New Tool Idea - Tool Consolidation
DarkIntent
Houston Join Date: 2015-07-11 Member: 206108Members
Houston Join Date: 2015-07-11 Member: 206108Members
Updated Credits 13/10/16: @P4R4D0X1C4L (V.A.C.U.U.M.), @tickera (H.A.R.P. concept), @DragynDance (IntelliNet concept)
All right, I'm going to delete and rewrite this whole post to reflect the core of what I wanted to do here, rather than go crazy spitballing just whatever came to mind. Credits will remain for those that contributed to the original, more jokey version, but the actual ideas are gone from this post. I've also come to the conclusion that the Subnautica community, or at least these forums, still has the same serious moderation and attitude issues that turned me off to it a year ago; that being the case, I'm going to do the same thing I did a year ago and drop out. Obviously that only matters to me, I just wanted it on record why I'm not participating in my own thread after the date of last edit.
At core, what I think is needed is a way to consolidate the tools at our disposal that are... let's say, more of an excuse to needlessly inflate "inventory management" than actually fill a critical or useful role, like the dive reel or flares. Not that those two examples don't have their uses, but it seems more than a little ridiculous that you either have to have them sitting around on the off chance you'll need them, make them as you need them which requires much more running around scavenging for materials than is really excusable after the early game, or just don't use them because you'd rather save the materials used to make them for something more overall worthwhile. An easy way to fix this would be to simply introduce a single platform, with its own advantages and disadvantages, to either supplement or improve the viability and long-term usefulness of certain single-purpose tools; the flares are an especially good example, as they rapidly become outdated and pointless when the player has access to the flashlight and LED lightstick. Obviously there are more and better potential uses for such a multi-tool platform, but I'll leave that up to further posters and the devs themselves if they even bother to read this.
As one further note, it's absolutely stupid to force the player to choose between a flashlight and other tools; it could easily be integrated into, attached to, or simply equipped alongside those other tools. It's also absolutely stupid to have both a welder and a cutter but never granting access to a single tool that does both; jsut off the top of my head, it could be balanced by being less power efficient. The fact that both of those things need to be brought up at all indicates some questionable decisions being made with regards to gameplay.
All right, I'm going to delete and rewrite this whole post to reflect the core of what I wanted to do here, rather than go crazy spitballing just whatever came to mind. Credits will remain for those that contributed to the original, more jokey version, but the actual ideas are gone from this post. I've also come to the conclusion that the Subnautica community, or at least these forums, still has the same serious moderation and attitude issues that turned me off to it a year ago; that being the case, I'm going to do the same thing I did a year ago and drop out. Obviously that only matters to me, I just wanted it on record why I'm not participating in my own thread after the date of last edit.
At core, what I think is needed is a way to consolidate the tools at our disposal that are... let's say, more of an excuse to needlessly inflate "inventory management" than actually fill a critical or useful role, like the dive reel or flares. Not that those two examples don't have their uses, but it seems more than a little ridiculous that you either have to have them sitting around on the off chance you'll need them, make them as you need them which requires much more running around scavenging for materials than is really excusable after the early game, or just don't use them because you'd rather save the materials used to make them for something more overall worthwhile. An easy way to fix this would be to simply introduce a single platform, with its own advantages and disadvantages, to either supplement or improve the viability and long-term usefulness of certain single-purpose tools; the flares are an especially good example, as they rapidly become outdated and pointless when the player has access to the flashlight and LED lightstick. Obviously there are more and better potential uses for such a multi-tool platform, but I'll leave that up to further posters and the devs themselves if they even bother to read this.
As one further note, it's absolutely stupid to force the player to choose between a flashlight and other tools; it could easily be integrated into, attached to, or simply equipped alongside those other tools. It's also absolutely stupid to have both a welder and a cutter but never granting access to a single tool that does both; jsut off the top of my head, it could be balanced by being less power efficient. The fact that both of those things need to be brought up at all indicates some questionable decisions being made with regards to gameplay.
Comments
Ayy, nice idea and thanks for mentioning me.
This sounds much better thought out than my idea, and it's worded nicely too. I'd like to see this implemented!
Hey, credit where credit's due my friend; I might've gone overboard with it, but your idea got me going. Also, I've thought for a while that a modular multi-tool of some kind is sorely needed to condense down some of the other available tools that are only sort of useful, or only useful under very specific circumstances. I don't know about you, but it's been a good long time since I carried a dive reel, or flares, just because I don't need them very often. Then, if I do, I have to go back to base, or to the Seamoth, or the Cyclops, and either make them or get them out of storage, which might also require a scavenging trip, then back to where I needed them... ugh. As a matter of fact, while we're here, I'm gonna add another idea...
I'm not sure it's a bad thing, actually, if it would be AFTER the startup, instead of when the pod splashes down. Late-game consolidation, found as alien tech 1.6km+ under the surface, making life more convenient. I disagree that it should be available from the start, though, since it makes it pointless to craft a bunch of different items. A reward for endgame tinkering, rather than gameplay grease that makes things too easy from the beginning.
Why endgame tinkering? Why not just a slow burn of constant, but paced, advancement linked to the player's understanding of existing tools? Even more important, why would it be alien tech at all, let alone found far beyond the deepest point in the map? Is the PC such a moron he/she wouldn't think of any of this stuff on their own? I know I'd be wondering why I have a handheld laser cutter that can slice through a starship bulkhead but can't just dial down the power to use it as a welder instead of carrying two separate battery-eating hunks of metal around. Yes, there has to be a point to having separate tools; I never said there wasn't. But having to constantly and forever lug around a hundred pounds of crap just because the character can't be bothered to duct-tape a frigging flashlight to the stasis rifle is idiotic.
EDIT: While I'm here, I'm right about sick of your attitude, especially since as far as I've seen, about all you're good for is talking down to people or making snide little remarks because someone dared to have an idea you don't 100% agree with. I can't stop you from posting, but I'm not going to put up with any sh*t from you, either.
Oh, that IS a good idea. Flashlight attachments for things would be useful, and a good upgrade to put somewhere! And I would rather like a welder/cutter device myself. Again, as an upgrade hidden somewhere.
The main idea though, lacks balance. Game balance is a thing, if you give the player a doodad that combines a half-dozen important functions into one, they never use the half dozen other items. Subnautica is about exploration, and balancing inventory space against needs, and the various other issues that pop up. Occasionally about the large fish that is swimming at you with its mouth open, what do you do. If you take every tool with you, you have little space for resources and such. This requires the player to prioritize, and means you might leave some tools at home or on the Cyclops, so you can pack more resources back from a trip.
If the player can just take a single super-tool along that combines all the functions into a small package, it cheapens inventory management. They would just take that one item along every time, and never have to deal with priority issues issues. Like "do I take the Seaglide and be fast, or leave it and carry 9 more resource items?" or bring the stasis gun and be safer, or leave it behind and carry 4 more items. Or carry ammo? batteries? food? water?
Well, the net's more a concept than anything, and I definitely agree that it could easily go horribly wrong; assuming they found a way to avoid that, though, it would make a good "poor man's stasis rifle", which is the intention. A useful, but ultimately not as good, version of a later tool. Which goes for the grapple, by the way; poor man's propulsion cannon. It can grab small fish and reel them in, but that's about it; pretty handy any time, but for anything big you need the real thing. Using it to propel yourself was more flavor text, to be honest, since it's sort of useless for anything but the P.R.A.W.N.; that being said, letting it replace the dive reel, which IMHO is a waste of inventory space, would be really nice. H.A.W.T. and H.A.R.P. would need balancing, obviously, before implementation, but beyond that I can't see any reasonable objection to a fancy tree trimmer and a way less powerful, personal version of the Perimeter Defense Field.
The main idea is perfectly balanced, as long as you account for the fact that those half-dozen doodads will never be quite as good as the dedicated tool, and that the player needs to have some familiarity with those tools to combine them effectively; say, you have to use the dedicated flare, or make it, a dozen or two dozen times before it even unlocks as an attachment, and even then the projectile flare will only illuminate half as much due to it needing to be more lightweight to be fired. The phrase everyone needs to keep in mind for any of my ideas, or any others they want to post here: you always pay for convenience. Game balance is always an issue, yes, but just as importantly you can't expect to modify a technology to perform in a way it was never meant to without some kind of performance loss.
"Make something else a bunch of times" is a bad gating mechanism for unlocking items. People have to make a bunch of flares (and probably just throw them away), to get a flare that places easier? It's busywork that adds no real gameplay. Just running out, collecting a mess of items, processing them, and then making the item you really want? Does that really sound like fun gameplay to you? It does not sound like fun gameplay to me.
And it still cheapens inventory management. And sidegrades are pretty hard to make. The PRAWN is a sidegrade to the Seamoth in shallow water, being much slower, but having more/different tools and durability in exchange. The Seamoth still has a pretty neat point defense that the PRAWN doesn't get.
Trying to make a tool that is a sidegrade AND and an upgrade would be even harder. If the multitool is not useful enough, it is dead weight. If it IS useful enough, everything else is dead weight. And the line between the two is very thin, and quite possibly different for different people.
So running out, collecting a mess of items, processing them, and then making the item you really want is barrels of fun if it's one of the items already in the game, right? Because that is exactly how you get all of the items currently in the game. What I'm proposing is no different whatsoever in execution to how the base game already works, and it has the added benefit of, once you've schlepped enough crap around to make one of those things that already exist, you then have the chance to only have to do it once more, with some caveats; limitation on how many projectiles can be loaded into the tool at a time being the biggest and most obvious.
Now let's talk about inventory management; let's pretend, for just a minute, that my multi-tools (A.M.P.S. and HandiWeld) were put in tomorrow, as-is. Guess what, you still have to make choices about what to bring, because every advantage they have comes with a drawback - almost like I already considered that it might need balancing.
The HandiWeld: Sure it's convenient, but it's also being used twice as much since it serves dual roles and uses slightly more power as a welder because lasers are much better at cutting than welding, making it less power-efficient overall.
The Nite-Lite: Half the materials for launchable flares sounds great, except that it costs half as much because you had to drop the weight to launch it effectively, which also means you either get half the light or half the duration.
The D.O.A.G.: Good for catching Peepers and falling ore like the propulsion cannon, except it only grabs and reels in, it doesn't throw things, store them as projectiles, or have the power to move large objects; sure it also functions as a dive reel, but how long can that line really be?
The IntelliNet: Functions mostly as a low-tech stasis rifle, major advantage being a faster-moving projectile, except that it's useless against anything bigger than a Stalker, and unlike the nice and predictable stasis rifle, you never know when it's going to wear off.
The H.A.R.P.: Much faster than harvesting with a knife and can be used more than once (NOT indefinitely, too overpowered), but also requires parts to make that the knife doesn't, plus unlike the knife it has no effect on fauna, making it useless as a defensive option.
The H.A.W.T.: Exists solely to allow the multi-tool to maintain at least some viability as a defensive option in later-game biomes where the Crabsquids and Warpers roam.
So, do you take the all-purpose tool that can do a little bit of everything to save space for loot and hope you've got your bases adequately covered, or do you take the dedicated tool to get things done more efficiently but lose space? That's important.
Finally, the P.R.A.W.N. is not a sidegrade, upgrade, or downgrade to the Seamoth; it exists to do things the Seamoth can't, so you're just flat wrong. Besides which, the best use of a combination tool or multi-tool is neither upgrade nor sidegrade anyway; you use them as a convenience-centered alternative to dedicated tools. Multi-tools, by their nature, don't have to do everything as well as the tool meant for the job; they just have to be convenient and reasonably functional. You yourself say, quite rightly, that the line between a tool being useful and useless changes from person to person, so frankly whatever point you were trying to make is moot in that regard; somebody would find a use for it, despite whatever restrictions or drawbacks are put in to balance things.
Overall, @EvilSmoo, this whole thread isn't just about hashing out ideas, some of us are trying to have a bit of tongue-in-cheek fun with it, too; if you're going to nitpick and take everything literally and would rather spend a whole post sh**ting on ideas than coming up with ways to improve on it the ideas, take it someplace else.
Sorry to shit on your idea as you so eloquently put it, but this all seems a tad too much. It's quite a few new items, and new mechanics for some of them. And if you're just spitballing, then more power to you, but don't get your hopes up for something this big being added.
Yeah, I'm aware of that. Everybody is aware of that. To be brutally honest, I don't believe for a minute that the devs pay the slightest bit of attention to the Ideas and Suggestions board, and I certainly don't believe they'd implement any of this stuff even if they do. On the other hand, maybe they see it and it makes them think, "You know, with a bit of tweaking..." and bam, we wind up with a cool new toy that may not look anything like the original idea, but still does something useful. That's the point of spitballing; come up with a concept, refine it, maybe get it noticed. Not implemented, not even considered, just noticed.
Besides, if I had the power to make game developers bow to my every whim, I wouldn't be wasting it here; I'd be over on Bethesda's forums making them not suck at pretty much every aspect of game design and reminding them that the modding community is there to improve, customize, or expand on the existing product, not fix their mistakes or put in all the fun they couldn't be bothered to code.
You missed the point about collecting items. Yes, items require resources, but once crafted, they can be used. Your "brilliant" idea is to make those items, throw them away, and then make the item that we really want. That is MMO-quality busywork, not good gameplay. Like spam-crafting 1000 iron daggers in Skyrim so that you can make a perfect Daedric sword.
As for the rest... ok, so the devs have to code twice the items or more, but make them kind of suck, just to be easier to carry around. Again, this is not a good use of dev time. They're working on critical gameplay stuff, not coding different versions of basic stuff. Stuff like that creates games that take a decade to come out and bankrupt companies (Duke Nukem Forever, anyone? 1997-2011. 15 years.)
The PRAWN and Seamoth are both minisubs that launch from Moonpool and Cyclops. They both provide transport and protection, in different ways, and allow access to areas in different ways. They don't directly upgrade from one to the other, and are both more useful in certain situations. Seamoth visits the floating island more easily than PRAWN, and PRAWN visits the lava zones that crush Seamoth. You don't upgrade a Seamoth into a PRAWN, you use both for different things.
It's not the technical use of sidegrade, but that's the term that I use to describe, for example, all the different guns in Planetside2, which are very similar, but have slightly different characteristics, occasionally very important differences.
Heh, so when people tell you why your idea is bad and enumerate the reasons, you call it "tongue-in-cheek fun"? I've seen that before, people careen in with something and when called on it, they claim they were joking to save face.
That was pretty harsh. Most Bethesda games are pretty large scale, and most of the issues can be pretty small. And some of them aren't even issues. And "putting in all the fun they couldn't be bothered to code"? I don't even know what you're trying say there. Just becuase you don't think it's fun doesn't mean others don't. And if a modder creates something that makes the game more fun, that's not Bethesda's fault, nor is it a fault in the first place.
Did anyone ever tell you that arguing with you is like arguing with a brick wall? Because it is, and I'm absolutely done doing it. You've clearly got your mind made up that pretty much anything said here is a bad idea by default, and I don't know why it didn't occur to me sooner that it just isn't worth trying to convince you otherwise. The first post will be rewritten soon to reflect my decision with regards to this thread.
Yeah, it was harsh. And it's high time Bethesda started getting some harsh treatment, because for every one thing they do right they do three dumb things. Let's look at Skyrim; it was pretty, it was interesting, and it was also boring. It was TES for babies, with quite a lot of what made TES different either removed or "stream-lined" to the point of uselessness, with a bunch of flashy but poorly implemented new stuff thrown in to distract you from all the things that were missing. Armor and weapons don't break anymore, yet smithing is one of the two most overpowered skills in the game thanks to the fact you can make whatever you want and improve it far past the point where upgrading to the next tier even matters. Then, with enchanting, they take away the ability to buff your armor but you can give yourself limitless mana allowing you to cast spells forever, meaning that a magic-using character is almost totally invincible with very little disadvantage beyond the extremely limited magic system. Have you played Enderal, the total conversion mod? You should; it quite rightly has been said that Enderal feels like the original game and base Skyrim feels like something made by the fans. It's interesting, it's well written, and even having to work around Skyrim's engine doesn't do much to hamper it.
And then... there's Fallout 4. A predetermined character following a predetermined story path to encounter predetermined factions you're only given the illusion of choice about joining. Nothing you do, at any point, makes the slightest bit of difference one way or the other, unless you have an Ug the Caveman approach to storytelling, which concerns itself solely with who is no longer alive and cares not at all about what, if any, impact that death has. Karma as a mechanic is gone, the SPECIAL system has been raped almost beyond recognition, and combat is a joke. The coolest things they did are the way Power Armor is handled, which I will readily admit is a major improvement over older Fallout games, and the crafting system, though just like Skyrim it would have benefited from still having weapons and armor break, or at least wear down, with use. Beyond that, it's a lackluster entry in the series at best, and would need to be majorly overhauled to even compare to New Vegas.
So, ragging on Skyrim and FO4 when all of their games have bugs and are still fun? I mean, Those aren't the greatest Bethesda games, sure, but all of their games are fun and have bugs, which was the entire point I was trying to make. Instead, you went off on a rant about why you don't like them. And before you yell "OBSIDIAN MADE THE GOOD FALLOUT GAMES", well, maybe, but Bethesda made ALL of TES. Including the good ones.
Yes, Bethesda did make all of TES; how strange that they would make all the games in the series they own and created. And I didn't address your point because it's irrelevant to the one I was making, which is that whatever fun there is in their games seems to be getting a dramatic reduction with each new entry; systems go missing rather than being refined, new ones are introduced that don't work properly, bugs and coding problems that never should have made it out of beta testing take months to fix properly. Rather than getting better they're getting worse, with Fallout 4 being the most obvious, and most painful, example of this regression. But you're clearly not willing to hear any criticism directed at sacred Bethesda, so I imagine you're not going to care any more about what I just said than you did about what I said before. It's also not my problem.
I offer no complaint if you'd like to close or delete it, @Foxy. In fact, deleting it would probably be the best idea; it's not going anywhere, and I won't be returning to the forums anyway.
Well, that's the second time you've used your "You disagree with me so you're not worth my time" argument. Really proves nothing other than that you've used all your good points and don't want to come up with other ones.
Sorry. I try to keep my arguments civil, but do whatever you think is best.
I look at a concept that someone has
I think about the pros and cons
I evaluate them.
His criticism does not exist to tell you no, he is simply providing the "negative" feedback, items that a developer must seriously consider before he begins to code. A lot of the time when I talk to people about stuff in my law class, people talk about why "This is illegal" or "You can sue someone for that," and I'm the guy that presents the objective arguments and loopholes that would deny a suit. dealwithitdog is doing the same thing here, he's just telling you the reasons for why something may be unnecessary or undesired. I promise no one is out to get you and tell you no. Please understand.
But @DarkIntent isn't doing that, he just thinks we should have everything at the start. And that is the single best way to kill a sense of progression. It's good for a sandbox, like Minecraft. It's death for an MMO. And somewhere in-between for a survival game, but combining the three probably wouldn't end well. He's accusing me of having my mind made up, after that "oh, neat idea" in the second post, because I'm just not on board with the rest of the stuff.
And if people don't agree with him, he doesn't think more on the idea, but instead edits the OP and calls for the thread to be locked. I've certainly been poking holes in ideas and calling ideas and gameplay bad, but if someone can quote something I've said that's actually rude at a person, I don't see it, and would actually like someone to point it out. Because oneself is blind to that kind of thing and people can take things entirely differently than intended.
Like, a clip of flares for a propulsion gun would be pretty neat: add a packager that makes prop gun clips of chuck-able items. THAT, I could get behind.