i guess follow me @bethposting on bsky or pillowfort


discord username:
bethposting

bruno
@bruno

Balatro is a good example of how if your game gets the fundamentals right, you can get away with a lot of nitpicky design flaws.

Like, there's a lot of reset mitigation left on the table in Ante 1. In higher difficulties, you are heavily incentivized to skip the first small blind; but you can roll skips that are just too bad to continue, forcing a reset before taking any game action.

Or note how the game's balance is completely skewed around effects that copy or duplicate jokers, particularly Blueprint. Runs where you have access to those effects simply have a higher ceiling than runs where you don't.

But does it really matter? By the time you understand any of those balance issues, you are in so deep that the game already has you.


bethposting
@bethposting

because having money early on to buy jokers can lead to a snowball effect of success, while missing out on buying stuff can end up with you struggling to keep up with scaling


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @bruno's post:

i think also at some level it is inevitable that highly complex roguelike or ARPG-style games that involve stacking interactive bonuses will degenerate, in the very endgame, into a simplistic very small handful of "best setups" that lean into a handful of effects as hard as possible for best results.

it seems like in any game the amount of time it takes to reach that endgame where it breaks down into those few things is mostly a matter of how much content has been created and balanced with the early game

Hah on my own post about Balatro I mentioned that it took a single video by a high-level player for me to recognise how much that stuff would annoy me and decided not to buy.

To be fair though, that's probably more down to the quality of player than my own insight.

in reply to @bethposting's post: