Heart of the OHR Contest 2014

In my eyes, backtracking is only as good or bad a thing as how well it's pulled off. I don't think anyone will argue that Super Metroid is a bad game because of its backtracking, in fact the way it handles backtracking only enhances the sense of deeply exploring an alien planet. Also there is a definite sense of gratification when you get a new ability/power/item/weapon/whatever and gears turn in your head and you think "oh yeah, there was THAT THING, I should try going back to THAT THING now!" and you do it, and it works. That's game design par excellence. Finding every single missile and energy tank (and even one or two powerups IIRC) is totally unnecessary for completing the game, but the content is there in the level design, for players who adore exploration and depth to get into.

On the other hand, backtracking can be awful (I'm blanking on a good example of bad backtracking off the top of my head). It can completely derail the flow of gameplay and make the player so bored they'd rather be doing anything but backtrack. This is mostly a symptom of lazy design and poor playtesting. If I make mistakes and there are situations in my game where backtracking drags down gameplay, I'll try to rectify it and if that doesn't work out I'll just cut it out of the game.

I mostly wanted to emphasize that I hate this sort of thing with a passion and I won't put it in my game. If the player wants to backtrack, they can backtrack to their heart's content.

If there's anyone out there who's procrastinated and wants to bang out a last-minute entry, I have an idea swimming around in my head. Drop me a line.

---

Mega Tact v1.1
Super Penguin Chef
Wizard Blocks

I posted a picture in the wrong thread.

Whoops.

Anyways. YAY Hot OHR 3: The Lan Party Before Time.

Wow, I have to disagree. I thought that t4r4d1ddl3 is exactly the type of game this contest was meant to bring about: one that uses the engine the way it was designed to be used. I would say that t4r4d1ddl3 definitely does that, as you don't have to use every feature of the engine (in this case, battles). As far as I can tell, there's zero scripting. This game is in many ways a quintessential OHRRPGCE game, one that could have been made in 1998, minus BAM music. I think that requiring that people tell their stories in a particular way (i.e. as a JRPG with battles, while disallowing exploration games where you only talk to NPCs and collect items) would definitely be unnecessarily restrictive.

Now, I went back and read the rules and saw that "must be an RPG" was specified more strongly and narrowly than I remembered, but my personal interpretation (memory) of the rule was as I gave above: make a "normal OHR game", don't make a non-interactive "movie" or sidescroller or rhythm game or scrabble. So I'm petitioning for a rule change in 2016.


If you have a choice right at beginning, is there any intention of it being replayable? Or is it just to allow the player to play the game the way (e.g. combat style) they want to? If so, I wonder how you can make the choice clear to the player rather than "arbitrary personalisation".


The example James gave is that very typically in RPGs if there's a fork in a dungeon and it turns out that you took the right way, then on reaching the end you may feel compelled to slog back through the random battles to get the reward you know was there for going the wrong way.

How strange, I made a thread about that exact same thing just 2-3 months ago. Or rather it was a general thread about "list game design flaws you despise" and that was what I opened with.

Yeah, rest assured there won't be anything like that in my game.

That would be because that was the thread I was referring to.

That's an excellent point about taking the OHR to its grassroots level. That does call me to question the necessity of including battles, even though character-building is still a necessary part of what makes an RPG and RPG. Thanks for making it. I do have more to say about the topic following your next quote:



Yes, the key here is don't make a movie, side-scroller, or rhythm game, or, and I hope this wouldn't happen anyway, Scrabble. But I worry that t4r4d1ddl3 fits entirely under the banner of adventure without RPG elements (I have a hard time seeing a scavenger hunt as qualifying). Given the nature of the argument and the mechanics of the game, I wouldn't see how this would qualify and a game like Ramble Planet, another adventure with intelligent puzzles, wouldn't. If I included t4r4d1ddl3, I'd want to also include Ramble Planet, and then I'd start to wonder how many games I've unfairly denied entry in the past (Saminaster and Sorcery, Bagne's game that was supposed to use the BoulderBeast, comes to mind) thanks to being just an adventure.

Once again this begs the question, what does the community think? Should t4r4d1ddl3 be included in the Heart of the OHR? Should the rules allow for any quest game regardless of whether it contains battles? Keep in mind that the rules don't prohibit games that have no battles; they prohibit games that aren't RPGs. Is it fair to lump a straight-up adventure game in with the likes of a traditional RPG?

Based on recent discussions, I'm heavily considering making changes about how the Heart of the OHR works in the future. This can include what constitutes a valid entry.

What do you think, guys? Should t4r4d1ddl3 be included in this year's vote? Tell me why. Keep in mind that whatever your reason, for or against, will help me to decide how the next Heart of the OHR will work.

Also, based on recent discussions, I'm gonna make an executive decision to amend parts of the current rules.

1. Because the idea of splitting games into categories was never a good idea (I'd done it in 2012 in response to issues that arose in 2010), I'd already chosen to merge the categories for 2014. However, in 2014, OHR Legends remained out of the prize pool, even though it could receive a vote. I've since been convinced that this is a bad idea. So, effective immediately, all games, regardless of category, can receive the same prizes. The difference is that OHR Legends ALSO get a prestigious title attached to them.

2. I really don't know why I thought it was a good idea to include bonuses this year. Unless anyone objects (speak now), I'm gonna remove them from the contest. Just make your games and let people vote how they feel about them. I'm pretty sure I had liked the idea of injecting parts of the old Epic Marathon contest into this one, but it was subjective and complicated then, and I'm sure it's subjective and complicated now. Even though it would be nice to see those elements outlined in the bonuses in play, they shouldn't be necessary to make your game interesting. I doubt anyone was actually going for the bonuses anyway.

If anyone disagrees with any part of this post or has anything else to say in response, please speak up.

---

Place Obligatory Signature Here

I have to agree about t4r4d1ddl3. I downloaded that game because the artstyle looked cool, and then I played it and was absolutely and entirely confused, and I loved it. I loved every minute of it even though I could find no purpose to it whatsoever. If there is something to it that I missed, like some sort of message, then I really need to go back and find it, because that game was amazing.

EDIT: Also, about the no sidescrollers thing, does that mean Stand is ineligible for the contest? It doesn't have any platforming and it's a definite RPG, but it is a sidescroller.

---

My pronouns are they/them
Ps. I love my wife

Here's what I think about t4r4d1ddl3, and ramble planet too. The developers have shown no interest in entering the contest so I feel like both cases are moot. Now I'm sure we could debate what makes an rpg an rpg in extreme detail. For example, is the new game Destiny an rpg? Is Zelda an RPG? Is Pokemon an rpg? These are of course rhetorical questions.
What I'm trying to say is that the definition of RPG is a bit loose. So some sort of rules need to be set. I think at the very least, if a game is at all in question of being an rpg, then a game's developer needs to indicate that the game is an rpg in some way. If then a game is claimed to be an rpg and people disagree with that claim, then we could deal with these games on a game to game bases.

I agree with the fact that RPGs are probably the genre with the most grey areas, but I also think that is what made them, in my eyes, the best gaming genre around! To put it in perspective, Gary Gygax (if you are on a RPG forum, and you don't know who Gary Gygax is, I suggest you reconsider some life decisions) had this to say about role playing games:

"The essence of a role-playing game is that it is a group, cooperative experience. There is no winning or losing, but rather the value is in the experience of imagining yourself as a character in whatever genre you’re involved in, whether it’s a fantasy game, the Wild West, secret agents or whatever else. You get to sort of vicariously experience those things."

Now, I interpret that two ways. The first way I see it, nearly every game on this site is an RPG (excepting the Giz's text editors). Since the point of them is to imagine yourself in those places, living out those events, being those people. The second way I see it, NONE of these games are RPGs. Look at this part: "The essence of a role-playing game is that it is a group, cooperative experience"

How many of these games focus on having a group, cooperative experience? I haven't found even one. But, then again, how many great RPGs of the past haven't had a multiplayer function? Final Fantasy? Dragon Quest? Ultima?

So, this is what I propose:

Any game that is not SPECIFICALLY labeled as NOT an RPG qualifies for the HotOHR.

---

Sent from my iPhone

I think Pepsi Ranger's intent in this contest is fairly clear. The hero in an RPG most typically advances in power throughout the game. This could be through acquiring items (i.e. Zelda or Metroid) or statistical growth (i.e. Final Fantasy).

The real question is: What if Bloodlust was submitted? Don't your stats decrease as you fight battles? The mind boggles.

@TacoBot:
Gary Gygax was talking about table top RPG's. In video game culture however the RPG genre is generally meant to refer to games that resemble Final Fantasy or Dragon Quest. Saying that anything could be considered an RPG is, quite frankly, wrong. You play a "role" ins lots of games but that doesn't make it an rpg anymore than a game having adventure in it makes it an adventure game or a game having puzzles makes it a puzzle game.

Although the definition for the RPG genre is vague it's not completely without boundaries.

@Spoonweaver

That is absolutely true, but I still think HotOHR needs to have some laxer rules.

---

Sent from my iPhone

Gah, I've just spent two full weeks in a row procrastinating instead of working on my game.

I really want to make this thing, but I don't want to force myself into working on it when I'm not into the spirit of the thing; that's killed projects of mine for me before, both ones more simple and ones more ambitious than this one.

One thing I'm still not certain of is what website I'll be putting this game on. This game has more nudity and inappropriate humor than No Eat did, and thus likely more than the rest of my game library thus far combined..

---

Remeber: God made you special and he loves you very much. Bye!

Eat me. If you don't want to pretend to be Ernest Hemingway, The Bard, or Charles Dickens working on their greatest stories then I don't want to pretend to know you.