>>I'm too busy staying alive.
>That's exactly the thing I've been aiming for.
Then it's not been achieved. And the reason for that is there is too much else going on that is not consistent with what the player 'thinks' she has to achieve.
This is the mistake all high value mission makers such as yourself encounter. You give the player a sense of failing when she succeeds!!!
objective complete.
well, umm no, >>I<< didn't
go look at the fireworks
umm, I can't
1 down 2 down 3 down mission complete
but i didn't save my squad? I didn't know where to go.
loons everywhere, mission complete, splat splat zing
but, umm. >>>>I<<<< haven't finished yet.
In otherwords, she survived, she succeeded, she stayed alive. And failed.
I can see the half-construct, I love missions where it's smoke and bangs and nastiness around every corner. I love chaos and deep deep doodoo.
The mistake you are making is trying to tone it down!!! Ie setting game pauses by clearing the village alerting player to a fresh counter attack, changing mood sequence by looking out for napalm as if these were 'objectives' to achieve. They aren't.
Suggestion: scrap all feedback, all of it, scrap ALL msg text, the lot. No radio traffic of any kind, no titletext, nada.
play the mission through, let the triggers happen that happen.
THEN put back some message traffic in QUIET moments.
when the player sees an F4 coming in, let her wonder, let her be amazed, you keep quiet.
>RTO
if you make a player leader with a half dead squad, you have to watch out for player sense of failure. Unless she can keep the remnants alive, there will be a feeling of despondency, a let down, for the player at the end.
I've got no issue with you Hawkins introducing experimental stuff in beta missions, seeing if the napalm looks good, is inherently 'good'. The issue is poor choreography, too much instruction, too much mission text, let the game play itself.
Topic: (Review Completed) [SP] Dak To ('Nam mission) (Read 11490 times)
