Revert to the 1-up counter for players

[Rusty-Box]

This might become a controversial idea but:

Instead of having the complicated coin math, percentage mumbo jumbo, the game should revert back to the 1-up counter for players. However, incase the idea of adding shops still is being consitered for the future the coin counter should not be limited to only 100 coins.

Depending over the game's overall difficulty every 100 coins can reward the player with an extra 1-up besides the Tux doll (i.e. if the game would end up too easy it would only make things worse... but I assume that is not the case here).

[weluvgoatz]

I am strongly against this idea. A one-up counter seems like it will make the game more complicated than it already is. Also, the 1-up counter is one of the things that confused me the most about 0.1.3, because it was unclear what would happen when the 1-up counter reached zero. In my opinion, it will be better if the coin deduction "mumbo jumbo" is just removed, because I still like collecting coins for the sake of having something collectible and countable.

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:19 PM Carsten Wirtz notifications@github.com wrote:

This might become a contoversial idea but:

Instead of having the complicated coin math, percentage mumbo jumbo, the game should revert back to the 1-up counter for players. However, incase the idea of adding shops still is being consitered for the future the coin counter should not be limited to only 100 coins. Depending over the game's overall difficulty every 100 coins can reward the player with an extra 1-up besides the Tux doll (i.e. if the game would end up too easy it would only make things worse... but I assume that is not the case here).

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SuperTux/supertux/issues/1293?email_source=notifications&email_token=AJPWEMSQ3UGRHPYLHKXCQO3QZ7RWFA5CNFSM4J6NX7Y2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4ICGYDBA, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJPWEMUYVCOGMA2R4DDMNBTQZ7RWFANCNFSM4J6NX7YQ .

[weluvgoatz]

Also, weren't 1-ups directly related to the lives system, which is something that was considered a rejected feature forever?

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:23 PM Daniel the Degenerate weluvgoatz@gmail.com wrote:

I am strongly against this idea. A one-up counter seems like it will make the game more complicated than it already is. Also, the 1-up counter is one of the things that confused me the most about 0.1.3, because it was unclear what would happen when the 1-up counter reached zero. In my opinion, it will be better if the coin deduction "mumbo jumbo" is just removed, because I still like collecting coins for the sake of having something collectible and countable.

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:19 PM Carsten Wirtz notifications@github.com wrote:

This might become a contoversial idea but:

Instead of having the complicated coin math, percentage mumbo jumbo, the game should revert back to the 1-up counter for players. However, incase the idea of adding shops still is being consitered for the future the coin counter should not be limited to only 100 coins. Depending over the game's overall difficulty every 100 coins can reward the player with an extra 1-up besides the Tux doll (i.e. if the game would end up too easy it would only make things worse... but I assume that is not the case here).

— You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SuperTux/supertux/issues/1293?email_source=notifications&email_token=AJPWEMSQ3UGRHPYLHKXCQO3QZ7RWFA5CNFSM4J6NX7Y2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFUVEXG43VMWVGG33NNVSW45C7NFSM4ICGYDBA, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJPWEMUYVCOGMA2R4DDMNBTQZ7RWFANCNFSM4J6NX7YQ .

[Rusty-Box]

Also, weren't 1-ups directly related to the lives system, which is something that was considered a rejected feature forever?

Possibly, I don't know. Most likely I wasn't around at that time so I'm unaware of that statement if that's true.

A one-up counter seems like it will make the game more complicated than it already is.

Is it really? 2 lifes -> You die -> 1 life left etc.?

[weluvgoatz]

But what about when the lives counter reaches zero?

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:28 PM Carsten Wirtz notifications@github.com wrote:

Also, weren't 1-ups directly related to the lives system, which is something that was considered a rejected feature forever? Possibly, I don't know. Most likely I wasn't around at that time so I'm unaware of that statement if that's true. A one-up counter seems like it will make the game more complicated than it already is. Is it really? 2 lifes -> You die -> 1 life left etc.?

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SuperTux/supertux/issues/1293?email_source=notifications&email_token=AJPWEMUYO3DECF73KTI4LQ3QZ7SZJA5CNFSM4J6NX7Y2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEHP3EHI#issuecomment-568308253, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJPWEMQV4G35AWLHWLD2JKLQZ7SZJANCNFSM4J6NX7YQ .

[Rusty-Box]

In my opinion, it will be better if the coin deduction "mumbo jumbo" is just removed, because I still like collecting coins for the sake of having something collectible and countable.

So no lifes, no coins related to checkpoint restarts? A bit too easy isn't it? ATleast for my taste.

But what about when the lives counter reaches zero?

Game Over? Like... in every other game that uses this mechanic? You will replay the level again from the very beginning. Like already handled when you have no coins or less then 25, I believe.

[Rusty-Box]

Maybe get kickout back to the world map first so you need to re enter the level first.

[weluvgoatz]

Well "Game Over" doesn't work well in my opinion because 1) It sounds like you must restart the game if you run out of lives, which is misleading and 2) Having to restart from just the beginning of a level is a bit tame if you must have a "Game Over" and "Lives" screen.

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:34 PM Carsten Wirtz notifications@github.com wrote:

Maybe get kickout back to the world map first so you need to re enter the level first.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SuperTux/supertux/issues/1293?email_source=notifications&email_token=AJPWEMTARZAW75RW6NS4ON3QZ7TOPA5CNFSM4J6NX7Y2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEHP3HNI#issuecomment-568308661, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJPWEMSM5QSBA575H3VLKTDQZ7TOPANCNFSM4J6NX7YQ .

[weluvgoatz]

And if the "Game Over" penalty works exactly how the coin deduction currently works, then what's the point of readding that penalty to begin with?

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:36 PM Daniel the Degenerate weluvgoatz@gmail.com wrote:

Well "Game Over" doesn't work well in my opinion because 1) It sounds like you must restart the game if you run out of lives, which is misleading and 2) Having to restart from just the beginning of a level is a bit tame if you must have a "Game Over" and "Lives" screen.

On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 2:34 PM Carsten Wirtz notifications@github.com wrote:

Maybe get kickout back to the world map first so you need to re enter the level first.

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/SuperTux/supertux/issues/1293?email_source=notifications&email_token=AJPWEMTARZAW75RW6NS4ON3QZ7TOPA5CNFSM4J6NX7Y2YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEHP3HNI#issuecomment-568308661, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AJPWEMSM5QSBA575H3VLKTDQZ7TOPANCNFSM4J6NX7YQ .

[Rusty-Box]

We could go for a more "extreme" approch which would be: Game Over = Restard an entire world. But in general the lifes main prupose would be to allow you to restart after dying from a checkpoint instead of the very beginning so it is somewhat punishing. (like the coin count right now, but imo it is too vague and made unnecessarily complicated).

That's how it goes in many jump 'n' runs/platformers.

[Rusty-Box]

Why use random 25 coins as a limit for a checkpoint restart if it is more easily communicated to a player that they cannot go below 1 life when wanting to restart from a checkpoint.

[Rusty-Box]

I just noticed that right now coins don't even get reduced upon dying which makes them not even work as a life count alternative right now.

[Ordoviz]

IMHO Tux should always respawn at checkpoints but dying should cost 10% of your coins. The coins can then used for something different like a shop.

So no lifes, no coins related to checkpoint restarts? A bit too easy isn't it? Atleast for my taste.

No, the difficulty should arise from the platforming. Farming lives or coins is not difficult, just time-investing.

That's how it goes in many jump 'n' runs/platformers.

That's how it goes in many old jump 'n' runs/platformers. Celeste is a great example for a very hard modern platformer. I has permanent checkpoints after every room but the rooms themselves are really hard. For the ultimate challenge you can try getting golden straw berries though that you get when you complete a level without dying.

The golden strawberry equivalent of SuperTux is to max out all stats for a level and get a flashing level dot.

Related: #556

[Rusty-Box]

@Ordoviz Not a bad argument. Going for a modern approach might actually be more beneficial. But maybe have Tux only loose the coins he gathered before a next checkpoint or level goal has been reached to make it a bit more fair. Like in Celeste, the strawberry collectibles are saved once you landed safely. You don’t loose them again after dying unless you die during the process of getting it.

[Zwatotem]

So you suggest coin counter state to be saved and permanent checkpoint on every bell? I feel then it dethrones a level form the role of basic division of the game, that one needs to be able to walk through at once (or with only few mistakes) to proceed. I would like to have some form of warranty, that level was played smoothly, not tryharded, before the next one can be started.

Also for the coins: Leaving them as currency you can only earn, not spend makes little sense. If we leave them with no way to be lost, they should remain as one-time collectibles, to encourage players to get them all.

[Rusty-Box]

Also for the coins: Leaving them as currency you can only earn, not spend makes little sense. If we leave them with no way to be lost, they should remain as one-time collectibles, to encourage players to get them all.

There is the idea for an item shop (like a toad house) where coins can be spend on powerups or other goods like tips on the locations of secret exits (a feature that is considered for v0.7)

[HybridDog]

We could add a number next to the coins number which shows how many times Tux can die and respawn at the checkpoint without collecting coins between the deaths. Calculating this number mentally is too difficult I think (enthusiastic players may remember the coin thresholds up to 10 deaths by hard).

If we want to use coins for a shop and do not like that coins disappear when dying, we could save the lost coins as another number. The shop could offer goods for which the player has to pay regular and lost coins.

[Alzter]

The checkpoint coin deduction idea is stupid in my opinion. It's literally just lives but more complicated, and you need to pull out a calculator to check how many you have left. As for replacing coin deduction with a lives counter, I don't know. Reverting to lives would make things a lot simpler but maybe we should just get rid of limited continues altogether, as after all lives are a bit of an archaic concept and having the player get punished for dying too much on a hard level and lose their checkpoint doesn't sound very fun, and some hard levels like the Grandmaster Journey already compensate for lives by giving you 100 coins at every checkpoint.

[busybody42]

NO... I think lives make it more like a generic mario clone... and that's boring... and that's terrible! Stick to coins! Maybe, we could have a mechanic, where dying without being able to pay for a respawn at a checkpoint will make you respawn at the PREVIOUS checkpoint hit, and forgetting about the one you just hit... so you'll lose progress, if you can't afford a respawn, but not ALL progress!

[busybody42]

also, using the item shop is risk and reward Do you risk getting a new powerup safely, but guarantee the loss of coins, and making it more likely to run out of coins for the next checkpoint? Or do you try to find the same powerup in a previous level, and risk losing it before the end, or dying and losing coins anyways? It's your choice.

[Alzter]

@busybody42 That just sounds even MORE confusing and complicated, and most story levels only have one checkpoint to begin with.

Tweaking random game mechanics just for the sake of "not being a Mario clone" with no true benefit to the gameplay doesn't improve anything, and I think the coin deduction only complicates the lives system to nobody's benefit. At least revert it to lives.

[busybody42]

Lives were pointless... you should know if you played milestone 1 before to the end... (stupid milestone 1 Miyamoto Monument, however that's spelled) At least make the coins useful for more than lives, if they're added...

[Alzter]

At least make the coins useful for more than lives, if they're added...

I say we remove the coin deduction and instead make a powerup shop in the worldmap that lets you buy powerups for the coins you earn. (Maybe even add some new powerups so we can get a bit more than just the existing four?)

[busybody42]

(Like this one: A hard hat that lets tux use a hammer, and a cape (based off of revenge in redmond supertux) that lets him use a spin attack)

[Alzter]

...A hard hat that lets tux use a hammer

...generic mario clone... and that's boring... and that's terrible!

So you're okay with copying Mario ideas (Super Hammer from SMM2) but not game mechanics (lives counter) that are much less specific to just Mario? Confusing. Anyway bringing back the Redmond cape sounds cool, but maybe it could do more than just a SMW like spin attack. Ideas anyone?

[Ordoviz]

If anyone has an idea for a new powerup, he or she should post on the forum. This issue is about choosing between

• a coin system (status quo),
• a live system, and
• always respawning

[HybridDog]

You could show the number of respawns next to the coins. Did I calculate this correctly?

#!/usr/bin/env luajit

local function count_lives(coins)
    if coins < 25 then
        return 0
    end
    coins = coins - math.max(math.floor(coins / 10), 25);
    return 1 + count_lives(coins)
end

local t = {{0, 0}}
local lives = 0
for coins = 1,100000 do
    local l = count_lives(coins)
    if l > lives then
        lives = l
        t[#t+1] = {coins, lives}
    end
end

for i = 1,#t-1 do
    local coins_min = t[i][1]
    local coins_max = t[i+1][1]-1
    local lives = t[i][2]
    print(coins_min .. " - " .. coins_max .. " | " .. lives)
end

coins range	respawns
0 - 24	0
25 - 49	1
50 - 74	2
75 - 99	3
100 - 124	4
125 - 149	5
150 - 174	6
175 - 199	7
200 - 224	8
225 - 249	9
250 - 276	10
277 - 306	11
307 - 340	12
341 - 377	13
378 - 418	14
419 - 464	15
465 - 515	16
516 - 572	17
573 - 635	18
636 - 705	19
706 - 783	20
784 - 870	21
871 - 966	22
967 - 1073	23
1074 - 1192	24
1193 - 1324	25
1325 - 1471	26
1472 - 1634	27
1635 - 1815	28
1816 - 2016	29
2017 - 2240	30
2241 - 2488	31
2489 - 2764	32
2765 - 3071	33
3072 - 3412	34
3413 - 3791	35
3792 - 4212	36
4213 - 4680	37
4681 - 5200	38
5201 - 5777	39
5778 - 6418	40
6419 - 7131	41
7132 - 7923	42
7924 - 8803	43
8804 - 9781	44
9782 - 9999	45

Edit: I forgot the MAX_COINS

[busybody42]

gasp

[Rusty-Box]

It has been decided again the concept of lives as well as removing the link between coins and checkpoint respawning. See #1410