Best way to start an "Adventure"

[Judge Hades]

That is why I prefer skill based systems than class base systems, SP.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

They could be a little more flexible don't you think. Just look at KotOR. Why the hell can't a woman get a massage from another woman? There is nothing sexual about a massage. That is just stupid.

Would you give a massage to your mother? [/end poor attempt at Pulp Fiction reference]

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Well would you have been happy if it had been 3 male and 1 female ? Actually as long as the one was Viconia I would have. But you get the point

 

Yeah i feel the same way on that one; Viconia felt like the only interesting romance there. Though I disliked the option of "redeeming" her, felt like I was creating another Drizzt <_<

 

And Aerie's an insuferable **** who's only interesting when she gets a backbone, which is like, towards the end game.

 

Dave has to think about making games that will sell to the widest possible audience. Higher production values - need to sell more units. More units sold higher expectations of sales from the next title - the more the game needs to be made accessable.

 

I accept that, however, their priorities seem too weird for the RPG genre. The genre is not really know for its mass market appeal, and trying to make mainstream RPGs ends up getting them reputation, no doubt, but their games feel more like FF games. And FF games are basically adventure games with combat and some character advancement, but are too market driven to be RPGs. Not that this means it might be a game, but its certainly not a good RPG if it focuses on non-RPG elements to sell.

 

In a game with only stats Int or IQ is fair measure for dialogue. If you have skills though then you can write more skill oriented dialogues. Because it dosnt much matter how intelligent you are if you dont know the subject matter your never going to be able to fool someone who does like a professor. The higher the specific skill, or if you have a particular skill like legend lore the more you can find out.

 

Yup.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I accept that, however, their priorities seem too weird for the RPG genre. The genre is not really know for its mass market appeal, and trying to make mainstream RPGs ends up getting them reputation, no doubt, but their games feel more like FF games. And FF games are basically adventure games with combat and some character advancement, but are too market driven to be RPGs. Not that this means it might be a game, but its certainly not a good RPG if it focuses on non-RPG elements to sell.

 

In a game with only stats Int or IQ is fair measure for dialogue. If you have skills though then you can write more skill oriented dialogues. Because it dosnt much matter how intelligent you are if you dont know the subject matter your never going to be able to fool someone who does like a professor. The higher the specific skill, or if you have a particular skill like legend lore the more you can find out.

 

Yup.

They are probably trying to stay one step ahead of the market. But what I dont really get is thats not what that particular audience wants to hear anyway. And the majority of the people who have bought and are buying their games wont even be aware of it. Then again you cant really fault him for his honesty about his goals at least.

 

There isnt really anything remotely adventure gamey about FF...The best analogy I have for an FF game is this.

 

Take PST and remove the choices so you have a single path through the game.

Then add in lots of secret areas which are off the beaten path of the main story and some critters that make the end boss look like a pussycat.

The player takes care of the "game" elements and the characters take care of the "roleplaying" elements themselves. I just dont see the point in Bioware trying to copy Squenix on that front. But at the end of the day its really upto them.

 

The best thing about the FF games is they constantly change so your never quite sure what your going to get.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

They are probably trying to stay one step ahead of the market. But what I dont really get is thats not what that particular audience wants to hear anyway. And the majority of the people who have bought and are buying their games wont even be aware of it. Then again you cant really fault him for his honesty about his goals at least.

 

I never criticized his honesty (or anyone else's for that matter, that I can recall). The most i've criticized were Bioware's decisions in terms of game design.

 

There isnt really anything remotely adventure gamey about FF...

 

While i don't disagree with your definition, i basically state they seem adventure games because 1) much like adventure games they are centered around predefined characters with usually predetermined roles. Even Torment often feels like one for that matter. 2) they're very linear 3) they usually depend on completing one task or another to advance in the game, usually from point to point in a straight line. Sure they have other elements, but the basic premise feels like that of an adventure game. I'm not considering an adventure as something entirely revolving around solving puzzles or anything like that.

 

The best thing about the FF games is they constantly change so your never quite sure what your going to get.

 

I stopped playing them . I dabbled in the 10th, and haven't finished the 9th yet, but i gave up on console RPGs some time ago, so I can't see myself return to them (even if i wanted, my PSX has apparently become a piece of junkpile). I haven't played any PS2 RPG in recent times, even. I followed an acquaintance of mine playing trough Xenosaga but it felt too boring and contrived. Other recent games i just watch someone else play them.

 

The thing i like most about the FF games were the different means of character customization. The Job and Junction system remain my favourites, though the Grid Sphere didn't seem too bad. But in game terms i became dissatisfied with the series, and don't plan on returning there.

[Darque]

The best thing about the FF games is they constantly change so your never quite sure what your going to get.

 

Not really.

 

Same schtick different game.

 

3 -> 5

 

6 -> 8

 

4 -> 7 -> 10

 

Can't testify to 9... it bored me after about an hour

 

1 was too basic, and 2 was a step in the wrong direction.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I never criticized his honesty (or anyone else's for that matter, that I can recall). The most i've criticized were Bioware's decisions in terms of game design.

 

While i don't disagree with your definition, i basically state they seem adventure games because 1) much like adventure games they are centered around predefined characters with usually predetermined roles. Even Torment often feels like one for that matter. 2) they're very linear 3) they usually depend on completing one task or another to advance in the game, usually from point to point in a straight line. Sure they have other elements, but the basic premise feels like that of an adventure game. I'm not considering an adventure as something entirely revolving around solving puzzles or anything like that.

 

I stopped playing them . I dabbled in the 10th, and haven't finished the 9th yet, but i gave up on console RPGs some time ago, so I can't see myself return to them (even if i wanted, my PSX has apparently become a piece of junkpile). I haven't played any PS2 RPG in recent times, even. I followed an acquaintance of mine playing trough Xenosaga but it felt too boring and contrived. Other recent games i just watch someone else play them.

 

The thing i like most about the FF games were the different means of character customization. The Job and Junction system remain my favourites, though the Grid Sphere didn't seem too bad. But in game terms i became dissatisfied with the series, and don't plan on returning there.

Oh I have but thats an old story... Anyway I more or less forgave all after KOTOR.

Not what you would call the biggest fan of NWN.

 

When you put it like that yes. First thing that comes to my mind when I think adventure game is collecting items and puzzle solving. While there is the odd puzzle its not really a defining aspect.

 

The story is very linear but I dont think the games themselves are. And FFX-2 is anything but linear (though oddly it plays better that way as you get a more complete story so I saw it as a big of an odd choice).

 

There is always a point in the game where you have the whole world at your fingertips so to speak. In the case of VIII when you get the Ragnarok (coolest vehicle ever).

Thats another thing I like about them. Even after you have played the story there is plenty more "game" in there to play.

 

I started with FFX and worked backwards... FFX impressed me greatly.

 

I'm a huge fan of the job system. FFV is one of my faves just for that reason. Love those whacky job combines.

 

In VII I just picked 3 characters and junctioned them to the gills. Really paid for that when the end battle chose 3 characters at random.

The sphere grid was ok. Never liked the way you could only have a small ammount of it onscreen at once. Got a fold out map and the bloody thing was huge. FFX-2 went back to the job system (renamed dress spheres)

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Well, from what i remember, FF games were mostly linear from 1 to 4. 5 i found out i had to play it in a linear fashion, because the remaining locations weren't making sense or weren't "open". 6 i believe was fairly open to me, and 7 was initially very linear, and alternated ocasionally. 8, which is all a big blur now (surprisingly, since its quite likely my favourite of the series), also had its moments.

 

Ragnarok was damn cool

 

The Dress Spheres, i was told they felt more like a gimmick and were more about showing the female character's... ehem... attributes. Not having played however, can't comment much.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Well, from what i remember, FF games were mostly linear from 1 to 4. 5 i found out i had to play it in a linear fashion, because the remaining locations weren't making sense or weren't "open". 6 i believe was fairly open to me, and 7 was initially very linear, and alternated ocasionally. 8, which is all a big blur now (surprisingly, since its quite likely my favourite of the series), also had its moments.

 

Ragnarok was damn cool

 

The Dress Spheres, i was told they felt more like a gimmick and were more about showing the female character's... ehem... attributes. Not having played however, can't comment much.

I dont go that far back. I have 1&2 in my collection but never played them. Missing number III.

 

The generally start linear and end linear with a big non linear bit in the middle where you can take a break from the story to level up, steal items and what ever else you feel like doing. Oh and finding those hiddent locations like Bahumat in the undersea research station and Omega in the chapel.

 

Best vehicle ever although the one in Skies of Arcadia is pretty spiffy too.

 

You could see it that way I suppose. Basically instead of having to choose your job before battles you can change them during battle. There are a bunch of things called garment grids which you can place you chosen spheres on. You can then jump one grid path each turn. If you jump all grid paths then you can transform into your ultimate sphere which varies for each of them but is pretty powerful.

 

If you get the mascot dress sphere then you can use certain class skills while in that form. Otherwise you need an appropriate accesory.

 

Honestly though you only need 2 dark knights and an Alchemist with mega potion and your pretty much set except for the secret areas.

 

Oh and depending on what you do in the game and what final score you end up with you get different endings. You can also choose which faction to side with along the way which changes things a bit as well.

 

Fun game but dosnt really have the depth of FFX and I really missed Auron...

[Gromnir]

yadda yadda

try not to fib.

 

in another thread you made some generalizations 'bout folks who seemed to be 'gainst applying d&d rules to crpg games... and when Gromnir asked you to give some specific examples of folks representative of your bizarre generalizations, you could not do so... probably 'cause no such people ever existed. regardless, it was your reasoning that was twisted and flawed and that is why we bring up in this thread

[Diogo Ribeiro]

@ShadowPaladin V1.0: Agreed.

 

@Gromnir:

 

in another thread you made some generalizations 'bout folks who seemed to be 'gainst applying d&d rules to crpg games... and when Gromnir asked you to give some specific examples of folks representative of your bizarre generalizations, you could not do so... probably 'cause no such people ever existed. regardless, it was your reasoning that was twisted and flawed and that is why we bring up in this thread

[Kasoroth]

I think that the distinction between a premade character and a player-made character is not nearly as blak and white as some people seem to think. Most games have at least some elements predetermined, while some are almost completely predetermined, but there are a lot of games that fall somewhere in between.

 

I think it's important to look at the different elements that make up a character and consider which elements can be predetermined without annoying players, and which elements can't. Some of these elements are related invarious ways, so they can not be entirely separated from each other, but I think some form of classification is useful here.

 

I would break the elements of a character up into a few fairly broad categories:

 

1) Stats. This is all the stuff that relates to game mechanics, including Str, Dex, etc, and also things such as race, class, and alignment.

 

2) Appearance. This includes the actual on-screen appearance of the the PC (unless it's a strictly 1st person game where you can never see the PC), as well as any situations where NPCs comment on your appearance, or are influenced by your appearance. Choice of appearance is sometimes limited by choice (or lack thereof) of race and sex.

 

3) Sex. I hope I don't need to explain how this can be an important element of a character's identity.

 

4) Personality. This includes the character's motivations, moral beliefs, general outlook on life, and preferred ways of dealing with situations. It can be related to alignment, and also to race (in terms of different cultures), but it is separate from these.

 

5) History. This is what the character has done before the game starts.

 

Personally, the most important element that I want to control as a player is personality. It's nice to have a choice of stats, appearance, and sex, but not really important for me to enjoy a game, so I won't go into any more discussion about those for now. Control of a character's history is not inherently important to me, because the nature of computer games is that the more control of the character's history you give to the player, the less meaning the history has within the context of the game.

 

The difficulty comes from the fact that (except for some unusual cases, such as amnesia) a character's personality is generally shaped largely by their history. If all games used these unusual cases as a device to explain a PC's disconnection between history and personality, I think it would get repetitive quite quickly.

 

The alternatives seem to be:

1) Predefine both the history and the personality. This technique seems to be the preferred method in the Final Fantasy games. I don't really like this method much, because it limits the player's control basically to the mechanical aspects of gameplay, such as combat, while the actual story and "roleplaying" is done automatically with little player choice in how it occurs. Combat for the sake of combat doesn't really interest me, so it becomes just an annoying interruption from the story. I'd much rather read a book or watch a movie than play this sort of game, that way I can read or watch the story without interruptions.

 

2) Leave the history intentionally blank. IWD did this. One limitation here is that there is no common background that can be referred to by NPCs. Sure, the player can make up a background, and the game might even provide a place to type it in, but it doesn't actually do anything.

 

3) A compromise, where the character history is given some constraints, but otherwise left intentionally vague. Fallout and the BG games took this method, although BG had more constraints, some of which were not revealed until later, potentially causing logical inconsistencies with details that the player made up. In general I tend to prefer this method.

 

 

As for how I'd rate different games in terms of character freedom:

Fallout Series:

1) Stats: A lot of freedom here, although race was restricted to human only.

2) Appearance: Not really much choice here in terms of actual on-screen appearance, although based on NPC reactions it was implied that higher charisma gave you a more attractive appearance.

3) Sex: Yes, you could choose.

4) Personality: Yes, you could decide your character's personality, and there were quite a few relatively meaningful ways to express you character's personality in the game and have NPCs react to you, and reach differnt end results.

5) History: A few constraints, but mostly left up to player's imagination with no impact on the actual game.

 

BG Series:

1) Stats: A lot of freedom here, but some of the choices caused logical inconsistencies in the plot (elves who are way too young to be adventuring, rangers and barbarians who had never left the sheltered citadel of candlekeep, etc)

2) Appearance: You choose a portrait, your on-screen character appearance is determined by race and class, with no independent choice except for colors. No in-game effect of appearance that I know of.

3) Sex: Yes, you could choose.

4) Personality: Left mostly up to player imagination. There were some dialogue options for "good vs. evil" but it generally ended up with the same result. Your character's personality generally seemed to make the least amount of difference at the most important points in the story.

5) History: You have to be a Bhaalspawn raised in the sheltered environment of Candlekeep with no knowledge of your heritage, but aside from that constraint, the history is left mostly up to the player's imagination.

 

PS:T

1) Stats: Somewhat limited. You can change your ability scores, and later in the game you can change you class, but you're stuck being a human.

2) Appearance: No choice really. You're a scarred, zombified guy.

3) You have to be male.

4) Personality: Yes, you could decide your character's personality, and there were quite a few relatively meaningful ways to express you character's personality in the game and have NPCs react to you, and reach differnt end results.

5) History: Predefined. One of the main themes in the game is discovering who you were, so this was necessary. Amnesia is used to allow the game to define who you were, while still letting the player define who you are.

 

IWD Series:

1) Stats: Lots of choice.

2) Appearance: You choose a portrait, your on-screen character appearance is determined by race and class, with no independent choice except for colors. No in-game effect of appearance that I know of.

3) Sex: Yes, you could choose.

4) Personality: Left mostly up to player imagination. There were some dialogue options for "good vs. evil" but it generally ended up with the same result.

5) History: Left blank, other than that you went to Icewind Dale. You could type in a history, but it had no effect on the game.

 

Since one of the most important parts of a CRPG, in my opinion, is being able to define my character's personality in a way that the game can respond to, Fallout and PS:T are ranked significantly ahead of BG and IWD on my list of favorite games.

 

While it may be difficult (or even impossible) to make games that focus on the PC's history without either resorting to amnesia or some other gimmick or forcing a specific personality on the PC (like the FF games), that does not mean that games have to be hack and slash combat oriented games like IWD. For me the best parts of Torment were the interactions with the NPCs (both party members and non-party members), and this can be done quite well without relying on the character's history. In fact, I would much rather have NPCs respond to things I do in the game rather than things I did before the game. Although the Nameless One's story was quite interesting, it was not what makes me rank Torment as my favorite game of all time. It was the well developed NPCs with believable motivations that I liked. In Torment many of them were connected to TNO's past in some way, but this was not necessary. Some, like Nordom, Annah, and Fall-From-Grace had very little, if any, connection to TNO's past.

 

-Kasoroth

[djkillingspree]

Actually, I think there are some smart ways to involve character's pasts in a CRPG while allowing the player a lot of personal choice.

 

If you've played Mechwarrior 3rd Edition (the P&P game, not the PC game) or the old PC RPG Darklands, what I'm saying will sound familiar. But, essentially, you have a player select from some early childhood, late childhood, adolescence and adult childhood occupations, with either some player chosen or randomly determined variations. Then, you have the game reference your upbringing when appropriate.

 

For instance, in a Star Wars game, you might select:

Poor Family->Petty Thief->Pod Racer->Smuggler, and then maybe have three or four gurps-style Traits (from which you'd pick one) for each selection. Then you'd have a basic background that the game could call on and work with throughout the game. Also, there could be some really cool quests derived from the system. For instance, maybe one of the traits you could pick as a Smuggler would be "Backstabber", where you start off with a lot more wealth but have made an important enemy, who will appear in a sidequest later in the game.

 

Essentially, the goal is to provide something that allows the player to express the backstory they have made for their character within the game world and to provide the designer with a way to deal, in-game, with a variety of backstories.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Hmm, Fallout's Traits and Arcanum's Backgrounds taken to the next step. Sounds good.