The Dimentio and Anarchy Show

migokalle wrote:Here's an idea: don't validate this insane retardation by discussing these ideas as if they are legitimate concepts. If these people want to keep jacking off that superiority complex of theirs, why not let them? They're clearly enjoying it a whole lot.

This.

The debate completely lost touch with reality the moment it was said Type A never focuses on "gameplay" (which is such a loose term to begin with). Can we go back to shitposting pls? Thx.

You're a Type A shitposter.:angryfire:

You guys are way, way, way off course about type A and type B. Type A and type B are so much more than just difficulty and graphics - its a way of thinking, a culture, a way of defining your personality traits.

I shall repeat my definitions for those who missed them way back:

There are two distinct types of players who enjoy Zelda Classic. Type A players enjoys graphics, puzzles, a great story line, very low difficulty. The kinds of quests that have rated well with them include DarkFlameWolf's Lost Isle, Russ's Light of the Heavens, Nick and Link's Fairy Dream, Cole's Souls of Wisdom and MBWChampion's Hero of Dreams. The vast majority of Zelda Classic players are type A players simply because Nintendo's Zelda currently is type A - but type A is not always how Nintendo has written Zelda. Arguably, the original Zelda was written for a very different kind of player - type B players.

Type B players are the exact opposite of type A and they like very challenging quests with high difficulty and the rest of the quest including graphics, puzzles, storyline is a nice bonus but isn't very important. DarkFlameWolf affectionately calls us the "insanely gung-ho" players and has written numerous extreme quests intended to cater for our tastes. The kinds of quests that have rated well with them include OUCH!'s Armageddon Quest, my own Liberation of Hyrule, Nightmare's James quests, Phantom Menace's Demo quest, Jerome's the Hero Without a Name, Saffith's Eight Objects and Gleeok's mini-quests. Some even argue that Nintendo's first and second quests are type B due to dungeon 6 in the first quest, the difficult 2nd quest for newcomers, the lack of nice graphics and storyline. Type B players are the minority.

In type A quests, the quest maker is assumed to be writing the quest to entertain the audience. In type B quests, the quest maker is assumed to be writing the quest to entertain themselves first and the audience second. In type A quests, the quest maker is expected to let the player win. In type B quests, the player only wins if they are of equal or better ability than the quest maker. In type A quests, the quest maker is expected to adjust the level of difficulty to suit the majority of player's abilities. In type B quests, the quest maker is expected to adjust the level of difficulty to make the quest challenging to themselves. In type A quests, the quest is expected to have bug free and beautiful graphics - the slightest graphical bug is grounds for major criticism and low ratings. In type B quests, nice graphics are not very important and are only of trivial concern. In type A quests, if a few players think the quest is too hard, the quest maker will usually make it easier to suit them. In type B quests, the onus is on the player to improve their abilities if the quest is too hard for them.

People can give me shit about this all they want, but I say it is you who is ignorant of the truth and you who will have a lesser understanding of the playerbase and what they are really like due to the fact that you can't accept politically unpalatable concepts. Look at most of the other video games around you from the very first ones to the ones we have now and you can see this in all clarity. Some examples: Hearthstone, normal and heroic mode for boss challenges. StarCraft 2, every level has 4 modes of difficulty ranging from casual to brutal. Lemmings series always has levels ranging from easy to mayhem. Master of Orion 1/2/3 all have casual to impossible modes of play. The Last Stand: Dead Zone - challenge quest books for the challenge quest players. Candy Crush Saga - gotta love those occasional hexagon levels. And in all these games I can say that the difficulty buffs/nerfs are "true" in that they truly win acceptance by the audience they are intended to appease.

Gaming culture has accepted this split between type A and type B as inherent to the human species. Type B is the minority in all cases but one that is recognized to exist. The only successful way of dealing with this split is to have a team of very expert designers who are well paid by both camps to suit their respective interests. And since ZC isn't in the business of paying developers - it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being able to deal with this problem. See any quest on the database able to appease both camps yet?

James24 wrote: See any quest on the database able to appease both camps yet?

The impression most people seem to get about this "type a/b" is that if a game has good graphics and fair (fair as in "if you die it's your fault", not fair as in "official zelda easy"😉 difficulty and has polish, then it can't be a Type B quest and it must be a Type A quest. To me it just seems like """Type A""" is basically people who put in the effort of making something amazing, and stick with low difficulty to not scare people away. Why can't """Type B""" do the same, but just add difficulty? You seem to act like difficulty balancing takes the same amount of time and effort to do as good graphics and polished gameplay. Aren't you basically saying that Type A's are lazy then?

Also, if Type B's are a minority, aren't you basically saying "Well PureZC is made of two people: People who only care about high difficulty, and the rest"? I mean, obviously you're going to be able to split them into two groups if you do it that way. I can split PureZC into two groups: people who think AGN is a good website, and the rest. Or people who like MLP, and the rest. Or People who believe in Type A/B, and the rest. See the fallacy, yet? Why not just call yourselves "difficulty purists", and everyone else "non-difficulty purists"? You'd at least avoid confusion and people getting pissed at you over labels that way.

Most of your post sounds like an armchair critic rambling about a black/white and overly simplified/generalized version of a complex topic. I think it'd be easier to just own the fact that you don't want to listen to criticism because you're not interested in making a good game outside making it very hard and entertaining for serious masochists (which might be good to those people). There's a reason the majority dismiss this type a/type b nonsense, because it's such a silly and simple solution to a complex situation and it excludes all the grey. Not to mention the ulterior and personal motives behind them of basically dismissing criticism. And bringing this up in such a thread is only making it look more like a joke at this rate. :P

If you truly want to make a quest for yourself, you wouldn't be spending years talking about this made up stuff because you wouldn't actually care what others think about your stuff and how they misunderstand it. If you truly made a quest for yourself, you wouldn't of uploaded it to a community you know consists of "type a" players, players that you look down upon when they give the time of day to play your public quest. It's really silly. Here's a simpler solution, since you seem to like simplicity: Just own the fact you don't want to listen to criticism. Ignore it, actually ignore it. And you might end up creating a small safe corner for yourself in the ZC community and you wouldn't be so caught up speculating what sort of motive each negative reviewer has. The fact that you saw this shitpost of a petty feud that extends beyond some terrible "type b" quest and thought this had something to do with this "type a/type b" nonsense is truly a testament to how deep the rabbit hole the idea has taken you.

Now this is truly the cherry on top.

*walks into thread expecting countless flames, reads Type A/B discussion*

Orithan wrote:*walks into thread expecting countless flames, reads Type A/B discussion*

You have a micropenis and you smell bad.

James24 wrote:You guys are way, way, way off course about type A and type B.

[...]

Gaming culture has accepted this split between type A and type B as inherent to the human species. Type B is the minority in all cases but one that is recognized to exist. The only successful way of dealing with this split is to have a team of very expert designers who are well paid by both camps to suit their respective interests. And since ZC isn't in the business of paying developers -

I accept payments in the forms of souls, human sacrifice, and vats of blood. Type B or A, or AB.

it doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of being able to deal with this problem. See any quest on the database able to appease both camps yet?

In all fairness, I have. Try some of the newer stuff from Evan.

These days, I play or view plays of games most often for story, to relax, but I've beaten LoH, AQ, and some others. I can play some of the hardest NES titles, and I find games such as SMB2J childishly easy. I also beat some of the Kaizo Mario games.

I have no clue where, in this dichotic system that you have devised, that I would fall. I'll say that I can tell when difficulty is artificial or unfair, based on random factors or just silly mechanics. That doesn't stop me from trying, but I'm still a general sadist, not a massochist. I do this stuff for the satisfaction of the victory, not because I enjoy the pain.

...Also...designing a kaizo game around fixed mechanics of an engine is fine, but designing one on bug exploits--while also fine in theory--is potentially a terrible notion, as if those bugs are ever fixed, the game might break, and there's not a 'snowball's chance in hell' that I will care. Fair Warning to All: If you abuse a bug, or a glitch, that's on you mate. :/

I'm not generous-enough to spend hours of my finite lifetime slicing hacks into the ZC engine to facilitate abuse of engine bugs in quests.

This is why I have made it a point, not to document bugs that could be thus-abused, in any public venue.

This also, is why, if you don't test your quests in an update while it is in beta, and it breaks in release, I won't care until we're at the next major beta phase. :P

Nn.nn.patch versions are dead for non-critical shyte, at least untilwe have more staff.

P.S. What is the category for games such as 'Dark Castle'? It's difficult AF, but in a purely idiotic way (useless controls). Are those... Type O? 😃

P.P.S. Using the above James24 definitions, [MENTION=59578]NewJourneysFire[/MENTION], Akumajou Dracula/CV4 for the SFC/SNES is clearly 'Type A'. The X68K version is in dubious territory.

P.P.P.S I'm pretty sure that this entire Type A/B concept stems from 1st year Famicom/NES games that had a mode select:
1 Player Game A
2 Player Game A
1 Player Game B
2 Player Game B

Think back to 'Donkey Kong', 'Mario Bros', 'Excitebike', and so forth. Originally B-mode was harder, until 'Tetris' wrecked the entire system. Tro-lo-lo.

James24 wrote:Cole's Souls of Wisdom

This quest was criticized heavily for bad design. It's certainly not catering to any Type A gamers. Not those with any taste anyways. ;p

It was the biggest cheese I ever made. Sure, it was popular, it was very popular for a small bit of time, but it was never known for being good or being able to measure up to quests like Isle of Rebirth or many of Moosh's wonderful quests. I've been spending years improving my skills and I hope it shows in my newer projects.

Who does my newer projects cater to? Type A and Type B gamers. If you feel that's impossible, then believe what you will.

Regarding Evan's quests, you guys seem to be ignoring the rather long comments/ratings section in pure about it. The fact is that despite the numerous difficulty levels, there was quite a lot of criticism that its easy mode difficulty was artificial and simply halving the damage dealt is not an acceptable way of nerfing a quest. There was no "true" nerf where Evan changed the enemies and their attack patterns to make things truly easy. And when I see those criticisms how else can they be interpreted other than a type A rejection? Just ask Lunaria here who is eating popcorn and I'm sure she will be very happy to tell you all about it.

Now, Evan continued this pattern of nerfing into his later quests like Umbral Cloud and it seems like he will for his upcoming quest too (I haven't seen it). But if those earlier criticisms caused so much criticism and the mechanism was not fixed - then how can it possibly have got better? I know many of you would like to sweep the bad news under the carpet and herald it as proof that the dichotomy was solved and can be solved by a free community - but the evidence says otherwise. And even if I were to somehow accept this miraculous case that did appease both camps, then its a pure fluke a one off that took 15 years of ZC existence to produce. It'll probably take another 15 years before another miracle. And in the meantime, we're going to have lots of these lovely bitching sessions about type A and type B Zelda of which Zelda 3 was the latest catalyst.

Shane, you're pretty much right - I don't care about anyone else's enjoyment apart from my own when it comes to spending my precious time making quests. Its nice if other people like it, play it and rate it well but if not then I'm prepared to go it alone. The thing is that I'm ballsy enough to say such a thing whereas most other quest makers will pretend - "oh yes I care about the community and I love their feedback" - but deep down they will do the same thing as I do. They lie to keep everyone happy but their actions speak louder than words. When it comes to the actual quest - surprise, surprise - they only ever look after their own enjoyment and don't give a rats ass about what anyone else wants. And if they do, then it'll be some cheap nerf like Evan's IoR. Actions talk - bullshit walks. Take a look at your own Rite of Storm Shane - did you give a crap about type B when you designed it? Nope - and as long as you do like that then type B will continue to do likewise.

Zoria - how is anyone supposed to know whether something is a bug or not in Zelda Classic especially if something is an edge case? That is why I will forever play AQ in 1.92 Beta, The Hero Without A Name in 2.10. Can't trust backwards compatibility for exactly the reasons you specify.

I don't care about anyone else's enjoyment apart from my own when it comes to spending my precious time making quests.

The thing is that I'm ballsy enough to say such a thing whereas most other quest makers will pretend - "oh yes I care about the community and I love their feedback" - but deep down they will do the same thing as I do.

James24 wrote:

Zoria - how is anyone supposed to know whether something is a bug or not in Zelda Classic especially if something is an edge case? That is why I will forever play AQ in 1.92 Beta, The Hero Without A Name in 2.10. Can't trust backwards compatibility for exactly the reasons you specify.

You report playability issues, and we address them when we work on the upcoming builds. When people fail to report problems, or they discover something that is obviously unintended and exploit it, that is what causes incompatibility issues in future versions. We are trying to address most of these for 2.53 and 2.54, but no-one is bothering to take the time to work with us on that subject, so if it is not important to the users, then we are not going to overly worry about it.

My comment was a quasi-trollish way of saying that, if people have enough time to discuss something this esoteric (and inherently non-quantifiable) at length, then they probably have an hour or ten to kill testing their quests and reporting problems.

2.10 tuff should all be fine, as far as I am aware. 1.92bXXX is where ZC begins to take it in the arse, because there were so many changes in 1.92 that were never documented, and we do not have the 1.92 sources at all (nor the 1.80, 1.84, and 1.90 sources). I do have all of the 2.10 stuff, though. :shrug:

Stuff though, like precision timing on how many i-frames a leever that is descending into the ground has, should probably not be a merit-worthy thing around which to base a game mechanic. There is also a required decorum when presenting these cases to us, for inclusion (support), as it basically requires us to implement, and to maintain an engine hack for one specific case at a time.

In general, I try not to implement any changes without a rule or version-based exception, but nothing is fool-proof. I think that 2.53 has the greatest compatibility across old versions of any recent ZC build (2.10 or newer). If you know where there are copies of the 1.92 sources, then we could probably use that to add greater compatibility, later; but when we patch stuff now, we generally need to do it by observing the old behaviour and emulating it. Given that we cant run 1.80->1.92 on modern systems, that is a rather large problem with no ideal solution.

James24 wrote:You guys are way, way, way off course about type A and type B. Type A and type B are so much more than just difficulty and graphics - its a way of thinking, a culture, a way of defining your personality traits.

...

I think I get what you mean now. Type A = Project Runway; Type B = Predator. 8:^D

[youtube]-9-Te-DPbSE[/youtube]

.

Honestly, I do have to agree that the A+B classification scheme is too generic. Let's leave the Project Runway stuff to the screen design Nazis and just go back to calling some quests "niche" or "challenge" just like the good ol' days of ZC and be done with it.

This is why I started putting up big warnings on some of my quest downloads that warrant it. Most people see the warning and avoid a headache from playing it; some others may see the warning and want to check it out based on their preferences for that sort of thing. In the end I think it works well because people are reading a completely honest description of the quest and not an advert trying to get people to play it.

But I'm type O-. What do? 😞

EDIT: Never mind, I figured it out!

[video=youtube;j-jYnU-UPcA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-jYnU-UPcA[/video]

Nice job downvoting all our videos. I bet you feel real proud of yourself and your contribution to society.

Shane - people like to talk, bitch and gossip about each other since the beginning of time. Its a fun pass-time and its cheap and free. I know that the things I'm saying will have next to 0% chance of convincing anyone but I like to say them anyway. Most people saying things to me likewise have 0% chance of convincing me especially when they aren't backed up with any evidence. My type A/type B theory comes from many years of observing many games and their interactions with the fanbase and aren't going to change because a few people here say otherwise.

The only thing that you can be 100% absolutely sure about is that I don't care about whether or not anyone else enjoys my quests. They were made for the sole purpose of my own enjoyment and I don't see anything wrong with that motivation. And also I'm 100% sure that this policy apples to every other quest maker out there type A AND type B - but you'll never hear them say it directly. The only way you'll find out from them is through their actions in quest-making.

As for DX, quest makers will listen if what the audience is suggesting enhances their own enjoyment and isn't too time-costly to implement. My own LoH and LoH:IE for example I did listen to Yloh when he suggested that I use the wooden sword instead of the white sword in the room of 10 blue darknuts. I did listen when Yowza said that tough battles should be made like the level 5 death-knight fights. I did listen when Evan said that the beginning part of level 8 suxed. And they were remade into LoH:IE which is a deluxe form of LoH. But I don't listen to type A players when they say, oh but the fights are too unfair and there aren't enough puzzles.

And I think that a similar process goes on for type A players when they are making their quests too. Type A players listen to the feedback of other type A players because type A players share the same enjoyment and culture. But I'm pretty sure that I barge in and say that their quests are too easy and they need to get rid of some puzzles that I will get a flat rejection. How about if I start telling you these criticisms about Rite of Storm? Are you going to do as I ask and make a DX version for type B?

This is probably totally the wrong place, but does anyone remember Warlock's 210quest? I don't know any other title for it, but it came bundled with older versions of ZC. It was basically an enhanced version of the first quest, featuring updated graphics and some tougher puzzles, as well as a few new enemies and items. If that quest still exists. I can't find it in the QDB.

I mainly bring it up for two reasons: if there is such a thing as a type A or B, this would probably count as type B. Secondly. Megan (aka Pink Fairy) really wanted to try it after I told her about it, but I can't find it anywhere.

James24 wrote:And I think that a similar process goes on for type A players when they are making their quests too. Type A players listen to the feedback of other type A players because type A players share the same enjoyment and culture. But I'm pretty sure that I barge in and say that their quests are too easy and they need to get rid of some puzzles that I will get a flat rejection. How about if I start telling you these criticisms about Rite of Storm? Are you going to do as I ask and make a DX version for type B?

One last thing I'm going to say after this is that the fact that you've been on the defense and offense over like... 2-3 negative reviews by reviewers who no longer care about your quests specifically for over half a decade shows that you do care. That's all I need to say really, don't have to take my word for it. I'll let other rational people decide for themselves.

We need to get Puzzledude in here to defend maddeningly difficult Z3 challenge hack puzzles as Type B.

Is everybody involved in this stupidity kissing and making up yet?

Gleeok wrote:Is everybody involved in this stupidity kissing and making up yet?

Doubtful. There have probably been several discreet blowjobs, though.

If there's a type b for sex, would that be b for blowjob? Adds a whole new meaning to type b players then.

Shane wrote:If there's a type b for sex, would that be b for blowjob? Adds a whole new meaning to type b players then.

What would type A entail?

Chris Miller wrote:What would type A entail?

Shane wrote:I'm sure you know what Type A gives out. ;o

I think I have a general idea now, but we could use a more in-depth explanation. Paging [MENTION=60616]James24[/MENTION]

Type A, Type B? Fuck that, there is more than two options, everything isn't black and white... I'm Type Q, Zeta X.

There's never going to be a true kissup and makeup. All you'll get is temporary lulls in silence where people keep quiet but don't speak what's on their minds. And then when a catalyst comes along its all going to flare up again, in this case being Zelda 3. Sadly, history will keep repeating itself because the fundamental nature of quest making is flawed. That is, quest makers only care about themselves and what they want and will never truly care enough about the audience to make significant changes to their quests. Chris Miller, you'd better be ready to make bitching a permanent thing especially if Pure won't allow it. At least then AGN will have an audience! haha.

It interests me to look back in time to when few of us knew about Zelda Classic's existence. Put in a search for "Armageddon Quest" and you can see this whole conflict between type A and type B again - just with different people. Type A players demanding the quest be made easier to accommodate their tastes. Type B players loving the difficulty and saying its such a nice thing. And then its interesting what came of it when OUCH! made his Armageddon Quest Forever. Type B quest with a cheap nerf to appease type A. Flat rejection by both camps of players.

To me I'm as convinced about type A and type B as I am convinced that the earth is round. Everyone else believes the earth is flat. Well, what else can I do if people are in denial about the source of their problems?

James24 wrote:To me I'm as convinced about type A and type B as I am convinced that the earth is round. Everyone else believes the earth is flat. Well, what else can I do if people are in denial about the source of their problems?

Type A/Type B believers are a vocal minority that feel superior based on literally nothing but phony evidence claiming that non-believers are ignorant and blind along with the majority due to getting poked fun at.

I think my comparison works better, lol. :P

By the way, no one was talking about type a/type b until you made this joke of a thread into a soapbox for it. The fact that you had to piggyback off of petty feud to try and spark a debate is hilarious. This is going to be forgotten in a few days so enjoy it while it lasts.