-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Lessons In Game Design: Devil May Cry 3
- Thread starter Leguna
- Start date
Spazbiohaz
Member
With the Save option mid level I feel replaying the level helps you become more powerful for the second time you Playthrough. Also, like in MS3 you cannot continue at the boss, making you learn. In all the levels of DMC3 after the 3 or 4 time trying to beat a boss you learn the level inside and out and reaching the boss with full life was easy. The continues in DMC3 are more like retries to learn the boss pattern, once you learn it you can retry the level and kick the shit out of the boss.
Kudos to you I agree 100%!
You could say that having 5 continues in Contra SS is annoying. Or that you cannot continue at the boss in MS3 is annoying. You can also say that losing you memory card is annoying. But when something is annoying Hard...It is because it is hard.
Your earlier complaints are because you do not understand them. Read the replies you were given in this post.
1. Every level is 5-15 minutes TOPS!!! No checkpoint is needed.
3. To me the Handguns are the most powerful. Guns are used to break AI combos or to give you time to reach an enemy. Not to kill them (Unless you are in Gunslinger). This is how DMC was and applies to DMC3.
Gunslinger With the Charge button Guns will kill enemies in 3-4 charged shots. Again Guns are combo breakers and to continue yours. Gunslinger is great to get orbs.
Trickster When you reach level 3 Trick you cannot be touched (Due to the ability to disappear). This is the most useful Style late game. I had this maxed at level 7.
Royal Guard Great for hard enemies with different patterns. I did not use this style much but Air block ownz
Sword Master Never used
Shouta
Member
Quote winner.
Whether or not you like the save system in a game, it doesn't make a game artificially harder, just more frustrating. Putting this save system/checkpoint system in something like Ninja Gaiden as opposed to the system they used just a more frustrating game rather than a harder game because it doesn't actually affect the combat, just where you start.
MrAngryFace
Banned
If you actually time yourself through matches of a videogame, you need to just stop.
HAving not played DMC3, I think I could have made the same kind of thread, but been more accurate than leguna.
HAving not played DMC3, I think I could have made the same kind of thread, but been more accurate than leguna.
I have gotten the impression from reading alot of reviews, that this game could have been truly one of the great ones. But as the american version stands, it's a fundamentally broken game.
That guy Greg at Gamespot summed it up best when he said that if it weren't for it being his job to complete the game he wouldn't have bothered with it. Yall can sit there and call everyone that dislikes the game as "weaksauce". But almost every review i have read has implied that the game went passed challenging and is just plain frustrating. Meaning it's just a broken game.
You can actually feel the reviewers giving the game scores much higher than what they think it deserves. It's almost as if there thinking to themselves that they should really like the game but are just as frustrated as everyone else.
That guy Greg at Gamespot summed it up best when he said that if it weren't for it being his job to complete the game he wouldn't have bothered with it. Yall can sit there and call everyone that dislikes the game as "weaksauce". But almost every review i have read has implied that the game went passed challenging and is just plain frustrating. Meaning it's just a broken game.
You can actually feel the reviewers giving the game scores much higher than what they think it deserves. It's almost as if there thinking to themselves that they should really like the game but are just as frustrated as everyone else.
Shouta said:
Quote loser.
In NG, you could make mistakes through the level, save before a boss, repeatedly fight some respawning enemies for cash and energy, save again, and fight the boss. Mundane, but not moreso than repeating entire levels. And the initiative to get better in NG still exists; when you get better you naturally don't have to follow this method and keep whaling on boring enemies. NG promotes skill, but doesn't punish amateurs. Except on stage 2. NG wins, fatality.
Shouta
Member
NG lover aren't ya?
I said a save system doesn't artificially make a game harder. A game is hard by the design of the enemies and battle system. I don't see any relevancy in your post to what I said.
On the subject of your post, the save system was the one thing I didn't like about NG. I'm in the minority there.
Spazbiohaz
Member
junkster said:
That is what made NG so easy. Restarting the whole level is about just the same amount of time that NG save spot were in. If i Remember right NG was not level base it was save based.
Duckhuntdog
Member
To be honest, he does bring up so good points, but taking into consideration the type of game DMC3 is and the basic mechanics, I don't really see that many "design" problems.
DMC is about pattern recognition and memorization. You learn the enemy and assoicate a pattern to them. Once you have this down, beating the enemy is easy. The easy way, is to limit the pattern of the enemy, so you don't have to take in too much information, but that just makes the enemy really easy and as far as I can tell, easy is not part of the DMC 3 vocabulary. Capcom figures will you learn the patterns or parts of them, each time you face the enemy. So in a way the game is designed around you dying and applying the knowledge the next time you face the enemy.
It's not the best way to do this approch, IMO. It could have been handled much easier, say with short attack patterns that have a set up- the old, the enemy will show you the attack he is going to do in this pattern and you read the action/environment and decide the best course of action. You do this with several attack patterns, but the actions involved become more complex, or another action on the player's part is added.
As far as the guns being useless, well, they have to be weak, or else they would become a dominating strategy. That's all you would use in the game would be the guns. It's like in Double Dragon in the arcade how everyone would just do the elbow. There really isn't much risk to using the gun, you are at a distance, they fire at a good rate, so the reward for using them as the main way to fight isn't great.
I don't see the problem with the 5-15 minute stages, each time you play through the stage it is assumed that you learned something about dispatching the enemies and your play through should be considerably faster.
Again, the basic mechanic for the type of game DMC is naturally has you dying often as you learn patterns.
DMC is about pattern recognition and memorization. You learn the enemy and assoicate a pattern to them. Once you have this down, beating the enemy is easy. The easy way, is to limit the pattern of the enemy, so you don't have to take in too much information, but that just makes the enemy really easy and as far as I can tell, easy is not part of the DMC 3 vocabulary. Capcom figures will you learn the patterns or parts of them, each time you face the enemy. So in a way the game is designed around you dying and applying the knowledge the next time you face the enemy.
It's not the best way to do this approch, IMO. It could have been handled much easier, say with short attack patterns that have a set up- the old, the enemy will show you the attack he is going to do in this pattern and you read the action/environment and decide the best course of action. You do this with several attack patterns, but the actions involved become more complex, or another action on the player's part is added.
As far as the guns being useless, well, they have to be weak, or else they would become a dominating strategy. That's all you would use in the game would be the guns. It's like in Double Dragon in the arcade how everyone would just do the elbow. There really isn't much risk to using the gun, you are at a distance, they fire at a good rate, so the reward for using them as the main way to fight isn't great.
I don't see the problem with the 5-15 minute stages, each time you play through the stage it is assumed that you learned something about dispatching the enemies and your play through should be considerably faster.
Again, the basic mechanic for the type of game DMC is naturally has you dying often as you learn patterns.
I may be taking this out of context but YES way a save system can artificially make a game harder. Imagine if DMC3 didn't allow you to save AT ALL and forced you to finish the entire game in one sitting, and if you die at the final final boss then too bad son back to Dante's shop unskippable cheese cinematic for you. That's artificially hard right there.Shouta said:
Right on, Leguna.Leguna said:
I want to play games at my leisure. They're recreation, I'm busy these days and I don't have the huge blocks of free time that I used to. Likewise, technology has advanced to the point that saving frequently is a relatively easy thing to implement in any game. Therefore, as a developer, you should not dictate to me how much time I have to spend on your game in one sitting to make progress (beyond the point of reason). To Hell with your game if you do so.
Imagine a DVD where you were required to watch it uninterrupted all in one sitting, or had to wait at least 15 minutes between pausing it or turning off the DVD player, otherwise you had to re-watch a long portion of the movie. Folks wouldn't stand for it and the DVD wouldn't sell.
And I won't stand for it in modern games.
Shouta said:
LOL, of course it does! You mean to say that a system where you can save at many points throughout a chapter/stage is the same difficulty as one where you can only save at the beginning? That's like saying emulation savestates don't make a game easier. Of course they do! Anyone here can beat any NES game with savestate abuse. And getting back to normal gaming, having savepoints sprinkled throughout a stage instead of only at the beginning of a level guarantees that you have more room for mistakes. This absolutely guarantees easier gaming.
Having an (arguably) BAD save system, such as DMC3's makes the game harder. Less room for mistakes, much more precision and skill and luck is involved to make it to the boss with full health. Meanwhile you're nervous because it takes actual time to get to the boss that handed your ass to you and since you have to work your way back, so you probably won't get to experiment as much since its such a menial task to get there in the first place. The game actually penalizes for losing so you have to play safe and focused to win. If you deny this, you're just plain batty man!
I'm either misinterpreting you, or you're not making any sense!
C- Warrior
Banned
Why do people keep saying "over and over?"
The level is 15 minutes?
You replay it, you gain more orbs, level up your experience, learn new styles of play and you yourself get better.
So replaying it isn't repetative, certainly not more so than any other game.
And it's 15 minutes!!
Do you want a checkpoint per minute?
The benefit of having no checkpoint in before a boss is because it allows you to not go in with guns blazing an whatnot. You have to have strategy, you have to balance your currecny and realize what you get. Should you buy this, or that, or save up for this.
If you want a checkpoint, buy a yellow orb. You can hold 99 of them.
Make sure you save in-game (in-mssion) so that when you die, you can still save your exerience and orb count. Honestly, end up dying once or twice in a mission you'll hvae like 40,000 orbs and the yeloow orbs cap out at 3,000 orbs a pop....talk about "infinite saves there they are..."
The level is 15 minutes?
You replay it, you gain more orbs, level up your experience, learn new styles of play and you yourself get better.
So replaying it isn't repetative, certainly not more so than any other game.
And it's 15 minutes!!
Do you want a checkpoint per minute?
The benefit of having no checkpoint in before a boss is because it allows you to not go in with guns blazing an whatnot. You have to have strategy, you have to balance your currecny and realize what you get. Should you buy this, or that, or save up for this.
If you want a checkpoint, buy a yellow orb. You can hold 99 of them.
Make sure you save in-game (in-mssion) so that when you die, you can still save your exerience and orb count. Honestly, end up dying once or twice in a mission you'll hvae like 40,000 orbs and the yeloow orbs cap out at 3,000 orbs a pop....talk about "infinite saves there they are..."
Shouta
Member
That's not hard, that's frustrating (and extremely stupid as a design choice but it's made up anyway). The difficulty in a game comes from the gameplay. Even if the save system was different, if a boss is kicking your ass, it's gonna kick your ass. It won't matter if it takes you 10 seconds to get to the boss fight again or 10 minutes, the same game is gonna be hard either way.
15 minutes is a long time.ninja gaiden da best said:
Especially if you didn't love the level the first time, or die a few times on the boss (doesn't seem uncommon), then all of a sudden you are looking at an hour of the same crap. I have a lot of games sitting on my shelf to get to.
Shouta said:
:shrug: there's a huge overlap between 'frustrating' and 'hard' and this is it right here (in fact the case can be made that videogames are only frustrating when you can't finish the objectives it gives you and that only happens if you keep on losing or dying in them and that only happens when the game is hard) . After all If I was a DMC3 god then having no saves at all wouldn't be frustrating to me because it wouldn't be hard for me to finish de whole damn game in one sitting, but since I'm normal it does frustrate me because finishing the whole game in one sitting is HARD.
Is the Easy Mode really that difficult, as well? I must be in the minority, but I prefer my games to err on the side of challenging because it forces me to stay focused and engaged. I feel ripped off when I can victoriously flop and stumble through a title with little to no effort.
That being said, super cheap AI still pisses me the fuck off quite often. *cough*NBA Live*cough*
That being said, super cheap AI still pisses me the fuck off quite often. *cough*NBA Live*cough*
Doc Holliday
SPOILER: Columbus finds America
I wonder what the guys complaining about dmc3 thought about Ninja Gaiden on the nes. Now that is hard...starting a level LOL how about restarting the whole thing if you turn off the console or being thrown back 3 levels if you die after a certain point. i smashed a few gamepads playing that mofo.
I played a demo at E3.
But for that matter, where do I specifically mention DMC3 in my posts above? It's the practice of being unnecessarily stingy with game saves that I'm on a crusade against, not this game in particular. It happens to be the latest example of a scourge in gaming which MUST BE STOPPED AT ANY COST.
But for that matter, where do I specifically mention DMC3 in my posts above? It's the practice of being unnecessarily stingy with game saves that I'm on a crusade against, not this game in particular. It happens to be the latest example of a scourge in gaming which MUST BE STOPPED AT ANY COST.
Duckhuntdog
Member
Seriously, some of you guys shouldn't be game designers. Reviewers, yes, designers, no.
And I mean that with the utmost respect. The way most of you would design a game would be like this: Get weapon, save, press button to fight boss, save, game finished.
And I mean that with the utmost respect. The way most of you would design a game would be like this: Get weapon, save, press button to fight boss, save, game finished.
Kabuki Waq
Member
usually it takes quite a few tries to figure out how to beat a good boss. If for each one of those tries i had to go through 15 mins of enemies you are damn right i would be frustrated. FUck that shit, noone should be defending save systems like the one in DMC 3.
Imagine if TEkken 5 made you restart teh game from the beginning each time you lost to jinpachi.
Its frustrating it makes the game artificially harder and has no place in gaming today.
edit: why not make the AI better instead?
Imagine if TEkken 5 made you restart teh game from the beginning each time you lost to jinpachi.
Its frustrating it makes the game artificially harder and has no place in gaming today.
edit: why not make the AI better instead?
How do you design a game like that? That's a style of playing a game.Duckhuntdog said:
It's more like this: Allow saving anywhere/anytime (or reasonable checkpointing). Then make difficulty as hard as you want, and leave the rest in the hands of the gamer.
I don't mean to rip on DMC3, I just don't understand why console games, by now having caught up to their PC counterparts in nearly every other aspect, can't also afford the standard practice of quicksaving. It's not a technological issue any more, it's a stubborn, antiquated design choice.
Kabuki Waq
Member
yes quicksaves do suck ass i think well placed checkpoints are way better like the ones in RE4. RE4 has teh best save system this Gen IMO.
Funny, I've always felt that a game that derives a lot of its length or difficulty by forcing you to replay long sections was poor design. Emphasis on the "forcing," of course some games are built around replayability and successfully so (like arcade titles).
I love RE4's save system, good checkpointing is just as solid.
I love RE4's save system, good checkpointing is just as solid.
Shouta
Member
I agree to some extent there's some overlap but it's usually a cause/effect relationship to me. A game becomes frustrating because it's hard and not it's a frustrating game so thus it's a hard game to me. At any rate, a differing save system would just make the game less frustrating because you wouldn't have to go through the fat to get to the meat of the problem players have (bosses it seems). I don't see any correlation between being able to save before the boss and that making it easier =P.
I can't think of many games that derive difficulty from forcing you to replay sections. Perhaps length, but not difficulty.
I've personally never been a big fan of quicksaves. While it's useful, it ultimately just forces me to learn the placement of enemies and how to beat a certain room (FPS in this case which is the most prominent user of Quicksaves IMO) rather than training me to be a better player. Same philospy transfers over to games like DMC, I need to be a better player to beat this in the overall sense rather than just learning how to deal with just a specific room.
Ristamar said:
I remember a big fiasco with aliens vs predator when all the whiners didnt get an instanst save because they'd have to play that oh so tough level all over again. The nature of games is repetitive I dont get what the problem is. Especially with these action style games I mean yes their is a story and you want to progress but it's just their to serve the experience of playing the game. If you hate playing it so much why even bother
Doc Holliday said:
Ninja Gaiden NES was actually fair until the last level.
Levels are usually 5-10 minutes apiece in between checkpoints.
Unlimited continues
Bosses have easy patterns with few variations
The entire game takes about an hour to reach the end
The unlimited continues, short stages, and short game made it doable without frustration... until the last level. That's where patience kicked in. Until then it was rewarding. And since it was only the last level that was truly punishing, it was worth persevering.
NG3 had limited continues.... and therefore it fell into the same trap as DMC3.
Duckhuntdog
Member
Teddman said:
Console save mentality is stuck in the "don't let the player save any time they want, it makes the game easy." school of thought.
Saves and how they should be implemented will always be a sticking point. Some designers believe you should save at any time, and for the most part I agree. Others feel you should only save a certain points.
Design choice is design choice, each designer sees the issue differently and implement their beliefs.
Some even see saving as the big difference that defines console gaming and PC gaming. PC gaming you crash often, makes sense to save at any time. Console chance of crashing is near zero, you will only need to save a few times.
The save issue/implementation arguement has been around a long time and it never gets settled. Will it ever get settled? Probably not.
Kabuki Waq
Member
its a lazy design choice "hey instead of making the AI smarter lets just make them re do the level over and over again"
You know, I was hitting myself for importing the Japanese DMC3 when the U.S. version was coming out a little over a week later, and now I'm glad I did. But I still think the original DMC is the best in the series.
:lol
LOL, Ramirez is one of the main reasons WHY you have that avatar and had that tag.
Leguna said:
I'm going to give you 2 options...Option A, we agree on a game to play each other one on one and see who's the better player; option B, you don't do anything and your words mean nothing.
:lol
LOL, Ramirez is one of the main reasons WHY you have that avatar and had that tag.
the one problem some of you guys have to understand is, specially the guy who played the game for 30 hours...that some of us dont have that leisure anymore.
i barely get 3 hours of playtime per week, and if these 3 hours involve just running back and forth in DMC3 to upgrade my skills, then i might not even just bother with it. i understand that the game itself may be very enjoyable in its own terms, however those terms are not enjoyable by me.
same reason why i couldnt play any of the nippon ichi srpgs, i just cant devote that time. im sure the games are great, but what does it matter to me if i cant enjoy them?
if DMC3 was like the first one, where i could play in short intense bursts of a few hours in each sitting and advance the storyline along, that would have been great. as it stands, it cant be played that way, and thats bad design.
i barely get 3 hours of playtime per week, and if these 3 hours involve just running back and forth in DMC3 to upgrade my skills, then i might not even just bother with it. i understand that the game itself may be very enjoyable in its own terms, however those terms are not enjoyable by me.
same reason why i couldnt play any of the nippon ichi srpgs, i just cant devote that time. im sure the games are great, but what does it matter to me if i cant enjoy them?
if DMC3 was like the first one, where i could play in short intense bursts of a few hours in each sitting and advance the storyline along, that would have been great. as it stands, it cant be played that way, and thats bad design.
I should be grabbing DMC3 in the near future, so I guess I'll see what the fuss is all about. Admittedly, my first reaction is to scoff when the initial clamor about a game being 'too hard' arises. A lot of people bitched about Viewtiful Joe's Adult mode. Talk about much ado about nothing. Unless you were trying to mindlessly button mash your way through every level, the game wasn't that difficult.
C- Warrior
Banned
Nitwulf: The save system to DMC3 is similar to that of DMC1. (I'm not a fan of DMC1 but I did play about half of it) DMC3 on the other hand is amazing, I was truly surprised at how kickass and "free" the combo system is.
Yellow orbs are continues. While in the JPN version, there are infinite continues via RE4 style.
Kabuki--it's not because they were lazy. They had the infinite continues in the JPN version, and now consequently the PAL version instead.
It's just some Capcom USA guy who wasn't even involved in development, was told to make the US game harder, and he said--hm, let's take out the checkpoint system and replace it with yellow orbs.
With that said DMC1 fanatics, DMC3 is right up your alley. For those that are novice to action games it might be a different story.
Yellow orbs are continues. While in the JPN version, there are infinite continues via RE4 style.
Kabuki--it's not because they were lazy. They had the infinite continues in the JPN version, and now consequently the PAL version instead.
It's just some Capcom USA guy who wasn't even involved in development, was told to make the US game harder, and he said--hm, let's take out the checkpoint system and replace it with yellow orbs.
With that said DMC1 fanatics, DMC3 is right up your alley. For those that are novice to action games it might be a different story.
Spazbiohaz
Member
nitewulf said:
I understand this argument, as my days are too getting short. But that being said, I still beat it on Normal. And, to those who have lost there skill at speed gaming Capcom included an easy option, because they understand that not everyone has the time or skill. The problem there lies in gamers pride. If you don't have time to be skillful or play games, then don't expect to be good at them. I would be interested in the opinions of gamers 12-17. Maybe some of us are getting old. I mean My dad kick major ass at tetris and Ms. Pac Man and anything pre 3D, but playing him in Golden-eye or Tetrisphere was a joke.
Kabuki Waq
Member
ninja gaiden da best said:
instead of making the AI smarter? yes i would call that lazy. Being a novice or whatever has nothing to do with anything. Replaying a level over and over is bad game design.
Spazbiohaz
Member
Kabuki Waq said:
Um...The AI is hard. That is why you die. I'm sorry but if you can't beat the AI then that is your fault not the games. Also, I would have to say if you need more then one large Green Star, then there is a problem. Not one boss takes more then that first time through.
Kabuki Waq
Member
Spazbiohaz said:
YOu missed my point completely. If they want to make the game harder they should focus on AI not SAve points.
Attack You
Member
The savepoint/continue thing in DMC3 is being over-analyzed. (In a gaming message board, too. Shock and Awe.) If I had to sit through dozens of minutes of menu-fondling and half-assed exploration, I'd curse the game of Xenosaga I was playing before blowing my brains out. As it stands, DMC3 is all white-knuckle action and suffers very little from pacing/difficulty problems (unlike DMC2). Not to mention you have the option to keep the orbs/abilities you collect before dying.
Spazbiohaz
Member
Kabuki Waq said:
So you are saying that the game is hard becuse there are no save points? Hmm....Wait if there are no save points and the AI is hard, I think that they foucsed on the AI more then the Save points. But, honestly I have to say, Finally Americans can rub it in Japan's face that they need harder games coming from Japan because we are that good. I am happy with this.
Leguna said:Ramirez:
I'm going to give you 2 options...Option A, we agree on a game to play each other one on one and see who's the better player; option B, you don't do anything and your words mean nothing.
Hollllyyyyy shiiit! :lol :lol :lol
Anyway, I knew this was going to turn into Gaiden vs DMC3 again. My *final judgement* won't be made until I beat DMC3, but right now my feelings sit inbetween the two camps on the whole difficulty/save issue. We'll see if my opinion sways one way by the time I finish the game.