Instead of having 3 set difficulty levels, would it be possible to code in more customisable difficulty settings? Or even in addition too.
For example at the start of the game a player could be given three settings.
1. Scrap avaliability (low/medium/high)
2. Opponent difficulty(easy/moderate/hard)
3. Allow Pausing in combat (yes/no)
I could easily imagine more settings that could be tweeked (eg perhaps an option to randomise the end boss).
Disclamer: I have (yet) to actualy play the game
Difficulty suggestion
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:06 am
Re: Difficulty suggestion
1. There is no hard difficulty. only easy and normal... normal being very difficult. It's kinda sending a message that "this is a roguelike. You shouldn't be able to finish the game every run"Solourus wrote:Instead of having 3 set difficulty levels, would it be possible to code in more customisable difficulty settings? Or even in addition too.
For example at the start of the game a player could be given three settings.
1. Scrap avaliability (low/medium/high)
2. Opponent difficulty(easy/moderate/hard)
3. Allow Pausing in combat (yes/no)
I could easily imagine more settings that could be tweeked (eg perhaps an option to randomise the end boss).
Disclamer: I have (yet) to actualy play the game
2. If you couldn't pause in combat the game probably would be impossible... or at least stop being fun. It's such an integrated part of their game model that I don't think it can be removed.
-
- Posts: 7
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 2:33 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
Pausing should ALWAYS be allowed, no option for that in my opinion.
-
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 2:51 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
I can't claim expertise, having only played the onlive demo and only kickstarted enough for the full game, but I found I didn't pause that much. I guess it's individual play style- and the game has evolved so much since then....
-
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:58 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
I like the "no pause" as being an option. It could act like a multiplier to your final score. Nothing says you NEED to use the setting. Just one more thing to make it appeal to the masses without taking anything away from the game.
-
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 2:51 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
The only thing "no pause" would do is prove the speed at which somebody would accurately click at, and think, rather than skill, though. watching some of darthcaboose's stream today I realized that power switching needs to be a lot quicker than I could do it without pause; also, is the speed of the game designed to simulate real time 1:1? I'd have expected the game is running faster than that anyway, if you know what I mean.
-
- Posts: 97
- Joined: Fri Apr 20, 2012 5:58 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
So your argument is that you don't see how doing things quickly and accuratly while at the same time problem solving is a skill or difficult?
-
- Posts: 512
- Joined: Thu Apr 26, 2012 2:06 am
Re: Difficulty suggestion
I think his argument is that it would be fake difficulty. Subcategory number 1.Snake Plissken wrote:So your argument is that you don't see how doing things quickly and accuratly while at the same time problem solving is a skill or difficult?
-
- Posts: 39
- Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2012 8:12 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
I like all of Solourus suggestions. I have always been a fan of difficulty modifiers like this, and especially when they have attached score modifiers. For a game like this one, getting a big final score actually means something...and it would give the game longevity and more possibilities for improving your score if you could take on certain handicaps.
I think the no pause option would be a lot more fun. Certainly it would be more difficult, which is great. But it would make battles way more frantic and like actual battles, where you can't micromanage everything. I don't think this would be for everyone but considering it is just disabling a game feature I imagine it would not be that hard to do programming-wise. I suppose you could even just not have the option in-game and instead just not pause if you wanted to play that way, but the bragging rights would be more difficult to justify
I think the no pause option would be a lot more fun. Certainly it would be more difficult, which is great. But it would make battles way more frantic and like actual battles, where you can't micromanage everything. I don't think this would be for everyone but considering it is just disabling a game feature I imagine it would not be that hard to do programming-wise. I suppose you could even just not have the option in-game and instead just not pause if you wanted to play that way, but the bragging rights would be more difficult to justify

-
- Posts: 67
- Joined: Wed May 09, 2012 2:51 pm
Re: Difficulty suggestion
I think the no-pause should be an option, but with no score multiplier- it's a different skill, managing the best (with pausing) or managing the fastest (with pausing). And there's something cool about frantically smashing the keyboard to power up shields before that laser fires. if it's possible to have a second leader-board, that could be an option.
Another thought to adjust the difficulty is "realistic oxygen" as soon as a door was opened or a hull breach, that room would be emptied of oxygen. This would obviously make breach missiles more valuable/dangerous, and change some people's tactics for boarders.
Another thought to adjust the difficulty is "realistic oxygen" as soon as a door was opened or a hull breach, that room would be emptied of oxygen. This would obviously make breach missiles more valuable/dangerous, and change some people's tactics for boarders.