Jump to content
The Community Blog (An Invitation)

mcmanusaur

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    601

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

 Content Type 

Everything posted by mcmanusaur

  1. mcmanusaur
    Hmmm... so it seems we have a lot of people who claim to like fantasy just because it tends to have a medieval setting (swords and castles). I'd be very curious to hear their thoughts on magic, since that arguably has more to do with fantasy than swords.
  2. mcmanusaur
    You know, I think I'll edit the poll to include an option along these lines.
  3. mcmanusaur
    Hey guys, by now you have probably noticed my tendency to sporadically put up very generalized polls, and this is my latest effort. Essentially, I'm asking everyone to think very hard about why fantasy appeals to us, being fully honest with ourselves in the process. I think that we often tend to fall prey to the allure of crusading under the "fantasy" banner, without really considering what it is about fantasy that specifically appeals to us. There are many potential answers for this, and I believe that they have different implications for design philosophy, so I think it's important that this is considered. Poll answers are anonymous for the record.
  4. mcmanusaur
    "But how can this exist in an RPG unless there's some gamist motivation for caring about it?"
  5. mcmanusaur
    I would be inclined to assume that it stems from the fact that in DnD- despite there being a wide variety of classes in recent editions- there's really only a handful of potential roles in combat, and most classes are just subtypes of those roles (a ranger is just a warrior who happens to specialize in archery, for example). Thus, when a class that is typically confined to a single role begins to have the potential to fulfill one or two other roles, that one class starts to encapsulate most of the role possibilities in such a system. The solution is creating classes that are fundamentally different and not re-skins of the same role (I would assume that PE seeks to do that for many reasons), as that would lead to a larger body of possible "roles", but that would take a lot of creativity in the narrowly defined scope of combat.
  6. mcmanusaur
    So, if I'm getting your point, you seem to be saying that the IE games might work because they are cohesive rather than my 'symbol' hypothesis. (BTW, I don't know what you're referring to by the "uncanny valley" spiel). One reason why it may not suggest that is that if you were to compare the IE games with the same stories played with pencil and paper where you were doing dice rolls and calculations yourself, the mechanics of playing could intrude on the story. Also, the voice and graphics of the IE games are adding something. My hypothesis is that they are adding something like a symbolic language. Fair enough. Let's not use the word immersive. Suppose that for the sake of discussion, we say there is a 'book - movie contiuum'. I'll just throw this out there: The IE games might be closer to the book side where they succeed whereas many newer games have tried to put themselves on the movie side and failed. You could probably make the case that what I'm arguing about it being easier to entertain one's own idiosyncratic representations (such as the hair example) as being in general agreement with the "symbolic representations" idea that you propose. I am simply suggesting that it's the ability to personalize such symbols that is what lends them their attractive qualities, rather than a general quality of "immersion" inherent in symbols but not in realism.
  7. mcmanusaur
    Ah... yep, learning curve is definitely one aspect that I overlooked, and it makes sense that class-based systems might perform better in that regard. Many implementations of classless do seem somewhat lacking in diversity of experience, but I like to think that this is something that can be mitigated in a cleverly designed classless system, especially a more holistic (i.e. not exclusively combat-focused) one. There's conceivably a finite limit to the number of ways that you can kill something, and perhaps when that comprises an RPG's entire scope a more firmly delineated (i.e. class-based) system can be preferable, but otherwise "the possibilities [for diverse experiences] are endless".
  8. mcmanusaur
    Not correct at all. I'll save this one for future use. While I do have a couple reservations about the "soul magic" (which may or may not turn out to be valid once we know more about it) making every character something of a mage in the manner of Skyrim's dragon shouts, I've really never seen how one can make the case that free weapon and armor choice "lets all classes take on any role". That would be somewhat akin to arguing that just because a warrior can equip a bow in DnD, he can suddenly become a ranger at his discretion (the implication of which is that the actual ranger class becomes pointless). In fact, this is not the case at all; one can think of it in terms of "basic attacks" and "special abilities". In reality, most classes have always been rather similar in regards to their "basic attacks", and the only real functional difference has been in terms of melee vs. ranged (magic staff attacks being a subtype of ranged). Thus, "special abilities" have always been what defines the classes, and PE will rely on a similar principle. A wizard may be able to wield an axe and wear heavy armor, but she will never have the correct supporting "special abilities" to be able to compete with the warrior at his own game (though the melee wizard may be effective in her own right). One could make the case that problems could arise if the "special abilities" of different classes started to overlap too much, but I think this is unlikely simply due to the sheer number of class-specific abilities it would require to cover all roles, if nothing else.
  9. mcmanusaur
    Tactical party-based combat is one of the three stated pillars of PE which is one of the reasons we're using them. Of course, and I might add that I believe that alone is reason enough to use classes in PE. That said, if you think class-based systems inherently have additional advantages (over all other systems, including but not limited to skill-based systems) beyond party-based combat, I would definitely be interested in hearing them. (My post was simply intended to address the singleplayer RPG genre in general, for which I believe a classless system is usually- but not always- somewhat preferable. Such general conjecture seems to be something of a habit for me, even though one could easily make the case that this forum isn't the place for it, so I apologize for any confusion it may cause. )
  10. mcmanusaur
    I honestly have to say that for me this "less graphical fidelity is [somehow] more immersive" angle and even also some of the "uncanny valley" spiel doesn't ring true at all. I can see how sometimes highly stylized graphics can provide a more cohesively unique experience than incoherent attempts at photorealism (such as if the terrain had high quality textures but the character models were bad) can, but in such cases I wouldn't say that my immersion in particular is benefiting. If what this post seems to suggest (that symbolic abstractions are more immersive than realistic simulations) is true, then are card games or board games the holy grail of immersion? There are probably some who would argue that they are, but I wouldn't agree with that. I suppose it comes down to defining immersion in a better way; I suppose I'd compare it to the difference between reading a book about something and watching a movie about something. I'd argue that watching the movie feels more directly immersive, but I've heard people make the case that when reading a book you have a bit more freedom in your mental representation of things. Let's say you want to imagine this character with one hairstyle for whatever reasion; it's relatively easy to ignore the one or two mentions of contradictory information in a book, but in a movie you're constantly subjected to seeing that character's "true" hair. Maybe that's something- which I myself would consider separate from immersion personally- that people value in more abstracted and stylized games as well. While the progress of graphics has slowed down over time, I think that this is sort of a generational thing motivated by habit and nostalgia; an older generation of gamers might still find the 16-bit era "most immersive", whereas a newer generation might always find current-gen graphics "most immersive" even if the VR stuff continues to advance. I do believe that immersion is actually a thing, which is worth discussing, but sometimes it seems like there's a tendency to label anything that one finds pleasing in an interactive environment as "immersive".
  11. mcmanusaur
    My only problem with it is it makes avoiding combat the best way to handle most any given situation that doesn't net you magic items or directly achieve quest goals. How so? It simply makes combat not necessarily the best way when it otherwise would have been, no? My immersion disappears the second that there are believable consequences to disembowling inhabitants of fantasy worlds.
  12. mcmanusaur
    Look, guys. All that the lack of "combat XP" means is that combat is simply a means of achieving other ends in this game, not an end in and of itself. If you ask me, that's not a bad thing, unless you like having an incentive to grind for the sake of it.
  13. mcmanusaur
    In general, I find that DnD class-based systems slightly suffer from having their metaphorical heads too far up the figurative rear ends of their heavy abstractions. For a long time, I have been undecided when it comes to this question, but I think I'm finally coming around to the fact that I prefer classless systems. I'll be able to tolerate classes in PE, but I think it's fair to say that there aren't too many advantages to class-based systems outside of tacticool party-based combat.
  14. mcmanusaur
    Interview where Obsidian addresses all of your concerns
  15. mcmanusaur
    Classes can and will be defined by form rather than function as you mention, but unfortunately this often leads to the different classes feeling samey (if a warrior has their own quasi-magical abilities, then aren't they effectively a mage?). If you aren't forced to specialize within your class among the different roles it can perform (and you can perform all of them with the same character), this is what results. I also think this can happen if every class can potentially perform every role (which results in class amounting to nothing more than a cosmetic re-skinning), so I think that even if most classes should be able to perform multiple roles, no one should never be able to be offensive, defensive, support, or utility; instead, one class should be able to perform two or three of those generalized roles. I think that PE will manage to avoid most of these pitfalls, however. It is worth considering, though, whether we are really just approximating a specialized skill-based system with the kind of tricked out class-based system mentioned here.
  16. mcmanusaur
    I wonder if we get to name our stronghold. I'd personally love one called "Vicegrip Stronghold" because I'm all clever with my wordplay and... wait, what was I talking about?
  17. mcmanusaur
  18. mcmanusaur
    For me it really depends on whether they're presented in an interesting manner and if they have a purpose other than "flavor". While as an "explorer"-type of player I do definitely love learning about fictional settings and such, I guess to me doing that simply by reading everything sort of defeats the purpose of the medium's interactivity. Yes, some reading should and always be required as part of that, but I think there is some validity to the argument "if I wanted to spend all my time reading in-game then I'd choose to read a book IRL instead".
  19. mcmanusaur
    I think your problem may come down to using the term "beat the game" in reference to an RPG. For me, due to the wide range of choices (some of which are mutually exclusive) RPGs simply aren't about fostering a completionist mindset, which is the mindset you seem to take toward what constitutes an enjoyable experience. Just my two cents though. However, in the spirit of fairness and making the stronghold choice interesting both ways, perhaps it would be cool if a hostile NPC took/built up the stronghold if the player chose not to (assuming that you make the decision at some particular point, rather than being able to initiate the process anytime) and there were a bunch of quests based off of besieging and raiding the NPC's stronghold instead of defending it (though this may be how you obtain it in the first place). Personally I don't see why anyone would choose repetitive stronghold-clearing quests over what's described in the OP, but hopefully that should appease the anti-stronghold crowd. And if not the only thing I can think is that they really want something fancy like a stronghold as a substitute for the stronghold...
  20. mcmanusaur
    Crusader Kings II has a lot of great examples of traits that are mechanically (not just narratively, which is equally important) relevant, and as far as overlap with feats go, I think feats are the problem there. Feats are one of the most incoherent RPG mechanics I've ever seen, and they need fixing regardless of whether traits are included.
  21. mcmanusaur
    Make of it whatever you will, but I find that for me often times antagonistic characters are just so full of cliches and tropes that impersonal antagonists (man vs. self, vs. environment, etc.) work better. If we must have an antagonist character, let's make sure that their identity is betrayed by a thick accent, facial hair, or other shallow features that reveal them to be a mere xenophobic caricature of foreign cultures. That said, given the traditions associated with PE, I think a characater antagonist is largely inevitable, but it's actually interesting to think about how RPG characters mirror our Western culture's preoccupation with individuality.
  22. mcmanusaur
    All of this sounds pretty great, but possibly the best thing is that this hasn't been confined to the endgame.
  23. mcmanusaur
    Well, well... I do personally think that these kinds of threads are generally pointless (there are way too many of them as it is), but let's not put words in his mouth.
  24. mcmanusaur
    Ten poll options, broski... If I had more space I wouldn't be lumping them together, but this seems like the fairest way to do it. Indeed.
  25. mcmanusaur
    Wow, I didn't realize that the title of the game has an impact on player immersion... and if the title does, why not other meta-game aspects? "The price of this game is really breaking my immersion right now!"
×
×
  • Create New...