Print

Please login or register.

1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever

Login with username, password and session length

[Demetrious]

you might come off as a little less hostile if you reined in some of the metaphor.

I laud them as "ninjas" who's exploits are spoken of in tones of awe and I'm coming across as hostile? I honestly apologize. I never want people to read hostility in my tone unless I explicitly intend it.

If you're complaining about having to learn a new set of commands to play a game, and you can't be bothered to script your own custom commands, then you probably should go back to Call of Duty.

2DeviationsOUt, I wish to explicitly express great hostility to you. I'm a lifelong Roguelike player, Multi-User-Dungeon player and simulation gamer. I play IL-2 as often as I'm able, and IL-2 has dozens of critical controls completely unscripted - no default keys, you've got to set them up yourself, and best be hoping you've set keys for opening your canopy, raising your seat, engaging/disengaging wheel chocks and manually cranking up your landing gear if you ever want to look sideways at an F-3F Wildcat. It's even more fun with Complex Engine Management; enjoy setting up keys for mixture control, prop pitch and radiator flaps. Let's not forget bombsight controls; increase/decrease speed, altitude, target altitude, adjust bombsight angle, toggle auto mode. Like most adults with a paying job I can't "study" a game so obsessively that even compensating for UI quirks becomes flawless, unconscious muscle reflex - but you might say I've scripted a few commands.

And unlike a Roguelike, you're using all these keys in extremely "fast and furious" combat; e.g. "closing with a Bf-109 in a head-on merge at 700 combined MPH" fast, making snap judgements on speed, angles, energy, potential energy and positioning as you think ten steps ahead in about a second and a half.

So try to appreciate just how much it pisses me off to have you telling me to "go back to Call of Duty." Because I complained about "having to learn a new set of commands." I've got a $40 copy of Shaw's Fighter Combat sitting on my desk - that's a textbook still used to teach actual fighter pilots how to fly. I learned how to play submarine simulators by reading books written by WWII submarine commanders. "Learn a new set of commands?" Chum, I do homework for my games.

So when I, of all people, say a particular user interface can be a pain in the ass, you may consider that a statement.

I feel that a lot of the complaints about randomness/interface are actually barely disguised complaints about difficulty.

Despite some very succinct explanations meant to counter that exact accusation:

Yes, we must distinguish between conscious gameplay decisions and unintentional actions input into the program because of human/machine interface issues.

However, this isn't fair. I'm new here, after all; quite likely this is a recurring thread oft filled with the bitter tears of newbies whom did not fathom that the "Living Hell" part of Doom RL was not entirely metaphorical. So even though nobody in this thread is whining about difficulty levels, you just jumped the gun and spoke directly to the typical root of most UI complaints. I get that.

But please understand that not everyone raising these concerns are "new/casuals" who need to "learn to play," and so glibly blowing them off as such while you talk down to them might really, really, really rustle their jimmies.

I thank you for your consideration.

[Murkglow]

Ummm you wonder why you come off as "hostile" (or at the least unsympathetic) when you say stuff like this?

I'm an adult, you know? I've got a job, and responsibilities, and the paperwork and everything. I have enough time to play games but not enough time to make a fucking study of them. Which is exactly why I don't play Nethack anymore; games I used to play when I was a basement-dwelling CHUD of the highest order.

You diamond-badge earning Roguelike ninas; I respect and fear your skills. We surface-dwellers may speak glibly, but at night we tell of your exploits in awed whispers. But at the moment, the price of following your steps is too high.

Not only does the "awe" and "ninja" stuff come off as sarcastic and perhaps mocking but just prior to that you basically say that people who do actually take the time to think about what they are doing and not spam the "r" key are "basement-dwelling CHUD"s with no jobs, responsibilities, and the like.  Not everyone who plays the game and handles the situations that are being brought up here lack a real life nor does not spamming the "r" key (or not walking into lava) equal making a study of the game.  Simple common sense and a smidge of restraint handle that just fine.

This kind of stuff, plus comments (from other posters) about "Forget Strategy.  This is about fun" and "Let the game take care of the safety" are the reason your position comes off as complaining and likely what provoked the "Go back to Call of Duty" response.

[Matt_S]

I feel that a lot of the complaints about randomness/interface are actually barely disguised complaints about difficulty.

I'm just going to come out and say this: I don't think you know what you're talking about.  I know now that I'm not a good player, though I used to think otherwise.  Sometimes walk into lava because my fingers are misplaced, and sometimes I accidentally hit i+u and waste an item, and sometimes I don't notice that an enemy has appeared and I take another step or reload another shell, and in the past I used to hit f without realizing I didn't have any ammo and I'd walk instead of aim.  But that's not why I'm a bad player.  I could name a ton of reasons, among them the fact that I can hardly play anything but overpowered melee builds nowadays, and that I'm still awkward with corner shooting, and that I don't handle being surrounded well at all, and that I don't know how to manage my inventory when I do have to carry a lot of ammo, and that I'm not very good at using any chainfire weapons.  Sparing me those input accidents won't make me a good player, but it'll make things a lot less frustrating.

[LuckyDee]

So when I, of all people, say a particular user interface can be a pain in the ass, you may consider that a statement.

I disagree with 2Deviations as well, in that this is not a difficulty issue. I do, however, find it hard to conceal my amazement at the 'interface issues'. As I mentioned to Napsterbater, yes this game is Doom and yes this game is not. In fact, in a lot of respects it comes really close to chess. The run command issues (and comparable) put aside, the faster you play, the more likely it will be that you'll make mistakes - you'll press the wrong key, press 2 at the same time, etc. I got slaughtered by 2 Revenants yesterday when I miscounted my ammo and stepped out from cover thinking I was aiming for a cornershoot.

The only reason I died was because I was going too fast: no one was urging me on, there was no clock ticking away, and dinner wasn't getting cold. I wasn't paying enough attention and pressed the wrong keys - and paid for it.

Back to chess: you can (and will) guess at what your opponent's next move(s) are going to be, and plan a few of your own ahead accordingly. If you then execute these planned moves without bothering to check if your guess at the countermoves was more or less correct, you, generally speaking, are a great big nincumpoop. And without wanting to be offensive, the remark that started this discussion ('I pressed 'r' 5 times in a row without thinking') falls smack dead in the middle of this category.

So, in summary:
* Actual design flaws in the game should be rectified. So far, I've seen none discussed in this thread.
* Interface errors are more or less non-existent - I can point out a few, be not enough to start complaining about them. I agree that either a numpad or custom bindings are vital, but the result will always be Press This Key - Watch That Happen. All you need to do is make sure you know what the keys do, and press them in the right order.
* If you use the 'run' function instead of thinking for yourself - which in my perception makes no difference in the time it takes, unless you want to make coffee while Doomguy does the running - don't complain if it doesn't think like you do. In my opinion, it shouldn't think at all, and drop you straight into a pool of lava if it happens to be in the way.
* If you want to play fast, don't complain if you're fingers are faster than your eyes. The game wasn't built for speed, it was built for strategy. Live fast, die young.

All this aside, if you feel changes to the game should be made - as Matt demonstrated - go ahead; as long as I don't have to pay the price for having a different style of play than someone else, you won't hear me moaning about any 'improvements'. And additionally: great discussion. Lots of input from lots of people, nice to see how everyone experience the game.

[Ashannar]

I think 2DeviationsOut is right on the money.

The one thing I'd disagree with him on is that he thinks NetHack is less forgiving than DoomRL. I get that I'm kind of new to this game, and that very may well be why I think this way, but.. I don't know. He brought up the E-word. That mitigates 90%+ damage in that game, effortlessly. I sure wish I had E in this game. I will surely concede that something like an illiterate atheist NetHack ascension is much harder than most DoomRL badges, but not all or even many by a longshot.

[Napsterbater]

It's utterly ridiculous to say that DoomRL has the best interface of any roguelike. Full-stop. The three other roguelikes mentioned in this thread have been in continuous development for 17+ years, by teams much larger than DoomRL's.

And could we please save the flames for the cacodemons?

2dev, you like DoomRL's game mechanics. That's great, so do I. I don't currently play any other roguelike. Angband takes too long to get started and I don't last long enough on the interesting parts. It takes 2-3 hours of fast gameplay to get deep enough where you start finding the cooler items/monsters. Then I maybe last half an hour or so before I die. Too much buildup. Don't take this as a complaint against Angband. If I had oodles of time to while away, I would play Angband. On the whole, it's the better game, believe it or not. Most of Angband's *variants* are better than DoomRL, the top-shelf ones, anyway.

I put up with DoomRL and the sillier of its design decisions because it's the roguelike I can take a break with. It's a game I don't have to do any real mental heavy-lifting to play. It's fun even when I die. Dying is not fun in Angband. I can stare at the tombstone for 5 minutes before I clear the screen.

I don't think you're quite understanding my complaint, nor of the others who've voiced support for my proposed changes.

I get difficulty. I don't like games that aren't difficult. I play DoomRL because every single Wii game I've ever played was shit. The console world hasn't seen a difficult game since the Super Nintendo. Easy games are not fun. I expect a learning curve from every game I play. I expect a slow buildup of skill. I just don't think that certain things are skills. Taking any more time than it takes to form a tactical plan to move is not a skill. It's a waste of time that detracts from the real game.

I get game balance. I don't complain about the five or so early levels which are more perilous than the last fifteen. Because I can see how difficult it is to balance all that out. Making the first levels more interesting while being easier than the rest is, well, I'm not even sure it's possible. You either get tedium like in Angband, or painful difficulty/randomness like in DoomRL. Not a lot of middle ground.

Before you make more blanket statements about how you assume I play the game, check back to the three requests I made and actually look at what I'm suggesting. I started this thread looking for ideas, not just to complain. I don't see how fixing interface problems makes the game easier. In fact, it can open the way for making the actual game even harder, through monster AI improvements or whatnot, which I would welcome. I've been following roguelike development cycles for a few years now, mostly Angband's. They devote a lot of time to streamlining the interface. And it shows.

[Napsterbater]

The game wasn't built for speed, it was built for strategy.

Can we dispense with this nonsense? People keep saying this without anything to back it up. It says right there on the DoomRL homepage:

"DoomRL (Doom, the Roguelike) is a fast and furious coffee-break Roguelike game, that is heavily inspired by the popular FPS game Doom by ID Software."

If you don't have the skills to play fast, then don't. But don't attack us for wanting to play fast and finding that the interface isn't as well-suited to it as it could be.

[LuckyDee]

Isn't this all just a matter of misguided expectations? If you have problems with the interface, which was built for strategy, aren't you playing the wrong game? I mean, extremely oversimplified this is like playing simcity and complaining that the firepower of your residential area is lacking. I mean, with a lot of games it's fun to play them differently than intended, but if it doesn't work, I think you're barking up the wrong tree.

[Napsterbater]

Do you know the difference between strategy and tactics? There is no strategy involved in DoomRL, save that of choosing an advancement path.

[Ashannar]

I put up with DoomRL and the sillier of its design decisions because it's the roguelike I can take a break with. It's a game I don't have to do any real mental heavy-lifting to play. It's fun even when I die. Dying is not fun in Angband. I can stare at the tombstone for 5 minutes before I clear the screen.

You say that as though a guy can't faceroll through any roguelike until he dies without doing any mental heavy-lifting. But how many platinum and diamond badges has facerolling gotten you lately?

I guess what I'm saying is I don't see DoomRL's typical characterization as a 'light' roguelike as particularly meaningful. A game takes an hour or two as opposed to 8+, but what does it matter if I play eight times as much? Every action I take in DoomRL seems to matter a lot more than in most roguelikes. The gameplay elements all work together to support each other. A few core concepts combine to form a very rich and satisfying experience, which is something that most other roguelikes never capture. A lot of them feel like a lot of 'cool' stuff slapped together.

And don't get me started on the difficulty/badge progression in DoomRL. It's absolutely unmatched in the RL world. It complements this tendency to play more games fantastically by rewarding devotion in addition to skill. Whizkid gets better with age, as I gradually find more and more schematics. The XP/rank system, though maybe minor to some, is a really nice touch to me. I like how it rewards time put in as well as raw ability. It's always interesting to see how some people get a high rank in one but not the other.

Yeah, I rambled a bit. I guess the takeaway here is I don't like these subtle jabs I sometimes see about DoomRL being less 'deep' than other roguelikes. I don't agree at all.

[LuckyDee]

Do you know the difference between strategy and tactics? There is no strategy involved in DoomRL, save that of choosing an advancement path.

How can you state this after starting this discussion based on the fact that you require DoomRL to think for you instead of doing it for yourself? It's not that there's no strategy involved, it's just that you can't be bothered to figure it out and would rather do a mad dash to the finishline instead.

[Creepy]

He's talking about strategy and tactics as military ideas; strategy as in goals in an operational sense versus tactics being small-scale manuevering and whatnot to achieve short-term goals. The fact that even the people that want the game to require doubled keystrokes or a speed governor to stop you from going too fast wouldn't use the terms in a military sense because DoomRL isn't a military campaign isn't really something he's caught yet. I get the impression that's trying REALLY hard to show that he knows more stuff so that his opinion sounds more educated.

Honestly, the whole "The frontpage says FAST AND FURIOUS so I want a thing in place to stop me from going so fast that I make mistakes because that's not FAST AND FURIOUS" doesn't really help his cause. I like Matt and Demetrious' arguments; they don't claim the idea is to be FAST AND FURIOUS (And how the inputs forcing you to slow down is supposed to be FAST AND FURIOUS is simply beyond our slow-playing ability to understand). They at least just go with stuff like "I've got butterfingers sometimes and would like the game to not jump on me for it" and whatnot instead. Even if you disagree with that, it actually makes sense, as opposed to the weird "It's not FAST AND FURIOUS enough if the game doesn't stop me" argument.

[Cotonou]

When someone questions our collective abilities to distinguish between strategy and tactics, this thread is over.

[Pricklyman]

When someone questions our collective abilities to distinguish between strategy and tactics, this thread is over.

The thread was over when the ideas stopped coming and the flames were kindled.

Which was a while back...No offense guys, but seriously...

[Malek Deneith]

Moderation: It was brought to my attention that this thread is getting nasty. While I still have to review it to see who was at fault and how much I'd like to remind everybody involved to play civil and keep it cool.

Update: After reading through the thread I must admit to having difficulties as to figuring out at which point you've managed to pass from "heated discussion" towards "open flame". As such I am going to proceed as follows:

1) This thread is getting locked, at least for the time being, to avoid further escalation
2) As soon as I get contact with other people high-up this thread is getting forwarded to them for further evaluation
3) Regardless of results of #2 I'd like to remind everybody involved to cool thier heads. Continuing the hostilities elsewhere on the forums would be... unwise.