[MUD-Dev] Balancing Melee vs Ranged Combat in Games Which Model Space

Ben Sizer brsizer at kylotan.eidosnet.co.uk
Tue Apr 10 23:27:05 New Zealand Standard Time 2001


On Sunday, April 08, 2001 6:33 AM
Brian Hook <bwh at wksoftware.com> wrote:

> Looking Glass had a similar philosophy -- play the game THEY
> intended you to play, not the game YOU want to play, and I
> personally don't care for that philosophy.  I probably would have
> finished Thief if I could have warped past the Tomb Raider levels.

Could you go into a little more detail? More than any other
story-based game I've ever experienced, Thief has been replayed by
many fans who are choosing to go through the game again with a
different play style. By default, the play style for most is probably
to rely on some 'middle-way' of combat, stealth, and evasion. But the
game is also quite playable using 'extreme' tactics. For example, some
people replay the game with the intention of dealing no damage to any
foe except where the scenario explicitly requires it in the
objectives. Others try to attempt to remain unseen at all times. And
some like to replay it by killing or knocking out as many adversaries
as possible, which can often be harder than the alternatives, due to
the inherent weakness of the lead character. Some players justify
these styles of play on roleplaying grounds, others on the grounds of
it simply being a new and increased challenge.

Therefore I would argue that Looking Glass did quite well to embody
several distinct styles of play into what is effectively a single
'character class'. And that they offered a fairly wide scope for
gameplay options, especially given the premise that you were supposed
to be a thief. Not bad considering that many muds only offer 1 style
of gameplay for all their classes...

--
Ben Sizer


_______________________________________________
MUD-Dev mailing list
MUD-Dev at kanga.nu
https://www.kanga.nu/lists/listinfo/mud-dev



More information about the MUD-Dev mailing list