Re: Dimini****ng Returns in Game Engineering

"Nathan Mates" <nathan@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message 
news:fsSdnTAJaMKcNc3VnZ2dnUVZ_vSdnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> In article <CYqdnbyEZ8ypPc3VnZ2dnUVZ_j6dnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,

>   Here's the problem: you seem to think you've made some profound
> insight. The rest of us are saying "if you get in the same timezone as
> a point, make it." To me, your posts need a lot more thought before
> they'll have any useful content.

This study shows the effect of using more stats. We can see how quickly
the 
product drops away from max, as the number of stats increases. If the stat

average takes even a tiny step to the left, the product plummets.
Also, as the number of stats increases, the product hangs around the
bottom 
until the very end. The situation devolves into a set of boolean 
maxed/not-maxed prerequisites, making the individual stat ranges rather 
pointless.

So if many variables are desired, then it's probably best to just model
them 
as a set of boolean prerequisites. This eliminates the false sense of a 
range of values, for both the designer and the player.

I would describe the previous paragraph as containing both a point, and 
useful content, the two metrics you proposed. However, since you didn't
pick 
up on it the first time through, I must ask you: (1) Why not? and (2) 
Anything you can think of that would have gotten you to see it better the 
first time?