Also on AOL
- Autos
- Technology
- Lifestyle
- Gaming
- Finance
- Entertainment on AOL
- Lifestyle on AOL
- Sports on AOL
- Travel on AOL
- More on AOL
Featured Galleries
Joystiq
© 2013 AOL Inc. All rights Reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Use | Trademarks | AOL A-Z HELP | About Our Ads

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
4-30-2010 @ 4:41PM
Daniel said...
I have never understood this logic: random=uninteresting. Randomness is interesting to me. It's interesting to all the people who go to Las Vegas and who play the Powerball and other assorted lotteries. I personally thought that one of the worst things they ever did was take the stun proc off of Starfire. I had so much fun with that proc I miss it to this day.
Reply
4-30-2010 @ 5:24PM
Lissanna said...
having no control over damage dealing is not interesting because it takes out the element of skill and replaces it with luck. You want a balance between luck & skill to make it interesting.
4-30-2010 @ 6:03PM
DeathPaladin said...
Random can be interesting, but not when random is the only determining factor for whether you win or lose. Powerball and slot machines cater more to the fantasy of getting rich without having to work.
The more glamorous games are things like blackjack or craps. They are also random, but they also require knowing how to capitalize on the randomness if you want a better chance at making a profit.
On a different note, I can see taking out random stun mechanics. From a design standpoint, it's really difficult to create a situation where you don't have one of the two situations cropping up:
1. The stun is so powerful that you can only really win in fights where it procs
2. The stun is so weak that it might as well not exist