I honestly really love hearing about stories from the planning and/or development stages of games, so this was intriguing. Thanks for the update on Breloom.
Yeah. Just removing or changing change the whole will be better. It could be a poison thing. Like you use a slow-moving, smaller, that last for 2 seconds and poison the person if it hits for maybe 3 ticks
I think is interesting, but may do something different than direct damage. maybe counters for something else, like a small stun, so it become a combo tool at some point
I honestly wondered why it costed a meter in the first place. I am no game designer, but if the move had to stay, I would just make it last 1-2 seconds and costing no meter. More of a "oh shit it wasn't safe to jump in" tool rather than a stall strategy enabler. But I am just 1 person with this opinion, and I really like the bravery of removing a move.
I have no idea why this was in my recommended, but I'm happy it was! What engine/framework was used to make this game? Purely based on what I could find on the website, it doesn't seem to be any game engine I recognize
@@nomnom2407 this was basically the original version before it got tweaked The consensus was "the worst move in the entire game by a wide margin, except in fringe situations where it won the game with zero counterplay" There was no winning with this move.
I honestly really love hearing about stories from the planning and/or development stages of games, so this was intriguing. Thanks for the update on Breloom.
My answer is: because of wasted time policy.
I spent time implementing this stupid mechanic, and now i have to spent time to remove it.
Yeah, this is called the Sunk Cost Fallacy. Unfortunately when it comes to game design sometimes fun ideas don't actually work out to fun gameplay.
this is super interesting insight, would rly love to see more vids like this!
so down for more of these!! love hearing people talk about game design
Neat. Appreciate sharing. :3
i wish blazblue devs considered this when designing rachel's coffin
Yeah. Just removing or changing change the whole will be better. It could be a poison thing. Like you use a slow-moving, smaller, that last for 2 seconds and poison the person if it hits for maybe 3 ticks
I think is interesting, but may do something different than direct damage. maybe counters for something else, like a small stun, so it become a combo tool at some point
I honestly wondered why it costed a meter in the first place.
I am no game designer, but if the move had to stay, I would just make it last 1-2 seconds and costing no meter.
More of a "oh shit it wasn't safe to jump in" tool rather than a stall strategy enabler.
But I am just 1 person with this opinion, and I really like the bravery of removing a move.
I knew this move was weird , like not bad but i think its a good idea to repove it , nice job atilt
I have no idea why this was in my recommended, but I'm happy it was!
What engine/framework was used to make this game? Purely based on what I could find on the website, it doesn't seem to be any game engine I recognize
Engine is called 2DFM, its pretty old but has a long list of old freeware fighters made for it.
I think that instead of dealing chip damage the cloud should kill either player instantly after 1 second
balance enjoyers hate him
Why not just make it last 3 seconds, instead of outright removing it, and then see what the playerbase thinks of it?
@@nomnom2407 this was basically the original version before it got tweaked
The consensus was "the worst move in the entire game by a wide margin, except in fringe situations where it won the game with zero counterplay"
There was no winning with this move.
Sunk cost fallacy is a bitch =p