Sacred_Path
-
Posts
1328 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Posts posted by Sacred_Path
-
-
So slaughtering fantastic beasts with a sword is as mundane and commonplace a task as eating bread? What drugs are you on and how can I acquire them?
So eating can't be in the game because it's more mundane than sex or talking to other people? Stay away from my stash, your stuff is better than mine.
-
#This isn't fallout or some other game were basic survival is one of the main challenges.then why not make it one? I'm generally interested in why romance is preferrable to food
Presumably your character is smart enough to buy rations at the inn before departingthat would imply that there is a food mechanic in the game. If no gold is subtracted from my party's bag than they obviously didn't buy any food.
not to mention that in most fantasy settings there are a surfeit of tasty non-irradiated animals frolicking about.Nice, then why not simulate hunting? Does your wizard really catch deer with his little dagger? How come no arrows are used up in your quivers?
I also think there will be enough delicious damsels frolicking about in the cities, so why not simply assume that your character gets some?
-
I'd like to assume that my character knows when they're hungry and how to plan to have food available to them when traveling.
I don't like to assume my character knows how I want them to interact with other people.
I can't understand this arbitrarity. If you allow for the fact that your character has enough experience in his world to take care of his physical needs, why don't you just guess that he also knows how to satisfy his emotional needs?
A character doesn't have to be in a romance to live; they do have to eat* to live.Thanks, but that means there's more reason to have food in the game than romance, u know?
I'd like to assume dialog with other characters can lead to unexpected outcomes. If I eat bread, I should eat bread. Not roll for initiative and try to hit with my teeth.When you hit a monster with a sword, it dies. Not much variation in the outcome there either. Still it's in the game
The only way these two situations - in my opinion - could be remotely relatable is if I have to have dialog options with my food to successfully eat or something. Which is just weird enough concept to be worth it.Absolutely. If I could romance a pie [and eat it], we'd all be happy and I'd buy 10 copies of this game.
-
Morte wasn't forthrightly emotional. He displayed bratty, comedic behavior, yes. He wasn't a mature character, but he was written in a mature way.
I disagree. Unless you think using sarcasm is a sign of maturity (I'm p. sure teens can pull that off generally).
Morte was a gimmicky character like Bender. Due to their peculiar condition hey're both not or pretend to be not affected by things that would deeply affect others, so they can be entirely blasé about them. They're also both mediums or spokepersons for the writers. Thirdly, they're supposed to offer comic relief. The one thing that saved Morte from being just a nuisance was that he was using 'slang' that had been created for a fantasy game.
You can have violent hysterics that are written in a mature way--people tell them to shut up instead of rushing to their side and then yelling at you for hurting their feelings. They are a rarity and are treated as if they are making idiots of themselves (sometimes forgiveably) rather than being a prime example of standard behavior.In most cases where I've seen dialogue like your example I suspected it was at least in some ways the writer's understanding (and even mockery) of the fact that with the limited lines you usually have in a CRPG, it's very hard to create dialogue that is on the one hand well-tempered and realistic, and OTOH affects the player emotionally. Especially in an isometric 2D game where you have no body language to speak of. At least for the IE games, I also can't remember that I've seen such weird dialogue so regularly that it gave the impression that this was the norm in this gameworld.
-
I'd like someone who supports romance in games argue against a food mechanic. Anyone?
-
2
-
-
You're thinking hysterical means humorous.
Erm no, I didn't. I was generally talking about over-the-top emotional dialogue, like your eample.
It doesn't. It means wildly, violently emotional in an extremely demonstrative way. It is the antonym of reserved. Morte was a reserved character--he used humor, sarcasm, and occasionally outright lies to cloak his past and his emotions. Being reserved doesn't mean you can't be friendly, talkative, or humorous. It means you don't go around shoving your problems in people's faces.puh-lease, do you mean to tell me you actually liked Morte's dialogue, but not the sobbing, weirdly emotional housewife? They're both not examples of what I'd conceive as realistic or well-tempered. Morte was entirely a gimmicky comic character (I just didn't mind because he was a floating skull and that made it clear from the outset what his role was).
-
While the community may be diverse the reasons for their backing are not; the IE games, and as long as their philosophies aren't against things that were present in those games it shouldn't be an issue.
I don't think that if you're against handling certain things like they were done in IE (like stealth) makes you any less of a backer.
-
To be fair, in IWD1 you're part of what's supposed to be a fairly large contingent of people, so I don't think its that crazy. You were joining a large group organized by a former adventurer, not supposed to be the sole defenders of the caravan.
Still, they paid you for the job. It's not like you just ended up on that caravan.
-
Don't make the player faster than most monsters, that should take care of most kiting.
On higher difficulties, make sure that slow melee monsters are often accompanied by enemies with ranged attacks/ spells.
-
Rape? Rascism? Sex? Usually put in as a juvenile attempt at appearing mature and gritty.
Yes, it's all about the presentation. Which is probably why rape is not usually portrayed in CRPGs, there are so many wrong notes you could hit there. [The other reason is that RPGs tend to be egalitarian and you'd need some female-on-male rape just because]
I've also understood 'mature themes' to mean more discussion/commentary on the 'grey areas' of humanity. I'll write up some examples of what I might expect to see in a fantasy RPG like Project Eternity:
Does the end justify the means? #1
You're stocking supplies in a coastal town. You've been hearing about a plague sweeping up from the west, and are planning to leave on the next ship. You were among the last people to be allowed in before the local ruler garrisoned the town. When you're paying the blacksmith for his work, you hear noise from the gate. You wander over to see what's happening - there are archers shouting at people standing a distance away from the gates. You hear people whispering about the plague.
Do you allow the local ruler's archers to shoot down the mob of people because some of them might be carrying the plague? This could prove to be a wise decision - after all, you've heard that there's no cure for this plague.
Or do you grant them entry across the town perimeter and potentially endanger hundreds of healthy citizens? Maybe this is something you could live with, regardless of the consequences. Or could you?
Or do you simply leave, wanting to have nothing to do with any of it? Perhaps this isn't your fight, and you're certainly not the ruler here.
This is interesting. Will people be happy to roleplay without a clear "moral compass"? Would you really just walk away from content, missing out on playtime, XP and gold? Will people miss the hero and villain routes, because they give you clear objectives and a pat on the head (alignment/ reputation)?
Dial up the subtlety. You have to tell someone that their husband was killed in battle? Instead of "OH GOD, WHATEVER WILL I DO!!!! *sob*" How about "I . . . thank you for telling me. Please, if you would . . . I need some time."Related to the question above, would people miss clear, "hysterical" NPCs if they're presented with more subtle dialogue? After all, it has to make an impact on you (or at least try to). Morte basically only had over the top, cheesy dialogue, but people mostly loved him.
-
I do find that in Dragon Age and Mass Effect and other cinematic games, the opportunity to use just a facial expression or body language for communication is ignored.
But then, cutscenes often show mimics and gestures that don't totally relate to what's being said. And then you have to think of the semi-Aspergers (like me)
-
I think romances are expensive to develop well. You just can't slap one together and call it a day.
Reminds me of that one time where I romanced Arie. I just kept on doing it to see exactly how masochistic I am.
-
1
-
-
A few things that irritate me:
- Abundant material wealth w/o any explanation. Village blacksmiths swimming in swords, gold everywhere.
- Lack of citizens in cities. If for some reason you don't want to put many (filler) NPCs in one place, make it a town, not a sprawling city.
- Unexplained (lack of) buildings. Cities that have no walls, or buildings that are far larger than any medieval couterparts (it's teh magic I know)
- Thriving communities, again without walls or many guards, when the entire countryside is crawling with monsters.
-
Also having to comit a crime or work with a particularly malignant criminal organisation to achieve a good goal might also be interesting (such as how an under cover cop might have to witness unspeakable things yet maintain his composure and not do anything about them in order to crack a particularly difficult case).
That's the kind of thing I expect to see, too - creating the "grey" by having the player sway between "white" and "black". What I'm wondering about is what consequences they will come up with that really affect the player - without an alignment meter that satisfyingly (somewhat) drops or rises, will the consequences of such actions ever matter to anyone but you?
-
Social issues work if you're hitting some of those grey areas, but if it's just broad "social commentary" - oh look, this town is poor and starving under the tyrant's rule and I must gather them 10 sacks of grain so they can survive the winter - I tend to feel a bit blase about it. Needs to be personalized in some way.
I second that (when I said it's neat and easy to tack this onto some dialogue I meant it's neat for the developers, not the players). What also bothers me is how the player usually stands outside of all these issues - they're never discriminated against, and they're never caught up in any devious capitalist mechanics that eat up all their gold.
-
In Divine Divinity, you had two skills that increased your sight. In PE, maybe make it a feat/ perk.
-
It's been made known that PE will explore MADSHURE themes. We're still left to guess as to how that pans out.
I think that today, that inevitably means romances. I just hope that they will be written in such a mature manner and with such relevance for gameplay that they are more than the usual nuisance.
Just as inevitable are comments about social issues like racism, sexism or class struggles. What is nice about these is that they can be injected into dialogue without much effort and give it a hint of maturity and relevance.
I'd also expect some light philosophical dialogues as in PS:T. I'm not sure wether that's a good thing yet.
What I'd personally like to see is more internal consistency of the world, like a somewhat believable economy.
What do you expect to see, and what makes you feel like you're not playing a game that was made for kids?
-
Having areas be different during the day and night dovetails very nicely with you always arriving in the day and being able to "sleep until dark"--so you can explore the area on purpose during both the day and the night.
It would be cool if the areas would be a little different during the night, not significantly safer/ more dangerous. I'm all for strongly limiting your sight during the night though, and if that makes fighting more dangerous, so be it. Did your characters infravision or lack thereof ever make a difference in BG? I never noticed, it was definitely not more difficult to navigate or fight at night.
-
No, players complain about level scaling because it removes challenge (no higher level enemies than you,)
Depends entirely on the game. There can still be fixed enemies/ bosses, and the scaling can allow for some difference in level (both are true in Wiz8).
and believability (everyone else is at the same level as you,) from the game.granted.
Example: Oblivion. By the late 20s in level, you were running into podunk bandits carrying the highest-tier equipment in the game when it's simply impossible that these bandits could have killed the otherworldly abominations that originally owned that Daedric Armor.Wait - do you mean these bandits didn't have the stats and skills to explain their gear plausibly? Were they too easy to kill still? If yes, that's more of an example of scaling done badly. If not, there's nothing implausible about them having this equipment.
Level scaling isn't hated because we're whiny and want stupid easy oneshot fightsIf you haven't read a lot of posts on level scaling with exactly this statement, then you haven't read a lot of posts on level scaling. Personally I'm not decided on the matter btw, level scaling can be useful if done right but there are drawbacks.
-
If the designers can't do that, then I'd almost prefer that the party be banished from the first city.
Speaking of banishment...
Maybe make at least one city not so easy to enter/ re-enter. I remember being so baffled when (without reading the tutorial) I walked up to the first town's gates in U7: Serpent Isle and wasn't allowed in (hey I was 13). I had expected the game world to be as lenient as in U7/1. Also Darklands. I also remember how many were commenting on how lame it was to get into Barcelona in Lionheart (no matter what you said to the guard the gate always opens).
Don't make the world the gamer's oyster. This would be especially cool if getting into a city was a really pressing concern (because camping outside is v. dangerous, for example).
It could be something as simple as charging the player to get into the city.
-
1
-
-
Don't make one of the cities redundant, plz. Not like hub 2 replaces hub 1 at some point in the game and there's no reason to ever return to 1.
-
3
-
-
Companions should abide by the same rules that characters from the Adventurer's Hall go by. They shouldn't have weirdly high skills or attributes, and no shpeshul personal equipment (like Edwin's Amulet in BG2). Don't punish the player for creating his own party.
-
The game should be designed in a way that accomodates no-reload play more. For instance, if you have only very small chances of stealing something, and if failure means your entire game goes to hell (because of guards spawning that kill you), the only option in a no reload game is to avoid stealing altogether.
-
Just leave that can of worms to Bioware.
Did Bioware do this to its fanbase, or do video game romances attract these sorts of people?
slowclap.gif
Relationship/Romance Thread IV
in Pillars of Eternity: General Discussion (NO SPOILERS)
Posted
1. Few things would be more important than food.
2. There can be choices about food - do you actively kill monsters/ animals and eat them, do you use a character's skill (like setting snares) to simulate hunting, or do you fight humanoid enemies to buy food with their gold?
that is a primitive food mechanic, one that I'm not averse to. Sadly you don't even have that usually