Balance in an ARPG without items

I'm making an action-RPG (I think), but without items (except one). You are a robot who picks up universal modules to non-permanently enhance your abilities. The modules are in this way a combination of equipment and skill points. I've been inspired and encouraged by Expeditions: Conquistador, for reference.

My problem is how to balance this thing. First, I'm not a big player of ARPGs, due to the reasons reflected in this design: loot collection doesn't do anything for me. Second, it's my first time working on something like this.

Right now I've implemented several abilities:

Basic Attack, deals little damage from a distance,

Nuclear Punch, deals a lot of damage close-up with a long wind-up,

Repair passively heals you with your free modules

You also invest modules to increase your max health

I think I should add another type of item - blueprints that unlock the abilities in the first place. But what does it mean to unlock an ability and not have any modules invested into it? Does it just not work? Or if it does, how much damage does it deal (or heal, or whatever)? How much does a single module add?

On the flipside of this conundrum is what to do with enemies. They can't all drop modules, you'll either get overpowered too quickly, or modules will make too little difference. But if only few enemies drop loot (and in fact just drain it and potential upgrades, via healing) it seems to remove any motivation for fighting them.

What do you think?

 

Slow down. Let's start with the mechanics you've already thought out. Why do you have them? Think about how you'd like your game to ultimately play and feel, and consider whether they help achieve that feeling or not.

RPG's and temporary buffs (that come from items) generally don't get along well. In fact consumables in all old-school RPGs (which is where most ARPG's sit) were just extremely underwhelming. They could help get you out of a problem very early on, but as the game progressed you just stockpiled them and never actually used them.

Also I'd like to point out that most games in the genre are not loot-centric as much as they are exploration centric. Unless you're thinking of games like Diablo; they're technically ARPG's too, but the whole loot stuff makes them a genre of their own (Dungeon Crawlers).

So per example TLoZ (one of the two mainstream sagas I can think of for this) rewards exploration by placing gizmos after the obstacles that actually change how you approach gameplay itself. Exploration is rewarded with things that broaden and enrich your experience of the world, based on how you interact with it. And since of heart containers and other hidden goodies, these tools literally expand the world around you.

The other example I can think of would be the Mana Saga games. They're certainly not as strong, and I'd say they're more combat centric than they are exploration centric. Scenarios are generally bland, and the fact you can actually level up makes it all the more prominent. You grind and become stronger. You hone your combo based skills. Where Zelda has you learn the weaknesses in enemy attack patterns, here you just level up. As the story progresses you unlock different weapon types, and these can also be leveled up (sort of in a dexterity with xxxx weapon kind of stat).

This is also what I meant when I mentioned thinking about the result you'd like to have and ponder on whether your designed mechanics help create that result, or erode it.

Zelda
-Has tools that work both as a reward and as means to expand the world that you're exploring, allowing you to explore it EVEN FURTHER once you have them.
-The dungeons are a fantastic way to teach the player through exploration how the tool they just found affects the world.
-Then each dungeon's boss comes at a point where the dungeon itself has already reinforced how the tool is used a lot. And the boss sends the poignant message that you, as a player, are conquering where many others failed, because of exploration, since that's what gave you the tool in the first place.
-The game lacks tutorials and other than Navi and a couple other annoying sidekicks, it allows you to figure out how to advance on your own. Which goes full circle with the exploration regard.

Mana Games
-Have actual leveling up systems. There aren't nearly as many puzzles nor hidden rewards.
-While it (just like Zelda) focuses on the idea that it's the journey itself what makes you ultimately stronger when you go around tackling the final boss, the message the mechanics send is "it was the things you got to live that made you this way" (both steamy bath house scenes and deep conversations as well as actual grinding via combat, even if only the latter is counted as far as the system is concerned).
-The weapon profficiency levels give you a gentle push toward having you experiment with different weapon types and find not only which work better against certain enemy types (old mana games had a Rock - Paper - Scissors thing going on), but also so you can pick the ones that you're the most comfortable using, within having you be mono-weapon.

Maybe I'm just not grasping your concept yet, but I feel you have dynamics that go directly into conflict with one another. Can you give me an example of the skills you'd be unlocking in game?

 

Oh, I can't anymore with these genre names. Once I would have called Diablo a "Hack and Slash" but apparently that's God of War now... (or maybe already 10 years ago)

Anyway, I really didn't come off clear enough. I've got a really basic demo, although I don't know how I'm supposed to share stuff like that.

So, for me the core of the game is the gathering of modules and upgrading of your abilities. (There's another problem that stems from this, and which I didn't want to mention to avoid making the thread too multi-purpose: I really don't know where or when my game is set.) The upgrades aren't temporary but also not permanent - you can install the modules as well as uninstall them and freely reconfigure your abilities, which is something that also appeals to me.

Abilities that I have in mind are basic stuff - attacks, shields, buffs, minions. Although I have to say, they're about as fleshed out in my mind as that sentence. Somehow lately my mind tends to game mechanics instead of content. So I probably wouldn't mind having the exploration component that you've mentioned, but I just can't turn my imagination to dungeon design, etc.

 

So a boring attack, either a completely useless attack or the only one that's ever used for the entire game, and a constant F*** up eraser rate. Not exactly a sound base to start from.

First, make a proper action game. Without any expectations of progression, build a competent action game. Don't even worry about the numbers, because at this point it should be qualitative. You should think about things as properties and how all these properties should bounce off of one another.

You can worry about how things unlock later.

 

Sorry, I don't understand. What should an action game consist of in this case? You probably don't mean levels, models, sound, etc. I mean, not a complete action game?

 

YUP!

You'll find that a constant issue on the forums when asking for advice about mechanics is that people generally refuse to look at a design as anything more than a copy of another game.

If you say you're doing an MMO, people instantly think it's a carbon copy of WoW.

If you say MOBA, people instantly thing it's a carbon copy of LoL.

Believe me, trying to explain that a mechanic is not the same is a fool's errand.

90% of people just won't get it until they see it.



ANYWAY, if I may make a suggestion.

What if the modules were synergistic and situational?

Then have an way of leveling up the modules with diminishing returns.

So when you first get a module it opens up a new dimension of gameplay which gives it instant value, but then you can level it up as well for an increasing amount of of cost.

As an example.

Let's say you have a module that shoots in an arc. Now this arc gives you an alternate range of direction and you're able to attack things over you. It may not be as good a straight shot that is leveled up significantly more, but since it does something different it has value.

Then maybe have it so that 2 modules will allow you to upgrade to level 2 for +10% damage.
4 modules to level 3 for +20% damage.
8 modules to level 4 for +30% damage.
16 modules to level 5 for +40% damage.
32 modules to level 6 for +50% damage.

And so on.

Ideally you'd be better off coming up with things that improve the mechanics, not just bump up some numbers. Maybe the attack could pass through multiple enemies. Or maybe it ends with a stunning explosion.

Whatever you do, definitely give the player the option to swap out loudouts of modules without going to a menu.

 

I actually love this idea (or maybe I should say, I shamefully didn't think of it before).

On the other hand, I thought of increasing module costs, but it sort of felt like a maths nightmare, at least the way I imagined it. Although I guess it can be managed.

 

Basically make a game that doesn't have to rely on progression and loot drops/skinner boxes. Think about it like trying to make the end-game first. Figure that out and make it enjoyable, then you can go back and disempower the player.

The idea here is that if you can't make the end game good, then it's never going to be good.

 

The lore setting isn't as important as knowing what feel you want to produce, I think. Not temporary but not permanent. Are we talking NTNP like having cooldowns for the abilities (you pop them and they become unusable for a while after, and then can be popped again) or always active but with a limit to how many can be active at the same time?

The Cooldown route allows you to have more impactful resources in game, because they won't be able to be spammed. Think how DotA handles cooldowns on abilities. Game breaking stuff can be used every 120~180 seconds, whereas abilities that tend to be complementary skills that aren't anywhere as important in fights sit around 4~10 seconds.

The Loadout route works a lot more for balance if the player is meant to be able to access many paths of character development at the same time, and you want to hold back how much of each path they can hold at the same time. It kind of allows for character builds (whereas the Cooldown route generally ends in all characters being the same in late game). The challenge here would be balancing out low skill-high impact abilities so that they're not prominent. Using MMOs as an example, it's useless to have multiple branching systems of character customization if most of them are borderline terrible to begin with.

I wouldn't use both together, but they can coexist.

About the "all enemies dropping stuff" problem, you could fix it simply by having multiple types of in-game resource that play a part in the gameplay.

Let's go from having a Paella module, an Applepie module and a Corndog module, you had a Groundbeef part, a Shrimp part and so on. And that to be able to craft these into game mechanics, you need fuel that is gathered by defeating enemies. For the sake of the example, heat.

So you could gather Rice, Shrimp, Onion and Garlic parts from boss type characters per example (or from AI controlled characters that look like yours, meant to represent other players in your single player environment), combined all that with say 150 Heat that you got by killing random enemies and got a mega endgame Paella module.

And then you could level those up by adding extra parts to the initial prototype and throwing extra energy in. Kind of like it'd be to refine the design of an actual machine. So in the example, adding a Spices part and 20 Heat.

This way you can avoid the "should there be absolutely meaningless enemies" or "should the rewards be meaningless because of how often you get them" dilemma.

However, for this I wouldn't follow a Zeldaesque design that locks game mechanics behind getting a certain module/getting that module to a certain level, because then you'd have to make your game in such a manner than when you've just started it, the thing looks extremely bare and uninteresting, because the ways you can interact with the world are very limited.

A Manaesque approach feels better for it (all the world interaction tools are unlocked easily, what you get from playing the game extensively are different ways to kill the enemies, so you can pick which you prefer to use) if you go with anything resembling this. Then you could have things like a brawler build, with an upgraded CPU that slows down enemies within a radius from you (to give the idea that your CPU is predicting their movements and allowing you reaction time), or a light deflecting module that makes you invisible for periods of time, and so on. The possibilities are broad and expansive, once you decide what the finished product should feel like from a gameplay perspective.

 

I decided that 30 seconds of gameplay is worth a million words, so here's... a demo? https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B0-dmFeSBK-bRExJNlBySkNlYTA (Click on things to do stuff.)

Maybe what I should call this, and the way I should continue, is a roguelike. Unless the modern definition is again completely different from what I'm thinking, this conveys less enemy swarms or puzzles, and more thoughtful exploration. Except without procedural levels... which, again, is going to lead everyone in the wrong direction.

I'm not particularly happy about the idea of multiple module types. I'm kind of trying to make a game where I wouldn't have to keep track of many types of items.

But abilities could indeed do with more fun and varied effects. I guess I could take inspiration from roguelikes, too.

 

A couple of ideas pop to mind for this.

• Make your game linear. Then you can place modules at strategic points. Diablo 2 did this quite well.
• Tie modules to experience. Levelling is used so often in games because it's a great auto balancing agent.

 

I'm leaning towards linearity myself. But that means that modules can't be lost frivolously, such as for simple healing. What I'm struggling with now is how do you heal? I could do an ability that passively heals you "out of nothing", but I'm afraid that would lead to stuff like moving all modules to healing between fights (and then forgetting to reassign them back, or switch to a combat loadout). On the other hand, being unable to heal strategically during fights seems to be contrary to the roguelike idea. Yet if I introduce a special healing item it creates for me an unpleasant contrast where the modules are universal and always useful, and the healing item you could potentially just hoard, if you find a combination of abilities where you don't get damaged too much, or indeed if there's passive healing.

 

Maybe my age is showing, but I've always been a fan of healing check points. Games like Zelda where it forces you to pause and grind for hearts takes me out of the flow.

But having points that heal, ala Metroid and Castlevania and Dark Souls, means that there's a leg that you know you'll have to conservatively make it through. It adds tension and puts risk of failure.

 

Be very careful with passive healing. In many game designs it's a bad idea to reward the player for sitting and doing nothing for a while. Do you really want players to leave the action and sit just to get their health back up?

 

Thanks for these comments. I feel it's kind of coming together. The idea I've got right now is that you're on an enemy spaceship. There are small combat-free partitions with repair stations, separated by longer partitions which are periodically resupplied with enemies. Throughout them are strewn modules, and at the end there are blueprints. I guess there should be some kind of fun relationship between the enemy types in a partition and the blueprint you get, but I shouldn't get ahead of myself any more than I already have.

 

I thought I implemented lots of base systems (including sound effects, which I've never touched before in Unity). Then I decided to move on to level design... and realized a bit of a problem.

An ARPG or hack-and-slash usually means at least 10 hours of content. And to a certain extent, that's all authored. That is to say, the player doesn't stay in a single spot, consuming a single chunk of content for an hour, like, say, in an adventure game. I have to constantly supply the content. My mind refuses to comprehend this amount of stuff. Teams of experienced people working full-time take years with projects like that. I basically don't see any chance for myself (a single hobbyist) here.

Unless, there's worth to making it an extremely short thing (30 minutes?). For gamedev experience? (I know this is a reasonable goal, but it kind of seems futile making a game without trying to appeal to any kind of audience, if you have any aspirations of one day making gamedev your full-time occupation.) In that case, even though the amount of stuff becomes much more graspable, I think most of the importance moves to meaningful distinction between enemies and between abilities.

I don't know. Any opinions?

 

It's definitely possible. It's always possible. The question is whether you want to put in the work or not. And only you can make that decision.

 

I mean, if we're talking many years, in my mind I'm married to a different idea (for which I've already made a thread around here). However, that idea I don't really know how to do... I guess trying to make a presentable 30-minute demo of this one is a good alternative to doing nothing... Although that could still mean something like a year with my current skills. Unless I go fashionably lofi.

 

The length of time it would take probably depends upon the way you work, and the way you design the game. For instance, if you focus on really making the combat a big part of it, then you can focus on increasing combat content, which is more about mixing up authored content in new ways, rather than authoring completely new content all the time.

Furthermore, if you use a modular type of design, then you can mix and match pieces together to author technically new content in a quick amount of time. For instance, I believe you talked about a robot on a spaceship. That's a perfect opportunity to use a modular approach which allows for..."asset reuse" I suppose you could say.

So it's all in what you do with it.

 

This is kind of dumb, but I feel that I have to publicly announce that I've stopped working on this. I went through a rough physchological period and also it doesn't seem like a good idea to me to focus on a type of game where balance and polish and action seem to be the crucial factors (hack-and-slash, ARPG, looter, Diablo-like things). I mean to say, for me they are not factors that I particularly focus on as a gamer and they aren't interesting to me as a developer. I'm sorry, everyone, especially since I want to make a thread about my new idea.

 

Don't be sorry. Seeing this thread may inspire and inform someone else who does want to work on the idea, and talking about these things is enjoyable in its own right.

 

You're forgiven. I mean, you don't need to be sorry in the first place, but that doesn't make you not feel what you're feeling. It's okay to throw an idea away when it doesn't interest you anymore.