Ren'Py Horizon Nexus [v0.1.1 Hotfix] [HorizonNexus]

[-CookieMonster666-]

Difficulty does not mean tedious or time-reducing or frequent game over screens. A game can make it easy to get a game over without being difficult.
Difficulty comes from informed decisions the player has to make. This game presents uninformed decisions. There is no basis for the decision making. That's why the game's decisions are not easy, nor hard. They're random. You have no control over what choice is the right one but trial and error.
If I put a bomb in front of you with a red and green switch and ask you to deactivate it, there is a reasonable inference you can do on what deactivates the bomb.
If I put a bomb with 3 grey buttons in front of you, there is nothing you can go by to deactivate it. The choice is random.

If the decisions to convince Bridget, for instance, were not two equally plausible versions of which you have to guess the right magic sequence, but you had to use your knowledge of Bridget (which would have to be established previously) to convince her, than it becomes an informed decision. Your knowledge of a character and how the character internally works allows the right decision. If the character isn't well established, or the decisions don't clearly enough indicate (or at all) what part of her personality you appeal to - then there is no informed decison, and the player, when presented with the options, can only randomly guess.

Cool, sounds like I did understand you, then. It's not the choices themselves being randomized (because they are not). It's picking at random because you don't have the information you feel you should. Good feedback.

The minigame being random that I was thinking of was the story-minigame where you fix the access to the tech lab.
I have no idea why I failed the first time or why I won the second time, nor do I clearly understand the rules.
I have to click x times and then press the button, and then get a 50% random chance of succeeding? Or click 2x times or so and then the button for a 100% chance? There's no counter of how many clicks I've made. I don't know where I'm at, or why I failed and then succeeded.
The game is not clearly telling my what actions cause what outcome, doesn't show me how I'm progressing, and then seems to maybe or maybe not leave a part of it once again up to random chance?
I got past the game in less than a minute, but that's not the point. The point is I have no idea what the minigame was supposed to even accomplish for my play experience, or what it was really even asking of me. I don't know why I lost the first time, and why I won the second time.

OK, so a counter showing number of clicks should be shown. The only reason you would've failed is because you didn't click enough times within the time limit; you mainly just couldn't see how close you were to getting the proper number. (It is possible to get 40 clicks in time without using a mouse-clicker, as I've done it. However, it's hard to do, as I've also missed it when trying.)

It's possible I'm misremembering, but IIRC to cut down on the monotony of having to do the harder number of clicks in time, the count of how many you've done is cumulative across 2 attempts (if you chose that option). So if you only got 25 clicks on the first attempt, you'll have succeeded with just 15 more on the second try.

But a counter showing clicks you've done is desirable, so I'll let the dev know.

Repeatable minigames depend a lot on programming skill.
Usually they should be...
* responsive (visual reaction to actions, audio cues)
* clear (you know exactly what to do, the game makes it clear when you do something right and when you do it wrong)
* well defined (simple and logically cohesive in its design)
* short

You've mentioned Tetris. That's a good example.
* Every action you do visually shows on screen as the tile moves or rotates. Pressing the down key lets it crash down.
* When you lose because the screen is filled, the rest of the screen fills and makes it clear you lost because the tiles grew too high. The moment you form a row, it explodes, score numbers pop up. The game tells you when you did bad and when you did good. In addition, the game tells you *ahead* of time what the next piece is going to be, so you can calculate a step ahead and know what you'll have next.
* The game of Tetris is simple. Use the shapes to form rows and make them explode, or the rows grow too high and you lose.

Another example of good minigames is Sword & Soul: Never seen.

You must be registered to see the links

It has multiple "training" minigames that boost your skills. Every one of them fulfills all of the above. You know exactly what to do, the game shows you what you did right and what you did wrong, and the interaction uses visual and audio cues to create a satisfying interaction loop where clicking on stuff feels like more than just clicking. It feels like slicing apples, shooting arrows, zooming projectiles, evading, etc.

I'm gonna be honest: you and I have a different idea of a "fun" minigame if the video you linked is your idea of it. I got to about 90 seconds and couldn't keep watching... and that was only the "training" part. (Conversely, I do think Tetris is fun for awhile, although I can't keep playing it level after level; I get bored of it after a bit.) I definitely think the minigames (and menu choices, ofc) in this game can be improved, though. I'll bring up the points you've mentioned with the developer. Thanks again for the feedback.

 

[Juerhullycin]

OK, so a counter showing number of clicks should be shown. The only reason you would've failed is because you didn't click enough times within the time limit; you mainly just couldn't see how close you were to getting the proper number. (It is possible to get 40 clicks in time without using a mouse-clicker, as I've done it. However, it's hard to do, as I've also missed it when trying.)

that while a nice idea is super unintuitive, it's not a game mechanic I ever came across at least i dont know about it and would never guess that this is what happend, and if you "need" to fail the first try it is bad designed.

I'm gonna be honest: you and I have a different idea of a "fun" minigame if the video you linked is your idea of it. I got to about 90 seconds and couldn't keep watching... and that was only the "training" part. (Conversely, I do think Tetris is fun for awhile, although I can't keep playing it level after level; I get bored of it after a bit.)

its called minigame for a reason yeah the individual sections were (far) to long, but there is no arguing about that you know exactly what the game wants from you and if you succeed or fuck up.

to your Tetris part, minigames should be used sparingly and they should be short enough so that they don't start to piss the player off (to be honest they should be skippable. Bonus points if it's a menu option that skips shit like that globally, because they always negatively effect the flow of the story).

Look at WarioWare for minigames done right.

 

[-CookieMonster666-]

that while a nice idea is super unintuitive, it's not a game mechanic I ever came across at least i dont know about it and would never guess that this is what happend, and if you "need" to fail the first try it is bad designed.

You don't have to fail the first try. It's just difficult to succeed. The second try option is for if you did not succeed, at which point the requirement is much easier to get. Or, if you choose the single attempt option, having only one try is offset by the lowered difficulty. (It's either that number of clicks needed is reduced, time given to get the clicks in is increased, or both; I can't remember at the moment.)

I do think having the click counter is helpful so a player knows how close or not they are to getting what is required.

its called minigame for a reason yeah the individual sections were (far) to long, but there is no arguing about that you know exactly what the game wants from you and if you succeed or fuck up.

to your Tetris part, minigames should be used sparingly and they should be short enough so that they don't start to piss the player off (to be honest they should be skippable. Bonus points if it's a menu option that skips shit like that globally, because they always negatively effect the flow of the story).

Look at WarioWare for minigames done right.

The minigames are skippable. You just need to choose Easy Mode for that. That's by design: if you're going to choose the difficulty that offers more content, the ability to take the easy route (like skipping) is removed. So you get to decide: either get the harder mode without any skip option, or get the easier mode with potentially a little less content available but the option to skip minigames if you want.

 

[kuraiken]

You don't have to fail the first try. It's just difficult to succeed. The second try option is for if you did not succeed, at which point the requirement is much easier to get. Or, if you choose the single attempt option, having only one try is offset by the lowered difficulty. (It's either that number of clicks needed is reduced, time given to get the clicks in is increased, or both; I can't remember at the moment.)

It's not difficult, I just didn't even know the first time when the game was starting, how many clicks I already had and when it was ending. Usually you have an initial timer, sound effect cues, etc.
The use of the word difficult is really problematic. None of the things that we've talked about have anything to do with difficulty. Clicking 60 times or even 120 times is not difficult. I just need to know when the game starts and what I have to do in precise fashion.

Fast clicking is not difficult. I've been honed by the Stronghold map editor where you have to manually place entire armies. I can click the mouse purely through lower arm vibrations, giving me dozens of clicks per second.

But on that note: you may want to consider that players who have physical disabilities will not be able to do minigames like that without a clicker tool.

I'm gonna be honest: you and I have a different idea of a "fun" minigame if the video you linked is your idea of it. I got to about 90 seconds and couldn't keep watching... and that was only the "training" part.

It's a game for a reason. The video shows you how it looks, not how it feels. You do not have the tactical input that goes along with the game.
That's why games and videos are two different things. That minigame uses specific rhythmic frequences so that your actions are learnable rhythms, like a dance of your fingers, and it matches them with precise, clear visual and audio cues which results in you *feeling* what you see on screen. That you cannot get this perception from a video is understandable.
But if you think those games don't look like fun, I'd suggest you make a video of the any of the mini game in this game and ask yourself and others if it looks like fun.

There's a difference between personal taste (which is why it's entirely possible for someone not to enjoy a certain minigame) and gameplay design. The minigames in those examples are well designed, but may not be fun to some people because the things they rely on (rhythmic patterns, anticipatory audio & visual cues that clue you in to the next rhythmic pattern, precise & quick keystroke sequences) are not enjoyable to them.
The current minigames do not have functional gameplay design. What's fun about clicking a button without any feedback for x seconds as fast as you can?

 

[UnDeaD_CyBorG]

Personally, on all those "minigames" where you just have to click a lot, I just hold down the autoclick button.
That's not a game, because a game implies something is done with specific rules for recreational purposes, and me clicking 40 times to be done with it is every much practical.
Pressing the buttons quickly enough on the space walk, that was a game, because it required actually aiming.

Until this discussion, I never considered this a game at all. I just thought it was not finished, or it was some pointless grind the developer added because they saw it in some other game, trading chore for progression speed (in the case of training strength).

 

[-DEV-Phil-]

Hello everyone,

I actually didn't intend to comment here anymore, but I guess I'll do it again to clarify a few things.

First of all, a big thank you for all the positive feedback. I think hardly anyone here can imagine how good it feels to release your idea into the world after 6 months of secret work and to see that some people really like it. As of today, I am very satisfied with all of the positive and also with the majority of, let's say, critical feedback

But let's clarify some things

What I find unfortunate about some reviews is that they often read as if we had released a full-priced game and completely messed it up, which is certainly not the case.

Even before you can dive into the action of the demo, you accept a disclaimer stating that this is a demo or rather a proof of concept and that the things you're playing now may change in the future.

I sincerely apologize to every player who has been or will be disappointed. In the future, I would like for everyone to see this more as a free-to-play demo or proof of concept. Of course, there may be things that you don't like but please give us feedback that we can work with; simply saying everything is shit doesn't really fit into a roadmap.

We as a team believe the foundation laid here is above average when it comes to adult visual novels. Of course, one can argue about that as well, but let me enjoy the satisfaction for now please ?


Now, let's move on to some more direct feedback and what we are planning for the future:

View attachment 3495019

Robot: "Do you have to yell that every-time?"

View attachment 3495020
THX for sharing...

Stop trying to fuck B.O.B. !!!

The dev's Patreon linked in the OP is inactive at the moment.
What does it mean?

You must be registered to see the links

is working now, the Patreon-team took a bit longer to release the page.

i just wanna know one thing... there's a good amount of foot fetish scenes?

In the current version, there is one scene, but more are planned for the future. As always, they will be optional.

.......

Also, the "dom" path with Bridgette seems to be bugged. For some odd reason, the MC still acts like a bumbling submissive coward for the remainder of the demo even after choosing it.

In otherwords, it's a bit jarring if you're going to write him to be this inept buffoon that gets verbally pushed around in every other instance, only for him to suddenly switch gears exclusively when it comes to sex. Perhaps this was designed to be a femdom game first and foremost, (Dev notes has no clarification on tags) in which case this game just probably isn't made for me. Or, perhaps it's too early to tell and the MC will actually grow a spine as time progresses? Dunno, not enough info.

.......

Other than that, renders are slick, girls are hot, and the idea of base building and colonizing planets sounds super cool. Looking forward to more.

In any case, I completely agree with you and others. We will definitely make adjustments.
When selecting a Dom or Dev part for a crew member; these should indeed be more distinct. In the future, there will naturally be more characters with different paths, and this will be taken into account from the beginning. Currently, the two different paths were more of a later idea, and we wanted to show in the demo that different paths for characters were possible to naturally increase replay value for some. However, we will definitely focus more on this in the future.

Anyone who wants to help shape the story and support the team as a writer, please contact me on Discord.

.......

As for real bugs:
View attachment 3500337

.....

This will be fixed in the first hotfix, more details later

Still no Android port??

Looking for testers for an Android version, please contact me on Discord, file is ready.

I second it looks great for an initial release, but the plead for backing the project sounds like they have a kickstarter up or smth and not just ye olde patreon.
I'm definitely a bit sceptical about the "we can do everything, the possibilities are limitless" thing advertised, that usually scares me right off, but I suppose I have the luxury to wait.

Actually, it was initially planned as a Kickstarter, but for various reasons, we decided to go with Patreon.

This game might have promise, but it has the stupidest branching path idea I've ever come across.

Pick the wrong choice and it's game over. Not only is it game over, but it's game over in half an hour to an hour, because the game will continue to play until you finally figure out that you failed.

What is the point here?
Making the player feel the "weight" of their choices?
There's none. You reload, you skip all the content, you press different buttons. There's no weight, just the weight of savegame management to allow reloads at checkpoints.

Keeping the player in the dark so they're surpised by the result?
The result is largely out of your hands. You can only guess, and then you just content skip again. Getting the revelation "you failed an hour earlier, try again" is not exciting, or fun, or surpises you. It's just a bad idea.

Allowing the player to see the results of his failure, to allow a glimpse into an alternate timeline where you fail?
Nope. The content is identical. There is no added content, no changed content. It's just a game over screen with an hour delay.
You don't get to "see" your failure, you just get notified. Sorry bro, you failed an hour ago.

There is nothing redeeming to this gameplay mechanic. It adds nothing, it just detracts. It doesn't even increase playtime, since players will just skip. It takes players out of the game and into content skipping, which distances them from the gameplay experience.

An unimaginably bad decision.

Okay, let's get started and address the elephant in the room:

The server issue seems to really frustrate some people, but let's get a bit more specific. What wasthis game again?

A visual novel.

Let's see if we can find clues about which server we could choose if we're not in easy mode.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

But joking aside, they are indeed very subtle and you really have to look closely. Certainly, we could work on this to make it clearer. For starters, I thought of giving the MC a line for it, but even that will be very subtle. After all, we don't want to have to rename the hardcore mode to normal mode.

And yes, the fact that the decision has consequences only an hour later is intentional. Of course, this should make it clear to the player that your decisions could have long-term effects, in this case, the end of the game. I understand that there might still be room for improvement in the implementation, and we are considering whether we can enhance it and will implement changes in the future.

And yes, of course, in the future, the wheat will continue to be separated from the chaff.
As the game progresses, it will become less common for it to end in the end of the game, rather naturally in various developments in the game. However, in hardcore mode, you might be sent back to the menu, and a majority will then learn to save more frequently and perhaps pay more attention to details. But sure i think we could emphasize this a bit more to the player before sending them back to the menu. Some players will then close the game, go to a forum, and write a negative message but iI have received messages asking me what the things shown in the spoiler are about....maybe there will be an answer to that later in the game, who knows...

There's a couple problems with the Game Mode.
1. If the dev offers "exclusive content" for a game mode, most players will pick that option.

2. No help is indicated as "you have to play minigames and don't get tips" (since Easy talks about minigames).
This is a problem. The game is not "hard" or "hardcore". I'm not having any difficulty with loading a previous save and skipping through the dialogue and clicking other options. That's not hardcore or difficult, it pulls me out of the game into the savegame meta level. It ruins the atmosphere.
Nor are the minigames or choices "hardcore" or difficult. They're random. The outcome for the decisions is dependent on your luck in picking the right options, not in actually engaging with the situation, puzzeling things out or using clues for a deduction. You just guess. Maybe you're right. Maybe you're wrong. If you're wrong, you reload, skip, click different things.

The Problem is that I want to play hardcore - but it isn't. It's random. Decisions and minigames should not be random - or a chore. They should be fun.

3. The dev should ask themself what exactly they're going for with that mechanic and the minigames. What's the purpose they're supposed to fulfill and how should they affect the player's experience. And do those things actually do what they're intended to do or are they badly/wrongly implemented?

If the decisions would be based on you paying attention for clues that help you in deducing the right course of action, that'd be interesting. If it's just guessing, it's boring.
The same applies to the minigames. They're not fun. They're a chore. But they don't have to be. People have been able to create entertaining small minigames that provide both a challenge, as well as some excitement.

This game has potential, but there are some design decisions that are completely incomphrensible to me. I do not know and cannot imagine what the developer thought those would contribute to the game.

Now, onto the next big topic: the mini games:


Some enjoy them, many hate them.

Personally, I have put a lot of effort into integrating them as well as possible into the game, but for those who don't like them, you can select the Easy mode to skip them.

And for those who voluntarily want to endure these things, I think they should be rewarded.

And I mean, if you read attentively, you can understand what needs to be done.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Why did I remove the clicker counter?

Because I want to show you what happens when you mess up.
I explained to you earlier what to do.
When I give you a clicker counter what happens ? exactly at the moment you see the number 39 when you have to click 40 times, you jump back as a player to try again. But I really wanted to show you the game over screen i really put effort into it, so I'm adding the clicker counter but removing the button to jump back?

Come on, guys, clicking 40 times shouldn't be that hard, and you can count it in your head. I tried it.

It's called Hardcore mode, so I think it's okay to get screwed over occasionally, but of course, not everyone sees it that way.

But we will discuss this within the team and make changes if necessary


Halfway through this post​

Those who have made it this far deserve a break, take a moment for yourself.

Okay, let's get to how it continues:

In the next few days, a small hotfix will be released. This will fix some minor bugs and address some feedback regarding some confusing points in the game, but nothing major, just some small improvements.

Then a first slightly larger update is planned:



Here, we will also address the following points alongside some new content:

- The emotions should come across more, so far I've been afraid of overdoing it and only slightly adjusted the facial expressions. But after the feedback, we've decided this is something we can work on and significantly improve. Here are the first tests:

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Did I overdo it now? Would appreciate feedback on that.




- We will address the issue that the MC becomes somewhat more masculine in certain situations when interacting with Bridget.

- A few subtle changes to a few points in the story where shortcomings have been evident.

Oh, and if I haven't annoyed some of you enough with this post, take a look at our

You must be registered to see the links

page. It's now online and what we allow ourselves to do there is really audacious. Definitely check it out, there you will also find the voting section for the next episode. Personally, I would find it quite interesting if it
continues here.

I think I will vote for her:

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

You must be registered to see the links

​

I certainly forgot something and probably made some people even angrier than they already were. But please do me a favor and don't take it all too seriously, because I didn't mean it that seriously either. I tried to implement a story I had in mind with the demo and I would be thrilled if this leads to us finding enough supporters so I can afford to build a proper team and make something real out of this. Thank you all for your feedback, and we are working hard to make this whole thing a great experience for you. And if you help us by supporting us on Patreon, you can look forward to an exciting journey:

AND ---- > Please do me a favor and be nice to -CookieMonster666- . He's not responsible for any of this; he was handed the mess and tried his best with the proofreading. I am so grateful to him for that. So be kind to Cookie!


And special thanks to this:

- players familiar with dead space, mass effect or cyberpunk games will relate and have fond memories;
- alien movies level of cutthroat corpo tactics with actions of outright guerrilla warfare close to deux ex human revolution - these will populate the minds of gamers getting a feel for the gameplay.

Whoever you are, please know that the kind feedback in your comment really warmed my heart when I read it. The mentioned games and series are a big part of my childhood, and of course, some references were intentional. I was genuinely so pleased that it was noticed and that some people probably enjoyed it. Thank you for that.


Fuck, the post is way too long, I'm out, as I will rarely be active here - For urgent questions, contact me on Discord!

Thanks for reading, now take a moment, you've earned it, and take a deep breath before you start typing

 

[Aristos]

-DEV-Phil- thanks for the super long and detailed post; it was really clarifying.

Now, since you asked about the facial expressions, I'll give you my opinion:
Regarding the set of 3 pictures in the spoiler box, v2 looks indeed better and less exaggerated; she looks more naturally pissed.
Now, in the 3 pics above I feel that v1 and v2 are not showing the same emotion. In v1, she looks shocked or worried, while in v2 she looks more upset or suspicious. Both look very good to me, but they can't be used interchangeably.

 

[Byczer]

This one is promising good luck dev

 

[-CookieMonster666-]

-DEV-Phil- thanks for the super long and detailed post; it was really clarifying.

Now, since you asked about the facial expressions, I'll give you my opinion:
Regarding the set of 3 pictures in the spoiler box, v2 looks indeed better and less exaggerated; she looks more naturally pissed.
Now, in the 3 pics above I feel that v1 and v2 are not showing the same emotion. In v1, she looks shocked or worried, while in v2 she looks more upset or suspicious. Both look very good to me, but they can't be used interchangeably.

I think I misunderstood the point of the sample renders. I thought they were just to show the character being more expressive to convey emotions better. I didn't think they were necessarily supposed to be the same emotions. In the top set, I personally interpret them as neutral, a little scared / worried, and annoyed; in the bottom set, I think of them conveying restrained frustration, exploding in rage, and a combination of anger and sorrow. If they are supposed to convey the same emotions, I definitely agree that it's not represented in the first set in a way that I could see the same feeling.

 

[kuraiken]

Okay, let's get started and address the elephant in the room:

The server issue seems to really frustrate some people, but let's get a bit more specific. What wasthis game again?

A visual novel.

Let's see if we can find clues about which server we could choose if we're not in easy mode.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

But joking aside, they are indeed very subtle and you really have to look closely. Certainly, we could work on this to make it clearer. For starters, I thought of giving the MC a line for it, but even that will be very subtle. After all, we don't want to have to rename the hardcore mode to normal mode.

This is not how you create a puzzle.
You don't put the indicator to an answer to a puzzle the player does not know he will face in 10 minutes into a background clue.
This is worsened by the fact that you mistelegraphed through the voice of ICAS, convincing the player it's a 50-50, when you could have instead said something like: "I cannot preceive a method you could use to deduce the right outcome, but perhaps you can spot something."
You're misinforming the player about the nature of the puzzle they face, and then say "well it's hard."

None of this has to do with the game "being hard".
If I make a game where, at the very end of the game, to get the good ending, the player has to link the villians final line to an innocent dialogue the villian said in disguise to the player 30 play hours ago at the start of the game and select it, this does not make the game hard. It just provides a challenge the player could not anticipate and thus the only avenue is replaying & rereading the entire game - or save-scumming.

And yes, the fact that the decision has consequences only an hour later is intentional. Of course, this should make it clear to the player that your decisions could have long-term effects, in this case, the end of the game. I understand that there might still be room for improvement in the implementation, and we are considering whether we can enhance it and will implement changes in the future.

A game over is not a consequence that shows or proves anything to the player. It does not create tension, it does not create anxiety, all it does it what you said: it makes people save more often and then just skip through the sequence again.
This does not add to the atmosphere. It detracts from it.

The player has to play meta-save-scumming, instead of the game.

A real consequence is a story-development or result that DOES NOT end in game over, because a game over means the player starts again and just picks differently. Which means the possible consequences are made irrelevant.
The result is that the scenes play idential, there is no difference between your choices beyond the game over screen.

Characters don't view you differently, there won't be future obstacles that come as a result of your choice. You're just forced to "replay the game", which means loading a savegame, pressing CTRL for 5 seconds, clicking 3 options and you're back where you were.

The way you are going about creating "lasting consequences" is the opposite way of how you could get it to actually work.

Now, onto the next big topic: the mini games:


Some enjoy them, many hate them.

Personally, I have put a lot of effort into integrating them as well as possible into the game, but for those who don't like them, you can select the Easy mode to skip them.

And for those who voluntarily want to endure these things, I think they should be rewarded.

Why would you want players have to "endure" your game instead of making them fun?
Why do you think you should waste people's time and reward them for allowing you to waste it?

The problem isn't something that's fixed by an easy mode, because my problem isn't that I can't avoid those things.
Heck, I could go into your code, make a mod of it, and just scrap whatever I don't like.

That's not the issue.

The issue is that you're adding things to your game that, by design, make your game less enjoyable, when you could make it more enjoyable. Hard does not mean less fun. It means demanding choices.

And I mean, if you read attentively, you can understand what needs to be done.

Spoiler

You don't have permission to view the spoiler content. Log in or register now.

Your characters are talking about probability and chances in a section that's supposed to set up the minigame.
Your characters are misinforming the player as to how the game is supposed to work.

It isn't even really concise in the dialogue. At one point you talk of 40 pumps as requirement, but further below it talks about at least 35 pumps. I have to activate the ignition, but ICAS says "the ignition success chances are at 50 percent", which further confuses the player into connecting the ignition to a percent chance of success. Even reading it now, I'm still not sure if I have to get 35 or 40 pumps.

And I still don't know if you have to press the ignition button or not. I pressed it both times, the second time it worked. But do you actually have to press the ignition button? I don't know. Because none of this was made clear.

Why did I remove the clicker counter?

Because I want to show you what happens when you mess up.
I explained to you earlier what to do.
When I give you a clicker counter what happens ? exactly at the moment you see the number 39 when you have to click 40 times, you jump back as a player to try again. But I really wanted to show you the game over screen i really put effort into it, so I'm adding the clicker counter but removing the button to jump back?

You're contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say it shouldn't be hard (see below) on the other hand that you really want the player to fail so they see a single gameover screen and then replay it all.

Come on, guys, clicking 40 times shouldn't be that hard, and you can count it in your head. I tried it.

It's called Hardcore mode, so I think it's okay to get screwed over occasionally, but of course, not everyone sees it that way.

But we will discuss this within the team and make changes if necessary​

It's not hardcore. This word keeps being used. It does not mean what you and CookieMonster think it means.

The problem is not that players lose. It's that players largely do not know why they lose. Did they mispress the ignition key? Were they supposed to press the ignition key? Was it random chance and they just failed? Was this a fake-path and they should've picked the other option because (as in the server selection) there is only one right option and the minigame isn't actually determining the result. Did they press on the wrong icon? Do the mouse clicks have to go on the screen or a particular button?

This isn't a "you shouldn't have make minigames as part of this" criticism. It's that they way you're doing it is gameplay design wise wrong. You're not clearly telling players what they have to do. You do not use things like a countdown, which lets players at least see the screen, see the buttons and know what to do, instead of immediately triggering a countdown. The way you design the game, you, as the developer, who has spent hours designing it, may understand how it works and what's needed. The player does not.
Nor are there audio-cues to tell players they clicked on the right spot or that their click was registered. There is no feedback.

It's not difficult. It's not hardcore. It's bad game design.

 

[-DEV-Phil-]

This is not how you create a puzzle.
You don't put the indicator to an answer to a puzzle the player does not know he will face in 10 minutes into a background clue.
This is worsened by the fact that you mistelegraphed through the voice of ICAS, convincing the player it's a 50-50, when you could have instead said something like: "I cannot preceive a method you could use to deduce the right outcome, but perhaps you can spot something."
You're misinforming the player about the nature of the puzzle they face, and then say "well it's hard."

None of this has to do with the game "being hard".
If I make a game where, at the very end of the game, to get the good ending, the player has to link the villians final line to an innocent dialogue the villian said in disguise to the player 30 play hours ago at the start of the game and select it, this does not make the game hard. It just provides a challenge the player could not anticipate and thus the only avenue is replaying & rereading the entire game - or save-scumming.


A game over is not a consequence that shows or proves anything to the player. It does not create tension, it does not create anxiety, all it does it what you said: it makes people save more often and then just skip through the sequence again.
This does not add to the atmosphere. It detracts from it.

The player has to play meta-save-scumming, instead of the game.

A real consequence is a story-development or result that DOES NOT end in game over, because a game over means the player starts again and just picks differently. Which means the possible consequences are made irrelevant.
The result is that the scenes play idential, there is no difference between your choices beyond the game over screen.

Characters don't view you differently, there won't be future obstacles that come as a result of your choice. You're just forced to "replay the game", which means loading a savegame, pressing CTRL for 5 seconds, clicking 3 options and you're back where you were.

The way you are going about creating "lasting consequences" is the opposite way of how you could get it to actually work.


Why would you want players have to "endure" your game instead of making them fun?
Why do you think you should waste people's time and reward them for allowing you to waste it?

The problem isn't something that's fixed by an easy mode, because my problem isn't that I can't avoid those things.
Heck, I could go into your code, make a mod of it, and just scrap whatever I don't like.

That's not the issue.

The issue is that you're adding things to your game that, by design, make your game less enjoyable, when you could make it more enjoyable. Hard does not mean less fun. It means demanding choices.


Your characters are talking about probability and chances in a section that's supposed to set up the minigame.
Your characters are misinforming the player as to how the game is supposed to work.

It isn't even really concise in the dialogue. At one point you talk of 40 pumps as requirement, but further below it talks about at least 35 pumps. I have to activate the ignition, but ICAS says "the ignition success chances are at 50 percent", which further confuses the player into connecting the ignition to a percent chance of success. Even reading it now, I'm still not sure if I have to get 35 or 40 pumps.

And I still don't know if you have to press the ignition button or not. I pressed it both times, the second time it worked. But do you actually have to press the ignition button? I don't know. Because none of this was made clear.


You're contradicting yourself. On the one hand you say it shouldn't be hard (see below) on the other hand that you really want the player to fail so they see a single gameover screen and then replay it all.


It's not hardcore. This word keeps being used. It does not mean what you and CookieMonster think it means.

The problem is not that players lose. It's that players largely do not know why they lose. Did they mispress the ignition key? Were they supposed to press the ignition key? Was it random chance and they just failed? Was this a fake-path and they should've picked the other option because (as in the server selection) there is only one right option and the minigame isn't actually determining the result. Did they press on the wrong icon? Do the mouse clicks have to go on the screen or a particular button?

This isn't a "you shouldn't have make minigames as part of this" criticism. It's that they way you're doing it is gameplay design wise wrong. You're not clearly telling players what they have to do. You do not use things like a countdown, which lets players at least see the screen, see the buttons and know what to do, instead of immediately triggering a countdown. The way you design the game, you, as the developer, who has spent hours designing it, may understand how it works and what's needed. The player does not.
Nor are there audio-cues to tell players they clicked on the right spot or that their click was registered. There is no feedback.

It's not difficult. It's not hardcore. It's bad game design.

After reading your latest post, only one sentence comes to mind:




I don't want to continue arguing with you because it doesn't make any sense.

In my last post, I agree with you and state it clearly:

"I understand that there might still be room for improvement in the implementation, and we are considering whether we can enhance it and will implement changes in the future."


ICAS doesn't say it's random; he presents two options and informs you that one path is more challenging but offers a higher likelihood of success. For your benefit, the second option will be modified from Saying 50% chance to a 60% chance, making it no longer random.




Take this Win, my friend. You've earned it!

And i would like to apologize for your negative experience with our game. That was never our intention.

However let's just leave it at this: this game is definitely not for you.

Hey, I wish you all the best for the future, but I have to go now. I need to let FromSoftware know that they fucked up the last years

See ya

 

[kuraiken]

After reading your latest post, only one sentence comes to mind:

View attachment 3515268


I don't want to continue arguing with you because it doesn't make any sense.

In my last post, I agree with you and state it clearly:

"I understand that there might still be room for improvement in the implementation, and we are considering whether we can enhance it and will implement changes in the future."


ICAS doesn't say it's random; he presents two options and informs you that one path is more challenging but offers a higher likelihood of success. For your benefit, the second option will be modified from Saying 50% chance to a 60% chance, making it no longer random.



View attachment 3515296
Take this Win, my friend. You've earned it!

And i would like to apologize for your negative experience with our game. That was never our intention.

However let's just leave it at this: this game is definitely not for you.

Hey, I wish you all the best for the future, but I have to go now. I need to let FromSoftware know that they fucked up the last years

See ya

You're making bad game design decisions and calling it hardcore. You're completely unable to have any introspection into how a game looks from the player's perspective, with completely unrealistic expectations such as considering dark spots on some background image blood that should clue you in that the distortions you see on a server underneath a filter that darkens the whole screen is not metal corrosion, or a server that's melting due to the heat (and thus the wrong choice) but clearly must mean that it's the server that for some reason is the right one to switch on because it's actually blood which means of the two failing servers, this is the one someone interacted with. Don't worry about the other failing server.

But your real problem is that you seem to have no idea how to react to criticism, with the underlying belief that it means the player is either not attentive enough to your game, or just not suited for your game. You see the primary flaw in the player, not in your decisions.

The fact that the second half of your post focuses on meming and turning this into a "ha, take the W, my debate-loving friend", makes this very clear.
I spent multiple posts trying to outline fundamental problems in the game design to make you stop blundering into mistakes that will absolutely come back to bite you in the ass. Instead, you've turned my attempts to constructively criticising the game by in-depth pointing out the problems into a shitpost that seeks to discredit the work I've put into giving you advice.

It's very clear now that no advice is desired on your part. You think you've got it all figured out, and players just aren't smart enough for your clever design.

Since you've brought up FromSoftware. If you were FromSoftware, you'd put a 50% failure chance on any action your player takes, and when people in the forum complain about how their dodge roll during a critical moment failed to be executed, you say: "That's intentional. It's a hardcore game. Maybe it just isn't for you."

Despite all this, I wish you the best of luck with your game. It's clear you've put a lot of effort into it and, knowing how much work making a game is, I would never wish for anyone to fail. I hope you're going to reconsider your approach to criticism and feedback moving forward, so the next time someone takes time to try to help you out, you don't see them as an enemy that clearly doesn't understand game design as well as you do.

 

[-DEV-Phil-]

You're making bad game design decisions and calling it hardcore. You're completely unable to have any introspection into how a game looks from the player's perspective, with completely unrealistic expectations such as considering dark spots on some background image blood that should clue you in that the distortions you see on a server underneath a filter that darkens the whole screen is not metal corrosion, or a server that's melting due to the heat (and thus the wrong choice) but clearly must mean that it's the server that for some reason is the right one to switch on because it's actually blood which means of the two failing servers, this is the one someone interacted with. Don't worry about the other failing server.

But your real problem is that you seem to have no idea how to react to criticism, with the underlying belief that it means the player is either not attentive enough to your game, or just not suited for your game. You see the primary flaw in the player, not in your decisions.

The fact that the second half of your post focuses on meming and turning this into a "ha, take the W, my debate-loving friend", makes this very clear.
I spent multiple posts trying to outline fundamental problems in the game design to make you stop blundering into mistakes that will absolutely come back to bite you in the ass. Instead, you've turned my attempts to constructively criticising the game by in-depth pointing out the problems into a shitpost that seeks to discredit the work I've put into giving you advice.

It's very clear now that no advice is desired on your part. You think you've got it all figured out, and players just aren't smart enough for your clever design.

Since you've brought up FromSoftware. If you were FromSoftware, you'd put a 50% failure chance on any action your player takes, and when people in the forum complain about how their dodge roll during a critical moment failed to be executed, you say: "That's intentional. It's a hardcore game. Maybe it just isn't for you."

Despite all this, I wish you the best of luck with your game. It's clear you've put a lot of effort into it and, knowing how much work making a game is, I would never wish for anyone to fail. I hope you're going to reconsider your approach to criticism and feedback moving forward, so the next time someone takes time to try to help you out, you don't see them as an enemy that clearly doesn't understand game design as well as you do.

As previously mentioned, I don't see the point in discussing hardcore vs. non-hardcore when the premise you're using is factually incorrect. It's not a matter of not accepting criticism; if the foundational reason is indisputably wrong, then there's no valid discussion.

It's not random!

The following is in the game code:

Hardcore Mode:

Path 1 - trie twice but have less time for the attempt:

You play on Hardcore mode:

if click_times > 39: You win and get a Bonus SaveCard with some girl (Found in Bonus Menu)

if click_times < 40: You have been given a second chance to try again, but you will not receive a bonus card this time.

if click_times again < 40:You get back to the menu


Path 2 - One attempt with more time

You get 10 Seconds

ICAS Says : "Very well. I will keep it open longer. If you manage to do at least 60 pumps, the chances of success should be higher. Try to make sure we get this right."



if click_times > 59: You win

if click_times < 60: You lose back to the menu


Easy Mode:

You won't receive a bonus card even if you choose the difficult path. However, you can skip the mini-game.

So there is no random action in the minigames !

ICAS says to pump 40 times for a 50 percent chance and then asks you to pump at least 60 times to ensure that it works.

And clicking 60 times in 10 seconds is doable, right?

Please, do me a favor and don't spread rumors that it's random if it's not. It would also be nice if you mentioned in your previous posts that it might be perceived that way, but it's not.

Personally, I would be somewhat skeptical of ICAS anyway, but I know him better than the players do.

Until then,
Best regards.

 

[Cpt.SumTingWong]

Good Start, I like the way we pushed Bridget

 

[Scyths]

Hey, just so we're clear, I'm trying to 100% the demo, so here are a few questions :

The quest robot seems to be bugged for half of the promps ? Bridget side quest is bugged, he doesn't say if there are or aren't anything else to do, and from spending a few weeks ingame time, there doesn' seem to be ? So that leaves Bridget with the footjob scene as the last unlockable thing with 1 text message ? But then why haven't I unlocked her part for the "WHAT'S NEXT ?" prompt on the tablet ? I have unlocked the 3 others but not hers.

The robot says I've finished the content with Eden, I have done the scene where she's masturbating, but I only have messages 1; 2; 3 & 5 for her ? What's up with message 4 missing ?

Robot says to continue the Friday evening dates with Haley, but it's been 3 ingame weeks where I only have that, I'm not unlocking anything new and have 1 message unlocked for her with the "what's next?" unlocked for her, so no idea if there is actually something I'm missing or if it's only the robot that's messing up.

And I've done the part with Bridget where you're asked to wake up someone else that's not on the demo.

Now, am I missing anything ? How do I unlock message 4 for Eden and the ending with Bridget ?

Thanks, so far I'd give this one an 8/10.

 

[-CookieMonster666-]

Hey, just so we're clear, I'm trying to 100% the demo, so here are a few questions :

The quest robot seems to be bugged for half of the promps ? Bridget side quest is bugged, he doesn't say if there are or aren't anything else to do, and from spending a few weeks ingame time, there doesn' seem to be ? So that leaves Bridget with the footjob scene as the last unlockable thing with 1 text message ? But then why haven't I unlocked her part for the "WHAT'S NEXT ?" prompt on the tablet ? I have unlocked the 3 others but not hers.

I'm really tired right now, so my brain is mush. But I'll answer as best as my brain lets me right now....

Bridget does have just the one message and image right now in the tablet. There should be a night when drinking with Bridget where she talks about her past, growing up in Sweden. If you've get that scene, then choose Follow her at the menu. During the next conversation (back at her crew unit), if you've already told her you like her, the MC will have his final conversation (and sex) with her... for now, ofc. You should see a point where Bridget gets blurry and then text is shown about reaching the end of her side quest.

I can't remember everything for certain, so there easily could be something I'm missing. If the above has happened for you, I'll have to spend more time later looking into it.

The robot says I've finished the content with Eden, I have done the scene where she's masturbating, but I only have messages 1; 2; 3 & 5 for her ? What's up with message 4 missing ?

Message 4 is supposed to be available if the MC has given Eden anal and cum inside her asshole.

Robot says to continue the Friday evening dates with Haley, but it's been 3 ingame weeks where I only have that, I'm not unlocking anything new and have 1 message unlocked for her with the "what's next?" unlocked for her, so no idea if there is actually something I'm missing or if it's only the robot that's messing up.

On the Friday of Haley's final date for this demo, I believe you need to go to her crew unit first and talk to her on her laptop. After that, head to the simulator in the evening to see the final date with her. Unless I'm forgetting something, I believe that should do it for now.

And I've done the part with Bridget where you're asked to wake up someone else that's not on the demo.

Now, am I missing anything ? How do I unlock message 4 for Eden and the ending with Bridget ?

Thanks, so far I'd give this one an 8/10.

It sounds like, other than the couple of things you're missing, this is everything.

 

[mob2010]

So good it made me post my first comment.
Great storytelling, lots of humor in the dialogue, love the characters.

Hope you have enough time and dedication for the game to continue!

 

[SonsOfLiberty]

Horizon Nexus [v0.1.1 HOFIX] [HorizonNexus]

Win/Linux/Mac:

You must be registered to see the links

 

[SonsOfLiberty]

Horizon Nexus [v0.1.1 HOFIX] [HorizonNexus]

COMPRESSED:

Win/Linux:

You must be registered to see the links

-

You must be registered to see the links

-

You must be registered to see the links

-

You must be registered to see the links

Mac:

You must be registered to see the links

-

You must be registered to see the links

-

You must be registered to see the links

-

You must be registered to see the links

 

[H0rnyPot4to]

As previously mentioned, I don't see the point in discussing hardcore vs. non-hardcore when the premise you're using is factually incorrect. It's not a matter of not accepting criticism; if the foundational reason is indisputably wrong, then there's no valid discussion.

It's not random!

The following is in the game code:

Hardcore Mode:

Path 1 - trie twice but have less time for the attempt:

You play on Hardcore mode:

if click_times > 39: You win and get a Bonus SaveCard with some girl (Found in Bonus Menu)

if click_times < 40: You have been given a second chance to try again, but you will not receive a bonus card this time.

if click_times again < 40:You get back to the menu


Path 2 - One attempt with more time

You get 10 Seconds

ICAS Says : "Very well. I will keep it open longer. If you manage to do at least 60 pumps, the chances of success should be higher. Try to make sure we get this right."



if click_times > 59: You win

if click_times < 60: You lose back to the menu


Easy Mode:

You won't receive a bonus card even if you choose the difficult path. However, you can skip the mini-game.

So there is no random action in the minigames !

ICAS says to pump 40 times for a 50 percent chance and then asks you to pump at least 60 times to ensure that it works.

And clicking 60 times in 10 seconds is doable, right?

Please, do me a favor and don't spread rumors that it's random if it's not. It would also be nice if you mentioned in your previous posts that it might be perceived that way, but it's not.

Personally, I would be somewhat skeptical of ICAS anyway, but I know him better than the players do.

Until then,
Best regards.

I made the post about this back in page 3 that I was unable to click anything in the test lab and I kept failing when the timer ran out. What's worse I couldn't click on the button and I have to move the mouse repeating out of the window and back in.