Jump to content

spacekungfuman

Members
  • Posts

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by spacekungfuman

  1. First, I'd like to thank you for taking the time to discuss this issue with us. As you know very well, hardcore fallout fans spend a LOT of time talking about this very issue, so the chance to talk with the lead Designer of Van Buren about it is pretty incredible. I'll grant your metagaming point, but just because we can simulate actions in a different way doesn't mean that we should. You're right to say that hardcore CRPGs require a different skill set than pikmin or Katamai Damacy, but its not coincidental that hardcore CRPG fans all possess the skills to play their chosen games, while only some have the skills to play the latter types. If you have a decision between a system that works for all the genre fans and one which doesn't, then why use the system which doesn't work for all the genre fans? Bungie could make the next Halo a lightgun game, and while that may simulate being master chief as well or better than the old control scheme, that doesn't neccesarily mean that its the right choice for a Halo game. I guess that's just the point. Stealth in Oblivion isn't challenging in any way, so making it require more effort than the infinity engine's toggle is just a waste of time to many people. And including a challenging stealth game would exclude a lot of traditional rpg fans entirely. There's probably a balance here (which I know if what you're looking for) but it seems to me like its a compromise that doesn't need to be reached, since the stealth toggle was so easy and quick that it didn't need to be fun on its own. It was just unobtrusive, leaving non stealth action fans alone, while keeping stealth action fans from being disappointed by a promising yet over simplified stealth mini game. See, this doesn't implicate any twitch ability, so I agree that noone would find it objectionable. But I can personally say that given the choice of IE stealth or mild twitch based, I'll take the IE toggle. At the worst, its what I (and other CRPG fans) are used to. I wasn't accusing you of liking Oblivion's world interaction I just wanted to bring it up to show how far Oblivion has strayed from CRPG traditions. You know I wasn't saying that all RPG fans don't like Oblivion. But I'm sure that you've seen the reaction to Oblivion on RPG enthusiast sites. Fans on RPGCodex, NMA, DAC, hell, even on the fallout 3 and Morrowind boards on Gamefaqs, generally revile the game as being the most watered down and disappointing excuse for a CRPG in years. So I have to admit that its disheartening to see a Black Isle alum like yourself saying Oblivion was a step in the right direction, even if its only in limited ways. Maybe this approach is a good way to grow the market (and I know money is the chief concern here) but it comes at the expense of the hardcore fans. I'm tired of saying all my favorite games are 10 years old. I hope that 10 years in the future, if I say my favorite games are 20 years old, it isn't be default.
  2. Josh - I honestly think that you've lost sight of the player/character distinction that is the heart of a game being an RPG vs just a game. Here's what I think an RPG requires: A brain transplant, and a world that's not a vacuum. I've mentioned numerous games as examples to better illustrate what I mean by both of these characteristics. Part 1: The brain transplant In an RPG, your character is a person in a world. His characteristics are set out by his statistics, and the way that those statistics impact his interactions with that world's rules of physics, standards of behavior and attractiveness, etc. The player essentially has his brain placed in the character's body, and has to abide by that character's physical abilities. (note, its really more like you become the pilot of his brain. All the data is still filtered through the character's mental statistics, but you give the orders based on that data.) In a standard game, you just put on a mask. Regardless of how well the character could aim, run jump, dodge, etc, it is meaningless, because the player's ability with a mouse or controller is all that determines how the character fares. This is playing a role in a trivial sense, but all you're really doing is playing yourself, with another person's appearance. And blended games like Oblivion are not any better when you look at the marginal cases. People tend to focus on the unskilled character who hits based on high player skill, but I think the bigger problem is the high skill character that misses based on low player skill. Many people are forgiving in the former case, because its fun to succeed. But how about in the latter, where a character with a heavy stealth build is always detected because the player (who wants to play as a stealth character) is simply not skilled with a mouse or keyboard. Ironically enough, this type of hybrid game restricts a person's ability to assume the role of a character different from himself, because the player isn't enough like the character that he wants to build. If you insist on taking the main characters in Splinter Cell or Thief as archetypes of the stealth based rpg character, then how can you respond to the Thief player who desperately wants to play the game in a stealthy way, but can't because the character is the only member of the character+player team who knows how to stealth. What I'm basically driving at is these types of games are only fun for people who are good at action games, and there may be little or no overlap between that group and CRPG fans. They're certainly not mutually inclusive, but its equally clear that the class of people who like action games does not include the entire class of CRPG fans. Part 2: The Vacuum. Part of being a person is making choices, and part of being a person who does not live in a vacuum is having those choices impact that state of the world. When Fallout 1 and 2, Arcanum, KOTOR 1 and 2, BG 1 and 2, and many other PC RPGs give you choices that impact the content in the game, they effectively tell you that your character is a PERSON, and that as such, he can impact the world, for good or for ill. If you take this away, then the choice that you make (moral or otherwise) in the game are no different in character than facial customization at the start of the game: they're merely aesthetic. In Fallout, people would react to a child killer by saying "He's a terrible person, and I want nothing to do with him, based on his immorality." Where as In Oblivion (if you could be a child killer, which is impossible) people would say "Oh he's a child killer. Let me treat him like everyone else." To show the absurdity of this, let's consider a parallel reaction, based on your character having a big nose. In Fallout, people would probably say "He has a big nose. Sure he's a little ugly (so I don't want to sleep with him) but I'll treat him like any other human being". In Oblivion it would be "Oh he's got a big nose. Let me treat him like everyone else." In Fallout, choices can actually be moral, because they bear consequences, including social disapproval. In Oblivion, all you can really do is make choices about what type of nose you want to have. The Arena champ's nose. The worst mass murderer in history's nose. All choices that impact you, but only in superficial ways. What can we conclude from Oblivion's 1) emphasis on player skill, not character skill 2) complete lack of meaningful choices and 3) its huge success in a market populated with players who have probably never even played a PC RPG (xbox 360 owners)? That Oblivion does not represent the evolution of the RPG at all. It represents a successful way to appeal to an action oriented crowd with no experience playing the stat based simulation RPGs. In other words, Oblivion is a great example of how an RPG maker can abandon their genre, for a hollow commercial success. Oblivion is "Selling Out 101."
×
×
  • Create New...