I don't have a perfect answer for how to solve the attrition issue, but I think its one that plagues the genre as a whole as the opposite (where healing/energy is showered upon you) often makes it far too easy at times if not limited.
Agreed. Ideally we'll include two difficulty options (focusing on AI behaviour and spawn number/type as opposed to just damage multipliers), but with designed encounters balance is especially time consuming. My thinking is if the moment to moment gameplay remains mechanically satisfying (not mindless, good game feel, decent variety) then one has some leeway.
Whereas most of the rest of the Action Genre makes you feel like a tiny ragdoll made of paper... Which creates a huge dissonance
I think it's just a matter of internal consistency, and that both the Souls games and NG actually do well on this front.
Dark Souls is an inversion of the traditional power fantasy, and perseverance in the face of powerlessness is thematically prominent throughout the series. That the game loop mirrors the cycle of hollowing is a nice flourish.
In NG, Ryu is an untested heir to a clan tasked with a mission of utmost importance. There's a "secret" difficulty mode that leans into this, in which a support character provides continued assistance - because regardless of your failings the mission comes first. Gameplay wise, cowardice is not an option. Enemies actively punish prolonged blocking with lethal grapples, so it's aggression or death - and few games make you feel like more of a badass when you get it right.
Letting the player define what is fun, whether its varied moves or tried n true, rather than cranking numbers around to force things to be "difficult."
Yeah, we're not going the scoring/combo-mad route and are instead treating movesets and weapon types, along with active abilities, as means of introducing meaningful alternatives - both to overcome contextual challenges and allow players to tailor their experience to some degree.
More than anything, I'm interested in ways of providing alternate avenues for the player to succeed - potentially easing mechanical difficulty beyond just a difficulty setting. The challenge is in designing something consistently available as to avoid difficulty spikes when it isn't applicable. Player knowledge as an advantage, in terms of obscure behaviours and enemy weaknesses, and battlefield control type abilities coupled with greater mobility seem the most viable to date.
Another idea is to move away from "in the moment" gameplay and offer a lot more "preparation."
This is something we thought about. Essentially treating stage challenges as combat puzzles, which the player could "solve" through secondary means. The problem again is balance. Designed encounters, in terms of enemy assortment and positioning generally provide more enjoyable and varied combat - which is a primary design goal. In practice, the two are quite hard to reconcile. We still intend to include this on a smaller scale - undermining area specific threats and constraints, easing certain difficulty factors and precluding some encounters, but it isn't prevalent enough to base a playthrough around unfortunately.
ability to specialize your playstyle to what feels most comfortable to you
Definitely. Our progression is classless and skill based. All builds have access to the most basic of mechanics from each route. How you play influences what you can enhance, and ultimately how your "power grid" ends up looking.
I still ended up rambling a lot there so hopefully its still coherent enough, and maybe useful to your goals.
It certainly is, thanks. Nuanced perspectives from someone mindful about mechanics and with a lot of gaming experience, but with different preferences, is never not useful. It's too easy to get locked into a single set of priorities/way of thinking when one is constantly iterating on a set design.
I don't have a perfect answer for how to solve the attrition issue, but I think its one that plagues the genre as a whole as the opposite (where healing/energy is showered upon you) often makes it far too easy at times if not limited.
Agreed. Ideally we'll include two difficulty options (focusing on AI behaviour and spawn number/type as opposed to just damage multipliers), but with designed encounters balance is especially time consuming. My thinking is if the moment to moment gameplay remains mechanically satisfying (not mindless, good game feel, decent variety) then one has some leeway.
Whereas most of the rest of the Action Genre makes you feel like a tiny ragdoll made of paper... Which creates a huge dissonance
I think it's just a matter of internal consistency, and that both the Souls games and NG actually do well on this front.
Dark Souls is an inversion of the traditional power fantasy, and perseverance in the face of powerlessness is thematically prominent throughout the series. That the game loop mirrors the cycle of hollowing is a nice flourish.
In NG, Ryu is an untested heir to a clan tasked with a mission of utmost importance. There's a "secret" difficulty mode that leans into this, in which a support character provides continued assistance - because regardless of your failings the mission comes first. Gameplay wise, cowardice is not an option. Enemies actively punish prolonged blocking with lethal grapples, so it's aggression or death - and few games make you feel like more of a badass when you get it right.
Letting the player define what is fun, whether its varied moves or tried n true, rather than cranking numbers around to force things to be "difficult."
Yeah, we're not going the scoring/combo-mad route and are instead treating movesets and weapon types, along with active abilities, as means of introducing meaningful alternatives - both to overcome contextual challenges and allow players to tailor their experience to some degree.
More than anything, I'm interested in ways of providing alternate avenues for the player to succeed - potentially easing mechanical difficulty beyond just a difficulty setting. The challenge is in designing something consistently available as to avoid difficulty spikes when it isn't applicable. Player knowledge as an advantage, in terms of obscure behaviours and enemy weaknesses, and battlefield control type abilities coupled with greater mobility seem the most viable to date.
Another idea is to move away from "in the moment" gameplay and offer a lot more "preparation."
This is something we thought about. Essentially treating stage challenges as combat puzzles, which the player could "solve" through secondary means. The problem again is balance. Designed encounters, in terms of enemy assortment and positioning generally provide more enjoyable and varied combat - which is a primary design goal. In practice, the two are quite hard to reconcile. We still intend to include this on a smaller scale - undermining area specific threats and constraints, easing certain difficulty factors and precluding some encounters, but it isn't prevalent enough to base a playthrough around unfortunately.
ability to specialize your playstyle to what feels most comfortable to you
Definitely. Our progression classless and skill based. All builds have access to the most basic of mechanics from each route. How you play influences what you can enhance, and ultimately how your "power grid" ends up looking.
I still ended up rambling a lot there so hopefully its still coherent enough, and maybe useful to your goals.
It certainly is, thanks. Nuanced perspectives from someone mindful about mechanics and with a lot of gaming experience, but with different preferences, is never not useful. It's too easy to get locked into a single set of priorities/way of thinking when one is constantly iterating on a set design.
I don't have a perfect answer for how to solve the attrition issue, but I think its one that plagues the genre as a whole as the opposite (where healing/energy is showered upon you) often makes it far too easy at times if not limited.
Agreed. Ideally we'll include two difficulty options (focusing on AI behaviour and spawn number/type as opposed to just damage multipliers), but with designed encounters balance is especially time consuming. My thinking is if the moment to moment gameplay remains mechanically satisfying (not mindless, good game feel, decent variety) then one has some leeway.
Whereas most of the rest of the Action Genre makes you feel like a tiny ragdoll made of paper... Which creates a huge dissonance
I think it's just a matter of internal consistency, and that both the Souls games and NG actually do well on this front.
Dark Souls is an inversion of the traditional power fantasy, and perseverance in the face of powerlessness is thematically prominent throughout the series. That the game loop mirrors the cycle of hollowing is a nice flourish.
In NG, Ryu is an untested heir to a clan tasked with a mission of utmost importance. There's a "secret" difficulty mode that leans into this, in which a support character provides continued assistance - because regardless of your failings the mission comes first. Gameplay wise, cowardice is not an option. Enemies actively punish prolonged blocking with lethal grapples, so it's aggression or death - and few games make you feel like more of a badass when you get it right.
Letting the player define what is fun, whether its varied moves or tried n true, rather than cranking numbers around to force things to be "difficult."
Yeah, we're not going the scoring/combo-mad route and are instead treating movesets and weapon types, along with active abilities, as means of introducing meaningful alternatives - both to overcome contextual challenges and allow players to tailor their experience to some degree.
More than anything, I'm interested in ways of providing alternate avenues for the player to succeed - potentially easing mechanical difficulty beyond just a difficulty setting. The challenge is in designing something consistently available as to avoid difficulty spikes when it isn't applicable. Player knowledge as an advantage, in terms of obscure behaviours and enemy weaknesses, and battlefield control type abilities coupled with greater mobility seem the most viable to date.
Another idea is to move away from "in the moment" gameplay and offer a lot more "preparation."
This is something we thought about. Essentially treating stage challenges as combat puzzles, which the player could "solve" through secondary means. The problem again is balance. Designed encounters, in terms of enemy assortment and positioning generally provide more enjoyable and varied combat - which is a primary design goal. In practice, the two are quite hard to reconcile. We still intend to include this on a smaller scale - undermining area specific threats and constraints, easing certain difficulty factors and precluding some encounters, but it isn't prevalent enough to base a playthrough around unfortunately.
ability to specialize your playstyle to what feels most comfortable to you
Definitely. Our progression classless and skill based. All builds have access to the most basic of mechanics from each route. How you play influences what you can enhance, and ultimately how your "power grid" ends up looking.