View Full Version : "Randomized Loot"
It would be possible to have randomized loot, so every time you played a THIEF mission, it would be different. This would be better for replayablility. You could have a mix of fixed primary loot (which makes sense for intelligent placement) and randomized secondary loot.
I think it is time that we voted on whether to have the randomized loot feature in THIEF IV. please read the thread "Death to the loot stat" (http://forums.eidosgames.com/showthread.php?t=89522) if you haven't already before voting.
Here is an excellent example illustrated by Platinumoxity:
http://img229.imageshack.us/img229/8582/aarre.png
Yes!
+2 :thumb:
But...!
With different randomized loot that makes sense for the randomized locations to which they are assigned, and not all possible loot locations will always have loot, but mainly in the CITY maps, which should have much more world surrounding the mission location to really randomize where and what (the type of random loot is always appropriate for where it's found). These randomized loot items are well above and beyond the mission objectives and have no bearing on the mission, nor impact the next mission, by design. It's not possible, this way, to feel gypped, and it's always possible to clean out the entire map and gloat.
ToMegaTherion
08-05-2009, 12:08 AM
No option for "no preference"? :(
Not only loot should be randomized like this, but also placement of some AIs.
The devs would continue to place loot items at locations as the story they want to tell dictates. Sometimes, however, the dev may choose instead to place a Spawn-Marker at a location, assigned to a pool of objects for the appropriate type of location.
The system would have some similarities to how an AI is assigned a randomized set of voice-files per condition.
In this case, the Spawn-Marker would be assigned to a set of objects to randomly choose from. These object "schemas" would be written in NotePad (or current dev equivalent) and would be a set of loot object lists and conditions, just like the sound schemas are sets of grouped filenames and conditions.
The listings would have a main heading setup like this arbitrary example...
BEDROOMS/BARRACKS:
Female Commoner
Male Commoner
Female Guard/Watchman
Male Guard/Watchman
Female Servant
Male Servant
Female Noble
Male Noble
Female Pagan
Male Pagan
Hammer
And subgroups like Armoire, Chest, Nightstand, etc. And beneath those would be the magic list of precious items that would make sense to be found in those locations.
Once again, the devs could always choose to place a regular loot item in a spot to tell a story. A dev could deliberately place a silk scarf on a pillow intentionally, for instance, and not use the Spawn-Marker.
A further example for a Noble's bedroom in general, one could find a silk scarf or silver cuff-links somewhere. And for the Nightstand subgroup, one might find gold-rimmed reading glasses, or a gilded book, or both.
Keep in mind the devs can still place regular loot anywhere they want to have it always appear for the story they want to tell--such as the child who wrote of hiding her jade comb... it would always be there.
As with the sound schemas, the FREQUENCY that an object can be randomly chosen is definable. A really expensive item could be assigned a '1' so it can only spawn once or zero times in a map at the beginning, and a stack of gold coins could be assigned a '6' to spawn from zero to six times in the whole map at the beginning, and so on.
The devs would choose a specific object from the hierarchy OR a specific Spawn-Marker to randomize the loot for a specific location. Heck, the devs could probably come up with an even more elegant design. One folder of text files could handle all the heavy work.
This is a great explanation of how randomizing loot will not interfere with intelligent design. It will actually enhance intelligent design with the intelligent randomization of loot, and in relatively simple fashion to boot.
Squid
08-05-2009, 01:48 AM
I'm absolutely for this, as long as it works in a similar method as described in jtr's quote.
Squid
Well of course you are, since you are me and I am you, what else would you say. :rolleyes:
FriendlyStranger
08-05-2009, 02:03 AM
Thx for putting the vote up, will get interesting.
End since this vote wasn't held neutral of personal opinions, here the counter arguments to this idea:
I personally think random loot amount/position is no good. I want to search through the levels. I want to know more and more everytime I run through it, until the point I know everything about the level. Thats part of the experience of exploring the secrets of the maps. If you add in random loot, I get the feeling of "uncompleteness".
I want to know how much loot is hidden in a level. And I want to discover where it is. Randomization is one way to kill replayability, sounds paradox but is best proofed by TES4:Oblivion. They made everything random, resulting in the complete loss of the exploring fun. Whereas in TES3 you knew where you could find powerful artifacts in TES 4 you never knew if it pays off to visit place XY. That ain't fun.
I would also like to know the amount of loot available in a level in advance of the level, or showed in a stats window in the menu. Making the perfect thieving run, is something I like to challenge myself with, but this becomes impossible, whith random loot. Random loot leads to random running around in the level, never knowing where to go. The fun of getting to know a level is destroyed.
The fun in thief isn't wandering around picking up candle-sticks. It's in the atmosphere and exploring interesting places. I really don't think a couple of bits of additional unimportant random loot is going to be quite the life-enhancing game changer some here are suggesting. I appreciate the desire to squeeze a little more Thief out of Thief, but I'm not convinced this isn't it.
...
And all this possible with loot stats and non-random loot. Clearly we must petition EM to fix this desperately broken mechanic.
Next...
Burrick
08-05-2009, 03:08 AM
I read again the death to loot stats threads and I find I am not convinced by random loot - I don't know and that's it why I vote no - if I am not sure about something I don't change something.
this is sounding logical!
Flashart
08-05-2009, 03:27 AM
I thought of a new dynamic to add, see the "Death to..." thread.
Basically, if the random loot was of different values, you could end up with quite a variety of totals for the same mission. It's radical, and some won't like it, but I think it's got a nice "real" game aspect to it.
Platinumoxicity
08-05-2009, 03:38 AM
Randomized loot is good when the system is designed well. And Vae, that overview of the system I made is flawed. It doesn't take into account the logical placement of different loot items. In that scematic, you could find paintings in the kitchen cupboards and golden vases on the wall. I need to update the system proposal.
Mumbojumbo
08-05-2009, 03:51 AM
I voted for no. I just overflew the idea and have to say: I just don't like it.
I mean I loved to share the loot locations with friends back then, the time when Thief was just a fresh new game. I asked my friend, if had found the diamond on the floor of the skyroom, then he asked me if I found the one at the entrance of the Lost City. Man this were times, this game had so much depth and fun.
this was my frist post, I hope there are many more to follow, hi@all!
- and hey you are welcome to call me Stephen, if ya want to!
jay pettitt
08-05-2009, 04:16 AM
I'm completely undecided (and unconvinced), but I am certain that this poll has been presented in a biased fashion 'Random Loot(tm) will be awesome - would you like thief to be awesome? Vote 'YES' to Random Loot(tm)' such that I'm afraid my sense of fairness compels me to vote no out of a desire to punish disingenuous polls.
Platinumoxicity
08-05-2009, 04:31 AM
I'm completely undecided (and unconvinced), but I am certain that this poll has been presented in a biased fashion 'Random Loot(tm) will be awesome - would you like thief to be awesome? Vote 'YES' to Random Loot(tm)' such that I'm afraid my sense of fairness compels me to vote no out of a desire to punish disingenuous polls.
Does it really matter if the poll questions are biased? I mean... you were smart enough to notice that, weren't you? That means you're smart enough to be able to vote your own opinion without letting the biased options affect your decision. ;)
jay pettitt
08-05-2009, 04:42 AM
Does it really matter if the poll questions are biased?
That depends on whether or not you are genuinely wanting to canvas peoples' opinion.
At the very least the poll would have been significantly improved by including option for those who are uncertain. The results of this poll may indicate that public opinion is for or against or indifferent, when in reality most people just might not feel sure. Expecting uncertain votes to fairly fall either side when the design of the poll expressly favours one particular answer is a little optimistic I think,
Also, I don't really want to have to continue the discussion over two threads or turn it into a competition, but I guess that's partly unavoidable given that the forum software doesn't allow you to create a poll retrospectively.
--edit-- actually I'm going to retract some of that. Vae's opening gambit really isn't so awful. But an option for uncertain votes would still be a marked improvement. Vote away...
Flashart
08-05-2009, 05:55 AM
For me, the other thread isn't so much about "randomized loot" as changing the game experience for each play. I'd be interested to hear from the "No" voters, if they are just against random loot, or do not want any change to occur for each playthrough the game? My views are well documented so I've tried to be unbiased in this post.
jay pettitt
08-05-2009, 06:03 AM
for sure - it's just the cherry-picking bits of posts from the other thread and bringing them into this one and saying - 'look this is a great example of why my point of view is right and you should vote for apples' which makes me think 'sigh' - because having got involved in the other thread I'm kinda compelled now to wrestle with a load of complex issues and write posts all over again in this one.
But that can't be helped.
Burrick
08-05-2009, 06:11 AM
For me, the other thread isn't so much about "randomized loot" as changing the game experience for each play. I'd be interested to hear from the "No" voters, if they are just against random loot, or do not want any change to occur for each playthrough the game? My views are well documented so I've tried to be unbiased in this post.
:( I don't get what's your demand again sry (language problem) - I voted no, but I don't know what you want exactly - could you write as easy as possible. Is it just you want an explanation why I voted no? or is it something else!
I stated my reason and also Mumbojumbo made a good point I think. There is some real truth in this, it indeed is a lot of fun to talk about other have found items here and there. that is also what I have done back in school!
Flashart
08-05-2009, 07:05 AM
I would like the Thief game to be "different" each time you play through. This could be random loot, different guard patterns, different AI for different difficulty levels or alternative side quests etc. Anything that changes the experience and prolongs the Thief experience.
Would you prefer some random elements/changes each time, or the same game each time?
It doesn't have to be loot, (except in this thread).
vesemir
08-05-2009, 07:12 AM
great idea!
Freshman
08-05-2009, 07:29 AM
mediocre idea!
Yaphy
08-05-2009, 02:29 PM
I want it, but I dont want total randomness. It should still be a plausible place to put valuables in/at.
DarknessFalls
08-05-2009, 08:19 PM
If randomized loot gets implemented, I hate to say it but I hope I have an option available to me so I can choose to NOT randomize loot. I want it kept in the same place every time I play, if I so choose.
This way, I can have the same loot experience every time and figure out out where the heck I'm going wrong when I'm only able to collect 1435 of 1834 loot. I'll be more inclined to go over the level with a fine-toothed comb if I know the loot is not moving around on me. Otherwise, if the loot is in different places every time, the amount of loot you collect will vary every time you play, even if you visit the exact same places every time -- thereby sometimes giving you false hopes you've found new rooms when you haven't. So if I find 1435 one time, 1320 another and 1634 another... I'll just give up on trying to reach a perfect 1834 since I may not know if I'm finding more or less places each time. (Well, I probably won't give up entirely...but I'll sure feel like I'm spinning wheels since I can't statistically compare my loot stats from one playthrough to the next.)
Yes, there are benefits to randomizing loot; but there are also benefits, imo, to not randomizing it. I'd prefer not randomizing if we have to choose one or the other.
Randomized loot eliminates the loot stat, thus, "Death to the Loot Stat". You meet your objectives, and collect a lot more loot from all the expanded non-mission areas of a larger City around the mission locale, as well as all the usual extra loot that has always been a part of the missions. The mission's loot objective is the only number to worry about, and when it checks off (Objective Completed!), you know all your future spending needs are covered. Explore and collect more and worry no more.
I was afraid this would happen. The poll is skewed because the explanations aren't sinking in.
DarknessFalls
08-05-2009, 10:42 PM
^-- Sigh.
I think I understand what you're saying... but I still want consistency. I would want the option for randomness, but I'd also like the option to just keep it at the default of what EM programs into the levels in case I want to have my personal competition to try and get all the loot EM hand-placed throughout the level in tricky spots, etc. If they are mutually exclusive, I still vote for consistency (not random).
Note: If randomized loot gets implemented, it could/should still tell you at the end how much loot there was in the level. I'd hate to see that go away entirely. It'd still have value to know you found 1403 of the 1553 randomly placed loot. And it wouldn't spoil anything because the total loot amount would be different next time you played that level.
And if people flat-out want to see the loot stat die, then just hide it on the post-mission summary and have players unveil this stat via a section of the screen that folds open when clicked or something. Kind've like spoiler tags on forums. The person has the choice to view it if they want, or not.
There wouldn't be a default and it would ALL be hand-placed, just some placements would be Spawn-Markers that random loot would appear at at the mission load, and others would be fixed loot objects placed there according to difficulty level.
All a loot stat really tells you (regardless of how it's interpreted) is that you did or didn't explore everywhere you could've/should've. The purpose for killing the loot stat is to get away from the high-score mentality of the majority of games, encourage immersing into the role of Garrett and a thief a bit more, and actually be more realistic in a benign way, unlike many suggestions that do the opposite of these. Seeing many comments throughout the fora, numbers, violence, and aesthetics are way up on the list of desired imperatives. I believe those shouldn't be anywhere near the top of the list--important enough, but not high priorities.
And I'd bet a mod would be made to tally it up anyway, heh, although the way this would be designed, the total loot in the mission wouldn't matter if the player explored everywhere, but most importantly, the total loot would not matter for the next playthrough. It's a new way of thinking. People keep saying they want more realistic and difficult thieving this and that, and this is only a half-step towards realism, yet it's opposed for non-realistic-thief reasons (interesting). Thief has so much anti-establishment. It could use more.
Next time someone wants to write a thesis on gaming, they could explore why numbers mean so much more than the experience itself? The thesis could be titled "Forget the Game, Just Give Me the Score!"
I would want the option for randomness
What I'm most sure of is that EM will definitely not make options like this. They don't have 100 years to develop the game, you know. So it's a plain choice: whether we have it always random, or we have it always static. If the developers make their choice from reading these forums (I don't think they do, but hey), and if they decide to drop random loot because of this discussion, it will be a shame and a huge waste of great opportunity for Thief 4.
Tutterbug
08-06-2009, 02:13 AM
I wanna see da core of thief unchanged, and to this core, da loot belongs if ya asking me.
being neutral on this issue I haven't voted but I am curious to know who's winning and I can't see for myself unless I vote
It's 50/50.
15+15 among 30.
I still seriously believe that it's only a misunderstanding and the need for a paradigm nudge that keeps the new idea from winning, even by a single vote.
Platinumoxicity
08-06-2009, 02:32 AM
I made an updated description of a random loot placement system. In this model, each loot item has, or has not, many different places where it can appear randomly.
http://filesmelt.com/Imagehosting/pics/217f42de7f6212c123d47545c1a20480.PNG
That, of course, is the first option that would get a YES vote. More options within one voting choice. So, in essence, is it safe to say you still want a fixed TOTAL loot count that's the same for every playthrough, rather than an unknown number that is always above and beyond everything the player needs?
Flashart
08-06-2009, 02:40 AM
I absolutely take the point about wishing to get 100%, so having the same loot every time is vital.
Personally, I never minded being some loot short, which is why I opt for change each playthrough.
Hmm, it's a tough call, I completely see the argument. I do think that the random loot offers a "real" sense of thievery, in that you don't know what will be there till you get there, and thus for me, a greater replay value, but I can understand the frustration for you if the loot keeps moving around.
I'm loathe to suggest this as you will probably disagree, but would a save at the start of each level be a good enough trade-off for greater playability? I know it's a big ask but I can't see the Dev's making it an option.
I've said before that this isn't a "deal breaker" for me, I can live with static loot, but I do like the idea of some dynamic element.
Okay, now that's interesting. Other than memorization, is there another frustration element to loot changing places? Is there a frustration element in expecting all the loot without exploring 90% + of a mission? Interesting. This is where adaptation and middle-ground can develop.
Platinumoxicity
08-06-2009, 03:05 AM
I've never even considered the idea of having a random loot amount. that would be stupid. I always had in mind a system where there is always a fixed amount of loot, but the locations of the items vary.
So...ONCE AGAIN...I'm on your ignore list. :lol: Some of us, actually.
"That would be stupid". Why? Where've you been, anyway? Hadn't seen you around as much. Got a life or something? :D
"Stupid"-- always that little barrier between Us and Them. Information and Emotion. Teaching and trashing.
Platinumoxicity
08-06-2009, 03:51 AM
So...ONCE AGAIN...I'm on your ignore list. :lol: Some of us, actually.
"That would be stupid". Why? Where've you been, anyway? Hadn't seen you around as much. Got a life or something? :D
"Stupid"-- always that little barrier between Us and Them. Information and Emotion. Teaching and trashing.
Sorry, I tried to make the "random loot haters" think that there's at least one thing that we agree about. But you really got me there. :) I really don't have anything against random loot amount because I wouldn't want a "total loot stat" anyway.
When I was writing that "stupid" -word I had to think of any comebacks I could use to back up my opinion of it being stupid. I couldn't think of any. Just like the haters can't think of any reasons why random loot is "stupid". ;)
kabatta
08-06-2009, 04:12 AM
I like where this debate is going.
If you remember Thief 2, in Eavesdropping mission, the key you have to take is positioned at one of ~15 preset locations every time you restart the mission (the other ~14 locations have fake keys; I've no idea why LG did that instead of just spawning the proper key at one of the spots). Every time you restart the mission, even if you played it for 10 times already, you don't know precisely where the key is. For me, it is a GREAT touch to the mission.
And in First City Bank & Trust mission, you have some guards and some security cameras randomly appear or not appear in the mission. Was that a breaker? Of course not, it adds a whole lot of emergency to the gameplay.
So I simply can't see why some people here don't want random loot placement (I repeat: placement! No one needs random amount of loot!) in Thief 4. It's just beyond my understanding.
Oh well, if only EM actually read this.
I'm a askin' for information, explanation. It's totally irrelevant to me that more than half of y'all don't like the idea. I do, you don't, so what? WHY? Why must you have a fixed amount of loot every time? What neurosis does that soothe?
DEVS: "More than half think it's stupid. We don't know why, for sure, but we can guess from the classes we took. So okay." :thumb:
kabatta
08-06-2009, 04:27 AM
It would be refreshing that a small determined amounth of loot get spawned randomely in missions.
kabatta
08-06-2009, 04:32 AM
500 to 2000.
FriendlyStranger
08-06-2009, 04:48 AM
I'm a askin' for information, explanation. It's totally irrelevant to me that more than half of y'all don't like the idea. I do, you don't, so what? WHY? Why must you have a fixed amount of loot every time? What neurosis does that soothe?
DEVS: "More than half think it's stupid. We don't know why, for sure, but we can guess from the classes we took. So okay." :thumb:
Ok, basically everybody, who is against random loot is a hater. Great you agreed on that with yourself.
You HAVE been told various explanations, why (currently) 50% of the people on this vote do not like the idea of randomly placed loot. How much more explanation do you need?
And btw I would like to hear some explanations from your side too! Why should random loot be such a revolutionary improvement as you claim it is? You guys just keep explaining HOW you imagine random loot to be realized (spawn zones, some static loot etc.), but you don't tell us any good reasons, WHY this will be good for Thief.
(Replayability and Exploration aren't the 100% Uber-Argument)
I understand your HOW but I can hardly see any WHY.
The saving your game at start is no alternative for me, that's not the same, in this regard I also want to quote Mumbjumbo, for this is another good argument AGAINST random loot:
I voted for no. I just overflew the idea and have to say: I just don't like it.
I mean I loved to share the loot locations with friends back then, the time when Thief was just a fresh new game. I asked my friend, if had found the diamond on the floor of the skyroom, then he asked me if I found the one at the entrance of the Lost City. Man this were times, this game had so much depth and fun.
this was my frist post, I hope there are many more to follow, hi@all!
- and hey you are welcome to call me Stephen, if ya want to!
There is no more sharing the game experience since everybody gets his generic and exchangeable version of the level everytime he starts it.
Another thing, which came into my mind is the following: With fixed missions (fixed guard patrol, fixed loot) you can play with your environment. You can check out different paths and methods of achieving the goal. If loot (and/or guard) is randomized, the environment starts playing with you. I cannot try out different tactics for myself, I am forced to do it by the game.
Wanting fixed loot amount etc. has got nothing to do with beeing stupid or ill, its just a preference. Or is it neurosis that some people prefer to wear casual wear instead of a tuxedo? Are they sick? Do you like to wear brown shirts? No? Oh man, are you beeing neurotic again? Some people like certain things better than other things, is that so hard to accept? You tell me and others we aren't allowed to like the high score mentality? The appropriate reply-phrase for that would break the forum rules I'm afraid.
kabatta
08-06-2009, 05:13 AM
And where are your arguements? I only see you quoting people in this topic.
(Replayability and Exploration aren't the 100% Uber-Argument)
Oh well than. If that's not the 100% argument, I don't know which one will satisfy you. Well. You don't want more replayability and exploration? Hey, Tales of Monkey Island has just been released, go for it! There's NO replayability in this one.
Another thing, which came into my mind is the following: With fixed missions (fixed guard patrol, fixed loot) you can play with your environment. You can check out different paths and methods of achieving the goal. If loot (and/or guard) is randomized, the environment starts playing with you. I cannot try out different tactics for myself, I am forced to do it by the game.
This is a point, but don't forget that Thief has always been about realism and about unexpected events. The best moments in Thief is when you have to figure out what to do, where to go, and how to avoid that goddamn guard who has just come from around the corner while you were picking the lock. Randomness will significantly improve this effect.
Flashart
08-06-2009, 05:26 AM
If the "static" camp don't like the idea of saving at the start of every mission after "seeding", I have another thought, but this may throw a spanner in the works. Randomized equipment thoroughout the level? This to me, is a far shakier option but in the spirit of invention what do others think?
A 33% chance to get a broadhead,flashbomb,nothing, etc....
^ Most sure EM will not bother doing this, since it's far too much work. Ranodmized loot is the biggest we can hope for (I personally almost sure they will not make loot randomized just becuase they won't risk).
Sure! The key, of course, is that the player has to go out of his/her way to break the game for running out of anything because there will always be a minimum amount for the mission, placed according to the traditional methodology, and the extra added on top, which will really be about playing the larger areas around the missions, but could be saved for the missions themselves. The only part of this that I would personally feel a loss is in the classic sense one could get before a mission (on the first play, at least), where you really had to choose wisely. And in keeping with the spirit, any caches of gear would be fixed.
For both ideas, the larger areas around the mission could load you up if you don't squander, or you could squander and make the mission more tense. It'd be cool if the surrounding mission-hub (hublet?) offered enough challenge to make it a challenge to hold onto gear.
This one would be a different set-up, since gear is harder to randomize and keep it seeming correct and "natural".
ToMegaTherion
08-06-2009, 05:48 AM
I've never even considered the idea of having a random loot amount. that would be stupid. I always had in mind a system where there is always a fixed amount of loot, but the locations of the items vary.
I think random loot total would be OK as long as we still have a loot stat so people who want to get everything can find out how much is available on that particular playthrough.
But I am strongly in favour of a loot stat in all cases, because I like to see at the end of the mission whether I was very poor or just poor at loot collection. Sometimes I almost get everything! This makes me quite happy.
I reckon I am leaning towards the no-random-loot camp right now, I find the arguments against it a little more appealing, but my vote is still available.
FriendlyStranger
08-06-2009, 05:49 AM
Yeah but I explained, why these two aren't 100% true arguments. In the death to all loot stat, I tried to line the following out - plz tell me whats wrong with the following statements:
1. Exploration - Is not really promoted in a more intensive way by adding random loot. We all explored the levels, tried to find the secrets. And for all of that exploration no additional motivation in the form of random loot was needed - heck, people even used dromed to find out where the missing lucky coins in the first level of TMA disappeared to after the patch. All of this did came out of the present interest and love for the game and its design - random loot doesn't add anything to that, so why bother with additional work for something already present?
2. Replayability - other games like Diablo 2, Oblivion have shown, that nor alternating level construction (D2) nor a randomized loot tables for chests etc. has helped the games replayability. Who seriously claims he felt that the D2 random levels added to replayability? If you ask me they looked and felt the same, were monotonous like almost no other game. Next Example: HGL - followed the same concept as D2 - no replayability. D2's fascination came solely from item collection, creating and gathering better equipment than others, the alternating elements added almost 0 to it.
Thats why I don't follow this two arguments.
I can only state that I think (from other experiences) that random loot will feel completely differnt from the way some of its supporters here are thinking it will be.
@Bono Yeah, I understand that, this is certainly true to a certain extent. But at second playthrough I know whats going to happen, and then I take control. I don't really like to lose that feeling.
Exploration - Is not really promoted in a more intensive way by adding random loot. We all explored the levels, tried to find the secrets. And for all of that exploration no additional motivation in the form of random loot was needed - heck, people even used dromed to find out where the missing lucky coins in the first level of TMA disappeared to after the patch. All of this did came out of the present interest and love for the game and its design - random loot doesn't add anything to that, so why bother with additional work for something already present?
I see your point. But I actually hate 100% loot collecting, for me it's an attempt to suck everything from the game on the first playthorugh. I mean, I always complete all the objectives and then leave. If the game tells me to get 1700 loot out of 3000, I rarely get more than 2000. But first time I play through the level, I will get one set of loot, next time I'm sure I will pick some other trinkets. It gives you freedom. If the loot is randomised, it will further enhance that exploration aspect - every time you will have to actually look for some stuff in every room, because you never know if this golden ring is in the bedroom, or it is in the basement. I love that.
I mean, I don't know why, but I always have problems with finding enough loot in T1's The Haunted Cathedral. I'm always 100 or something short, and I always spend time looking for another peice of loot, no matter how many times I played this mission. But if I try to remember exact loot locations (and I DO remember them on my 5th playthrough), it will get easier anyway. Randomization will force me to explre the level again and again. I think it would rock.
2. Replayability - other games like Diablo 2, Oblivion have shown, that nor alternating level construction (D2) nor a randomized loot tables for chests etc. has helped the games replayability. Who seriously claims he felt that the D2 random levels added to replayability? If you ask me they looked and felt the same, were monotonous like almost no other game. Next Example: HGL - followed the same concept as D2 - no replayability. D2's fascination came solely from item collection, creating and gathering better equipment than others, the alternating elements added almost 0 to it.
I quite agree with you here. However, I finished Diablo (the first one) for 3 or 4 times just because it had random levels. I would've never played this game again if I knew I would have to run through the same dungeons again. So it really enhances replayability, really. And I never was a fan of collecting unique items.
But at second playthrough I know whats going to happen, and then I take control. I don't really like to lose that feeling.
That is possibly the main difference between random loot 'lovers' and 'haters'. I don't want to take control. I want the game the amaze and confuse me every time I play it. Thief is great because it really amazes me no matter how much time I played it. But I believe that randomization will only make it even better.
Flashart
08-06-2009, 06:31 AM
To me, random loot does promote exploration, albeit on the 2nd or 3rd playthrough. If we assume most areas will be visited on the first playthrough, then where's the motivation on that 2nd playthrough? I agree to have the loot stat may encourage you to try again, but retreading ground is hardly "exploration", at least random loot provides something a little different to the same enviroment. Or put another way, once you've achieved 100%, which could be possible on the first playthrough, the game gets very predictable. Random loot, especially if you include "unique" treasures, just gives a little freshness.
"Did you find the crown in the attic?
"No, I found gold theodolite.
"Really? I found a bag of jewels." etc
Just something that may your playthrough that tiny bit different from everyone else, and even your own 2nd playthrough.
I take your point "Be careful what you wish for..." Yes, I agree this could get implemented horribly. But then so could movement, combat, AI...etc
"What did you find in the kitchen? I found a bottle of Gravecourt Red."
"Nothing but the usual fine cheese and deer legs, this time, but there was large gold figurine in the basement. Last time I was in the kitchen, there was a set of silver dinnerware."
FriendlyStranger
08-06-2009, 07:16 AM
To me, random loot does promote exploration, albeit on the 2nd or 3rd playthrough. If we assume most areas will be visited on the first playthrough, then where's the motivation on that 2nd playthrough? I agree to have the loot stat may encourage you to try again, but retreading ground is hardly "exploration", at least random loot provides something a little different to the same enviroment.
but isn't the kind of replayability random loot creates exactly the one you are descibing here? oh man I am still missing about 30 g loot, lets visit the atrium again its the only room I haven't visited this playthorugh... Isn't this equivalent to revisiting already seen places?
@Bono: Maybe we have to accept that there are differences between the different player types that cannot be overcome with a single compromise or solution. One likes the changing, everytime a little different levels in D2 like you, the other one prefers the static, but beautifully created landscapes of Dungeon Siege 2.
We will see what we get, expect nothing, but be dissappointed anyway..
...This is a point, but don't forget that Thief has always been about realism and about unexpected events. The best moments in Thief is when you have to figure out what to do, where to go, and how to avoid that goddamn guard who has just come from around the corner while you were picking the lock. Randomness will significantly improve this effect.I disagree with this point, I find that knowing that a guard AI is going to come around the corner and that I have only a few seconds to pick the lock and get through the taffin door before they spot me and all hell breaks loose significantly raises the excitement level for me
after I played thief for a while I started to think more along the lines of "ok there's a door, it's probably locked, there's a corner and an AI comes round it roughly every so many seconds so I have this long to get to the door, this long to pick, and this long to get away if I can't, where can I go if I get spotted, are there any shadows I can use..." and so on
if the patrol is random most of that goes out of the window
if I have no idea when to expect them I'll probably end up resorting to a sequence of make a save, try the door, get caught, sigh, reload, try the door and so on until I get through it or get bored, but there would be very little thrill in that for me
I'm not saying random events can't be used, just that in this particular example it would detract from the experience for me
I disagree with this point, I find that knowing that a guard AI is going to come around the corner and that I have only a few seconds to pick the lock and get through the taffin door before they spot me and all hell breaks loose significantly raises the excitement level for me
after I played thief for a while I started to think more along the lines of "ok there's a door, it's probably locked, there's a corner and an AI comes round it roughly every so many seconds so I have this long to get to the door, this long to pick, and this long to get away if I can't, where can I go if I get spotted, are there any shadows I can use..." and so on
if the patrol is random most of that goes out of the window
I don't think so. In order to plan your moves, you have to observe and note the guards behavior. But you have to do it only once, when you first play the game, because when you restart the mission 2nd time, you already know everything about this particular AI behavior. Having guards patrol routes randomised will not prevent you from planning your moves, but you will have to observe and learn their behavior each time you replay the mission. Once you figured out where the guard is going this time you play the mission, feel free to plan.
However, I believe that sometimes AIs must do some unexpected things. Let me give you an example. There is the Assassins mission in Thief 1. In Ramirez' manor, guards walk only in the hallways, and all the rooms are empty. When you play the mission for the first time, you don't know whether someone visits rooms or not, so you're always nervous and extra careful. But when you play longer and realize, that noone actually navigates these bedrooms, you can really position Garrett in the middle of a room, then walk away from your computer, have a dinner, and when you return to your game after an hour, nothing is changed, Garrett is still standing here in a complete safety. Imagine if there was a servant who might occasionally visit some of these rooms once in 10-15 minutes. If you know that you might be chased in these rooms, you will play more carefully, you will be always listening if there are footsteps and someone is approaching.
ah, so you don't mean a random patrol you mean a patrol that follows a fixed route but the route is different for each play though
I'll have to think about that but it sounds interesting
I believe one of the guys who writes scripts for T2 FM's has a route selector so you can define several possible patrols for a single AI and have them pick one of them at the start of the mission, would that sort of thing do ?
so you'd still have fixed patrols but a different one each time and it would be up to the developer how many different variants there were
would that be a sufficient level of randomness or would you want the route made up on the fly ?
as for AI not patrolling rooms that's mainly down to the developer not making the patrol route complex enough, it is perfectly possible to create patrols where AI occasionally check the rooms with a repeat time large enough to make the player think it's a random event
so if the patrols were made more complex in this way would that be ok ?
DarknessFalls
08-06-2009, 09:20 AM
jtr7 wrote: All a loot stat really tells you (regardless of how it's interpreted) is that you did or didn't explore everywhere you could've/should've. The purpose for killing the loot stat is to get away from the high-score mentality of the majority of games, encourage immersing into the role of Garrett and a thief a bit more, and actually be more realistic in a benign way, unlike many suggestions that do the opposite of these.
Hmm, I've never taken the loot stat as a high-score thing. I've always seen it as an amazing thing when I scoured the level only to find I was 200 or 300 loot short of finding it ALL. I tip my hat to LGS every time I come up short. (Except I heard recently there's maybe an issue in TMA where the total loot in a level is artificially inflated and you can never get it all?? If true, it saddens me and I try to block that knowledge out so it doesn't hurt my experience.)
High scores help you gloat. The loot stat helps you see that you failed and that there's more to find. High scores let you achieve unimaginable high scores. The loot stat is capped and very achievable, so it's not like I'm going to go for a world record high-score in "loot stat".
Removing the loot stat would not do anything for me in terms of immersing into the Garrett role. It would have a neutral effect there. If anything, I'd appreciate the Thief experience less.
kabatta
08-06-2009, 09:26 AM
In TMA sone loot pieces are stuck in the wall and the pickpocket counter is a bit buggy. But it's insignifficant.
I believe one of the guys who writes scripts for T2 FM's has a route selector so you can define several possible patrols for a single AI and have them pick one of them at the start of the mission, would that sort of thing do ?
I believe one can do it without any special scripts. By the way, if I remember correctly, the assassins in, erm, The Assassins, walk different routes from the start of the mission to Ramirez' mansion, and this is done without scripts. If you preset a number of patrol points and link them all to an AI, the AI will randomly pick one of the points and will proceed.
However, we're really offtopic here :)
kabatta
08-06-2009, 09:35 AM
That route depends on the difficulty that you choose. The higher the difficulty, the longer you get walked around the city.
"What did you find in the kitchen? I found a bottle of Gravecourt Red."
"Nothing but the usual fine cheese and deer legs, this time, but there was large gold figurine in the basement. Last time I was in the kitchen, there was a set of silver dinnerware."
That's the spirit! :)
That route depends on the difficulty that you choose. The higher the difficulty, the longer you get walked around the city.
If I remember correctly (and I'm pretty sure I do), there are a few different routes for Expert difficulty.
Yes, on every difficulty. Assassins! has many many patrol points, and "look back" points, which are chosen by preset routes per difficulty. If kabatta had pluralized "route" you'd get the gist. If patrol points are deleted, they AIs just go to another one. Patrol points could be deleted randomly to create a different path, but the major puzzles of Thief are solved by observing patrol patterns and timing a move, which means staying hidden and watching, which most players don't wanna do, but it's more thiefy to do so.
And it is a High Score mentality to achieve the highest possible score, the most impressive and complete stats. Many games have the same highest possible score every time and people gloat when they reach it. The point is not to know anything but the terrain on every playthrough. Other than the main objective loot, it would feel like revisiting a place you've robbed before, rather than revisiting the same game play that one could play with less challenge each time, and it would lean the experience a little more toward that first feeling that can never be experienced again (not much closer, but more than ever).
"Exploration is not promoted..." in a lot of cases, but not as completely as stated. Exploration this way means you don't know what you will find, if anything, when you revisit an area, making it fresher, and sometimes surprising, and if you want all the loot you can find, yes, you will have to explore thoroughly. As the games often stated in the goals, find the minimum goal for expenses, then do what you want afterwards, when you are done, get to the end mission zone. That won't change.
"...so why bother with additional work for something already present?" If you are serious, and not just parroting me, I'm glad to hear that thinking. I also point out that I have been accused of wanting a remake/reboot/rehash, and being overly conservative, and an old taffer afraid of change. How the tables have turned. I'm pushing for radical change, and it scares people, even though it's extra thiefy. Thiefier than ever. I'm amused and pleased to see ideas sinking in. All I want is for the suggestions to be considered honestly before making an informed decision to reject it. I will only reject ideas according to what I've learned over the last 8 years. This idea is a positive step for a new Thief game to be released in a new decade. Gameplay will not be affected negatively. You will only miss a piece of the aftermath. I'd like to hear why the total possible is critical, not just a perk held over from centuries of gaming with scores where the score actually matters to win or gain extra lives or power-ups or level-ups or unlock stuff. Garrett will still be tallying up the loot, and sorting what goes in his pocket, what goes to the landlord, what goes to the stores, what goes to the fences. Let's promote Thief growing up, especially after the anti-aging of TDS.
DarknessFalls
08-06-2009, 06:05 PM
And it is a High Score mentality to achieve the highest possible score, the most impressive and complete stats.
Oh M G! You guys won't believe this. I just got 2435 of the loot on Thieves' Guild! Beat that you sorry Taffers!!!!!!!!! Wish we could do a multi-player showdown so I could show how a true taffer plays this game extra fast and achieves this loot total in 26 minutes!
Hmm.
Some peeps may use the loot stat in that way, but I don't. Do you actually see people gloat all the time in Thief forums like ttlg.com? Even if they do, that's not the benefit I gain by having it. You won't see me gloating over loot totals. You can just choose to avoid those forum threads or EM-sponsored leaderboard (g forbid), if it's too traumatic.
Certainly not exaggerated into ridiculousness like that. However, you've seen the suggestions HERE for a leaderboard. As far as I can determine, the concept of a leaderboard for official Thief has never come up. I've searched for keywords, but I don't know if it may have come up in some discussion that used other less descriptive or concise terms.
DarknessFalls
08-06-2009, 09:12 PM
:) Maybe they're calling it "Sneakerboard" or "Tafferboard", not "Leaderboard". LOL.
Hahaha! I may have to try it. online stats brought up FMs--but not what this discussion was about--and other games that have power-ups, level-ups, and things Thief never did. That was as close as I got, but definitely nothing like that one thread here.
Flashart
08-06-2009, 10:32 PM
The first time you play any Thief level from any game the AI and Loot may as well be "random" as you've never seen it before. Garrett wouldn't know what doors are locked, patrol routes, loot location. The 2nd time you play it, you obviously go in "pre-prepared". I guess it's a toss up between how much enjoyment is derived from both scenarios.
Randomizing things means your playing Vs the Game. There's an unpredictability.
If you're trying for 100% then you're playing "against yourself", trying to beat your previous total.
Both are perfectly acceptable, but you could still do the "100%" with the random game, but you can't do the uniqueness with a "static" game.
This is all about using Thief in different ways, just like the "High Score" or "Speed Run" or "Ghosters" do.
I make the point again, would static "fans" be prepared to make "Saves at the Level start" thereby creating a "Static Level"?
ToMegaTherion
08-07-2009, 12:17 AM
If you save at the start of a level then you are stuck with whatever loot you had from the last mission to buy your equipment with (or, if we have a Deadly Shadows type of game, the exact equipment you entered the level with). I suspect this would be unacceptable to the static fans.
I've never really been able to remember most of the loot locations in subsequent playthroughs anyway, so perhaps I am not the best qualified to be offering an opinion here, but one thing that does happen to me a lot is remembering vaguely where some loot is, like "there is something behind a statue somewhere" and it's quite satisfying to find the relevant statue eventually.
But since I never find all the loot I can never say "there's no point in my exploring there because I know nothing is there" so I guess randomised loot doesn't really fulfill any purpose for me.
I find guard locations and patrols easier to remember (presumably because they're more important than loot). So randomising these might be a better use of randomisation. But this will also be harder to do, so it might not work so well, so it might be a worse use of randomisation. Bleh.
Yes, on every difficulty. Assassins! has many many patrol points, and "look back" points, which are chosen by preset routes per difficulty. If kabatta had pluralized "route" you'd get the gist. If patrol points are deleted, they AIs just go to another one. Patrol points could be deleted randomly to create a different path, but the major puzzles of Thief are solved by observing patrol patterns and timing a move, which means staying hidden and watching, which most players don't wanna do, but it's more thiefy to do so...I'm not sure that's how it works, in TMA each patrol point is linked to both the previous and the next patrol point, delete one and, as I remember from making patrols in my own mission, the patrolling AI will get to the patrol point just before the deleted one and stop dead because of the missing forward link not sure if it's the same in TDP tho and I've no idea what TDS does
FriendlyStranger
08-07-2009, 05:14 AM
Using a save game might work for yourself alone, but you still can't help each other out if you miss a certain bit of loot and the whole speedrun fun videos (yeah I enjoy seeing someone run through Morrowind in 20 minutes ^^) get impossible, since they are no more reproducable. And its not the same feeling to manage something in an individual random version of a level, instead of doing it within the one, same version everyone had to play. Its not the same if A gets 100% in his (maybe easier?) level than I, B, get 100% in my level.
I don't think the savegame option helps me, I also still fear what jay once pointed out - for me the loot placement was part of the level design, the bottle and goblet in front of a fireplace, the lucky coins in a well - I just can't imagine I get the same feeling if an amount of the loot is randomized. Thats just not the same feeling I think...
I'm not sure that's how it works, in TMA each patrol point is linked to both the previous and the next patrol point, delete one and, as I remember from making patrols in my own mission, the patrolling AI will get to the patrol point just before the deleted one and stop dead because of the missing forward link not sure if it's the same in TDP tho and I've no idea what TDS does
That's how it works usually, yes, but in Assassins! I described something that actually happened when I was trying to get a screenshot of Quince and Jacow before they walked away from Farkus Functionals. I don't know how to make them stop patrolling, but I wanted them animated, just idle. I deleted a bunch of patrol points, and they would walk to whichever ones were available. I had to deleted them all to get them to idle outside Farkus' window! Whatever makes that level different, it does exist and can be tapped.
fayfuya
08-08-2009, 08:13 AM
21 people voted no? that's so....disappointing having the same treasure in the same place each day is just so...old, get advanced already! you got too old ideas in few threads over here that i'm just shocked to read it, it's Thief wer'e talking about! not super mario!
jay pettitt
08-08-2009, 08:37 AM
The best ideas don't grow tired and old, they're timeless.
That's how it works usually, yes, but in Assassins! I described something that actually happened when I was trying to get a screenshot of Quince and Jacow before they walked away from Farkus Functionals. I don't know how to make them stop patrolling, but I wanted them animated, just idle. I deleted a bunch of patrol points, and they would walk to whichever ones were available. I had to deleted them all to get them to idle outside Farkus' window! Whatever makes that level different, it does exist and can be tapped.
to stop them patrolling remove the 'does patrol' attribute from the AI otherwise they will head for the nearest patrol point they can get to and join that one, they aren't actually linked to a specific patrol they just start on the nearest one, usually you put the first patrol point for a route inside the AI's bounding box so it doesn't go heading off on some other route, so you probably had to delete every patrol point they could get to, to get them to stand still
.. I think I shall have to reload T1 and have a look at that level to see what's going on
Thanks. Yeah, I knew they weren't linked to the points just watching them go like a magnet to one and randomly go to another one.
I don't know if Mosley and the Pagan courier are doing the same thing, too, but it's probable, I guess.
the_fish
08-09-2009, 03:49 AM
I mentioned this in the "Death to the Loot Stat!" thread, but figured it's more appropriate here (and hasn't been brought up yet as far as I can see).
You can implement both random* AND static loot easily - code the random loot model and then have a toggleable option for whether the seed value used for generation is random or fixed.
*by 'random' of course I mean 'intelligent pseudo-random' - a fair number of items are fixed (mission objectives, other 'special' loot) and the rest is distributed appropriately among a large number of spawn points (silverware in the kitchen, candlesticks in the bedroom). All the mapper has to do is specify more loot positions than normal - the spawn code itself should be fairly straightforward.
It's not an easy toggle. One has a marker that spawns random loot, and the other would have to spawn a loot item preset according to dev choice for each specific location per mission. It's double the work, not including the loot item pools. It's one or the other, a yes or no vote, with variations for either choice.
ToMegaTherion
08-09-2009, 04:02 AM
Good point, the_fish, that is a really easy way to do it.
the_fish
08-09-2009, 04:11 AM
It's not an easy toggle. One has a marker that spawns random loot, and the other would have to spawn a loot item preset according to dev choice for each specific location per mission. It's double the work, not including the loot item pools. It's one or the other, a yes or no vote, with variations for either choice.
As a developer who knows what I'm talking about, it IS an easy toggle. Sorry to sound arrogant, but you're wrong here.
Seeding a random generator means as long as you provide the same seed each time, the 'random' output is guaranteed to be the same - this is the concept behind procedural generation (google "Infinity: The Quest for Earth"). If the spawn system is intelligently designed (and proposals in this thread seem to fit the bill), then the fixed loot option will generate appropriate loot in the same places each time.
True, the devs can't place each individual piece of loot the way they want to, but if you're designing a system that generates plausible random placements the end result will look more or less the same. As said above, the system does have room for items are fixed independently of the random generation, so there's plenty of opportunity for loot to tell stories or whatever. The random part is intended for all the 'incidental' loot - goblets, plates, candlesticks, coins etc.
ToMegaTherion
08-09-2009, 04:13 AM
Also if the fixed seed were placed in an easily-found ini file then fans can discover the seeds that give the most fun distributions of loot for a mission and share them around!
Semirandom loot with the_fish's simple toggle sounds great! Everyone is happy! Well, those who don't want semirandom loot at all will be slightly unhappy at some time being spent implementing it, but I think everyone has to accept that some time will be spent working on features that one doesn't particularly want.
hammerite451
08-09-2009, 07:57 AM
personally i could see something like this making the game more challenging and interesting.
maybe we are looking at random loot a bit too stiffly, why not a partial randomization? where things like chunks of gold, diamonds, and especially candlesticks, change places, cuz to me it makes total sense that someone couldve picked up the candlestick, walked to the kitchen, and sat it down. while things like paintings, i dont see being relocated very often, people place things like this pretty affixed to a wall without much relocation usually. id say the average for this set up would be about 25% of objects randomized.
tinetone
08-25-2011, 08:32 AM
Maybe loot should always be the same. Always the same 4 candlesticks but on various places. Besides loot from objectives or very well hidden loot should be always on the same spots.
Platinumoxicity
08-25-2011, 09:24 AM
Maybe loot should always be the same. Always the same 4 candlesticks but on various places. Besides loot from objectives or very well hidden loot should be always on the same spots.
Exactly. There could be a dozen different places where a certain candlestick could be, or where a certain diamond ring could be, but diamong rings would never randomly be in places where you usually find candlesticks or vice versa.
Yep. The loot per location would be chosen to work with the fiction and world in sensible ways, while occasionally leaving one wondering how the item came to that location. Some items would never change, others would be entirely randomized. The game should never feel like something arbitrary is happening, but purposeful, instead.
GepardenK
09-21-2011, 03:57 PM
+1 to random loot, and guards for that matter.
We still have the level layout to memorize and thats fun, but adding a factor of uncertainty does wonders for "the thrill of the hunt" and for the replay value. The fun after all is in exploring.
And it wouldn't be 100% of all loot, and would feel the same as playing the level on different difficulties.
A random on/off option puts any contention to bed, and would give a whole new freshness to replayability.
If all the spawn points are in place, the option to toggle is relatively very easy.
Yep...a complete win...:)
GepardenK
09-22-2011, 02:12 AM
I agree that a toggle between preplace and random is the best option. Of course, the loot value should always be the same even in random; just at different locations.
fbdbh
09-22-2011, 10:49 PM
I am concerned about replayability as well, but randomized loot is just not the answer: complex level design with plenty secrets, and then who needs random loot? Hell, I still can find new stuff in T1-2, after playing them like 20 times.
If randomized, it should be very logical and limited, because frankly, I'm too old for this Diabloesque "hoping-that-I-find-it-again" gameplay-style.
fbdbh
09-22-2011, 10:52 PM
Yes, a toggle would be great for this. It helps replayability for everyone in multiple ways with relatively minimal effort to implement compared to other proposed toggles/options, I would think. Great pros, minimal cons.
Every toggle and every option is hard work for the developer, even this, believe me. But well, it's been "in development" for years, it better be like Worms: Armageddon / Atom Zombie Smasher in terms of options. ::rolleyes:
Platinumoxicity
09-22-2011, 11:52 PM
If randomized, it should be very logical and limited, because frankly, I'm too old for this Diabloesque "hoping-that-I-find-it-again" gameplay-style.
In the system I thought of, there wouldn't be dinner plates in some random corner of a garden shed. There would be a certain number of different logical places where a certain loot item would spawn randomly. Some of the locations would be very common and others would be very rare. Some of the locations could be static, and always stay the same.
But things would never be in stupid places. Loot wouldn't be randomly littered around the level.
Yep. Each spawn point is placed with the logic of the game-world and story in mind, down to every character, no matter how small an impact on the whole. Each spawn point will have a set of chosen possible items that may appear there according to difficulty level, the backstory, and current story of that gamespace. There are things that are well worth the extra development that evolve the game progressively, and other things that are not worth the extra development overall, which, at best, only evolve the game to match industry competition and gamer expectation without progressing the game itself for what it is.
fbdbh
09-23-2011, 12:08 AM
It's an awful lot of development time creating such spawn points for certain type of items. It doesn't seem much but it is... many days which could be used for perfecting much better gameplay-elements.
Not really. Since it's a Thief game, the loot is already taken to a level beyond other games and is part of the planning and budget, not including power-up-type items that essentially take more time to place and affect the whole gaming experience, and power-ups require additional playtesting that loot doesn't, which is why I really don't want more gadgets and potions. Loot is more like set-dressing in philosophy, and is chosen off a ready-made list and dropped in, rotated if necessary (x,y,z,h,p,b), and then the settings for the interaction and value are tweaked. Instead of placing the item itself, with instructions to destroy it on specified difficulties, the spawn point is placed, and the instructions given in it. It's more a way of thinking about it that's the most different, but still nothing on the level of power-ups. I could see it becoming a problem if there's a bit of bad code glitching things.
Grouping possible interchangeable items would be an early step, and the level designer would tweak the particular spawn point's flavor by toggling off the items he/she doesn't want included in it's list, and they could be toggled back on, as well as the difficulty levels. It's not necessary, but the list should also include a variable for how likely an item may be "randomly" chosen. The sound effects and varied responses of AIs per situation are already like this, so the tools for the crafting of a level are just spread further, and the Freq[uency] setting has its default and is optionally adjusted if the level designer feels strongly enough about it.
MarrowMonkey
10-14-2011, 06:52 PM
I like the idea, as long as it is sufficiently random and not only one or two pieces in one or two spots ("oh so it's not in the basement, then it must be in the crypt"). I agree with the_fish that it would be simple to make it an optional feature since computers generally use pseudo random number generators*.
I think the suggested idea might work nicely. Level designers would get a special object, a loot point (not visible to the player of course) to place on maps. Each spot could have a simple list of possible loot with the associated chance of occurring in percent.
One could even extend the idea a bit. Loot in the lists could be arranged relative to a loot spot so you could arrange items that belong together logically (eg sets of plates and cups and silverware). Instead of a simple loot-table there could be a loot tree-structure so that you could have a nightstand on which it might appear either an expensive vinebottle and a cup, or spectacles, but never all three at the same time and never a bottle without a cup and so on.
Standard furniture could have default loot points assigned, so that the only thing the level designer has to do is place some furniture in a room and loot would automagically (and logically) appear on that furniture (eg a winerack might have a set of points where different wines might appear). Then the level designer would only have to tweak the values a bit to his liking if at all necessary.
It would mean more work for the programmers, but less work for the level designers.
___
* [Optional reading] Not everyone might be familiar with the concept of pseudo random number generators so: Computers are very deterministic in nature, it's difficult--if not impossible--to generate true randomness on a computer unless it has hardware specially made for this task (which most computers don't.) A function generating randomness would work kind of like a dice, each time it's activated it would randomly return a number within some interval (eg 1 to 6). Since the computer can't generate true randomness it uses a pseudo random number generator (which appear random enough for most purposes). That's usually implemented as a "dice function" as well, but it has to be initialized with a seed value before it's used. It then returns a series of numbers (within an interval) that looks sufficiently random. The interesting part is that it will always generate exactly the same series of numbers if it's given the same seed value. Thus if every level has a predefined default seed value that stays the same unless the user chose the random loot option, the loot would always appear on the same spot. If the user chose the random loot option, the current time and date would be selected as seed value instead and the loot would appear on different spots every new second...
Hope it wasn't to confusing. :o
vBulletin® v3.8.7, Copyright ©2000-2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.