Well it is my opinion that the life-for ability mechanic is usually too brutal, and reduces fun. However I go accept it as a legitimate mechanic to limit special ability use. My main gripe with Turtles and X-Men is the pay-life limitation keeps me from playing the game the way I want to play it. Turtles, and especially X-Men USE their special abilities all the time. How often do you see cyclops or gambit PUNCH a sentinel? Well in this game you can use the mutant power something like 3-5 times per life before you are at 1hp and on the cusp of death. That is not how an X-Men game should be designed. There are mana solutions to this, all of which would make the game more fun to play.
Games (primarily Mass Effect currently, although for the life of me I can't remember how Knights of the Old Republic managed jedi powers...) with a abilities that cool down, but otherwise have unlimited use are much more fun to play. You get more abilities and can use them anytime. That increases fun, does not always mean a decrease in difficulty either.
I never played it, i'll look up some videos.
Lets bring this discussion into focus. I am not saying Cooldowns are better or worse than paying life, or paying energy. But I do think some games work much better with cooldown abilities as opposed to the other two. I am looking for examples of all the different types of ability payments and if they worked or didn't.
I think diablo had it right. Even though you payed mana, you could effectively spam your abilities and build a character to have more mana if it fit your strategy. Where as, a game like Turtles in time didn't poorly. You hard ever used your ability. I can consistently beat the SNES version without ever using the specials.
Yeah I am not sure how I didn't think og achievements on my own. They are not on every major console as well and steam and even iphone. Great idea with collectables as well. the huge DK coins from DKC2 are one of the best examples of that because the level actually had this DK icon when you found it. If you didn't find it, it feels like you didn't finish them game properly.
How do we define this form of collectable object though? Extraneous collectables?
Adding both to my list.
I am doing research, that is why I came to this forum full of like-minded avid gamers from the days before XBOX to ask these questions.
I need some help defining exactly what the modern idea of cooldown abilities are. But in my mind, and I am sure in the mind of many people here the different is clear. I don't remember any game since WC3, or WoW having an ability turn grey and then slowly refill until it's ready to use again. Since those days, every MMO I have ever seen had this implemented, as have many other games. If calling it a cooldown ability is the incorrect term, then enlighten me. But it certainly isn't the same as reloading a gun or punching.
it's not like I am getting paid for this, or I am writing for some magazine and I am asking you to do my research for me so I can collect a fat check. I am just writing this for fun because I get excited thinking about all the things in video games that make me happy. So there is no need to get so fierce about it, and tell me that I am doing it wrong, or that I am being ignorant.
There certainly a difference between using a cooldown ability as it is in WoW or Mass Effect vs shooting a gun. If we follow the gun-recoil-is-cooldown precedent then everything has a cooldown. Punching, walking, shooting, jumping all have a cool down. Obviously this means the definition we are working with is broken. I know you know what I am talking about and are just being difficult. Even the term "cooldown" and it's shorthand "CD" are now common and easily recognized by gamers. And it has never been applied to firing a gun.
Every game is different and every game needs to be judged individually on how the system works. I think that in the X-Men game and in Ninja Turtles games the system sucks, because I am punished for using my favorite moves. I would be more fun if I could use my moves without costing myself life. The risk/reward is a gameplay element that I respect, but but I will argue that it's more fun to have a character that can use his abilities more than 5 times per life before dying.
Sturgeon's Law: 90% of everything is crud. As it was, so it is now, and will be. We don't remember the cruddy games of yesterday because, being cruddy, they weren't memorable.
And I challenge that the NES had a worse SNR than the Wii.
VirtualAlex wrote:
Let me narrow down what I am looking for. See it all makes perfect sense in my mind, but trying to verbalize the dividing line is very hard.
You're gonna have to work on this if you want to write articles for others to read. :)
Let me narrow down what I am looking for. See it all makes perfect sense in my mind, but trying to verbalize the dividing line is very hard.
I don't consider something an innovation if gamer's have always wanted it. Things like Open-Worlds and Online play are not innovations in my book because people always wished and hoped that the game world could be HUGE and I could do ANYTHING and everything was destructible and I could interact with everything. Or I wish I could play with my friends.
But some kind of gameplay element that wasn't really around finally popped up, and changed the genre. Like bullet time for example. There are so many games now with some kind of slow-motion bullet time mechanic built in. it's not always done well, but it was technologically possible for a long time before it really "happened" that is what I call an innovation.
@Warp: Um... I don't know I probably just missed the O.
@Drekakon: Yes which is exactly why I don't want include that in my definition of cooldown. Rate of Fire/Casting and cooldown need to have some kind of dividing line.
I am more refering to streets of rage, final fight, turtles in time, and the X-man arcade game. In which using your special power would damage the player, making you either not ever using the power, or using it very rarely. Decreasing fun. The "cooldowns" in diablo don't decrease fun, because in Diablo you get to spam all your spells nearly as much as you want. I haven't played Diablo in a very long time, is the casting rate really listen in the spell description? If so, then diablo might be the first game that fits my cooldown definition.
Well I didn't mean to imply that it CAN'T involve other costs. But an "ability cooldown" in and of itself will not include other costs unless the game system includes additional costs. Which is fine, I will be talking about those as well, which is they work in WoW and most of MMRPGS that I have seen.
I am not familiar with the inner workings of Diablo. From a player perspective, your abilities cost mana. You are limited by a casting speed as well, which can be classified as cooldown, but I would equate diablo with shooting a firearm in a shooting game. Recoil and reload technically are cooldowns to using the "power" again. However it isn't in the definition of cooldown I am thinking about.
Defining and ability cool down accurately is also something I would enjoy some help with. The concept of cooldown I am talking about means that the main limiting factor of using a skill is the time it takes to recharge. Usually this is clearly stated in-game as part of the ability "Singularity, Damage 500, Cooldown 9 seconds" It is not an under the hood element, but a statistic for the player to be aware of.
Which is why the speed at which Simon can swing his whip in Castlevania wouldn't be considered a cooldown.
Diablo doesn't have ability cooldowns, Dialo 1 and 2 both use a straight mana system. I didn't know that about streets of rage 3 and I am happy to hear that. Of course in my article I will explain in detail what an ability cooldown is but if anyone doesn't know here:
After using an ability you are limited from using it again for a set amount of time. But it costs you nothing else otherwise. So in mass effect for example you can use the ability "push" (just like the jedi's force push) once every 6 seconds or so without fail. The time can vary based on different factors to allow for a fair amount of design space.
I feel selectable characters have always been a basic video game staple. I don't go back THAT far, but dungeon master, syndicate, gauntlet all used this to add variety to the game play. If there was a time this was lacking it was probably due to technology limitations.
Sliding is definitly a good one at least for the mega man series. Metal Slug also us the Down+Jump to slide function... but what other games?
No I guess not... but it would certainly make it easier for me to have an opinion on it if I actually was alive before it's existence.
You're going to get tons of complaints from crotchety gamers along these lines if you ignore everything from before you were born. Do the job properly; do the research.
Maybe once I run out of topics that I know about, i'll begin writing about topics I don't know about.
No I guess not... but it would certainly make it easier for me to have an opinion on it if I actually was alive before it's existence. If Turn-Based RPGs were around since the beginning of video games, it's unclear what/how it innovated. I mean... what were RPGs like before turn-based RPGs? In my experience the video game RPG evolution went like this Text-based rpgs --> turn-based dungeon crawls --> live action dungeon crawls
The way DLC is treated lately, compared to forever ago is very different. Now DLC is almost expected of console games. Halo 2 and on have all had DLC map packs, Civilization 5 has had DLC civilizations released, Mass Effect 2 has had 8 hours of bonus made available through DLC.
But you are right, it has little to do with gameplay, more gaming as a whole. Like I said my list isn't set in stone. I could be wrong on some of them, i just made my list yesterday. But I feel the new DLC concept is worth talking about.
So I am currently writing an article about how ability cooldown is a great innovation in gameplay. The first time I encountered this concept (although I know it's not the first implementation) was Warcraft 3. Now it's true that game had a mana system as well as a cool down system, but since then I feel like I see cooldowns all over.
Mass effect is my next first hand experience with them, and in Mass effect I absolutely love it. I get to spam all my abilities and never worry about running out.
I remember games like the X-men arcade game where doing the very move that made your mutant special would deal him damage. So you never wanted to do it. That is stupid. I understand that is just an arcade thing to suck money out of you, but it followed gaming tot he consoles too. Final Fight and Streets of rage and tons of other beat-em-ups had a "super move" which did damage to you.
Also I feel that cooldowns have a large amount of design space compared to a energy or self-damage system.
Please give me your thoughts, hopefully someone can give me an earlier implementation of cooldown as well as some other alternative methods of managing special moves.
I find your premise a bit weird. Either you should write columns about the greatest innovations in gaming, period, and include the significant technological advancements as well (since you can't really skip over things like Quake being the start of the serious 3D graphics era), or you should write a column about the greatest innovations in game design. I find it quite astonishing that you'd choose to ignore all technological achievements and yet list ability cooldown of all things.
You are right, Game Design would have been the more accurent word choice. I am less concerned with the technology and much more interested in design changed. Also not sure why you are so offended that I listed ability cooldown as an important innovation. Remember turtles in time? Or that X-men arcade game where doing your TRADEMARK move would actually deal you damage? So cyclops can't even spam eye beams? Thats bad design, which was GREATLY improved by cooldowns.
It's very hard to draw the line, and in the end it's just going to be me choosing what to write about. Basically if the idea is something people always wanted, but just couldn't have because of technology limitations, then Id on't count that as an innovation. So Co-op, mulitplayer, online multiplayer, MMPRG, Open-world sandbox games are all things, that although great and important, I don't consider innovative because everyone had that idea. I remember saying, while playing fallout 1, man I wish my friends and I could play TOGETHER.
Also you are 100% that not all innovations are well implemented and that is something I will talk about especially with Morality and Quicktime events. I think they have potential but some games fumble them badly.
Thank you guys for all the ideas. I have already begun writing my article on ability cool downs, I will start another thread about it so I can get some ideas and input on it.
I am planning on writing a recurring column on my website which will talk about the greatest innovations in gaming. I would like all of them to be gameplay innovations and not technology innovations.
For example MMRPGs i wouldn't call innovative because the idea has been around for ever, technology finally caught up and let it happen. Same with online multiplayer. However online matchmaking is an innovation. Here is my list so far I am just looking for more ideas.
Checkpoint saving
Randomized loot
Cover-based FPS
Ability cooldown
Regenerating Health
Morality
Lack of Hud
Limited weapons
Quicktime events
Time manipulation
Free running
DLC
In-App Purchases
Matchmaking
Feel free to disagree with me, I would love to hear that also. If you think something is not an innovation then lets talk through it.
