Instead you could give the player absolutely no reward for killing the enemy (no points or anything), you could also make enemy encounters not worth the risk (as in making the player restart the level if an enemy kills them, or have enemies be "thieves" where if they hit you you lose items). You might be thinking that you could just make enemies stronger and therefore make the player want to avoid them -this might just make finding and killing enemies an interesting challenge for the player. You do not want to punish the player as to deter them from playing at all, so what you could do instead is implement a clever negative feedback mechanism. It turns out that too many players are focusing on finding and fighting enemies rather than experiencing your game how you designed it to be experienced. For example say you do not want your game to be focused on fighting, although you want to have an occasional enemy in your game. Negative feedback is not necessarily a punishment, but is used to deter a player from making specific choices. There is also a third category known as negative feedback. Simply put, rewards are great to use to encourage players to make certain choices, and punishments are used to deter certain behavior. The second meaning of positive and negative feedback would be rewards and punshiments to a player. Similarly, you can give advantages to the players in last place to encourage and help them catch up to the leaders. If a leading player seems to be constantly destroying all the other players in an unfair way, create a negative feedback response in which the system (the game) reacts and hinders the leading player. Usually positive feedback loops are harmful to a game's flow (flow will be explained more in depth soon), and should be switched out for negative feedback loops. What's the point of continuing play if the outcome of the match has already been determined in the middle of the game because the leading player has a tremendous advantage over the rest of the players? These types of design flaws can be controlled with positive and negative feedback loops. I also see the losers in a game have no means of catching up to the leaders. I also see games made in which the leader has no way of letting the other players catch up to him, because he has such a great advantage over the other players. Too often I see games designed in StarCraft maps that are too hard or too easy, or too hard or too easy once the player reaches a certain point.
0 kommentar(er)
