Jump to content

SanguineAngel

Members
  • Posts

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SanguineAngel

  1. The problem with your approach is that you end up hamstringing your party by not taking a Rogue along. I'd not mind having multiple solutions to each problem based on each class. A Rogue might use their knowledge of the criminal underworld where a mage might use a charm spell - in both situations, still provided that they possess the necessary skills. Likewise, a fighter OR rogue might try intimidation, while a mage might teleport and a rogue or ranger might use stealth or a fighter simple brute force and a mage might fling a fireball. The only pre-requisite, really, is that the devs put a bit of thought into each situation as to how each class and temperament might tackle a situation.
  2. Quite true, and that should be taken account in world building, I agree. However there is much more the the aesthetics of a culture than the basic weapon and armor designs. I'm saying that just because you have guns does not necessarily mean you also have powdered wigs, clothes with frills, and a dueling culture. If you enjoy renaissance or age of sail aesthetics then it's simply a matter of preference, of course. Fair enough, that makes sense. Just derailing a little bit - I wish all topics were this civilised Also, Sharmat's onto something. I'd love to see outlandish and lavish, fantastic design in the game but still retain a practical design ethos. The two are not mutually exclusive
  3. Thanks Sharmat. In fact, I do actively hope for [well written] romances. I believe that having a broader range of possible character interactions can only improve the party experience overall. Besides, if they are going to created multi-dimensional Relationships with companions then I can think of no reason for not including romance aside from it not being thematically relevant. So I answered the poll in that light. It was really just a case of realising, on coming in here, that many opponents to Romances are inadvertently throwing the baby out with the bathwater so to speak - grouping party relationships in with romance options and doing away with all of it, which would be a terrible shame.
  4. I don't know if it's just me but I've been using Romance as a sort of shorthand for "relationship" when it comes to cRPGs So to be specific, I don't mind if there is or is not romance available in your interactions with companions but I do think that developing relationships with companions is vital. The party dynamic (as in not static) is a huge part of the RPG experience and the simulated interaction in single player games like planescape and BG are a good way of instigating the dynamic through storytelling. I would therefore say that, whilst I don't mind overly whether character interactions lead to romance, I do think that the interactions between NPC and the player character & each other are very important and should be a high priority for devs. If well told, then romance is fine. But whether it's a tale of romance or friendship or enmity is academic. The important point for me is the dynamic and the player's ability to influence it from their character's perspective. The more paths you are able to take on that journey, obviously, the better. But the quality is important.
  5. Because, in a system where spells can be used outside of combat, so you would also expect to be able to use ALL classes outside of combat. So thieves wouldn't just be there to unlock loot you couldn't otherwise reach but would instead be able to use their own abilities to navigate interesting challenges.
  6. To be perfectly honest I would prefer a practical design over crazily outlandish design (although, I suppose this depends on the context). Really though, far FAR more important to me is that the visual design not be sexualised like 99% of all RPGs ever. By this I mean "armour" with plunging necklines down to the navel or "casual wear" that exposes every nook and cranny. I'm an adult and I'm perfectly at ease with depictions of romance and of sex where appropriate. But in the gaming industry, sex is crammed in in the least appropriate places and Fantasy games tend to be the biggest offenders. Please don't ruin a good story and good writing with a ridiculous aesthetic that is completely at odds with the rest of the game.
  7. I have to admit I'm not too fussed about the animations. I always have this idea where there's no "Hit points" and instead, combatants loose when they become too exhausted. Animations could reflect this - combatants deflecting attacks, with the odd touch landing or glancing blow indicating one combatant doing better than the other, then upon defeat, a lethal hit. In this way, you would need set animations for different weapon types in combination with each other. Also for number of combatants. But if we're talking an isometric game then such animations wouldn't necessarily be crazy amounts of work. I'm still not entirely clear if it's to be 3D or 2D (like IE engine)
  8. I'd rather not see game over partway through the game. Maybe a different [still satisfying] ending or a change to main plot. But it would be swell if these large decisions are not telegraphed to the player Bioware style. Although when it comes to being killed, hard please. Punishing traps! Tricky NPCs. Having to actually think about what you are doing. No to decisions made 10 hours ago killing you now but yes to doing something stupid/unlucky and going splat
  9. Is that not a problem regarding the writing rather than the mechanic itself?
  10. Nor is it an ARpg and so out of combat challenges are expected, it would be nice for class and skills to matter as much out of combat as in it. Sure enough, but expecting lots of QfG-style environmental puzzles may be taking it too far. I don't know. QfG was an RPG/Adventure hybrid. In a tabletop RPG you can certainly expect plenty of non-combat challenges. I suspect the limitations of early computing forced those RPGs down a very combat focused route - as combat was much easier to control for the programmer. Even then, games such as PST and BG2 tried to introduce those out of combat elements where they could. We're at a level of technology now where I suspect that we can evolve that element of the cRPG much further, if the devs are willing to try.
  11. Nor is it an ARpg and so out of combat challenges are expected, it would be nice for class and skills to matter as much out of combat as in it.
  12. Yeah, I think there were quite a few situations, especially in the late game, where puzzles like that had different solutions based on proficiency (which could be based partly on class in other games)
  13. Given the inspiration of Planescape and fallout, I am very optimistic about this. If I recall, it was possible to complete Planescape killing only 1 person. Whilst I distinctly remember in the old fallouts many a bandit camp stumbled upon and negotiating my way out. What happens if you can talk to the monsters? Turns out you can convince them not to kill you and you have a wicked time. Edit: As Pangur mentioned, the XP system in place would need to account for this.
  14. My god I would love to see some creative use of magic in RPGs for puzzle solving and in NPC interaction. Whether options presented as you describe or even dynamic effects. Chancing to cast charm on a guard, then talking to him for example. But yes, I agree with you. I would like to see magic used abundantly outside combat in not just PE but all cRPGs
  15. My main concern with this focus on "good" and "evil" is that this is a flawed and tiredly standard model for RPGs. The standard fable/mass effect good/bad bar is just... far too narrow minded. Most decisions aren't good or evil they are just decisions. The motivation and the outcome may vary wildly, and that applies to role playing. So I would like to see decisions aplenty! But I'd like it to be a different take on the whole deal. Maybe tracking not just player morality but also reputation separately. Limiting available actions based on your previous actions maybe - allowing to modify your character's personality tangibly through your actions. I don't know, there are so many ways of handling decision making and morality in games and I am bored of the same old good choice evil choice neutral choice - it's gamey, predictable, meaningless and boring. I would be disappointed if they went that route
  16. That's when he is talking about maximum party size. Goes on to say " It is no coincidence that there are at least as many companions as there are classes" implying that there will be more potential companions than the number of classes but that they will add companions with classes to continue their theme of having all classes available to you. No, dude, check update #2. Base goals and stretch goals. Ah I see, I didn't spot that, thanks. Although that does mean there are currently 6 companions to choose your 5 party members from and at the current rate of funding, 7 looks very likely. Still a few more would also be nice
  17. That's when he is talking about maximum party size. Goes on to say " It is no coincidence that there are at least as many companions as there are classes" implying that there will be more potential companions than the number of classes but that they will add companions with classes to continue their theme of having all classes available to you.
  18. Yes, and romance has no place in stories! Edit: Sorry, I should also contribute. For my part, I believe that the question of sexual orientation, whether straight or homosexual should only come to the fore if it's relevant. If romance and sex does come into the story, then I think it is crucial that not just sexual orientation but also gender roles in general be handled with respect and dignity. Above all, I hope whatever the story that the characters are well written and expertly presented and provide an intellectually and emotionally engaging, respectful story. That being said, characters come in all shapes and sizes. Even if it's not being directly addressed, I hope that the characters created represent all walks of life and are all handled with due care, respect and attention.
  19. Tenebrael I like what you're saying. Both the use of skills other than lethal combat to resolve situations and the organic decision making. Although I would add that both of those can be done in dialogue too.
  20. My only fear in this is that with so few companions, it will end up akin to Bioware's "catch-em-all" BFF-collection "parties", with very little true choice in the way your party plays out or is shaped. This is doubly true if you "just happen" to get one of every class - something that by itself stifles replayability, but is also such a trope, as if you're making them for the sake of making them, rather than to have interesting, fitting characters. Mechanically fitting or appropriate choices is in no way mutually exclusive to good storytelling, but it is just so incredibly boring to see "The Ranger", "The Warrior", "The Mage", rather than characters developed for their own sake. Is there no chance that we'll be seeing more companions than there are classes, or more relevant class-options than there are companions assigned to their roles? I was so very, very, very much hoping that we'd be able to get away from the ever-shrinking party options of modern RPGs. I want to do themed parties again. Bleh. I know exactly what you mean but I don't think that's what he meant. Given the games this is styled after, it's likely that while your part will be 6 adventurers, that 6 will be comprised of a selection from a larger cast, forcing you to choose which characters join you. My hope is that it won't be like NWN2 and DA:O where even if you do not have a character in your party they still count as being in your group.
  21. Sometimes, and especially in RPGs, I think failure would make just as good an adventure as success. I'd like to see valid failure states not just for the main quest line but also for meaty side quests. Ultimately an RPG is about the story you weave with your characters right? So it can only benefit if that tale can be full of tragedy as well as triumph. There's nothing to say that the hero must always be victorious. In fact that goes against every theory of storytelling I know of. To always win is boring and predictable.
  22. I don't see much of a difference if I'm honest. The PC or NPCs, none of them are you. They're all characters you have a hand in guiding their fate to some degree. Although, the idea that one character (the PC) would have such an arbitrary influence over their friends/companions' love life I would find a bit odd. Sure you ask your friends for advice but you make up your own mind. Likewise, I would expect an NPC to maybe talk to the PC about it, producing new story and interaction. But then giving the PC the deciding vote? Way too gamey.
  23. I agree - if you can't do it right, don't do it at all. But, I don't see why you're talking about simulating love. As far as I can tell, an RPG like this just needs to tell a good love story. It doesn't need to make the player fall in love but show the characters' love story in a convincing and engaging manner. And I believe that that is entirely possible.
×
×
  • Create New...