I don't really think this part is centrally relevant to the discussion
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Seven Deadly Sins
Also, I think you underestimate the negative effect of a misclick on high level play- very rarely does a misclick not have an extreme adverse effect on the player. The fact that a misclick with any implementation of Sleep Clause leads to instant forfeiture rather than a slow death due to losing an important Pokemon is pretty much just a technicality.
|
That "high level play" qualification is what worries me... I feel it necessary to point out that Pokemon is played at multiple levels, and I don't feel like being newbie-unfriendly is particularly desirable.
The reason Chess is more timeless than Monopoly, the reason StarCraft is more timeless than Total Annihilation (or their spiritual successors, StarCraft 2 and Supreme Commander respectively) is because of their newbie-friendliness, by way of their lack of hidden "gotchas" like Sleep Clause #4 would be.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Seven Deadly Sins
On top of that the potential for misclicks that instantly end the game does exist on the cartridge
|
The only part of my post that contained the word 'misclick' was the sentence "I'm not referring to misclicks".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Seven Deadly Sins
Finally, if the fear is that great, you can implement a "are you sure" where the person has to confirm their move if it has the potential to break Sleep Clause.
|
If it comes to that, I will definitely implement such a change.
But I feel like requiring such an invasive UI change is a massive warning sign that we're doing it the wrong way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fat Seven Deadly Sins
By explicitly defining it as a rule rather than a "win/lose condition" and noting that any real adverse side effects that may exist (potential for misclicks, need for risk-based prediction) are already inherent in the game and punished significantly regardless of the implementation of Sleep Clause, the "disadvantages" of option #4 are practically nonexistant.
|
This is semantics.
The point is that it's not you deciding whether or not you break the "rule", it's the RNG. I feel that at that point, it shouldn't be called a "rule" and should be called a game mechanic, but even if you think it should be called a rule, the fact remains:
It's not you deciding whether or not you break the "rule", it's the RNG.