Please take care of a pet-peeve of mine - No "loyalty meter"

[dmbot]

Alright, I don't know how many people this bothers besides me, but it really stood out in MoB for me (Which is still the best RPG of the last 10 years). It's actually getting quite widespread in RPGs today and it must stop.

I'm talking about this situation - After I'm talking with an NPC, the game will inform me he now likes me more by 4 arbitrary points, and sometimes when I have enough "he likes me points" I will get a bonus. Now, at first this might not seem so bad, it incentives the player to talk to their party and care about them. But a second look will reveal where this fails - When a player is informed that a character now likes him less by "6", he will not just take it, he'll reload the game and just say what he know she wants to hear - Because there's a clearly better outcome that he learns of immediately after the fact. Basically, the problem with this sort of system is that it incentives the player to have all the characters like him, like some sort of minigame. But sometimes, it's better when a character doesn't like the player - it create much more memorable interactions an banters when you're not sure what everyone thinks of you or what makes them like you or hate you. This also ruins any immersion those interactions bring. The unpredictable nature of these banters in older games is part of what makes them so immersing and engaging, it was like you were really interacting with those characters and that made you care for them.

 

So please, just hide these sort of parameters. Thanks

[C2B]

While I do think a similiar system could be handled differently and better....

 

I WANT to be able to manipulate my companies. I WANT that they can develop differently based on my interactions with them rather than being some static entity.

 

I even WANT that this has influence on quests and how they play out. Maybe my companion does something behind my back based on an earlier conversation, maybe he flees and leaves me to die when we come into a dire situation.

 

(I also want this to happen outside of the mainquest so it really surprises me)

 

Edit: Stupid me. Should read your post better.

Edited September 15, 2012 by C2B

[Odarbi]

I've gotta agree with this.

[Delterius]

I WANT to be able to manipulate my companies. I WANT that they can develop differently based on my interactions with them rather than being some static entity.

 

I suppose the OP believe that if its evident wether someone likes you more or less, that should be communicated in other ways than influence points. He's asking to hide a statistic, not to cut it.

 

I can agree with that.

Edited September 15, 2012 by Delterius

[C2B]

Yeah, see my edit (And I agree). Though, I want to emphasize the more reactive and independent companions part that activly can play their own parts in sidequests. With or Against the player (and anything *possible* in between).

Edited September 15, 2012 by C2B

[generic.hybridity]

Hmm. Yeah, there is something to be said for hiding those mechanics. Whilst making them explicit gives gamer's explicit goals and gamifies the dialogue. Hiding it can bring the story elements to the foreground.

 

You're less sure of your companions actions because you don't know explicitly if your companions approve of your actions. Being told by the computer that you have gained relationship points really does remove some of the uncertainty and drama from such situations. I'd be in favour of a more arcane method of telling how your companions are feeling (i.e. judging from how they respond to you or other in game mechanics. Walking dead has some interesting moments of this, being left for dead by certain people depending on how you've treated them for example).

[rf5111918]

Exactly, it kind of kills the immersion to the game when it's laid out so explicitly. And it ends up being annoying because you are so focused on juggling your party to make sure everyone likes you. You should be able to have the freedom to say what you want to say.

I think there could be some penalty, but not to the extent where it severely limits combat abilities.

[Flouride]

As long as there's no way to cheat the loyalty meter with gifts ala Dragon Age. I'm fine with it. I want my companions to react uniquely to what I do and say in the game, not to my bribes.

[DAWUSS]

And within a few months, the game's wiki will have the right combination of responses readily available.

[Badmojo]

I actually like knowing, maybe a simple option in the settings could hide it for those who do not like mechanics showing like that, but leave it on for those of us who like to keep track.

[septembervirgin]

I notice several games which handle loot and loyalty differently.

 

Dragon Age has NPC accepting gifts and being customized by the player. This is good to a small extent but the upshot is, no one seems to want anything beyond gifts for dangerous duty. The feeling this gives is utter reliance and trust in the player character, a system that seems a bit over-reliant to me. They have loyalty ratings so to speak, but it's the loyalty of a party attendant. It's more happiness than loyalty and friendship.

 

Temple of Elemental Evil has NPC taking a share of the loot before the player ever sees it. This is problematic (because it takes an invisible section away from the player) and relies on player trust of the computer game. It was a swift way of handling a delicate issue but its drawback is there was no approval of each situation where loot is to be dispersed between party members. The sense of loyalty was only in that they continue to work unless offended or lead away by the story. There's no actual sense of approval nor disapproval in that game, not really. I did admire that the NPC had their own partially represented wants.

 

Some MMORPG have each player receiving their own version of the treasure; this might be ideal but some players like outfitting their party individually.

 

What I'd like to see is that NPC will always want a share (and indicate what they want). Before entering cities there should be a "dividing the loot" screen or something, and gauges showing how satisfied each NPC is with their share and commentary as to their feelings on the matter (see Civilization 5 diplomacy). Also, gifts could be given, and NPCs could be offered items to use and will use these if they feel that the item is useful or better than what they have. Some NPC would deny some loot, including items they feel ethically against or see no use in having (even if it seems useful to the player).

 

I guess I see loyalty as not being entirely applicable to adventuring. In AD&D loyalty was for NPC and only if they found themselves in a situation safe enough to leave or if they were tempted to abandon their leader's cause. Morale was for how well they kept themselves together in dangerous situations. I think what we see in most recent RPG is not loyalty as much as happiness and what they ask for is often unrealistically meager.

Edited September 18, 2012 by septembervirgin