Pink Petal Games
Feedback => New Features => Topic started by: letmein on October 23, 2009, 12:35:03 AM
-
First off, necno, love the addition here. Having more talk options is, in my opinion, an essential.
However, I have a couple general questions. First of all, do you think that the number of available talks should be increased? Five seems pretty low, especially considering that most games get to 40+ girls, easily. Perhaps you can increase the *total* number of available talk actions, but restrict the number you can have with one girl? I wouldn't let the player talk to every girl three times, but since you changed the timeframe to a week what if you had the total value be, say, two or three times a day? That'd be fourteen or twenty-one talk actions...
My other question is simple. What do all of these do? Sure, I can interact in a zillion different ways, but what difference does that make? I don't necessarily need (or even want) to know the exact details, but how about a quick overview? Something like "if you force actions, you can assume the girl will be PO'd at you but her rebellion will generally decrease", or "more... exotic... actions have a chance to affect her personality".
Thanks!
- letmein
-
I think you'd have TOO many then. What I think may be a better option is to upgrade the player. So you'll start out with only being able to talk to the girls 5 times and slowly upgrade it to maybe 10 times. For a large sum of money, or achieving specific conditions.
It doesn't have to be restricted to talk options either, but how quickly girls train together, maybe the chances of rare items appearing in the store, or how much talking/torture does to a girl. ect. ect.
-
I like the upgrade idea. How about making it so that achieving objectives give you ability points instead of random amounts of money or items? Then you can use these ability points to buy upgrades.
About the talk options:
Talk about general stuff - toned down version of previous comfort option
Ask about day - raises love faster, but does nothing to hate or fear
All the ask for options - if successful, same effect as talking about general stuff as well as exp in the sex skills
All the force options - well... if the girl didn't love you at all, then rebelliousness would probably decrease but otherwise you will need to raise love back up for you to see the decrease
-
how about making girls with the masochist trait like being forced, but not like being asked?
-
I must admit, that's how I'd expect it to work.
-
Masochst, Twisted...al those sorts.
-
Well, maybe, but I wouldn't guarantee that. Just because you're a masochist doesn't mean you *dislike* when someone asks first...
-
Well, in in real life, certainly. In the game though ...
-
I suppose. I, personally, wouldn't worry about it - it's an unnecessary complication, as both traits and the new talk options are already quite complex. I'm not sure anyone really knows what all the traits and talk options do, including necno. That's not necessarily bad, since this way there's a certain element of faux randomness, but complication tends to lead to bugs too (evidenced by the constant reports of traits doing weird things, and the newer ones involving the talk menu). So it's not necessarily good either. Again, why do it, if it's not really going to add much for the effort required? (I say this, not because this one thing would be hard, but because once you relate one trait to the talk actions sooner or later you'll be relating a *lot* more of them...)
-
I suppose. I, personally, wouldn't worry about it - it's an unnecessary complication, as both traits and the new talk options are already quite complex.
Personally, I think it's the little "unnecessary complications" that give games like this their depth.
I say this, not because this one thing would be hard, but because once you relate one trait to the talk actions sooner or later you'll be relating a *lot* more of them...
We can worry about crossing that bridge when we get to it, if you ask me.
That said, it's necno's call.
-
See, whereas I believe there is a strong, and oft-ignored, difference between depth and complexity. Games do not need to be complicated to be repeatably and consistently entertaining, although I acknowledge that they *can* be. I just want to make sure that things are considered for a while before they're thrown into the game haphazardly.
So far, I think necno's done an excellent job of keeping his additions useful and fun, and I don't really expect that to stop. On the other hand, with so many people saying "more! more! more!", should there not be at least one person serving as devil's advocate, just for balance? It's completely necno's creation, but he *does* take player remarks into consideration (otherwise, there would be no open beta).
-
See, whereas I believe there is a strong, and oft-ignored, difference between depth and complexity. Games do not need to be complicated to be repeatably and consistently entertaining, although I acknowledge that they *can* be. I just want to make sure that things are considered for a while before they're thrown into the game haphazardly.
Oh no question about it. Go is a fantastic example of a game with simplicity and depth. And, at a certainly level of abstraction, it's not only an excellent game, but a decent wargame too.
The trouble is that it's not exactly the sort of game that evokes the smell of blood and cordite, y'know? It's a fun game but it's not a Sim.
Contrast that with Sid Meyer's Civ games which do evoke their setting powerfully. Yet these are complexity stacked atop complexity.
At the end of the day, our experience of reality is a complex one. If a game strives to create the illusion of a fully functioning world, it will need to recreate a lot of that complexity if the simulation is to appear convincing.
with so many people saying "more! more! more!", should there not be at least one person serving as devil's advocate, just for balance?
The way you joined this discussion led me to believe that you found the proposal personally distasteful, and that you disliked the notion that some of the game characters might respond well to force. I'm willing to accept that I formed an incorrect impression, but if so, I don't understand why you're opposing such a tiny change with such determination.
-
Contrast that with Sid Meyer's Civ games which do evoke their setting powerfully. Yet these are complexity stacked atop complexity.
Well, yes, to an extent. Again, I'm not arguing that games *can't* be complex while being deep. On the other hand, my least favorite of the Civ series was, hands-down, Civ III - which, arguably, was the most "complicated" of the series. The devs there also do a phenomenal job of only adding things that make the game better, and streamling, streamlining, streamlining...
The way you joined this discussion led me to believe that you found theproposal personally distasteful, and that you disliked the notion thatsome of the game characters might respond well to force. I'm willing toaccept that I formed an incorrect impression, but if so, I don'tunderstand why you're opposing such a tiny change with suchdetermination.
Oh, no more distastful than the whole point of the game, which is "never in real life, but in a game? Sure." Much like playing hockey, mowing down policemen (and hapless innocents!) with a Glock, or singing in a band.
As for the second part, "opposing... with determination", all I can say is that perhaps I am overreacting. However, I still believe that the game will truly be better if kept relatively simpler; better for the programmer, the modders, the players and even for the simple aesthetic joy of making something good. So again I reiterate that someone has to take the other side, and say "less less less" to the "more more more"'s.
-
My two cents on this "issue" :). While I can't say that having some more chat options isn't nice people seem to forget what this game is about. Although I'm not exactly sure with that myself, I'm pretty sure it wasn't supposed to be dating sim :). What's in there ATM is far more than enough. Who wants more can make talkscripts that do more. Each girl can have her individual talk script so if you want special talk menu make one.
If I remember correctly necno said he plans to add player home to the map and that player could have few girls there. I can already see new requests, furniture store, house decorations and similar :).
I mean, I have nothing against it, but what's exactly the point of the game, and what's an overkill?
-
Well, the point under dispute (unless I misunderstood something basic) was wasn't more or less talk options, but rather whether or not it would be a good idea to make masochistic girls respond better to being forced than to being asked. It's not even an extra talk option, it's just a single if statement. Maybe two.
And except in so far as that's how I would have expected the game to work, I really don't have any strong opinions on the subject. Although I will admit to a certain mystification as to how the whole thing got blown this far out of proportion.
-
I think that can already be done. Not 100% sure about this but scripting could check if something (some specific trait) exists and if it does present different choices than the girl that doesn't have that trait. From my little dabbling with scripts I remember check stuff, only question is if you can check traits. Alternatively you could make custom scripts for girls that have these traits, although they would still have that script even the traits in question got removed from them somehow (like with item).
-
I wasn't thinking of changing the dialogue tree at all. Just altering the sign of some of the effects from minus to plus.
I entirely agree that it's not going to be feasible to add everyone-and-his-dog's pet dialog option. But this is a suggestion that would take two lines of code without any GUI changes at all.
I honestly don't understand why this is proving so controversial.
-
Good discussion on game design, your both correct. There is also an issue of target audience. Some audiences find depth only from complexity, these are usually hardcore gamers and they will generally stick to strategy games and such. Then there are the casual gamers who are the types of people that prefer good dialog and narrative to provide depth and won't generally find it in higher complexity. Its just one of those things that a game designer must try to balance. Go to far either way and you lose some of your audience (as the ultimate goal of many game designers is to create a game that appeals to both audiences). It should also be noted that complexity implemented well can appeal to both sides, where as removing complexity will turn of the hardcore crowds.
As for adding talk options, i like the suggestion about gaining ability points the player can spend to get "perks". Say 600 points will buy you access to a high end slave market that sells monster girls. 100 points will get you a perk where you can convince girls better.
-
Neat thought, but where would you get points from?
-
Neat thought, but where would you get points from?
Meeting objectives would be the obvious thing. Currently the rewards for meeting a mission are a bit meh: the slave girl is nice, but the money i usually have already, and the the items are usually to bland too be motivating.
If meeting mission targets was the only way to imrpove the PC, I'd take a lot more interest in them.
-
Ah. I suppose I should have thought of that. I could see that working, since otherwise the mission system as it stands is pretty much a distraction, and not a "fun" part of the game.
-
Some audiences find depth only from complexity, these are usually hardcore gamers and they will generally stick to strategy games and such. Then there are the casual gamers who are the types of people that prefer good dialog and narrative to provide depth and won't generally find it in higher complexity.
It is alittle offtopic, but dividing the audience in this two groups isn't quite correct.
If the hardcore gamers would find depth only in complexity, and the casual gamers would search for good dialogues and try to avoid complexity, casual games like Moorhuhn (no complexity, no story) would aim at no audience and the hardcore rpg player wouldn't be annoyed about munchkins/powergamers who are roll-playing. Even so the hardcore rpg player is a dying species.
-
Your right of course. Dividing groups like that into clear cut factions is only done to illustrate how different approaches may turn off certain types of people. I would fit into both of those categories, but the end conclusion that a game should strive to provide a balance where possible between the different game design methodologies is still relevant.
-
Here's a helpful idea for talk options have different conversations and reactions to the various talking options that are dependand of her stats. Not like She refuses or a straight acceptance. But something like you make a request for something and instead of the She refuses why not have a responce if she isn't interested will be, "She simply tries to ignore you and say not now" (But only in the brothel in the dungion she would then react more nervously or worried), IF she dislikes you she could then simply threaten you or insult you, If she hates you then have her call you a bastand and try to attack you (if she has those aggresive stat traites). You can even have an event where a girl who hates you enough tries to kill a girl who is related to you that works in the same Brothel depending on the options you select you could save the related girl, she could end up dead, the dangerous girl could end up dead, or the both could survive but heavily injured and one has to end up being punished.
If the woman is fearful of you have her make responses as though she is terrified or various degrees of scared depending on how scared. She could even try to shrink back and cower at certain responces.
For raping if the girl is a massocsis she would probably enjoy it more and find torture better than girls who aren't so if a girls has that kind of title have her respond more positivly to torture and rape.
If a girl is mind fucked she would react alot more blankly toward sex and thus her reactions to those options would more likely be more subdued.
If she is broken have some sort of event that marks that like a small story that changes somewhat depending of her traits (Physical ones). She would also likely respond to the stuff you say with the work master in them and also likely to be much more complient.
If the girl is a nymphomaniac have her sometimes act more agressivly to sex like she takes the lead in that act is you suggest it unless you want to force her to you dominant will.
Does this help with ideas for this.
-
For raping if the girl is a massocsis she would probably enjoy it more and find torture better than girls who aren't so if a girls has that kind of title have her respond more positivly to torture and rape.
Uhh....lets be clear here. Masochists (in a sexual sense) like pain mixed with their pleasure. There is nothing pleasurable about rape or torture. Just because a girl likes to be hog-tied and hung up with a clothespin clipped to her clit and hot wax dripped on her tits before, during, or after sex does not mean she likes to be raped or tortured. Even girls who have rape fantasies generally want them acted out in a consensual manner - they would not respond "positively" to actually being raped.
-
A lot of this is actually implemented; I know that responses are based on at least the PC modifiers (PClove, PChate, PCfear). I'm not sure if traits or other stats are considered, although I rather thought the idea has been brought up before and necno either did it, or put it in the TODO list.
-
Letmen: I'm not sure I found that part actually. I found the talking results to be rather repedative dispite how the girls stats were. I mean it would be interesting if your the one taking a girls virginity to have a short story depending how your taking it.
Zodiac44: I understand your meaning I was mainly using it as a idea for having the Girls personlities affect their responses to you. I guess I put the massosist example idea was a poor choice but varients for stuff like that would likely be more likely to grab a player.
-
I know what you were getting at - I'm fine with the idea in general, I just don't think there should be any positive reaction to raping or torturing a girl in the game, regardless of what traits she has.
-
The responses will change.
Still, the area could do with a little more "fluffing", which is planned. I think Krayben is slowly warming up, and will eventually be trying to write lots and lots of events for various things. Or at least, that's what *I'm* assuming he's getting up to, and if he fails I shall be most disappointed. ;)
-
Ok I look forward to seenig that.
(I'm also agreeing with both previous posters)