Advertisement

What should I do now that I implemented a game mechanic that is not popular among players, but I liked it so much I don't even want to remove it?

Started by June 06, 2015 04:51 AM
29 comments, last by imawesome511 9 years, 2 months ago

Yeah the bottom line is are you making this for yourself or other people to play.

Adding too much realism in games aren't as fun as people think. Video games are meant to be fun. So anything that prevents people from having fun, e.g. seeing their own entities get destroyed by their own projectiles, should be taken into consideration.

You could just brush that off and say that this is how you want your game. That's your choice, that's your game.

I agree with friendly-fire being toggleable.

Advertisement
Thank you everyone. By the looks of it, I am really doing something wrong here, possibly even forgetting the whole point of making my game with a critical mindset.

Good thing I asked for advice about this when it is in its early stages.

i should know better than expressing an unpopular opinion around here,

people are rendering judgement left and right without context, probably because it's assumed. the ultimate purpose of this creation is _____. (to please crowds? to challenge individuals?)

if commonality makes all the decisions, left unchallenged, and continually coddled to, well... good luck society, i'll continue to spend a lot of time alone.

i like the option option :p

neither a follower nor a leader behttp://www.xoxos.net
Sounds like they are acting like spoiled kids. I think it's a good mechanic. Keep the friendly fire in. Making an edsel is the reason that so many games today are crap to play. You SHOULD have to learn and experiment to successfully play a game!!!

This is my thread. There are many threads like it, but this one is mine.

I know there have already been a lot of answers. It's a tricky one -- personally I like friendly fire, but I also normally believe that one should listen to your players! As stated above, the important thing with a mechanic is whether or not it makes the game better, not easier to develop (okay, yes, the real world intervenes sometimes).

Perhaps you can keep the mechanic but tweak it to be more pleasing to use? Perhaps friendly fire causes less damage? Is different visually so it's more obvious when it's happening?

Advertisement

The trick is giving people what they need, not what they want.


Your mileage may vary but in my experience the people who are the loudest in game forums are also the ones least likely to have well thought out and reflected opinions. Of course that also depends on the game and actual community, for example a lot of the people over at the official Age of Wonders III forum are markedly distinct from what I'm used to in other games. I still wouldn't blindly implement any change suggested on those forums though, either.

Friendly fire can be nice, IF you have control over it.

If you have units that act on their own, I can definitely understand the frustration.

It's not fun to have a unit route behind a wall, then commit suicide by blowing itself up.

It's not fun to have to micromanage a bunch of units because the ones in the back keep hitting the guys in the front instead of the enemy.

It's not fun if your rocket artillery starts hitting your key unit/structure because a single enemy got close to it.

No feature can be looked at in complete isolation.

Also, listen to your players, but don't listen too closely to them.

All you can really know is that they are unhappy with the current design, they can't tell you how to fix it.

That is your job as a game designer.

Thanks again. I am currently back at my planning and designing stages to try and it might take awhile to fix the overall issue.

How many people agree with you?

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement