Limiting rest areas

[curryinahurry]

 

 

The purpose of gaming is to have fun, not to play the game exactly as TrashMan would play his game. One option gives everyone the power to play as they like, the other does not. All this "I win" button crapola you guys keep spouting is just background noise. You play your way, Ill play mine.

 

 

I would disagree with this definition (vis a vis "fun"), but even if we accept it; the problem with playing a game anyway one likes, is that one runs the risk, with that level of freedom, of ruining ones own good time.  Since people seldom blame themselves for playing games incorrectly  the blame falls back on the game developer.

 

Remember, what started a lot of this discussion (and also the whole xp for kills vs quests), was the desire on the part of Obsidian to discourage degenerate gameplay.  That concern seems to track back to people ruining their own good time, and blaming the game and game designer, which in turn hurts the company's reputation.

 

I think many of the people who are advocating less flexibility aren't necessarily trying to tell other s how they should play, so much as trying to make sure PE is successful in its intentions.  Which is ultimately to play the game the way that Obsidian envisions it.

 

That and making sure that the limited resources Obsidian has at its disposal don't get wasted at the expense of better dialog, quests, etc.

Edited May 23, 2013 by curryinahurry

[Gfted1]

I would disagree with this definition (vis a vis "fun"), but even if we accept it; the problem with playing a game anyway one likes, is that one runs the risk, with that level of freedom, of ruining ones own good time.  Since people seldom blame themselves for playing games incorrectly  the blame falls back on the game developer.

 

Remember, what started a lot of this discussion (and also the whole xp for kills vs quests), was the desire on the part of Obsidian to discourage degenerate gameplay.  That concern seems to track back to people ruining their own good time, and blaming the game and game designer, which in turn hurts the company's reputation.

 

I think many of the people who are advocating less flexibility aren't necessarily trying to tell other s how they should play, so much as trying to make sure PE is successful in its intentions.  Which is ultimately to play the game the way that Obsidian envisions it.

 

That and making sure that the limited resources Obsidian has at its disposal don't get wasted at the expense of better dialog, quests, etc.

There is no accounting for individuals stupidity. Are you aware that BG2 + expansions literally had an "I win" button built into the game(Ctrl+Y)? That's right, you could hover your cursor over any mook or boss and instantly kill them with a keystroke. Yet somehow the game was one of the best ever produced. Weird huh?

[TrashMan]

 

 

Which is beside the point.

 

You're asking the player to compensate for bad design. Why should he?

 

You might as well add a "I win" bottun and then claim it is brilliant design because it makes it easier on the players. After all, you don't have to click it.

The fact that it compeltely undermines the entire purpose of the game is irrelevant to you?

 

 

 

The purpose of gaming is to have fun, not to play the game exactly as TrashMan would play his game. One option gives everyone the power to play as they like, the other does not. All this "I win" button crapola you guys keep spouting is just background noise. You play your way, Ill play mine.

 

 

 

And what is fun?

If the only purpose of hte gmae is to deliver this nebolous, undefined concept of fun, what type of fun do you actually deliver?

 

I ask again - what if I consider clicking the same bottun again and again fun? What if I consider things you hate the most fun?

 

 

No, no...sadly you are wrong. There are ways games are meant to be played....otherwise there wouldn't be genres in the frist place and no mechanical limitations.

 

Mechanics serve a purpose.

Creating a set of mechanics that undermine eachother is bad design. Pure, simple logic.

Wether you like it or not is irrelevant and is "background noise".

 

 

 

 

There is no accounting for individuals stupidity. Are you aware that BG2 + expansions literally had an "I win" button built into the game(Ctrl+Y)? That's right, you could hover your cursor over any mook or boss and instantly kill them with a keystroke. Yet somehow the game was one of the best ever produced. Weird huh?

 

That was a cheat (and for game testing purposes) and not part of the mechanics.

Very bad example.

Edited May 23, 2013 by TrashMan

[Gfted1]

And what is fun?

If the only purpose of hte gmae is to deliver this nebolous, undefined concept of fun, what type of fun do you actually deliver?

 

I ask again - what if I consider clicking the same bottun again and again fun? What if I consider things you hate the most fun?

 

 

No, no...sadly you are wrong. There are ways games are meant to be played....otherwise there wouldn't be genres in the frist place and no mechanical limitations.

 

Mechanics serve a purpose.

Creating a set of mechanics that undermine eachother is bad design. Pure, simple logic.

Wether you like it or not is irrelevant and is "background noise".

Rofl, talk about self fulfilling prophesy. Im not going to get drawn into your rudimentary circular argument technique. Nobody cares what Trashman thinks is fun just as nobody cares what I think is fun, its up to the individual player. One method allows that, the other does not. 

 

That was a cheat (and for game testing purposes) and not part of the mechanics.

Very bad example.

Ah, moving the goalposts again. Whether or not it was a cheat is irrelevant. You claim the mere existence of a capability breaks the game and I showed that is not the case. People could choose to use that function, or not, and unsurprisingly the sky didn't fall.

[TrashMan]

Rofl, talk about self fulfilling prophesy. Im not going to get drawn into your rudimentary circular argument technique. Nobody cares what Trashman thinks is fun just as nobody cares what I think is fun, its up to the individual player. One method allows that, the other does not. 

 

 

And it is irrelevant wether it allows it or not.

I'm putting up the issue of sound game and mecahnics design.

 

"Allow me to play the way I want by brekaing mechanics" doesn't automaticly equal good.

It does to you probably.

 

You are equating a game that allows more playstles as automaticly superior, compeltely ignoring what is sacrifices for that.

 

 

 

Ah, moving the goalposts again. Whether or not it was a cheat is irrelevant. You claim the mere existence of a capability breaks the game and I showed that is not the case. People could choose to use that function, or not, and unsurprisingly the sky didn't fall.

 

It is. A cheat/test code is NOT part of game design and what is or isn't part is relevant.

 

And no, I said the mere existence breaks the game DESIGN. It will unavoidable break the game for some tough.

 

 

Think of it this way:

I can poke you for the whole day and you could cetanly choose not to poke me back... But will you? Will you be equally engaged in your reading a book as long as I'm poking you?

 

[Lephys]

Gfted1... You do realize that you're basically saying "there is no differentiation between what constitutes playing a game and what does not, except people's silly opinions," right?

 

So, a player fires up P:E after it comes out, and decides they wanna play it by dumping a bucket of water on their computer. Only, this just fries the crap out of everything and the game stops functioning. Man, who's the jackass who decided that we had to play P:E by not-dumping buckets of water upon our computers?!

 

The ridiculousness of that example is intentional. How water functions when dumped upon operational electronic devices is not up to anyone's opinion. It just works that way. And it's the same way with logic and rules, and the very idea of gameplay that can be failed. That's why things that remove limitations are typically called "cheats." Because there are established rules for any game, and breaking those rules defeats the purpose of the game.

 

So, either "You can only recover your HP and spells so often" is a rule, or it isn't. There is no point in making it a rule, then saying "you never CAN'T recover all your stuff, but you can only recover all your stuff whenever you're allowed to."

 

What's even stranger to me is that I pointed out that I don't mind someone playing the game by completely choosing to not even have a limitation, thereby accomplishing the same thing in a non-illogical fashion, and yet you're still acting as though I'm "trying to get people to play the game only the way I would play it." Which is silly. If I were trying to do that, wouldn't I be against the idea of lifting the limit on HP/spell recovery in the first place?

 

I genuinely do not comprehend why you think this is some kind of opinion battle, and everyone's trying to simply invoke their will upon other players. The laws of nature existed long before anyone ever thought them up. They merely observed them. Everything in the world isn't made out of opinion.

[Gfted1]

I can poke you for the whole day and you could cetanly choose not to poke me back... But will you? Will you be equally engaged in your reading a book as long as I'm poking you?

Absolutely. I post here from work so Ive got (almost) unlimited time to joust. You will have my attention until 5:00pm-ish or until I bore of you. 

 

What's even stranger to me is that I pointed out that I don't mind someone playing the game by completely choosing to not even have a limitation, thereby accomplishing the same thing in a non-illogical fashion, and yet you're still acting as though I'm "trying to get people to play the game only the way I would play it."

If this is your opinion then Im not even addressing you.

[Lephys]

If this is your opinion then Im not even addressing you.

Let's all just not address opinions that aren't already our own. That seems ultra-constructive in a discussion. But, hey... to each his own.

[Gfted1]

 

If this is your opinion then Im not even addressing you.

Let's all just not address opinions that aren't already our own. That seems ultra-constructive in a discussion. But, hey... to each his own.

 

 

 

What? Your opinion seemed to mirror mine so there was no point in addressing it. I too feel the player should be able to play without limitation. I really dont want to have to dissect this conversation 25 times so if thats not what you meant then please restate. A tl;dr version would be appreciated.

[Valorian]

 A tl;dr version would be appreciated.

 

Wrong request.

"A tl;dr version under 1000 words would be appreciated" is the correct way to approach this specific situation.

[Lephys]

What? Your opinion seemed to mirror mine so there was no point in addressing it. I too feel the player should be able to play without limitation. I really dont want to have to dissect this conversation 25 times so if thats not what you meant then please restate. A tl;dr version would be appreciated.

My bad. I misunderstood.

 

Yes, that is my opinion. I just feel it's extraordinarily silly not to just have the option to play without the limitation simply do away with the need to rest in the first place if it's going to be unlimited, rather than require you to actually click rest after every single battle when you'll never not-be-able to do that. At that point, the resting mechanic, alltogether, is rendered moot. That's all.

 

For what it's worth, tl;dr versions don't work. I do that, people say "Why? How? Where in the hell is the reasoning behind this?". I don't do it and elaborate, and people say "Why did you go into detail and explain why you felt how you did? Just use like 5 words, man!"

 

It's a lose-lose, for me. So, I just do my best.

 

And, for what it's worth, on the topic of doing away with limitations, there are certain limitations that the game is in no way obligated to provide a bypass for (such as finite health, or mutual exclusion in dialogue/story choices, etc). That's more a tertiary point, though.

[TrashMan]

Absolutely. I post here from work so Ive got (almost) unlimited time to joust. You will have my attention until 5:00pm-ish or until I bore of you. 

 

 

Nice lie.

Btw - I also post from work.