MUD-Dev
mailing list archive
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]
Date:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Thread:
[ Previous
| Next
]
Index:
[ Author
| Date
| Thread
]
Re: Tactical Interest Was Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs
On Thu, 16 Sep 1999, Spin wrote:
> As I embark off on a totally new project, I'm striving to totally avoid
> such quantisation, however I'm not sure that I can do without it. Aside
> from pregnancy, has anyone ever encountered something that was best
> simulated with a binary type variable? The only other problem I see with
> this is the need for objects to carry around a large number of values for
> what they affect and by how much, but as my game is to be a sort of real
> time diplomacy, there won't be a huge number of affectable things to
> start with...
>
> Cheers,
> Malcolm.
My felling is, the more you make abstractions, the fewer states things
have. For example, you could abstract combat to be either
{win,loose,stalemate}, as indeed is the case in diplomacy. Binary (or
ternary, or few-nary..) should be used where a much more gradual
difference would not give much to the game, other than confuse the player
and obscure game mechanics. I guess you could implement things like
'x% blindness' but it would be very hard, and often many of the actual
uses will be shown by a binary or ternary component {you see it,you see a
vague description,you see nothing} (assuming textual interface).
In all, 'best' depends on do you go for realism, or do you go for
gameplay. Simply consider if the gameplay/player needs the extra
complexity, and if it will allow you to do 'more' for the player, and what
this will bring to the gameplay.
Also avoiding quantization is also a step away from realism. Often the
human mind does not use 100 levels of quantization when percieving
something, like 'How good am i at math' is not measured in 100 degrees
of percent, but much more abstract. So even if you have a finegrained
set of values, sometimes it gives you a plus in gameplay if you choose to
present them by fewer states, because this allows the player to get an
easier feel for the state of the objects/himself/whatever. Ofcause the
descriptions need to keep the player on the right track, but that is a
game balance issue ;-).
Hans Henrik Stærfeldt | bombman#diku,dk | work: hhs#cbs,dtu.dk |
address: |___ +45 40383492 __|__ +45 45252425 __|
Dybendalsvej 74 2. th, | Scientific programmer at Center for Biological |
2720 Vanløse, Danmark. | Sequence Analysis, Technical University of Denmark|
_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev maillist - MUD-Dev#kanga,nu
http://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev
- Thread context:
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs, (continued)
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs,
Marian Griffith gryphon#iaehv,nl, Tue 24 Aug 1999, 02:37 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs,
Matthew Mihaly diablo#best,com, Wed 25 Aug 1999, 01:29 GMT
- Tactical Interest Was Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs,
Spin spin#triode,net.au, Thu 16 Sep 1999, 22:39 GMT
- Re: Tactical Interest Was Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1#142 - 4 msgs,
Travis S. Casey efindel#io,com, Fri 17 Sep 1999, 17:47 GMT
- Re: Tactical Interest Was Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs,
Hans-Henrik Staerfeldt hhs#cbs,dtu.dk, Fri 17 Sep 1999, 17:48 GMT
- Re: Tactical Interest Was Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs,
Adam Wiggins adam#angel,com, Fri 17 Sep 1999, 23:21 GMT
- Re: [MUD-Dev] Re: MUD-Dev digest, Vol 1 #142 - 4 msgs,
Par Winzell zell#alyx,com, Tue 17 Aug 1999, 22:25 GMT
[ Other Periods
| Other mailing lists
| Search
]