I admire your persistance sirenapples. Regarding your last post - what if what people really want IS a sandbox game ? Frankly i never played all levels of besiege current campaign. I was too busy tinkering with stuff in free build. So far the only reason for using levels i've seen was to demonstrate doomsowing capabilities of various stuff.
Which wouldn't change at all. The sandbox elements all remain exactly the same. This stuff only adds directly to the gameplay and progression of the "Campaign".
Two things guys (sirenapples, zodium): first - try to get some distance, im afraid that this discussion (however great) is starting to gain too much heat, second - wouldn't be steam achievments solution for all that ?
I don't hold any heat, I just get a bit mentally drained. I feel like no one is understanding that the sandbox remains untouched and that adding value and a means of assessing a craft's potential is some ungodly sin that will ruin the world. Meanwhile I don't feel like I get what Zod's trying to say and I usually see both sides to everything, but on this matter I'm blind to the side that suggests it's a bad idea. To me it only feels like change resistance for change resistances sake.
There is probably endless spectrum of possibilities for such - this way people who like to feel they gained / accomplished something would have their due - and badges for particularly hard achievments would be reasonable and shareable cause for pride. To that we could put in the progression system which i guess we all rather like.
How about that ?
I've never even seen anyone who cared about steam achievements. They're hollow and have only sentimental value for some, though I think there's some sort of point thing that adds up that's used for events or something. In-game progression is real and obvious where you might return to past levels loaded with cannons on top of some giant walker to crush that lone little house.
It's like starting a game like Skyrim off at level 80 with all spells, all weapons, all armor, all skills, all map markers, and all quests vs starting off at level one with your steel dagger and sparky fingers. You need that exploration, you need to gain those levels, and you enjoy the road to get there.
Besiege is far from Skyrim, but the example is exaggerated for perspective.
Free-Building and sandboxes are for Besiege like what the console and modding is for Skyrim, complete freedom. The difference is in Besiege it's literally just a click away and it all melts away into a pure sandbox experience switching between your progress and your unlimited experience.
The only point I feel Zod has is the potential challenge in the developers implementing it. I feel that it's very exaggerated. Once you have the basics down it shouldn't be any more difficult than implementing new items and certainly less than building new locations. It could be as simple as adding a line of code to the item's data.
But honestly it's an Early Access game. It's meant to grow, it's meant to change, it's still in development, we are not playing a game we're playing a teaser, a demonstration and a proof of concept. Anyone who bought the game expecting it to remain as-is probably doesn't understand what it means to buy into early access titles.
That of course suggests that the game ever does reach completion and it doesn't go the route of many, many early access games- abandonment, or "Full" release without much improvement at all as a means of cash grabbing.
Last Edit: Feb 9, 2015 23:34:12 GMT by sirenapples
One little "but" here - you really don't appreciate complexity of price system. Although i rather sit on the fence on that whole discussion, that one thing zodium got absolutelly true - price systme would be ever-adjusting nightmare, always is, but in such type of gameplay it would be more. You may have some idea of it (im pretty sure you do), your idea might be even valid (certainly you think it is) but there is too much factors for anyone to grasp. They would have to implement, and gather feedback - loop it like 50 times and then maybe there would be balanced and fair price system. But even then not for sure. You ever read changelogs for any RTS ? it may be like 9 or 10 patch and they still introduce minor changes like (50 hp points more here, 5 dmg less there) - i took it as example of complex system with many variables and well known balancing issues; but here you would have much harder job not only to set some numbers to behave more or less evenly, but to set price on someones creativity.
I hope you didn't take my post as a protectionist one its just they are really, but REALLY complex things. And besides there rarely is something like "one line of code".
Also you must be pretty frustraded by now with that no one is getting that freebuild would be left alone, i feel for you.
So i would sum whole situation as: pricing is VERY complex to do, it has its pros and cons, we need to wait and see how the game develops.
I am afraid that this discussion could drag till the very release so i guess we all need to accept facts and differences in opinions and end this soon. Along the development of the game certainly there will be moments to rise the subject again - lets remember that we don't actually make this game, and devs have theri visions also, so we might be surprised yet
So i would sum whole situation as: pricing is VERY complex to do, it has its pros and cons, we need to wait and see how the game develops.
Thing is however, this is early access. This is development. This is the time for it to be implemented, now(ish- within months.), not later, and certainly not after an actual release. If we can't see the game become a game during this phase, it won't likely happen at all. Not that it isn't fun as-is. I'm just the sort of person who likes to see things she loves grow to full potential and make a point of trying to get my point across on how I think it could be done. Not to make sure it happens, just to try to make sure I'm understood/that my point gets across or until ultimately dismissed/ignored and I decide to move on.
Last Edit: Feb 10, 2015 0:18:09 GMT by sirenapples
True, and having that in mind lets not forget we are only on 0.0.3 And as i zodium mentioned each new block with new possibilities would affect whole system, so it is something to think about like around 0.8.x i guess - anyway, after all blocks are implemented.
True, and having that in mind lets not forget we are only on 0.0.3 And as i zodium mentioned each new block with new possibilities would affect whole system, so it is something to think about like around 0.8.x i guess - anyway, after all blocks are implemented.
I wouldn't want to suggest that it wouldn't be complicated, I just don't feel like it's as complicated as made out to be, and certainly not prohibitively so. But then I also know that countless other games manage systems like it just fine, and while it is a big change... as you said, 0.0.3.
I understand that freebuild would not be affected, it just doesn't have anything to do with what I'm saying. Do you understand that I'm saying it's not possible to do what you want to do in any useful sense, full stop? For example: How would you even begin to account for the value of something like a fireball block, which has wildly different utility depending on whether it's used as a weapon (low utility) or as a chaos engine (extremely high utility)? It's impossible, don't waste time trying. Blocks aren't a meaningful unit of analysis now, and they won't be in 0.08 either.
Money would kill this game dead. It's an unnecessary addition and as others have said in the thread it is hard to quantify the value of the blocks considering they can be used for simple as well as incredibly complex functions. Part of the charm of the campaign in this game is the fact that it only limits your space and not your blocks. You can build whatever the heck you want to get the job done and we've already seen 'solutions' ranging from the incredibly simple www.reddit.com/r/Besiege/comments/2v9c1v/minimum_block_completions_ipsilon_oc_454/ to the incredibly complex imgur.com/gallery/pUHAjsG. When I first downloaded Besiege and started going through the campaign I was able to throw together whatever my imagination came up with without limit beyond size. Loads of bombs? Sure! A whole mess of wood and wheels? Hell yes! A chaos engine with a propeller on it? Onwards to glory! The freedom is invigorating and it is what has made the game explode.
New players coming into the game are probably going to play the campaign first to try to learn the mechanics. I would never have learned as fast and move on to creative construction if I was restricted buy being only able to buy x amount of blocks. Having a money system would stifle creativity, which is a terrible thing to do in a sandbox game. Space restrictions allow for plenty of creativity, and make you think inside the box for what will work. Materials restrictions will just make the game way less of a joy than it is.
I agree that there should not be a money system, but I do think that there should be challenges or limits on some levels (e.g. "use less than 50 blocks", "must use hinge", etc). Maybe it can be a separate challenge mode, maybe it's a star system (1 star for completion, 2 stars for less than [X] blocks, 3 for less than [Y] blocks). At least no money for single player.
If there were a multiplayer, I could definitely understand there being a money system, though it might seem to be too similar to Robocraft at that point.
I figured I would chime in on this debate. I will say the typical "Why not have both" That way you cater to both crowds and thus increase a player base. I feel making the game money based will wreck any and all creativity with the game and as has been mentioned the fun of "over doing it". Adding money means you end up with nothing but cookie cutter builds and it becomes fairly linear in what you can do to complete a task before you. I know there are some in the Besiege community who like that sort of play and as such they should get what they want...
As a different mode. Same with those of us who want to go all mad scientist without being tethered to an arbitrary number count that limits what we can do. If it comes down to it, make money a part of some sort of "hard mode"
Having read most of what has been said, I'm just going to throw in my two cents.
As a completionist, I am all for a challenge and would spend hours racking my brain on how to complete different tasks and obstacles. I deeply feel that adding another layer of challenge, be it money based, block based, unlocking, or even time based (?) would make a great addition to the game, and give you more reasons to spend hours being all creative in the sandbox, to then utilise this new found knowledge on completing challenges.
Money Based: This thread started with the idea that money would make a great addition to besiege campaign, and I feel it would. However, having read the various comments about "SANDBOX, it's the only way", "EXPLOSIONS" and "USE ALL THE BLOCKS... for science!"***, I have realised, that this isn't what the majority wants. Hence why we come to the idea of another game mode! Challenge mode! (broken down into multiple possibilities)
Money
Time
Blocks Required
Unlocking
Destruction
Money: This mode would require the player to build contraptions which are cheap, and effective. The cheaper the machine, the better you complete the stage, Ie < $100 = Gold rank; >$100 < $200 = Silver; > $200 = Bronze. So to complete the stage, you don't have to be below a certain cost, but it you want to do get the gold, it does. Time: Now, this would be an interesting mode, it could require the player to build their machine as quickly as possible, OR, spend how ever long they want making their machine, and then use it to complete the objective as quickly as possible. Thus the quicker they destroy the village, for example, the better they do. Again bringing in the Gold, Silver, Bronze mechanic. * (Most preferably the latter)
Blocks Required: This mode will require the player to use certain different blocks, or potentially restrict the player from using certain block. This will help the player to explore different type of contraptions and mechanisms. ** Unlocking: This mode, similar to Blocks Required, will force the player to use a limited amount of blocks (number of blocks e.g. <30?) / type of block, and as they progress through the stages, more and more blocks are unlocked for them to use, and play around with.** Destruction: Simple. Do the most damage you possible can! This mode could potentially be merged with the current campaign, which would also incorporate the Gold, Silver, Bronze mechanic. I.e Do atleast x amount of damage to continue, Do x+y amount of damage for Bronze, do x+y+z amount of damage for Silver, ect. This would be very simple to do, as currently, each animal/building/person, has their own 'damage' points as such, all the would be needed would be set checkpoints to achieve bronze, silver, gold and possibly perfect (destroy everything on that stage).
*Time mode would not have to reply on each block being given a price value, and thus lower the amount of tinkering, and balancing required. (Some time and effort will be required to judge how quickly a stage can be completed)
**These modes do not reply on any form of balancing on the 'price' of blocks. However, consideration and a sprinkle of creativity would be required to choose which blocks should be required/unlocked for different stages. (although, it could just be unlocked based on complexity of block Ie Basic + some weaponry -> blocks -> Armour -> ect (or a mixture of different blocks unlocked simultaneously?)
***No actual comments that have been made, they are just generalisations, please don't hurt me This system will allow players to mess around doing what ever they like without having to be restricted. Yet simultaneously, it will also allow players to put their creativity, and ingenuity, as well as any designs/ideas they've developed to the test.
Please do not simply blow off this idea if you do not like it. Please be considerate as I have spent a fair bit of time writing this.
Cheers ~Sub
Last Edit: Feb 11, 2015 12:30:37 GMT by SuburbanSB
