Thoughts on Mandatory Combat

[Volourn]

I agree with both of you there. I never said stats weren't important...

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Numbers are important, and they do HELP define what you can or cannot do ina game; theya re not the be all/end all of ROLE-PLAYING.

 

Period.

And who said they were the all/end all of ROLE-PLAYING? Apparently, no one. Ooops.

 

Also, your rhetorical questions (as you so kindly pointed out) are moot. There's no number that defines your emotional state, but that wasn't my point either. Read closely what you're answering to; i'm not stating that numbers are defining of everything you do (because they aren't), they can simply allow character to have added expressions in the gameworld (i point out to the "acting a certain way" part of what i posted).

 

But the point of it was pretty much what you said so already, that they're not t3h w1n!, but that they help define the role. Taking a cue from yourself, Period.

[Volourn]

Then again, my original post on the subejct matter was on a specifc point made by Tri; not you. That somehow stats define one's role; that just isn't the case. It's one of the factors that help define it. So, Tri, inf act,w as saying it was the be all/end all. Oops... someone did say.

 

Get your own lame jokes and post endings. Period.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

There's a difference between saying they should define the role, and saying they are the ultimate form of defining one. Which one passed by unnoticed to you, i wonder?

 

And what was the lame joke i apparently stole?

[Volourn]

Ending your post with '"Period". Intentionally stolen or not, it's my llame ending!

 

 

Mine. All mine.

[triCritical]

And of course has nothing to do with the fact you like to play low str characters who you feel are overly punished because they cant carry anything significant 

 

Precedent has shown that a smart man can carry more then a strong man.

 

So what is the NPCs motivation for carrying some pansy ass who cant take care of themselves? Because it would have to be a very good one especially if you consider an NPC like Canderous.

 

In a good game it would be a characters charisma. In KotOR, I don't think there is a good reason for it. Although they are there anyway...

 

Well be impressed then because I have It's not that difficult FO is pretty short. Even if you do die in a fight with a combat build chances are you have given it your best. Which is very different from reloading just because your chosen way to play the game failed.

 

Its difficult because FO's crit calculation are totally F'd up. If you are going to tell me that you played Combat boy and never got hit with a crit that tore you a new arsehole, I will just simply assume you are a liar. Although, I am still certain there are some people that beat it as combat boy without reloading just like there are people who beat it as talk boy without reloading it. Play it enough times and its not so hard. Of course you will probably say you did it your first time, with both arms tied behind your back. You do talk the talk...

[triCritical]

Then again, my original post on the subejct matter was on a specifc point made by Tri; not you. That somehow stats define one's role; that just isn't the case. It's one of the factors that help define it. So, Tri, inf act,w as saying it was the be all/end all. Oops... someone did say.

 

Get your own lame jokes and post endings. Period.

I think you need to learn the difference between a role, and a character dispotition and attitude. A characters role in DnD, that old hack and slash rule set, is FIGHTER, PRIEST, etc. There strength in these roles is determined by their skills and attributes. This is their role in life, their occupation, their calling.

 

A person attitude does not determine if they use swords or spells. A persons personality does not determine if they sneak, or announce their arrival. A person dispotition does not determine their proficiencies with bows to make money to take over the world! Your stats do, and that is your role.

 

Anyhow its all semantics. I can't play DnD without stats, but I can play it without personality. That kind of makes it pretty obvious, which is more important.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Precedent has shown that a smart man can carry more then a strong man.

 

In a good game it would be a characters charisma. In KotOR, I don't think there is a good reason for it. Although they are there anyway...

 

Its difficult because FO's crit calculation are totally F'd up. If you are going to tell me that you played Combat boy and never got hit with a crit that tore you a new arsehole, I will just simply assume you are a liar. Although, I am still certain there are some people that beat it as combat boy without reloading just like there are people who beat it as talk boy without reloading it. Play it enough times and its not so hard. Of course you will probably say you did it your first time, with both arms tied behind your back. You do talk the talk...

Ha ! Dogding again are we

 

What makes that a good game ? Reducing the NPCs to servents does not make something a good game. It's just another one of your lets make the world play by my rules idiocies.

 

You would be suprised what you can do with high enough weapon skills and power armour.

Assume what you like you asked the question. For the record no it wasnt on the first play through.

 

Even people with huge emphasis on stealth know how to fight. Take Ninja , very stealthy people. But they still spent a lot of time training to fight. Why ? Because unlike you they realise that stealth is not 100% effective and when stealth fails you need to be able to handle the situation.

 

They didnt have a reload button which allowed them to escape both the consequences of their actions and their training.

[Judge Hades]

Combat should be an option, but not the only option. There should be no have to fights, even on boss levels.

[tripleRRR]

I agree, but I doubt we will be given these extra options, this is supposed to be a console game after all so we will probably be stuck with the same old formula of kill everything that moves.

 

 

 

TripleRRR

[Volourn]

Huh? You played a different KOTOR than i did...

[AlanC9]

Wow. I sure hope the Obsidian devs aren't taking this thread seriously.The idea that KotOR 2 should be like Fallout just strikes me as ludicrous on its face. The two games have utterly different constituencies.

 

I could never figure out how a pure diplo approach to FO made any sense. OK, it's smart to avoid combat whenever possible, especially given the system used. But given the situation presented in the game, not preparing yourself for combat strikes me as irrational, even perverse.

 

Incidentally, isn't the Vault 15 fighting unavoidable except by metagaming? Sure, there's no chip there. But your character shouldn't know that. Of course, Ian can handle that place by himself, so there's no need for the PC to get his hands dirty.

[triCritical]

Even people with huge emphasis on stealth know how to fight. Take Ninja , very stealthy people. But they still spent a lot of time training to fight. Why ? Because unlike you they realise that stealth is not 100% effective and when stealth fails you need to be able to handle the situation.

Even people with huge emphasis on stealth know how to fight. Take Ninja , very stealthy people. But they still spent a lot of time training to fight. Why ? Because unlike you they realise that stealth is not 100% effective and when stealth fails you need to be able to handle the situation.

 

A ninja is a trained japanese assassin. While a ninja may have to fight, its is pretty obvious that he has failed in his primary function, if it resorts to this. Unless of course you think revenge of the ninja is gospel. Knowing you you probably do. However, having a game that allows stealth and diplomacy solutions with the ability to fail, does not in anyway contradict your ninja analogy. In a game like Fallout you can play a ninja if you so desire.

 

see...

 

Fallout Ninja

 

Courtesy RPGcodex.

[triCritical]

I agree, but I doubt we will be given these extra options, this is supposed to be a console game after all so we will probably be stuck with the same old formula of kill everything that moves.

 

 

 

TripleRRR

I really hope this is not the case. I believe Taris, with a couple of modifications, really showed hope for Bioware. I think if Obsidian uses Taris as an example in which the different classes are allowed to approach things differently for the mundane combat and extrapolate on this, KotOR 2 will be a much better game.

 

Also I thought all the planet hopping was rather dull, especially since the planets themselves, were nothing more then little dungeons around a hub based linearity very similar to the linear portion of the plane hopping PS:T.

[triCritical]

Wow. I sure hope the Obsidian devs aren't taking this thread seriously.The idea that KotOR 2 should be like Fallout just strikes me as ludicrous on its face. The two games have utterly different constituencies.

 

I could never figure out how a pure diplo approach to FO made any sense. OK, it's smart to avoid combat whenever possible, especially given the system used. But given the situation presented in the game, not preparing yourself for combat strikes me as irrational, even perverse.

 

Incidentally, isn't the Vault 15 fighting unavoidable except by metagaming? Sure, there's no chip there. But your character shouldn't know that. Of course, Ian can handle that place by himself, so there's no need for the PC to get his hands dirty.

Wow. I sure hope the Obsidian devs aren't taking this thread seriously.The idea that KotOR 2 should be like Fallout just strikes me as ludicrous on its face. The two games have utterly different constituencies.

 

Well that is why I said it should be more like PS:T. And tell me where I said that the game should be void of combat? I think I said in the very first post that Star Wars would be pretty damn stupid without combat. Its just that a lot of the drama queens around here like twisting facts and baiting people into arguments.

 

I am pretty sure what I said was.

 

The fun is in designing a better game. For one thing Jedi's can kick the crap out just about anything that is not a jedi, agreed? That is why the adventuring aspect was the good idea and all of the mundane combat was the bad idea. I am a firm believer in a low number of difficult and tactical encounters over many easy ones like in KotOR. I guess I am just not a big fan of a hack and slash game with a weak combat engine. Star Wars should not boil down to DnD in space, but I guess since that is all they have been able to do for all but two of their games I should not be surprised.

 

I know the Bioweenies have always loved to make hack and slash adventure games, with pitiful combat, so I was wondering if Obsidian was planning more of a PS:T approach. In other words, understand that the weakness of KotOR was its combat, much like the IE's weakness, and instead make an adventure/roleplaying game more along the same lines as PS:T.

 

back to you.

 

I could never figure out how a pure diplo approach to FO made any sense. OK, it's smart to avoid combat whenever possible, especially given the system used. But given the situation presented in the game, not preparing yourself for combat strikes me as irrational, even perverse.

 

I don't think there were too many people that tried a pure diplo solution first run through, that is pretty hard. However, after visiting the Fallout boards over the years I would say that the two most tagged skills were small arms and speech. Showing a balance between combat and diplomacy. Why would someone play a pure diplo game? Or about a pure stealth game? Or even a kill everything game? Because a lot of people like to see if it could be done and had fun doing it.

 

Anyhow it makes perfect sense in the Fallout universe considering what the game was all about. It was a stat based roleplaying game that tried to explore a socially/economically/morally different world in a post apocalyptic world. Your character starts from a clean slate, and may have come from an environment where violence was non-existence. Given you have weapons, but as most defense contractors will tell you, there for self-defense...

 

Incidentally, isn't the Vault 15 fighting unavoidable except by metagaming? Sure, there's no chip there. But your character shouldn't know that. Of course, Ian can handle that place by himself, so there's no need for the PC to get his hands dirty.

 

In case I didn't get the point across already. It would be very difficult to get through the game first time through, with no exposure without killing anything. And most first time players I have talked to just about always tag small arms. In Fallout, its stupid not to.

 

If you would like to make the comparison with KotOR, what I really want to get rid of is all of the mundane mandatory combat that add nothing to the game but boredom. Again I favor a small number of tactical encounters, over many easy redundant encounters. IMO this makes the game less fun for people not playing a hack and slash game. And while there will be the drama queens that dispute this fact, its only logical to allow different characters to approach things differently. I think there was some of this on Taris, but not enough, and it completely dissapeared for the remainder of the game.

[kefka]

Obsidian would be unwise to change KotOR too much. The game has achieved its popularity because of what it is - an enjoyable Star War RPG. You don't need to be an RPG veteran to play this game. It could be better but not at the expense of what makes it KotOR. The combat will be pretty similar - cinematic battles which capture the Star Wars feel... and I'd expect a lot of fighting, not much in the way of pacifism.

 

I believe Taris, with a couple of modifications, really showed hope for Bioware.

Well, does Bioware really need "hope" when they're selling millions of copies? I think they'd rather continue their current strategy than trying to please a small minority of hardcore gamers. Sorry, but sales figures are what counts. Bioware made a game that sold well, they must be doing something right.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Combat should be an option, but not the only option. There should be no have to fights, even on boss levels.

Combat is the only thing that is 100% determined by you. If you decide to whack someone over the head. Not a lot they can do about it except fight back.

 

Diplomacy actually relies on giving the other side something they want. And coming to a conclusion which both sides are happy with. Its not a case of sending a charismatic individual into a room and them coming out with everything they want. Or world politics would be a very different thing.

 

Same with stealth. Stealth relies on certain enviromental conditions which may not always be present.

 

If the boss isnt interested in your point of view and has set up his "lair" to elimiate the stealth options what else do you do ?

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Why would someone play a pure diplo game? Or about a pure stealth game? Or even a kill everything game? Because a lot of people like to see if it could be done and had fun doing it.

 

If you would like to make the comparison with KotOR, what I really want to get rid of is all of the mundane mandatory combat that add nothing to the game but boredom. .

What has a pure stealth or a pure diplomacy game got to do with roleplaying ? Thats just another form of powergaming. With the added cheat factor of reloading rather than break your "no kill" rule.

 

Well what you want is all fine and dandy but thats all it is. Your no more correct than someone who would want to get rid of most of the talkie bits because they find them boring.

[kefka]

If you would like to make the comparison with KotOR, what I really want to get rid of is all of the mundane mandatory combat that add nothing to the game but boredom.

The mandatory combat is there for a reason - to increase your level, of course. You always gain far more experience for killing than diplomacy, and let's not forget the booty. Most games have "phat lewt" and KotOR is no exception.

What makes you think that everyone found the "mundane mandatory combat" to be boring? I didn't. I enjoyed it for the spectacle alone. A game that actually felt like Star Wars. KotOR's incredible success speaks for itself.

Obsidian should improve a few things but no major changes.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Well, does Bioware really need "hope" when they're selling millions of copies? I think they'd rather continue their current strategy than trying to please a small minority of hardcore gamers. Sorry, but sales figures are what counts. Bioware made a game that sold well, they must be doing something right.

 

I think this is hardly about pleasing hardcore gamers; after all, they have improved their game design over the years, and their games are still financial successes, despite what 'hardcore' gamers tell them. Its only in their interest to improve and fine tune their game design; there's only so much a company can present in the form of stale gameplay or stagnant design choices over and over and over until it bites them hard.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

The mandatory combat is there for a reason - to increase your level, of course. You always gain far more experience for killing than diplomacy,

 

This doesn't need to be the case with all games. Torment was actually the reverse of this, and Fallout had it so depending on what you chose, experience was balanced (not perfectly, o'course). Using diplomacy in some situations would be as rewarding as killing off everyone that moved.

[kefka]

Its only in their interest to improve and fine tune their game design; there's only so much a company can present in the form of stale gameplay or stagnant design choices over and over and over until it bites them hard.

Yes, and what if Bioware's "game design" takes them further away from the hardcore minority? You can't argue with success. KotOR was anything but stale. I'm a jaded RPG gamer and KotOR was like a breath of fresh air.

[triCritical]

This is why your a drama queen that just like to argue.

 

What has a pure stealth or a pure diplomacy game got to do with roleplaying ?

 

IMO its has a lot, but what does this have to do with reducing the number of mundane combat encounter, which have absolutely no bearing on the game? If it makes you happy IMO if a game offers you the ability to play a certain character then that same game should allow you to play that character to its fullest. Games like Fallout and Arcanum come very close to letting you do that. Others don't even try.

 

But again, you the drama queen, raises an issue that has no bearing on the fact that there is no need for redundant and mundane combat in a game, which plays more like an adventure game. IMO they should keep the encounters low in number, not whoring out my jedi abilities.

 

Well what you want is all fine and dandy but thats all it is. Your no more correct than someone who would want to get rid of most of the talkie bits because they find them boring.

 

Actually I am. The reason is because Dave dodge the question Gaider loves to state how important the story driven nature to the game is and how important character and NPC development are. I want to get rid of the excess fat, which serves no purpose but pad 4-5 extra hours of unnecessary combat just so they can say its a 30 hours experience, which its not.

 

If the game was meant to be a tactical combat RPG like ToEE, Silent Storm, or JA2 then I would have no problem with other people saying to remove unecessary talkie bits if they reduced the quality of the game. My question to Obsidian is does all the redundant and mundane combat improve the quality of the game, or does all the whoring of jedi combat reduce the quality. IMO if it does not improve the quality, which I am sure it does not, then let the non-combat character have an oppurtunity to avoid it.

 

Now your turn to make absurd analogies and pointless examples which do not pertain to topics on hands about topics on hand like pirates. My god your a loser...

[triCritical]

The mandatory combat is there for a reason - to increase your level, of course. You always gain far more experience for killing than diplomacy, and let's not forget the booty. Most games have "phat lewt" and KotOR is no exception. 

 

JE Mr. Audi S4 Sawyer once stated that he invisioned a game in which there would be no XP for killing monsters. Afterall its not necessary and he has GM'd campaigns in, which XP was only given for accomplishments such as finished quest. I agree with him.

 

BTW, quest experience is not phat l3wt.

 

What makes you think that everyone found the "mundane mandatory combat" to be boring? I didn't. I enjoyed it for the spectacle alone. A game that actually felt like Star Wars. KotOR's incredible success speaks for itself.

Obsidian should improve a few things but no major changes.

 

I never said everyone did. I just said make it a choice, like a good CRPG should. If you want to fight hordes and hordes of inept enemies be my guest. My elitist evil jedi has better things to do, that is my point.

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Yes, and what if Bioware's "game design" takes them further away from the hardcore minority?

 

Whatever happens, happens. My point wasn't about wheter their decisions moved them closer to the mainstream and/or 'hardcore' gamers, neither about would be consequences of that.

 

You can't argue with success.

 

Who's trying?

 

KotOR was anything but stale.

 

Who said otherwise?

 

 

 

As i answer this, i have to question if its possible to fudge up the interpretation of what i said even more. :ph34r: