The problem with most is they start you out as an incompetent. Start the player off feeling like a military badass. After that, make them a god among badasses.

Would that work in an Aliens game? I would think that the aliens would need to at least feel stronger, and as such dangerous to the player. I guess you could just make the aliens feel ultra-badass compared to the players badass, but it gets harder to make the game properly when you get to that point, in my experience.

Their strength doesn't come from being individually formidible to a fully armed Marine, it comes from there being a lot of them and them not being where you expect.

So? Switch aliens out with groups of aliens. My point was that it is hard to balance well if you make the player too badass, it is more acceptable to be much stronger than the enemies in the late game than in the early game because of progression and such, though if this game is to be even remotely scary you always have to feel vulnerable and undersupplied both in gear and ability. Why would I be scared of a bunch of aliens if I'm just totally badass? Answer is that I will laugh more than I will cry, and I want to cry tears of fear.

Why would I be scared of a bunch of aliens if I'm just totally badass? Answer is that I will laugh more than I will cry, and I want to cry tears of fear.

It doesn't mean you can crush planets with your thumb. Marines in general are military badasses. The marines in Aliens were military badasses (except Gorman). Did they have reason to be scared of a bunch of aliens?

 

By contrast, if you weren't a military badass, not only would you be scared of the aliens, you'd be dead when one looked at you funny. Probably because when you saw it, you accidentally shot yourself in the eye because you didn't know which end of the gun pointed which direction, ala Deux Ex and Bloodlines.

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Tale

some quickie observations, 'cause aliens universe got same appeal for us as does beastmaster or teletubies... which is to say, not at all.

 

1) horror games is never really scary.

 

sytem shock 2 were 'posed to be scary? if you say so. for Gromnir ss2 were a slightly annoying fps game with some half-baked rpg elements thrown into the mix. is a genuine difference 'tween media that freightens and one that startles. some pudgy and balding 40 year old accountant can leap out from behind a corner and scream... manage to startle you, but ain't genuine scary. games startle, but never really scare.

 

2) aliens were maybe not as good a horror flick as alien, but as fodder for a crpg we much prefer the sequel.

 

wouldn't take much to has a squad o' space marines do aliens kinda missions... makes sorta like fo:t or ja. sure, the insane codexers hated fo:t 'cause o' how it screwed with fallout canon, but first 2/3 o fo:t were actually a fun squad-based tactical combat game. add better story elements, 3d elements and allow us to further customize our squad and Gromnir would be happy to see a spiritual successor to jagged alliance or fo:t... as 'posed to a successor to system shock 2.

 

3) tb is great, but pause is probably 'nuff.

 

sure, we would prefer to move our chess pieces 'bout in a methodical and unhurried fashion, but pause affords us pretty much most o' the benefits o' tb anyways w/o having to resort to using the tb label.

 

*shrugs*

 

lets Gromnir choose and customize a squad o' space marines that we then controls from a godlike pov as we sends 'em on suicidal seeming missions... spray insane 'mounts o' projectile weapon ammo and alien acidic blood 'cross the gamescape.

 

HA! Good Fun!

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Gromnir

My problem is this:

I see no reason for it to be difficult using stats to make RPG combat visceral or meaty.

I might have misunderstood what you said, but you mention difficulty and stats which makes me think that you are talking about how strong (How good he is at killing) the player is and that does effectively remove the scary part from the monsters (aliens in this game) if you are too strong compared to how they feel to you.

 

But as I said I haven't watched the movies in a long time and barely remember them so my comments may be faulty because of that. Also horror mechanics don't work the same in movies and games, and you seem to want to just import a mechanic wholely from the movie and that wouldn't generate the effect that it gave in the movie.

 

An example: A human would be scared of getting hurt by the alien, the marines would be scared of getting hurt even if only a little. I a game health (assuming that you can take more than one hit in this game) only translates into how close to death you are, so the only way to scare me is to make me believe that I could die any moment. So if I'm too badass (again badass for me is being experienced and as such strong) I won't fear death and everything that is meant to make me believe that I can die at any moment will have less of an effect.

 

And yes most protagonist characters in both games and movies would be dead within seconds in reality, but they don't die because they're the protaginst. Don't come here with your fancy realism or following the aliens spirit, the marines themselves should probably have been dead in real life if they had any reason to be scared (did they die?).

 

All I'm really saying is that it is hard to translate the marines badassness to a game, since a game is different from a movie.

 

Do tell me if I still don't know what you mean with badassness.

 

@Gromnir's post

Your first point is the same point that I tried to convey in an earlie post, most horror isn't horro but is instead a lot of shocks that are supposed to give me a feeling of scaryness but falls short to the point of annoyance, startle is a good word for that.

Being a military badass doesn't mean a group of aliens can't kill you easily. You have to be making a mighty assumption to come to that conclusion. You're overinterpretating what "badass" means. All it means in that you can fire a gun like a good marine as opposed to a 5 year old. This doesn't somehow magically make you transcend to godlike status where the claws and teeth of vicious demon beasts cannot penetrate your divine aura.

 

To translate to D&D terms, a level 1 Military Badass has these features:

+10/+5 attack bonus

10 AC (fully armored)

4 HP

 

Should this guy be afraid of a swarm of Kobolds? Keep in mind that these Kobolds explode into acidballs of 1 damage when they die.

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Tale

Which would translate to an inexperienced person in my eyes, practising to hit chance (firing a gun) is something I see as easy to train (experience being something you get not trhough training but in the field) but survivability is something that you get only through experience and badass = experience to me.

 

Badass stats to me would be (Why D&D? it can't properly simulate a lot of stuff that differs a badass from little Jimmy down the road):

+10/+5 attack bonus (same since you can practise targeting)

20 - 30 AC (The badass marine has learned how not to get killed and as such doesn't fear for his life but mostly only being hurt)

4 HP (Humans are fleshy)

 

Notice that the badass is experienced and as such knows how not to get hit by the alien, which means he needn't fear death but simply getting hurt, and that doesn't translate well to a computer game.

 

About being able to fire a gun, Gorman could fire a gun (He did simulate drops didn't he?) but he didn't have the survivability inherent in experience and as such badassness.

 

This has given me a thought though, why not include are specific health ala deus ex? I feared loosing my limbs in that game.

This is what I'm talking about when I say you're overinterpreting. Just because you think badass means nigh-invulnerable god among men doesn't mean this is a point of contention. It means put the player into a position where he can play in a fashion that feels exciting. Make it where the player feels like he's a marine.

 

Stop reading too much into the word badass. You're practically trying to start a fight over semantics.

 

IN SUMMARY: Badass, in context, solely and only means a character the player is capable of playing in an exciting fashion. To be contrasted with the starting out ranged combat present in Deus Ex and Bloodlines where you couldn't hit a wall your gun was pressed against unless you waited 10 seconds to line up the shot. Nothing about this means the player becomes difficult to kill or godlike.

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Tale

I'm not reading too much into it, you're the one who posted the stats of someone who just got out of training (The stats were mostly lvl1 with the exception of the to-hit stats, if I remember my D&D right) and that would be the example you used of someone not being badass (Gorman).

 

The badassness of the player shouldn't have anything to do with how strong he is (his stats should be level 1 at start) but instead how strong he feels even though he is level 1 and has low points in every skill, the problem is how you make him feel strong while not having him start out with top notch skills, Deus Ex and Bloodlines being examples of games that failed.

 

Any better?

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Moatilliatta

WHAT? My Malkavian felt like a badass right from the start! No bum or prostitutes stood against her! SHE WAS INVINVCIBLE!

 

She also hid a lot.

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Sand

Malkavians are badass because they are Malkavians.

 

To be on-topic: did your malkavian use a gun before she got any skill in it? Because if so you might be the exception to the rule.

I'm not reading too much into it, you're the one who posted the stats of someone who just got out of training

*facepalm*

 

(The stats were mostly lvl1 with the exception of the to-hit stats, if I remember my D&D right) and that would be the example you used of someone not being badass (Gorman).

This is a semantics argument.

 

The badassness of the player shouldn't have anything to do with how strong he is (his stats should be level 1 at start) but instead how strong he feels even though he is level 1 and has low points in every skill, the problem is how you make him feel strong while not having him start out with top notch skills,.

In a twitch combat system, which is what I was responding to, strength is largely dependent upon your accuracy. Without top notch character accuracy to start with, the system would be either silly or useless in context.

Edited November 16, 200718 yr by Tale

I've been reading through this thread to get an idea of what Obsidian is feeling an Alien RPG should be like. I came here with no actual opinion on the matter as I had some trouble seeing Alien as an RPG but thanks to J.E. Sawyer's posts it became a bit clearer. I'm actually glad he took the lead as he seems to have the right idea concerning some of the game mechanics so, fingers crossed! I hope we'll get to see some previews soon too.

*facepalm*

How does that help your argument? (Yes, this is a joke)

This is a semantics argument.

No it is the difference between fighting melee and shooting, I might be wrong but it is easier to utilize the training with a firearm in real combat than it is with melee weapons, you're free to ignore this part of the argument if you disagree.

 

In a twitch combat system, which is what I was responding to, strength is largely dependent upon your accuracy. Without top notch character accuracy to start with, the system would be either silly or useless in context.

I'm not a developer and I could obviously be wrong, but a lot of the feel of the games we play has more to do with the design than the actual mechanics. Deus ex and Bloodlines felt silly because they were silly, not because the player didn't have top-notch accuracy.

Here you could use the semantics argument because what you're talking about isn't badass but something after 'recently from bootcamp' and before 'I crush aliens with my pinky finger', the latter should preferably not be explored as it wouldn't fit and the first is where the player should start i.e. he can hit stuff but can't be sure when placing a shot.

 

Oh and I have been discussing twitch based combat all the time, it's just that there is a difference between how you feel your character is, as a player, and his actual stats. The feel very much depends on the visuals, which is why most games cheat with stats to to get good visuals.

 

To escape this endless argument a bit. How would you describe the difference between badass and god of badass (you meaning of the words)? The difference between hitting at 100 meters and 300 meters? (Numbers taken out fo the blue)

I don't want to be level one at anything ever again, I payed my dues. The traditional RPG has a power curve that never stops, you start out useless and gradually get more powerful as the monsters and encounters get harder. ei. the mandatory 1-20+ levels of D&D. The system in Bloodlines had only 6 stages, but many different abilities to chose from.

 

The problem was as already mentioned that guns were a complete joke untill you got 4 or more points in them. You could spray an entire clip with the Uzi or Mac 10 at point blank range and hit nothing at all. This is where the mechanics failed.

 

 

As long as you start the game feeling capable i'm fine with that.

Edited November 17, 200718 yr by Gorgon

can't be sure when placing a shot.

Which would make him absolutely worthless.

 

To escape this endless argument a bit. How would you describe the difference between badass and god of badass (you meaning of the words)?

Better question to escape this particular argument: WHO CARES? This is trivial.

Edited November 17, 200718 yr by Tale

How about the immersion factor? The first person view is effectively used especially in horror and survival genre.

The most successful survival horror game of the past few years has to be Resident Evil 4. Not that it didn't have problems (like all games), but it received very high acclaim and sold pretty darn well. You could chalk it up to hype, but I think it's because it was very well done. I think their 3rd person camera worked very well and still allowed for a lot of immersion.

I haven't played Resident Evil. However, some horror movies express something you can feel the presence but cannot see by using the limited view and sound effects to enhance the tensions. The audiences are sure that they saw something in the corners of their eyes but not sure what it really is, which stir their imagination, building up tension. This is quite traditional and proven to be effective in survival horror genre. For example, even in classic film such as Jaws, you cannot see what is going on underwater and your movement is much more limited in the water. (Just a thought and I wonder if it is manageable but how about 0G combat, for example? Also, some characters are fitted to maneuvering but others may not.)

 

To turn this topic to something less focused on general game design discussion and more toward Aliens, I would like people to describe what they would expect from the action of an Aliens RPG -- everything ranging from perspective to the use of weapons to sneaking to using computers, etc. I have found that a lot of people simply can't reconcile the idea of an RPG in the Aliens universe, and it often comes down to a disconnect between the association of fast-paced action with the Aliens universe and slow-paced gameplay with the RPG genre. This is a conversation in which I won't participate for obvious reasons, but it's very interesting to see what people say.

 

I see. Then, I'd list my personal preferences. Of course, I'd like to add more things but the below is just a starter...

 

The first person camera and the third person camera switch This would work for both ranged and melee gameplay and some people would like to enjoy alternative camera mode. The reason for requesting the first person view beside it's use of the ranged combat gamplay is already mentioned above. Please let the players decide which would fit their preferences. Also, graphics shouldn't make the movie titles feel ashamed.

 

Skill based System and No superhuman characters Aliens are survival horror about human-beings trapped in space with viciously powerful creatures. So, about stat management, I prefer more realistic feel or would like to feel my avatar is not a superhuman so he/she cannot become an extremely powerful being in a few days, months, or even in years. Many PnP skill system games have much more moderate skill advancement than that of epic class systems. So, if you have played some PnP skill system, you know the formula (BTW, if you like The Name of the Rose world, why not play Cthulhu: Dark Ages, J.E.Sawyer?) I'd like to decide the background of my character, which determines his/her skills and other abilities. After the game start, the stats should not increase unnaturally. Instead, I'd like to see the game-play shifting by interacting with environment, exploring, finding resources and learn how to utilize them rather than just increasing stats. Personally, I would like it to be near to Alien. All in all, everything seems to come down to the balance between fast -paced visceral game-play and slow-paced survival horror feel as J.E. Sawyer pointed out.

 

Various ways to deal with the situation and survival horror feel Since the characters are not supposed to be a superhuman-being, they shouldn't simply "level up" and beat every single enemy. I'd like the designers to leave multiple ways to deal with threats. If the designers leave one single solution to deal with a threat, it ends up like point and click adventure game. The werewolf in Bloodlines would be an example. However, at the same time, the more solutions mean less survival feel. I think this is where character customization gets in. Some characters can their scientific/specialist knowledge to deal with the situation and others may be able to do with sneaking while others may use their social skills to persuade/manipulate NPC into what they want. These intelligent characters are good subject of survival horror. Of course, if the players go for more actions, then, let them choose weapon related skills but...not "epic" level, please.

 

Interesting NPC interactions

I hope the Aliens RPG deals with aliens as Fallouts dealed with super mutants. You kinda know they are there and they are evil or atleast so different from you that they can be considered as evil, but there

If there is a stat governing an action, and the player invests in that stat while the computer game calculates success in some other way than using that stat, then the player will be confused in kind of the same way some folks become confused when encountering a run-on sentence, no matter how carefully the member is when crafting it, with a large number of clauses.

 

Yes, when I played City of Heroes, where I could stand right next to someone, aim straight at my enemy, and shoot straight into the ceiling. It was jarring, I'll admit. ...But you can't include choices for the player and then render those choices meaningles. This is especially true if you're going to avoid the pitfalls of "pointdexterity." Making a game with a lower learning curve and less numerical clutter is fine. However, that will make the remaining choices even more important. If you then render those choices pointless by relying on something else, then you don't really have an RPG any more.

sytem shock 2 were 'posed to be scary? if you say so. for Gromnir ss2 were a slightly annoying fps game with some half-baked rpg elements thrown into the mix. is a genuine difference 'tween media that freightens and one that startles. some pudgy and balding 40 year old accountant can leap out from behind a corner and scream... manage to startle you, but ain't genuine scary. games startle, but never really scare.

 

Startle and scare have pretty similar definitions. But that's just one of the methods of delivering horror in multimedia. There are others. And SS2 certainly delivered more than simple shock, and was effective in the way it used shock.

If there is a stat governing an action, and the player invests in that stat while the computer game calculates success in some other way than using that stat, then the player will be confused in kind of the same way some folks become confused when encountering a run-on sentence, no matter how carefully the member is when crafting it, with a large number of clauses.

 

Yes, when I played City of Heroes, where I could stand right next to someone, aim straight at my enemy, and shoot straight into the ceiling. It was jarring, I'll admit. ...But you can't include choices for the player and then render those choices meaningles. This is especially true if you're going to avoid the pitfalls of "pointdexterity." Making a game with a lower learning curve and less numerical clutter is fine. However, that will make the remaining choices even more important. If you then render those choices pointless by relying on something else, then you don't really have an RPG any more.

I am probably so accustomed to reading complex sentences that I don't know why people are confused with them. Even in these boards, some people seem to misunderstand or have problem in getting what I meant immediately. I tried to make each of my sentence short by replacing relative pronouns to pronouns. Then again, it seems to make it tough to tell which pronoun point out a certain nouns. Well, then, I'll try since people seem to have problems with my style and not to even reach the context.

 

Cantousent, I don't see which part of my comments you are referring to due to the communication issue but I guess it's this part. If you point out exactly where you are lost, I can try to expand my explanation.

[Off Topic]

Speaking of Bloodlines and bitterness, some Bloodlines players may bitterly remember trying to fire a gun. Bloodlines tried to faithfully implement something resembling the Storyteller combat system, so you can start out aiming a revolver at a garbage can at point blank range and hitting the wall several feet to the left of your crosshair. Similarly, Morrowind would have you actively swinging a sword through targets and then "missing" according to the rules. It's the execution in this sort of "RPG"/action hybridization that I think winds up creating more disconnection than satisfaction. It puts things partially in player control, but either simulates something in the background (e.g. Bloodlines, Morrowind) or has input/timing/collision issues (Jade Empire, DMoMM) that can make some players (like myself) step back and say, "What the heck?" You feel more in control of the moment-to-moment actions of your character, but the connection drops every time the game defies your expectations.

That is exactly why I wrote the Elder Scroll is an odd combination, which mixes two opposing factors: direct input control and stat simulation. Troika was faithful to the in-world character simulation, totally putting off FPS fans while they failed to deliver the variety of squad based combat for combat simulation fans, which they did in Fall Out...exactly speaking, when some of them were in Black Isle Studios. However, this is not much a problem with other FPS/RPG hybrids since Deus Exs and the elder scroll series (You must have been mistaken, J.E. Sawyer, Morrowind's hit is not calculated by stats.) have already managed to solve the issue simply by determining hits/miss by player control and the damage rates by the stats. This is a simple solution though somehow illogical. Rather, surprising is the stealth of Oblivion. Neither VtM or Deus Ex couldn't do that. I was glad to see Emil hasn't lost his touch. As usual, I cannot tell how he and his team could manage to do that. I thought that the formula itself had problem but they managed to proven that I was wrong. However, as I wrote long before, I think the success hugely depends on whether the designer team has skilled craftsmen team for stealth play or not.

It doesn't make the choice meaningless in the Elder Scrolls since the damage is calculated by the skill of the character. This is a very simple solution and most importantly it works although it is illogical as a faithful simulation. For, strictly speaking, as a faithful simulation, the judgment on hit or miss should be based on the skill of the characters while the damage should be decided by the effectiveness of the weapons. I used to think there wouldn't be a convincing solution for this. However, the stealth system in Oblivion did a great job in not making it feel unnatural in terms of direct control or making it illogical as a stat simulation. The character is still what you built and you feel directly controlling the character at the same time. This is a good example that the direct control/simulation hybrid is not flawed as the idea but just how the designers implement it.

 

As for visceral fun and more slow-paced fun outside of stats management ranging from enjoying story, character interactions and the feel, I don't have stats but I think American popular games have been heavily visceral. Probably, this is why J.E. Sawyer say that stat management belongs to the minority. However, I don't think the modern gamers are totally satisfied with the adrenaline-rushing gameplay experience. I think there are considerable demands for a change, where, I think, some Obsidian/Troika materials could fill in. If Obsidian can combine these essences properly, there are still a chance for them to make a quality with commercial success. This is what, I think, they are aiming at with Aliens RPG.

 

To allow players who would like to enjoy visceral fun from the start to the end, how about letting them choose from a bunch of pre-made characters during the character creation? This is like an arcade game and I think Jade Empire, which I haven't played, did it. Fall Out did the same thing while letting some other players build their characters from scratch. If the came experience is crafted as more visceral and straight forward, I think there is no need for "stat management" after that. This is why I suggested to use much more moderate character ability advancement, where the skills you chose at the start count. After that, the choices of the players are heavily on the interactions with the world including NPCs, of course.

 

I have problem in judging if I am on topic or not because we don't have much information on Aliens RPG and have to refer to some other games.

All these melee combat mechanics discussion, are we seriously seriously going to have melee combat in Aliens RPG?

 

If that is so, it just feels so wrong. It doesn't feel like Aliens to me.

Well, obviously the aliens will get close at some point. Melee is an option, although it's one that doesn't really seem all that great.

All these melee combat mechanics discussion, are we seriously seriously going to have melee combat in Aliens RPG?

 

If that is so, it just feels so wrong. It doesn't feel like Aliens to me.

I thought so. They are supposed to be vicious and over-powering. In fact, this is a part of the reasons why I am not so convinced of the 3rd person view, too although it depends on the presentation. I guess this is another issue between visceral fun and the setting feel don't seem to work together. However, seeing the modern game market, I wonder how many gamers would be happy with the gameplay where they are forced to keep low-profile. Personally, I prefer stealth but I know some people including J.E. Sawyer find more fun in assault-stealth when it comes to visceral fun. This is just a matter of preference and I simply hope for the option of "build your character and choose your adventure."

I for one want melee combat, and I can totally see how it could work well in an an Aliens setting. I'll use SS2 as a reference again, but adding melee doesn't negate scariness or atmosphere (though I admit it does alter it slightly). Melee is very fun and in SS2 it was designed so that both the player and the enemy did nasty dmg in melee... which I think is a working balance - similar to a fair few games really... half life for example. This will likely be a 3rd person, possibly squad based game, I know, but I still think it can be pulled off.

 

And further more, you guys can rant all you want about Alien canon, and not being true to the aliens universe.... but in the end this is a unique part of the aliens universe. You'll be lucky if the userbase has seen more than one of the aliens movies (or played an Aliens game), and of those you'd be lucky to get 1/2 of them caring if the setting or atmosphere was altered slightly. As such, and because I truly believe combat is possible to alter while maintaining what made Aliens interesting, I think that if the game decides to take a unique perspective on the strategy or atmosphere of alien combat, it is justified in doing so.

Wombat, I confess I wasn't addressing you so much as the underlying idea of "visceral combat." I like the idea of using players actions, as opposed to player builds, as key to in game consequences. However, there will be builds. You've made a couple of suggestions, such as premade characters/parties. That's fine, but it does diminish player choice. I don't necessarily think that's bad, but I wonder what Sawyer has to say about how "visceral combat" stacks against "player choice." He has, as far as I've understood, maintained the prime importance of choice in CRPGs. If the idea is to create a character/party where the only input the player has in the creation process is a menu choice at the beginning of the game, then we've solved the problem. We don't have to worry about player choices if we deny them any throughout the game.

 

Now, as far as stealth in Oblivion: I agree with you that the stealth model was reasonable. However, the focus of this thread has been combat, not stealth. I think it's perfectly legitimate to cite the success of the stealth model in light of this discussion, but that argument only goes so far. By the way, I'm not saying that creating a more visceral experience is mutually exclusive to player building stats. I'm just saying that it's going to be hard as hell to implement and that the way to implement the decision is not to remove or render moot player choice. Moreover, Sawyer's original premise, as I understood it at the time, namely that pointdexterism leads to combat that is not visceral, is flawed. It is not the extent of number crunching that leads to the problem. It's number crunching in the first place.

 

In regards to your posts, they've all seemed reasonable and intelligent to me, even where I've disagreed with them. Everyone in this thread is advocating a position. I respect that and I think arguments, by the mass, have been good. That's all I'm doing. :Cant's friendly grin icon:

Edited November 18, 200718 yr by Cantousent