Varied loot and balanced random loot tables = even more replayability?

[Sedrefilos]

Aaahhh... how I envy those who can replay rpgs...

Unfortynately, try as I may, I can never replay a good rpg. Like an rpg with good roleplay. Like New Vegas for exaple. The reason about this is because,during my second playthrough, I end up doing the same things I did the first time, so I just give up. If a game has so good roleplay that I can behave like I would in real life, I just can't make any other dicision. I can't play the "evil" guy for example. So, since I know how things gonna end up... I see no point in continue playing. Different loot won't change my mind. Because the primary purpose of the game is to have a good role play. These are the best gmes for me.

 

In games like Diablo, on the other hand, where there is no, or very little role play and the game is 95% focused on playstyle and loot, I find it more easy to replay. Same thing goes for Bethesda games as well. They have role play, but it's very basic and you can't see NPCs as real people, more like things that are there to smash your weapons on, so replay happens  more often there too.

Edited May 8, 2014 by Sedrefilos

[Valorian]

@HH

Because unlike Dragon Age 2 for instance, PoE will likely have symmetrical combat mechanics, with enemies functioning within the same set of rules. If my fighter can have 3-4 Talents at level 5, I expect the same to be true for an enemy fighter. Then there's the AI and its prioritization of active abilities, so it isn't just a matter of simply dumping as many abilities as possible into a creature to accommodate your particular fetish.

[Hassat Hunter]

That's just severly limiting your options for enemy encounters, and adding a huge amount of work for zero payoff.

[Valorian]

 If you say so.

 I'm pretty sure that enemies equipped by hand, and designed from head to toe with appropriate abilities, improve encounter quality. Decent item randomization and programming the AI to take into account random item/ability combinations is lots of work too.

 

 But if you're worried that bandit #37 on playthrough #X will use exactly the same tactics (which you'll obviously remember with crystal clarity, just like his items) as in your playthrough #1, you don't have to be. Abilities are never randomly assigned, but the AI may select semi-randomly from the abilities it has based on a variety of criteria.  The creature is given a set of abilities in its prefab (data file) and then its instruction set has an entry for each of those abilities.  Each entry has a relative weight and set of conditions applied to it.  When the AI analyzes the validity for any entry’s conditions, it adds that entry’s weight into the mix and randomly selects from the valid choices.This quote is taken from Josh Sawyer's tumblr page. http://jesawyer.tumblr.com/post/79942961685/answering-about-ai-enemy-types-and-their-abilities

I think that's neat.

 

[Hassat Hunter]

MActive and passive abilities are completely seperate things, however...

 

I agree active ones shouldn't be randomnised. But there's no point forcing a NPC to only be able to wield a sword. Makes encounters prone to human error and requires more work if you rebalance something...

[Valorian]

However, it's entirely possible that some active and modal talents, e.g. shield bash, will be tied to specific combat styles or category of weapons.

 

It's not like the NPC is forced to do anything. It's simply designed that way to complement an encounter with other two enemies who use crushing and piercing weapons respectively, for example. I am confident they'll take care of details and assign appropriate abilities to creatures.

[Lephys]

Sure, they don't need to mention their specific weapon, but it would be a pity to have a Talent that boosts prowess with swords and then randomly receive a mace.

It would, but these are not naturally-occurring entities that the devs are just outfitting with weapons. Their talents, and any other traits whatsoever, are just as adjustable as the weapon they possess. Thus, there's no more worry of this somehow inadvertently occurring than there is about a Wolf without opposable thumbs being assigned a sword to wield, or something.

 

Is this further evidence that the implementation might be more trouble than it's worth? It sure is. But it's hardly a conundrum.

 

The AI won't always use the same tactics because there's a bit of randomness involved, so you don't have to worry that a static AI will ruin your subsequent playthroughs.

I realize this. I didn't mean "we'll literally just run the exact same football play, every time we fight this guy." Specifically where you step and what order in which you use abilities and such will be different, and you can even use completely different party makeups and strategies. However, your goals will be the same, because a bunch of factors will be the same. "Oh, he's got hefty plate armor, so we're all gonna wanna worry with DT-breaching than attack speed." Or "Oh, that guy's got a huge two-handed sword, so we need to make sure to work against damage types A and B in this fight."

 

That kind of stuff. Just, ideally, in complete isolation, it'd be really nice to play a game in which your combat challenges mixed it up a bit. In a way. That's a hardly an "and therefore, that's how the game should obviously work" observation. There's a lot more to consider before making such a decision, and I'm not really privy to enough info about the game's design context to even begin to decide whether or not such a thing should be implemented, or how. That's why we end up brainstorming and discussing so much hypothetical stuff around here. "Theorycrafting" and all that.

[Valorian]

 

The AI won't always use the same tactics because there's a bit of randomness involved, so you don't have to worry that a static AI will ruin your subsequent playthroughs.

I realize this. I didn't mean "we'll literally just run the exact same football play, every time we fight this guy." Specifically where you step and what order in which you use abilities and such will be different, and you can even use completely different party makeups and strategies. However, your goals will be the same, because a bunch of factors will be the same. "Oh, he's got hefty plate armor, so we're all gonna wanna worry with DT-breaching than attack speed." Or "Oh, that guy's got a huge two-handed sword, so we need to make sure to work against damage types A and B in this fight."

 

That kind of stuff. Just, ideally, in complete isolation, it'd be really nice to play a game in which your combat challenges mixed it up a bit. In a way. That's a hardly an "and therefore, that's how the game should obviously work" observation. There's a lot more to consider before making such a decision, and I'm not really privy to enough info about the game's design context to even begin to decide whether or not such a thing should be implemented, or how. That's why we end up brainstorming and discussing so much hypothetical stuff around here. "Theorycrafting" and all that.

 

 

But.. if you use completely different party makeups, your tools will be completely different, and the encounter will indeed feel like you fight it for the very first time. Awesome! It's possible that you won't even be upset that this one guy is using plate armor and a two-handed sword, again.

And honestly, I think you slightly undervalue the impact of an AI that's unpredictable with ability usage.

 

There's a lot more to consider before deciding "let's go random, yay!", indeed.

[Lephys]

^ I don't disagree. I'm simply saying it's an additional variable in the list. Not that nothing's variable without it. That's all.

 

As I've said about 3,000 times, I don't know that it's really all that valuable, all-things-considered.

 

I don't think I'm undervaluing predictable AI. I think you're not understanding that I'm not disregarding that.

[Valorian]

 

I don't think I'm undervaluing predictable AI. I think you're not understanding that I'm not disregarding that.

 In fact, I was talking about the AI being unpredictable...

[Lephys]

^ Sorry. typo.

[Randomthom]

Personally I'd like to see a mixture, allow me to explain.

 

I open RandomCrate.243 in DungeonX and it generates loot off a random table. Most likely it'll be 5 gp or similar but there's a small (too small to encourage save scumming) chance it might turn up a +1 longsword or similar. 

 

Similarly when I kill the average mook loot is a mixture of what they have equipped + random loot gen.

 

There will still be placed items but here's the innovation. Specific items with different bases. For example, Firkraag dies and Carsomyr is a 2H Sword/Bastard Sword/Longsword. Shortbow of Gesen might be a Longbow of Gesen. Hindo's Doom is a Wakizashi (sp?), Mace of Disruption could be a flail or a morningstar. Likewise armour could be any type within it's category (heavy, medium, light). Also rings might suddenly be necklaces etc.

 

Perhaps that last one could be turned on/off to allow for pre-built ideas.

[Didier2]

I think interesting classes and class choices, interesting  quests and interesting ways to solve them, plus little hidden secrets u arent likely to discover on your first playthrough, will add way more to replayability than random loot.

Random loot really reminds me of games like Diablo and grinding enemies.

Adding a lot of unique items (some of them hard to find and/or obtain perhaps) that are usefull to different classes will add more to replayability I think.

[Gromnir]

Finally, we get to have great use of all those lovely gems!

 

In IWD2 alone, I'm literally drowning in them. I hope there will be gem bags, potion coffers, scroll cases and the like in PE too.

the nwn2 system is sounding familiar to josh's teases 'bout enchanting weapons/armour. recipes called for a combination of essences and a gem. essences were, for all intents and purposes, critter parts. sadly for indira, the gems required for nwn2 crafting were not the kinda l007 that filled up gem bags. anything you would bother to craft were requiring the most valuable gems.

 

the plant/herb stuff is new, and am not sure we see it as a good idea either. any kinda scavenger-hunt gameplay always feels like bloat to Gromnir. kill a dragon or jabberwocky to get scales is going to be involving combat. whether you like it or not, combat is gameplay. mindless uncover far corners of maps in search of special babba yagga witch hazel? *groan* am hoping there is more to the plant/herbs collection than... collection.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lephys]

the plant/herb stuff is new, and am not sure we see it as a good idea either. any kinda scavenger-hunt gameplay always feels like bloat to Gromnir. kill a dragon or jabberwocky to get scales is going to be involving combat. whether you like it or not, combat is gameplay. mindless uncover far corners of maps in search of special babba yagga witch hazel? *groan* am hoping there is more to the plant/herbs collection than... collection.

I dunno... it doesn't have to require combat. Maybe if you go at night, instead of during the day, to the jabberwocky nest, you can simply collect some scales that it's shed in the area. Maybe you have to mask your scent to do so, because your scent will wake it up? Maybe you have to figure out how to even get TO the nest, etc.

 

Just because games make such things a loot drop doesn't mean there can't be more to it. I think that'd be an improvement, from both allowing the player an actual non-combat means of achieving a goal that doesn't directly involve the death of something (jabberwocky SPLEEN would be another story, ), AND making the process more interesting than just "you kill things, and they drop stuff."

 

Same with plants. Maybe they only grow in some precarious place. Maybe you have to get through some spiffy scripted interactions to actually get the plant you want, instead of simply running around enough, manually, in a game environment, then left-clicking on the plant when you finally get near it.

 

Possibility often trumps precedent.

 

I definitely agree that collection stuff should be more than just collection.

Edited May 27, 2014 by Lephys

[Gromnir]

 

the plant/herb stuff is new, and am not sure we see it as a good idea either. any kinda scavenger-hunt gameplay always feels like bloat to Gromnir. kill a dragon or jabberwocky to get scales is going to be involving combat. whether you like it or not, combat is gameplay. mindless uncover far corners of maps in search of special babba yagga witch hazel? *groan* am hoping there is more to the plant/herbs collection than... collection.

I dunno... it doesn't have to require combat. Maybe if you go at night, instead of during the day, to the jabberwocky nest, you can simply collect some scales that it's shed in the area. Maybe you have to mask your scent to do so, because your scent will wake it up? Maybe you have to figure out how to even get TO the nest, etc.

 

Just because games make such things a loot drop doesn't mean there can't be more to it. I think that'd be an improvement, from both allowing the player an actual non-combat means of achieving a goal that doesn't directly involve the death of something (jabberwocky SPLEEN would be another story, ), AND making the process more interesting than just "you kill things, and they drop stuff."

 

Same with plants. Maybe they only grow in some precarious place. Maybe you have to get through some spiffy scripted interactions to actually get the plant you want, instead of simply running around enough, manually, in a game environment, then left-clicking on the plant when you finally get near it.

 

Possibility often trumps precedent.

 

I definitely agree that collection stuff should be more than just collection.

 

you really aren't helping make plants sound better. steal scales from nest via stealth or whatever is additional gameplay options beyond combat that would be seen by Gromnir and many as a positive. on the other hand, making plant location More obscure is not helping diminish the scavenger hunt nonsense. if you already got the critter parts that one may use combat and/or steatlh and/or diplomacy and/or whatever, then why bother with plant scavenger hunts?

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Hiro Protagonist II]

I'd have to say I really disliked the random loot system in the IWD games. Knowing that a character like Kaylessa in IWD1 had four different types of loot (Ring, Bow, Gloves and Eleven Chain Mail) that could drop was disappointing, especially when you had the Ring or Bow drop. While it was a good Bow, there were so many better bows than hers in the game. I can't even remember the RIng as I never used it. The best was the elven chain and gloves. All it does for me is to reload or use something like Dalekeeper to put another item in the game and throw away the item that dropped. And then just role play that the item I now have is what dropped.

[Gromnir]

josh mentioned a Long time ago that feargus were personally responsible for the inclusion of some of the blatantly monty haul weapons in the game. 

 

example:

 

http://www.gamebanshee.com/showshot.php?/icewinddale/equipment/images/statictwohandedswordplus4.jpg

 

am thinking the obsidian developers has matured a bit since then. 

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lephys]

I don't want to make plant locations more obscure. I want to make the process of getting to them less mundane. Scripted interactions present scenarios with mechanical attribute/choice checks, rather than "can you spend enough time and click enough to get to this location, then click 'Harvest' on this plant?"

 

The plant's right there, but it's not just lying on the ground easily within reach. You've got to actually play the game to obtain it, instead of simply jogging to it. Unless I'm mistaken, the whole boringness part of collecting herbs in the wild is that it's simply a matter of traveling and clicking. NOT the simple fact that they're plants, or that you're obtaining them. There's plenty of other stuff in the game we obtain, and it's perfectly fun to do so. I can only imagine the process is the flaw.

[Gromnir]

I don't want to make plant locations more obscure. I want to make the process of getting to them less mundane. Scripted interactions present scenarios with mechanical attribute/choice checks, rather than "can you spend enough time and click enough to get to this location, then click 'Harvest' on this plant?"

 

The plant's right there, but it's not just lying on the ground easily within reach. You've got to actually play the game to obtain it, instead of simply jogging to it. Unless I'm mistaken, the whole boringness part of collecting herbs in the wild is that it's simply a matter of traveling and clicking. NOT the simple fact that they're plants, or that you're obtaining them. There's plenty of other stuff in the game we obtain, and it's perfectly fun to do so. I can only imagine the process is the flaw.

why? why do it with plants? everything you mention can be done via collection o' monster parts, so why add plants? what is different about plants? obvious answer is that with few exceptions, the plants don't fight back.  nevertheless, put Godberry bush at the top of Mt. Trumpet is just likely just a silly scavenger hunt, 'cause they ain't gonna build an entire area around a craft resource. you is gonna be at Mt. Trumpet for other reasons. the plant don't fight, so if you gotta fight a guardian to get, what is purpose of the plant? sure, you can makes puzzles or other obstacles, but that would be exact same for critter parts. 

 

am not seeing the point other than bloat.

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lephys]

I don't understand the question. Why plants in addition to critter parts? I dunno... why anything that wouldn't feasibly be dropped by something slain? Why books on bookshelves? Why objects in sarcophagi?

 

... Because they're useful? *shrug*. I mean, why critter parts, if not plants?

[Gromnir]

I don't understand the question. Why plants in addition to critter parts? I dunno... why anything that wouldn't feasibly be dropped by something slain? Why books on bookshelves? Why objects in sarcophagi?

 

... Because they're useful? *shrug*. I mean, why critter parts, if not plants?

we already established that critter parts is obvious. you is fighting critters anyway. the gameplay is inherent in any squad-based tactical game. 

 

as for why put in books or sarcophagi, we agree that such is stoopid if you is gonna make part o' a mind numbing scavenger hunt wherein the gameplay is to not accidentally pass over the book or sarcophagi.  a book might have some additional value to be adding optional exposition. can't say that for a plant, but if you is making gameplay same as the critter part, but without the combat, then we agree that there isn't much point to hide stuff in such things.  

 

HA! Good Fun!

[Lephys]

What actually makes it a "mind numbing scavenger hunt," though? Is it okay to accidentally pass over a critter, but not a sarcophagus?

 

If you've got nothing to do, at all, but hunt down a critter to gain its parts, then that's only marginally less mind-numbing than "hunting" down some flora. Luckily, it's simply one of the activities in which you can partake. Maybe you have other reasons to slay that critter. Maybe it's in your way. Etc.

 

I'm seeing "gathering plants is boring," but I'm not seeing the reasoning behind what, exactly, makes that boring and other things not-boring. Combat? Just because combat is a big part of the gameplay? That's pretty circumstantial. There can still be boring, terrible combat. Again, with no other reason than to stand between you and the critter parts. How is that any different from simply 15 minutes of jogging standing between you and some plant? What if you have to fight the flora? Would that suddenly make everything okay?

 

I agree that plenty of gathering (regardless of what it is, exactly, you're gathering) in plenty of games is, indeed, mind-numbing. However, I don't see "because it was plants!" as being any kind of cause of this mind-numbingness. I think there's a lot more to it than that, having nothing to do with the nature of the organism from whence the parts originate.

[Gromnir]

What actually makes it a "mind numbing scavenger hunt," though? Is it okay to accidentally pass over a critter, but not a sarcophagus?

 

If you've got nothing to do, at all, but hunt down a critter to gain its parts, then that's only marginally less mind-numbing than "hunting" down some flora. Luckily, it's simply one of the activities in which you can partake. Maybe you have other reasons to slay that critter. Maybe it's in your way. Etc.

 

I'm seeing "gathering plants is boring," but I'm not seeing the reasoning behind what, exactly, makes that boring and other things not-boring. Combat? Just because combat is a big part of the gameplay? That's pretty circumstantial. There can still be boring, terrible combat. Again, with no other reason than to stand between you and the critter parts. How is that any different from simply 15 minutes of jogging standing between you and some plant? What if you have to fight the flora? Would that suddenly make everything okay?

 

I agree that plenty of gathering (regardless of what it is, exactly, you're gathering) in plenty of games is, indeed, mind-numbing. However, I don't see "because it was plants!" as being any kind of cause of this mind-numbingness. I think there's a lot more to it than that, having nothing to do with the nature of the organism from whence the parts originate.

sure, if is a stoopid one-in-game fire-breathing dodo-velociraptor that is behind a secret door, then it is gonna cheese us off if it is part o' crafting. if is a staple monster, or even a side-quest monster we is ok with it. heck, might even be a fun battle. opening a box or picking a plant dont have gameplay value in itself, unlike the critter... how is this not getting through?

 

as for the mr. straw man routine, nobody is asking that the combats for resource gathering should be boring. lame combat is lame regardless o' how it is used in game. you serious deserve a digital smack in the face with a less than fresh trout for even bringing that into a thread. no joke on that. was terrible. bad cess and all that.

 

there is no gameplay from the plant itself. so what can it possibly add to crafting that the critters options don't? ask 'bout other options? well, if is just random stuff laying in a glorified box, we would be against that too. books at least has some possible storytelling value, so am not gonna dismiss, but plants? why? you say why not and we keep telling you because it is inherent less than critter... is one less thing you can do with plant. so, why?

 

if you make the plant difficult to find, it is gonna be annoying.

 

make easy to find and what is the freaking point? for crafting you already needs the critter part, so what does plant add.

 

am seriously beginning to worry 'bout you.

 

HA! Good Fun!

 

btw our complaint is that plants is bloat. you keep saying "why not," stead o' answering why. is possible you don't see a problem with bloat. have two skills or class or weapons that does functional the same thing is bloat. we see such as a waste of resources and potential dishonest depending on how such things is used. is not an additional feature. is just... bloat. if you don't mind such stuff, then we "get" your failure to understand. some folks actually like bloat. 

Edited May 29, 2014 by Gromnir

[Enoch]

This has been an interesting conversation to read.  I'm not really sure where I come out on it.

 

Ultimately, you have an item customization system to balance out the effects of loot drops in a system where characters have several options and have to make specialization decisions in advance.  (Other primary way games balance this:  Have all the good stuff for sale.  Which is a lame.)  A customization system that requires specific inputs also functionally serves as a quest.  Indeed, they're often quests that feels more personal to the player-- they're solving a problem their character has, rather than one that some NPC questgiver has. 

 

So, I suppose that, like any quest, you want the right balance of appropriate challenge and fun.  Challenge is pretty straightforward-- have make the low-level modification ingredients relatively easy to get, and the higher-level ones comparably rare, expensive, or inaccessable. 

 

Fun is the tricky stuff.  I will posit that picking flowers is not especially fun (unless you're my niece, but she's 3 and also enjoys spinning around just to get dizzy).  Mining gems yourself wouldn't be any fun either.  Nor would just trudging from merchant to merchant to buy all the components you need.  Hopefully, the combat is fun.  That will clearly be an element of the "animal parts" ingredient, and possibly an element of the other two.  Rewarding a player's investment in a noncombat skill can be fun (e.g., the stealth example).  Hopefully, scripted interactions are fun.  Hopefully, NPC interactions are fun.  Hopefully, optional locations are fun to explore (for reasons beyond just "that's the only place where the Shimmering Gladiola grows").  Hopefully, resource-management in running the party stronghold is fun.

 

That said, I get Gromnir's point-- why have 3 objectives when 1 would do, and why plants when beastie viscera are a more natural consequence of typical-CRPG activities?  Which are fair questions.  I suppose that plants can be a useful way to give character to the game's locations ('The Breezeless Moors, where Sawyer's Stinkroot clouds the still air...'), and possibly a more natural goal in the game's scripted interactions.  There is probably more that I haven't thought of.  Is it worth the effort?  I dunno. 

Edited May 29, 2014 by Enoch