Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago
Ooops. Updating labels.
Original comment by wagic.jeck@gmail.com
on 23 Oct 2009 at 9:47
On further contemplation, I realize that a potential solution could be achieved
by
use of restricted card sets, ala the wiki's FeatureGameMode page. This raises
the
question, though, of how to handle the shop with restricted card sets. I'd been
kinda
assuming that your collection was static throughout all game modes, just that
some
cards would be banned, and have some graphical indicator of that in the deck
editor... and that the shop would only sell "legal" cards.
On second thought, however, this seems a bit problematic, as, for example, a
"Commons
only" set would be unable to support boosters, and other sets might make things
unbalanced in other ways. Hrm. I'll think on the issue a bit and then move some
thoughts onto the wiki.
Original comment by wagic.jeck@gmail.com
on 24 Oct 2009 at 12:04
I agree that if someone wants to play with specific sets, then limiting the
shop
selection to these sets will be more enjoyable. Otherwise the player will feel
like a lottery player who keeps drawing blanks. It's *good* (imho) to encourage
the player to make use of the cards currently displayed instead of waiting for
one or two specific cards. However, this approach breaks down when 90% of
displayed cards are unusable to the player because they come from sets that the
player doesn't want to use.
There may be other solutions to the problems though - not necessarily better
ones, but here's food for thought:
A) If the player doesn't want to play with a given set, then (instead of first
unlocking it for him and then giving him the option to ignore it) why not give
him a choice whether he wants to have this set at all? Instead of
force-unlocking
a random set, give the player the opportunity to choose one of three sets to
unlock, and offer him a money prize as fourth alternative, if none of the sets
meets his approval. This way, players can make a conscious choice with which
sets
they want to play, and there wouldn't be "unusable" sets in the shop in the
first
place.
B) Instead of unlocking a random set, award the player with a token that he can
trade for a special treat in the shop. Such a treat might be unlocking a new
set,
or getting a choice of one out of 5 rares from a given set, or free boosters,
etc. This would ensure that the player gets a reward he actually enjoys (or at
least a higher chance for that, and less of a chance to get a reward that's
actually detrimental to his enjoyment of the game.
(Thinking further about it, I come to the conclusion that the real problem is
not
that the shop has no filter for sets, but rather that the game rewards the
player
with things potentially detrimental to his enjoyment of the game.)
Original comment by Psyyri...@gmail.com
on 24 Oct 2009 at 12:11
Oh, nice! I like both of your solutions... they seem to handle the problem much
more
elegantly than an option would. I do prefer option B though. I think part of
the fun
of unlocking sets randomly is that it often /doesn't/ unlock the one you really
want.
It's that whole psychology thing about variable reward patterns, etc :)
I really, really like the idea of awarding tokens, though. Check out the email I
forwarded to you of a bit of prior gmail conversation to see something related
tangentially.
As an aside, these kind of detailed game design conversations are something that
Wololo and Jean will definitely have to be involved with before we make any
decisions. We were using gmail for that earlier, and I'm not certain whether
that or
this is a better way of tracking things... gmail is easier and more private,
but if
we'd been using the issue tracker I guess I wouldn't have to forward things :P
Original comment by wagic.jeck@gmail.com
on 24 Oct 2009 at 12:32
Moved to wiki to clear out issue tracker. See
http://wololo.net/miki/index.php/Wagic/Dev/RewardTokens
Original comment by wagic.jeck@gmail.com
on 25 Oct 2009 at 7:02
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
wagic.jeck@gmail.com
on 23 Oct 2009 at 9:44