38 réponses à ce sujet

[The Interloper]

Role playing in games generally means that what happens depends on your actions. Nice and all, but that also means it's predictable. If you do this or say this then that will happen, no matter what (or maybe a variation depending on the circumstance.)

Do you think Mass Effect (and role playing games in general) would benefit of outcomes were partially random? One thing that springs to mind is Fallout 3's speech system (there was a chance a persuade would work or fail, depending on your score, whereas in ME if it's available, it will work for sure.) However, the main thing I have in mind when I'm talking about this is not genral RPing but the Suicide mission, and similar scenarios that are often the most important part of the game. If you have some particular  Normandy upgrade that character will live, and if not they will die. Most of us have probably read SM guides and we know how the mechanics work. Other than who dies if you choose the wrong person on the long walk and the holding action, everything else is a if this, then that releationship.

What I'm thinking about here.is if the outcomes of things like the SM were partially random, ie with an invisible die roll. For instance, if you don't have that ship upgrade, theres a 75 chance the character will die, but a 25% chance they actually survive. And if you do the survival chance raises to 75%. but there's still a 25% chance they die. And the character who bites it is also randomly selected (instead of being chosen from a list, and if the top character is gone the second one on the list dies, and so on). More factors could be added then one die roll, but I think you get the idea. I believe it would make the SM, and similar missions in future games, feel much more dynamic rather then a straight cause and effect releationship you can easily learn and exploit, making having everyone survive as easy as checking off a list.

Any thoughts on this? My apologies if this has already been discussed.

[KainrycKarr]

The Interloper wrote...

Role playing in games generally means that what happens depends on your actions. Nice and all, but that also means it's predictable. If you do this or say this then that will happen, no matter what (or maybe a variation depending on the circumstance.)

Do you think Mass Effect (and role playing games in general) would benefit of outcomes were partially random? One thing that springs to mind is Fallout 3's speech system (there was a chance a persuade would work or fail, depending on your score, whereas in ME if it's available, it will work for sure.) However, the main thing I have in mind when I'm talking about this is not genral RPing but the Suicide mission, and similar scenarios that are often the most important part of the game. If you have some particular  Normandy upgrade that character will live, and if not they will die. Most of us have probably read SM guides and we know how the mechanics work. Other than who dies if you choose the wrong person on the long walk and the holding action, everything else is a if this, then that releationship.

What I'm thinking about here.is if the outcomes of things like the SM were partially random, ie with an invisible die roll. For instance, if you don't have that ship upgrade, theres a 75 chance the character will die, but a 25% chance they actually survive. And if you do the survival chance raises to 75%. but there's still a 25% chance they die. And the character who bites it is also randomly selected (instead of being chosen from a list, and if the top character is gone the second one on the list dies, and so on). More factors could be added then one die roll, but I think you get the idea. I believe it would make the SM, and similar missions in future games, feel much more dynamic rather then a straight cause and effect releationship you can easily learn and exploit, making having everyone survive as easy as checking off a list.

Any thoughts on this? My apologies if this has already been discussed.

No thanks.

[Had-to-say]

I not sure I would like it but it would add more realism.

[Nissa_Red]

I dislike dice as a player in RPGs



I think they have their role in generating some situations (shaping the world, missions, etc), or in combat, but outside of it, the less randomness, the more I generally enjoy the game.



In unfavorable situations involving dice, most players abuse of the QuickLoad feature anyway, me included.

[Big stupid jellyfish]

Whether good or bad, that would make users to replay the missions over and over to reach the desired result. Thus, most users would likely find it extremely annoying.

[GreenSoda]

No, because that in turn would mean that your choices on some level don't matter (as the result isn't necessarily fully dependend on the choices you made).

Modifié par GreenSoda, 14 janvier 2011 - 04:50 .

[ZachForrest]

It'd add some real jeopardy no doubt - but everyone (me included) would just replay until you get the desired result (death of Miranda, Jack, Ashley). So any immersion you might gain might just be lost by going to back the menu

[uzivatel]

No.



(I would like the outcome of some actions to be more unexpected though)

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Nah. It's really about story to me. I like the randomness in the action portions when you're shootin' and punchin' and bioticin'.

[Omega-202]

The only result, as stated above, would be that people continuously load old saves to get the desired result.

You use Fallout 3 as an example, but:

A) Nobody I know ever accepted a failed Speech check in that game. They'd just keep reloading until they succeeded.

There's a reason that New Vegas did away with this system. There was no real reason to invest in Speech in FO3 because the only thing it did was save you time not having to reload the game.

Modifié par Omega-202, 14 janvier 2011 - 06:20 .

[Elvis_Mazur]

Supported. I can already see a new feeling in a more random SM and RPG's in general.



But, there is the chance that some people will just be reloading old saves so they can get the result they want.

[Ulzeraj]

PetrySilva wrote...

But, there is the chance that some people will just be reloading old saves so they can get the result they want.

I would depending on results. On my first suicide mission I experimented with the results until I got a formula that saved everyone.

Maybe more dialogue options would cause the effect you want. Anyone here played NWN2?

There was a trial where you had to defend yourself. There wasnt a blue or red magic option that could allow you to win. There were multiple diplomacy choices (some of them could even count against you with the accuser distorting your meanings), intimidate and even perform (never worked lol) skills could be used.

Modifié par Ulzeraj, 14 janvier 2011 - 06:37 .

[kmcd5722]

No, I want my decisions to affect the world around as it has been promised for ME3. I would like a choice editor though, so I won't have to replay the trilogy 8 more times to get all 142 different endings.

[Omega-202]

PetrySilva wrote...

Supported. I can already see a new feeling in a more random SM and RPG's in general.

What RPG's are going the "random" route?  

And in regards to ME 2's Suicide Mission, there was nothing random about it.  Some people falsely believed this before we knew the numbers behind everything, but now we know that every condition has a value attached to it and every outcome is perfectly predictable and reproducible.  There never was such a thing as the "random Mordin death". 

[Aigyl]

As others have said I wouldn't like a roll of the dice.

I would other on the hand like some decisions to have unpredictable outcomes, like Dragon Age occasionally did - especially when you looked at the epilogue for Orzammar.

[SalsaDMA]

Do I want to reload all the time untill the dice shows what I want them to show?



No thanks.

[Destroy Raiden_]

Supposedly during the SM we do get to experience a random event apparently whoever goes into the vent is tied to their loyalty and to whom you pick as the 1st team leader. If you send Legion for instance and you have his loyalty but you choose Samara to lead the first team Legion still dies because you choose Samara which is confusing players are left wondering if his death could’ve been avoided and as they work to try and change it gets confusing why he keeps dying until Samara is switched out for Garrus.



I wouldn't mind some of my paras dialogue to blow up in his face sometimes but not in the Horizon sort of blow up which made no sense more of a making sense sort of argument I try to para a person and they just get more upset. It works like this in customer service sometimes a customer calls in angry on whatever you try to para your way out of it and they just get more angry because they know you're paraing your way with them and they'll only respond well to a neutral or ren response to get them off their high horse after you do that then a para dialogue would work better but you need to make them see they're being ridiculous in their demands.

[88mphSlayer]

i like the idea because after the first time you play the suicide mission it becomes entirely predictable and thus you no longer have that initial emotional effect you had the first time you played it... it's not suicidal after that, it'd be like playing any combat and just selecting a certain gun meant you won... no need to actually fight the fight, the battle was won immediately - just isn't the same

it's why the suicidal mission isn't really a suicidal mission - it's just a noob trap

Modifié par 88mphSlayer, 14 janvier 2011 - 07:50 .

[InvaderErl]

Nah, as somebody said it would lead to people reloading until they got what they wanted which would totally undermine the whole cinematic approach.



As for randomness during the suicide mission, its a nice idea but ultimately its a very cheap one that would fall flat on its face during execution. You're basically punishing the player even though he did everything discernibly right. Its not good design.

[Lunatic LK47]

InvaderErl wrote...

Nah, as somebody said it would lead to people reloading until they got what they wanted which would totally undermine the whole cinematic approach.

As for randomness during the suicide mission, its a nice idea but ultimately its a very cheap one that would fall flat on its face during execution. You're basically punishing the player even though he did everything discernibly right. Its not good design.

Ding ding ding. This man sees the light.

[88mphSlayer]

InvaderErl wrote...

Nah, as somebody said it would lead to people reloading until they got what they wanted which would totally undermine the whole cinematic approach.

As for randomness during the suicide mission, its a nice idea but ultimately its a very cheap one that would fall flat on its face during execution. You're basically punishing the player even though he did everything discernibly right. Its not good design.

don't people already do that? there's lots of guides on the internet, and most people unhappy with how their mission ended up specifically tried to get a "better ending", thus negating the entire point of a "suicide" mission

[james1976]

From one perspective I can see how random results would be interesting but at the same time if you are roleplaying a certain kind of character, it could be a bigger pain in the rear and just not worth all the reloading to get what you want for that character.

[InvaderErl]

88mphSlayer wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Nah, as somebody said it would lead to people reloading until they got what they wanted which would totally undermine the whole cinematic approach.

As for randomness during the suicide mission, its a nice idea but ultimately its a very cheap one that would fall flat on its face during execution. You're basically punishing the player even though he did everything discernibly right. Its not good design.

don't people already do that? there's lots of guides on the internet, and most people unhappy with how their mission ended up specifically tried to get a "better ending", thus negating the entire point of a "suicide" mission

No because there IS a right way to do it. The people who complete the suicide mission and then look up how to do it right know they made a mistake along the way. There is a logic to the mission.

To take away that logic and say no somebody died because we wanted to introduce an element of pure chance is the worst possible thing you can do. You're breaking the agreement between game developer and user that yes there is a suicide mission and yes there is a way to get everyone through safely by saying but we just want to screw with you a little even if you play by the rules.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 14 janvier 2011 - 08:26 .

[JrayM16]

I like the logic behind such a feature, but randomization would ultimately just feel cheap.