Community discussion

Lives and Health Bar

Started by macon on 15 November 2009 • 11,250 views

24 posts

#5458115 November 2009

I've been wondering if anyone else thinks like me that having lives and a health bar is not really needed in todays Dizzy games?

Because of the save game feature I can reload a save if I'm running out of lives rather than start again. I don't think I've ever had to restart a fan game that has a save feature. I mean, does anyone ever get three hours into one of Jamie's epics only to die and have to restart? I can't see it.

In some adventure games such as Simon the Sorceror and the Monkey Island series it is impossible to die. This leaves the player free to enjoy exploring and solving puzzles.

I am seriously thinking of doing away with health and lives in 'Dizzy's Dream Home - The Next Day'. I'm not 100% sure yet so I thought I'd see what thers thought.

#6714115 November 2009

Such versions of games are. But not all, but the best and most difficult. But probably authors will be against.

#6714215 November 2009

but its a pain if you forget t save after 20 minutes and then die.
I always tend to get down to my last life with the saves.. can't be others to keep restarting and saving every 5 minutes.

Also.. if your adding 'points' then its necessary to have the health bar and lives.

Im wondering if its possible to disable the save in certain parts of the map?
For example like the Zaks gauntlet in my MRD. would have been nice to disable the save for that section.. one of the reasons why i added an extra life with the letter puzzle before entering it.

#6714316 November 2009

This exactly the conundrum I came up against with Clover, and it makes you realise a few things about the design of Dizzy-style games.

Back in the day, having a limited set of lives was the norm in such games, so I dare say not a lot of thought went into it, especially for TUCA. I'm sure he won't mind me saying that I had a conversation with Phillip Oliver where he said that they were deliberately trying to make the Dizzy games easier than most, and he originally thought they were too easy!

As I mentioned recently in another thread, it really does come down to what is your game about? Where do players get their satisfaction from? My opinion is puzzle games like Dizzy are fun because of the challenge and elation in solving the actual puzzles. The limited set of lives serve two purposes: 'artificially' making the game harder, and also adding conflict through which tension arises.

The first purpose there is easily addressed. Make the puzzles harder, and add more of them! If your game is about puzzle-solving and you're making the game longer by adding a lives mechanism, you're not really treating the cause of the problem.

The second is a bit more difficult. Tension's quite an important factor in games; without it they're not much of a challenge. I certainly remember dread and fear whenever having to jump onto that crocodile in FWD or the shark fin in MLD, especially near the end of the game when you only had one life left! I don't necessarily think that's a good feeling though, and one that enhances the experience.

One interesting way to add tension is to take something away the player earned, but didn't start with. In Clover instead of death we have 'trouble', which is kinda like a rechargeable health bar. If you're somewhere you shouldn't be, your trouble level increments, and if it gets too high you get teleported to the gaol, which is a massive inconvenience. One idea I toyed with was having the main character (who's a shy sort) increase in confidence the longer he stays out of trouble, and the more puzzles he solves. This would be manifested in increasing player speed and jump distance. It'd be annoying if you lost those advantages by screwing something up, but not as bad a having to start the whole game all over again!

Blimey, that ended up a bit longer than I thought. Hopefully it'll give you some ideas though!

#6714416 November 2009

Ooh, another thought I forgot...

The Lucasarts adventure games would've been a monumental pain in the backside if you could die. I like to think of Dizzy-style games as point 'n' click adventures in a platforming medium.

#6714616 November 2009

Hmmm... Whilst I agree that dying in adventure games does not always have a point (Simon the Sorcerer is an excellent example, leaving you free to try all sorts of silly things with humorous comments from Chris Barrie), sometimes - SOMETIMES - it does work. I remember one of my favourite sections of Broken Sword 2 was after the British Museum, where you were trying to get aboard the little tug boat to listen in on someone's conversation. The events were happening in real-time, a guard stood at one end of the boat and another patrolling round. You had to time your moves in the point n click interface to hide on the roof of the boat, wait for the guard to pass, quickly get down and open a storage room door, climb back up (which could only just be done in time), then we he investigated it shut the door on him, pick up the nearby mop and ram it in the door handle. The first time I did all of that, it was so intense and took me so many tries (if the guard sees you, he shoots you - game over) I just thought it was brilliant and soooo satisfying to solve. In this instance, being able to die in a point n click game was brilliantly 'executed' :wink:

As I've mentioned before, Dizzy for me is about the whole package. I love puzzle games, I love them to death I really do. I love the satisfaction of figuring out the conundrum laid before you before moving onto the next one. But I love every element of Dizzy games: The puzzles, the platforming and the various threats. To me it's not just about the puzzles. If you remove the platforming and remove the threat, it's just not really Dizzy. The only example I can think of where it's appropriate is Jamie's excellent Dizzy Legends series. The traps could be removed and you would still have a great puzzle game. But then, that game plays like no other Dizzy game does it?

For your standard side-on flick-screen platform puzzler I think Dizzy needs to have his lives. I remember getting halfway through Magic Land and being on my last life, and the thrill of avoiding the nasties and not falling in the water made the second half of the game very tense and very fun! I also enjoy the platforming very much, and I would like to see more platforming challenges in Dizzy games. Trying to get to the top of a complex treehouse to finally reach THAT item you need, performing near pixel perfect screen-to-screen jumps only enhance the pleasure for me, and knowing that if you miss the jump you're going to land in the sea and die makes it even better.

I think without that you lose something.

So, in response to DeeJay, that's my take on Dizzy games and what they represent for me.

{dizzy}:cool:

#6714716 November 2009

If I had to choose, I would rather have a health bar with the usual 2 or 3 lives. It would be better if you could simply save your game, but to be faithful to the Dizzy games of old, it would be best keeping with the old style health bar.

As long as I don't see a Dizzy game where you have just 1 life (like in Treasure Island Dizzy), then I'll be happy :teethy:

#6714816 November 2009

what about the health bar with no lives.. you not going to keep saving and restarting every 5 minutes, but onces it's gone it's gone.

Plus its nice to add a few lives and eggs.
In fact i might just do that have the one life, the full health bar, save option and use 'eggs' as food. seems like an interesting idea, you'll have to be careful and you can still save when needed.

But at the end of the day.. does it matter? people will pay the game how they want, or they just wont other playing it.. and we don't want that.

#6714916 November 2009

Congrats Macon on starting a very interesting thread.

Now for my two-penneth:

For me it depends on the sort of game -
In a platformer with obstacles and nasties - it makes sense to have lives - otherwise, what would be the point in having creatures to avoid or spikes to jump over or needing scuba gear to go in the water. I think it also can add some fun to the game - like seeing Dizzy change shape to a fried egg when he dies from fire etc.

For other sorts of games like Fast Food or Kwik Snax - I think lives are also important. If there was no lives or energy, the game would lose its challenge.

However lives can make other games frustating - I'm thinking of Bubble Dizzy or Panic - games I never had the inclination to play over and over, because of the difficulty in getting to the highest level on limited lives.

Ive also played plenty of non-dizzy games such as first person shooters where you get infinite 'tries' so even if you die you just respawn at the last place you were, which is more than handy if youre playing a massive game or if you get the thrill of challenge from something else in the game.

The save game feature is a useful tool to let the player come back to the same point at a later time. I thought the save game portal in Starship Dizzy was quite an interesting idea - and in the context of that game I thought it worked quite well - as it controlled the difficulty of the game, only letting you save the game at certain points.

Now, for Macons next game - if its anything like Dream Home 1 or the most recent YttR - I'd suggest no lives are required - I cant remember any nasty objects to avoid in either games. Also the onus was all on puzzle solving within a time limit rather than avoiding traditional platform obstacles. So in short, I'd try without lives and see what happens.

Good luck Andy, look forward to your next game :smile:
:teethy:

#6715917 November 2009

Thank you for your responses. The route I've decided to take is to try it and see. I personally think it will suit what I have got planned.

My idea was that if there was nothing to draw on the hud then I could do away with it. I posted elsewhere that I would release a test demo but since then I've expanded on my original idea. On the Hud I've drawn tiles that represent the edge of the next room on all 4 sides. This gives the impression that the play area is now 320x240 pixels. It isn't of course it just an illusion because the hud is an unplayable area. Pressing F10 to go full screen makes the play area fill the whole screen to the edge of the monitor.with no border and I think it look really cool.

Because the real playing area is 256x192 the player flips to the next screen before reaching the screen edge which is not the behaviour we are used to. So I am in the process of knocking up a small tree house complex to see how it looks. I've done the ground level and I think I can easily get used to changing screens before reaching the screen edge. I just need to do an upper level to see how flipping screens up or down looks.

As soon as I've done that I will start a progress thread for my game and release the test there so people can have a look and comment on it.

#6718218 November 2009

Consider that the game may be played in other resolutions than 320x240.
you're ok at 640x480 (2x scale), but at 800x600 or wide resolutions, you will have the black bars on the sides.

And as a rule, don't place any elements important to the gameplay outside of standard screen (256x192). If I'll ever port DizzyAGE on Spectrum... ha! ha! just kidding. I guess it's safe to consider 320x240 a standard resolution, even for mobile devices. Maybe I should make the game resolution selectable per game (now it's fixed with a define in engine at 256x192). I'll think of that...

#6718318 November 2009

[quote data-userid="17" data-postid="67182"]

Maybe I should make the game resolution selectable per game (now it’s fixed with a define in engine at 256×192). I’ll think of that…

[/quote]

{yolkfolk}:meh: wouldn't that would require an update to the .exe file?

#6729528 November 2009

[quote data-userid="61" data-postid="54581"]

I’ve been wondering if anyone else thinks like me that having lives and a health bar is not really needed in todays Dizzy games?

[/quote]

yes and no

if there are saves available, i don't think it's necessary. i always do 'save and load' to get my save game perfect.

#6729628 November 2009

I'm sure y'all will moan about the lack of a health bar in Winter Nightmare Dizzy :tongue:

#6731529 November 2009

Hahaha, not at all - I will enjoy the challenge, just as with the no save features of your smaller games. I don't want to be able to play through and complete it straight away... Where's the fun in that!?

#6732029 November 2009

exactly! that's why there's no save feature in WND either :tongue:

#6732129 November 2009

In favour of save games - I just like the feature to be able to save a game half way thru, if Im pushed for time and then pick it up where I left off later - for convenience.

Id say to Jamie to be careful when deciding to disable this feature - I cant remember completing any of Deltas games on the first go or without several trips to a help forum, or just because of the size of the game - a Save feature is very necessary... Is WND any different?
{yolkfolk}:scratch:

#6732229 November 2009

^ i believe its only a small game other wise the save would be enabled.

It is a pain having to make sure you can play without any interruptions.. unfortunately thats not always possible so i tend to skip those games, the save doesn't make the game any easier just means you don't have to do it all on one go, which kinda takes the fun out of it if you do.
But I'll give it a look..

Kinda like MSD which didn't have a save i spent most of the time jumping and rolling off the edge into the water at the start.. so i gave up with it, Dizzy just isn't alway controllable and deaths like that become very frustrating and it get boring, especially if it happens all the time at the same spot and theres nothing you can do about it.

#6732330 November 2009

[quote data-userid="23" data-postid="67320"]

exactly! that’s why there’s no save feature in WND either :tongue:

[/quote]

... I had a feeling that was coming {dizzy}:cool:

#6733530 November 2009

I haven't yet timed myself on a full run through, but i believe it is easily possible to complete the game (when you know what to do :wink: ) in less than 20 mins.