or maybe more with rare ones. The bionic could have a rating which would determine if it would have any affect so if you found a driving augment bionic with a rating of 3 it would raise your skill by 1 unless you already had a skill of 3 or more. If the implant of the bionic failed it could lower your skill as well as any of the other side affects.

[SalmonGod]

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

I understand where you're coming from. You're more interested in the stories that arise naturally through the course of play, and enjoy the thrill and challenge of potentially losing everything. Dying is a momentous event rather than a failure, because in your mind you see it as a story rather than an investment.


As someone who feels like he has very little control over his own life, though, gaming is often about feeling powerful in fantasy when I can't feel powerful in real life. I tend to get very invested in my characters as the source of my power trip, and if I'm not prepared to move on from a character concept I save scum or make an identical character with a few tweaks to better match my imagination.

Losing time over something arbitrary makes me feel less powerful and turns me off on the game. Even if I have the ability to cheat or save scum, the game basically rapes my ego and says, "I am the god here" whenever I die from something left completely to chance. It's demeaning and kills the fantasy. To me, a good game treats the player's ego with respect and makes them feel like the god, even when both the game and the player know who's really in charge. Not that there's no risk or challenge, but the game is fair enough to make sure the player doesn't run off to die without knowing the consequences.

I suppose the reward isn't as important as having the game recognize that I accomplished something other than living another day, even if it only says it by giving you some cool stuff.


I think a game where you're at the total mercy of a cruel, unforgiving world and must survive by your wits and limited abilities alone would be fun as long as it's honest about what it is, but it'd be a completely different direction than where DDA has been heading. A good example of almost-powerless would be Project Zomboid, which is pretty up front about how the game's entirely about events leading up to your death. I still enjoy it, just not for the same reasons I enjoy Cataclysm.

Fair enough.  It is indeed just personal preference.  And you're right that Cataclysm has so far set itself up to be kind of a power trip.