Подтвердите e-mail

Для публикаций, комментариев, реакций и сообщений подтвердите адрес.

←

Публикация

Jon Ingold

The first version of ink contained no randomising at all, and my thought was that we could instead tie results to arbitrary flags - so if you picked the yellow tie, you’ll get a 7 in combat later, etc - to make scumming impossible.

Seva Khusid🔜gamescom

But I don’t think it’s a randomness problem. Even a deterministic, progress-by-winning game should be fun to fail at; otherwise why are you including the option to fail?

Обсуждение

Ответы

Seva Khusid🔜gamescom

But isn't this randomness in games from the first principles? See also: Mario 64 speedrun kicking dust now to manipulate where a coin would land half an hour later.

Ответ для Seva Khusid🔜gamescom
Jon Ingold

It’s more normal to have a ”column” of random numbers the game works through, which is different because if you do two things in a different order you’ll get different results, whereas in this model things are entirely (arbitrarily) fixed

Jon Ingold

(then we introduced shuffles, and someone used them to set a dice, and we relented. but I still think it’s a good constraint)

Ответ для Jon Ingold
A Sam of Good Quality

You could produce a bunch of random values at the very start and then just pull from that list when you need to randomize if anti-scumming was the goal I guess.