Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Propose new game/software design concepts or new game/software ideas. They can be as whimsical as you like, just be careful you don't ask someone to make it for you...
User avatar
R-Tape
Site Admin
Posts: 6353
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:46 am

Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by R-Tape »

We have less time for Speccy games these days, and a google times more distractions. Most people play in an emulator with snapshots, hacking is easier than ever, and POKEs usually appear within a few days of release.

Is it even worth trying to design a game around a limited number of lives anymore? Should game authors acknowledge this and include an infy lives option on release? Or is it yielding too much to the leg jiggling ADHD of the lazy (or modern) player?

I suppose the hackers would get bored...
Ralf
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Poland

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ralf »

I release and will release my games without built-in cheats. Let hackers have some fun as you said.

When creating games I also make some dirty map of game if it is more than one screen game. I also don't publish it and allow people who like
map making to have fun.

But yes, we have less time, motivation and worse reflexes than in our teenage days. So my opinion is: use anything that will help you have fun and will keep you plaing the game - saving, pokes, maps, walkthroughs, rollback. Some people may call it cheating but who cares :) The ultimate goal is that you had great time and how you'll obtain you it's your choice.
User avatar
Ast A. Moore
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ast A. Moore »

R-Tape wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:07 pmMost people play in an emulator with snapshots

Is it even worth trying to design a game around a limited number of lives anymore?
See what I did there? ;)
My answer is no. Tough tamales.
It also lifts the responsibility from the developer to put some effort and design well balanced gameplay.
Every man should plant a tree, build a house, and write a ZX Spectrum game.

Author of A Yankee in Iraq, a 50 fps shoot-’em-up—the first game to utilize the floating bus on the +2A/+3,
and zasm Z80 Assembler syntax highlighter.
User avatar
MatGubbins
Dynamite Dan
Posts: 1237
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:45 am
Location: Kent, UK

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by MatGubbins »

If Manic Miner was released today on a console - save game after each level, acheivment points for killing the Kong Beast etc.... No, let's just send them back to level one and start again, there would be riots and a low score from the magazines.

If Portal was released back in our day, Chell has 3 lives. Dead and back to the start screen. Yup, fine with that, bung the cube on the button, through the door, level 2.....

It is up to the player if they want to cheat, use snapshots or rollback features. I admit, I do use them, but I will try to play each level normally - unless it's one of those games that everything is jumping on the player and the reaction time is faster than than I can handle.
Maybe we are older and don't want to learn how each level works, to seek how that level was crafted, the laser fire and jump timings, the movement patterns of the nasties and the different optimal routes to complete it in the fastest time possible.
They called it skill in our day.

Built in cheats for new games, it's an option that is too tempting to use.
Hikaru
Microbot
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 1:42 pm
Location: Russia
Contact:

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Hikaru »

Some people just habitually use POKEs all the time, even if the gameplay consists of 'pressing X to win'. Otherwise, the number of people willing to cheat can be seen as a means of telling whether a game has reasonable difficulty and/or whether it is achieved using fair means. Or alternatively, whether you're targeting the right audience.

Hacking and disassembling is easy these days, but hardly anyone would be bothered if they found out they had to disassemble an entire game. :roll:

Things like 99 lives and especially built-in trainers are just plain wrong.
Inactive account
User avatar
R-Tape
Site Admin
Posts: 6353
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:46 am

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by R-Tape »

Ast A. Moore wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:04 pm It also lifts the responsibility from the developer to put some effort and design well balanced gameplay.
Hmmm don't agree. Developers could accept that the game will be played with snapshots and design it with that in mind.
MatGubbins wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:21 pm Maybe we are older and don't want to learn how each level works, to seek how that level was crafted, the laser fire and jump timings, the movement patterns of the nasties and the different optimal routes to complete it in the fastest time possible.
They called it skill in our day.
True, I like the idea of developing the skill but just repeating things already done many times can become metronomic. The player needs to get good enough to solve the challenges you describe at least once in order to progress.
Hikaru wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 6:52 pm Things like 99 lives
I'm guilty of this with Biscuits in Hell (well 128 lives anyway), but the game is very, very hard. I don't see a problem, a lot of Yerz's games do this and I just file it under 'a fun experience' rather than a massive challenge.

-----------
IMO restricted lives are a hindrance to many games. The new Xelda is just about okay because there are energy top ups and the action part of it is fairly pedestrian, but it'll take around 3 hours to solve the puzzles - how many people playing 'on bread and water' will bother to complete it after being forced to restart? How many people have completed one of the adventure styled Egghead games without snapshots? Jonathan puts a lot of effort into anti hack measures (and I love the ideas from a programming point of view!), but these are big, challenging games that few people will want to repeat everything if they spoon that tricky jump yet again.
User avatar
Sokurah
Manic Miner
Posts: 283
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:38 am
Contact:

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Sokurah »

I think that the number of lives in a game should depend on the type of game.
If the game is about motorskills and precision then a set number of lives is suitable, but if it's a rapid-death type game then unlimited or perhaps 99 is good. Depends on the game. Figure out what suits it.
Bottom line is that the game should be challenging but not punishing the player ... too much ;)

With the 128K version of Vallation I made the game a lot easier (perhaps too easy?), as I thought many people would already have played through the 48K version so they might not want to be dragged through the pain of the first 4 levels again before they got to the new stuff. I'm even awarding extra lives every time a level is completed.

I also made it much more challenging for the hackers (speaking to you, Mr. All-Caps :lol: ). Sure, it's possible to find all the usual POKE's, but anyone trying is going to work a lot harder to find them. Just a bit of fun to do for me ;) :D
Website: Tardis Remakes / Mostly remakes of Arcade and ZX Spectrum games.
My games for the Spectrum: Dingo, The Speccies, The Speccies 2, Vallation & Sqij.
Twitter: Sokurah
User avatar
Juan F. Ramirez
Bugaboo
Posts: 5101
Joined: Tue Nov 14, 2017 6:55 am
Location: Málaga, Spain

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Juan F. Ramirez »

Definitely not!
User avatar
Ast A. Moore
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ast A. Moore »

R-Tape wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:34 pm Developers could accept that the game will be played with snapshots and design it with that in mind.
Of course, but then such games will hardly be playable on real hardware.
Take Einar’s Pixel Quest, for instance. It took me a few days to complete both games in the series. Would I even bother with them if I didn’t have an emulator? Well, no, because the games were designed with the emulator in mind and only the emulator.

Snapshots and rollbacks already give players the option of frequent save points, so why take away the full experience by essentially incorporating them in a game?

As Sokurah noted, it should depend of what kind of games we’re talking about. Some—Pixel Quest—don’t even have the concept of lives or energy or even scorekeeping. For others, these are essential elements that make them enticing.

A cheat mode is a viable alternative. Give the player invincibility but limit the number of levels or points awarded, for instance.

Another alternative that may address your original concern of the lack of time for playing is making shorter, simpler games. Something one could spend a few moments to learn and return to it every once in a while and perhaps even complete in a few minutes after mastering the basics. A sprint rather than a marathon. That’s the approach I took with Yankee.
Every man should plant a tree, build a house, and write a ZX Spectrum game.

Author of A Yankee in Iraq, a 50 fps shoot-’em-up—the first game to utilize the floating bus on the +2A/+3,
and zasm Z80 Assembler syntax highlighter.
Ralf
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Poland

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ralf »

You should remember that it's actully quite hard to guess if game will be hard or easy for gamer.

You don't know what he will be using - keyboard, joystick, some pad... Will he be playing it in emulator, real Spectrum with rubber keys or on on small mobile phone with tiny keys.

Should we assume that if it's a game for Spectrum then he should be playing it on real Spectrum??? I'm not so sure about it.

I also saw many times so guy losing all lifes on first screen of the game where your reaction was "wtf? how can be so lame?" ;) Players can foten surprise you.

And another thing - in most cases when you write a Spectrum game you are a single man doing coding, design and testing. You don't have testers. Sometimes you don't want testers - you want to do your game your way and not hear some guy complaining, nagging and telling you to do your game his way ;)

The problem is that while making a game you play and test it hundreds of times so you learn it ,you memorize it. It becomes easy for you and you are no longer able to take point of view of a guy who sees it for the first time.

So it's not east to make game easy but not to easy. My answer is - do it your way and let player play it his way.
User avatar
Ast A. Moore
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ast A. Moore »

Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 am It's actully quite hard to guess if game will be hard or easy for gamer.
Not really. It’s harder to predict what the gamer’s initial experience will be, true, I’ve experienced it myself. Once the player overcomes the initiation barrier, his experience will be not dissimilar from that of the developer. We’re all human.
Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 amYou don't know what he will be using - keyboard, joystick, some pad... Will he be playing it in emulator, real Spectrum with rubber keys or on on small mobile phone with tiny keys.
I can only speak for myself, and I develope games for the ZX Spectrum. Not ZX Spectrum clones (including the NEXT), nor ZX Spectrum emulators running on traditional computers, nor ZX Spectrum emulators running on touchscreen devices. I will try to accommodate all of them to a degree—and if necessary—but not if it requires breaking compatibility with the original hardware. It is unrealistic to expect a ZX Spectrum game to operate as though it has been written with a modern smartphone in mind.
Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 amShould we assume that if it's a game for Spectrum then he should be playing it on real Spectrum? I'm not so sure about it.
Should be? No. Might be? Absolutely.
Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 amI also saw many times so guy losing all lifes on first screen of the game where your reaction was "wtf? how can be so lame?" ;) Players can foten surprise you.
True, but it can easily go the other way. That’s what balancing gameplay is all about.
Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 amwhen you write a Spectrum game you are a single man doing coding, design and testing. You don't have testers.
True for many other platforms, including modern ones. It’s neither here nor there. It’s up to you to invite more people to help you design, develop, and test your game. You’re free to release as many pre-release versions, or updates to the final release. Some developers prefer not to do it. Others are quite open about it. Neither approach is inherently good or bad. Ultimately, it’s the result that matters.
Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 amThe problem is that while making a game you play and test it hundreds of times so you learn it ,you memorize it. It becomes easy for you and you are no longer able to take point of view of a guy who sees it for the first time.
I partially addressed it in my first point. Unless it’s some cryptic puzzle-solving adventure game, where it is, indeed, not easy to predict if anybody other that yourself will get the clues (e.g. pour machine oil on a magic bean during a waning gibbous moon, jump up three times while standing 17 pixels to the left of the Dorky Idol statue, and feed the been to the blue pterodactyl), we’re all pretty much on the same level. It will obviously take a novice a little bit of time to get the hang of the game’s mechanics—controls, inertia, collision detection, enemy patterns, pace, etc.—but it’s not something unattainable in principle. In this regard, the developer is just a gamer with more gameplay time under his belt.

TL;DR: Design a well balanced game. Then you won’t have resort to enabling, or relying upon, cheats such as infinite lives, emulator snapshots, etc.
Every man should plant a tree, build a house, and write a ZX Spectrum game.

Author of A Yankee in Iraq, a 50 fps shoot-’em-up—the first game to utilize the floating bus on the +2A/+3,
and zasm Z80 Assembler syntax highlighter.
Hikaru
Microbot
Posts: 100
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 1:42 pm
Location: Russia
Contact:

Sorreh!

Post by Hikaru »

MatGubbins wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 5:21 pm Maybe we are older and don't want
Image
Inactive account
User avatar
Morkin
Bugaboo
Posts: 3251
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:50 am
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Morkin »

R-Tape wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 8:34 pm I'm guilty of this with Biscuits in Hell (well 128 lives anyway), but the game is very, very hard. I don't see a problem
One thing about collect-em-ups is that I don't find infinite lives helpful when the game resets the objects on a screen after you lose a life. I accepted it with Manic Miner but nowadays I like to feel that I'm progressing, even if a game is hard.

The biggest problem with Biscuits from Hell was the disgraceful lack of custard creams in one of the first two levels to give gamers motivation to persevere with it. :evil:
My Speccy site: thirdharmoniser.com
User avatar
R-Tape
Site Admin
Posts: 6353
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:46 am

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by R-Tape »

I think most games will work equally well on hardware and emulator. I can only think of the typing game 'Utter Tripe' that should have a separate rubber keys version, and people that play Speccy games on smartphones are lunatics that should never be catered to :mrgreen:

It all depends on the type of game of course, but say in a large flip screen game what is the point of sending the player back to the start? I suppose there is more of a thrill if you jussst complete the game with one life to spare.

And why does the correct number of lives always seem to end up somewhere between 3 and 8?

Serious questions by the way, these are things I've always done "just because we do".
User avatar
R-Tape
Site Admin
Posts: 6353
Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2017 11:46 am

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by R-Tape »

Morkin wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:20 pm One thing about collect-em-ups is that I don't find infinite lives helpful when the game resets the objects on a screen after you lose a life. I accepted it with Manic Miner but nowadays I like to feel that I'm progressing, even if a game is hard.
When I did Stamp Quest I reset the objects on screen because I didn't know how to do otherwise*, with Biscuits I chose not to do it. I preferred the idea of 8 separate challenges, each one having to be fully completed.


*I hope no-one ever does a disassembly on that game.
User avatar
Spud
Manic Miner
Posts: 372
Joined: Sun Nov 12, 2017 8:50 pm
Contact:

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Spud »

What about Treasure Island Dizzy? That only had 1 life. They got that spot on in my opinion.

I don't like it when games don't give you the final life, ie life 0. Starting the game with three lives should mean you get 4 lives. That is criminally poor form.
Ralf
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Poland

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ralf »

I'll generally hold my opinion that people of our age are nowadays crappier in playing games that you would ever expect ;)

The problem with retro communities is that many people here aren't actually active gamers. They used to be gamers 20 years ago. Now they are mostly driven by nostalgia, they turn on some new game, play it for 3 minutes and turn it off.

If you don't play games regularly then you are lame at it. And when you are lame you quickly lose so you give up and don't play. It's a vicious circle.

So for whom should I do my games? For 10 people that are active, motivated gamers and will play it from start to end? Or for 500 lamers who played seriously for last time 10 years ago?
User avatar
Ast A. Moore
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2640
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 3:16 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ast A. Moore »

Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:48 pm The problem with retro communities is that many people here aren't actually active gamers.
Agreed, but I don’t think it’s a problem.
Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:48 pmSo for whom should I do my games?
I make games I myself would like to play. Developing retro games (I mean actual retro games, not modern games with a “retro” vibe) is hardly a commercial or highly profitable undertaking. We don’t have binding contracts with publishers, no deadlines to meet, no bad reviews in magazines that might dissuade our employers from renewing our contracts. While it does take away a certain degree of healthy competition, we can focus on things that are more rewarding to us, if only to distract us from counting the number of gray hairs (at least those of us who have any left to count to begin with).
Every man should plant a tree, build a house, and write a ZX Spectrum game.

Author of A Yankee in Iraq, a 50 fps shoot-’em-up—the first game to utilize the floating bus on the +2A/+3,
and zasm Z80 Assembler syntax highlighter.
Ralf
Rick Dangerous
Posts: 2279
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 11:59 am
Location: Poland

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Ralf »

I make games I myself would like to play
All right, so do I :) I don't do any serious research if other people find it entertaining I just do what my intuition tells me is right. And actually I will never know if most other people find it entertaining. When I release a game I get comments from let's say 10 people. And I have reasons to believe that number of people who downloaded it is actually much bigger, let's say 100 or even 1000 in longer time. But as they don't say anything I don't know their opinions.

Okay, I guess we went too far from the original question ;)
User avatar
Morkin
Bugaboo
Posts: 3251
Joined: Mon Nov 13, 2017 8:50 am
Location: Bristol, UK

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Morkin »

R-Tape wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 1:32 pm When I did Stamp Quest I reset the objects on screen because I didn't know how to do otherwise*, with Biscuits I chose not to do it. I preferred the idea of 8 separate challenges, each one having to be fully completed.


*I hope no-one ever does a disassembly on that game.
Yes, I guess it changes the dynamic slightly, making them like 'screen challenge' games, each level of which you have to master. Probably why I'm always rubbish at Donkey Kong (back to the bottom of the screen...). Mind you, I'm rubbish at Pac Man and that game doesn't put the eaten dots back when you lose a life... Hmmm..
My Speccy site: thirdharmoniser.com
hikoki
Manic Miner
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:54 am

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by hikoki »

Infy lives may force the designer to make smarter and harder level designs which engage the player. I for one tend to make fewer snapshots so it may help to challenge the playe as there's room for more difficulty with lots of chances to improve. The designer is freed to think out more complex levels without worrying about getting the player tired or frustrated. Some classic games used to be be really hard for durability and lack of testing. Infy live on modern games MAY be a good excuse to make good old challenging games while being approachable, that is, more work for the designer even though the game will last few days in the hands of the player.
User avatar
1024MAK
Bugaboo
Posts: 3104
Joined: Wed Nov 15, 2017 2:52 pm
Location: Sunny Somerset in the U.K. in Europe

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by 1024MAK »

R-Tape wrote: Sun Nov 19, 2017 4:07 pm We have less time for Speccy games these days, and a google times more distractions. Most people play in an emulator with snapshots, hacking is easier than ever, and POKEs usually appear within a few days of release.

Is it even worth trying to design a game around a limited number of lives anymore? Should game authors acknowledge this and include an infy lives option on release? Or is it yielding too much to the leg jiggling ADHD of the lazy (or modern) player?

I suppose the hackers would get bored...
So, I've read through the whole thread (without needing infinite lives :mrgreen: ), and no one has mentioned that a lot of early ZX Spectrum games were inspired by arcade games machines. Arcade games of course had to have a system to get you addicted, but also to "kill you off" so that you would put another coin in the slot to try again... or to tempt another player (spectator) to have (another) go...

That was Sir Clive's big failing, he never put a coin mechanism on the ZX Spectrum Image

So to sum up
  1. Games should be playable enough to get a player interested, to get them addicted.
  2. But, just as there should be rewards in the game, there should also be some kind of stick (punishment), to as to encourage the player to be more careful in his/her moves. Loosing a life (or energy level or similar) does this.
  3. And of course, there has to be a balance, as it is the overall balance in the difficulty of the game that makes it a good game. Too easy and players will feel let down. Too hard, and many players will give up, and moan that it was too hard...
  4. And of course, without the coin mechanism, there are many other ways to "punish" the player (metal Joystick that gets energised to 1000V maybe? - only joking!) within a game. Or to reward the player. But it is up to the game designer to decide ;)
So to answer the original question, NO games should not normally be released with an infinite lives option.
And games should be developed that are playable on a real ZX Spectrum.

Mark
:!: Standby alert :!:
“There are four lights!”
Step up to red alert. Sir, are you absolutely sure? It does mean changing the bulb :dance
Looking forward to summer later in the year.
hikoki
Manic Miner
Posts: 576
Joined: Thu Nov 16, 2017 10:54 am

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by hikoki »

A few examples.
Doodlebug:
good stuff but too short!!
Dead Flesh Boy :
makes me play despite being killed many times (the free version has some bugs and too easy levels like they were designed in a rush.. so the cassette version may be worth a try)
Janosik:
Hard Dinamic-like great game. It could have been better (even harder, with randomness elements,etc) with infinite lives.
Nomad
Manic Miner
Posts: 600
Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 12:38 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by Nomad »

Ralf wrote: Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:42 am <snip>
The problem is that while making a game you play and test it hundreds of times so you learn it ,you memorize it. It becomes easy for you and you are no longer able to take point of view of a guy who sees it for the first time.
So many of the microcomputer games of the 80s fall into this trap and become unintentionally cryptic enigmas, Spectrum and Commodore were ok because the pool of players was large enough you would run into someone who knew how to beat the stage/level. But pity the Dragon/Atari/BBC micro user in the UK lol.. No dice, you could have spent 10 pounds or more on a game that you were totally stuck on and there was no way you could realistically progress.

With a text adventure; the well written ones it was ok because you could work through it. But for the action games there was no way you would get through some of these games unless you knew the trick(s). There were many times I put down a title and thought 'it must have made sense to him at the time, but I can't understand why a human being would do it that way...' lol.

It's really true what they say 'You can be to close to something to see that there is a problem'.
ANDREWRYALS
Microbot
Posts: 106
Joined: Sat Mar 24, 2018 5:02 pm

Re: Should every new game be released with an infy lives option?

Post by ANDREWRYALS »

Fashionably late as usual. I used to hack everything in site and I used to look for code levels, passwords, solutions to text adventures. I even found a few spikey messages left for me (thanks guys). Now I just prefer to hack for a little nostalgia and I only poke things which I really enjoy playing or need hacking for historical reasons.
Post Reply