Jump to content

ogrezilla

Members
  • Posts

    882
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by ogrezilla

  1. ya hopefully most areas have a combination of armor/weapon types so you can't just equip the whole group with the "best" equipment for that location.
  2. no artificial level cap. Just have a limited amount of XP available in the world. I absolutely hate when games let you reach the level cap before completing the game. If I'm still completing new things, I should still be gaining XP.
  3. I am super happy they are moving away from the DnD class designs. I am also happy they aren't listening to the fans too much. The guys at Obsidian are better game designers than we are. There is no doubt in my mind that JS has a better understanding of what will make a game I enjoy than I do myself. This thread has me even more optimistic.
  4. I fully support the type of rogue and cypher you are describing. But I also think rogues should be able to be built to be really good at stabbing people in the back. Even if it just means they are better at getting to the back than other classes; no special damage boost required. I like options within each class.
  5. Sure, a Thief isn't an Assassin. And a Rogue isn't a Thief. A Rogue is an unprincipled, deceitful, and unreliable person; a scoundrel or rascal. A wandering beggar; a vagrant. Or someone operating outside normal or desirable controls. That might lead them to steal things. Or it might lead them to assassinate people. The main thing to expect from a Rogue is for them to have little respect for honor, the law and a fair challenge. They will do what they can to tilt the odds in their favor. Dirty tricks should be expected. But whether they are using these tricks to steal or fight or murder is completely left out of the definition of Rogue.
  6. I think this would take away entirely too much exploration and discovery. The trigger idea makes sense to me. I know I've played games that do this, I just can't think which ones.
  7. torches seem much different than those other things. they fundamentally change how you need to go about certain dungeons. They change the actual strategy and tactics of the combat and everything. The others are simply more micromanagement. I think a game would need to be designed to take advantage of dynamic lighting from the ground up for it to be a worthwhile addition to the game. That is to say, probably not this game. I love the idea though.
  8. definitely not necessary, but I think dynamic lighting could be a very good mechanic for this type of game. Whether this is a game that should use it (being an intentional "throwback" type of game) I don't know.
  9. it depends. If they are a limited item they should actually be limited either by being hard to find or by gold actually being limited and valuable. If including lockpicks as an item means I have to be careful about unlocking every lock I come across because I might run out of picks, then ya that's cool with me. Maybe I need to listen to some guards or explore a little more for clues to decide if breaking into a chest or a room is worth the resources. But if including lockpicks as an item just means I have to go buy more lockpicks for practically no money on occasion then no, that's just a waste of time. I don't really remember ever having to carefully consider if I could afford to unlock something in any game with lockpicks; but then again I always have a character who is very good at picking locks which usually means I am using very few per lock. It is a decent way to provide some leeway to a party without a great thief without allowing them to open locked things very often due to a lack of resources.
  10. because I like knowing that I overcame an obstacle that I might not have been able to overcome had I made different choices with my character's development along the way. And ya, I understand wanting to experience things as the character. But its still a game; I don't want to experience the boring stuff. I don't want to eat or go to the bathroom. I assume they get done because I don't starve and people will talk to me without mentioning that I smell like I soiled myself, but I don't want to do them. I don't want to put together the pieces of stuff it takes to craft something. I enjoy the gathering of materials and the outcome of creating something though. And I don't want to actually pick locks even though I enjoy the decision to unlock something I am not meant to be able to open and I enjoy getting the rewards it can provide. It is a mundane task. I don't have any desire to simulate mundane tasks. I do enough of that in my own life. I do, however, enjoy the decision making process and possible ramifications that go along with picking a lock.As a skill, it is a valuable part of the game. As an actual in game activity, I want no part of it. edit: I am aware that this is purely opinion. You are completely entitled to your own as well. Its not something that will cause me to quit playing the game or anything. I'll simply cringe a little every time I have to do it.
  11. Unless the game includes action sequences where it actually matters how fast the character picks the lock I hope there is no delay for picking the lock. It adds no value to a game designed like the IE games were. It just wastes a little time. The "minigame" method just gives me something to do while wasting my time. I don't play these games to pick locks. It just isn't a fun process. I have never thought to myself "man I can't wait to find a locked door so I can pick it!" Its something that needs to be included, but the enjoyment is in having the character skill to get past the lock. I have no interest in simulating the actual process of picking a lock. Not even a little bit.
  12. I'm not talking about the things we can control in a fight. We don't control all of the little details in effectively swinging a sword in a fight. We tell the character where to go and who to swing at; their stats decide everything else. Misses, hits, blocks, crits, dodges and everything like that. It all gets represented by the character just swinging away while the character stats actually do all the work. We have no control over any of it beyond "stand here and swing at this guy." I think lockpicking should be the same way. We tell the character to stand here and pick this lock and let their stats decide if they do so or not. Again, we do NOT have any control over the effectiveness of a sword swing because it is decided by character skill. We don't have control over the effectiveness of a picked pocket. We don't have control over the effectiveness of a bluff. We tell the character to do these things and the stats of that character decide if they are successful or not. I don't see why picking locks should be any different. I also just don't enjoy the lockpicking "minigame" in any game I have ever played. That's obviously purely an opinion, but I find them to be a boring waste of time.
  13. Hitting the opponent while not being hit yourself would be a better equivalent to picking the lock. Just swinging the sword would be like putting a lockpick in the lock. I could put a lockpick in a lock and jiggle it around just as easily as I could swing a sword. Effectively swinging a sword in a fight is a MUCH more difficult process than effectively picking a lock.
  14. swinging a sword with any skill is a process. skilled fighters aren't just going to flail their arms around. They are going to decide where to aim. They are going to time the swing so that they can hit the opponent while they are vulnerable while minimizing their own vulnerability. Then they are going to decide what to do next. They aren't going to stand next to their opponent and take turns swinging. But that's what we see in game. The stats simulate everything else. Telling a convincing lie is a process. Stealing something from someone's bag or picking a pocket is a process. The player inputs his decision making into the game and lets the character's skill perform those actions. I don't want to perform the menial tasks. If I wanted a game where I controlled the processes my character was going through, I'd play an action game. If the next Assassins Creed wants to include lockpicking minigames, by all means go for it. As someone told in their story up above, it fit well into The Elder Scrolls games because they are more action oriented. But in an RPG like this, I just don't have any interest in it. My role in a cRPG is to be the decision maker. The decision of breaking into a house or stealing someone's locked treasure is fun. Picking a lock is not fun in my opinion. Especially when its the same basic process every time. In my opinion obviously.
  15. Because, unlike being strong enough to lift an object, or possessing enough willpower to not run in terror, picking a lock is an actual process. Meeting a skill requirement doesn't change the fact that picking a lock actually requires your character to perform that process. Is it necessary to have a minigame represent that process? No. But it's equally as unnecessary to automatically assume that process shouldn't be represented at all. Which is exactly why there's generally some silly little 5-second animation associated with a lockpicking attempt, as well as the risk to fail, in a lot of RPGs that don't use any sort of "minigame" mechanic. Should PE use a separate mechanic interface for lockpicking? Maybe, maybe not. But, whether or not it should or shouldn't, or even ends up using one or doesn't, it is absolutely pointless to argue that a minigame mechanic offers only cons and no pros. If you eat a banana, and you decide you don't like bananas, that doesn't make all the nutrients you just got from that banana cease to exist. Maybe at that point you should ask "Hmm, how might I go about finding something that provides the nutrients the banana provided while also tasting good?" rather than coming to the conclusion that food is useless because it has the potential to taste bad. so what about swinging a sword or casting a spell? Or picking pockets? Crafting? Should we have to control the facial expression of our character when he bluffs to be sure he doesn't give himself away? It just doesn't make sense to me that every other character skill is decided by the stats of the character, but player skill comes in to play for lockpicking. Player decision making trumps skill in almost every other scenario in this type of game -- what makes lockpicking so special that the process needs to include the skill of the player along with the skill of the character when no other character skill does the same? Swinging a sword is a process. Shooting a bow is a process. Dodging or blocking an attack is a process. But this isn't an action game so we don't perform those processes; we make the decision for our characters to perform those processes. You mentioned inventory management at some point. I don't like the tetris style inventory systems. Its just annoying. Give me a stat based weight limit and call it a day imo.
  16. Is there a good reason why lockpicking should be handled differently than any other skill check by having an interactive "minigame" attached to it while none of the other skills have something similar? I do personally like unique puzzles to unlock certain things; just not the repeated minipuzzles that come with every single lock in some games.
  17. I will be very disappointed if an isometric party based game released in 2014 doesn't have full hotkey and mouse button functionality; including but not limited to party grouping hotkeys. I also want an RTS style minimap for the map and movement controls they allow but others have seemed to be against that. But yes, no reason the different buttons and keys shouldn't all be utilized. The mouse wheel switching between characters on the different menus seems like a good use to me. If zooming is enabled I would expect the basic use for the wheel outside of menus would be to control the zoom.
  18. I have never played a game with a lockpick minigame that I enjoyed. Not one. They don't ruin the game or anything, but they add absolutely nothing but a distraction that gets incredibly stale after the 4th or 5th lock. If lockpicking gets minigames, I don't see why every skill check wouldn't get the same. Every sword swing could have a minigame. Every save attempt could get a minigame. Every dialogue check or attempt to craft. I just don't see the reason behind lockpicking getting a minigame. If they want to add minigames, add a fair or something that you can go to and play them. Add an optional card game. But don't force minigames on basic character skills.
  19. it really just depends on how it is implemented in the world. I definitely thing there should be differences in the world that reflect the existence of magic. I just don't know how far it needs to go. It depends on how common the ability to use magic actually is too. Are the enchantments permanent? Is a fire enchantment the same thing as actually setting something on fire? Or would fire magic just allow them to light their fires more easily while still requiring fuel to keep the flame going? If magic can start the fire but not maintain it without a constant effort by the caster its more likely the people in this world would still use fuel; they just might forgo the invention of matches or lighters. In general, I think I agree with your train of thought though. A world with magic should have signs of magic throughout the world; not just in combat.
  20. separate tutorial in the menu please. BG2 and ToEE both did this.
  21. good call. if we're being realistic enough to consider magic and the economy, we should consider magic and physics as well. The energy has to come from somewhere.
  22. I'm just quoting this part because I agree with the rest. But I think magic is a perfectly valid reason for this world to be considerably different than a realistic medieval europe would be.
  23. My assumption is anyone picking that option would go and do those things you mentioned -- like read a book -- if they wanted that kind of story. The video game is for the combat. That said, I can't really vote here because I like good games either way. There are some great games with very minimal or no story, and there are some great games with very minimal or no combat.
  24. And I again ask you why do you think that battlefield mobility doesn't make him effective enough? Does he really have to have a special crit atack to be effective? Of course not. There is no "must". Balance cna be achieved in may ways...especially if you're a immaginitive sort. Fair enough. I worded that poorly. I meant I prefer the more direct stab guys in the back style, but would definitely be happy to see the style you are talking about as a valid option as well. I like choices and both sound fun to use to me. In general, I do agree that rogues don't really need to do more damage from behind than other classes do. I'd be perfectly happy with them simply being more adept at getting into position to take advantage of it than other classes. Because ya, a trained fighter can probably find a weak spot in someones back just as well as the rogue; the fighter would probably just have a harder time getting behind his enemies.
×
×
  • Create New...