So much wrong with this game

5ro4 · 2014-01-23 17:25:38

Hi. I'll never play this game again when the contest ends and only because I would like and try to get my money back, so before that happens, being this a beta, I though you would appreciate a constructive critique of the game, so here it is. English is not my first language, so excuse me for the possible mistakes.

1.- The game es evil. From a game design standpoint it's overly compulsive. I started the game to play some minutes and ended playing 8 hours straight, not even stopping to eat. The bad this is I wasn't enjoying it. Behind this game lays the same psychology of the gambling games. You just keep playing in the hope that the next time more favorable events will occur. Maybe some fools will fall into your trap, maybe the next house you go in will be badly protected, etc. Rewards for playing are extrinsic. You don't enjoy going to other houses to steal; you only steal because it will give you money. You'll never go to a heavily protected house with $0 just for fun, because there's scarce fun in that. It's a very addictive game, but it relies almost entirely on that to keep people playing. On the other hand, designing your home is enjoyable by itself. It's a shame that everything around it makes it so frustrating.

2.- It's outrageous that you can die trying your own home. I just spent more than an hour building a macro complex only to die on it while trying, and it's not the first time it happens; it's the fifth. Can you imagine how I feel when that happens? Is that what you want your players to feel?
"But it's more interesting this way as you have to be very careful while trying!" No. If you go for something more elaborate than the typical labyrinth with a hundred doors with pit bulls behind, you'll need electronics, and it's almost impossible to be sure that something is gonna work when you have dozens of switches and cables crossing one another.
"But you can try it first with chihuahuas!" No, you can't. If you try something, then you can't edit it without losing money. You should be able to recover the money of everything in your house; if not, editing is just wasting money, and you usually can't afford that.

3.- Robbing is not fun. Houses are too big. Most people just go with the giant labyrinth, and it's a pain in the ass only to think about robbing those. Also houses are not stable. You can't study a house and prepare for the big theft because it will probably give chills or just disappear any moment.

4.- Robbing is not profitable. Because of the previous point, robbing is usually not fun at all and very discouraging. Also, buying equipment to rob in most cases result in a terrible waste of money. Equipment is very expensive and you don't know how large is a house. So let's say you see a house with some dogs and you buy 20 units of drugged meat and go to try and rob it. It turns out there were 22 dogs. You die and lost everything. And usually the cost of the equipment is barely the same as the quantity you'll rob, so robbing in any house minimally well protected is a stupid risk (except if you just restarted and have nothing to lose). Worst of all is that if you don't use the equipment, you just lose it. You see a house with the wife with a shotgun, you buy a gun, and when you want to go back to that house it has either disappeared or now gives "chills" and you just wasted $1200. I can't even think of a reason why you lose your items if you don't use them.

5.- The game is a huge waste of time. I could cry just to think of all the hours I have unnecessarily lost playing this game, not because the core of the game requires it, but because of how wrong are some areas designed. Being building your house the most fun aspect of the game, the waste of time it requires is outrageous. Having to build your perfect complex house one or twice would be one thing, but to have to redo it constantly, even without actually having finished it because you died trying, is infuriating. The fact that I have already lost so much time pushes me to keep playing, to try and have more luck the next time, to make it count for something. If I stop playing now, all those hours went to nothing. I feel the urge to keep playing, even though I don't want, even though I hate it. Just like a compulsive gambler.

Hope this helps you with the development.

DethBringa · 2014-01-23 17:46:10

Not speaking english as a first language should never be frowned upon or have the poster hassled regardless of any mistakes. Constructive criticism is always helpful for game development. Everyone is entitled to an opinion without flames or rage.

I do feel this game is not for everyone, but I myself love it. Even the permadeath is good. Frustration from dying takes me back to the old cartridge days where you couldn't just save for the sake of saving.

1.- The appeal to the game even though evil is not really a negative. There are a lot of evil games, look at GTA.

2.- double checking and triple checking (especially after dying a few times to your own traps) is a good idea. The strategy of making something complex and taking your time to not die is pretty much half the game.

3.- Everyone is different. To some people, they love it.

4.- That's part of the idea to mapping a house and making sure you can back out. Robbing is extremely profitable. You can buy 10k worth of tools and complete a house for 120k. Thats a nice profit.

5.- Isn't the very nature of gaming to waste time? How can any gaming be productive?

This is just my opinion, as I said everyone is entitled to their own. Everyone has different tastes and games can't cater to everyone 100%

Blip · 2014-01-23 18:12:13

As Deth said, you're fully entitled to your opinion. However, as one of the fans of the game, I have to say I love some of the very things you hate. For example, permadeath is what, in my opinion, makes the game good. Without permadeath, the game would have so little tension - especially in you own house! Also, all the difficulties you go through to succeed in this game makes the success so much sweeter. It's the best feeling to rob a top house with just some water, a brick, and your wits, or to see some sap change into your trap just as you planned he would.

This game, though, isn't for everyone. Think of it like Payday, plus Minecraft, with a little bit of Slender too; but all, of course, way harder. I'll admit its a niche game, but for those of us who love it, it's really the be-all and end-all of online gaming. We do appreciate your criticism, as somebody who isn't as big of a fan, but some things that you might dislike about the game are here to stay.

5ro4 · 2014-01-23 18:15:04

The appeal to the game even though evil is not really a negative. There are a lot of evil games, look at GTA.

I'm not talking about the evilness of the game with regard to the theft theme or anything like that. I'm talking about how the game uses very manipulative methods (even if it's unintentional) to keep you playing.

I assure you I've tetrachecked things but ending up failing. This should not happen. The negative aspects of dying while trying your own home exceed vastly the good ones. As a designer, what do you gain from someone to lose hours of work and having to redo everything? Making him want to kill himself? There is little justification for the game to allow this.

3.- Everyone is different. To some people, they love it.

There's people who like to hurt themselves. That's not actually an argument. Spending 15 minutes going through corridors opening random doors is hardly fun for anyone. If you could not rob from other houses, how much people do you think would just keep doing it because they think it's fun? I would be surprised if more than one. Why would you limit your game to that audience instead of making it more fun overall? Also note than addiction is usually confused with enjoyment. "I play a lot, so I must like it" is an unconscious though. Frustration is a very bad choice for the main element of a game.

Isn't the very nature of gaming to waste time? How can any gaming be productive?

As I said, I'm talking about unnecessary time loss., the time you spent achieving nothing inside the game. A game has to have respect for the player's time and this game clearly doesn't.

Btw, I dind't say I don't like permadeath. It's a very important element of the game, it's just badly applied.

Last edited by 5ro4 (2014-01-23 18:16:32)

iceman · 2014-01-23 18:51:59

I definitely agree this game is frustrating, and it definitely encourages you to waste your time, upgrading or robbing or just checking on your house (which is what I like the least about this game). I took a break for a month or two after losing my favorite, and most successful, house design - I was crushed. However, to me, the thrill of pulling off a successful, high value robbery, as well as (especially, even) the thrill of designing a house that traps experienced players made it (just barely) worth enough to try again.

There's just a couple of stuff in your post that I'd like to correct - hopefully it will alleviate some frustration throughout the rest of the contest.

5ro4 wrote:

"But you can try it first with chihuahuas!" No, you can't. If you try something, then you can't edit it without losing money. You should be able to recover the money of everything in your house; if not, editing is just wasting money, and you usually can't afford that.

You only lose money if you actually reach the safe when testing your house. The best thing when testing is to replace dogs with chihuahuas and lights (like you said), make sure you can get to the safe, then leave through the door. If your last edits to the house were to replace the dogs and traps, then you can just press undo until everything's, all without paying.

5ro4 wrote:

You see a house with the wife with a shotgun, you buy a gun, and when you want to go back to that house it has either disappeared or now gives "chills" and you just wasted $1200.

You only lose tools if you enter a house with them. In your case, if your case, if you buy a gun and realize the house isn't there anymore, just return to your house, press "Backpack", and place the gun in the vault. That way, the gun will stay there throughout robberies (although you can't access it during them). Once you find another house that needs a gun, go back to your house and place it in your backpack.

As for chills: The chills only stop you from going inside a house if you died in it or took tools inside before dying in a different house.

5ro4 wrote:

Robbing is not profitable. Because of the previous point, robbing is usually not fun at all and very discouraging. Also, buying equipment to rob in most cases result in a terrible waste of money. Equipment is very expensive and you don't know how large is a house. So let's say you see a house with some dogs and you buy 20 units of drugged meat and go to try and rob it. It turns out there were 22 dogs. You die and lost everything.

Robbing is generally as profitable as you want it to be. If you're going to have to spend more money than the house is worth, simply don't rob it.

Also, remember: There has to be at least one way to get through the house without tools. Do your best to try to figure out what that is during scouting robberies, (where you go in with little or no tools). I've robbed fairly expensive houses with very few tools simply because I'd been in it several times before, getting an idea of the traps, then took just the tools for robbing it, with maybe a few "just in case" tools.

5ro4 wrote:

Robbing is not fun. Houses are too big. Most people just go with the giant labyrinth, and it's a pain in the ass only to think about robbing those. Also houses are not stable. You can't study a house and prepare for the big theft because it will probably give chills or just disappear any moment.

Trust me, the only reason houses are this unstable is because of the contest. I've gotten more robberies in an hour than I normally get over a couple of days. Normally (at least before the steam launch), you'd have plenty of time to study most houses.

Also, if a house disappears, it's probably just the owner editing it or someone robbing it (both of which are happening like crazy during the contest), so it will most likely be back in a few minutes.

Hopefully that will explain some stuff that you've found frustrating. If you have any questions, or would like some explanations of certain design choices, I'll try to answer the questions and show you posts that go into greater depth on the issues.

Last edited by iceman (2014-01-23 18:52:20)

5ro4 · 2014-01-23 19:27:35

Thank you for your answer, iceman. There's lots of things I didn't know.

I must disagree with the robberies, though. As far as I have played, looking for the no-tools path to the safe is virtually impossible (except for really bad designed houses) usually you will have dozens of paths to choose while a pack of dogs chase you and/or so many paths with no-return mechanisms that you need an enormous amount of equipment just to go and try some of them, while risking losing most of your money and your life. Unless you can make a great and cheap theft with your initial $2000, you just can't afford it. Luck is a great deal in my experience with this game.

Of course, practice makes experts and you may know more tricks than me, but for most people the impression will be the same as mine and they will just stop playing as will I.

If I'm bothering at all discussing this is because I think fixing most of these problems would make the game more enjoyable to everyone. I can't see anyone enjoying less the game by not dying while trying their own house, for example, and making houses smaller would force players to be clever and compact with the traps instead of relaying on vast mazes with endless paths, doors and buttons.

Last edited by 5ro4 (2014-01-23 20:02:10)

Blip · 2014-01-23 19:40:08

I actually really support the suggestion of smaller houses, and your point about it making traps more clever is a good one. it would mean that people would have to use their house space wisely, and it would prevent many arbitrarily difficult houses that are far too common.

jasonrohrer · 2014-01-25 14:39:46

Thanks for the feedback!

First of all, if you'd like a refund, just email me. jasonrohrer@fastmail.fm That goes for everyone: I don't want to keep anyone's money who is not happy with the game.

Some of the things that you talk about, like dying in your own house, are deeply connected to the themes of this game. The game is about violence as a means of self defense. Many people are killed each year by guns, but most of those people are the OWNERS of those guns. A few people are killed each year by guard dogs, but most of those people are the OWNERS of those dogs. Security has a cost. That is one of the main points of this game.

So, when you put something dangerous in your house, it can kill you too.

I know it is frustrating and NOT what you're used to from building games... but that's the point! This game is different, because it actually has a point.

As for this game being intentionally addicting, it is actually LESS addicting that some other "roguelike" games (Spelunky, FTL) for these reasons:

1) There are no random elements. You will not get a "better roll" next time.

2) Death is ALWAYS your fault. You can always back out and save your own neck at any time (use the front door). Therefore, when you die, you feel terrible/stupid and want to quit out of rage. Not rage at the game, but rage at YOURSELF, which feels even worse, and makes you want to keep playing even less.

Other games have a "just one more try" hook after you die... but this game has more of a "I QUIT AND AM NEVER PLAYING THIS AGAIN" feeling when you die.

Checking your house IS addicting, though, but that's because of natural human nature---which is part of what the game is about thematically. The game makes you paranoid, and it's a game ABOUT paranoia.

Blip · 2014-01-25 14:47:20

Yeah, death isn't ALWAYS your fault. Twice now it's been my cats', for unplugging my router.

DethBringa · 2014-01-25 14:59:05

Hit the nail on the head there. Death doesn't have that gambling must keep playing feeling. It really is more rage quit and never play again feeling. However due to my system of whinge, whine, complain instead of rage quitting I'm still playing (altho everyone in my house knows when I screw up )

Like life, death isn't always your fault, crap happens. Think of say League of Legends, a DC can be fatal and lose the game for you. Almost all online games have this same issue. If was wasn't like that people could purposely unplug their routers to exploit the game.

Blip · 2014-01-25 15:19:02

It was just a joke; I understand that things have to be dome that, in some cases seem rather harsh, to prevent widespread cheating by simply unplugging your router mid-robbery. And I agree, I rarely "rage-quit" for more than an hour; but my cats realize that something bad has happened due to shouts of anger and a keyboard hitting the wall (just a bit of an exaggeration there).

jasonrohrer · 2014-01-25 19:36:41

My family (real life one) hears me screaming quite frequently too over mistakes that I make in this game!

Eldrad · 2014-01-25 20:12:05

Definitely want to register a differing opinion about "4.- Robbing is not profitable."

Robbing is expensive, but as the value of houses goes up it's profitable. If you know what you're doing and you're careful you can always make sure that you have a safe route to the exit at all times so there is no risk of death. Traps can be viewed as costing 'x' amount to safely pass instead of as something that you pass and might later kill you. Yes there are some traps which may not look like a trap at first (a closed electric door which you would walk towards along your exit path, or a closed wooden door that could have an already seen dog behind it for example), but there are a finite number of those and they can be passed perfectly safely for a price. Yes it's expensive in some cases to figure out a safe path for each portion of a house and the price adds up but if the target has enough money it pays off.

Garcian · 2014-01-25 21:08:15

Ryan Dao

Last edited by Garcian (2014-01-26 14:18:51)

5ro4 · 2014-01-26 00:42:30

Thanks for answering, jasonrohrer. I really appreciate it.

It's your game and you can have it your way, but "making a point" is a terrible, TERRIBLE choice for a game. A good game is meant to be played and enjoyed, not to "make a point". The game isn't even remotely similar to reality to sustain that point. Dying because you miscalculated in which step would a dog that watched you through a window step on a switch that activates an electrical grill will hardy be taken as a good point about home security. It will be taken as just bad design.

Second thing, the fact that you can actually test all your traps makes death on your own house moot. You can ensure all your traps work correctly, it just takes you even more time to do so (on a game that already is extremely time consuming). "Making a point" aside, it's a mechanic that adds absolutely nothing of value to the game, and a lot of extra time wasting and frustration. You may as well go ahead and remove the "undo" option from the editor. It may reinforce your point and if you place an element in the wrong place, it was just your mistake so no complaints allowed.

Also, in any case, the point would be made pretty early in the game. This game has no victory condition; it is meant to be played a lot. Why do I have to keep suffering from your point? I get it, just avoid me the hours wasted on triple-checking every little change I make to my house. Editing and improving you house should be encouraged, not discouraged, as it is now.

There are no random elements.

There is a random element: players. Will an uncautious player with $20k come into your house and fall into your trap? Will you find a house of a rookie player who didn't add any defenses at all? You can actually rob ANY house if you randomly take the correct no-tools path. In fact, house design is build around the idea of reducing the chances of someone finding the correct way at random. Luck is a huge factor in this game. Luck is the only way I have gained any money at all. This is a massive skinner box.

I ask you to reconsider it. Do you want to make a point or do you want to make a good game? I don't wanna buy, nor expend my time with the former.
You can get away with it now because it's a very unknown game and only people who likes it sticks with it, but if this game ever gains enough popularity, you will be hearing this complaint constantly.

Last edited by 5ro4 (2014-01-26 01:00:44)

Cheeetar · 2014-01-26 01:35:39

5ro4 wrote:

It's your game and you can have it your way, but "making a point" is a terrible, TERRIBLE choice for a game. A good game is meant to be played and enjoyed, not to "make a point".

That's akin to saying that all paintings should just be pretty things to look at, or all films should make you feel happy. (I think the game is playable and enjoyable, and it looks like a lot of other people do too.)

g0m · 2014-01-26 10:23:10

5ro4 wrote:

Thanks for answering, jasonrohrer. I really appreciate it.
It's your game and you can have it your way, but "making a point" is a terrible, TERRIBLE choice for a game. A good game is meant to be played and enjoyed, not to "make a point".

That's kind of a false dichotomy though, like you're saying that a game that makes a point can't be enjoyable as well.

5ro4 · 2014-01-26 10:23:20

That's akin to saying that all paintings should just be pretty things to look at, or all films should make you feel happy.

No, it's not. It's like saying the engine of a car should work properly, not be pretty. The gameplay design of a game is not artistic; everything surrounding it can be. You can have your point in the story or have ugly graphics or disturbing music if you think that helps the mood, but the gameplay design is a system. You can make your car engine look pretty instead of working properly, but then expect me to look at it, not to drive it.

That's kind of a false dichotomy though, like you're saying that a game that makes a point can't be enjoyable as well

A game can make a point as long as it doesn't interfere with it's gameplay.

Last edited by 5ro4 (2014-01-26 10:27:40)

g0m · 2014-01-26 11:07:52

5ro4 wrote:

A game can make a point as long as it doesn't interfere with it's gameplay.

Oh shit son, I thought you were sort of taking your own experiences as axiom and dismissing all others as scoundrels and liars while pawing gently at a keyboard like a confused puppy; I didn't know you were quoting from the actual rulebook of game creation that all games must adhere to and as such I apologize for my insolence. I will remove myself from your presence and ask humbly for your forgiveness.

5ro4 · 2014-01-26 11:17:59

I don't think I was disrespectful to you, nor did I dismissed anyone's opinion. Your sarcasm is out of place.

Following with the car analogy, you can make a car pretty if you want, but if that affects the engine, it will be a bad car for driving (or not so good as it will be if you didn't mess with the engine to make it prettier). This not my experience; this is a fact.

g0m · 2014-01-26 11:27:22

With all due respect, I have never used sarcasm in my life, and am not even sure what it is. In fact, I only have one problem with your analogy, and it's that a car is nothing like a game; however the rest of your argument is rock-solid (an engine does make the car go, you can make a car pretty, etc)

colorfusion · 2014-01-26 11:31:58

5ro4 wrote:

I don't think I was disrespectful to you, nor did I dismissed anyone's opinion. Your sarcasm is out of place.
Following with the car analogy, you can make a car pretty if you want, but if that affects the engine, it will be a bad car for driving (or not so good as it will be if you didn't mess with the engine to make it prettier). This not my experience; this is a fact.

I'd say a game is more alike to a painting than a car. A car generally has the specific purpose of getting you from one place to another, and if it fails to do that then it's usually not a very good car.

A game doesn't need to fill one specific function, there isn't really a single thing that you can measure to see how good a game is. It could be interesting and make you think, it could be enjoyable and relaxing to play, or it could teach you new things and train skills.

Just because a game isn't constant exhilarating fun doesn't mean it's a bad game. The moments of despair when you realise you just lost $20,000 and want to ragequit make the game interesting IMO. There are plenty of other tile based dungeon designers that are smoothed down to the point of the player never losing anything or feeling bad.

Last edited by colorfusion (2014-01-27 10:49:45)

5ro4 · 2014-01-26 13:27:20

A game doesn't need to fill one specific function. It could be interesting and make you think, it could be enjoyable and relaxing to play, or it could teach you new things and train skills.

If this was a game with a beginning and an end, and maybe also a story, you could defend that point, but it is not. If the objective of the game is to make a point and not to be played and enjoyed, once that point is made, end of the game. I died in may own house, point taken. The game fulfilled its objective, now it's over.

But that's not the case. This game is meant to be played after the point is made, and beyond that, dying in your own house is just a frustrating waste of time that adds nothing of value to your game experience.

Last edited by 5ro4 (2014-01-26 13:29:38)

Spiderman · 2014-01-26 15:05:08

5ro4 wrote:

A game doesn't need to fill one specific function. It could be interesting and make you think, it could be enjoyable and relaxing to play, or it could teach you new things and train skills.
If this was a game with a beginning and an end, and maybe also a story, you could defend that point, but it is not. If the objective of the game is to make a point and not to be played and enjoyed, once that point is made, end of the game. I died in may own house, point taken. The game fulfilled its objective, now it's over.
But that's not the case. This game is meant to be played after the point is made, and beyond that, dying in your own house is just a frustrating waste of time that adds nothing of value to your game experience.

5ro4, I see some problems with your understanding of games. You have trouble with the divide between games as a consumable, single experience and a system that can be explored to a masterful degree. Furthermore, you seem to think that only games with a single narrative experience are deserving of "a point" while all other games with "replay-ability" should be "fun".

Castle doctrine has a theme, home burglary and defense. Without that theme, it would be abstract grid of symbols and non-intuitive. Within the theme, new players can understand how elements of the game function (an electric grate will not chase a player like a pitbull will). This theme does relate to Mr. Rohrer's desire to make a comment on white suburban home defense and masculinity. However, the system itself is also contains a complex of interrelated mechanics that can be mastered such as trap design, vault versus family defense, understanding of electric systems. Along with the meta game of player psychology the server provides a wealth of exciting possibilities and room for exploration.

Dying in your house is just a form of laziness that mastery of this game does not permit. A chess grandmaster could loose against an amateur if they are too lazy to apply their knowledge and understanding of the game. However, if they follow all the heuristics they've developed the amateur will never win.

For further interest on the matter, consider this profound book: http://www.amazon.com/Characteristics-G … s+of+games

5ro4 · 2014-01-26 22:10:36

Spiderman: I already own that book.

The thing is that while trying your own house, you should be allowed to be lazy, as you are not competing with anyone. Imagine that while arranging the chess pieces on the board before the game starts, if you placed one piece in the wrong place you automatically lost. Is that necessary? Would that make the game better? No and no. It would just increase the time wasted arranging the pieces on the board.

The undo button while designing your house is also lazy and mastery of the game should require you to place every single piece of your house correctly without place for mistake. Do you want the undo button to be removed?

The Castle Doctrine Forums

#1 2014-01-23 17:25:38

So much wrong with this game

#2 2014-01-23 17:46:10

Re: So much wrong with this game

#3 2014-01-23 18:12:13

Re: So much wrong with this game

#4 2014-01-23 18:15:04

Re: So much wrong with this game

#5 2014-01-23 18:51:59

Re: So much wrong with this game

#6 2014-01-23 19:27:35

Re: So much wrong with this game

#7 2014-01-23 19:40:08

Re: So much wrong with this game

#8 2014-01-25 14:39:46

Re: So much wrong with this game

#9 2014-01-25 14:47:20

Re: So much wrong with this game

#10 2014-01-25 14:59:05

Re: So much wrong with this game

#11 2014-01-25 15:19:02

Re: So much wrong with this game

#12 2014-01-25 19:36:41

Re: So much wrong with this game

#13 2014-01-25 20:12:05

Re: So much wrong with this game

#14 2014-01-25 21:08:15

Re: So much wrong with this game

#15 2014-01-26 00:42:30

Re: So much wrong with this game

#16 2014-01-26 01:35:39

Re: So much wrong with this game

#17 2014-01-26 10:23:10

Re: So much wrong with this game

#18 2014-01-26 10:23:20

Re: So much wrong with this game

#19 2014-01-26 11:07:52

Re: So much wrong with this game

#20 2014-01-26 11:17:59

Re: So much wrong with this game

#21 2014-01-26 11:27:22

Re: So much wrong with this game

#22 2014-01-26 11:31:58

Re: So much wrong with this game

#23 2014-01-26 13:27:20

Re: So much wrong with this game

#24 2014-01-26 15:05:08

Re: So much wrong with this game

#25 2014-01-26 22:10:36

Re: So much wrong with this game

Board footer