Jump to content
The Dark Mod Forums

Poll: Objectives: no-kill, loot and KO limits


Sotha

  

39 members have voted

  1. 1. What do you think about objectives that limit player's ability to KO AI?

    • I absolutely hate them in all forms. They should not exist at all!
    • They are okay for higher difficulty levels
    • I would like to see more of them, especially on lower difficulty levels.
    • Other, please post thoughts.
  2. 2. What do you think about objectives that prohibit killing?

    • I absolutely hate them in all forms. They should not exist at all!
    • They are okay for higher difficulty levels
    • I would like to see more of them, especially on lower difficulty levels.
    • Other, please post thoughts.
  3. 3. What do you think about "collect X loot" objectives?

    • They are useless.
    • They increase the challenge in a meaningful way, as long as loot requirements aren't too high.
    • I just love finding that last piece of loot to be allowed to exit the level!
    • Other, please post thoughts.


Recommended Posts

Hi!

 

I'm making my WIP and wanted to ask the community what they currently think about objectives concerning KO limits, no-kill and loot.

 

Please understand that I, as FMA, will not be bound democratically by the majority opinion. I just want to hear your thoughts about this.

 

Thanks!

Clipper

-The mapper's best friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My opinion about the loot requirements:

Nearly every mission has them; they are a nice progress indicator and reward, but apart from that they are kind of pointless. They can kill progress if the missing loot is to well hidden. They also have to make sense storywise. It's completely stupid when a thief refuses to leave a zombi infested area because he absolutely needs 3 extra gold coins.

 

The no-ko objectives:

I think they are a cool challenge for people who want it. It should be an option for players to choose. We did that with the hard and expert settings in "Collateral", but the 3 difficulty levels are not ideal for this.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding loot the quantity you need to get and the difficulty in finding it is a major factor

Even on the hardest loot level it shouldn't develop into a loot hunt

This, in my opinion, is a problem with Penny Dreadful 3 to the point where I would stick to the lower two levels

Of course there is an alternative approach as used in a few FM's - make the loot objective optional

Edited by Oldjim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's subjective.

 

On KOing, I like being able to whack everyone and then explore to my heart's content, but I'm a very novice player, and I guess more experienced players would enjoy that challenge.

 

Killing doesn't mater much for me, as I do no-kill runs anyway.

 

The loot is iffy, and depends on the level. It's no fun when the objective demands that you scoop up 95% of the loot, especially if it's hidden everywhere.

 

Of course, you can short-circuit all of these complaints by making them optional, I suppose.

 

My opinion about the loot requirements:

Nearly every mission has them; they are a nice progress indicator and reward, but apart from that they are kind of pointless. They can kill progress if the missing loot is to well hidden. They also have to make sense storywise. It's completely stupid when a thief refuses to leave a zombi infested area because he absolutely needs 3 extra gold coins.

 

 

Level idea: Start out with overly large loot objective, then once you break open the tomb of Blarge the Unquenchable, loot goal is either optional or dramatically reduced. :P

  • Like 1

Because in mystery novels, the first suspect is almost certainly never the murderer. No matter how much unmovable evidence there is, it will all be smashed in pieces by the wrath of the remaining number of pages of the story.

 

-"The Evil Spirit of the Zushi Clan" from Virtual Carnal Pleasure by Yamada Fuutarou

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to keep it a "realistic" game, i think all the attack methods must be allowed.

i love to discover things, so keep the x-loot. (because as a thief, you need to pay the rent.)

but it doesnt have to be a priority.

 

A time-limit can be nice, only to thighten the security, when the time is ended or beeing discovered.

Edited by freyk

Info: My portfolio and darkmod graphical installer
Amnesty for Bikerdude!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I voted "Other" on all three I shall explain...

 

What do I think about objectives that limit my ability to KO AI?

This could be contextual to the mission itself. If the mission's story rules are to sneak in and out of a mansion without being seen at all, and knockouts would giveaway that someone was there that night when stealing the Sceptre of Costsalot from Lord Ivan O'Locksondoors.

 

A good way to not have to enforce a specific knockout limit would be for map designers to put in the guards with the special "I can't be knocked out" helmets in key locations perhaps? Although, I have played several missions with non-knockoutable guards, allowing me to choose whether or not to distract the guard from their post to drop a heavy crate on their head, thus possibly alerting even more guards if nearby!

 

A mild issue that I have faced with missions where you are not allowed to knock out a single guard... you have to wait for ages and ages for the guards to patrol back and forth, waiting for that moment to creep across the hallway without being seen. This can get a little boring after a while, so I've bound [PgUp] and [PgDn] for "Timescale 2" and "Timescale 1"!

 

 

What do you think about objectives that prohibit killing?

This makes sense all round and also good to be mission dependant. If it were Garrett from Thief then this option should always be permanent because Garrett is not a killer, he's a thief!

 

However, this is The Dark Mod and every mission has a story to it... so I think prohibiting killing is fine but it is down to the player's choice too. I prefer to play on expert every time because of the challenge, and not being allowed to kill guards is a personal choice I play by default. However the mission "Trapped!" is great fun because of having the option to once in a while go bow-crazy and headshot everyone for the lols!

 

 

What do you think about "collect X loot" objectives?

I don't mind too much because I usually grab the required amount to steal by the end of each mission, but there is always that extra bit that I missed and sometimes I've replayed missions again and again and still cannot find the actual total loot within each level. I'll admit I've even resorted to binding a key to "TDM_Show_Loot" and NoClip+NoTarget through the map because of simply needing to know where that remaining loot actually was! Terrible I know, but a settled mind is better than madness.

 

Perhaps if a mission stated that the character that you are playing as required X-amount of loot to pay off this guy and that loan-shark and etc etc... this would make more sense. But then it IS a game after all, so as for collecting 100 rings in Sonic the Hedgehog is the thing to do to get rank "A", it makes sense to have to collect 700 loot on easy but 1500 loot on expert and so on.

 

For that little extra realism, I've always wanted a "Loot Sack Weight" mechanic, where you have a limit for how much loot you can actually carry at once, before you should head back to the start location to drop off what you have found so far, or hide it in a bush as a loot pile to collect later and then return to where you got to in that mission. I would really like a mechanic like this, especially when I just stole 3 massive golden urns from a mantlepiece and then in my mind I'm thinking - "Where the hell am I carrying all this loot? In my Star Trek Elite Force Holo-Belt?"

 

All in all I think these a good questions, and as long as a balance between good gameplay and strategy is met then each option can work!

 

 

Example of how a "Loot Sack Limit" could look

 

saintlucia_2016_09_17_21_54_14.jpg

 

* Edited for spelling failures

Edited by crowbars82
  • Like 2

My Autoexec.cfg contains seta g_fov "65" and seta r_gamma "0.9" for a more immersive Dark Mod experience...



Always expert difficulty every time... all hail the Dark Mod mission authors!



"Hmm, 'tis too quiet... I should summon the minstrel."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A time-limit can be nice, only to thighten the security, when the time is ended or beeing discovered.

 

Or even a time limit when a guard will generally wake back up again, although depending where the guard has been hidden like under a shelf... they may not get back up too easily I guess. I've always liked the idea of an unconscious time limit, but this would be quite hard to put into the game. I don't normally like time limits on anything, however a reasonable time limit until the sun came up or something like this could work? I've seen fully functional clocks in some missions so the player could keep an eye on the time, or even have a pocket watch item as well!

My Autoexec.cfg contains seta g_fov "65" and seta r_gamma "0.9" for a more immersive Dark Mod experience...



Always expert difficulty every time... all hail the Dark Mod mission authors!



"Hmm, 'tis too quiet... I should summon the minstrel."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I prefer making them optional objectives, unless there are valid story reasons to limit them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am I the only one who thinks that "loot sack" is a grand idea?

So very fitting, cozy, classy, thief-like!

 

Even when it would not be used to indicate the percentage of loot, and is only employed as a picture above the loot statistics in the

inventory - I deem it a small detail that would make a great permanent contribution to the sophistication and style of DM.

 

 

Example of how a "Loot Sack Limit" could look

 

saintlucia_2016_09_17_21_54_14.jpg

 

 

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly while bad people will find a way around the laws." - Plato

"When outmatched... cheat."— Batman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A "No K.O." objective might make sense in missions, or part of missions where you're supposed to disguise your presence. Other than that, i don't see a point in them. I do see a point in the "No kills" objective though, firstly "you are a thief not a murderer" ;), and secondly, your employer, or the people you deal with after a break in, like fences, probably don't like too much attention, and a job where you murder the whole household will probably draw a lot of attention, hence it will always be better to not kill anyone (on the other hand, it might not be a problem to murder someone from the city watch, when he gets in your way, so it might be best to make the objective not to kill civilians). For the loot objective, i think that most missions get it right on the hardest difficulty, and ask you to get a reasonable, but challenging amount of loot. To be honest, in many missions, i feel like the loot requirement could be made a tiny bit more difficult. But that's only a minor issue, most get it right really. I rarely ever get the full amount of loot in a mission though, but, hey, that's a motivation to replay the mission then. :)

 

Btw, that "loot sack" idea is great.

Edited by chakkman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No Kill and No KO are usually self-imposed limits like ghosting. I believe these actions are also registered

in your mission statistics so if you are inclined to share your work they sorta act as a demerit for purists.

 

I don't hate the idea of these limits but I tend to think of them as a tool to coerce a certain play-style.

 

If you do choose to apply them to harder difficulties it shouldn't just be a tick-box feature.

You should have a meaningful intended play-through path that aligns with these limits.

 

Ideally, you would highly tailor the mission to the limits and then reward players by saying

 

"If you want to get the intended experience, please either play at higher difficulties or refrain from KO\Kill

activity. Otherwise, this mission may seem more unstructured (sandbox) to you. You'll be robbing yourself

of the true intended experience."

 

All that said, I do tend to prefer missions where these are fully optional and I can use them to either

sloppily rescue myself from a pursuit situation or bypass a tedious scouting section.

  • Like 1

Please visit TDM's IndieDB site and help promote the mod:

 

http://www.indiedb.com/mods/the-dark-mod

 

(Yeah, shameless promotion... but traffic is traffic folks...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One problem with the "loot sack" is that the player has no clue what the loot total is, so how does his sack know what % he's grabbed?

A "loot sack user" would always know how "full" his loot sack is even when ignorant of the total available loot "out there".

And, as I said above, even without use as an indicator of loot amount (that can be made optional) that loot sack really looks very good where it is -

because I think the loot statistics item always looks so coldly "computer-like" and pulls me a little bit out of immersion when I look at it in a mission.

That loot sack is, at least in my opinion, artistically very nice and fitting, alone for making the loot statistics item looking friendlier and more immersive.

"Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly while bad people will find a way around the laws." - Plato

"When outmatched... cheat."— Batman

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I voted other to mirror Spring's suggestion.

These sorts of objectives are best done as optional. The check is there to validate players that accomplish it, but the mission won't hang up just for them.

 

In my experience watching playthrus, a lot of players try to meet the optional objectives, and only ditch them if they're put in a real bind that you could see would be really frustrating if they couldn't do it or they'd have to reload, and I think it's better for players to stick to the game than just reloading when trouble hits. So I think it works generally as intended.

What do you see when you turn out the light? I can't tell you but I know that it's mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A "loot sack user" would always know how "full" his loot sack is even when ignorant of the total available loot "out there".

 

 

So a loot sack tells you what percentage of the loot objective you have, as opposed to what percentage of available loot you have.

 

That makes sense.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These are some interesting matters as they all impact the gameplay, and the comments above show that people think quiet different on them.

 

Regarding the loot objective: The main problem with them is that the loot only really makes sense in a campaign, where you need the loot to buy equipment for the next mission. This way the player have a motivation to search for it, and everyone can decide whether it makes sense to invest time and energy searching it for the benefit of the next mission to be slightly less difficult. In such a case, a loot objective is pretty redundant.

 

Restrictions on knockouts and kill are a way to limit the player a bit, but similar to the loot objectives they tend to feel artificial if you don't provide a good reason for them.

 

Regarding all those points I think it makes more sense to think on how this concepts can be developed further. They are all part of the objective design in the original thief games, and we should be able to use more elegant approaches. Personally I think it makes more sense to give the play some sort of motivation to do or not to do certain thinks. If the player has a specific reason to avoid killing someone for example, you do not have to force it on him and he can decide for himself which approach to use.

 

Regarding optional objectives: This is something often suggested, but personally I hate them like nothing else. A game, independent from whether it is a pc game or a board game, should have a fixed set of rules. Applying a rule but telling the player that he is free to ignore it is a terrible design approach imho. It's like you tell a chess play that is king can only move one field, but he is free to ignore it and move him accross the whole board if he likes to.

 

Also the counter-argument that you may enforce a certain playstyle onto players doesn't really apply here. I mean the whole point of a game is that you have to solve certain tasks under a specific set of rules which you have to adopt to. Limitations on what the player can do are a part of the ruleset, and the players have to live with it. Despite the fact that everyone keeps saying that game design was much better in the past everyone seems to got used to beeing hold in their comfort zone, like today games tend to do it. ;)

 

I may conclude by citing the headline of the Thief4 review of the german games magazine GameStar: "Everybody's darling is nobody's friend." If you think restrictions are making sense in your mission or are improving the gameplay, apply them. Don't aim to create something that should appeal to everyone.

FM's: Builder Roads, Old Habits, Old Habits Rebuild

Mapping and Scripting: Apples and Peaches

Sculptris Models and Tutorials: Obsttortes Models

My wiki articles: Obstipedia

Texture Blending in DR: DR ASE Blend Exporter

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it this discussion is really difficult, so I will also tackle the points one by one:

Loot requirements: I think they are really handy to set the difficulty in a campaign, but for independent missions, they are actually unnecessary. Nevertheless, as chakkman pointed out, in most missions the loot requirement is very reasonable and can be achieved as long as you keep your eyes open, so I don't really mind if they are there or not.

Regarding the loot-bag: It is true that it would add to realism, but only, if this does not give any info about the total loot in the level. Also, it can grow quite annoying if you have to get the loot to an exit point several times, as it is senseless backtracking. I believe this kind of realism is not why people play TDM.

 

No killing is something that goes without saying for me, so I don't mind at all, but I also think it is something that should either have a reason or have consequences. However, the latter is also only possible in campaigns as you can increase amounts of city guard patrols or disable fences etc as a penalty for killing (or as in-level fences are not very common, delay the access to the money for one level, as the "heat" has to go down before you can sell your loot), but in an independent level such penalties do not make sense as long as the corpse is not found.

 

NoKO-ing, on the other hand, is something that very many people will find annoying and is something I would only require for levels, that (explained in the story) require ghosting. Something like the first "Mask"-mission in Thief 2, where you are scouting the target and risk increased security, if anything is amiss. Apart from that, I don't see any reason to give this restraint.

 

I agree with Obsttorte, that restraints should not be optional, except if the penalty coming from them can somehow be implemented (like in campaigns as described earlier) and the obejctive itself is only meant as an indicator for the palyer that he messed up in this point. Optional objectives should, in my opinion, really be objectives. So, you give the player a hint, that there is something extra to find in the level. If the player wants to find it, he/she gets a littel bonus (either for this level or in a campaign also in later missions), but it is not releveant for the overall progression.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is definitely a subjective topic, and can vary immensely depending on the mission, the author, and the player. For what it's worth, here's my two cents on these questions:

 

What do you think about objectives that limit my ability to KO AI?

 

Personally, I'm not a fan since my playstyle tends to deviate towards the "KO everyone, explore everything in peace" route. However, a good bit of ghosting can be immensely satisfying if executed correctly, so I would say implement KO limits or prohibitions only if you have a very good reason for it, or it's absolutely crucial for the mission's story. If you do end up implementing limits, I would also suggest allowing knockouts on lower difficulties, since forced ghosting definitely isn't for everyone. Otherwise, this should be optional or not present at all.

 

What do you think about objectives that prohibit killing?

 

I myself have gotten used to not killing anyone if I can help it - so much so that I'll take the pacifist route in practically every game it's possible! That said, forced non-lethal can also fall into the contextual category, as Crowbar mentioned. After all, it makes sense for some gentleman thief to not want to get his hands dirty... but it also makes sense for some common street thug to not give a whit about offing someone, so in fact the no-kill objective can act as a bit of character building in and of itself! That said, I'd advise some lenience on this, e.g. making it optional or even removing it on the lowest difficulty, though on the whole I don't think this is as big a deal as KO limits.

 

What do you think about "collect X loot" objectives?

 

This one I'm not sure there's a definitive answer to, since a lot of different things can work here. There's definitely a fine line between a so-easy-it's-boring objective and a frustrating loot hunt, though, so I guess what I might attempt is to keep testing and refining until you hit that sweet spot. Most missions tend to be pretty good about their loot goals, and I've gotten used to having this mandatory, so I don't mind it at all. On the flip side, though, you could also argue that a given loot goal can be mission-contextual in order to best satisfy story and mechanics needs. Ergo, in the end it's up to the mission author to decide on what's best to bring their vision to life.

 

 

For that little extra realism, I've always wanted a "Loot Sack Weight" mechanic, where you have a limit for how much loot you can actually carry at once, before you should head back to the start location to drop off what you have found so far, or hide it in a bush as a loot pile to collect later and then return to where you got to in that mission. I would really like a mechanic like this, especially when I just stole 3 massive golden urns from a mantlepiece and then in my mind I'm thinking - "Where the hell am I carrying all this loot? In my Star Trek Elite Force Holo-Belt?"

 

I can see where you're coming from here, but I might urge caution with this since it has the potential to get a tad bit annoying. I do, however, really like how Quinn Co.'s bank mission handled loot, with the player having to manually ferry heavy boxes and sacks of ill-gotten gains to a specific drop-off point, rather than sucking said boxes into their magical bag of holding, this being used in conjunction with the normal loot mechanic. I'd like to see more missions do something like that, since I found it to be an interesting challenge and a welcome change of pace, while being optional (if I recall correctly) and therefore not something to stress about.

 

 

In all, I'd say balancing everything properly is a good thing to strive for, but ultimately you should also stay true to what you've set out to create.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the nice discussion. I was sure the community would once again show its wisdom in a nice and civil discussion with well justified reasons for their views, and that's what is happening.

 

I see from the poll that the majority is comfortable with the thief standard: easy difficulty allows everything and on harder difficulties players expect sort-of-artificial limitations for kills/KOs just like the original thief games.

 

I also belong to this majority, but I feel it is sorta 1990s / 2000s gameplay mechanic. It is the standard, and it is safe as it matches the expectations of the players.

 

That said, it would be cool to bring this to the 2010-2020 era somehow, but I do not see how it could be done. That's why I was curious what you guys think.

 

But I guess the standard expectation nowadays is The Sandbox: make the mission playable with many styles. The good ol' standard thief mechanic allows it via difficulty settings. If it works, don't break it. ;)

Clipper

-The mapper's best friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Other on all of the votes.

 

I think whatever fits the context of your story and world best while allowing me to accomplish all loot blind, at least in theory, is the best option, but this is coming from someone who does stealth score 0 runs.

 

I think your best bet is to always include a fairly easy lower difficulty mode that doesn't limit the player too hard, but that's just my solution.

I like to record difficult stealth games, and right now you wonderful people are the only ones delivering on that front.

Click here for the crappy channel where that happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...

A bit of a bump here, but I really dislike global no-kill/no-KO objectives. To me, a big part of what makes Thief fun is the elasticity/"soft failure" thing; you get caught, but you've got options for getting out, and each of those options opens up new kinds of play. Hiding bodies, swordfighting, headshot sniping; these are all forms of play that you're just excising completely with these restrictions, possibilities that you're stopping the player from exploring. Heavy restrictions of this nature this are something I've seen in a lot of the TDM missions I've tried lately, either through no-kill restrictions or heavily limited inventories like in the PDs or the start of Ulysses Genesis (which is even worse, IMO, because you lose even more forms of play such as "Flashbomb and run"), and they kill the fun for me. An entire game of "wait for the patrolling guards to look away, then slip through the danger zone, with a forced reload if you mess it up" with no variations can get old, fast.

 

I'm a bit more flexible on no-kill than I am on no-KO. No-kill on a story target or two is OK. "No unarmed civilian kills" is also OK with me, since there's never a situation where you'll be properly "fighting" something unarmed. A global "that fancy sword is just for fashion", though, is just a huge turn-off.

 

As for loot goals, I like them as long as they're reasonable. "Find shiny thing, hear that tell-tale chime and know that you're one step closer to your objective" is a great feedback loop.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recent Status Updates

    • Petike the Taffer

      I've finally managed to log in to The Dark Mod Wiki. I'm back in the saddle and before the holidays start in full, I'll be adding a few new FM articles and doing other updates. Written in Stone is already done.
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      TDM 15th Anniversary Contest is now active! Please declare your participation: https://forums.thedarkmod.com/index.php?/topic/22413-the-dark-mod-15th-anniversary-contest-entry-thread/
       
      · 0 replies
    • JackFarmer

      @TheUnbeholden
      You cannot receive PMs. Could you please be so kind and check your mailbox if it is full (or maybe you switched off the function)?
      · 1 reply
    • OrbWeaver

      I like the new frob highlight but it would nice if it was less "flickery" while moving over objects (especially barred metal doors).
      · 4 replies
    • nbohr1more

      Please vote in the 15th Anniversary Contest Theme Poll
       
      · 0 replies
×
×
  • Create New...