702 réponses à ce sujet

[Tirigon]

Haexpane wrote...

Tirigon wrote...
 

It is true: The worst things about RPG is the so-called "RPG-Elements" like leveling, which, in fact, have nothing to do with roleplaying.

We should get rid of them.

You're mixing LARP w/ videogames, always dangerous.

Videogames are software, they are 100% dependent on systems.  

Sorry, I don´t get your point.

[Tirigon]

Haexpane wrote...

 I dont tabletop, but Dice Rolling for videogames started on the PC FYI

I admit I´m surprised about this revelation:wizard:.

I still don´t like it, though^^

[mhanna211]

I believe there was an alternate experience point system in either the original D&D or AD&D.  It was based on class.

Warrior types (Rangers, Paladins, Fighters) received bonus exp for fighting based on the level of the defeated mob.

Cleric types (Clerics, Druids) received bonus exp for using their abilities successfully (ie. turning undead, casting a spell to further their deities cause) and for researching or creating new items and spells (based on the level of the spell effect).

Rogue types (Thieves, Assassins, Bards) received bonus exp for using their abilities successfully.

Mages received bonus exp for using their spells successfully based on the level of the spell and for researching or creating new items and spells.

Also, bonus exp was added to anyone that roleplayed exceptionally well (ie. acting you characters intelligence or alignment), although that probably couldn't translate into a video game.

Something along those lines could be incorporated into a game somehow.  You'll always get exp for defeating monsters, but getting bonus exp for using your character to its fullest is a better option than none at all for fighting.

[Ariella]

Bioware tried this once in Witch's Wake. All I'm going to say is it didn't really work that well.



It's a lot easier to reward xp for roleplay in TT than it is in a CRPG, where one of the main foci is combat.

[Vaeliorin]

Ariella wrote...
Bioware tried this once in Witch's Wake. All I'm going to say is it didn't really work that well.

I really liked Witch's Wake.  I was sad to see it get abandoned.

It's a lot easier to reward xp for roleplay in TT than it is in a CRPG, where one of the main foci is combat.

I think this is a given.  I'd probably go so far as to say it's virtually impossible to give out RP XP in a single-player cRPG, given that the game doesn't know if you're roleplaying or simply randomly clicking on replies.

[Mallissin]

I'm not a big fan of XP by just killing things, either. Mhanna's explaination of a system where XP is awarded in context of the class and perhaps by the level of difficulty of the action involved (so using a skill you got at level 2 all the time verses one closer to your current level gets you less XP) makes more sense for more realism and entices people to master new skills instead of spamming the same ones forever.

[kraze07]

Guys who think like the OP are ruining gaming. I could care less if a game is realistic I just wanna have fun being immersed in a fantasy world, and play a game with deep a story and traditional RPG style gameplay. Even the JRPGs are being dumbed down on consoles these days. Just look at how FFXIII turned out.

[Vaeliorin]

kraze07 wrote...
Guys who think like the OP are ruining gaming. I could care less if a game is realistic I just wanna have fun being immersed in a fantasy world, and play a game with deep a story and traditional RPG style gameplay.

Strangely...you can have a game with a deep story, traditional RPG gameplay, and still not award xp for kills.  Truth is, I've even played such a game.  In fact, it sometimes makes the story even more interesting sometimes, because you actually can have options other than "Kill Everything" for solving quests/progressing without completely gimping a character who doesn't just kill everything.

Modifié par Vaeliorin, 29 juillet 2010 - 05:10 .

[Tirigon]

kraze07 wrote...

Guys who think like the OP are ruining gaming. ...

And guys who think like THIS are not only ruining a discussion but also making themselves look ridiculous.

[Andaius20]

To the OP, I don;'t know perhaps if you try to RP you character and not metagame the system, you'll actually try those "other options" instead of killing everything?

[Aratham Darksight]

Andaius20 wrote...

To the OP, I don;'t know perhaps if you try to RP you character and not metagame the system, you'll actually try those "other options" instead of killing everything?

I'm honestly curious: Did you read the entire thread, or only the first post?

There seem to be a many posters who only respond to the OP, or echo one of the nasty comments left on the first few pages, without acknowledging that their point has (at least partially) been addressed later on.

[Aradace]

Aratham Darksight wrote...

Andaius20 wrote...

To the OP, I don;'t know perhaps if you try to RP you character and not metagame the system, you'll actually try those "other options" instead of killing everything?

I'm honestly curious: Did you read the entire thread, or only the first post?

There seem to be a many posters who only respond to the OP, or echo one of the nasty comments left on the first few pages, without acknowledging that their point has (at least partially) been addressed later on.

If you, or anyone else actually reads through 20+ pages of posts before posting then you sir or madam, have WAAAAY too much time on your hands...More so than the rest of us who post here

[Sylvius the Mad]

Vaeliorin wrote...

I think this is a given.  I'd probably go so far as to say it's virtually impossible to give out RP XP in a single-player cRPG, given that the game doesn't know if you're roleplaying or simply randomly clicking on replies.

The game shouldn't have to reward roleplaying,  Roleplaying is the reward.  Reolplaying is the whole reason the game exists.

[Aradace]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Vaeliorin wrote...

I think this is a given.  I'd probably go so far as to say it's virtually impossible to give out RP XP in a single-player cRPG, given that the game doesn't know if you're roleplaying or simply randomly clicking on replies.

The game shouldn't have to reward roleplaying,  Roleplaying is the reward.  Reolplaying is the whole reason the game exists.

That sir...is an opinion...remember that

[DaySeeker]

kraze07 wrote...

Guys who think like the OP are ruining gaming. I could care less if a game is realistic I just wanna have fun being immersed in a fantasy world, and play a game with deep a story and traditional RPG style gameplay. Even the JRPGs are being dumbed down on consoles these days. Just look at how FFXIII turned out.

I don't see how endless slaughter equals immersion into a fantasy world or deep story.  FFXIII has experience based systems that relied on killing enemies to level up and had a pretty traditional world layout; I am not sure how this makes your point.  What is your point?  I think it would be the opposite of "dumbing own" if you could do more then enter an area, destroy everyone, watch cutscene, enter next area, destroy everyone, watch cutscene.  You point seems contradictory, "Don't change anything" and "See how when they change stuff they're stupid."

[Haexpane]

the_one_54321 wrote...

FFX had a fantastic leveling system though. Lots of freedom but still with distinct progression.
FFXII still has my favorite RPG combat system of all time.

You are one of the rare people that liked both systems.  I loved FF12 combat, the problem IMO was bad level design.

FFX sphere grid and FF12 license board are relatively similar when broken down.  You can make any character any class.   I prefer class based system IMO otherwise, why not just have all the characters take the best abilities?  Even more so in FF12

[Haexpane]

angj57 wrote...

 I'm sure a lot of purists thought that this was blasphemy and was pandering to casual gamers, but looking back it was a logical change which kept the important aspects of RPGs while improving the gameplay experience. Try and keep an open mind.

I don't recall reading many complaints about BG2 being RTWP, the engine behind the scenes is still dice rolling

[AlanC9]

There shouldn't have been any purist complaints -- RTWP is about the best way to handle the AD&D action system.

Real purists were the ones complaining that the Gold Box games botched AD&D.

Modifié par AlanC9, 29 juillet 2010 - 07:40 .

[Haexpane]

[quote]Tantum Dic Verbo wrote...

 
 
You said explicitly that removing xp per kill would be a rejection of the inspiration of Baldur's Gate 2.  That seems to me to be a pretty minor variation. 
[/quote]

Major point of disagreement then.  I don't consider removing XP for killing enemies minor at all.  It's core to the combat, which is over 50% of the gameplay.  IMO it's a major change in design, a complete paradigm shift.

[quote]
I disagree with you that most minor variations would have resulted in something vastly different. 
[/quote]
You can't disagree since I don't believe minor varations will result in drastic changes.   My statement is that paradigm shifts and significant system changes will result in something vastly different

I use Mass Effect 1 and ME2 as the most recent example.  Many fans don't consider ME and RPG any longer.  The "rank up" screen as opposed to the old leveling system is one example.

[quote].  If you'd never played with xp per kill, do you really think you would have invented the idea to improve whatever games you'd played?

[/quote]

Wait, now you're accusing me of claiming to be the fixer of all things RPG?  ROFL show me one quote where I state I "would have invented the idea" , you're being an absurdist now.

I've played a ton of games w/ no XP per kill, in a previous post I gave an example of how it can suck the fun out of combat

[quote].

  The manner in which those levels are reached is pretty superficial. 

[/quote]

I think you believe this on paper, but not in practice.  How you reach levels varies wildly for games.  How you get levels can determine a game's genre, and most certainly affect the playstyles.

Again, I gave an example a while back.   Getting something for killing things provides motivation.  Remove reward for killing, and why kill? 

If you've played any MMOs you know this first hand.  Once rewards are removed from enemies, players stop killing the enemy.

Even if you don't like MMOs, they provide great data to analyze.  We've seen this for over a decade now, people kill stuff for the rewards, and no rewards makes for very angry players.
[/quote]

 

[quote]

You completely lost me here.  Are you really suggesting that theme and atmosphere can be licensed as IP?

[/quote]

No I'm not suggesting it, I'm stating a truism.  Baldur's Gate/Forgotten realms IS a licensed IP.  Just like Star Wars, Godfather, Harry Potter, Twighlight, Batman etc...

Are you denying franchises that are licensed come w/ atmosphere?  Are you suggesting that a game like Batman AA would be the same if it was a generic IP?

[quote]

 

I'm not sure what you mean by balanced gameplay in BG2.  AD&D 2E wasn't even well-balanced internally as a tabletop game.  D&D has spent two editions trying to iron out the imbalances, in fact.


[/quote]

What I mean by balanced gameplay is in comparision to DAO of course.  Do you think DAO is more balanced than BG2? I'm not talking perfection.  I'm talking real world games that made it to market.

I don't think anyone who has played both games would suggest that DAO is more balanced than BG2

 
[quote]
   If I don't like the gameplay, a "50xp" floating over a slain enemy won't retroactively make the action entertaining. 
[/quote]

Nothing retroactive about it. DAO has combat w/ 50XP floaters.   It's already a proven model.

I didnt' say adding XP per kill to a bad game would make it good.  I said removing XP per kill from DA franchise would make combat less fun
 
[quote]

I prefer the model in which the player concentrates on completing the mission, without worrying that he didn't dig all of the xp out of the entrails of every enemy in the area.
[/quote]
My primary focus in offline single player is completing the mission.  But years of playing RPGs as my genre of choice has me expecting XP, levels and loot.

When RPGs are "streamlined" I usually lose interest fast.  IMO there is a reason people play God of War for 7 hours and never touch it again, and spend 60 hours in DAO and replay it 2-3x

That reason is RPGs are deeper, more complex, more rewarding.   The story in DAO isn't all that special, I'm sure some people are replaying for the story, but most replay because the game is replayable.

XP per kill IMO is a huge part of that, as it's in the core of the combat.   The loot from killing stuff is terrible, it just clogs inventory.  XP is the only thing left.

Remove XP per kill and half the users would just speed run by enemies to the exit, move on to the next cutscene

[quote]
 
 .  I find a mission-centered approach to be more immersive, myself.  If I save the damsel in distress, I don't want to feel as though I've missed something by not exterminating three henchman in a dark corner somewhere. 
[/quote]

I feel like DAO is already mission centered.  But I do feel like I'm missing something by not killing the hiding henchmen.

But in DAO I learned that the hiding henchmen probably don't have anything other than small XP, it's better than nothing. I was hoping for a start of a new quest that would branch , get longer and ultimately lead to a reward of some sort.

So it's not that I like scraping the jar for every XP I can find , it's just the only reward for killing grunts.  I'd definitely be in favor of making the enemies harder to kill and changing the loot tables, or make random spawning quests or something...

I am just against taking DAO and removing XP per kill and leaving everything else about killing stuff the same.  
[quote]

As for the die-rolling, my point is that BG had it built right into the design.  You could see your D20 roll right on the display.  You don't get that with DA:O.
[/quote]
Many of us miss it greatly, even "casual KOTOR" had it

[quote]
It seems that you are largely untroubled by the differences between BG2 and DA:O, that none of them detracted from its quality as an RPG.  It seems odd that so many of the expected differences between DA:O and DA2 are deal-breakers for you.
[/quote]

I really don't understand this, but many of the differences between BG2 and DAO did indeed bother me
-lack of 6 person party
-no dice rolls
- easy combat
-map not as good
-art less interesting
-less characters in total
-easy to exploit class system
-less races
-less summons
the list goes on and on

[quote]

I don't really have an opinion on whether BG or DA are better games. 

Similarly, the Baldur's Gate series was a tour de force in its time. 
[/quote]

You played BG2 tho?  You must have an opinion on which you liked more?  
My opinion is BG2 is more fun, more challenging, deeper, and has a better designed gameplay system.

But DAO is on my PS3, and is a much easier game to play.  SO yes, DAO has many strengths over BG2.  But if BG2 was on the PSN, I'd buy it tomorrow and play it all weekend.

Honestly the only reason I play console games more than PC games is because my consoles are in the HDTV room and the computer is in the office and I share it



[quote]

  I wonder if DA:O wasn't something of a jumping-off point.  An homage to BG, even as it prepared to move on.
[/quote]

It certainly was, the thing is where do we jump off to?  I think a lot of people were let down that the jumping off is "more like ME2, stripped down RPG elements,  more focus on "horns/spikes/claws"

[Haexpane]

Tantum Dic Verbo wrote...
 .  A great number of people seem to think that what they're used to actually defines the genre.  Just as our early childhood imprints upon us a certain worldview (which may vary wildly away from the rest of the world, depending on one's parents),

our early experiences with a sort of game may tend to define the game for us.  

Not at all for me.  

My first time playing Baldur's Gate 2 - 2008.  So it's nothing about psychology of early experiences, or nostalgia and rose colored glasses at all.

I played BG2 up against modern day games, BG2 still stands tall.  Childhood imprinting has nothing to do with it.

Sometimes things that come later, with more technology and money and "improvements" actually aren't any better.  This is especially true in the world of Art.

Perfect example
Star Wars Original Tril
Star Wars prequels

Lucas says, Preqs are great, people just look at OG through nostalgia and star wars has "always been for kids"

That was debunked.  The prequels are just really bad movies.  All the "improvements" of 20 years of tech and planning resulted in boring, movies that were so bad they hurt the original tril.

I just don't want to see Dragon Age turn into Attack of the Clones:unsure:

[zazei]

Removing XP doesn't have to mean dumping the game down or removing RPG elements. I strongly dislike ME2 and some of the direction RPG takes these days but this is one thing I would sign up for without hesitation if they did it well. Look at how Bloodlines did thing for example.

They use a skill point bases system where a skill cost more and more to buy the higher up you get and you get points for completing quests and advancing the plot. Now the good thing in this is that the player can get more points from exploring and being creative. If you manage to find out secrets that are not needed to advance the plot or undig certain characters motives you can get 3 points instead of 2 for a certain quest for example.

For me that just makes RPing your character more interesting when building your power will depend on more then how many zombies the player killed. I'm all for this.

Modifié par zazei, 29 juillet 2010 - 08:13 .

[angj57]

If the game is really well balanced it will give you just as much xp for sneaking past someone or diplomatically defusing a situation as it would for going through and hacking everyone to pieces, and that would satisfy the role players and the combat-oriented players at the same time, I think.

[Sylvius the Mad]

AlanC9 wrote...

There shouldn't have been any purist complaints -- RTWP is about the best way to handle the AD&D action system.

I would agree.

There are some who legitimately prefer the turn-based combat that was first used to implement D&D rules (like Vael up above), but I am not one of them.

[Si-Shen]

Removing the XP for killing isnt really needed, frankly that would hurt those of us that prefer to fight through things, however granting XP, equal to what you would earn via fighting, for other options is perfectly fair and I definatly think its a good thing.

I have seen other games that only give XP if you do it one way or another but none for fighting, it made it near impossible for those of us that use fighters to beat. You still need the xp per kill IMHO, because it rewards those of us that prefer to use our combat skill for our actions, all they need to do is also add in xp for areas where you avoid combat somehow (ie talk your way out), its been used in the past in other games and works.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Si-Shen wrote...

I have seen other games that only give XP if you do it one way or another but none for fighting, it made it near impossible for those of us that use fighters to beat.

That would be an interesting balancing mechanism: if fighting granted no XP, but provided loot, while avoiding fights granted XP but no loot.