Dungeon Master Forum

I'm just curious, what would make a dungeon game complete? What kind of features should definitely be in a game that you like to play?
For example, I'm personally very fond of the many scripts that are triggered in Eye of the Beholder 2 where you gotta choose between two or more options to choose your destiny. Or the thieves in Dungeon Master 2 ("miiine!") that are running away with your stuff and will try to sell it in some corner.

Let me know what you think makes a dungeon crawler complete (long thread pls!)

I like good puzzles that are satisfying to solve...like those in Soph's "Dark Portal" dungeon (err...thik it was called that anyway...was about a year ago I played it ).

Ameena wrote:I like good puzzles that are satisfying to solve...like those in Soph's "Dark Portal" dungeon (err...thik it was called that anyway...was about a year ago I played it ).

What kind of puzzles in particular? In detail, how do they work in that dark portal dungeon?

Umm...gawd, this will be difficult to describe. Actually, rather than try to actually describe the puzzles I like, might I suggest you try playing Dark Portal and see for yourself? I can't remember, specifically, the details of any of the puzzles off the top of my head right now anyway, and wouldn't really wanna post up spoilers to a dungeon in an unrelated thread.
It can be downloaded from here - http://www.dungeon-master.com/forum/vie ... hp?t=25796

If you're interested, that is.
I like those kinds of puzzles, not really reliant on speed or hack 'n' slash ability, but more kinda figuring out wtf you have to do with this bunch of seemingly-useless items you've been acquiring throughout the game.
Stuff like Monkey Island. Those kinds of puzzles. An inability to die helps too (as in MI), but it would hardly be much of a dungeon crawler if you couldn't get blown up, hacked to bits, eaten, squished,etc .

Ok thanks, I will look into this game.
You might wanna know why I am so curious. It's because of my new game Dungeon Maker. I'm gathering info at the moment for adding more good features to the editor and the game.

Now, as i am a pure hack'n'slash gamer, here are my preferences

Dungeon Master basic concepts i like :
- combine runes to invoke a (wizard) spell
- several actions for a same weapon (i.e. swing, chop, melee, thrust...)

Features i like in other games :
- two weapons in hands (of course, you can interact only one at the same time) or one two-handed big weapon, so that you cannot carry anything on the second hand (seen in Ishar series)
- fighting combos : as you have to combine runes to make a spell, you could learn how to combine actions with a weapon to create a "powerful" final action, only possible if you have reach a minimum fighter/ninja level (seen in many hack'n slash games)
- alchemy is more realistic than spells for potions (seen in Oblivion), but a spell can be added to "enchant" the mix.
- when a spell is invoked, i'd love to hear the character saying the formula at the same time (seen in japanese RPGs). This one is actually doable in RTC with a voice sound.

As far as puzzles are concerned, I think I can safely say I'm the exact opposite of Ameena, tastewise. I hate inventory puzzles with a passion. I do not consider it a puzzle if one can just try all possible combinations until one works. Throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks is not my idea of fun..

Enough with the bashing, here's what I do consider a good puzzle: easy to understand, hard to solve. In other words, it should be obvious what the player is supposed to achieve, and it should be fairly obvious to figure out logically how to achieve it, but the actual execution should involve jumping one or more hurdles.

Also, it is fairly important to me that puzzles are not presented before the player has the ability to solve them, unless they are clearly marked as 'long-term puzzles'. It's all in the presentation really. For instance, an unmarked door with a standard lock near the entrance of the dungeon "says" 'solve me first'. A very ornate door with a special lock in a prominent place near the entrance of the dungeon, on the other hand, "says" something more along the lines of 'entrance to part 2, solve part 1 first.' The difference between the two is just in the way they are introduced to the player. That and not having fifty forum posts in your dungeon thread all asking "Where is the key for the door at the entrance?"

Reciprocally, if a puzzle is going to require a partuicular item for solving, make sure said item is still available for the player. A good counter-example of that can be found in EOB1. Towards the end, a puzzle requires iron rations for solving. By then, your cleric has been casting 'create food' for so long that you are probably not carrying rations anymore. Getting some is a looong trek back up towards the surface.

The main weaknesses of DM* are the lack of an in-game story and the fact that fights are trivial as long as you have room to maneuver around the enemy. So these are aspects you can improve upon.

Oh, and long thread != long post, sorry about that.

*: I know it's heretical to even think that DM could have any, but what the heck, I'm willing to risk reprisals (in the form of Beo banning Trantor, most probably) to help you.

Ameena wrote:might I suggest you try playing Dark Portal and see for yourself?

Dark Portal is a (rather loose, really) adaptation of the old game Shadowgate. So, it's completely puzzle-oriented, though you can die in all sorts of gruesome ways-- just like Shadowgate.

linflas wrote:This one is actually doable in RTC with a voice sound.

And all of it, including that one, is doable in DSB.

Anyway, on to my own preferences--

I like a certain degree of open-endedness, though perhaps not to the degree of CSB. It's nice, though, that if I'm stuck in one area, to be able to wander around a bit, and explore something else. When there's nowhere to advance and I'm stuck just bashing against the wall, that's when it becomes less fun for me.

I like it if the fights are pretty much kept to the difficulty of DM or CSB. I'm sure that some of the experts here can handle much more than that by now, but, pushing it to that level exposes some of the flaws of the DM combat system, to me. I don't really like advanced monsters used early on-- they can kill you in one hit, which I guess some people think adds "challenge."

Interesting stuff guys.
About monsters, it would be nice that monsters are becoming the real challenge on a later stage in a game. Like in World of Warcraft, the most fun thing there is in this game is trying to break the code of a boss. In this way, the monster is the puzzle that u gotta solve.
Games like 'Myst' or 'The Seventh Guest' I liked alot. Especially the latter. The puzzles are there in front of you, but it is uncertain what you have do. Slowly you discover the basic rules of the puzzle and then it's time to solve it.

From the Myst serie, to me Riven is the best one :
exploration, amazement of the wonderful settings,
and puzzles that are all ultra-logical and yet sufficiently
complex and with hints spread over the maps so that it is understandable.

Considering a dungeon crawler, I like the last version of Conflux a lot :
with a reasonable party (at least 2 characters) it's quite balanced,
with a lot of freedom, a host of puzzles, strange places
(like the sewers and their ecosystem, with plants spreading, monsters etc.)

What lack the most are more friendly creatures and a dialog system.
The dungeon itself is also very big and stuffed with so many things that
are here only for the challenge... It is always better to keep things within
a coherent universe.
One thing that I also would advocate :
adding a class of creatures that have the same characteristics as players.
Why :
- They could provide a bigger challenge than the average creature
- It would allow dialogs / situations to convince those creatures to join the party as in "Ishar" or (maybe) "Might and Magic", and also leave it.
- It would be more realistic
- It would be a step toward a MP dungeon

Actually the best PC RPG to take influence from are Fallout 1 & 2.
So even if they are not dungeon crawlers, they have everything
a player should look for : atmosphere and design, freedom of choice,
coherence and causality of the universe (with quest having an influence
on the environnement), multiple possibilities to solve a problem
(more than most player would think of).

I like to the feeling of 'moving forward'. That is to
say that I know that having accomplished some quest,
task, or battle that I am closer to finishing.

DM was like that in space.....If you could get to the
next room or hallway then you are closer to finishing.
CSB was like that but in a bit different way. At least
you could solve/clear out an area and it stayed
that way (DDD a big exception). Even the 31 groups
of mummies could be ultimately defeated.

I don't like that feeling I get when I accomplish some
difficult goal and find that I am worse off because
170 dragons have sprung to life in my path of retreat.

I like the game to 'ratchet forward'.

Paul Stevens wrote:At least
you could solve/clear out an area and it stayed
that way

I think that that is indeed the thing that separates good games from bad games. I believe there are whole philisophical discussions about why that thing makes games great, from the human characteristic of cleaning compulsion to the natural appetite for destruction.

I hate excessive respawning. There is nothing more annoying than clearing some place and then when you turn to leave something hits you in the back.. Monsters appearing from thin air are not my thing. If something needs to respawn, it should be made so that the player can't really tell whether the monster respawned or just moved from another area.

Another kind of terrible respawning example is from Oblivion. There is no feeling of accomplishing anything when you clear a cave/ruin/fort and it's completely respawned just a couple of days later.. And sometimes I'm obsessed in picking up every plant that I come across. There are maaany.. And they all grow back in just a couple of days. It's like WTF.

Half Life 2 suffered from this and annoyed me, since I didn't expect it of the game, and there was no logivc to where the respawn happened (oh, this blind alley now has zombies again...I see.... so really I should save ammo and be running not waste it killing them all then)

Sorry to not participate more on this discussion yet, will post when I get some time!

Deaths with no given warning are a pain in the arse too...like, you find an unexplored corridor so go to take a look, when suddenly you get blown up by something or smashed to bits by some mob that appears in front of you, with no warning it was gonna happen or a hint that you might need a certain object in order to get there without dying or whatever. It feels like a punishment for exploration. If there's an unexplored corridor with a bunch of scorch marks on the walls and bones lying all over the place and then you get nuked trying to go down it, fair enough .

or some "Do Not Enter" door

Deaths with no given warning are a pain

Amen. Exploration should result in something
that you can recover from without reloading.
Reloading is so entirely outside the game it ruins
the whole experience of being in the make-believe
world.

Not to mention it results in annoying situations where you cannot remember if you actually did that detour or not to flick that switch when you reload. And if a dungeon has puniched you once, you know it will punish you again later when you go to do soemthign and find that you saved before the switch flick, etc

I also hate dungeons where you are not rewarded or even penalised for exploration and creative thinking in one place yet expected to engage in it elsewhere. For example an inescapable dead end without anythign to tell you you need to restart, and later an elaborately escapeable dead end.

Consistency.

One of these days I will learn how to boil down long windy posts into nuggets of wisdom like that

It might make my post count low, but it will make my post quality high


As Paul S says - consistency!