Lost in Random (Zero Punctuation) 

Morning Nick

Speaking of experimenting, what do you take before doing a review 🤣

A new recruit in the vitally important Guild of Referees, who has to hunt down a rogue striker as their first assignment, but discovers a nefarious match-fixing conspiracy and has to save the entire world from being kicked into oblivion!

Have it be the American and the random fights/encounters happen because they keep accidentally calling it 'soccer' in conversation.

Sounds a lot like the show Ted Lasso

I could imagine it as a sort of puzzle game where you have to line everyone up correctly so one person kicks the objects to the next and so on until it gets to the goal.

Reminds me of the story "17776" where everyone on earth suddenly became immortal, and now thousands of years later they all constantly play ridiculously elaborate variations of American football because it distracts them from the crushing ennui of immortality.

It's really fun to cover the 'i' in the title

....why isn't there a Tales Of Arse?

@@EvilPikachu because that would be an *entirely* different type of game.

@@EvilPikachu Because Nier:Automata already exists

@@Delightfully_Bitchy copyright killed that, sadly

Yeah I mean, the one single time a Broody Anime Sword Boy MANAGES to snog the Hottie...

Though there's no shortage of other broody anime boys that fail to snow their own hotties in that game. The others just don't have swords.

🤢🤮

Yeah, but this world of "No Game No Life" could just as easily have been designed by someone like David Lynch...

Pretty sure that's just Yu-Gi-Oh 5D's and the Synchro Universe in Arc-V, with an emphasis of the Hunger Games and No Game No Life elements in the Arc-V version.

I'm beating my fanfic at the thought

Well, since this game also has elements of combat, i'd wager to say the most effective way to build the game is to not make it like a traditional training card game. You should use the variety of foes and their different capabilities, passive effects and tactics to get the player to use a variety of options to engage them. Since the system is structured around real time action combat with dodge rolls and what not, make the card system simple, but give the cards a variety of effects that change your capabilities in battle. Combos would be too tedious, and there would likely be "that one combo" that would just work on 99% of your opponents. Sounds like the game has a serious case of DPS race and the only good options are the ones that deal the most damage. This is likely because enemies don't make that approach ineffective. You could have all of these wacky combos, but who would bother with them if they don't do anything useful, which in all likelihood they won't. So no, I disagree that you want combos. What the game really needs is a more thought out balance of conflict between player and foe, using your cards as resources to solve various problems your enemies put in front of you. That's far more important to the health of good gameplay.

Depends on how you play: you can just go hard on the big old twatting stick (that sounded dirtier than intended) or you could experiment with different combinations of hazards, buffs, and weapons . This is especially useful in later chapters where you're likely to run into bigger groups of mixed enemies instead two or three of the same type. It's not super customizable, but you're still likely to hit on a favorite combo or two based on how you like to play.

@@asthmeresivolisk3129 Well said. Maybe you need a skill that breaks an enemy's armor before you can deal them physical damage - or maybe they don't take much fire damage unless you've already doused them in oil. Maybe opponents will move you around, or block certain types of attacks, or just be more aggressive. Maybe enemy attacks are harder to dodge, but you can stun them to get some breathing room. Maybe some enemies poison you, and you have to forego a generic attack in order to get rid of that DoT. There's a lot of options here.

id argue interesting synergies is essential for most combat systems. even something considered traditionally simplistic like cod, has stuff like flashbangs, that apir nicely with automatic weapons.

@Benjamin Lambert I'll address your comments to help give more insight to the design process, and how thinking ahead can help you avoid pitfalls in design. Just know i'm expounding on things you suggested for educational purposes and i'm not criticizing or belittling your input as I found much of it very valid. [Requiring a specific ability to get through armor] This we can broadly define as gate skill. Essentially it's a skill design to counter a very specific condition without utility beyond that. This is a pitfall in design as, instead of improving complexity, it just adds asm extra step to the process and makes combat more tedious. Once you break the armor you'll just fall back on the "meta-tactic", here by referring to any attack/ability/combo that can be used efficiently in the majority of situations. There are two ways to improve this concept. The first and laziest is to tack on additional elements to the armor breaking move so it's not a one trick and has a greater breadth of utility. If done well it is a multitool that's fun to use. If done poorly it's less effective than the meta-tactic and still essentially a one trick. Your other option is to expand interaction with the armor mechanic. Maybe, instead of an armor breaking move you need to employ a mixture of tools tactically to handle it. For some foes they're only armored in the back so you use a move that freezes foes in place or a move that teleports you behind a targeted foe to make hitting their weak point easier. Or for hoards of weak but armored foes you use your other idea of drenching them in oil and then blasting them with a wave of fire. This would better encourage greater utility of your toolbelt and its the preferred option. It's also harder to implement because it requires a lot of thought, consideration and testing to get right. [Enemies moving around] enemies should be relatively mobile in any action game, but this mobility can be used to deter stale tactics and can be used as a tool for the enemies. When it comes to tactics you can have powerful moves that require you to line up shots to hit multiple targets or have spread area moves that require appropriate timing and positioning to get the most out of. For enemies, ranged attackers can keep distance and stay behind beefy melee units to give themselves defense. Super squishy targets can move quickly and be hard to "catch". Enemies could leave a trail that when stepped on damages the player. You can have foes that rush the player and push them around, or crawl on the ground/float in the air making certain moves wiff so you can't disarm the same thing over and over. Movement has a lot of design space for utility [Poison that requires cure] This is generally a pit fall, you don't every want to waste space in design for niche circumstances. And players don't want to waste time and "deck space" countering a very specific ailment that pops up from time to time. So, unless your game is structured heavily around such an interaction I wouldn't create a random resource tax like that. Lastly [Blocking certain moves] for similar reasons to the poison, you don't want to do this either. Having options suddenly become completely invalidated for seemingly no reason is not fun. But you can punish players for using moves at the wrong time or in the wrong context. Like shooting fire at an enemy carrying a bomb in an enclosed space, well you can probably see where that's going, but it makes sense and the player won't feel like it's unfair. Or trying to attack an enemy winding up for a powerful strike, probably not a smart idea. That's all I got for now. But I hope that adds something of substance to the discussion.

Though it is just a personal guess of mine, perhaps Yatzhee dislikes recycling formulas, which leads him to be more critical of titles that brings more of the same.

@@wisesquirrel4986 Well if game X is like game Y, but worse in several ways, why not play game Y instead? Meanwhile, if game Z is completely unlike any other game, but has some flaws, you don't really have an alternative if you want to experience the type of game that game Z is. There is also the chance that if game Z attracts interest, then someone will use the good ideas from it and make a much better game in the future. Plus a lot of indie titles that take risks are a fraction of the cost of safe AAA games, so the cost of trying out a novel experience isn't as high.

Also the story wasn't completely braindead, unlike most games. Yahtzee reall likes games (as in becomes a bit more forgiving) in which they put effort into the stories from my experience.

@@Nerdnumberone Well said, king. 👑

A genuine effort was made by the game, and he respects that, at least.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that immediately thought "Oh so it's Dicey Dungeons-like"

*wheezes in Milllenial*

Haha, along with "League of Literally all the Legends" and "Call of Duty: Mood 'n Warfare" and maybe "Fortnite amiright?"

*this is top tier comedy right here*

"Warriors of meh" Doraleous and associates flashback

Don't need to italicize and quotation.

Glad i wasnt the only one that looked at this game and said "didn't kingdom hearts do that for one game and everyone hated it?"

@@10puppyluv well to be fair CoM wasn’t bad but it’s like if the next major Devil May Cry was just a fleshed out version of the board game from DMC4. Potentially interesting but why do we need to play it to understand the story in DMC6?

@@10puppyluv I wouldn't say everyone hated it. A lot of people really liked it. Everyone else did hate it though. It was the kind of weird bullshit system that's either a really engaging change of pace from what you're used to, or its a frustrating mess getting in the way of you figuring out how Sora went from running through a field with Donald and Goofy at the end of KH1 to half-dead in a big pod at the start of 2.

Yeah, this sounds like one of those "Wait for the sequel where the devs have ironed out the gameplay and taken out the more annoying stuff" situations. Good idea, needs more time to develop.

It sounds like Kingdom Hearts Chain of Memories. When trying to put cards as the restrictive element of your actions you need enemy design to be more engaging. Both these games just boil down to, choose the most efficient option for dealing damage, which isn't particularly fun after the 10th fight on. Put in enemy design that justifies the use of other mechanics than raw DPS and you've got yourself something more palatable. Sadly I have yet to see this done effectively.

I liked it too! Shame there's no wiki so far.

Those games were rather held back by a lack of... development time and funding, I imagine, probably due to publishers not wanting to sink too much into a somewhat niche-y title that isn't part of some enormous, established-fanbase-type franchise. That said, I quite liked how Madness Returns would just give you a triple or quadruple jump and plenty of checkpoints so you could focus on exploring the kooky, fantastical, often beautiful environments... and the bit where the executioner card guy chases you down hallways but then you have some cake, turn giant, step on him and go on a rampage... pure brilliance. Dark and macabre, to be sure, but some people like it that way, and I find myself not minding it much, taken as a whole with all the gorgeous locations and weird dialogue and whatnot. I hope the third game happens some day, and that it gets more of a chance than the first two, but I kind of doubt it to be honest... more likely it'll be another wonky mess with potentially redeeming features, if it happens at all.

@@hazukichanx408 it's gonna happen, McGee is going to make a 3rd game called Alice Asylum set after the events of Madness Returns, you should check his youtube page.

@@madhatter6790 Truly? Well, I won't stake my sanity on it, but if he and his team do manage to finish the third game, I will likely get it at some point and probably enjoy the scenery a lot, if nothing else. Something to look forward to, in a back burner of my mind sort of way. Here's hoping! =)

I saw the town names and the Onett theme immediately started playing in my head

Yahtzee doesn't do requests mate sadly.

Just play D&D and snog dice in real life

@@ibrahimoshodi4472 As your advice got me kicked out of several D&D groups, I'm afraid I must give said advice the lowest possible score... 8/10. Sorry.

@@hazukichanx408 If you're getting kicked out of D&D groups for snogging dice, it's because you're not confident in the action of snogging dice. If the sight of you making sweet mouth love to your d4 doesn't inspire awe, adoration and a bit of envy, you have only tour poor technique to blame. Unfortunately, I must only guess your technique is anywhere between a 4-6/10. But don't worry, you'll get better in time. Keep snogging dice, disregard all other stimuli

@@ibrahimoshodi4472 instructions unclear; got snogged by dice in D&D.

@@sluttyMapleSyrup At least you only got snogged. I somehow got dice stuck up my butt....and they weren't even mine.

Yeah but does he actually knob her or is it one of the joyless/sexless affairs where she finds another man while staying married because he's too wrapped up in himself (like the Goku/Chi-chi/Piccolo triangle in DragonBall Z)

@@Sigilstone17 they seemed pretty happy, and the story basically indicates that they're soulmates

@@Sigilstone17 Goku had several kids, what are you talking about?

That game was strictly turn-based though.

Got it on sale and def worth for the sale price

@@briandalion366 enjoy the game mate

Holy shit, I literally picked up my copy of Phantom Tollbooth today and started reading it to my young son, I was wishing there was a way to kind of, bring it back to newer readers. There's no copies in any of our local libraries so I figured it was pretty much forgotten.

I was just about to comment that, lol. A dice is just as wrong as two sheeps.

I've seen a bunch of screenshots but haven't heard anything on the gameplay. Wondering if I should pick it up or not.