12-18-2014, 12:49 PM
(12-18-2014, 08:07 AM)Fuiba link Wrote: While tasks are a good way to track progress in a mission I think that they can sometimes utterly break the immersion. Take for example an objective to kill an officer in a heavily guarded enemy base. If you use mortars on the base and kill the officer you get a pop-up saying that the objective is completed even though you actually have no idea whether you killed the officer or not.
This doesn't necessarily hinge on tasks vs. no tasks. There's much more involved here. The problem is, how do you actually confirm the death of the officer ? You can have a trigger that has !alive officer in it's condition field, and it will go off once the officer is dead. This can either pop up up a task hint or send a void message (or both, my preferred method) and tell the players about it. Or, you can say nothing. What do you do then ? Have the players go and see the officer's body ? How ?
The solution I would do for this is to make the success depend on two conditions, the officer being dead, and a player being near the officer's body. Then, the task is shown to be finished.
However, this is NOT AT ALL an issue of whether you use tasks or not. It's a mechanical issue and the way it is presented is totally decoupled from it.
(12-18-2014, 08:07 AM)Fuiba link Wrote: My point is that while we are used to giving control over whether objective is completed or not to the game logic, perhaps we should consider giving it the the player. Is this going a bit off-topic?
It's somewhat off topic (although I think we should start a new thread on this), because the problem you describe is a design decision, and the why it is presented to the players is independent from this.