159 réponses à ce sujet

[vertigofm]

signed

[Emloch]

KOTOR had combat logs and that did not happen
BG2 had combat logs and that did not happen
Jade Empire had combat logs and that did not happen.

The urban myth about "numbers were just there because graphics couldn't do it" has been debunked by JE, KOTOR, MMOs the list goes on and on.

This idea that "OH NOES NUMBER CRUNCHING WILL RUIN RPGS" is completely off base, since RPGs are built on numbers

Essentially, RPG’s are built on numbers. The mechanics for pen and paper RPG’s are dice and a scorecard so mathematical statistics are a requirement for the end user. However, video game mechanics are computer coding so mathematical stats are not a requirement for the end-user as the games elements can be displayed through graphics, sounds and description.

Are you comparing a game to real word? Ok let's do it. Let's talk about military weapons. This is an example of how we cares about numbers in weapons:

Spoiler

"B53 nuclear bomb: The B53 was 12 ft 6 in (3.8 m) long with a diameter of 50 in (1.27 m). It weighed 8,850 lb (4,015 kg), including the 800-900 pound (350-400 kg) parachute system and the honeycomb aluminum nose cone to enable the bomb to survive laydown delivery. It had five parachutes: one 5 foot (1.5 m) pilot chute, one 16 foot (4.9 m) extractor chute, and three 48 foot (14.6 m) main chutes. Chute deployment depends on delivery mode, with the main chutes used only for laydown delivery (for free-fall delivery, the entire system was jettisoned).

The warhead of the B53 uses oralloy (highly enriched uranium) instead of plutonium for fission, with a mix of lithium-6 deuteride fuel for fusion. The explosive "lens" is a mixture of RDX and TNT, which is not insensitive. Two variants were made: the B53-Y1, a dirty weapon using a U-238-encased secondary, and the B53-Y2 "clean" version with a non-fissile (lead or tungsten) secondary casing. Explosive yield was approximately nine megatons."

So dont talk me about we dont use numbers in real life.

Yes, we use math every day but despite all of those numbers, when the bomb is dropped, it goes BOOM! and unleashes a massive devastation in it’s wake. In the end, that’s all that matters. During the early ages, they discover bronze weapons. Later they discovered that iron was better than bronze. Eventually, this led to steel weapons which proved much stronger and more flexible so it was the chosen metal for weaponry.. All of this was founded through practice and not through mathematical analysis.



I’m going to attempt to explain why too many statistics tend to ruin RPG’s. Role-playing games are all about pulling you into another world, portraying someone else and help you escape reality by creating as much realism and immersion as possible. It’s clear that we strive to do this as we  produce better hardware to enhance the graphics, sounds, etc. to make these games a real as possible; hence the word “realism”.
 
Dungeons and Dragons is the grandfather of everything RPG. To play a game based on dice and a scorecard, the numbers were important; actually, a necessity. I started playing D&D in the late 70’s and by the mid 80’s I was DMing and I never looked back.
 
Occasionally, while playing, a player would make an in game decision based on knowledge of the outside game and its mechanics even though the character he/she was playing would not know such things. E.g. A young warrior decides to run around looking for the lich’s phylactery even though the warrior wouldn’t know that lich’s even had phylactery’s. It was the player portraying the warrior that knew. This condition is known as meta-game thinking and it tends to ruin the game and a players experiences. The specifics of the example are irrelevant; it’s the point of the example that is. Too much information, especially mathematical stats, takes away from the realism and brings you back to the real world, ruining the experience.
 
While DMing, when I gave a player a magical “+4 trollbane sword” I wouldn’t tell the player what it was; only clues to help guide them. I may explain that the pommel of the weapon was a trolls head, etc. A clever player would ask questions to npc’s in the game and may, eventually, discover that this was a magical sword of a moderate enchantment that was effective against trolls. However, I would never reveal the “+4” attribute. I would simply add it, in secret, to the players dice roll when he/she fought trolls. This helps reduce meta-game thinking. This did NOT hinder game play for the player, in fact, it did just the opposite. Leaving mystery behind the weapon, etc adds much more to the game.
 
With video games; the mechanics are in the games coding so we do not need to know the bare statistics for the weapons, etc. in game. We have the luxury of not having to add and subtract so why would you want to? All we would really need to know is that the weapon in “slightly enchanted” or moderately enchanted” etc. and, perhaps, some brief description about it. We could be told that grey iron is better then regular iron and so forth. These games, now, have the prowess to portray these stats graphically and mechanically.
 
Too many stats pull you away from the immersion and leave you scrutinizing over every thing in the shop comparing armor class, mitigation, evasion, damage and attack statistics. This is especially true for MMO’s and it saddens me.
 
The bottom line is these developers work very hard to create a very realistic world for you to explore and lose yourself in. Mystery and intrigue are, both, great tools to help in creating the immersion. The next time you find yourself “number crunching” the statistics of any weapon; stop and see where you are. You’re back in the real world looking for a better edge over the game instead of “in the world” discovering the weapons qualities,,over time, through killing your foes. This is a role-playing game and I know that the character you’re portraying wouldn’t know that the magical dagger you just picked up gives him a +4 to attack, so why should you know? All you need to know is that it’s moderately enchanted and leave the rest up to the game.

Modifié par Emloch, 12 novembre 2009 - 12:34 .

[Immortal-Dark]

Ya I Agree on This As Well

[soteria]

SheffSteel wrote...

soteria wrote...

SheffSteel, you generally make intelligent posts, but this isn't one of them.  Also, you probably shouldn't comment about WoW.  Actually, most people probably shouldn't talk about how WoW ruined things when what they mean is MMOs made RPGs more popular.

Hey, I don't mind if you want to voice your opinion here, but if I criticise your intelligence you can be pretty sure I'll follow it up with a rationale. Please do me the same courtesy. What you've done, instead, is disagree with my opinion and provided your own by way of contrast. That's fine as part of a discussion but not as the basis for insults.

Back on topic... this thread wouldn't be necessary if people were more childlike and less childish. Every one of us, I'm sure, used to enjoy learning through play, without a compulsion to win getting in the way.

I did.  You say numbers are deceptive, and that you can't really predict what is going to happen in a round of combat anyway.  I pointed out how that wasn't really true, since in any given situation, once I have assessed the type of monster I am fighting and a few other factors, damage is actually very predictable.  That's not my opinion, and your post wasn't stated as an opinion either.

You concluded by implying that you can just reload if you make mistakes as contrasted to WoW.  I replied by saying that first reloading might not always be a reasonable option and second by how bad of a comparison that is, simply because WoW makes it much easier to correct mistakes like that.

I really don't see where you get the idea that either of us were sharing our opinions on the issue.  An opinion can't be right or wrong; it's just what you think about something.  The only part that is opinion is whether or not you prefer to see more information.  What we're discussing is whether or not more information would be helpful or not, which, although hard to quantify, is not an opinion. 

Instead of getting huffy at being told you said something stupid--all of us do that, sometimes--you could have actually read what I said instead of stopping at the first line.  Oh well.

[Laodicean]

+1

[droganmaster]

Totally agreed +2009 !

And the lack of races and classes lower the replay value!

[Dragon Age1103]

droganmaster wrote...

Totally agreed +2009 !
And the lack of races and classes lower the replay value!

huh? how many races do you need? & classes there are so many my head spins. I don't ppl realisse as good as BG2 was the reason they could fit so much content was b/c the game took like a 1Mb or RAM to run. lol.
   Anyways this complaint I can't understand, there are 4 specilizations for each class. You can blend classes & be a dual wielding archer berserk warrior. How are there not enough classes? I think ppl are just too hard to please. lol.

[Delikar]

Signed. This whole "immersion" obsession I fail to comprehend because I can see past my PC screen to the four corners of my room. I'm not trying to offend anyone of course, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with wanting to be involved in a video game and believe you are playing your character, completely understandable, but I do like to know if I should be putting my skill points into certain abilities because of the damage multipliers and not simply because it says "releases a devastating attack on multiple foes", mostly because that is such an opinionated description and I believe devastating would be like leaving a wake of destruction with nuclear fallout.



Anyway...Now that I've rambled on and on. Sign me up, cuz I don't think numbers in spell description would ruin any sort of immersion. I pick up the dice, roll 'em and look at a sheet of paper and feel just as immersed if I hadn't have.

[Pvt_Ryan]

OK just finished reading all the posts. Quite a varity of opinions to say the least.

A few points that I picked up on:
1) WoW Syndrome, yes I realise that most of you hear RPG and think WoW not your fault you're just young. I hear RPG I think Champions of Krynn (Still my favourite RPG) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champions_of_KrynnThe Mage class on that has iirc in the region of 50 spells if not more. I know that game is D&D and this one isn't based on D&D however the game machanics are pretty much the same (Did spell/arrow/melee hit? if yes was it resisted/defelected if no how much damage).
2) I used a bad example at the start I said Chainmail vs Rock Armour. I should have said Rock Armour vs Arcane shield. The question being if I am going down a non-primal route which is better to have or do they both give enough of a bonus that both are worth having? Yes I could stand around and cast the spell and then read the number etc but if it can be determined that way why not just put the figures in.
3) I don't what to know the exact formulas but if you hover over the spell in the tool tip it should give me the expected damage based on a char with no armour/resistances and my current level (i.e. the raw figure).
4) Cast times are another stat I dont remember seeing (i'll check that tonight) but are critical to know. eg if a stun wears off after 2 seconds (assuming it wasnt resisted) and i cast an AoE spell that takes 3-4secs the target(s) may be out of the area targeted.
5) As someone else pointed out we get hard figures for armour so why not spells?

I tend to play mages as cloth due to the bonuses to magic/resistance so the armour amount provided by spells is important to know.

I am not complaining about the game in general as I am really enjoying it. I just see this as a major oversight.

To those complaining about the stats ruining and making a number crunching metagame I ask:
How do you choose what sword/bow to give to a melee/archer char?
You base it on damage and/or it's other stats.

Modifié par Pvt_Ryan, 12 novembre 2009 - 12:23 .

[Bryaugh1]

Delikar wrote...

Signed. This whole "immersion" obsession I fail to comprehend because I can see past my PC screen to the four corners of my room. I'm not trying to offend anyone of course, I'm not saying there is anything wrong with wanting to be involved in a video game and believe you are playing your character, completely understandable, but I do like to know if I should be putting my skill points into certain abilities because of the damage multipliers and not simply because it says "releases a devastating attack on multiple foes", mostly because that is such an opinionated description and I believe devastating would be like leaving a wake of destruction with nuclear fallout.

Anyway...Now that I've rambled on and on. Sign me up, cuz I don't think numbers in spell description would ruin any sort of immersion. I pick up the dice, roll 'em and look at a sheet of paper and feel just as immersed if I hadn't have.

Quality post.