Some thoughts on My Ideal Game (long).

[gojira]

IMO, thinking up good game ideas, ones that will really create truly innovative, exciting games is not all that different from thinking up ideas for a novel or film. The mediums are not really so different. Instead of a viewer/reader you have a "player", an active participant in the scenario, who would ideally have as much freedom to make decisions as a real person in the same circumstances.

 

Creating a game is just like being a creator-god. First you need a world/setting for your characters to inhabit. Then you fill it with characters, one or more of which the player has complete control over, ideally making those characters into "wildcards" within the constraints of the world that you have created. Since the player controls their actions, any part of the story could be changed by them at any time.

 

For instance, if the player decides to kill and eat one of the main characters in your story, how does that effect the plot? Did the designer allow for the possibility of not merely random killing, but cannibalism as well? This may necessitate the whole story changing to one where the player needs to escape from the police etc. Ideally an RPG would be this way, allowing the player to make whatever choices he wanted without ending the story. The story would change dynamically to accomodate whatever crazy choices the player might want to make, just like in real life. Since this is currently impossible to program, compromises in the number of allowable player choices is inevitable.

 

Still, allowing for as many of these choices as possible would certainly make for an interesting game. It might require hundreds of different macro-stories consisting of thousands of micro-stories. This is the holy grail of "interactive fiction" I guess. The player actually creates the story from a large number of discrete story branches. There could be no "walk throughs" because every player would end up with a very different story.

 

A sub-program, sort of an artificial Chris Avellone, which could create complete and well-written stories on the fly, in response to character actions would be ideal. Unless I'm mistaken, simple story writing was an area of AI that was specifically targeted by some, although obviously without much success. Something like a Cyc enhanced Rule Based System combined with some kind of Neural Network architecture to train by example and genuinely learn things in a more organic, less predictable sort of way might be a good start. Obviously just creating this sort of system would likely consume many times the budget of even a long dev cycle game.

 

Also, why is it that game devs dropped text parsing as a conversational tool after the Zork text adventure kind of games? It was kind of fun to be able to type in simple sentences and have the computer understand. I would like to see some Natural Language processing going on in future RPGs. Why limit everything just to predetermined conversational branches? Aside from money and time, of course.

 

Although a pretty good natural language parser could easily consume the budget for any number of entire games, the core tech could be re-used and even licensed to other companies. Even fake Eliza or MegaHal-esque kinds of conversations with NPCs would be a nice addition. I would like to see a version of Annah which could pass the Turing Test.

 

Having said all this, it is difficult for me to imagine a better computer game than Torment (at least up until TNO met with Ravel). If you can come up with a main story and a setting as good as that, the rest should be easy. Yes, the combat could have been improved, although I liked it very much the way it was. It may not have been as strategically fun as games like BG2 or MM8 (IMO) when it came to the fights, and the graphics were laughable when compared to a game like Morrowind, but at least it gave you some reason to play besides leveling up.

 

Don't even get me started on FedEx questing games. If I want to run errands, I can do that in real life and even make some money. I don't know when RPGs started to be equated with a series "quests", but it may have spelled the beginning of the end for them. For many game devs, its not even a question of whether their RPG will have quests, but merely a matter of what kind. After all, they need more than just a pretty world. They need to actually give the player something to do right? Imagine that. It's an easy way to avoid the fact that no one on the team can write their way out of a paper bag, as well as the cost of a real writer.

 

I have a 5 year old nephew. The things that can keep him genuinely entertained never cease to amaze me. I'm not sure I could keep my dog from getting bored with some of them. He actually enjoys sweeping floors and vacuuming. Pretty much any kind of cleaning job is fun for him. Maybe it's a novelty thing. He hasn't done it before so it seems fun at first. I don't know. Everything is new and interesting when you're young I guess.

 

All I really ask of game designers is that they think about the motivations and emotions of the player. Don't try to motivate me with money or power. Obviously a player wants to grow in strength (although too much power too quickly leads to boredom), but constantly being led by the nose to get yet another BroadSword of Fireballs or Boots of Infinite Speed can get tiring. I am a 30+ gamer and I need a better carrot (or stick) to keep me playing.

 

In Torment I was motivated by all the mysteries I wanted to figure out. There was genuine suspense built up in that game/story by all of the fascinating possibilities to be discovered/figured out/remembered. I find that kind of motivation to be far more satisfying than the quest to become an uber-character which can kill any monster in the game in less than 3 seconds.

 

Of course, if you are in this business only to make money, all of this is irrelevant. The quickest game cycle that can produce a saleable game (preferably to be finished with even quicker to make "modules" to be priced the same) is the way to go. And why bother with PC only games when younger, less experienced, less jaded, console players will pay as much for a simpler, cheaper to produce product. If you can then quickly port it to a PC you might earn a few extra bucks though. So it might be worth it.

 

Feargus has denied that console games are really cheaper to make. That may be true if you are comparing apples to apples in terms of game complexity, but most console games tend to have simpler, more arcadish designs (due to their younger or more casual target market). So really the point is not PC vs. Console (assuming a hypothetical console with all the abilities of a PC), but complexity vs. simplicity or long dev cycle vs. short dev cycle games.

 

For this reason I have a theory that experienced game developers cannot create great games. All it takes is one award winning but poorly selling game. (See the history of Looking Glass CRPGs for an interesting example). Humans really are fast learners. I think that Feargus really would like to make a sequel-in-spirit to Torment. He has said as much in the past. Based solely on financial reasons, I don't think he ever will. Why risk bankruptcy on a very expensive game with a more limited, hardcore audience. It's not like such games sell more copies. We all know what does sell more copies. Some of us just don't like to think about it.

[GamerFromStart]

You are right this is LONG!!

 

But seriously.....

 

There could be no "walk throughs" because every player would end up with a very different story......

Agree!

Great CRPG = ability to replay (Different characters, different endings, different

middles) - you will note this is a constant theme of mine...

 

A sub-program, sort of an artificial Chris Avellone,.....

Hehe, that's just a great line! Too funny!! Where can I get one?!!

 

Having said all this, it is difficult for me to imagine a better computer game than Torment (at least up until TNO met with Ravel).  Why risk bankruptcy on a very expensive game with a more limited, hardcore audience. It's not like such games sell more copies. We all know what does sell more copies. Some of us just don't like to think about it.

 

Have just started playing Torment again, I am having a better time than I remember last time and I do think it was a brilliant work. However, I think part of Torment's appeal / sales problem was the single "Namless One" character, in the unfamiliar planes setting. For the mass gamer, perhaps "too weird...can't relate?"....

 

So, I disagree that Obsidian won't make another great CRPG vis a vis Torment's pluses, rather they just need to pay heed to the mass gamer's need for more familiarity. Can be done IMO.

[Ronald]

I got to about "IMO" before deciding to disagree.

 

My ideal game is an evolutionary RPG in which the player is paid by an evil corporation (Named "The Corporation) to hunt down aliens. But the plot twist, which is about halfway through the game, is that all the aliens you've been killing are really quadriplegic humans. So the second half of the game is actually challenging.

 

Basically, the stat and skill progression is such that you have to take the stem cells of the aliens and cripples you defeat in honourable battle (semi-honourable in the case of the disabled folks, at least) which boost your stats. The skills you gain from being trained by the Pyscho Dweebs, a race of powerful hunters who will only train you if you bring them the malformed skulls of your enemies.

 

The stats themselves will be rather subtle -- no silly fantasy staples like "lol one more strength point = +29 melee damage!". For example, increased strength will increase the damage done in melee combat to some degree, but actually hitting will be reliant on skill.

 

Different body parts will have hit zones, but no hit points. Instead, there will be actual physical results from damage occurring in a certain area -- for example, if the player stabs a man in the chest, there is a chance of puncturing the lungs (thus greatly lowering the AP of the enemy), really messing up their heart (which in turn would result in subsequent death of the enemy) or hitting some other organ.

 

To sum up how stats and skills affect combat, here's a hypothetical situation:

 

Rick Danger encounters a paraplegic with an agenda -- namely, the death of our hero, Rick Danger. The paraplegic is sly, so he manages to get the initiative and go first. He is skilled enough to hit Rick with a baseball bat, but his strength is so slow, all he manages to do is cause a bruise, temporarily stunning Rick. He hits again, but this time missing. Rick is pissed off, and since he has enough skill to hit, he nabs the paraplegic in the face with his cattle prod. Of course, since Rick has extraordinary strength, the prod impales the poor paraplegic's skull and fries his brain, a critical hit, resulting in instant death.

 

But enough about combat. In the area of interacting with the environment, my ideal game would excel. Even though it'd be an isometric game, one could still do just about anything with any item in the game. Nethack pretty much did it, and even though it's a lot harder to pull off in a game that's not ASCII, I am confident it can be done. Due to its high level of interactivity, the game may have some adventure game-esque puzzles, but nothing like in Myst. Nothing ruins the immersion more than some silly puzzle that takes days to solve, and still doesn't make sense when you finally look on the internet for the solution out of frustration.

 

Dialogue would be handled like in RPG's such as Fallout, but there will be more, and varied, options. For example, a character who makes a successful Acting check would be able to use dumb-speak (a la Fallout 2) and trick the NPC into thinking he was cognitively challenged, even though he may be one of the smartest men who ever lived. The reason why I'm adding this is because there was a part in FO2 (the whole hubologist thing near the end) that if you screwed up something, you had to take Psycho to lower your INT, and an NPC would help you because he thought you were dumb. Why not be able to feign stupidity in that situation.

 

Essentially, aside from those technical issues I mentioned, (I may have forgotten a few) and the "OMG SEMI-NON-LINEARITY" type of stuff that everybody always says, that's the way I feel.

[Fionavar]

Due to the fact that this thread quickly degenerated after this post, as well as the several complaints I received in regard to this matter, this thread has been pruned. I apologise for those who had tried to post on topic, but it was easier to make a clean sweep. I would request that flaming and baiting not occur and if it must take it to PM.

[The Ayatollah]

Due to the fact that this thread quickly degenerated after this post, as well as the several complaints I received in regard to this matter, this thread has been pruned. I apologise for those who had tried to post on topic, but it was easier to make a clean sweep. I would request that flaming and baiting not occur and if it must take it to PM.

In the name of Allah the Compassionate and the Merciful,

 

Thank you Fionavar; if only other moderators took their duties as seriously as you do, this place would not degenerate into flamewars so easily. If only you could "moderate" the developers of Obsidian from using cliched ideas in their game.

 

God willing!

[The Ayatollah]

In the name of Allah the Compassionate and the Merciful,

 

I would suggest combining the gameplay of Planescape: Torment with the engine and storyline of Fallout, and you shall have the perfect game.

 

God willing!

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Fallout's strong point was anything but the story. I'd agree if you said setting or roleplaying.

[Killzig]

I think you have that backwards.

[roshan]

the ideal game is planescape torment. period.