I can't review the rm2k3 help file because of Windows Vista, but the internet says that the help file says that the skill damage algorithm is:
dmg = base + (atk/20 * Atk Influence) + (def/40 * Int Influence)
NOTE: I believe Magic Defense (MDF) = 1/8*INT. I don't know how it factors in but it does where INT is involved.
Through some experimentation, I have concluded the help file to be mistaken. When I tweaked Character DEF or Enemy DEF there was no difference in skill effect (for magic influenced skills). Therefore, I conclude the actual skill algorithm to be:
dmg = base + (atk/20 * Atk Influence) + (Int/40* Int Influence)
Still not happy with Rm2k3? I recommend upgrading to RPG Maker VX Ace anyhow, but if you can't, here's what else I recommend:
Try to imitate either "Lunar the Silver Star" or the remake "Lunar SSSC."
In the original Lunar on Sega CD, spells always did ~exact damage. The spell list for each character tended to be huge. Later spells are the stronger versions of earlier ones which become obsolete.
To do this, enter the desired damage for a particular spell into the effect rating box and make many more.
For the remake on PSX, the effectiveness of spells was clearly influenced by the characters' growing stats. Nash for instance has only 3 lightning spells instead of 11.
To do this, go into your attributes page and crank up the numbers for Magic attributes only. The C value should be 400% because INT is divided by 4.
A = 800.....the new Double
B = 600.....1.5x
C = 400.....1x or normal
D = 200.....= half
F = 100......= 1/4 (or 0 for 0)
Now, for the Skill. The skill's Effective Rating field works fine at 1. As a result, at the C value, the damage from a spell will now reflect the INT stat +/- variance.
Want some variety? Maybe you want your Fireball spell to be weaker than your Lightning Bolt spell. Create a new Magic Attribute for your Lightning Bolt spell, and set the C value for say, 500 (=1.25x stronger than Fireball!). Now, Lightning Bolt does INT*1.25 damage and Fireball does INT*1 damage. All your spells should have their own individual Attributes.
NOTE: Multiple attributes on 1 skill can get complicated.
I find that it's helpful just to set the ATK/INT influence to 10 because it simplifies the math (Wikipedia commutative property), which now looks like this:
dmg = base + (atk/20 * Atk Influence) + (Int/40* Int Influence)
dmg = base + (atk/20 * 10) + (Int/40 * 10)
dmg = base + (10/20 * atk) + (10/40 * int)
dmg = base + (1/2 * atk) + (1/4 * int)
*for magic, attack influence is 0, right? So, Dmg = base + 1/4INT.
Final formula is probably, Dmg = base + 1/4INT - 1/8INT.
Did you follow that? This is why I suggest a 4 base (400%) number system.
*This idea doesn't work for the Normal Attack algorithm (Atk/2 - Def/4 = dmg).
Atk is multiplied by 1/2. You could cancel it out by creating Weapon Attributes where the value for C is 200. Now it's Atk * 1/2 * 2; effectively Atk*1. (NOTE: The damage formula when Characters attack Enemies is now effectively dmg = ATK - DEF/2 instead of DEF/4. Whatever number is in an enemy's DEF field is halved now, not quartered.)
Here's the problem with this. Enemies do not have attributes for their normal attacks, so they will still use the old algorithm when they attack. You could improvise by giving enemies a "dummy skill" as an alternative in place of a basic attack. This means you'll see a lot more of that "SKILL NAME" window in battle. Not pretty. Also, skill accuracy is not affected if the enemy is blinded. If you do this anyway, make do with the original algorithm for enemies and adjust their stats accordingly.
Another problem is characters do not have attributes for their attacks if they are unarmed.
At least you can do some neat stuff with skills!
Friday, December 21, 2012
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Resident Evil Games
I love the original Resident Evil games. I don't like the new ones. Whenever I mention that, however, most people disagree. Some of them disagree in a manner more fiery than is rational. Once upon a time, side-scrolling platforms were in demand. These days, action games and shooters are most popular. Resident Evil is adapting to the gaming market. It hasn't sold out or betrayed anyone or anything; although, it feels like it. I'm mostly disappointed that there'll never be another game like it.
I love the classic RE games, probably for all the reasons most people don't. I love the controls for movement and fighting. I love the back tracking and ridiculous puzzles. I love the slow pacing.
I love the camera angles and inventory system. Many of these characteristics are seen as poor design, but I would like to share my perspective.
Let's start with those camera angles. People don't seem to like them. Maybe they don't understand why the game is designed this way. Resident Evil is a horror game. The camera angles are used to create atmosphere, like in a horror movie. I liked the camera angles and I never had a problem with them, even those particular ones that worked to your disadvantage. In RE games, there's going to be a monster that's just around the corner or off screen you can't see it and so you don't know how to deal with it your first time through, or even successive times through. It always felt like a fun challenge to me. You're supposed to be in spooky, unsettling places. You're suppose to be edgy and feel uncomfortable in your environment. The camera angles did a good job showing off the neat backgrounds. They were dynamic and lively. I feel a traditional, over the shoulder 3rd person or 1st person perspective would be less interesting.
How about the controls? Moving around is stiff. You move forward an back with UP and DOWN, respectively. LEFT an RIGHT do not move your character, instead, LEFT an RIGHT spin you around, reorienting the direction you face. Moving laterally in an RE game is non-existent. You can run in arcs though, by combining forward with left or right. It takes time to learn to move like this, making the game almost inaccessible to new players. There isn't much else in the way of moving or maneuvers. In an emergency, you can turn around 180* to retreat by pressing two buttons. There was also a dodge action in RE3, but it too was difficult to learn.
Also, fighting is very limited. You press and hold an AIM button to aim your weapon. You automatically lock-on to the closest enemy. Then, press the ATTACK button to fire. You can aim medium, low, or high. You cannot move and shoot at the same time, which would actually be very helpful. You could criticized these controls for being unrealistic. In real life, I can aim at specific points, not just low, medium, or high. In reality, I could also move around while I shoot.
I'll concede to these points, however, I would prefer simply altering the controls to make the same game have more intuitive controls than to do a complete overhaul and change in game design. You know, sometimes a game is fun because of what you're restricted from doing by the rules. For instance, there's no clothes-lining in basketball and no tripping in Soccer. The restrictive controls in RE games was never a problem to me. They were the rules and if something didn't go well for me because of the rules, I didn't blame them. You could also relate Resident Evil to an RPG game, where you don't actually mash buttons or enter combos, and you take turns getting hit. Not realistic, but I liked it.
Also an issue in the RE series is how come a single key takes up as much inventory space as 50 grenades or a shotgun? Another instance where abstract rules provide an interesting challenge. I can only carry 8 different items at once, simple. Maybe you can over think these things?
Also, don't knock the stupid puzzles. I love the stupid puzzles. You're exploring functionally strange environments thought up by wealthy, eccentric, and paranoid kooks; Basically it's a fun-house level before a secret science lab level. I dig it. Remember, RE is Horror. These strange puzzles add to the atmosphere. Solving puzzles also involves collecting stuff. I love collecting stuff. I love collecting stuff while managing limited inventory space; balancing weapons, ammo, medicine, keys, and McGuffins.
This leads the slow pacing and backtracking aspects of the gameplay. You're an armed soldier in hostile territory, but it's not an action game. Classic RE games were strategy games. Killing monsters was one aspect of the game, and the programmers did intend for you to find creative means to avoid confrontations. Ammo is scarce, and sometimes you're better off taking a few hits than killing something. Half the game is solving a mystery, half of it is survival. A slow pace can generate suspense. Backtracking eventually puts you back in dangerous situations. There's also a risk of getting lost, but I suppose most people felt that was more frustrating than scary?
I wish I could make games, because I'd make my own versions of all the old games I used to play. Why don't I take an interest in the new gen games? The short version is I don't feel like it. I still haven't played RE 4 or 5, and I'm not interested.
I love the classic RE games, probably for all the reasons most people don't. I love the controls for movement and fighting. I love the back tracking and ridiculous puzzles. I love the slow pacing.
I love the camera angles and inventory system. Many of these characteristics are seen as poor design, but I would like to share my perspective.
Let's start with those camera angles. People don't seem to like them. Maybe they don't understand why the game is designed this way. Resident Evil is a horror game. The camera angles are used to create atmosphere, like in a horror movie. I liked the camera angles and I never had a problem with them, even those particular ones that worked to your disadvantage. In RE games, there's going to be a monster that's just around the corner or off screen you can't see it and so you don't know how to deal with it your first time through, or even successive times through. It always felt like a fun challenge to me. You're supposed to be in spooky, unsettling places. You're suppose to be edgy and feel uncomfortable in your environment. The camera angles did a good job showing off the neat backgrounds. They were dynamic and lively. I feel a traditional, over the shoulder 3rd person or 1st person perspective would be less interesting.
How about the controls? Moving around is stiff. You move forward an back with UP and DOWN, respectively. LEFT an RIGHT do not move your character, instead, LEFT an RIGHT spin you around, reorienting the direction you face. Moving laterally in an RE game is non-existent. You can run in arcs though, by combining forward with left or right. It takes time to learn to move like this, making the game almost inaccessible to new players. There isn't much else in the way of moving or maneuvers. In an emergency, you can turn around 180* to retreat by pressing two buttons. There was also a dodge action in RE3, but it too was difficult to learn.
Also, fighting is very limited. You press and hold an AIM button to aim your weapon. You automatically lock-on to the closest enemy. Then, press the ATTACK button to fire. You can aim medium, low, or high. You cannot move and shoot at the same time, which would actually be very helpful. You could criticized these controls for being unrealistic. In real life, I can aim at specific points, not just low, medium, or high. In reality, I could also move around while I shoot.
I'll concede to these points, however, I would prefer simply altering the controls to make the same game have more intuitive controls than to do a complete overhaul and change in game design. You know, sometimes a game is fun because of what you're restricted from doing by the rules. For instance, there's no clothes-lining in basketball and no tripping in Soccer. The restrictive controls in RE games was never a problem to me. They were the rules and if something didn't go well for me because of the rules, I didn't blame them. You could also relate Resident Evil to an RPG game, where you don't actually mash buttons or enter combos, and you take turns getting hit. Not realistic, but I liked it.
Also an issue in the RE series is how come a single key takes up as much inventory space as 50 grenades or a shotgun? Another instance where abstract rules provide an interesting challenge. I can only carry 8 different items at once, simple. Maybe you can over think these things?
Also, don't knock the stupid puzzles. I love the stupid puzzles. You're exploring functionally strange environments thought up by wealthy, eccentric, and paranoid kooks; Basically it's a fun-house level before a secret science lab level. I dig it. Remember, RE is Horror. These strange puzzles add to the atmosphere. Solving puzzles also involves collecting stuff. I love collecting stuff. I love collecting stuff while managing limited inventory space; balancing weapons, ammo, medicine, keys, and McGuffins.
This leads the slow pacing and backtracking aspects of the gameplay. You're an armed soldier in hostile territory, but it's not an action game. Classic RE games were strategy games. Killing monsters was one aspect of the game, and the programmers did intend for you to find creative means to avoid confrontations. Ammo is scarce, and sometimes you're better off taking a few hits than killing something. Half the game is solving a mystery, half of it is survival. A slow pace can generate suspense. Backtracking eventually puts you back in dangerous situations. There's also a risk of getting lost, but I suppose most people felt that was more frustrating than scary?
I wish I could make games, because I'd make my own versions of all the old games I used to play. Why don't I take an interest in the new gen games? The short version is I don't feel like it. I still haven't played RE 4 or 5, and I'm not interested.
Friday, November 23, 2012
Cartoons Suck!
Cartoons suck now. It's not me and it's not because I'm an adult.
When it comes to cartoons of my past, there's lots I could talk about. I watched a lot of Cartoon Network, although many other kids bounced back and forth from Fox Kids, Kids WB, Family, Nickelodeon, and Disney (anything else?).
Cartoons today do not have what I want. There's a new Looney Tunes show. I don't understand this, Looney Tunes is a sitcom now? Please. I love Looney Tunes for the violence, absurdity, and samples of an older culture. Daffy Duck an Bugs Bunny are roomies in a house instead of a hole in the ground or a pond. I could shit.
I think the biggest crime of all is the new Tom an Jerry show, Tom & Jerry Tales. Tom and Jerry aren't violent anymore! Are you kidding me? Someone, please! Please give me the rights to this stuff! This is really painful for me. If Tom & Jerry is too violent for kids today, than for the love of humanity, make Tom & Jerry for adults! Put it on HBO or Showtime. Bring back traditional 2D animation. Bring back the guns, knives, poisons, explosives, boards with a nail sticking out, alcohol, cigars, red-hot fireplace pokers, frying pans, hammers, bug spray, mouse traps, broken glass, tacks on the floor, Ruth Goldberg Machines, and other easily-imitated violent acts. Tom & Jerry should be violent and even a little dark! I can't believe this!
Although, Phineas and Ferb is pretty good. It's gotten stale though.
When it comes to cartoons of my past, there's lots I could talk about. I watched a lot of Cartoon Network, although many other kids bounced back and forth from Fox Kids, Kids WB, Family, Nickelodeon, and Disney (anything else?).
Cartoons today do not have what I want. There's a new Looney Tunes show. I don't understand this, Looney Tunes is a sitcom now? Please. I love Looney Tunes for the violence, absurdity, and samples of an older culture. Daffy Duck an Bugs Bunny are roomies in a house instead of a hole in the ground or a pond. I could shit.
I think the biggest crime of all is the new Tom an Jerry show, Tom & Jerry Tales. Tom and Jerry aren't violent anymore! Are you kidding me? Someone, please! Please give me the rights to this stuff! This is really painful for me. If Tom & Jerry is too violent for kids today, than for the love of humanity, make Tom & Jerry for adults! Put it on HBO or Showtime. Bring back traditional 2D animation. Bring back the guns, knives, poisons, explosives, boards with a nail sticking out, alcohol, cigars, red-hot fireplace pokers, frying pans, hammers, bug spray, mouse traps, broken glass, tacks on the floor, Ruth Goldberg Machines, and other easily-imitated violent acts. Tom & Jerry should be violent and even a little dark! I can't believe this!
Although, Phineas and Ferb is pretty good. It's gotten stale though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)