Score question

[MagickPoultry]

Okay, I have a question about the length of a game in terms of the score.  Say every action that increases you score only does so by 1 point, which is the way I do my games now.  What range of points do you all think makes a good length for a game?

[Eero R]

What matters is max score... Remember LSL2, where max score was 6000 points?

[Kon-Tiki]

It depends on the dificulty of the puzzles too. If it is for opening a couple of doors, I'd say over 1000. If it is for solving a problem by, let's say combining a couple of inventory items, combining the combinations, using the final combination on something on the screen and using a different object on the screen with this, I'd say 100 as an absolute maximum. In other words: it's relative.

-Kon-Tiki-

[Jelle]

I think that a score is a little more important then people think. I gives the player an idea of the importance of his actions... Say, if you do a lot of things and you always just get 1 point, but than you do something and you get 10 points. You will know that the thing you did is something very important and it may be helpful in your game...

I have my own rules about giving points, e.g. picking up stuff: 1 or 2 points. In the game I'm working on (still ) the player must complete three (it may be four when the game is finished) jobs. For each job you complete you get 15 points. That's a lot, so the player will know it's important.

The scoring also depends on the difficulty of the actions. I think in KQIII you get 10 points for each potion you make... Some things are not very obvious, so you must give many points for it...

So, I don't think you should really care about the max score. Just make your game, and see how much it is in the end.


Jelle (still alive )

[df]

score can often tell you how far you have come or have left in the game to go.

[MagickPoultry]

I use the score as a way for the player to gauge how far he is and to tell if he's done something right.  In my current game, there aren't really many actions that stand out in importance, so I like the 1-point method.  In Tex McPhilip 2, it might have been more appropriate to give more points for certain actions, but what's done is done.  

The only reason I care about the max score is that it indicates to me how much has to be done to beat the game.  I don't know why I overcomplicated the issue by bringing the score into it, but indulge me...

I've finished planning out the game, and I'm concerned that there aren't enough puzzles.  My max score is currently in the neighborhood of 73-78, 25-30 of which come from battles.  That means there are 48 points that come from the standard adventure game sources, such as solving puzzles and getting items.  Tex McPhilip 2, which I thought was a decent length but maybe a little short, had about 75, and I'd like this game to be longer.  I expect that battles can substitute for a certain amount of puzzles, but I don't think it should be a 1:1 ratio.

(I've just realized that this post is becoming less of a question and more of an exercise in thinking out loud, but I'll continue just in case anyone is interested.)

So, let's say I equate two battles to one puzzle.  25-30 becomes 13-15 "real points" putting me in the 61-63 range.  I'd like to be at 85 at the very least which calls for 25 more points consisting of puzzles and obtaining the objects needed to solve them.  That's a pretty tall order to fill, but I'm going to try.

And that, my friends, would place the nominal max score at 98-103.  Then, if I wanted to, I could artificially inflate that by giving more than 1 point for certain things.  

[Allen]

What about Freddy Pharkas, where you got half the points just for unlocking the door

[Pikachu14]

Congratulations. You are now halfway through the game.