187 réponses à ce sujet

[In Exile]

RoninOmega wrote...
I'm just trying to say that a game, especially one labelled an rpg-shooter shouldn't be too linear/simple, all in the same time, sure it shouldn't be too complex. 

I understand what you're trying to get at. The issue is that the balancing act will always leave people unsatisfied. Keep in mind that your experience may also be biased, e.g. you'd only play games that are in the top 30% in terms of complexity and non-linear design. Bioware chooses the exact philosophy you describe, but being part of the industry that means middle 50% of complexity and non-linear design, which by your standard is linear and simple.

[bigSarg]

RoninOmega wrote...

bigSarg wrote...

RoninOmega wrote...

bigSarg wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

Ok, some say playing games should be fun. Great. At the same time you deny me the option of having fun. I do not find it enjoyable to see a tokyoish floating neon adverts with aaalll the horses and all of kings men to guide me through a straight ****ing corridor (ok, some crates in the way)!

I do not think of myself as elitist or smarter than average joe. But I see those things and I have an impression its to help those little kids that got ME as a present from their parents.

Arrows and cover. If space is a dash forward, in diagonal for cover and lets say shift is to swith to parallel one I dont see the need for said arrows. Are some ppl so short on leticine to forget how things work? Come on!

Its like finding a lever and a broken mechanism. Dont tell me you need all those glowing "arrows" to instruct you what to do?

GPS. It serves a porpouse irl.
In games - I find it irritating that when a quest pops up I have an instant marker where I can find said object within a 1cm radius error. With compass pulsing every other second of the game.

Its catering to a lowest common denominator. It is always bad. People in the industry should be rising the bar, making an effort, that creative/critical thinking is for. I guess we dont need that. You may, dear reader of this, find it comfortable to be spoon-fed through your eyes, gray cells dying of boredome. I dont.

First off I appreciate your point of view and I'm not trying to say its wrong, but to make this type of assumption is incorrect.

I'm 45 years old  man and I personally like the tips and hints as I go thru the game, I don't have the time to try to figure out every room or waste time clicking on everything in the room to find what I need, my time is valuable and the little bit of time I get to spend playing a game I would like to spend it playing not stuck in one room because I have no idea what I'm suppose to do there or I get interrupted while playing and miss something that I was suppose to pick up, many times that has happend and I would have missed an important upgrade or ammo mag/clip or something else if it had not been lit up or some type of indicator had not been present (sorry I'm not one of those detached parents that ignore their children because its inconvenient at the time). 

I do however appreciate those that want the extra challenge of not knowing every move or item that you need, in fact I'm a little jealous of those people to be honest, but the fact remains that not everyone plays the same and the option to have those hints and tips should be available for those that want them and should be able to be turned off for those that don't.  I firmly believe that no one should be forced to play a game according to someone elses preferences or abilites.   It really shouldn't be that difficult to implement a toggle switch or something in the game settings to accomodate the two different playing styles.

So you basically just want to go through a hallway shooting a-b style?  Why not just play an actual shooter?  A-B linear gameplay is ****.

LOL, so your going to continue to make assumptions and totally ignore the whole point of my post and try to force everyone to play a game the way you want to play, I should have known better than to try to have a mature discussion on this type of forum.  I beginning to see that having any type of discussion with someone that is obviously to immature to see past their own personal wants is pointless.

Why should I look for a different type of game when I like this one the way it is?  Maybe you should follow your own idea and find a game that caters to your style of gameplay or do you jsut enjoy trolling? 

Does this game not cater to my wants already?  I'm just saying, why dumb down the 3rd game anymore?  It's already going great right now judging from the vid last night.  There are already a lot of other great games out there that is exactly what this guy is looking for, why not let this game be more unique from the others?

The only point I was trying to make was that people should have the option to choose whether to have the hints and tips or not.  I do however agree that making a game to easy is not a good idea becasue it ends up being boring, but allowing someone that is not an avid gamer or maybe a little slower at getting the idea of how the game is played and what actions are appropriate at any given time should be available as an option.  As far as dumbing down the 3rd game, there are alot of new movement options in this game that are were not available in the previous games so its kind of difficult to compare them, and again I'm not trying to say that one playstyle is better than another, just that there should be an option to accomodate those playstyles so that everyone is happy with the game. I guess I'm a little confused as to why this is even a problem or a matter of contention, because giving a person the option to choose which type of gameplay they prefer does not interfere with the game or how a person chooses to play, it just boils down to personal preference options, like what difficulty level you play and if you want auto-level up turned on or off and so on.  All I'm saying is that a person should have the right to choose how they play the game, nothing more.
Do you have a link for the vid you referred to?  I would like to see it.

[RoninOmega]

bigSarg wrote...
The only point I was trying to make was that people should have the option to choose whether to have the hints and tips or not.  I do however agree that making a game to easy is not a good idea becasue it ends up being boring, but allowing someone that is not an avid gamer or maybe a little slower at getting the idea of how the game is played and what actions are appropriate at any given time should be available as an option.  As far as dumbing down the 3rd game, there are alot of new movement options in this game that are were not available in the previous games so its kind of difficult to compare them, and again I'm not trying to say that one playstyle is better than another, just that there should be an option to accomodate those playstyles so that everyone is happy with the game. I guess I'm a little confused as to why this is even a problem or a matter of contention, because giving a person the option to choose which type of gameplay they prefer does not interfere with the game or how a person chooses to play, it just boils down to personal preference options, like what difficulty level you play and if you want auto-level up turned on or off and so on.  All I'm saying is that a person should have the right to choose how they play the game, nothing more.
Do you have a link for the vid you referred to?  I would like to see it.

Yes the vid should be in one of the pinned topics, its the one with the q & a, there was also another vid which recently got deleted that explains the nice additions you mentioned in terms of movement.

Hmm now I do see where you are coming off from and I do agree, and even in the original post was asking for an option to toggle the tutorials on or off.

[TheRealJayDee]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

hangmans tree wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

[...]


"So called younger generation?" haha how old are you? I'm 24....

That is entirely your opinion, and one that the majority of my "so called younger generation" does not share with you. I never said it wasen't fun. I bet back in the 70's it was cutting edge. Then came the age of technology...

Dude...its not about tech...its about imagination that is far superior than any computer game. There is no limitation in PnP, you'll never achive that kind of response in cRPG as responsive a world can be - created by a GM. Again, you missed the point.
[…]

BTW I'm 31 if you're interested.

Well, couldn't one argue that a PnP experience is limited by the rules of the game and the world of the adventure?  I never really played D&D or anything like that but isn't your adventure taking place within a confined set of parameters and extensive rules?
[…]

PnP is so different an experience from playing a videogame that you can't really say that one is better than the other. And there are many different ways of playing a PnP RPG. A lot depends on which system you play (D&D, Warhammer, Shadowrun, WoD, or basically any other setting imaginable), how close you stay to the rules, wether you play purchased adventures/campaigns or stories your GM made up. The most important thing probably is the people you play with, and what and how you as group want to play. Some prefer simple dungeon crawls in a fantasy setting like D&D, some like to play epic campaigns in a cyberpunk world. Basically, everything goes.
 
What really sets a PnP RPG with a similar setting apart from a game like ME is the unmatched freedom of action and choice. You as the player have complete and total control over what your character says and does, and you can build exactly the character you want to play. Plus you play with actual people, who have the exact same control over their characters. And of course you have the GM, whose abilities are the only limit to story, world and NPCs.

I'm playing PnP for quite a while now, apart from a few changes with the same group of friends. But the times they are a-changing, people get married, get jobs, move to other cities etc, so we can’t play as often as we used to. And that’s where PC and console games step in to fill the void. Thanks to them we all get the necessary dose of excitement, adventure and great stories when we need them. I wouldn’t trade any videogame in for the epic Vampire: The Masquerade campaign we’re playing for about thirteen years now, but I wouldn’t want to miss the great experiences I had with them either.

I'm 27 btw.

[bigSarg]

RoninOmega wrote...

bigSarg wrote...
The only point I was trying to make was that people should have the option to choose whether to have the hints and tips or not.  I do however agree that making a game to easy is not a good idea becasue it ends up being boring, but allowing someone that is not an avid gamer or maybe a little slower at getting the idea of how the game is played and what actions are appropriate at any given time should be available as an option.  As far as dumbing down the 3rd game, there are alot of new movement options in this game that are were not available in the previous games so its kind of difficult to compare them, and again I'm not trying to say that one playstyle is better than another, just that there should be an option to accomodate those playstyles so that everyone is happy with the game. I guess I'm a little confused as to why this is even a problem or a matter of contention, because giving a person the option to choose which type of gameplay they prefer does not interfere with the game or how a person chooses to play, it just boils down to personal preference options, like what difficulty level you play and if you want auto-level up turned on or off and so on.  All I'm saying is that a person should have the right to choose how they play the game, nothing more.
Do you have a link for the vid you referred to?  I would like to see it.

Yes the vid should be in one of the pinned topics, its the one with the q & a, there was also another vid which recently got deleted that explains the nice additions you mentioned in terms of movement.

Hmm now I do see where you are coming off from and I do agree, and even in the original post was asking for an option to toggle the tutorials on or off.

Thanks for the info about the vid I'll have to look it up.

[hangmans tree]

TheRealJayDee wrote...


PnP is so different an experience from playing a videogame that you can't really say that one is better than the other. And there are many different ways of playing a PnP RPG. A lot depends on which system you play (D&D, Warhammer, Shadowrun, WoD, or basically any other setting imaginable), how close you stay to the rules, wether you play purchased adventures/campaigns or stories your GM made up. The most important thing probably is the people you play with, and what and how you as group want to play. Some prefer simple dungeon crawls in a fantasy setting like D&D, some like to play epic campaigns in a cyberpunk world. Basically, everything goes.
 
What really sets a PnP RPG with a similar setting apart from a game like ME is the unmatched freedom of action and choice. You as the player have complete and total control over what your character says and does, and you can build exactly the character you want to play. Plus you play with actual people, who have the exact same control over their characters. And of course you have the GM, whose abilities are the only limit to story, world and NPCs.

I'm playing PnP for quite a while now, apart from a few changes with the same group of friends. But the times they are a-changing, people get married, get jobs, move to other cities etc, so we can’t play as often as we used to. And that’s where PC and console games step in to fill the void. Thanks to them we all get the necessary dose of excitement, adventure and great stories when we need them. I wouldn’t trade any videogame in for the epic Vampire: The Masquerade campaign we’re playing for about thirteen years now, but I wouldn’t want to miss the great experiences I had with them either.

I'm 27 btw.

Yep, my point exactly, videogames are there to FILL the VOID

[DieHigh2012]

Eh, I really didn't mean to derail this thread like this.

It really ain't most peoples cup of tea guys, I only started commenting on it because rpgcodex guy tryed to claim the superiority of PnP. When the truth is most people do not play them or care to ever play them.

The point is you really love them, that's fine. Just don't expect a minor faction to set the rules for the majority

[Gatt9]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

FluffyScarf wrote...

You're talking to RPG fanatics. They represent the pinnacle of arrogance. Head over to RPG Codex to see why they're considered the bottom rung of society.

Are we the "Pinnacle of arrogance"?  Or is it the people who insist Adventure Games(Oblivion) and Shooters(ME2) are RPGs,  even when they admit to having never played a PnP RPG,  that are the pinnacle of arrogance?

I'd venture that trying to redefine something that's existed for 30 years,  just to fit your own tastes,  when you hate the thing you're trying to redefine is the pinnacle of arrogance.

I often end up with an image of someone putting a Corvette badge on their Ford Focus,  and then insisting that it's the new Corvette,  old Corvettes aren't valid anymore,  and anyone who disagrees is (Elistist,  Arrogant,  Old,  Outdated).

You just awnsered your first question with a yes...

Pen and paper only existed because they couldn't make games like Oblivion and ME2 in the dark ages. If you want to be proud of playing PnP RPG, fine I don't care. But please stop pretending your outdated opinion matters at all to the modern gaming public.

Go back to DnD, let us play awesome games like Mass Effect and Oblivion if you feel so strongly about it.

You're wrong on pretty much all counts I'm afraid. 

Games like Oblivion and ME2 existed all the way back on the Commodore 64,  and existed long before Bioware and Bethseda started making games,  games which were pretty decent replicas of PnP RPGs.

As far as the "Modern gaming public" thing goes,  DAO outsold ME and ME2.  Sold as much as Oblivion.  In fact,  ME and ME2 didn't even outsell Baldur's Gate 2.  You may want to try revising your arguement,  the numbers tell a very different story.

It's also pretty telling that you couldn't avoid tossing in the word "Outdated",  much as I predicted in my original post.

But I'm intensely curious,  if you've never played a PnP RPG,  how do you presume to tell me what an RPG is?  I've never played in an NFL game,  I wouldn't presume to tell an NFL player his game is just like flag football.

[sp0ck 06]

Gatt9 wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...

FluffyScarf wrote...

You're talking to RPG fanatics. They represent the pinnacle of arrogance. Head over to RPG Codex to see why they're considered the bottom rung of society.

Are we the "Pinnacle of arrogance"?  Or is it the people who insist Adventure Games(Oblivion) and Shooters(ME2) are RPGs,  even when they admit to having never played a PnP RPG,  that are the pinnacle of arrogance?

I'd venture that trying to redefine something that's existed for 30 years,  just to fit your own tastes,  when you hate the thing you're trying to redefine is the pinnacle of arrogance.

I often end up with an image of someone putting a Corvette badge on their Ford Focus,  and then insisting that it's the new Corvette,  old Corvettes aren't valid anymore,  and anyone who disagrees is (Elistist,  Arrogant,  Old,  Outdated).

You just awnsered your first question with a yes...

Pen and paper only existed because they couldn't make games like Oblivion and ME2 in the dark ages. If you want to be proud of playing PnP RPG, fine I don't care. But please stop pretending your outdated opinion matters at all to the modern gaming public.

Go back to DnD, let us play awesome games like Mass Effect and Oblivion if you feel so strongly about it.

You're wrong on pretty much all counts I'm afraid. 

Games like Oblivion and ME2 existed all the way back on the Commodore 64,  and existed long before Bioware and Bethseda started making games,  games which were pretty decent replicas of PnP RPGs.

As far as the "Modern gaming public" thing goes,  DAO outsold ME and ME2.  Sold as much as Oblivion.  In fact,  ME and ME2 didn't even outsell Baldur's Gate 2.  You may want to try revising your arguement,  the numbers tell a very different story.

It's also pretty telling that you couldn't avoid tossing in the word "Outdated",  much as I predicted in my original post.

But I'm intensely curious,  if you've never played a PnP RPG,  how do you presume to tell me what an RPG is?  I've never played in an NFL game,  I wouldn't presume to tell an NFL player his game is just like flag football.

Err...total sales from ME series so far...over 7 million.  Total slaes from entire BG series...5 million.

Now I love BG series to death, but games like Mass Effect did not exist on the Commodore 64.  If so, name them.  The earliest game I think you could reasonably compare to ME was System Shock, and thats a stretch.

I respect the PnP tradition, but don't come in here making definitive claims about what an RPG is an isn't.  As someone who enjoys PnP RPGs you should know better than most how wide an umbrella of gaming the term "RPG" encompasses.

Besides, who gives a frack what you label a game as.  Mass Effect series are great, enjoyable games and thats all that matters in the end

[hangmans tree]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

Eh, I really didn't mean to derail this thread like this.

It really ain't most peoples cup of tea guys, I only started commenting on it because rpgcodex guy tryed to claim the superiority of PnP. When the truth is most people do not play them or care to ever play them.

The point is you really love them, that's fine. Just don't expect a minor faction to set the rules for the majority

That is why  games are made for the lowest common denominator. PnP requires to make an effort, using imagination and brains, be knowlegable in many subjects - when you want to run a belivable world and campaign that is. Its like with reading books - you get smarter just by reading words, ideas, trying to imagine things that words only try to describe, contractually.
Every GM is like a DEV studio wether making ME or DAO... Playing games is for the most part passive receiving. That is only my opinion.

[TheRealJayDee]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

Eh, I really didn't mean to derail this thread like this.

It really ain't most peoples cup of tea guys, I only started commenting on it because rpgcodex guy tryed to claim the superiority of PnP. When the truth is most people do not play them or care to ever play them.

The point is you really love them, that's fine. Just don't expect a minor faction to set the rules for the majority

I'm still not sure you're getting what I'm/we're saying. Yes, the majority of people in our world doesn't play PnP RPGs. I'd also say that there are more people who don't play Mass Effect than there are ones who do play it. No idea what data you have, but quite a lot of people play PnP RPGs, just as quite a lot of people play RPGs on PC or console. Yes, more people play videogames in general, but as we tried to point out these two are drastically different mediums to begin with, so it's not necessarily useful to compare them. We told you why in our opinion PnP is the more enjoyable and rewarding medium, but we're not here to convert you if you're not interested.

What I don't get completely is what brought this subject up in the first place. This whole discussion, as delightful as it is, doesn't really lead anywhere. You as somebody who's not interested in PnP don't need to feel threatened by it in any way. I don't see any danger of BioWare cancelling ME3 as a multiplatform digital game only to replace it with "Mass Effect 3 d20 Edition".

Would I wish for more traditional videogame RPG mechanics in ME3 than ME2 had? That I do, although I did love ME2 nearly as much as ME. In the end I just want a satisfying conclusion for two of my favourite games, which should include a great story, a good measure between action and non-action parts, a strong sense of continuity, well thought out character development, a killer soundtrack and several degrees of appropriate endings, from 'wow, happy end' to 'omg, we ****ed up, bye bye organic life!'. 

And of course the lovely Ashley Williams still being herself...

[DieHigh2012]

Just simply in my experience, I've never known anyone under 35 (IRL) that actually still plays PnP.. No doubt they exist, but they are a mystery to me...

And it came up because Gatt9 brought it up, and on that note.
@Gatt9

I've heard a lot of complaining about DA:O from the PnP crowd, and the last time I checked that wasn't PnP. It was a slice of heaven only here only because of the advancement of technology. If want to claim that PnP was the first step fine. However we are on step 30 now a days.

Modifié par DieHigh2012, 10 juin 2011 - 10:04 .

[MDT1]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

It was a slice of heaven only here only because of the advancement of technology. If want to claim that PnP was the first step fine. However we are on step 30 now a days.

Though I never played PnP RPG I just don't get the sheer ignorance in witch you always hint modern media somehow outdated PnP because you don't get into it.
Its like claiming the possibility to make a film of it makes books obsolete.

On topic:
I would also prefer customizable help mechanics in ME3.

Modifié par MDT1, 10 juin 2011 - 10:28 .

[FERMi27]

Chris Priestly wrote...
Sure, smart people like YOU dear reader of this may not need them, but you'd be surprised how many people do.

Why do I have a feeling that roughly 90% of them are console users?

[DieHigh2012]

MDT1 wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

It was a slice of heaven only here only because of the advancement of technology. If want to claim that PnP was the first step fine. However we are on step 30 now a days.

Though I never played PnP RPG I just don't get the sheer ignorance in witch you always hint modern media somehow outdated PnP because you don't get into it.
Its like claiming the possibility to make a film of it makes books obsolete.

On topic:
I would also prefer customizable help mechanics in ME3.

Eh the truth hurts, and actually the advent of motion pictures did hurt the sale of novels and other pulished works quite dramaticly. I'm not saying that I prefer movies to books (it's the other way around actually), but there it is.

EDIT: I also love how you only quote a small part of what I said to give your opinion more weight.

Modifié par DieHigh2012, 10 juin 2011 - 10:51 .

[Hathur]

DieHigh2012 wrote...

Just simply in my experience, I've never known anyone under 35 (IRL) that actually still plays PnP.. No doubt they exist, but they are a mystery to me...

You have it backwards.. the younger they are, the greater the likelihood a person will play PnP RPGs. I played D&D for some 15+ years starting around age 10, stopped aorund mid 20's... why? Finished College, got a job.. so did all my friends... no more time to get together for numerous hours around a table at someone's house and play a campaign (let alone find a DM amongst us that had the time to prepare an adventure... people have jobs, kids, etc.. no free time).

I still drop into hobby shops every now and then to skim through some of the new 4th edition books out of sheer curiosity for my old beloved hobby... when I see people buying DnD stuff, they all look 20 years old and under... nobody there my age (32) is buying stuff really (other than comics).

The youngins are still playing pnp rpgs... if you visited the WoTC forums (makers of current DnD products) you'd see that there are tens of thousands of people in those forums alone talking about it, and many of them seem to be 25 and under.

Just because you personally don't know anyone playing DnD doesn't mean there aren't... visit a hobby shop or the DnD / WoTC website forums and you'll see there are no shortages of people playing (in fact, modern media has made it more popular... many people play using virtual tabletop software, instant messengers, play by post on forums, play by email, etc).

The fact that DnD products still sell well enough for WoTC to come out with a new edition of the rules every 6-8 years plus countless supplements suggests clearly that there are plenty of people still buying & playing classic pnp rpgs.

[DieHigh2012]

Hathur wrote...

DieHigh2012 wrote...

Just simply in my experience, I've never known anyone under 35 (IRL) that actually still plays PnP.. No doubt they exist, but they are a mystery to me...

You have it backwards.. the younger they are, the greater the likelihood a person will play PnP RPGs. I played D&D for some 15+ years starting around age 10, stopped aorund mid 20's... why? Finished College, got a job.. so did all my friends... no more time to get together for numerous hours around a table at someone's house and play a campaign (let alone find a DM amongst us that had the time to prepare an adventure... people have jobs, kids, etc.. no free time).

I still drop into hobby shops every now and then to skim through some of the new 4th edition books out of sheer curiosity for my old beloved hobby... when I see people buying DnD stuff, they all look 20 years old and under... nobody there my age (32) is buying stuff really (other than comics).

The youngins are still playing pnp rpgs... if you visited the WoTC forums (makers of current DnD products) you'd see that there are tens of thousands of people in those forums alone talking about it, and many of them seem to be 25 and under.

Just because you personally don't know anyone playing DnD doesn't mean there aren't... visit a hobby shop or the DnD / WoTC website forums and you'll see there are no shortages of people playing (in fact, modern media has made it more popular... many people play using virtual tabletop software, instant messengers, play by post on forums, play by email, etc).

The fact that DnD products still sell well enough for WoTC to come out with a new edition of the rules every 6-8 years plus countless supplements suggests clearly that there are plenty of people still buying & playing classic pnp rpgs.

As I said it is only my experinces I can draw from, and I also did say that they no doubt exist. However you honestly can't be saying that people playing PnP now a days numbers anywhere near what they were 20-30 years ago.

The main reason I jumped into this was rpgcodex guy (Gatt9) stated the superiority of PnP RPGs compaired to any other RPGs. That is obviously not the case when you take into the account the success of games like Mass Effect and Oblivion (I use those examples because those are the games he held up as inferior in his original post).

When I was 10 my friends and I would go play a game of basketball to have fun, that is still what we do this day. I'm glad you had fun playing DnD, however the the next generation of youth did not take to it as the older generation did. I didn't know of a single person in my class that played DnD, as I said earlyer Pokemon seemed to fill that role.

Modifié par DieHigh2012, 10 juin 2011 - 11:51 .

[hangmans tree]

It seems no one wants to excercise ones mind anymore

and the governments like that very much.

[Walker White]

Gatt9 wrote...

Games like Oblivion and ME2 existed all the way back on the Commodore 64,  and existed long before Bioware and Bethseda started making games,  games which were pretty decent replicas of PnP RPGs.

I know of no one that thought the 80s RPGs (as groundbreaking as Ultima IV was when it came out) were decent replicas of PnP RPGs.  There is a reason we referred to those things as cRPGs (and not RPGs) back then.  And still refer to them as such.

What is true is that there has been some back-and-forth between cRPG and RPG design; it isn't just cRPGs trying to approximate RPGs.  The SSI games (e.g. Pool of Radiance) had positional combat  and attacks of opportunity long before they made them into D&D proper.  And the new power design in 4th edition is clearly inspired by WoW and its variants.  And video games have long handled stealth gaming much better than the PnPs (as much as we have tried); properly managing the hidden information is just too complex for PnP gaming.

[bigSarg]

I for one miss playing the PnP RPG's, I remember having DnD weekend marathon's, lol, no sleep, eating pizza, and playing till we passed out. I prefer those to video games, because they forced you to use your imagination and to visualize a specific area in your head to make it come to life, it wasn't just a point & shoot thing, the better the GM the more imagination you had to use and critical thinking to get through a dungeon, the only down-side to PnP RPG's is finding a group that you really like and finding the time where everyone can get together, it was a good social outlet for people with the same interests, unlike playing anonymously in the virtual world and never seeing the people your grouping with or interacting with them in-person.

Don't get me wrong I do enjoy playing video games but it really can't compare to the social interaction of a good PnP game, at least for me anyways.

[FluffyScarf]

Most people have stressful/taxing jobs. The last thing they want is to spend more time 'exercising' their mind in a game when they're mentally tired from work and would rather kick back and have a bit of fun. Why do you think MP games are so popular? A quick 1 hour session where you can relieve some stress versus wasting 3 hours wandering across some digital farm looking for a farmer who looks exactly like another farmer just to initiate a fetch quest.

Modifié par FluffyScarf, 10 juin 2011 - 04:49 .

[Walker White]

FluffyScarf wrote...

A quick 1 hour session where you can relieve some stress versus wasting 3 hours wandering across some digital farm looking for a farmer who looks exactly like another farmer just to initiate a fetch quest.

This is a separate issue.  What you are talking about here is the "minimal playable unit".  What is the least amount of time that I can spend playing a game and still have a lot of fun.  If you are an iPhone developer, this is critical; your fun units have to be less than a minute.  Consoles can tolerate them in the half hour or 1 hour time period.  However, once you go much longer than that, you are seriously narrowing your player base.  

Indeed, this more than anything is keeping RPGs from hitting CoD numbers.  Context switching -- trying to remember where the plot was when you last left off -- can really eat into the gameplay.  And make it so that you want to spend more time in a single playing session, in order to minimize the switching.  This is also why ME2 went for the mission structure -- it makes the minimal playable unit more explicit.

But this does not mean that this one hour cannot be "hard core" gameplay.  It just means that it has to be self contained.

[MonkeyLungs]

FluffyScarf wrote...

Most people have stressful/taxing jobs. The last thing they want is to spend more time 'exercising' their mind in a game when they're mentally tired from work and would rather kick back and have a bit of fun. Why do you think MP games are so popular? A quick 1 hour session where you can relieve some stress versus wasting 3 hours wandering across some digital farm looking for a farmer who looks exactly like another farmer just to initiate a fetch quest.

Maybe they shouldn't play RPG's then. Non combat gameplay USED to be really important for RPG's.

[Walker White]

MonkeyLungs wrote...

Maybe they shouldn't play RPG's then. Non combat gameplay USED to be really important for RPG's.

Non-combat gameplay in cRPGs has rarely risen above the lock-and-key structure of adventure games.  Which itself is a dead genre because there is no market large enough to justify the production costs.

Modifié par Walker White, 10 juin 2011 - 05:01 .

[FluffyScarf]

Looking back at BW's last sci-fi RPG...I can't think of any element in KotOR that wasn't combat focused. Unless playing cards, racing 'pods' and solving a simple ring tower puzzle are considered to be traditional RPG.

Modifié par FluffyScarf, 10 juin 2011 - 05:03 .