Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
ReplyVanah
Let me say we had a blast. My only gripe would that I wish the quest was longer, I do think that 3 hours is just a bit short, 4 hours would be great. The first hour passed us by so quickly that it seemed like only ten minutes had passed.
The key to this quest is to approach it like a puzzle. With an open mind and your best guesses need to be shared with your WHOLE group.
Thanks again You will be seeing our group back in Black Swan as soon as we can get there! :)
~Shi'larra
~Shi'larra
One bold fella breaks from the chain and climbs up on Brinret's chest, grabbing a hold of the tufts of hair on both sides of his head and holding him still! A fat, wet kiss is placed before the monkey disappears
I agree, I had a good time, and I think a key player was our group personality. We didn't rush everything and treat it like a contest, we played it very much like a D&D quest.
Feedback:
The 3 hour time limit tries to force the quest to feel competitive. I would much rather see it be a longer window that would allow the group to finish, then tier out prizes on how fast they were able to finish.
There are A LOT of puzzles. I feel like we solved a lot, and we didn't end up making it extremely far. Near the end, as I was reflecting, I had a hard time remembering all of the puzzled we had to move on from because we weren't making progress. Maybe part of the 'challenge' is the need to organize all of the puzzles you've seen so far, but I found it overwhelming. Maybe some way to keep track of what rooms you've already solved so that you can feel like your making progress would make it feel a bit better. TLDR: The completionist in me wants a checklist.
Finally, it is very challenging. I'm sure this is by design, but we 'gave up' on some because we lost interest after being stuck for too long. I don't think it would be too easy if after say 15 minutes of being in the room without progress, a small (in game style) hint would show up. It would at least re-energize the people to rethink the puzzle a different way.
That said, thanks again. I'm undecided if I'll do another yet, but that would definitely change to a yes if our same group wants to get together and try again.
Thanks,
Matt / Vorks
Feedback:
The 3 hour time limit tries to force the quest to feel competitive. I would much rather see it be a longer window that would allow the group to finish, then tier out prizes on how fast they were able to finish.
There are A LOT of puzzles. I feel like we solved a lot, and we didn't end up making it extremely far. Near the end, as I was reflecting, I had a hard time remembering all of the puzzled we had to move on from because we weren't making progress. Maybe part of the 'challenge' is the need to organize all of the puzzles you've seen so far, but I found it overwhelming. Maybe some way to keep track of what rooms you've already solved so that you can feel like your making progress would make it feel a bit better. TLDR: The completionist in me wants a checklist.
Finally, it is very challenging. I'm sure this is by design, but we 'gave up' on some because we lost interest after being stuck for too long. I don't think it would be too easy if after say 15 minutes of being in the room without progress, a small (in game style) hint would show up. It would at least re-energize the people to rethink the puzzle a different way.
That said, thanks again. I'm undecided if I'll do another yet, but that would definitely change to a yes if our same group wants to get together and try again.
Thanks,
Matt / Vorks
I have no idea if they changed anything between the runs, but I think its fair to say the mindsets of the groups were at least part of the reason.
Group 1 had a daunting task of setting the bar in a challenge, and didn't know if they should expect to be able to hit Tier2 or Tier6.
Our group knew from the first run where to set our expectations on how well we'd be able to do, so it wasn't nearly as painful when we spun our wheels.
Group 1 had a daunting task of setting the bar in a challenge, and didn't know if they should expect to be able to hit Tier2 or Tier6.
Our group knew from the first run where to set our expectations on how well we'd be able to do, so it wasn't nearly as painful when we spun our wheels.
Group 2 on the plat said got to pick Group 1's brain during and after our run. They knew where we got stuck and what frustrations we had and go to bypass some of the worst of it.
Keith/Brinret/Shiun
ATTENTION: Monks were only designed to reach level 39. Please check into the nearest Inn and choose the retire option immediately before you break the game completely!
Keith/Brinret/Shiun
ATTENTION: Monks were only designed to reach level 39. Please check into the nearest Inn and choose the retire option immediately before you break the game completely!
Three hours is way too short.
I wasn't paying attention to the chat, so I didn't see Group 1's notes. Didn't realize some folks were comparing notes.
I enjoyed the second run to an extent, but I will say this: I seriously hate games of "Guess the Syntax." There were places where we sat for 15-20 minutes completely at a loss, and we had a group of experienced GS players. Some of the syntax was mind-boggling.
Some folks concluded that the quest is designed to go through multiple times, so you can quickly pass through the areas you've been before. While this makes sense, it should be solvable in one run.
My biggest complaint, as was Taaki's is simple: I hate time-sinks, and the quest is filled with them. There are so many time-sinks built into the puzzles that it became more and more frustrating, particularly where our group was at the end. There's nothing quite so fun as seeing a 40 second RT, followed by another.
At one point, we had one player completely separated from the rest of the party for fifteen minutes, with the rest of us just twiddling our thumbs. Not the fault of the one player -- it was the syntax issue, again. We were all offering help to that person.
I would prefer being able to solve the puzzle at our leisure. The three hour time-frame puts a strain on you (well, it did on me) when you remember it. Entire hours vanished quickly, which was fun, but perhaps the tiers should be set based on hours spent on the puzzle, ie 8 hours=tier 1, 7 hours=tier 2, etc. I wanted to solve it, but... see above.
Final comment: I WOULD go through it again, with the same group. You bond in there when working as a team. Everyone had jobs to do so we could go faster through rooms. I recommend that to everyone who goes on the quest.
Scott/Taeghan
I wasn't paying attention to the chat, so I didn't see Group 1's notes. Didn't realize some folks were comparing notes.
I enjoyed the second run to an extent, but I will say this: I seriously hate games of "Guess the Syntax." There were places where we sat for 15-20 minutes completely at a loss, and we had a group of experienced GS players. Some of the syntax was mind-boggling.
Some folks concluded that the quest is designed to go through multiple times, so you can quickly pass through the areas you've been before. While this makes sense, it should be solvable in one run.
My biggest complaint, as was Taaki's is simple: I hate time-sinks, and the quest is filled with them. There are so many time-sinks built into the puzzles that it became more and more frustrating, particularly where our group was at the end. There's nothing quite so fun as seeing a 40 second RT, followed by another.
At one point, we had one player completely separated from the rest of the party for fifteen minutes, with the rest of us just twiddling our thumbs. Not the fault of the one player -- it was the syntax issue, again. We were all offering help to that person.
I would prefer being able to solve the puzzle at our leisure. The three hour time-frame puts a strain on you (well, it did on me) when you remember it. Entire hours vanished quickly, which was fun, but perhaps the tiers should be set based on hours spent on the puzzle, ie 8 hours=tier 1, 7 hours=tier 2, etc. I wanted to solve it, but... see above.
Final comment: I WOULD go through it again, with the same group. You bond in there when working as a team. Everyone had jobs to do so we could go faster through rooms. I recommend that to everyone who goes on the quest.
Scott/Taeghan
>was anything changed between the Plat runs on the Simu side. If so, would a GM mind explaining what was changed?
The only thing that was changed was the door that Hal got stuck at, and the second group didn't open it the same way, anyway.
There are a few things that I tweaked after the second run based on the comments groups made, mainly alternate verbs that make sense to work. For example (but not a real example), if I had a puzzle that already trapped spin and turn, and one of the groups tried twist, I'd go ahead and add twist. Syntax is always a concern, and I will cut down on that frustration where I can.
>They knew where we got stuck and what frustrations we had and go to bypass some of the worst of it.
From watching both groups, I don't know how much information was shared. If it was, the people with knowledge on the second run weren't too insistent on using it. The first group got over the wall differently than the second group. It took both groups 90 minutes to get into the castle. Both groups attacked the next two puzzles differently. Once into the main area, the two groups went entirely different ways.
The big thing the second group took to heart from the first group was the warning NOT TO LEAVE THE GROUP. EVER. Sometimes, guys, you might have to. Every puzzle can be completed solo, so the group can technically stay together most of the time. But I stick by my earlier comment that the quest can be completed if people split into smaller groups.
>I would prefer being able to solve the puzzle at our leisure.
The problem is, with an automated quest, we need to have exact durations in order for the set to reset for the next batch. Blocks of time have to be set up in advance. What happens if one group runs way over the expected time, and the next group is ready to go? Plus, we have people complaining that they can't set aside three hours for a quest (and we are working on things for those with shorter attention spans or available play time!). The previous runs took 12-15 hours. I removed a lot of tedium from the old puzzles, but there's still a lot of content. Just like Droughtman's and the Academy Quest, you must be present in game when the quest ends to collect your prize. I think it's better to have a set duration than to give an estimated run time of between two and ten hours where if you have to leave you're out of luck.
If the tiers were based on time, the quest would have to be limited to one run per account. Otherwise, there'd really be no need for any more than two tiers. One tier for you to figure out the puzzle at your leisure, and the other tier to blow through everything you learned on the previous run.
I am the type of person who can do the 5 questions on a crossword puzzle that I know and walk away completely happy. I don't see partial completion as a failure. The lower tier prizes are on-par with the prizes from the Academy Quest, and you weren't guaranteed a prize there.
>I hate time-sinks, and the quest is filled with them.
Roundtime is really the only thing I have to keep the puzzles balanced regardless of how many players are currently running a quest. If ten players dance in the foyer for ten seconds of roundtime one time each, they're done in ten seconds. If one player dances in the foyer ten times, he's dancing for a minute and a half. At 40 seconds, the larger group still has the edge, timewise. Note: You don't need to dance in the foyer.
~Vanah
The only thing that was changed was the door that Hal got stuck at, and the second group didn't open it the same way, anyway.
There are a few things that I tweaked after the second run based on the comments groups made, mainly alternate verbs that make sense to work. For example (but not a real example), if I had a puzzle that already trapped spin and turn, and one of the groups tried twist, I'd go ahead and add twist. Syntax is always a concern, and I will cut down on that frustration where I can.
>They knew where we got stuck and what frustrations we had and go to bypass some of the worst of it.
From watching both groups, I don't know how much information was shared. If it was, the people with knowledge on the second run weren't too insistent on using it. The first group got over the wall differently than the second group. It took both groups 90 minutes to get into the castle. Both groups attacked the next two puzzles differently. Once into the main area, the two groups went entirely different ways.
The big thing the second group took to heart from the first group was the warning NOT TO LEAVE THE GROUP. EVER. Sometimes, guys, you might have to. Every puzzle can be completed solo, so the group can technically stay together most of the time. But I stick by my earlier comment that the quest can be completed if people split into smaller groups.
>I would prefer being able to solve the puzzle at our leisure.
The problem is, with an automated quest, we need to have exact durations in order for the set to reset for the next batch. Blocks of time have to be set up in advance. What happens if one group runs way over the expected time, and the next group is ready to go? Plus, we have people complaining that they can't set aside three hours for a quest (and we are working on things for those with shorter attention spans or available play time!). The previous runs took 12-15 hours. I removed a lot of tedium from the old puzzles, but there's still a lot of content. Just like Droughtman's and the Academy Quest, you must be present in game when the quest ends to collect your prize. I think it's better to have a set duration than to give an estimated run time of between two and ten hours where if you have to leave you're out of luck.
If the tiers were based on time, the quest would have to be limited to one run per account. Otherwise, there'd really be no need for any more than two tiers. One tier for you to figure out the puzzle at your leisure, and the other tier to blow through everything you learned on the previous run.
I am the type of person who can do the 5 questions on a crossword puzzle that I know and walk away completely happy. I don't see partial completion as a failure. The lower tier prizes are on-par with the prizes from the Academy Quest, and you weren't guaranteed a prize there.
>I hate time-sinks, and the quest is filled with them.
Roundtime is really the only thing I have to keep the puzzles balanced regardless of how many players are currently running a quest. If ten players dance in the foyer for ten seconds of roundtime one time each, they're done in ten seconds. If one player dances in the foyer ten times, he's dancing for a minute and a half. At 40 seconds, the larger group still has the edge, timewise. Note: You don't need to dance in the foyer.
~Vanah
Scott's post pretty much sums it up for me. I did have a good time with it, but the RT and guess the syntax were frustrating. I wish we had longer, because the 3 hours flew by.
Regarding the whole guess the syntax thing, part of the problem is that there are places where verbs are used that are rarely, if ever, used in other parts of GemStone. I won't say publicly what they are because of giving away puzzles yadda yadda, but suffice to say there was at least one spot that used a verb I've never used in GS for anything else.
Another thing is there's one part that doesn't appear to be solvable using anything available in game. The whole quest should be solvable without resorting to an outside resource. If one of our party members wasn't aware of that thing in that place, we would have been stopped right there and that would have been it.
I can honestly say, though, that I did enjoy the quest and that I didn't even think about the prizes while going through it. My main motivation was that we get at least as far as group one and not shame ourselves. :)
~~k
Regarding the whole guess the syntax thing, part of the problem is that there are places where verbs are used that are rarely, if ever, used in other parts of GemStone. I won't say publicly what they are because of giving away puzzles yadda yadda, but suffice to say there was at least one spot that used a verb I've never used in GS for anything else.
Another thing is there's one part that doesn't appear to be solvable using anything available in game. The whole quest should be solvable without resorting to an outside resource. If one of our party members wasn't aware of that thing in that place, we would have been stopped right there and that would have been it.
I can honestly say, though, that I did enjoy the quest and that I didn't even think about the prizes while going through it. My main motivation was that we get at least as far as group one and not shame ourselves. :)
~~k
>Roundtime is really the only thing I have to keep the puzzles balanced regardless of how many players are currently running a quest. If ten players dance in the foyer for ten seconds of roundtime one time each, they're done in ten seconds. If one player dances in the foyer ten times, he's dancing for a minute and a half. At 40 seconds, the larger group still has the edge, timewise. Note: You don't need to dance in the foyer.
What does this mean, exactly? If you go in a group of fewer than ten players, you're at a serious disadvantage time-wise to having a full group, despite the quest being supposedly solvable solo?
What does this mean, exactly? If you go in a group of fewer than ten players, you're at a serious disadvantage time-wise to having a full group, despite the quest being supposedly solvable solo?
>The roundtime on some puzzles scales according to how many players are currently running the quest to flatten any purported advantage or disadvantage of group size.
Thanks, that makes sense. But doesn't that mean that if you have a large group running the quest, it's better to stick together as one group instead of breaking off into smaller groups?
In other words, a full group breaking up into small groups is not the same as a small group running by themselves.
Thanks, that makes sense. But doesn't that mean that if you have a large group running the quest, it's better to stick together as one group instead of breaking off into smaller groups?
In other words, a full group breaking up into small groups is not the same as a small group running by themselves.
>In other words, a full group breaking up into small groups is not the same as a small group running by themselves.
It's not necessarily better. A full group breaking into two small groups will not go twice as fast as one small group on its own, but still might go faster than a full group all staring at the same puzzle perplexed.
~Vanah
It's not necessarily better. A full group breaking into two small groups will not go twice as fast as one small group on its own, but still might go faster than a full group all staring at the same puzzle perplexed.
~Vanah
>>Group 2 on the plat said got to pick Group 1's brain during and after our run. They knew where we got stuck and what frustrations we had and go to bypass some of the worst of it.<<
It's a little offensive to think that the only reason we had a better time was because we had information that group 1 didn't. If anyone in the group DID have any special information they didn't share it. It is entirely possible that maybe we went into the quest with a very different mind set, AND we had the advantage that whatever was buggy with your first puzzle was fixed for us.
The main thing we did take from group 1 is the following;
1. Stay grouped together.
2. Don't run verb trap scripts.
3. Work together.
I am looking forward to running the quest again but as others have said I wish we had more time.
FEEDBACK: There is definatly a few places where it is guess the syntax, and yes there are verbs used that I don't think we use in GS on an even semi regular basis, if there was a way to make it more intuitive it would be great.
~D
AIM: Delcian
"Only after disaster can we be resurrected." - TD
Seven stars in your cloak shine brightly, forming The Gryphon in the twinkling night sky.
It's a little offensive to think that the only reason we had a better time was because we had information that group 1 didn't. If anyone in the group DID have any special information they didn't share it. It is entirely possible that maybe we went into the quest with a very different mind set, AND we had the advantage that whatever was buggy with your first puzzle was fixed for us.
The main thing we did take from group 1 is the following;
1. Stay grouped together.
2. Don't run verb trap scripts.
3. Work together.
I am looking forward to running the quest again but as others have said I wish we had more time.
FEEDBACK: There is definatly a few places where it is guess the syntax, and yes there are verbs used that I don't think we use in GS on an even semi regular basis, if there was a way to make it more intuitive it would be great.
~D
AIM: Delcian
"Only after disaster can we be resurrected." - TD
Seven stars in your cloak shine brightly, forming The Gryphon in the twinkling night sky.
If anyone from either of the previous two groups has suggestions for alternate syntax options for puzzles that their group completed, please email me at GS4-VANAH@play.net.
For example, the H4H book that was mentioned as a hated guess-the-verb puzzle in this folder was bound by a strap had to be RAISEd before the book could be opened. Attempts to manipulate the book before that told you that the strap had to be lifted first. LIFT isn't a verb. Flat out changing that messaging to telling the player that the strap had to be raised first might be too obvious. I could, however, expand the puzzle to work with other existing verbs like UNWRAP, GET, or PULL. Not all verbs that make sense mentally work mechanically; REMOVE might make sense, but you're not wearing the strap so it may not work mechanically. If you have suggestions, I'd love to hear them but may not be able to implement them.
~Vanah
For example, the H4H book that was mentioned as a hated guess-the-verb puzzle in this folder was bound by a strap had to be RAISEd before the book could be opened. Attempts to manipulate the book before that told you that the strap had to be lifted first. LIFT isn't a verb. Flat out changing that messaging to telling the player that the strap had to be raised first might be too obvious. I could, however, expand the puzzle to work with other existing verbs like UNWRAP, GET, or PULL. Not all verbs that make sense mentally work mechanically; REMOVE might make sense, but you're not wearing the strap so it may not work mechanically. If you have suggestions, I'd love to hear them but may not be able to implement them.
~Vanah
Out of curiosity, how many people have to say that they hate playing guess the verb, AND that they perceived some puzzles to be merely 'guess-the-verb- before you'll consider that maybe, just maybe, perhaps they are right, instead of getting defensive and claiming that there are no 'guess-the-verb' puzzles in RtBSC?
Obviously, we haven't reached that magic number of people yet, but there is hope, with more runs of RtBSC scheduled.
-Taakhooshi, and Me
For the Story of Taakhooshi:
http://www.gsguide.net/index.php?title=Taakhooshi
Obviously, we haven't reached that magic number of people yet, but there is hope, with more runs of RtBSC scheduled.
-Taakhooshi, and Me
For the Story of Taakhooshi:
http://www.gsguide.net/index.php?title=Taakhooshi
Vanah --
I liked it. I was primed for something difficult, so I was not crushed by how hard it was.
If anything, I was too focused on mapping, looking for tricks, hidden items that weren't highlighted by Stormfront, etc. Ultimately, the puzzles did present themselves as puzzles and weren't big gotchas.
By the time we got to where we got, I was fried mentally. I would very much like to do it again, with the same team I hope, zoom through the puzzles we solved, and start fresh where we left off.
Our group of 10 was a bit unwieldy, but, when you're looking for ideas on how to crack a puzzle, you need the brainpower.
There were also definitely moments (toward the end) where we did things together, but really, one person should have done them alone. Time sinks for one don't have to be time sinks for all, it just depends.
-E
>>I will gladly take suggestions on how to streamline specific instances of confusing syntax to alleviate frustration.
I can vouch for this. The thing I mentioned earlier about the one verb I've never used for anything was changed/added to based on Vanah watching the verbs we did try to use and picking what made sense and was intuitive. So she's definitely paying attention and taking suggestions.
~~k
I can vouch for this. The thing I mentioned earlier about the one verb I've never used for anything was changed/added to based on Vanah watching the verbs we did try to use and picking what made sense and was intuitive. So she's definitely paying attention and taking suggestions.
~~k
<<Out of curiosity, how many people have to say that they hate playing guess the verb, AND that they perceived some puzzles to be merely 'guess-the-verb- before you'll consider that maybe, just maybe, perhaps they are right, instead of getting defensive and claiming that there are no 'guess-the-verb' puzzles in RtBSC?
Obviously, we haven't reached that magic number of people yet, but there is hope, with more runs of RtBSC scheduled.
>>
We get the message that some people don't like the puzzle design. Trust me, we get it loud and clear. As you can read, Vanah has been taking suggestions for alternate verbs and she has implemented many. Rest assured that the next few quests we release will have minimal (if any) puzzles.
We are also going to be very careful on the length of quests. We're going to aim for 1 - 2 hours and even try to stay on the low side of that.
SGM Sleken
Obviously, we haven't reached that magic number of people yet, but there is hope, with more runs of RtBSC scheduled.
>>
We get the message that some people don't like the puzzle design. Trust me, we get it loud and clear. As you can read, Vanah has been taking suggestions for alternate verbs and she has implemented many. Rest assured that the next few quests we release will have minimal (if any) puzzles.
We are also going to be very careful on the length of quests. We're going to aim for 1 - 2 hours and even try to stay on the low side of that.
SGM Sleken
I was frustrated last night, but like Eulogia, I went into it ready for it to be hard. Some of the verb traps are tough, yes, but as mentioned above, Vanah IS taking everything into consideration, and she and Myriamie's player had several emails back and forth today about the issues. Verbs are actively being tweaked (thankfully!) based on our actions. She's watching every group, seeing what the troubles are for each.
There's been an awful lot of work done here, it's obvious.
I'll gladly run again with the same folks, once things are ironed out a bit more.
There's been an awful lot of work done here, it's obvious.
I'll gladly run again with the same folks, once things are ironed out a bit more.
<We get the message that some people don't like the puzzle design. Trust me, we get it loud and clear. As you can read, Vanah has been taking suggestions for alternate verbs and she has implemented many. Rest assured that the next few quests we release will have minimal (if any) puzzles.
We are also going to be very careful on the length of quests. We're going to aim for 1 - 2 hours and even try to stay on the low side of that.
SGM Sleken>
This makes me sad. Eliminating puzzles in favor of hack 'n slash or maze quests (just two off the top of my head) signals to me that we sound like we're incapable of logical thinking. I, for one, found BSC to be an incredible challenge and would happily go back in with our group from last night. Yes, we had a few syntax/verb issues, but we recognized them for what they were and worked together to find different solutions. Sometimes we failed, but we tried! I marveled at the inventive thought process of my teammates and at times was humbled by how much of an "inside the box" thinker I've become.
Please don't dumb things down for us. We've scripted/macro'd/mapped ourselves into a hole that when when I think about it is often quite boring. We've done it to ourselves. Challenge us. If we get stuck, figure out a way to gently nudge us toward a solution. But don't lower the bar just because we forgot how to use a fork and are crying to be spoon-fed.
Just my thoughts ...
Jani
>>Rest assured that the next few quests we release will have minimal (if any) puzzles.
"Guess the verb isn't fun" isn't the same as "don't do puzzles." There are puzzles in Black Swan that don't involve the verb guessing game and, other than the RT incurred, I haven't seen those complained about. Or I missed it if they were.
~~k
"Guess the verb isn't fun" isn't the same as "don't do puzzles." There are puzzles in Black Swan that don't involve the verb guessing game and, other than the RT incurred, I haven't seen those complained about. Or I missed it if they were.
~~k
I'm not saying we'll never do anymore puzzles, but the next few quests will not be puzzle oriented. Puzzles are very difficult to implement and balance. And that means they are time-consuming to develop. We simply cannot have a development cycle the length of BSQ's on every quest. We really wanted to kick these off with something epic.
SGM Sleken
SGM Sleken
| We get the message that some people don't like the puzzle design. Trust me, we get it loud and clear. As you can read, Vanah has been taking suggestions for alternate verbs and she has implemented many. Rest assured that the next few quests we release will have minimal (if any) puzzles. |
If that's the message that you are taking away from what I said, then either I am mis-speaking, or you are trying to take it the wrong way.
Either way, to clear this up, 'guess the verb' /= puzzles. That's a DOES NOT EQUAL sign. More clearly, I like puzzles (and I believe the large majority of the people that have done RtBSC like puzzles as well). I DO NOT LIKE playing "guess the verb" which is completely and totally different from puzzles.
-Taakhooshi, and Me
For the Story of Taakhooshi:
http://www.gsguide.net/index.php?title=Taakhooshi
I told myself I wouldn't post again. But here's the issue with GS. Verbs are how we interact. In text, it's all we have to rely on. We just don't have the visuals like a graphical game to display a puzzle. So it's not like Myst where you see the puzzle, and you use your cursor to "solve" it. Yes, it's a little guess work, yes it's a lot of reading and looking at everything, but "guess-the-verb" is in a sense, a needed factor.
But it's VERY intuitive. I honestly wish more of GS could be as intuitive as BSQ is. Like, for example... In normal gameplay, you might find yourself needing to tie your shoe. You have to figure if it's pull, push, turn, twist, spin, etc. In BSQ, it's just "tie shoe." When I ran the quest and asked one of my party members how they did something, they were like it was just XXX YYY. And I was like, "...oh."
~Wyrom, SGM
Quests
Platinum
Promotions
But it's VERY intuitive. I honestly wish more of GS could be as intuitive as BSQ is. Like, for example... In normal gameplay, you might find yourself needing to tie your shoe. You have to figure if it's pull, push, turn, twist, spin, etc. In BSQ, it's just "tie shoe." When I ran the quest and asked one of my party members how they did something, they were like it was just XXX YYY. And I was like, "...oh."
~Wyrom, SGM
Quests
Platinum
Promotions
>>But it's VERY intuitive. I honestly wish more of GS could be as intuitive as BSQ is. Like, for example... In normal gameplay, you might find yourself needing to tie your shoe. You have to figure if it's pull, push, turn, twist, spin, etc. In BSQ, it's just "tie shoe." When I ran the quest and asked one of my party members how they did something, they were like it was just XXX YYY. And I was like, "...oh."
It being more intuitive could actually be part of the problem here. I haven't run the quest yet so can't say for certain but with a host of gamers that have all been trained to use verbs in one manner by GS going into an area with a more natural and intuitive interface I can see some issues coming up. Not to say that making it more intuitive is a bad thing, it just might take us some getting used to.
And in hopes of being as prepared as I can, is there a compendium somewhere of all the verbs that it is possible to use in the game?
It being more intuitive could actually be part of the problem here. I haven't run the quest yet so can't say for certain but with a host of gamers that have all been trained to use verbs in one manner by GS going into an area with a more natural and intuitive interface I can see some issues coming up. Not to say that making it more intuitive is a bad thing, it just might take us some getting used to.
And in hopes of being as prepared as I can, is there a compendium somewhere of all the verbs that it is possible to use in the game?
I had fun even though I didn't contribute much. The three hours flew by and if anything, our group may have been too tentative early in the quest. We had the right plans, but we wasted a lot of time looking for alternatives. By the time we were rolling, we didn't have much time left.
Thanks to everyone in the group for a fun evening.
Thanks to everyone in the group for a fun evening.
I completely agree with Wyrom. I bet we spent 15 minutes in a room, about 10 of it after Delican came up with the correct solution, because we were missing the obvious verb. I was trying to verb it in typical gemstone verbage, when really it just needed to be done like I would have done it if it was real.
Also, I just want to reiterate to the GMs that worked on this that in the end, I think this will go down as a fantastic quest and a successful accomplishment on your part. You should be proud, its obvious a lot of work went into this, and you'll have many appreciative customers.
Also, I just want to reiterate to the GMs that worked on this that in the end, I think this will go down as a fantastic quest and a successful accomplishment on your part. You should be proud, its obvious a lot of work went into this, and you'll have many appreciative customers.
>>But it's VERY intuitive. I honestly wish more of GS could be as intuitive as BSQ is. Like, for example... In normal gameplay, you might find yourself needing to tie your shoe. You have to figure if it's pull, push, turn, twist, spin, etc. In BSQ, it's just "tie shoe." When I ran the quest and asked one of my party members how they did something, they were like it was just XXX YYY. And I was like, "...oh."
That's true, but the thing is, doing things in not normal GS verb types actually makes it counter intuitive, because we're all trained to do things with the GS verbs we know. Most of the time in GS when we think to do something the way we'd do it in real life, it doesn't work. As a result, we stop thinking that way usually and the real life way becomes secondary to the GemStone way.
That's why it's great that Vanah is paying attention to what verbs we tried to use and adding verbs that make sense and are actually GemStone intuitive.
~~k
That's true, but the thing is, doing things in not normal GS verb types actually makes it counter intuitive, because we're all trained to do things with the GS verbs we know. Most of the time in GS when we think to do something the way we'd do it in real life, it doesn't work. As a result, we stop thinking that way usually and the real life way becomes secondary to the GemStone way.
That's why it's great that Vanah is paying attention to what verbs we tried to use and adding verbs that make sense and are actually GemStone intuitive.
~~k
I also think there are places where a more meaningful response to a wrong verb could go a long way. I'll e-mail Vanah an example of where I'm thinking of because I don't want to give anything away.
Keith/Brinret/Shiun
ATTENTION: Monks were only designed to reach level 39. Please check into the nearest Inn and choose the retire option immediately before you break the game completely!
Keith/Brinret/Shiun
ATTENTION: Monks were only designed to reach level 39. Please check into the nearest Inn and choose the retire option immediately before you break the game completely!
>>Rest assured that the next few quests we release will have minimal (if any) puzzles. <<
Yeah I don't quite understand how you reach that conclusion. Taking a broader viewpoint, let's start with the basic premise of Gemstone: this is a text based game. We play it because we like the imagination it brings to bear that graphics games just don't have. If you think the solution is to limit quests to hack and slash you're just not understanding your market, and your market is limited, so it behoves you to understand it clearly. You should be honing in on a few things that we quite obviously are interested in:
1. There's no doubt we like stuff. We like cool stuff. We are basically addicted to stuff and we admit it. Or at least I do.
2. Story. We don't pay 40 bucks a month (which is far more than just about any other game) just to hack and slash. We want interaction and story.
3. Quests that are more story than hack and slash are every bit as viable as your quick 30 minute hack fest like Droughtmans. More viable if you ask me. In fact, I would have been willing to pay 50 bucks for this quest instead of 14, if you'd let it run longer and scale the prizes based on time taken or some other method. This would be completely consistent with other pay to play quests that have been run over the years. You do one run per night and let it go for 8-12 hours at a $50 entry price and I bet you dollars to doughnuts that it sells out just as fast as it does at 14 bucks and 3 hours. We do not all have ADD. Some of us are patient and prefer to stop and smell the roses along the way.
Kerl
Yeah I don't quite understand how you reach that conclusion. Taking a broader viewpoint, let's start with the basic premise of Gemstone: this is a text based game. We play it because we like the imagination it brings to bear that graphics games just don't have. If you think the solution is to limit quests to hack and slash you're just not understanding your market, and your market is limited, so it behoves you to understand it clearly. You should be honing in on a few things that we quite obviously are interested in:
1. There's no doubt we like stuff. We like cool stuff. We are basically addicted to stuff and we admit it. Or at least I do.
2. Story. We don't pay 40 bucks a month (which is far more than just about any other game) just to hack and slash. We want interaction and story.
3. Quests that are more story than hack and slash are every bit as viable as your quick 30 minute hack fest like Droughtmans. More viable if you ask me. In fact, I would have been willing to pay 50 bucks for this quest instead of 14, if you'd let it run longer and scale the prizes based on time taken or some other method. This would be completely consistent with other pay to play quests that have been run over the years. You do one run per night and let it go for 8-12 hours at a $50 entry price and I bet you dollars to doughnuts that it sells out just as fast as it does at 14 bucks and 3 hours. We do not all have ADD. Some of us are patient and prefer to stop and smell the roses along the way.
Kerl
Everyone seems to be jumping to the conclusion that no more quests will have puzzles. That's not what I said. I said the next few will not. As I stated earlier, they are time sinks for development. Unless BSQ has some serious long legs, we're going to need to be quicker with the next couple of quests.
SGM Sleken
SGM Sleken
>Yeah I don't quite understand how you reach that conclusion.
It wasn't a decision based solely on player response. Speaking for myself, it was more of a "thank goodness that project is done" comment.
The renovation of Black Swan Castle was much more resource intensive than we expected. It was announced at Simucon 2011 with a release date of March 2012. The quest was written in 1993 and the code had to be almost completely rewritten and QCed. There are a little more than 100 scripts for Black Swan and tens of thousands of lines of code. In contrast, the Academy Quest is 5 scripts. It was a lot of work for myself; Bravura and Perezz who helped with coding; Sleken, Varulv, and Modrian who QCed the code; Zoet who repainted some painfully old rooms, Tamuz who QCed all 150 rooms and helped to bring them up to current standards, and the dozen or so GMs that I repeatedly killed in testing.
We are trying to build a good base of an array of varieties of quests. Droughtman's Maze is very different than Academy Quest is very different than Black Swan. There will be puzzles in the future, but frankly, I don't have another Black Swan in me.
~Vanah
It wasn't a decision based solely on player response. Speaking for myself, it was more of a "thank goodness that project is done" comment.
The renovation of Black Swan Castle was much more resource intensive than we expected. It was announced at Simucon 2011 with a release date of March 2012. The quest was written in 1993 and the code had to be almost completely rewritten and QCed. There are a little more than 100 scripts for Black Swan and tens of thousands of lines of code. In contrast, the Academy Quest is 5 scripts. It was a lot of work for myself; Bravura and Perezz who helped with coding; Sleken, Varulv, and Modrian who QCed the code; Zoet who repainted some painfully old rooms, Tamuz who QCed all 150 rooms and helped to bring them up to current standards, and the dozen or so GMs that I repeatedly killed in testing.
We are trying to build a good base of an array of varieties of quests. Droughtman's Maze is very different than Academy Quest is very different than Black Swan. There will be puzzles in the future, but frankly, I don't have another Black Swan in me.
~Vanah
