Oblivion: PC Gamer Praises in Preview

[Llyranor]

Of course, uninteractive and adynamic storytelling is the best way to tell a story and immerse the reader. It's people in the industry who can't see the potential of the medium itself as a storytelling tool that drive it to stagnancy.

 

'lol id rather read a book'

'lol lets make the same old story again but with bigger monsters'

'lol gaming conventions, let's add dungeons and random encounters that detract from storytelling because id rather read a book'

 

Innovation in storytelling in the medium has been virtually inexistent. LOL GAMES R 4 KIDS ROFLTUNASANDWICH GAMEPLAY isn't helping.

[alanschu]

I don't know if I would consider "Flying, seeing places, and swimming" as "gameplay." They all seem to fit under "moving around the gameworld."

 

I will give you the custom spell options. But I think you're just breaking up similar stuff to make your list.

 

 

 

I guess that asks, what exactly IS gameplay? Because to you, you considered going and seeing a place to be gameplay. Couldn't you say that going and having an engaging conversation with someone, that is interactive, gameplay as well?

Edited January 20, 2006 by alanschu

[Slowtrain]

Of course, uninteractive and adynamic storytelling is the best way to tell a story and immerse the reader. It's people in the industry who can't see the potential of the medium itself as a storytelling tool that drive it to stagnancy.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

OK. That I agree with. But that's a little different. Sure the medium has a ton more possiblity than is being even remotely utilized right now, but I think that's is to be expected. Until the environment created by games approaches 100% real in terms of input for all 5 senses, the push for increased sensory realism will mostly overshadow the push for story.

 

 

And even then, a with game 100% sensory realism and an awesome story but with no gameplay isn't a game, its a movie. Whcih we already have.

Edited January 20, 2006 by CrashGirl

[Slowtrain]

I don't know if I would consider "Flying, seeing places, and swimming" as "gameplay."  They all seem to fit under "moving around the gameworld."

 

I will give you the custom spell options.  But I think you're just breaking up similar stuff to make your list.

 

 

 

I guess that asks, what exactly IS gameplay?  Because to you, you considered going and seeing a place to be gameplay.  Couldn't you say that going and having an engaging conversation with someone, that is interactive, gameplay as well?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I would define gameplay as interactive stuff that you can do as part of the gameworld. That could be something like creating a spell or simply swimming. I love swimming in games. I did in Thief and I do in MW. Any game where I can't swim gets a minus 5 points off the top. I also love climbing and breakign in through second story windows. ME has no climbing of course which has always bothered me.

 

Reading is not gameplay (to me). Reading is completely one directional, from the designer to me. My input doesn't matter and has no effect. No interactivity.

[Jack the Ripper]

I don't know if I would consider "Flying, seeing places, and swimming" as "gameplay" mechanics.

 

I will give you the custom spell options.

 

 

 

I guess that asks, what exactly IS gameplay?  Because to you, you considered going and seeing a place to be gameplay.  Couldn't you say that going and having an engaging conversation with someone, that is interactive, gameplay as well?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Morrowind was a huge game that was completely open. Exploration was a huge part of it, but it didn't have to be. The main storyline was a huge part of the game, but it didn't have to be. Combat was a huge part of the game, but it didn't have to be. Trading could be a huge part of the game, but it didn't have to be. Sidequests could be a huge part of the game, but it didn't have to be. Reading the huge amount of literature offered in game on topics from the history of Dunmer to "The Lusty Argonian" *shudder* could be a huge part of the game, but it didn't have to be. And the game featured a skill called "speechcraft," which featured a bribing/admiring/intimidating/taunting minigame wherein the player could goad a character into a legal fight, or pump the character for necessary information. So yes, in Morrowind, having an engaging conversation with someone, that is interactive, could have been a huge part of the game, but it didn't have to be.

 

It was entirely up to the player to decide whether they felt like trekking into the wastelands to find Vampiric tombs, or go diving for pearls in the game's surrounding ocean, or make a house by stacking pillows, or do almost anything they wished to at all. So for once, how much fun a player had with a game depended on the player, and not the game. Some people would rather have a six hour story spoon fed to them, and that's fine. But a lot of people also enjoy the freedom to traverse a terrain and brave all of its dangers uninhibited by a linear story. And heck, if players wanted linear stories, Morrowind did offer a main quest and side quests, but they weren't at all compulsory.

[Llyranor]

Swimming and climbing is gameplay, because you get to move your character around! That's meaningful interaction with real consequences.

 

Navigating through a complex conversation with no clearcut solution - where each dialogue node the player chooses results in vastly different results and consequences - isn't gameplay, because it's just reading, and reading isn't gameplay.

 

...wait, you're talking about Final Fantasy!!!!

 

Meh, just because designers aren't trying to innovate gaming storytelling doesn't mean you should just give up and go read a book. This kind of attitude from the consumer leads to more books that pretend to be games. Otherwise, games will never progress in that aspect.

[alanschu]

Reading is not gameplay (to me). Reading is completely one directional, from the designer to me. My input doesn't matter and has no effect. No interactivity.

 

 

Yes, clearly

 

 

Example:

 

NPC1: So, what should we do with the prisoner?

 

PC:

1) Kill him

2) Spare him

 

 

 

Naturally, I can't imagine how this has any affect on the gameworld. It is 100% the same before and after this dialogue. Especially if sparing him leads to help/backstabbing in the future.

[alanschu]

To say that we want linear stories is also a misnomer.

 

I also wouldn't consider "spamming on the flatter button" to be an "engaging conversation."

 

 

I mean, if you want to get technical, everything is one-directional, in the terms that Crash Girl depicted. Nothing in the game is done without a designer having put it in the game for you to do. It's always from the designer to you.

[Slowtrain]

Swimming and climbing is gameplay, because you get to move your character around! That's meaningful interaction with real consequences.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

Dude, its a game. There are no real consequences. There is only fun and entertainment.. ANd if you are really bent on imitating a world of "real" consequences just play without ever saving Then you'll find MW is chock full of real conseqeunces. AS in death and 50 hours of gameplay down the tubes.

 

 

Navigating through a complex conversation with no clearcut solution - where each dialogue node the player chooses results in vastly different results and consequences - isn't gameplay, because it's just reading, and reading isn't gameplay.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

It depends. does this great conversational node just lead to another conversational node, or, god forbid, a cutscene? IF so than it just MOTS spoonfed designer crap. If a conversational node actually lead to some cool gameplay then that would be wort something.

 

Meh, just because designers aren't trying to innovate gaming storytelling doesn't mean you should just give up and go read a book. This kind of attitude from the consumer leads to more books that pretend to be games. Otherwise, games will never progress in that aspect.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

ALl I ask of games is that they give me an experience I can't get elsewhere.

[Slowtrain]

Naturally, I can't imagine how this has any affect on the gameworld.  It is 100% the same before and after this dialogue.  Especially if sparing him leads to help/backstabbing in the future.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

If I am actually killing him or sparing him then it IS the interactive gameplay that changes the gameworld.

 

 

If I am telling someone to kill him and they kill him, then great the gameworld's changed but its not like I did anythign interesting toward that end. ALl I did was push the button. Not too interesting, eh?

[Jack the Ripper]

Swimming and climbing is gameplay, because you get to move your character around! That's meaningful interaction with real consequences.

 

It is when you're trying to climb a high mountain in the game and could fall to your death, or when you're trapped in an underwater maze and desperately need to find a place to take a breath. You aren't always skimming over puddles in Morrowind or making your way through a sewer filled with spiders. There's an entire ocean and many large lakes to explore, and many dangers to be mindful of. Many times, a characters ability to climb or swim effect what quests they're capable of successfully performing, or how quickly that they can traverse the lands on foot. It can take hours to get from one side of Vardenfall to the other on foot without buffing spells or transportation.

 

Meh, just because designers aren't trying to innovate gaming storytelling doesn't mean you should just give up and go read a book. This kind of attitude from the consumer leads to more books that pretend to be games. Otherwise, games will never progress in that aspect.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

What?

[Slowtrain]

I loved all the environmental aspects of MW in terms of the landscape. Traveling between islands, looking for gaps in an impasssable cliff face, swimming through the underwater grottos. A lot of my characters were built around this very aspect of the game. SOme were waterwalkers or waterbreathers, some were flyers, some had no magic but were very athletic and ran and swam and jumped everywhere.

 

I've never played a game that had as gameplay enhancing environment as MW did. I hope Oblivion continues this.

[Plano Skywalker]

IMO, the biggest problem with open-ended RPGs is the lack of opportunity costs....and that can ultimately affect game balance.

 

The solution is quite simple: AGING...and forced retirement.

 

I personally think Pirates! is the greatest sandbox game of all time and it had aging and forced retirement (though it was not technically an RPG).

 

Fable also has that. Fable has its faults but it has the answer to the open-ended problem.....opportunity costs. It also has things like being able to get married, buy propery, etc that help open-ended games out alot.

[alanschu]

If I am telling someone to kill him and they kill him, then great the gameworld's changed but its not like I did anythign interesting toward that end. ALl I did was push the button. Not too interesting, eh?

 

Actually it can be exceptionally interesting.

 

Especially if you incorporate your solution and mine. If you go in and kill the prisoner yourself, and come back and talk to the NPC, his responses will be adjusted to the action you had performed.

 

I think it helps immensely with immersion, as it gives you the impression that you're in a living, breathing world.

 

 

It would also make sense if you were roleplaying the game from a point of view where you prefer to not get your hands dirty, but rather let others do the dirty work for you.

Edited January 20, 2006 by alanschu

[Llyranor]

HELLO?

 

Reading is not gameplay.

[Nick_i_am]

But watching cutscenes is!

[alanschu]

No no no. Neither is interactive.

 

 

To be honest, I don't think text should exist in games at all.

 

Yes, even to the point where I should just be able to tell it's a Daedric Diakatana by looking at it.

[Nick_i_am]

Yeah, screw talking to people.

 

Go go quality voiceacting!

[Llyranor]

Every RPG should have Patrick Steward.

 

And soil erosion.

[Meshugger]

I see. Some find it more interesting in trying different classes, spells, weapons, traveling/exploring and what not in a game, it gives a sense of immersion in letting the player be exactly what he wants to be, a story is a good afterthought. Others want a good story that drives the game forward, letting the player wonder "what's next? I have to find out!" or "How will story/characters change if i alter my alignment/class?", which also gives a sense of immersion. Combat/gameplay doesn't have to be first priority. That's how it is i guess.

 

It becomes ugly when one camp declares its "idea" of a perfect cRPG to be superior to the other.

 

As Bill Hicks would say: "That's a bit of a c*cksuck, ain't it?"

Edited January 21, 2006 by Meshugger

[Jack the Ripper]

Indeed.

[alanschu]

It's just rather irritating that apparently my enjoyment of dialogue means I'd rather "have a six hour story spoon fed to them."

 

I definitely get negative connotations from it, and as a result see it as derogatory or perhaps inferior.

[~Di]

The solution is quite simple:  AGING...and forced retirement.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Er, no. I won't buy a game that forces me to rush through it before my character turns into a senile, doddering geriatric. Didn't buy Fable for that very reason. If this is the direction RPG's go, then I'll obviously have more time for strategy games because I utterly hate the entire concept of Aging and Forced Retirement in my recreation. I have enough of that in real life.

[Arkan]

The solution is quite simple:  AGING...and forced retirement.

 

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Er, no. I won't buy a game that forces me to rush through it before my character turns into a senile, doddering geriatric. Didn't buy Fable for that very reason. If this is the direction RPG's go, then I'll obviously have more time for strategy games because I utterly hate the entire concept of Aging and Forced Retirement in my recreation. I have enough of that in real life.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I don't find aging or retirement from an adventuring life to be that much of a problem, really. It's just another way to look at a time limit gameplay mechanic. You could replace Fallout's time limit to destroy the Master's plans and the Mutant Base with aging for some story reasons, and this would still not matter to the gameplay nor would it really bring any negative impact.

 

Aging can also be a good way to increase replayability and from preventing players from doing everything possible in one single playtrough. I actually would have liked to see aging in Morrowind, for example.