World-building Mechanics

[fortuntek]

We all know that extensive world lore is established and scattered throughout a game in order to give the player some sense of being within a larger setting than the game takes place in, and to give that setting some story depth. But how else can we root players in a gaming experience and have them feel as a part of it?

 

I strongly feel that gameplay mechanics and NPC statistics help create an enjoyable sense of blending within a setting as well, and I've come to appreciate the game mechanics of certain games, especially Infinity Engine games, that enable this.

 

For example:

• The ability to attack any game creature (except possibly main quest NPC's or children) with consequences
  
• City Guards/Militia, neutral adventurers and the like not being complete useless pushovers
  
• NPC's have a functional combat level adequate to who they're supposed to be even if you're not meant to fight them
  
• A general sense of there being people in the world who are much, much stronger than you even by endgame
  

I heard that in terms of power, our characters in P:E will end the game at about the equivalent of level 12 in D&D. This is pretty moderate and I think it's a good place to end for the first game in what could possibly turn out to be a series if successful. But regardless if there ends up being sequels or not, I don't want to be able to blast through whatever I come across (should I choose to) towards the end of the game. I enjoy that if I attack say, the veteran General of the city army while in his barracks or whatnot, he will spank my sorry butt and it will be reload time. Well that was fun; note to self, am not a god. While this doesn't serve any direct purpose to the combat mechanics, it DOES serve a purpose for world building and giving players a sense of the setting they're in.

 

In other words, it helps avoid "gamey" elements that break immersion and remind the player that the story was crafted specifically around them for their situation only. I'm all for avoiding this sort of thing where possible; what do you guys think?

[jivex5k]

We should be able to attack children and main quest NPCs.

In fact, we should be able to break the main quest line completely, they should just let us know we did it morrowind style.

[fortuntek]

We should be able to attack children and main quest NPCs.

In fact, we should be able to break the main quest line completely, they should just let us know we did it morrowind style.

 

I'd have no problem with the main quest thing personally, but doesn't the ability to attack children affect ESRB ratings or something? Have devs stated that they're going for a Mature rating?

[Sacred_Path]

But will the children give XP?

[Hellfell]

Temple of Elemental Evil was PEGI 16+ and ESRB Teen yet you could slaughter entire village including women and children and loot everything they had on them. Oh World.

[fortuntek]

I've noticed that most games lately prevent you from doing things like this... is it because graphics have become better in recent years, making such acts more... well, graphic? Also seems to correlate more to games played in 1st or 3rd person behind-the-shoulder style games perhaps

[Pipyui]

Pretty much agree with every point you've made up there, nothing more to add.

[Hormalakh]

Some games even consider the fact that you kill everyone in your path and so leave items on the character that allow you to continue the main storyline without having to talk to that NPC.

 

Arcanum does this very well.

[Pipyui]

I think as far as mainquest NPCs are concerned, I'd rather they couldn't just be killed on a whim. They shouldn't be immortal (Martin Septim is unconscious!), but they should be somewhere between fairly difficult to combat and almost inconceivably so.

 

All-too-mortal quest characters were especially frustrating when you were informed of one being killed half a world away from you. Please, none of this.

[Nomine Vacans]

Some games even consider the fact that you kill everyone in your path and so leave items on the character that allow you to continue the main storyline without having to talk to that NPC.

 

Arcanum does this very well.

Yeah, just about any miserable f#ck you meet in your journey has a detailed diary or something like that.

To be honest, it was pretty lame, IMO.

[Nomine Vacans]

All-too-mortal quest characters were especially frustrating when you were informed of one being killed half a world away from you. Please, none of this.

Could you explain how it's even possible, if player is the only real source of action in the game? Some examples from other games maybe? Im realy curious about that.

[Hormalakh]

Some games even consider the fact that you kill everyone in your path and so leave items on the character that allow you to continue the main storyline without having to talk to that NPC.

 

Arcanum does this very well.

Yeah, just about any miserable f#ck you meet in your journey has a detailed diary or something like that.

To be honest, it was pretty lame, IMO.

 

NOT TRUE! SOME HAD KEYS TO DRAWERS...that had a diary in it!

[Tamerlane]

All-too-mortal quest characters were especially frustrating when you were informed of one being killed half a world away from you. Please, none of this.

Could you explain how it's even possible, if player is the only real source of action in the game? Some examples from other games maybe? Im realy curious about that.

While not directly relevant to an IE-style game, there was a certain quest-necessary NPC in Oblivion who had a nasty habit of falling off a very tall bridge and dying...

[Nomine Vacans]

While not directly relevant to an IE-style game, there was a certain quest-necessary NPC in Oblivion who had a nasty habit of falling off a very tall bridge and dying...

That's some ba-a-ad game design.

[AGX-17]

We should be able to attack children and main quest NPCs.

In fact, we should be able to break the main quest line completely, they should just let us know we did it morrowind style.

 

Considering Obsidian's dedication to writing, it wouldn't be a great feat to simply have branching paths depending on your actions. It doesn't have to be a dead-end leaving you with just a bunch of boring dungeons to crawl through for loot that's worse than anything you can craft like a Bethesda game. That's just the same as getting stuck by a glitch and having to restart, and this isn't going to be a sandbox game.

 

 

While not directly relevant to an IE-style game, there was a certain quest-necessary NPC in Oblivion who had a nasty habit of falling off a very tall bridge and dying...

That's some ba-a-ad game design.

 

I thought that "B" would be followed by "ethesda." They're great at making landscapes to explore (dungeons no so much,) but after Morrowind, quest & game design and writing basically became casual Xbox garbage.

Edited November 2, 2012 by AGX-17

[Nomine Vacans]

I thought that "B" would be followed by "ethesda." They're great at making landscapes to explore (dungeons no so much,) but after Morrowind, quest & game design and writing basically became casual Xbox garbage.

Amen.

[jivex5k]

I think it'd be cool to have the main quest change to accommodate your killing of a main quest NPC.

Not like, oh he dropped his diary.

More like, it changes from saving the world to ruling it. Making towns tremble in your wake...Muhahahaha.

 

And yeah, nobody wants important NPCs to die from monsters or falling off cliffs.

But if you get into a fight near him, accidentally fry him with an AoE...your fault, he should die.

 

That being said, you should be able to cast all spells on NPCs, including protective ones.

[Pipyui]

All-too-mortal quest characters were especially frustrating when you were informed of one being killed half a world away from you. Please, none of this.

Could you explain how it's even possible, if player is the only real source of action in the game? Some examples from other games maybe? Im realy curious about that.

While not directly relevant to an IE-style game, there was a certain quest-necessary NPC in Oblivion who had a nasty habit of falling off a very tall bridge and dying...

 

Ah, yes Oblivion. How I love thee, let me count the ways:

1.

 

Jokes aside, I actually really liked Oblivion (I grew up with it, I'm a young`un), but things like that were really annoying. Trouble with a big open world, I guess.

In Morrowind though quest characters were too easy to kill at my whimsey. Side quest characters sure, but main-quest characters should pack a little more pain (so long as it suits their characters, that is). Needless to say, this is especially necessary if I'm ever going to be traveling with them (don't need mr. bigshot being downed by his first goblin encounter).

Edited November 2, 2012 by Pipyui

[Lynx88]

What you describe is quite possible, and indeed present in a few other games, namely The Witcher, Gothic, Risen and so forth where you can easily be killed if you aren't being focused, no matter how good your armour is or what level you are.

[Aldereth]

More than the ability/permission to kill NPCs in a given cRPG, I would rather see a cRPG that incorporate writing and game mechanic that make players NOT want to kill any NPC even if that capability is there. Or at least kill for a reason.

 

Interesting NPCs written with depth is a good deterent to dissuade player from doing random killing in the name of "roleplaying" evil. Sure give the player the ability to kill them but it is going to be their loss when they miss out a good part of the character's story.

 

Consider combining writing with game mechanic that encourage players to be more engage with the game world. What if there is an in game mechanic to have each major population center (from village to megacity) can have various stage of developement throughout the entire game plot. So the settlement would grow or shrink depending on plot event as well as player actions. If the player help defend or build a community, that community will grow (village becomes town...etc.) and open up new resource in the form of recruitable NPCs, quests and items while a competing community would shrink or stagnate.

 

So if players start killing in a community, the community would stagnate at that stage or shrink down. The player would not be able to check out the new buildings such as shops, inn, churches the community is going to build later in the game or meet NPCs that would spawn if the community is left to further develop. Instead buildings will get abandoned. More impersonal guards would spawn in the place of dead NPCs the player killed. And if the dev want to spice things up, spawn in some interesting bounty hunters that is after the hefty bounty on the PC's head. Put some story there, maybe one of the bounty hunter is recruitable and is only available in the "evil playthrough".

 

Sometimes, when players want to randomly kill NPC is an indication that the player is simply bored and killing to check out the loot is the only way the player can stay engaged. Wouldn't it be better to encourage the player to be more engaged with the game world not to mention add to replayability?

Edited November 2, 2012 by Aldereth