Re: Gameplay theory: leaving object behind..


Thu, 14 Sep 1995 00:32:13 GMT

In article <4333qe$1fq@cnn.Princeton.EDU>,
Adam J. Thornton <adam@flagstaff.princeton.edu> wrote:
...
>A game should not require that every object have a use in the game. I'm
>all for hideously detailed games that have a great many objects that have
>no relevance to the game. Don't let the player get away with "I can pick
>it up--it must be useful".
...

Exactly right. I would take it a step further and have more locations
than should actually be visited. Think of how many locations there are
in the real world that have absolutely no visitation value. You have to
think about where you're going in real life to arrive at any place of
interest.

It wouldn't be hard to create a whole skyscraper full of rooms based on
series of random numbers derived from a specific seed number, so that the
player would have a consistent but randomly constructed world to deal with.
It would be a complete waste of time for the player to wander through it,
but it would be there.

-- 
*****************************************************************************
When in danger or in doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

-----------------------------------------Erik Hermansen (daedulus@eskimo.com)