Fatigue system ruins the game for me

[Charlemagne]

I just want to open the game and have fun, why i'm being punished to play with the character that i like most? Imagine if a open world game like The Witcher forced you to play all the side quests in the world to be able to finish the story. Just let me play how i want... Not receiving the bonus passive for playing other characters is okay, but being punished is straight up bad game design

[alpasy]

We Meat Again eredeti hozzászólása:

I'm going to leave you with the quote again: Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game.

I lost faith in this thread a long time ago, but you restored it. Great post!

Btw, my favorite character in Magma levels was Joey (on par with usually overpowered Linda). Another reminder on how versatile different characters in this game, and importance of fatigue system which compels players to try them out and not to miss all those nice story cutscenes.

[Charlemagne]

We Meat Again eredeti hozzászólása:

Let me take a crack at this. I'm using ideas from Mark Brown's Game Maker's Toolkit videos. I recommend watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H4kbJObhcHw and MAYBE this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9FB5R4wVno for more info.

1. Corruption Fatigue helps to avoid monotony.
- It's basically a negative feedback loop, which is a valid and useful game design tool, to get players to switch things around each run. While it FEELS good psychologically to use positive feedback loops, with the family passives as rewards for playing with different classes, there is still the possibility without corruption fatigue that someone just sticks to one character and miss out on 6/7 of the whole game. CoM is already a grindy game (which is not completely a bad thing; this allows it to be a very accessible and story-centered roguelite) and it can lose it's challenge very fast with upgrades from Rea, workshop and skills. Fatigue is just a small way to introduce some interesting challenge beyond making the enemies beefier or harder hitting.

2. Fatigue *strongly pushes(?)* players to make interesting decision.
- With this push, the game asks you to make an interesting choice in what other character to play, if your favourite one is fatigued. But it's not completely forcing the choice on you. I used to prefer the ranged classes but being made to choose fast melee characters like Kevin not only made me rethink my usual kiting strategy but also take notice of other skills like stealth and dodge. And that's not all. I don't really know the maximum runs and severity of fatigue (it reduces HP by 10-20% for the first stage? and it builds up to 50% max?) but you can still use a fatigued character in a run; they will just have less HP. IMO, that is a valid and good design, because the class is not completely cut out and you can still use them; you just have to pay more attention to their defense strategies which are very fun to think about (kiting, decoys, dodge chance, shields, Rage, etc.). Introducing challenge is important, because if the game is too easy, it feels boring and mundane and ultimately you will feel like you're grinding through CoM, partly because of the design but mostly due to not trying out the other 6/7 of the game. It's about getting into that flow state, with a balance of familiarity and challenge. So fatigue actually expands the choices a player would want to make make, from 1 to 7, by making the 6 other classes as appealing as (or more appealing than) using a fatigued favourite for a run. And, with the latest, update, there is another choice - use an Egg to reset the fatigue. The worst case scenario is to grind a low levelled character through the short early dungeons, like you should have been doing to get the passives anyway. Also, the random infliction of fatigue is quite in line with its roguelite nature.

3. It subconsciously protects the player from bad decisions.
- Here's another optional video recommendation https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7L8vAGGitr8. The key point I want to share from the video is the quote: Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game. CoM borrows a lot from the simplicity of Diablo-esque dungeon crawling but it does not have the variety in armour and weapons to back it up. So, it's important that players are at least incentivised to try out all the content. There is already a strong positive feedback loop with sticking to one character (more familiarity with them, more skills unlocked over time, there will naturally be a bias for early-available characters). The positive feedback loop in the other direction to try different characters, however, is limited (to unlock family passives, which stops being a factor after level 20; most likely the case for anyone starting NG+) so there should be some negative feedback too. It's not too much of an ask (there are 2 comparable characters in categories for ranged, slow melee and fast melee classes) yet it provides much needed variety considering that enemies, most level layout, and bosses stay the same each run. And it protects players from running headlong into the same challenge with the same approach every time. For instance, you might not do well in Magma levels with Joey because he's too slow with rushing enemies and missile traps, but you might think he is just underlevelled. If he's your favourite or most leveled character, you might keep subconsciously choosing him despite better options. Putting fatigue on him is the game's way of asking you to try a different, perhaps more viable strategy. Or, at the very least, to avoid getting frustrated because the characters don't synergise with each other, or the level elements.

4. Story-purposes
- I am kind of indifferent to the cutscene idea that you like so much. At the end of the day, I think corruption fatigue is a valuable addition. It introduces the challenge of reducing (not cutting out) your favourite class's HP, for two story themes. The first is family, which many have pointed out. Without fatigue, it could be possible to not bring a certain character to the dungeon at all, and it would take away a lot from the story of the family fighting together and tapping in and out, supporting each other. Take Kevin's arc; he's supposed to be excited and training hard to enter the dungeon and help the family. Incidentally, he's introduced around the same time as the fatigue, so that players are nudged to try him out at least once. The second story theme is the corruption following you back home. Before the fatigue was introduced, the corruption felt a bit abstract. Having the family experience fatigue makes the antagonistic force a bit more sinister and lingering, and as the story progresses, you unlock more character and the chance for fatigue gets higher, it coincides with the corruption enveloping the house. A cutscene of them being fatigued alone doesn't really cut it. There should be some coherence between gameplay and story. Fatigue becomes more of an issue as the story progress because gameplay-wise, there are more characters to experiment and develop while story-wise, the corruption was growing more powerful.

I'm going to leave you with the quote again: Given the opportunity, players will optimize the fun out of a game. I think some issues with Fatigue is more psychological than mechanical. If you stop framing it as a punishment but instead as an opportunity or reminder to try out different characters, maybe it won't feel as bad. And there are still some workarounds: pick the fatigued character anyway, or do some quick 10-min runs in the first dungeon with other classes.

Let's say that Children of Morta is a house, and when you walk in you have a wonderful experience by looking and walking around that house. There's beautiful furniture, the windows have the perfect size and the choice of colors couldn't be better. The house is not perfect but it's great, and that's ok because we all feel good when we are inside it.

Now to the real problem: Inside that beautiful house there's a room with a giant piece of wood. That piece of wood is unlike all the other furniture in the house. It's ugly, it smells bad, it's full of bugs and feels out of place.

The "designer" is called and when asked why that thing is just standing there he says that due to their planning, they had to place that piece of wood to support the structure or the entire house would fall apart.

Now i ask you, do you think that the designer is wrong about placing that piece of wood? Do you think it's his job to match the piece of wood with the furniture that was chosen by another person?

The answer for these specific questions is no, because design is not about art, about feelings, and making things look good. Design is about having a vision and executing that vision, and that's what his piece of wood is doing.

I don't know if i'm being clear enough, but i'm hoping to show you the basic problem with the points you have made. Gaming has evolved from being a formula or a set of rules and mechanics to become a form of art where rules cannot be applied.

I don't question the value of the corruption fatigue to the design of the game, all i'm saying is that it's a bad game design. It's the piece of wood holding the roof from falling apart that has a purpose and cannot be removed, but it wouldn't need to be there at first place.

If the game is monotonous without this mechanic, it doesn't mean that the fatigue is fruit of a good game design, it means that the problem lies with the game design itself, which was planned with structural problems from the beginning, allowing the mechanic to be created and be needed. The same concept applies to all your points.

Gaming is about making the person feel good, Dark Souls is an example of a hard game with good game design.

Video games are entertainment products and according to wikipedia "Entertainment is a form of activity that holds the attention and interest of an audience or gives pleasure and delight."

I'm going to leave you with the quote again: Gaming has evolved to become a full package of experiences, and design is not about making the person have said experiences, it's about having a vision and executing it.

There's a million of things that can make your product be bad or like in many cases, have some bad things on a great product.

It was designed, but it doesn't mean it was good designed. Do you really believe that if you watch a video about how to create a game like The Legend of Zelda you will end with a product with the same quality in all aspects?

[We Meat Again]

@alpasy: Aw thanks. Yeah, I think what you said about Joey and game's nature is true

@Lord Gaben: I don't completely see your point. We agree that corruption fatigue is valuable to the design but I don't understand why you think it's this unsavoury piece of wood. The core of CoM is the family and co-op experience. I can agree that games are about having a vision and executing it, and that's precisely what I felt the designers were getting at with corruption fatigue too. But you see, that is a contradiction with your other point, that games are about making the person feel good, or that players should play whatever way they want. You're getting into the debate of playing the game as intended vs players should play whatever way they want.

The closest thing to an argument you have presented was that Fatigue is abrupt, unnecessary (shouldn't be needed in the first place), and bad game design (because it is PUNISHING and any punishment should be avoided in favour of reward or balance). Let's break this down.

1. Fatigue is introduced abruptly
- I can't remember how it's introduced, as a pop-up? I am indifferent to your idea of having a cutscene showing the members fatigued. It's nice to have but not completely necessary, and it could quickly become repetitive having the same cutscene each time fatigue comes up. It's also barely an issue for players like me, who try to keep all the character levels even (because imagine having level 8 Kevin for the third act. Characters lose their value exponentially if they are not mixed up and brought to dungeons). Or are you having issues with the random nature of fatigue? But fatigue is predictable; it is most likely inflicted and gets worse if you keep bringing the same character for a run. I just have to say, it's quite extreme to go from 'I wish there was a cutscene to ease me into the fatigue mechanic' to 'This system ruined the game'. If they include a cutscene in an update though, more power to you.

2. It is unnecessary
- You will need to elaborate more on why you think so. You have already pointed out the wood supports the house, and to completely change it means changing what the game was envisioned to be. And games are about having a vision and executing it. The vision and core of CoM is the family (trying out and changing characters is of course necessary). I've already pointed out how valuable it is, if not necessary, with my points (prevents monotony, pushes players to make interesting decisions by having all choices seem appealing instead of having 1-2 obvious choices, protects players from bad decisions [like grinding too easily with an overleveled class, or having Kevin at Level 8 when Act 3 starts], enhances the story). If it has to avoid monotony by being redesigned from ground-up, we are entering into a world of what-ifs: what-if CoM was not about family, what if CoM used armours and weapons to add variety instead of different classes like Diablo. But CoM is not Diablo, or Witcher, or Dark Souls. Why do you think it is unnecessary or what wood would you replace it with? How do you get everyone to try out each classes at least once, when the temptation to stick to one favourite is so great? And it's also there for important story purposes, having the corruption breach the boundary of the home and follow them as they return. Of course you would feel annoyed, frustrated, sad or intimidated by this mechanic and that this malevolent force weakened your character, but those feelings should be directed at the antagonist of the game, the Corruption; not the developers. If you're feeling frustrated by the mechanic, it's actually working because it's making you feel how the family feels, being afflicted by this cruel force. And there are some interesting artistic significance also - should John continue going into the dungeon despite being fatigued because he could not bear his children being put in harm's way? For many of us, the wood is valuable and alright as it is.

3. It is bad game design because it is punishing, and games should be about making people have fun and feel good/players should play how they want.
- There are lots to disagree here. alpsy already pointed out there are many negative feedback loops anywhere, like getting your HP reduced when you are attacked and fail to dodge. It just feels like fatigue is punishment, while reducing HP after being hit is just status quo, because of the way you framed it. Instead of taking it as a punishment, as long as you constantly switch characters and keep them of the same level, you barely notice the Fatigue. Or take it as a reminder, or challenge. There is a valid problem in the game, and I need to know if you agree or not.

Problem: Some players stick to 1-2 characters only and miss out on the other 5/7 of what the game can offer, plus they won't appreciate the theme of family if they do so. That is because there is a strong positive feedback loop to stick to 1 character (more familiarity, more skills unlocked and upgraded over time, risk averse to trying out new and underleveled characters)

If you agree with this, then we can talk about the three intended solutions, and your proposed solutions:

a. Harder dungeons give out significantly more EXPs and money (positive + negative feedback loop)
- While you're not supposed to leave Kevin at Level 8 as Act 3 starts, just by bringing him into the dungeon you can notice that he will level up a lot faster because he needs less EXP to level compared to using an overpowered character. And that is an obvious negative feedback loop - higher level characters need more EXP to increase one level compared to a lower leveled one. But we don't frame it as 'the game is punishing us for leveling up because higher level characters require even more EXP'. This makes fatigue easy to overcome, because you are supposed to be training Kevin in the Dungeon anyway, for the purpose of keeping him viable late game and for story purposes (his arc as an enthusiastic fighter waiting to shine, the theme of family). But this is still not enough to solve the problem because it's not enough of a push to try new characters.

b. Family passives for level milestones (positive feedback loop)
- This was another good idea and you agree too, to have passives get unlocked as incentives for playing with each characters. I just want to say that this is still limited, because the passives go up to a maximum of level 20 only, which is probably the case for most people starting a NG+, and stops being an incentive to play different characters after that. Because of it's limitation, it does not go far enough to solve the problem.

c. Corruption Fatigue (negative feedback loop)
- Your main issue with this is that it is framed as a punishment, rather than as a way to introduce challenge or remind you to switch up characters. However, take it this way - in Dark Souls, if you get hit too much and die, you are 'punished' by losing your possessions and having to restart the level. You are 'rewarded' with souls after killing the enemies. Feedbacks are supposed to guide you to a certain way of playing - to avoid getting hit, obviously, and to get enough hits on your enemies. It's the same here - the developers intentionally and consciously wants you to play a certain way: to switch out different classes - do you agree with this vision or not? They executed this vision with the negative feedback of fatigue - if you play one character too much, you are 'punished' by the corruption. If you try out different characters, you are 'rewarded' with passives but only up to a certain point. To me, and perhaps many, this heavy-handed approach solves the problem above while still being thematically and narratively consistent (of course the corruption is supposed to feel punishing, being an ancient force that affects especially the most powered characters and make the world feel intimidating and callous).

Also, as I think more about this, fatigue feels like it has more intention and thought behind it - on the spectrum of 'too much player freedom' (ignoring the problem and jeopardizing the design vision) and 'zero player freedom' (cutting out characters completely as an option), it sits in a good balance, even leaning slightly towards player freedom (because fatigued characters can still be played). You see, fatigued characters suffer a specific penalty - it doesn't make them slower or weaker in attack (so the difficulty of the dungeon remains the same), it makes them have lower HP. You are not supposed to get hit anyway so lowering HP is a very smart decision. You only get punished if you BOTH choose a fatigued character AND get hit. Art is sometimes about the creator and audience having a conversation and here, the conversation is: So you think you're good at playing this character? Okay, we didn't intend for you to stick to only one but if you feel confident and like to be challenged, we will progressively take off the safety nets and you can make fewer mistakes in the run, without making the enemies tougher. It slowly asks you to go for a no-hit run, without cutting you off from the class. This is great for players who can play with the higher difficulty or speedrunners. And it asks you to make interesting choices in a run: prioritize defense/dodge/kiting/Rage/avoiding unnecessary risks more; and choices outside a run: which character to choose, should you use up an egg now. Interesting decisions are the core of any good interactive entertainment, as opposed to obvious choices with only one answer.

Moving on to your proposed solutions:
d. Remove fatigue and just ignore the problem
- I think this will make for a game that is less rich in challenge and variety because players, maybe unintentionally and most likely due to the strong feedback loop to stick to 1 character, won't try the other characters unless there is a heavy-handed approach, that is mechanically and narratively coherent, to force switching the characters. It also just sweeps the problem away and depending on whether you agree it's a problem or not, it makes you feel like the fatigue is a punishment or a simple reminder. As you have kept pointing out, the designers had a vision. Fatigue was the way to execute it.

e. Some bed-ridden character cutscene with Well-rested bonus (positive feedback loop)
- Again, I am indifferent to the cutscene idea. Go for it if you want to, but it feels like a hypothetical solution for a hypothetical grievance. And I am between indifference and unimpressed for well-rested bonus. How will it work and how can we predict which of the 6/7 characters that will get the well-rested effect? Is it supposed to be random? Will it make characters overpowered? And it is still not enough of a pull to try a different character. It just FEELS better psychologically because you are rewarded, but the aim of the story and gameplay is to make you feel intimidated, 'punished', by the corruption. There is also more story significance and tension with the corruption infiltrating into your home especially in the late game and having granny or the mother be the wise healer taking care of fatigued characters at home, as opposed to once-in-a-while, some characters having an extra good nap. Do you have any alternatives that don't just dismiss the problem or affect the thematic, narrative and mechanical weight of Corruption Fatigue? Can you elaborate more on your points and propose alternatives? (and try to keep the analogies to a minimum)

For my last point, I am not convinced by what exactly you think games should do. One line, you said: Design is 'not about art, about feelings', and the next line you said 'Games are art without rules'. I agree with you that games, even CoM, are art. SO, design should be in service of this artistic vision. It should not have to follow rules like 'players should play however they want'. Also, I fundamentally disagree that games should be about having fun and making people feel good, even though the vast majority of games do that and that's great. Great art can and should be challenging and should aim to evoke more than just 'pleasure and delight'. We have more than comedy - we have tragedy, drama, horror entertainments that make us feel challenged and provoked (especially Dark Souls), while still being entertaining experiences. Just frame Fatigue as part of the challenge and entertainment. Games should be about the developers having a vision and executing it - and the developers have the vision for the Corruption to feel oppressive and not something you can just leave at the doorstep at the end of the run. How would you have Corruption affect the characters, if not with Fatigue? On a side note, I am sympathetic to the 'players should do whatever they want', 'easy mode in Dark Souls' side but I think it detracts from the experience. In fact, I support Dark Souls having an easy mode, but players need to realise it's not the intended experience and some developers, for whatever reason, don't have the resources to execute such broad, easy-to-consume-for-the-masses 'art'. It's not like removing a piece of wood from a house or asking for no lettuce in a Subway sandwich - everyone gets the same game and for quite a lot of us, we like it this way. Not to be condescending, but I had a tedious time grinding in Hades, an otherwise stellar game in story and combat. So I modded some parts of the game and found that I shortened the game too much and missed out on story where I come back from failed runs. I was okay with that, but roguelites have to be a little challenging and tedious because coming back from failed runs still gives you progress and story cutscenes. If you still find Fatigue 'ugly and full of bugs and smells' or whatever, you will need to justify it with evidence beyond declaring it bad game design. There are many workarounds in the game too. And the last is, you can mod the game (and see for yourself how easy it is to add or remove features; the pinnacle of 'players should play however they want'). Design is not about you having a fun, easy experience without frustration; it's about the designer's vision of switching characters and executing it.

[Underprivileged White Male]

Just ran into the fatigue crap myself.... honestly at this point if I could refund I could.
About all I can do is give it a bad review.

RIP. Bait and switch AF.

[Telzen]

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

Just ran into the fatigue crap myself.... honestly at this point if I could refund I could.
About all I can do is give it a bad review.

RIP. Bait and switch AF.

Do you just throw out random words and phrases without knowing what they mean? Explain how this mechanic makes the game a bait and switch? Also maybe try actually researching a game before you buy it next time.

[Underprivileged White Male]

Telzen eredeti hozzászólása:

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

Just ran into the fatigue crap myself.... honestly at this point if I could refund I could.
About all I can do is give it a bad review.

RIP. Bait and switch AF.

Do you just throw out random words and phrases without knowing what they mean? Explain how this mechanic makes the game a bait and switch? Also maybe try actually researching a game before you buy it next time.

A mechanic added a few hours in that dramatically changes the experience for the worse? Sounds like a bait and switch to me. Bought the game on a recommendation from a friend.

Also kiss my ass.

[Charlemagne]

We Meat Again eredeti hozzászólása:

[/quote]

What i'm doing on this thread is saying that the fatigue mechanic is bad game design. And i've started to ask people to tell me that it's a good game design or to tell me that my idea of good game design is wrong. You managed to write a book chapter without doing either.

My point on my last reply was that design is about having a vision and executing it, so as long you are doing it, you are doing design, but that doesn't mean it's good. The designer of the "house" had a vision, and made that vision become true, but it wasn't a good design because houses aren't supposed to have a big piece of wood in the middle of a room. And this is what we should discuss, not how the designer came up with that using formulas and looking at his blueprint, etc.

Let's say that we have 2 phases here, the planning and the execution. My problem with your arguments is that when i read your comments, i have the feeling that you think that good design comes from good planning and execution. But that can't be futher away from the truth. How many times in your life you have made plans and after you finally did your thing, that thing wasn't good at all?

I believe that this is happening because you are approaching a concept, or an idea on a very logical way. It's like asking an artist to talk about programming or a programmer to talk about art. I can talk about both, but not because i'm both of these things, but because i'm a player and i can see the big picture rather than approaching problems on an artistic or logical way only.

I don't know if you noticed but your replies are 100x bigger than everyone else (100 is a random number, don't try to count the number of letters or something). This either means that everyone on steam is dumb, or that you are just trying too hard on something that has no need to.

Let me try to help you, clear your mind, forget about videos, and (+XP%MECHANIC-[LOOP]/FEEDBACK0101011100) and tell me why you think the fatigue mechanic is good or why my idea of good is wrong. If you can't do that without writing an entire book chapter i think you will already be wrong before you even type your arguments.

[We Meat Again]

I think it's good because it reminds me to enjoy the variety of characters in the game and avoid characters being neglected and unviable in the late game. It also fits the story since the corruption is supposed to be punishing and you feel the same frustration as the family, being afflicted with the curse. Good game design is not just about giving players power fantasy - it can include giving variety and appropriate challenge

I can't say why your idea of good is wrong because you haven't articulated what is good game design. The closest you have said is that gameplay should always be rewarding and never punishing, but I disagree with you on that, on my last point previously. So what is your idea of good design?

My criteria to change my mind is this: do you acknowledge the problem exists (of players not using 6/7 of the other classes) and do you have a good alternative for Fatigue that encourages class variety and contribute to the opppresive atmosphere of the Corruption?

[Underprivileged White Male]

We Meat Again eredeti hozzászólása:

I think it's good because it reminds me to enjoy the variety of characters in the game and avoid characters being neglected and unviable in the late game. It also fits the story since the corruption is supposed to be punishing and you feel the same frustration as the family, being afflicted with the curse. I find variety and challenge entertaining

I can't say why your idea of good is wrong because you haven't articulated what is good game design. The closest you have said is that gameplay should always be rewarding and never punishing, but I disagree with you on that, on my last point previously. So what is your idea of good design?

My criteria to change my mind is this: do you acknowledge the problem exists (of players not using 6/7 of the other classes) and do you have a good alternative for Fatigue that encourages class variety and contribute to the opppresive atmosphere of the Corruption?

It's pretty simple. There are 10's of thousands of games out there. My gaming time is limited. I'm simply not going to waste time on a game that forces me into doing something unfun to be rewarded with something fun. There are thousands of games to play that let me just enjoy it how I want.

The market is simply too large to waste time on a game that punishes you for playing the class/character you most enjoy.

[We Meat Again]

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

The market is simply too large to waste time on a game that punishes you for playing the class/character you most enjoy.

Okay.

That's true and that's fine. There are even genres, like walking simulators and clicker games, that are completely reward, zero punishment. CoM just wasn't designed like Diablo where you start and stick to one character only through the whole game. Go ahead with your negative review, maybe you can disillusion other people who were expecting Diablo or something from this game.

[Underprivileged White Male]

We Meat Again eredeti hozzászólása:

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

The market is simply too large to waste time on a game that punishes you for playing the class/character you most enjoy.

Okay.

That's true and that's fine. There are even genres, like walking simulators and clicker games, that are completely reward, zero punishment. CoM just wasn't designed like Diablo where you start and stick to one character only through the whole game. Go ahead with your negative review, maybe you can disillusion other people who were expecting Diablo or something from this game.

There is a difference in allowing you to play multiple character, or rewarding you for playing multiple characters, and actively punishing you because you have an hour to game and just feel like shooting some crap with a bow.

Actually I quite enjoy games with permadeath, and typically prefer rogue-likes to rogue-lites. That is a great way to do punishment in a fun way. There is no risk here, and certainly no reason to force people into swapping out every couple runs. It's just a silly pointless gameplay mechanic that limits the game while adding nothing. At least with permadeath you can jump back in with whatever character type you feel like.

No one who enjoys the game would quit if it was removed. A lot of people hate the game because of it. From both a marketing and gameplay standpoint there is no benefit from it. It's not like you couldn't just choose to swap characters every run if that's your play style.

[We Meat Again]

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

It's just a silly pointless gameplay mechanic that limits the game while adding nothing.

I disagree that it's pointless and adds nothing. To avoid repeating myself, see comment #45. The gist is: switching characters is core to the gameplay (having the family develop their levels evenly through to the late game) and story (family cooperating together). All of them are fun to play, so the game is not making you go through unfun parts to get to the fun part. But if you fundamentally disagree with the core of switching classes, you will miss out a lot on the game anyway and that makes your negative review valid.

I've been trying to avoid ad hominem, but it speaks to some sense of entitlement to expect something the game wasn't meant to or trying to deliver and get upset when it doesn't deliver it. Maybe your review can help others avoid having the wrong expectation about it. But for a lot of us, playing by switching between even just 2-3 classes, fatigue was a complete non-factor

[Underprivileged White Male]

We Meat Again eredeti hozzászólása:

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

It's just a silly pointless gameplay mechanic that limits the game while adding nothing.

I disagree that it's pointless and adds nothing. To avoid repeating myself, see comment #45. The gist is: switching characters is core to the gameplay (having the family develop their levels evenly through to the late game) and story (family cooperating together). All of them are fun to play, so the game is not making you go through unfun parts to get to the fun part. But if you fundamentally disagree with the core of switching classes, you will miss out a lot on the game anyway and that makes your negative review valid.

I've been trying to avoid ad hominem, but it speaks to some sense of entitlement to expect something the game wasn't meant to or trying to deliver and get upset when it doesn't deliver it. Maybe your review can help others avoid having the wrong expectation about it. But for a lot of us, playing by switching between even just 2-3 classes, fatigue was a complete non-factor

Again again I'll repeat myself. If it's a non-factor.. WHY HAVE IT.
Jesus dude, think.

Answer this. What does this system add as a positive? You can switch characters to your hearts content without it. The only thing it adds is a limitation. What point does that limitation actually serve? As you said it's a non factor to many of you. Well I say it's a factor to SOME of us...

If it adds nothing of value to the majority, but annoys some people... why bother with it?

Would you quit tomorrow if it was removed? Do you think anyone would?

[alpasy]

Underprivileged White Male eredeti hozzászólása:

What does this system add as a positive?

I'm constantly amazed how this very question was answered to you at least five times in this thread already, and you still behave like it wasn't, and quote only those lines of what other people said that in some weirdest way possible allow you to just go and go on with your "bad design" mantra (while at the same time you are also unable to define what is "bad" and "good" design).

The game would be mediocre without the fatigue system because about half of the players would just stick to a single character, like they always do in other diablo-games, and miss out on more than 6/7 of the content. They wouldn't recommend this game to their friends, game press wouldn't write about it and award it, and there would be no "majority" of players, only minority, like in other countless unknown mediocre games. That's what you'd get without your "bad design" in the end.

[Charlemagne]

Are you guys aware that there's a thing inside the game that motivates and rewards the player for switching characters? It's a passive system that was really well built and the reason why i've played with all family members. Yes, i've played for a long time before discovering that the corruption fatigue is a thing. And that's why, alpasy, what you have said is completely false.

As for what good game design is i've already said to another person that it's about making the player feel good while playing your game. I do believe that Children of Morta is good, my problem is with that mechanic which is there just to ♥♥♥♥ with you.

Think about the games that ♥♥♥♥♥♥♥ with you is a main theme. Dark Souls is the best example for that. You die, you get angry but guess what, you are rewarded after defeating a boss with feelings of pride and accomplishment. It's a masterclass on how a hardcore and challenging experience doesn't need to translate to a bad game if actually implemented properly.

Someone told me that Children of Morta does exactly that by giving the player the feeling of immersion as the fatigue makes sense in game, and that's why i've said that if the devs wanted an immersive mechanic, they could have added a cutscene or something. If you don't like that idea, don't worry, i haven't put much thought into it.

My conclusion: Devs created the fatigue just to ♥♥♥♥ with you, and not for immersion. That's bad game design, It makes zero sense. If a dev reply this saying that they have tried to create an immersive mechanic, but for some external reason they have falied, then it's not bad game design. Maybe they have rushed it, maybe they were lazy, no budget to finish things, etc.