Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#761
Vane Brain wrote:
laurhead wrote:well scp - 352 is one of my favorite scps. you would know when you encountered scp - 352 in the game because you would see her containment chamber and scp - 352's label on the outside of her containment chamber. she will be inside her containment chamber and if the player enters her containment chamber he will hear her humming and also see her sitting down. when the player gets too close to her she gets up and laughs like a witch and chases down the player. her role is to chase the player like some other scps in the game. she will stop chasing the player when he gets far enough away from her.
this is my idea of her role in the game.
"Containment area is to remain sealed at all times."
And it will be another "one time" SCP
So? the whole point of the game is to showcase and celebrate SCPs. Who cares how 'useful' or 'dangerous' they are so long as they are true to their story and are fun. Everyone has a favourite and they deserve the chance to see it.
Up and Down and All around.

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#764
KirbyMario12345 wrote:
laurhead wrote:Definitely my favorite. Hope they add scp - 352 even if it is one time.
An SCP won't be added if it's ultimately going to be useless. 'Cept 372, it was a replacement for an SCP that eventually got re-added.
You mean like the book and the ring and the teddy bear and the 3D glasses and the skull and the repeating corridor and the cowbell and the ducks and the virus and the music page and the ball of 'yarn' and the shadow lamps and the vending machine and the sarcophagus and the painting.... All so useful..totally not added just for people to enjoy the SCPs.

SCPs are added due to interest and popularity not usefulness.
Up and Down and All around.

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#765
Ravenxeo wrote:
KirbyMario12345 wrote:
laurhead wrote:Definitely my favorite. Hope they add scp - 352 even if it is one time.
An SCP won't be added if it's ultimately going to be useless. 'Cept 372, it was a replacement for an SCP that eventually got re-added.
You mean like the book and the ring and the teddy bear and the 3D glasses and the skull and the repeating corridor and the cowbell and the ducks and the virus and the music page and the ball of 'yarn' and the shadow lamps and the vending machine and the sarcophagus and the painting.... All so useful..totally not added just for people to enjoy the SCPs.

SCPs are added due to interest and popularity not usefulness.
Even if that is the thought process behind every new SCP added in each update, it's still bad game design. Most of the SCPs you listed just consist of:

A. Walk into room.
B. Witness some visual event.
C. Die or walk away.

They serve no purpose and therefore add nothing to gameplay. Diversity is out of the question when they all follow the same basic principle of "find X, witness Y, continue on your marry way". And no, adding an item in its containment chamber (012/372) doesn't justify an SCP's purpose in the game.

At this point the game should just be renamed to "Containment Breach Simulator 2016" because it's more interested in demonstrating SCPs rather than being a game.

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#766
CommanderMark wrote: Even if that is the thought process behind every new SCP added in each update, it's still bad game design. Most of the SCPs you listed just consist of:

A. Walk into room.
B. Witness some visual event.
C. Die or walk away.

They serve no purpose and therefore add nothing to gameplay. Diversity is out of the question when they all follow the same basic principle of "find X, witness Y, continue on your marry way". And no, adding an item in its containment chamber (012/372) doesn't justify an SCP's purpose in the game.

At this point the game should just be renamed to "Containment Breach Simulator 2016" because it's more interested in demonstrating SCPs rather than being a game.
Except the whole point of the game was the 'showcase interesting SCPs within the game during a crisis situation' which is exactly what it does. If you remove all the 'useless' ones we are left with all the 'chase and kill you' SCPs, the PC, medicine and the Mask which is hardly a good game either.

Not every SCP has to be this huge ground breaking, life changing event. Many indie games are experiences that become less enjoyable with every subsequent playthrough. and any Videogame deathtrap is avoided after it has been triggered once. I dont see why this game should be held to some sort higher standard.. Either way this isn't where we discuss such things.
Up and Down and All around.

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#767
Ravenxeo wrote:
CommanderMark wrote: Even if that is the thought process behind every new SCP added in each update, it's still bad game design. Most of the SCPs you listed just consist of:

A. Walk into room.
B. Witness some visual event.
C. Die or walk away.

They serve no purpose and therefore add nothing to gameplay. Diversity is out of the question when they all follow the same basic principle of "find X, witness Y, continue on your marry way". And no, adding an item in its containment chamber (012/372) doesn't justify an SCP's purpose in the game.

At this point the game should just be renamed to "Containment Breach Simulator 2016" because it's more interested in demonstrating SCPs rather than being a game.
Except the whole point of the game was the 'showcase interesting SCPs within the game during a crisis situation' which is exactly what it does. If you remove all the 'useless' ones we are left with all the 'chase and kill you' SCPs, the PC, medicine and the Mask which is hardly a good game either.
Bringing up the opposite extreme doesn't debunk his point. By that logic, my opinion on the arctic being an uninhabitable frozen tundra would be invalid because volcanoes are also uninhabitable.
Not every SCP has to be this huge ground breaking, life changing event
Sure, a filler scp here and there wouldn't really be much of a bad thing if implemented correctly.However, to begin with, they really aren't implemented correctly. If the player decides to trigger them, the events that follow can basically be summed by "lol, u ded" and you wouldn't really be missing anything. I think I could see a comparison with these filler pieces and the bad endings of Mogeko Castle, seeing how they are both optional set-pieces that serve to kill the player off. The difference however is that Mogeko
Castle has well written sequences that really emphasize how fucked up (or sometimes humorous) the situation is. Meanwhile the implementation of the teddy bear in CB goes like this: ear rape, blurry screen, and some text going "OMG, EARS", followed by death. At best you have that one sequence where D-9341 really wants to finish a musical composition, to the point of using his own blood, but for every one of those sequences, you get 5 1074s. It's a very mundane way to bring these Foundation writings to life, and is really just a waste of time, and it would just be redundant to use more resources to add more of these set-pieces.
Many indie games are experiences that become less enjoyable with every subsequent playthrough
True, but when the game uses a procedural map generation that limits good level design, pacing, and only provides a 20 minute experience that does not include all of the games content, not to mention the existence of multiple endings, I think re-playability becomes a rather fair criticism. (Also I like how you attach the word indie on that statement for no reason at all since getting bored of the same shit happening over and over again [or as some people call it "the brain releasing less and less dopamine and positive chemicals in reaction to receiving the same information repeatedly" but who is pretentious enough to say that?] is a thing that applies to AAA titles too. So in other words, stop getting your vinyl albums in my doritos, scrub.)
and any Videogame deathtrap is avoided after it has been triggered once.
Sure, but when more than half of the threats of the game are these deathtraps that follow the formula of touching the obviously dangerous sealed object and getting hit by the blurry screen train, there's a bit of a problem.
I dont see why this game should be held to some sort higher standard.
Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize caring about quality is a bad thing. I suppose I'll just take what I can get and give loads of praise of affection instead of playing something like Silent Hill 2, or Resident Evil 4... or watching Jojo's Bizarre Adventure, it's not horror but it's still a dank meme. I suppose you make a point though, why hold this game up to any standards when we can be like the rest of the world and forget it exists. Sure, it was a neat little experiment while it lasted, but despite 4 years, Regalis never figured out how to build upon it. He's moved on to Barotrauma now, and hopefully he's gained the experience from this to make a nice, stable game, even if it doesn't get as much attention as CB's short lifetime. Even with the game technically being out of beta, even with development being hijacked by new people, the legacy Containment Breach will always leave behind is "That one buggy game Makiplier and Pewdiepie played". I suppose I'm rambling, but the point I supoose I want to make is, if it's not worth attaching to any sort of standard, why is it worth my time?
Either way this isn't where we discuss such things.
This is a discussion on why it's stupid to suggest certain type of scps on a forum thread for discussion on suggestions. This isn't some derailment, this isn't some petty drama, this is discussing the subject on hand, there isn't a better place to do this but here.

So in conclusion, the flight plan I just filed with the Agency lists me, my men, and Dr. Lotims here. But only one of you. First one to talk gets to stay on my aircraft! So... who paid you grab Dr. Lotims. He didn't fly so good! Who wants to try next? Tell me about PXLSHN, why does he develop for CB? Lot of loyalty for a hired gun! Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a man before throwing him out of a forum post. At least you can talk. Who are you? It doesn't matter who we are. What matters is our plan. No one cared who I was til I started developing for containment breach. If I criticize that will you die? It will be extremely painful. You're a big coder. For you. Was getting criticized part of your plan? Of course. Lotims refused our offer in favor of Regalis'. We had to find out what he told him. Nothing, I said nothing! Well congratulations, you got yourself criticized. Now what's the next step in your master plan? Crashing SCP: Containment Breach... with no survivors.

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#768
Um....kay.

And for your info, I referred to indie games being experiences to be enjoyed once because i recently played both Limbo and Inside both are amazing journeys but i can see them being reduced almost to nothing if played a second time. But yes, any game can be of diminished quality the second time without some sort of incentive or new experience put into it.

You seem to be forgetting that most of the SCPs dont lend themselves to 'interesting sequence deaths'.. and i didn't say 'hold it to no standard at all' i meant 'dont hold it to the standard that would require removal of SCPs for no reason other than you dont personally like them'.

Like i said earlier, everyone has a favourite and they deserve a chance to exist under any implementation.
Up and Down and All around.

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#769
Awesomeguy147 wrote: So in conclusion, the flight plan I just filed with the Agency lists me, my men, and Dr. Lotims here. But only one of you. First one to talk gets to stay on my aircraft! So... who paid you grab Dr. Lotims. He didn't fly so good! Who wants to try next? Tell me about PXLSHN, why does he develop for CB? Lot of loyalty for a hired gun! Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a man before throwing him out of a forum post. At least you can talk. Who are you? It doesn't matter who we are. What matters is our plan. No one cared who I was til I started developing for containment breach. If I criticize that will you die? It will be extremely painful. You're a big coder. For you. Was getting criticized part of your plan? Of course. Lotims refused our offer in favor of Regalis'. We had to find out what he told him. Nothing, I said nothing! Well congratulations, you got yourself criticized. Now what's the next step in your master plan? Crashing SCP: Containment Breach... with no survivors.
Well, to answer why I'm developing for SCP:CB: Because it is fun for me. It's my hobby to program and with developing SCP:CB, I got the opportunity to be a part of the game. With version 1.3, we try our best to get the game as stable as possible (we also now have a tester for bugs and stuff and he's making a really great job at bughunting).
I have to say that after SCP:CB and after the NTF mod, I want to make my own game (mostly with an engine that uses the programmign language C++) and with Blitz3D I'm not using my whole potential of programming (mostly because it's an easy-to-use programming language).
BTW: I already became interested in SCP:CB since version 0.6.5. The game was just very cool for me and I enjoyed playing it, until I also realized it was programmed with Blitz3D. At the same time, I also already learned a bit Blitz3D (I actually started learning this programnming language since I was 12 and I always wanted to program something using Blitz3D, like making the NTF mod and SCP:CB).
I know that I'm not looking as the best coder here (mostly because of the NTF mod 0.1.0/0.1.1). Well, I should had taken more time into the NTF mod (we pretty much rushed it to release it, that's why this version is pretty bad), but we don't want to do this same mistake for SCP:CB 1.3 and for further versions of this game (this also includes the NTF mod and version 0.2.0 of it).
And I accept criticism and I'm not gonna die because of it.
Image

Re: The New Suggestions Thread

#770
Ravenxeo wrote:You seem to be forgetting that most of the SCPs dont lend themselves to 'interesting sequence deaths'.
Well in that case it really doesn't lend itself to anything other than the fact that it's an SCP, which at that point is pretty much arguing that "It's fan-fiction, therefore it's good." which is rather fallacious logic, especially when it's a thought process usually used to imply the opposite.
and i didn't say 'hold it to no standard at all' i meant 'dont hold it to the standard that would require removal of SCPs for no reason other than you dont personally like them'.
That doesn't really change my point. The standards for the SCPs are still so low that the player really have no reason to deal with them, and would probably spend their time doing anything else. The argument here isn't even necessarily to delete these SCPs entirely (although, I can't speak for everyone), but rather that their current implementation is poor and we don't need more following the same formula. Both of these problems are feasibly fixable with a little bit of clever design, although some of the SCPs just don't mesh with the design of the game, or are just beyond the capabilities of a small team without much experience on an outdated engine (I'm pretty sure there is a leviathan SCP that would be beyond hope of being implemented into the game). The reason we have standards is so neither consumer nor creator waste their time and resources on something when said time and resources could have been used on better things. Just attempting to create things indiscriminately with no thought on how to do so correctly will eventually lead to nothing more than regret.
Like i said earlier, everyone has a favourite and they deserve a chance to exist under any implementation.
People also like Sonic as one of their favorite video game franchises, but there is a reason why a good amount of the fans are unhappy with the modern games, alot of what they try to do with these games barely even function in most of them (even if said ideas were implemented well in the past). So no, giving a fan a turd that somewhat resembles something they like isn't the same as giving them what they want, it's just giving them a turd, and I'm pretty sure in most cultures that's considered rude.
Well, to answer why I'm developing...
Ok, that's cool, I can respect that, it was late and I needed some names and words to use in a shitty Bane-posting joke, that's all. It's ok that you addressed it anyway.

So in conclusion...