Politics and Emergent Gameplay

[Metabot]

I'd really like to see the political relationships between the various factions play a major role in the game. I think there's a possibility for incorporating some aspects of strategy games here, but in an RPG manner. If the proper systems were in place for the player to make unscripted actions that the game then reacts to, the possibility for replayability and roleplaying are really endless. I don't know if this is even possible or if Obsidian would even want to take this direction, but with their previous focus on the dynamics between factions in their previous games I think this is something to consider.

[Odarbi]

I'd also like to see something like this play into the game, and especially so if it ends up having a large impact on the way the game plays out. One of my favorite aspects of Baldurs Gate 2 was the faction choice at the end of Chapter 2. It only ended up being a minor change to the way the game played, but it was enough to be memorable.

[Pop]

The use of factions and choice/consequence systems (in whatever form) has been a consistent aspect of Obsidian's work going back to before they even existed. Fallout 2 had regional reputation, Planescape: Torment had faction alignment. I think it's safe to assume we'll see that sort of thing in Eternity.

[Super Grover]

I sincerely hope that allusions to real world politics are not used in the game. Let the characters and groups be their own entities rather than caricatures of politicians or agendas.

[generic.hybridity]

Obsidian does pretty well with factions usually. FO:NV had some pretty interesting interactivity with regards to them.

[Super Grover]

Very true! They've proven themselves very capable of creating living worlds and factions without alienating or marginalizing any particular group, which is honestly very impressive.

[septembervirgin]

What would be interesting is if the organizations moved something like social leviathans -- massive organizations composed of individuals with their own goals. The way an organization moves should depend largely on NPC behavior based on "perceived opportunity" and player character interaction; at least as regards leadership (inclusive of method and objective). Considering that the player character will be a motivating force of some power, perceived opportunities might be swayed by the player character's activities.

[Metabot]

I sincerely hope that allusions to real world politics are not used in the game. Let the characters and groups be their own entities rather than caricatures of politicians or agendas.

 

I don't want that either.

 

What I'm talking about isn't simply having factions and being able to join one or the other. What I'm trying to get at is to incorporate some principles of RTS or TBS games like Civilization but in an RPG setting. So for example, you could join x guild or faction and there would be game systems in place that would allow the player to influence the way that faction goes, what other factions they ally with, and many other options hopefully.

 

This is just an idea I have and I'm guessing Obsidian has a good idea what they're going to do with the game at this point. These are just ideas to add upon existing ones to add replayability and some spontaneity.

[Cantousent]

I would be happy if we got away from "business = bad" and "tree huggerz = good." It's not that I think there are shades of grey in every aspect of life, but any side that has traction in reality also has someone who can articulate its position with sufficient appeal to a large enough block of people to make a difference. Ideas, not swords or guns, are the most powerful deciders of humanity because people who weild swords and guns do so for the sake of ideas. Any war between populations greater than hunter/gatherer is because one side or both has belief in an ideal. It might be a sucky ideal, but it's still the thought that counts, so to speak. Within that framework, you'll end up with people who use the system as nothing more than a stepping stone for power. Hell, even if the person who starts the whole thing has nothing but personal glory or power in mind, which would still be ideas at any rate, he must convince enough people of the goal nonetheless. Napoleon might have been a self centered egoist, but the people of France still exported the revolution with "Libert

[Metabot]

Well it would all depend on what type of character you have made. If done right it would be incorporated into the rest of the game rather seamlessly I think.

 

The most basic example I can give for what I'm trying to get at would be that climbing the ranks of some guild is never guaranteed. It doesn't have the force of narrative behind, rather it depends on your choices and your characters' skills and abilities to do so. It would be a game in and of itself of sorts.

[septembervirgin]

What would be interesting is if the organizations moved something like social leviathans -- massive organizations composed of individuals with their own goals. The way an organization moves should depend largely on NPC behavior based on "perceived opportunity" and player character interaction; at least as regards leadership (inclusive of method and objective). Considering that the player character will be a motivating force of some power, perceived opportunities might be swayed by the player character's activities.

 

Of course that's difficult to do. And they're aiming at old school design structure, not stunning us with a shattering new NPC AI. The cost of developing a new NPC AI might be exorbitant -- and the opportunity to do so will come in the decades ahead of them. Game designers could study card games (like Steve Jackson Games' Illuminati!) and computer games (like Republic: the Revolution, Rome 2: Total War, Europa Universalis, and Mafia games) that do have organizations that respond with some sophistication to losing leaders, changing objectives and such. Grand Strategy games have been influenced by role-playing game structure and vice versa: "attributes" of leaders and experience all come to fore on how a person administrates, with even subtle differences being telling when the tension comes. Even sim-life games have the potential for influence in CRPG, where individual NPC go about their daily lives with only a few variables being influential; preference to self-preservation in all but "stupid adventurers" being a primary goal. But that level of complexity might not be possible nor wanted here.

 

I don't mind if the tavern populace are "always in position", ready for their closeup with their one liners. If the taverns change customers between day and night sequences, that would be suitable and even laudable. If the one liners are indicative of recent events that were rumoured or observed personally, that would be nearing ideal. However, we're talking about nostalgia -- and sometimes what is loved in nostalgia belays the potential of avant-garde concepts. Potential is not so great when it would cost a few hundred grand per year. Finally, new faces aren't going to swarm to a single feature, no matter how refined, that's been used in Fable and Fable II, arguably poorly executed in both games. Obsidian isn't competing with Fable (nor with Taeis MU*, RIP). Obsidian is bringing back the gold, returning home from exploits afar. And we're glad to see our Black Isle guys. If only Infocom were still around to applaud their efforts.

 

We can expect that Obsidian will excel in storyline and in "bringing sexy back" to the nostalgic world of CRPG.

[Paul D]

As well as politics, perhaps also corruption. Bribery and extortion may also fit the bill depending on the character you a choosing to play. Allowing the old saying "Money Talks" to play a part in the game, for good or bad. Introducing this sort of thing may allow for interesting emerging gameplay options; perhaps if your game character is flashy with the wealth, you have a greater chance of being mugged if you are in the wrong part of town. Alternatively, you can pay-your way to safe haven, or extort your way to good information.

[septembervirgin]

I like the concept of bribing NPC members of groups, sort of like an Illuminati card game except individual members exist. Individual members of the represented organization networks can be manuevered for one turn by an opponent who succeeds in a bribe.