What are peoples views on items in a game that have no use?
I ask because in my latest game, Yolkfolk to the Rescue, which is a remake of a Spectrum game called 'Everyones a Wally" has four such items. As a player you don't know that they are unused so do they get in the way and clutter your inventory or are they a welcome hinderance?
If the majority don't like them, then it will only take less than a minute to remove them from the playing area.
Also, If an item has been used should it be removed from the inventory even if it wouldn't be in real life? For example if you used a pair of garden shears to cut a bush, in reality they would still be in your inventory after the task has been completed. But as a game player would you rather see them removed? There are some instances of this in my game which I wouldn't have time to change before the games release. But I thought I'd ask at the same time for future projects.
I think its an item is used and has no other use it should go. Other wise you end up carrying too many things around.
And for dummy items. . i don't see a problem within reason.. its nice to have a couple to keep people guessing, all dizzy games did it. I think i only had 3 unused item in my current game as part of the chef puzzle. to keep people guessing which item they needed.. unless they can speak French.
But a couple of them i think are good fun.. (soggy ice cream cone)
Well, I thing such an item may have it's part in an adventure, but only if used with care. It's called "red herring". And it's not necessarily about an item.
The idea is to let the player think it's useful in a puzzle, when in fact the solution is different. Implemented right, it offers complexity to the game's universe and it grows the satisfaction of finding the true solution. Implemented wrong it just offer frustration - like making the player carrying it in inventory and testing everything in hope it will work on something.
For example I did use such a "red herring" in TOS at the rat merchant. I bet everyone imagined a lot of ways to use the items in his store - if only they could be obtained... In the end, it was not the magic lamp, nor the explosive... it was the stinky cheese! I think it was a funny situation.
Jamie did something similar with his merchant, where you could actually waste money on useless stuff, even if it looked worthy at first :smile:
A funny situation would be to have a pickaxe, or a similar tool, that player thinks useful on the whole length of the game, but he doesn't actually get to dig anything useful with it. With the right dialog of course.
Anyway to come to the point, I think a "red herring" item is bad if you have no idea what to do with it, so you just carry it and try it on everything else, just to find out in the end that it's really not needed and it didn't add anything good to the game experience.
A good "red herring" item is one that you anticipate it's use. Optionally you struggle to obtain it, only to soon find out it wasn't really what you expected.
For example you try to obtain a cutter but it breaks when you use it. And if you'll be able to use the broken pieces later, even for an optional puzzle, that's even better.
Now, about the number of "red herrings" per game... that's a different discussion. I'd say once is usually enough, twice at most.
If we're talking about more "dummy items" that have no use, the player should now pretty soon they're of no use.
As for the items that disappear after they're used, that's a simple and generally accepted solution to avoid accumulating "red herrings". If you keep the pair of garden shears after it's use, the player will try it again thinking it was a reason for that. And if he indeed reuse one item, he'll try all the others too.
Of course, it would be nice to find a plausible explanation for it's disappearance, like it was damaged in the process, or you give it back to whom you got it from, etc.
Or if you're left with lots of items, you also have a point in the game where they are all cleared. Like you've been robbed or you lost them.
regarding red herrings, i think one or two for most games is acceptable. i had three in IID, but ended up making a use for one of them anyway. how many you have i think depends on how big the game is, and how many normal items you have. but certainly i personally wouldn't ever have more than three, no matter what size the game is.
don't do what i did in my first game, DMD, and have something like 6! people didn't like that. I removed most of them for version 2.
I also think that items hiding coins are different, and shouldn't be counted as proper items, as most people will realise that it's only there to hide the coin.
and as for whether you lose an item or not after using it, i always try to ensure that if you'd lose it in real life, you lose it in the game. for example using s bridge kit. And if you wouldn't lose it normally, then you don't lose it in my games - e.g. a woodaxe.
Sometimes you do need it to be removed from inventory, for example if you have 5 accessable boulders, but ony want 2 of them to be broken by a pickaxe. However there has to be a good reason for it's removal, for example it breaks. As alex says, keeping items can then lead to an accumulation of items, but this is not normally too much of a problem.
For example, your garden shears cutting a bush. you could keep it afterwards, it would make sense. However if you do remove it, it would be good to put a message such as 'they're now blunt, so you throw them away'
I'll just add something else. it can be good with Red Herrings, to have a 'fun' use for them, that you don't need to do to finish the game. I've had a few of these in my games - mostly you get some extra points, and in IID a few items will get you extra coins too if used in the right place. But you could just have it for an extra bit of dialogue if your game doesn't have points. It's nice as a player to discover a fun use for something. a little 'easter egg' as it were.
for examples of 'fun' uses for items, try giving grass to dylan in MSD, or using the golf club on the golf ball next to Grand Dizzy in MSD too.
Having had a bit of confusion over the now famous 'soggy ice cream cone' item :tongue: when reading the thread as to whether or not it was required to be used somewhere in the game or not to complete its interesting to have seen this (red herrings) being discussed....as such I'll contribute also with a few thoughts.
Personally I think an item should have a function in some form or another in the game, not necessarily to solve a puzzle or to gain an exchange for another item required, but could be to gain coins or points or even to add some comedy dialogue to the game if used in the right place.
The counter argument would be however doing that would make a game a bit easier, so I suppose its getting the balance right between making a game challenging but not totally frustrating...hence maybe 1 or 2 can have their place.
As for items that have been used I believe they should disappear from the inventory if they no longer have a function for the remaining parts of the game. I think inventive dialogue can be used for reasons as to their disapperance which in some instances can give some comedy value opportunity as to why.
Just a few thoughts, ice creams all round for everyone but the cones are soggy {yolkfolk}:tongue:
When I think back to the original Dizzy games - such as treasure island/fantasy world I remember that nearly every item had its use and disappeared after use - red herrings like the whiskey bottle in fantasy world was good fun
But I also remember spellbound where there were quite a few objects that didnt disappear after you used them, like the jar or umbrella (which had more than one use) - and a couple of red herrings - the knife i think was one?
In some fan games, like Magic maniax, every item disapears when you use it and no red herrings - but those sort of games focus more on avoiding obstacles and timing of jumps than puzzle solving
I think in large puzzle games, id like to see more disappear after the final use so less used items clutter up the inventory.
- but red herrings can also be bits of scenery hiding coins - I think its great that in Jamies games for example he tries to use as many different sceneray items as he can imagine - but there are times when a piece of scenery looks useful even if it has no actual use, eg in IID: wheel or half dome - But i guess the rule should be: if an item looks like junk, then thats what it is.
Andy, having seen your game - i'd suggest that as many items as possible should disappear after use - because there are lots of items and many possibilities of puzzle combinations, due to using multiple characters and having buildings/puzzles which can only be entered/solved by certain characters. I think theres enough added difficulty - where its possible to select and use the wrong item with the wrong person on the wrong thing, without adding red herrings - but there may be room for a scarlet mackerel?
i like red herrings as long as there aren't loads of them - iid aside i think the items are better off disappearing from the menu unless they need to be used again - maybe even leave a couple for confusion sake!!! {yolkfolk}:music:
the thing is with IID, if i made every item disappear after use, then there would be nothing left to sell to the shopkeeper! {yolkfolk}:tongue:
[/quote]
Good point.
Altho given theres many coins hidden behind junk/scenery items, what we may need is a recycling depot as well as a shop...
Hmm, (cogs of thought turning) - Maybe that could be one for a future game ?
Imagine: - a Green eco-friendly Dizzy game - where instead of finding objects to solve puzzles - you're a 'Dizzy Womble', collecting junk and litter and bits of tree and railings - & then recycle them or turn into crazy inventions??
Anyone fancy making a Wombles homage using Yolkfolk?
There where quite a few red herrings in the original Dizzy games if I remember rightly. Magicland immediately springs to mind with having had a BAG OF RUBBISH and an EMPTY MILKBOTTLE outside the Castle's back door.
Fantasy World had the HOLE and the WHISKEY BOTTLE.
Yolkfolk had that damn MAGIC CARPET that I spent weeks trying to make fly *lol*
Obviously there were other bits and pieces here and there. Bits of BUSH, RAILING, SKULLS etc where all just there to hide coins/cherries etc but served no other purpose.
I don't think there's anything wrong with red herrings here and there. If they're ok by the Oliver Twins then they should be ok by everybody else! :teethy:
not exactly unused items but i loved the way you collected coins in summer blast dizzy without picking up whatever they were hidden behind {yolkfolk}:clap:
if its a small game then most unless items i think works better, its creates another puzzle in doing so. and being of a small scale you haven't got a 5 hour walk from one bit to another.
OR increase the amount of item dizzy can hump about.
I also like red herring puzzels that require an object you'll never find or be able to use. Like fall rocks that would be passable with a hard hat, or a blocked passage that needs a pick axe you just can't reach or a ledge just that little bit too high etc.
The secret caves in TUCA had a spare life you could never reach, but I spent a lot of time trying. I always wanted to know what was in that next screen? What lay further down the windy shaft etc.
I think I only left 1 red herring in SBD. That was the Dirty cloth towards the end. Though it wasn't really a red herring, just a result from using it from it's original state. think it only confused a couple of people though. Oh, and there was the first piece of cheese in VID