210 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Context. It should be clear to the player what's going on in the world. If the character needs to make a decision to prevent some time-sensitive consequence, then obviously the decision needs to be made quickly.

It's up to the player to roleplay the urgency. You cannot enforce roleplaying without limiting roleplaying.

I would, however, like to see gameplay mechanics that punish the character for failing to act quickly. If there's something that needs to be done now, make him fail if he does other things first. I fully support the idea of putting a timer on some types of events. Like the trench run on Ilos in ME - that worked very well with a timer, though I think it would have worked better if the timer started as soon as Shepard landed on the planet.

[MerinTB]

Or like having to get the waterchip in Fallout.

[Sir JK]

Hmmm... then I believe we're talking of vastly different scopes. The sort of urgency you suggest here is not what I meant in doing a snap decision (though I fully agree with your idea of them). But rather small stuff that literally just have a window of opportunity of a few seconds. Someone looks the other way, turning their backs as they end the conversation, dropping theur guard for but a monent, shifting their balance. That sort of stuff. All stuff that happens between or during the individual lines in a dialogue sequence.
The kind of situations in which there are no context. No reason. Just an opportunity. There if you wish to seize it but never coming again if you don't.

Spur-of-the-moment kind of situations, you know?

I do however agree with the final statement, sequences that, not necessarily punishes, but at least acknowledges that time has passed.

[AngryFrozenWater]

I really don't like timers in games. Especially in games where you can select the order of the quests. In the case of Mass Effect it worked well, because it was part of the end game and it made sense. After all, you needed to be there, to prevent a galaxy wide massacre.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir JK wrote...

Hmmm... then I believe we're talking of vastly different scopes. The sort of urgency you suggest here is not what I meant in doing a snap decision (though I fully agree with your idea of them). But rather small stuff that literally just have a window of opportunity of a few seconds. Someone looks the other way, turning their backs as they end the conversation, dropping theur guard for but a monent, shifting their balance. That sort of stuff. All stuff that happens between or during the individual lines in a dialogue sequence.
The kind of situations in which there are no context. No reason. Just an opportunity. There if you wish to seize it but never coming again if you don't.

Spur-of-the-moment kind of situations, you know?

I iknow what you're saying.  I simply disagree.  That sort of mechanic punishes the character for a failing of the player.  how does that make any sense at all within the setting?  Why has the character failed just because the player's reaction time was inadequate, or because the player was less perceptive than the character is.

With pausable events, a player can now play a character who is more perceptive than he is by allowing the player more time to gather information than the character has, thus simulating a more perceptive character.  You're denying that.  You're forcing player-based limitations on the character, and that breaks the setting.

Again, read my objection based on accessibility.  Your proposed mechanic excludes physically disabled players, and for no in-game benefit at all.

[Realmzmaster]

Sir JK wrote...

Hmmm... then I believe we're talking of vastly different scopes. The sort of urgency you suggest here is not what I meant in doing a snap decision (though I fully agree with your idea of them). But rather small stuff that literally just have a window of opportunity of a few seconds. Someone looks the other way, turning their backs as they end the conversation, dropping theur guard for but a monent, shifting their balance. That sort of stuff. All stuff that happens between or during the individual lines in a dialogue sequence.
The kind of situations in which there are no context. No reason. Just an opportunity. There if you wish to seize it but never coming again if you don't.

Spur-of-the-moment kind of situations, you know?

I do however agree with the final statement, sequences that, not necessarily punishes, but at least acknowledges that time has passed.

What you are suggesting would make the game more action oriented than it is and further limit who could play the game.  It would depend on the reaction time of the player and not the PC. There are already enough games that are inaccessible to many people I see no reason for Bioware to add to the pile.

Timers have their own problems, but can be used to good effect in certain situations as long as the timer is adjustable depending on the difficulty level or can be adjusted by the player or disabled.

Modifié par Realmzmaster, 24 novembre 2011 - 01:26 .

[MerinTB]

The gun fights and car chases in L.A. Noire, for example, will prevent my father-in-law from ever playing them. He refuses to touch (and now, at his age, I doubt he could manage anyway) those aspects of game play. He wants the Simon the Sorcerer experience, but I know he'd love Noire if it weren't for the action sequences that rely on reflexes.

Stuff like that.

[Sir JK]

I'd argue that it's not a matter of perception, and with suitable warning, not even much of a matter of reaction time. But rather an opportunity to take a spontane action. Not having these elements would effectively rob our characters of one form of expression. Because if we can pause, then everything they do will be a calculated decision.
It shouldn't be a matter of failing or not failing, just doing or continue like before. That particular moment will never come again, but that doesn't mean it was the only one of it's kind.

And with that, I think we're hitting full circle. So if I still cannot convince you then agreeing to disagreeing is the best course of action I think.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Sir JK wrote...

I'd argue that it's not a matter of perception, and with suitable warning, not even much of a matter of reaction time. But rather an opportunity to take a spontane action. Not having these elements would effectively rob our characters of one form of expression. Because if we can pause, then everything they do will be a calculated decision.

Only if you play him that way.  Your character can make a snap decision without you having to make a snap decision.

At this point you'r complaining about my proposed system because it allows people to play badly.  Well tough.  Who cares if some people aren't going to play the game the way we would play it?

[Shadowlit_Rogue]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

I would, however, like to see gameplay mechanics that punish the character for failing to act quickly. If there's something that needs to be done now, make him fail if he does other things first.

There was a bit in DX:HR where you had to save some hostages from a gas bomb of some sort, and the timer started as soon as the mission started. If you got lost or started doing sidequests first (or just got distracted with the exploration), you could arrive and find the hostages dead. I remember being shocked when I finally figured that out.

The context of the quest states that it's urgent your character gets there quickly, since there's a bomb on a timer involved, but it doesn't beat you over the head with a stopwatch either. Really liked that.

[philippe willaume]

Realmzmaster wrote...

Sir JK wrote...

Hmmm... then I believe we're talking of vastly different scopes. The sort of urgency you suggest here is not what I meant in doing a snap decision (though I fully agree with your idea of them). But rather small stuff that literally just have a window of opportunity of a few seconds. Someone looks the other way, turning their backs as they end the conversation, dropping theur guard for but a monent, shifting their balance. That sort of stuff. All stuff that happens between or during the individual lines in a dialogue sequence.
The kind of situations in which there are no context. No reason. Just an opportunity. There if you wish to seize it but never coming again if you don't.

Spur-of-the-moment kind of situations, you know?

I do however agree with the final statement, sequences that, not necessarily punishes, but at least acknowledges that time has passed.

What you are suggesting would make the game more action oriented than it is and further limit who could play the game.  It would depend on the reaction time of the player and not the PC. There are already enough games that are inaccessible to many people I see no reason for Bioware to add to the pile.

Timers have their own problems, but can be used to good effect in certain situations as long as the timer is adjustable depending on the difficulty level or can be adjusted by the player or disabled.

Hello
 
It is a matter of implementation, it could be a skill/talent that offers the interrupt, so you have all the time in world to click and act.
 
I think having mission on timer is a good idea once and a while. Ie you have 5 min to get to the mage before he tears the veil apart.
 
And as a previous poster noted you could have quest based on how many quest you do before completion/getting to the location rather than actual timer
There should be a mechanism to let the player know/hint that there is a time limit.
 
Phil