Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

Stun

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    2849

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    11

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Stun

  1. Stun
    It's also not hard for writers to project a sense of danger, and yet swords still do damage. And they're only unimaginative if the result of the timer going over is "YOU LOSE THE QUEST". Surely having something different happen if you wait several months to rescue the maiden is more imaginative than having the same set of events always happen? Which brings us right back to what we just got done discussing: the redundancy of the timer. Having something different happen if you don't rescue the princess".... can be done without one. So basically the only benefit of a timer is the sense of "urgency" or the illusion that the world moves on without your input, even though that elf maiden actually doesn't get kidnapped in the first place until you speak to the king and get the quest, or click on the notice board and get the quest, or overhear the town crier and get the quest....
  2. Stun
    The point is it's not hard at all for writers to project a sense of urgency, without resorting to controversial, and unimaginitive game mechanics like timers. And btw, what's this "waitng around" crap? Urgent, timed, quests ALREADY wait around forever for you to pick them up and accept them.
  3. Stun
    And What problem is that? I cited the possibility of failure at every step of the questline, including the very first step, which involves caving to greed, instead of "oops! I overslept and missed my appointment!" The problem is that, firstly, "caving to greed" isn't failure unless you're in the habit of basing your dialog options on a coin flip, and secondly, It is literally quest failure, since your mission was to rescue the princess, not strike a deal with bandits and let them kill her. To your second point, you assume of course, that joining a thieves guild is mutually exclusive to rescuing the princess, when the writers could easily make it NOT mutually exclusive at all, you could join the guild then recieve your very first quest: "Favors to get the king in our pocket ", which sees you....rescuing the princess.... Edit: my spelling skills are worsening by the second.
  4. Stun
    I cited the possibility of failure at every step of the questline, (your first request) including the very first step, which involves caving to greed, instead of "oops! I overslept and missed my appointment!" (your new request) The problem with things in the world happening without your input is that the entire game can literally pass you by if you're not a fast, and driven player. And while such a game might actually be interesting, No prominent gaming company will ever make such a game, so discussing it here is pointless.
  5. Stun
    Failure can easily be incorporated during the battle itself. One of the bandits, could, if you're not alert during combat, start taking shots at the elven maiden...killing her. Or you can kill the bandits, rescue the princess, but then refuse to escort her home when she asks, thus she dies from a goblin attack on the way home. Or, you could rescue the princess, decide to escort her home, but on the way, one of your companions decides to engage her in an argument, which you fail to defuse, which turns into a fight , and she gets killed. Still no timer needed.
  6. Stun
    Says who? What kind of lousy story writing sees someone kidnapping such a high profile target (heir to the throne!) and just assassinating her a.s.a.p, instead of holding out for countless blackmaling possibilities? And it doesn't matter "nick of time" isn't needed for the entire quest, branches, choice, consequence and all to play out.
  7. Stun
    Oh, Is the assassination supposed to fail because the player said "Yes, I'll prevent it" and get there, only to find out they arrived too late anyway? LOL Ok, Lets walk through this scenario. 1)Elven king's princess daughter gets kidnapped. 2)Elven king Hires you to free her. Marks the bandit group's hideout on your map 3)You go to the bandit hideout. 4)Bandit leader approaches you, tries to talk you into allowing them to assassinate her in exchange for [insert incentive/reward here] 5)You now have a choice. Side with the bandits and Allow the Elven princess to be assassinated -or- Side with the King and say NO and wipe out the entire bandit gang. The quest then branches out according to the choice you made in #5. No timer needed. Which means exactly nothing. Putting in fancy cinematics, QTE's, and full voice overs also adds more facets to the game, but is anyone here asking for Obsidian to turn Project Eternity into the Witcher 3?
  8. Stun
    Since Urgency isn't needed at all for such a quest to play out exactly as you're describing, branches and all, why are you citing it as an example on this thread in the first place?
  9. Stun
    Maybe you should read the entire thread, and the other one too. I've stated MANY times that "Complete or fail" is but ONE way timed quests can play out. Yeah,. and I cited it. point? In the meantime, we're no longer talking about urgency. instead, we've dishonestly changed the subject, preferring to put forth some fantastic, quest branching choice-consequence scenarios and then attempt to tie them to Urgency so as to make "timed quests" appear to be a no-brainer Must have. What you're describing can and does happen even in NON timed, NON-urgent quests. So you're not making a point.
  10. Stun
    And thus, she dies. Or maybe she escapes. Or maybe she's sold into slavery. If you character didn't care enough about the elven maiden, there's no reason to care now that something happened. Or the alternative: You took a few minutes to run to the shop to buy some arrows, and thus missed the stated deadline to save her by a few minutes. Yeah, no thanks. Again, that reeks of a clock game.
  11. Stun
    The inclusion of timed events where there's a definite "complete it on time, or else fail" does not, in any way, prevent the player from doing everything in one playthrough. Instead, it just prevents him from having a 100% quest success rate. big deal. Seems like a worthless thing to put in a game tho. Like Achievements. And deciding not to drop everything to save the kidnapped elven maiden in 30 minutes or less is not "ignoring the urgency", It's simply a refusal to play the "beat the clock" minigame.
  12. Stun
    Why must you assume that your debate opponent is a nutter who's only desire is to sit around forever, doing nothing? Many of us are Role players, and will easily impose our own urgency to deal with an eminent threat. we don't need the game to forceably impose it. As it stands, in my first playthrough of MoTB, I *didn't* "wait forever". The moment I had that conversation with Gann (where he's wincing about the spirits tearing up the land), I made my way to the front gate. Because that's all it took. So...why do I prefer *that* type of urgency over the one you keep preaching for? Because in the type I described the decision felt like it was mine to make. it didn't, for example, feel like the devs were forcing me to be their storyline puppet.
  13. Stun
    This entire argument operates in the complete vacuum of in game explanations for allowing the player to delay something that the story defines as urgent. An example was made early on this thread about a big bad army assembing at the border - and how the player shouldn't be allowed to casually/nonchalantly go about his day ignoring this army. But thatis a terrible example. There could be a MILLION reasons why that army chooses to wait, and not cross the border, until the player decides he wants to pursue that quest. often times in RPGs, we're Told that reason. Mask of the Betrayer, for example. Okku waits...waits in front of the Mulsantir gates for the spirit eater. Why? Because he's described as wise and calculating. Voila.... Problem solved. There's Still urgency, but the option for the player to take his time is still open, thanks to the writers covering the bases.
  14. Stun
    That, coupled with what is called a 'degenerate rest system' were flaws of design, true. But let me point out that there was the occasional urgency in BG: Jaheira and Khalid might quit on you prior to Nashkel. Likewise with Xzar and Montaron. A lot of people don't know that, I believe, because many recent tweak mods remove that feature. There's also the "Poisoned!" quest in chapter 5. And that dwarf who will leave your party if you don't flood the cloakwood mines. And Edwin will leave your party if you don't hunt down Dynahier. But lets be honest here, that's not really what we've been debating in these last 2 threads. It's not "urgency" when you're given a game month (or 2 game months) to do something. And you guys aren't asking for this sort of stuff anyway. No, you guys want something far more unneccessarily strict and "action-y"
  15. Stun
    Likewise, not every roleplaying game has to be a Navy Seals mission simulator. Man, you must have really hated Planescape Torment, BG1, BG2, Icewind Dale, Icewind Dale 2, and Temple of Elemental evil. As none of those games even *tried* to force you to play the 'beat the clock' minigame.
  16. Stun
    Finally. Someone gets it ^^
  17. Stun
    In other words, coming up with a more creative way to project urgency - one that doesn't involve quest timers. Yeah, I've been arguing for this since... Idk, page 4?
  18. Stun
    You're focussed on a friggin clock, instead of the game world. Only if you're the type of player who feels the need to be able to do everything in one play through without any sort problem. Or... if you're the type of player who dislikes excessive action-based mechanics in a non action based game. And there's a long list of "problems" that "my type" gleefully welcomes in an RPG. Quests avaliable only to certain builds, is one example. Quests that require serious thinking to solve is another. Then. don't. take. a. year. off. Give the quest the immediate attention you feel it deserves. But what you're arguing here is for such quests to *require* everyone to play as you would - and for success and failure to be dependent on a timer that goes tick -tick- tick, and can even run out while you're in the middle of actually *doing* that quest. Silly. Again, this goes counter to fundamental RPG basics.
  19. Stun
    How, exactly, do they break immersion? How do they not? You're focussed on a friggin clock, instead of the game world. I can think of nothing more retardedly arcade like
  20. Stun
    Ugh. Just... No. Quest timers have their own issues. They're lazy, immersion breaking, action-based mechanics that go counter to fundamental role playing basics. If we have to have urgency (see farm burning scenario), then lets use something more creative to project that urgency please. kthnksbye. What kind of argument is that? Do you feel that you will be unable to resist picking flowers in the face of an immenent threat unless the game forces you to? No? The by all means, when you're in that scenario, do what you want. But stop trying to shove your self-imposed limitations on the rest of us.
  21. Stun
    Then it seems that we're at an impasse due to the fact that you've drawn your line here, and I've drawn mine over there. How about some closing arguments. I'm totally alright with more logic and urgency in fantasy, right up until that logic and urgency infringes on my fun. If I have to rescue that child from the buring building before being allowed to go browse a merchant's wares, or before going to talk to that interesting looking quest giver I see down the street who just caught my eye, then the game is forceably trying to corral me. I dislike this. Story is nice and all but it should NEVER be the main and total focus of an RPG. Correct. it should simply be the main and total focus of an RPG's quest lines. Which is what we're discussing here.
  22. Stun
    That's not really an issue if the "quest timer" only starts from the point in time you pick up the quest. Which makes no sense. Somehow the gods have decreed that nothing is urgent until hero X hits the 'accept quest' button.
  23. Stun
    See, but that's the thing about trying to impose realism in Fantasy. You're forced to draw arbitrary lines in the sand on what's acceptable suspension of belief and what isn't. The fact of the matter is that it's equally illogical for something like a Fire to occur only when the protagonist is present, as it is for someone inside a burning building to survive for as long as it takes for the protagonist to rescue them. And my opinion is that the *Story* should reflect it. A well written story should sufficiently instill that sense of urgency. If actual gameplay mechanics have to be imposed on the player because the story itself wasn't powerful enough to get the player to act right away, then the devs have already failed.
  24. Stun
    Aah, the realism argument, is it? What else do you want the game to impose on us sheep? Should someone who takes their time, admires the scenery and spends a few hours chatting with NPCs at the inn fail to even get the burning building quest because the fire occured while he was away? Again, what's wrong with the way BG2 handled the Imoen questline? Does our thirst for action-game urgency REALLY trump classic role-playing freedom of exploration and taking your time to do what you want? Or better yet, what's wrong with the way Planescape handled the Carceri questline(s)?
  25. Stun
    I don't see why we need the game to force that urgency. Can't we just do it ourselves? If you think it's stupid that one can take 30 days to save that child from that burning building then.... don't do it. Go immedietly and fulfill that quest. And let the rest of us do what we want. Asking a game to arbitrarily impose urgency on the player - because you think the player will be too dumb to promptly react to an emergency otherwise - goes counter to the notion of Role playing. It's also a form of metagaming. Does your quest log have ESP? Does it have the clairvoyance needed to tell you precisely how long you have to save the elf maiden from rapists before they decide to kill her? I think BG2 did it best. You were allowed to impose your own Urgency with regards to saving Imoen - Or- you were allowed to take your time on it. Could you imagine how lame and freedom-constricting BG2 would have been if you were forced to save imoen within a set time limit otherwise she died?
×
×
  • Create New...