a discussion in the FTL dev office about game balance
Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2012 4:07 pm
Dev A: I just coded the feature we talked about, where the thingamajig targets the whatsit and hits it for 2 points of xeon damage.
Dev B: Great... [plays a while] Testing shows that unless the player has the whoozer installed, they have a 90%+ chance of dying in an encounter with a thingamajig.
Dev A: Oh man... it took me all day to code this new feature.
Dev B: It's ok, we just have to find a way to balance it. We could set it up so the thingamajig only appears after the whoozer, or tweek its damage numbers, or make it dodge-able, or...
Dev A: Wait are you saying we need to do this every time we add a feature?
Dev B: Yes, good game design takes this sort of thing very seriously.
Dev A: Hey I have an idea! 30 years ago when computer games called 'roguelikes' were played from punch cards, nobody bothered to balance games. They could put in anything they wanted and if the player died, they could start over. It's a feature, not a bug.
Dev B: Ohh, I see where you're going with that. So we put in random encounters, and instead of trying to balance them all out, the player can just die sometimes due to chance. Dunno man, players like to be tested on skills. Clicking on an RNG is no fun.
Dev A: You don't understand, this is a feature. Our game is too short to allow player skill to be the dominating factor - people would beat it too quick. Having a few unbalanced random encounters per game is a great way to kill players just enough that they have to keep playing over and over again to win.
Dev B: Brilliant. I can see why this style of game design has been enormously popular over the last 30 years and continues to be used today by big-name game publishers. What will we do with all the time we're saving from game balancing?
Dev A: Hookers and blow?
Dev B: Yay!
Dev B: Great... [plays a while] Testing shows that unless the player has the whoozer installed, they have a 90%+ chance of dying in an encounter with a thingamajig.
Dev A: Oh man... it took me all day to code this new feature.
Dev B: It's ok, we just have to find a way to balance it. We could set it up so the thingamajig only appears after the whoozer, or tweek its damage numbers, or make it dodge-able, or...
Dev A: Wait are you saying we need to do this every time we add a feature?
Dev B: Yes, good game design takes this sort of thing very seriously.
Dev A: Hey I have an idea! 30 years ago when computer games called 'roguelikes' were played from punch cards, nobody bothered to balance games. They could put in anything they wanted and if the player died, they could start over. It's a feature, not a bug.
Dev B: Ohh, I see where you're going with that. So we put in random encounters, and instead of trying to balance them all out, the player can just die sometimes due to chance. Dunno man, players like to be tested on skills. Clicking on an RNG is no fun.
Dev A: You don't understand, this is a feature. Our game is too short to allow player skill to be the dominating factor - people would beat it too quick. Having a few unbalanced random encounters per game is a great way to kill players just enough that they have to keep playing over and over again to win.
Dev B: Brilliant. I can see why this style of game design has been enormously popular over the last 30 years and continues to be used today by big-name game publishers. What will we do with all the time we're saving from game balancing?
Dev A: Hookers and blow?
Dev B: Yay!