Aller au contenu

Photo

Level Up


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
82 réponses à ce sujet

#76
Gandalf-the-Fabulous

Gandalf-the-Fabulous
  • Members
  • 1 298 messages

BasilKarlo wrote...

Exactly. It makes no sense. It's not a suggestion because it demands access to Nizaris' mind to decide what's realistic in video games, real life or her idea of either. You can't say "make the games more realistic" then say "realistic in games is not realistic in real life" and expect anyone to know what that means. Real life is the parameter of realistic. If something can't happen in real life then it isn't realistic. Calling for some form of realism relegated to video game logic and not bothering to define what that could even mean is... nonsensical.


This thread is not meant for the discussion of the definition of the word "realistic" is within the confines of a video game so take it elsewhere Basil. Besides I am pretty sure Nizaris means "believable" rather than "realistic".

#77
Guest_Nizaris1_*

Guest_Nizaris1_*
  • Guests

BasilKarlo wrote...

Exactly. It makes no sense. It's not a
suggestion because it demands access to Nizaris' mind to decide what's
realistic in video games, real life or her idea of either. You can't say
"make the games more realistic" then say "realistic in games is not
realistic in real life" and expect anyone to know what that means. Real
life is the parameter of realistic. If something can't happen in real
life then it isn't realistic. Calling for some form of realism relegated
to video game logic and not bothering to define what that could even
mean is... nonsensical.



What define real is as according to what world you live in

For example, magic is real where i live in, we have shamans doing stuffs, and we have religious peoples doing exorcising, that is the world i live in. So when when talk about is magic real, me and my people say magic is real. But in the west where people are skeptics, atheism rising, people who believe in science and facts, you guys don't believe in such things, so magic is not real to you guys.

Even in real world it is up to the people who decide what is real and what is not...

So when i say "realistic in games is not realistic in life" means the definition of real is as according to what define real in the game, not in real life.

in anyway...everything are just eletrical pulses in your brain, what is real anyway? How can you know you are not dreaming?

Modifié par Nizaris1, 15 décembre 2012 - 03:45 .


#78
Heimdall

Heimdall
  • Members
  • 13 240 messages

Nizaris1 wrote...

BasilKarlo wrote...

Exactly. It makes no sense. It's not a
suggestion because it demands access to Nizaris' mind to decide what's
realistic in video games, real life or her idea of either. You can't say
"make the games more realistic" then say "realistic in games is not
realistic in real life" and expect anyone to know what that means. Real
life is the parameter of realistic. If something can't happen in real
life then it isn't realistic. Calling for some form of realism relegated
to video game logic and not bothering to define what that could even
mean is... nonsensical.



What define real is as according to what world you live in

For example, magic is real where i live in, we have shamans doing stuffs, and we have religious peoples doing exorcising, that is the world i live in. So when when talk about is magic real, me and my people say magic is real. But in the west where people are skeptics, atheism rising, people who believe in science and facts, you guys don't believe in such things, so magic is not real to you guys.

Even in real world it is up to the people who decide what is real and what is not...

So when i say "realistic in games is not realistic in life" means the definition of real is as according to what define real in the game, not in real life.

in anyway...everything are just eletrical pulses in your brain, what is real anyway? How can you know you are not dreaming?

...Yeah I think "believable for the setting"  Would suit your purposes much better without confusing anyone.

#79
Marbazoid

Marbazoid
  • Members
  • 299 messages

In Exile wrote...
RPGs are dumb. The mechanics make no sense ,and the visual presentation is insane. You have someone literally being chomped by dragons, thrown around a room, frozen, lit on fire, etc. etc. etc. and as long as he drinks enough magic water, he's fine. 

The idea that there is any semblance of connection with reality between in-game powers, resilience and the gameplay mechanics is just so absurd. 


I assume you mean reality as far as the setting of the game is involved and not real-life? The point I was trying to make are the gameplay systems should serve the setting where possible, not the otherway around.

If drinking magic blue juice recovers your mana, and its explained in the setting, and the use of it in gameplay makes sense within the confines of the setting its ok with me. 

You can't blame the failed attempts at implementing the level system as a flaw of the system. Level scaling is of course only part of the problem in some implementations, and I mentioned it only to stay on topic.

#80
PsychoBlonde

PsychoBlonde
  • Members
  • 5 130 messages

Gandalf-the-Fabulous wrote...

I find myself curious, what do you think the purpose behind the level up mechanic in modern games is? In a game like Mass Effect what is its purpose? What is its purpose in the Dragon Age games? What will be its purpose in Dragon Age 3?


Personally, I think there are several purposes to a level-up mechanic.  NUMBERED LIST TIME!!!!

1.  It prevents you from having to build your entire character at the beginning of the game when you have no friggin clue how the mechanics ACTUALLY work.  (I don't care if you read the manual, you still have no clue of the details until you've actually thrown the fireball.)  Granted, this may not be a good thing, because if you build your entire character at the beginning, if you build a gimp character, you'll know it in the first 5 minutes of the game when restarting doesn't mean losing hours or days worth of progress.  Hmm.

2.  It doles out a steady stream of little rewards to help keep you engaged.   Part of the Skinner Box, although by no means the only part.  Personally, I prefer USING abilities to GETTING them, so after my first playthrough I generally cheat-level my character very early in the game.  Then the game is all about getting the lootz and exploring and enjoying the story, which is enough for me.  For some, not so much.

3.  It helps explicitly present the game as a certain type of progression, with you starting out crap and gradually getting better while facing nastier and nastier foes--even though the foes later in the game may actually be substantially easier at-level than that first dungeon full of goblins you cleared out.  The interaction between level and difficulty is a very strange one.  It may help mask a screwed up difficulty curve.  Or it may wind up creating one all on its own. 

4.  It gives you an option (in some games, depends on the game design) to out-level an area that's giving you trouble in order to just brute-force over it.

I think Dragon Age thus far has drawn more from the 1 and 2 aspects of leveling and not so much from the 3 and 4, although DA2 had more of 3.  The level-scaling in Origins along with your ability to do the areas in whatever order you felt like made this type of progression difficult to present and to see.  My characters would experience enormous jumps in power when they picked up critical abilities, then several levels of nothing while I spent points to get the next big ability.  

Part of this is that the abilities system means that there is absolutely no predicting when you will get certain abilities (apart from the ones with level requirements, which are always fairly low).  However, you do get a modest increase in power just from gaining more abilities (until you have so many that you can't keep track of them any more, anyway).

I think I'd like to see them do kind of a hybrid system in DA3 where you just GET certain abilities at certain levels (like, say, the ability to use a new type of combo attack, or a new defensive boost, or whatever), but you also use points to select your specific attacks.  I think this would allow for better scaling because they'd know at least SOME of what you had available to you.  It'd also work well with the single-specialization system, because your granted and chosen and specialization abilities could all interact in interesting ways.

#81
Guest_Nizaris1_*

Guest_Nizaris1_*
  • Guests
Level ups is open to abuse, for example, players who play as Rogue only invest in Dex and Cun on each level ups, so why not just give them the whole Dex and Cun in the beginning? Let say 25 levels give 20 points on each Dex and Cun, so why not just give 20 points each in the beginning of the game, then no level up at all?

If the enemy level as the player level, there is no point of level up at all...like in Oblivion, there is no reason to level up other than to get leveled items, because enemies leveled as you do, each level provide the same challenge

In pen and paper game, i mean in game books, the whole game is the same level, hard enemies are hard enemies, but along the way we play we have opportunity to upgrade our character to match up with the hard enemies in the end. Since DA is NOT an open world, there is no need for level up, because the game progress as the story progress....

DA, especially DA2 is very similar with game books...

Modifié par Nizaris1, 15 décembre 2012 - 06:06 .


#82
Steppenwolf

Steppenwolf
  • Members
  • 2 866 messages

Nizaris1 wrote...

What define real is as according to what world you live in

For example, magic is real where i live in, we have shamans doing stuffs, and we have religious peoples doing exorcising, that is the world i live in. So when when talk about is magic real, me and my people say magic is real. But in the west where people are skeptics, atheism rising, people who believe in science and facts, you guys don't believe in such things, so magic is not real to you guys.

Even in real world it is up to the people who decide what is real and what is not...

So when i say "realistic in games is not realistic in life" means the definition of real is as according to what define real in the game, not in real life.

in anyway...everything are just eletrical pulses in your brain, what is real anyway? How can you know you are not dreaming?


And here I thought we were full-up on crazy.

#83
Doctoglethorpe

Doctoglethorpe
  • Members
  • 2 392 messages

BasilKarlo wrote...

Exactly. It makes no sense.


That .gif was directed at both posts.  This conversation has gone beyond sense.