So Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines will be a decade old this year. LET'S TALK ABOUT OTHER RPG'S

[Jools]

I wish. It's just one way to cope with the limitations of games. My mind needs to find some sort of excuse/justification, or it will go "bah, screw this game". It's funny how it's more open to dragons and undead, than to poorly-implemented stealth. Maybe it's because stealth is something that one can relate to, and that does exist in our world, whereas dragons aren't.

 

[Irenaeus]

Dragons are very real.

 

[Excidium]

That's a good thing. Random failure ftl.

Life requires taking risks. Deal with it.

 

[Roguey]

Life requires taking risks. Deal with it.

This is a game, not a life-simulator. Uninformed risks ftl.

 

[Excidium]

How's it uninformed, in any stealth game you get all sorts of sound cues

 

[Roguey]

What about the guards who aren't moving (of which there are several even in Lord Bafford's Manor)? Even if you know they're there, you don't know their facing unless you have some way to observe them.

Note: A humming guard doesn't tell you facing.

 

[Nikaido]

The chance for failure and how you deal with it has always been part of the fun in most stealth games. It would be close to impossible to mess up in a game implemented by the likes of you.

But after having read a lot of the sawyer parroting I must say that the both of you are on a crusade against fun. Solo games aren't a competition. They don't have to be built the way you'd build a competitive multiplayer game. So what if the stakes are going against you at times? As long as we're not talking about full on game over screen it's fine.

 

[Excidium]

Note: A humming guard doesn't tell you facing.

There's the risk

 

[Roguey]

You screwed up and it's your fault = good game.
You screwed up because of random behavior or something unforeseen = archaic clunky bad game that does not deserve to be made in the 21st century

 

[Nikaido]

The world, thankfully, doesn't have to cater to your very contrived views.

 

[Zeriel]

"It's your fault" is utterly subjective, too. Many beloved games would have zero challenge without unfair moments. The fun is in overcoming the unfair shit, not eliminating it from the catalogue. Roguey reminds me of one of those idiots who actually sucks at games but convinces himself it's because of flawed game design--after twelve years of self-justification and long time spent developing some weird personal theory of why those "bad" games suck. Throw in some relatively high-profile game designer who writes painfully obvious ("Like, mechanics that don't do anything shouldn't be there and stuffies") and painfully dumb things ("Spells were the worst part of Baldur's Gate, lololol!") to obsess over and the picture is complete.

 

[Lhynn]

You screwed up and it's your fault = good game.
You screwed up because of random behavior or something unforeseen = archaic clunky bad game that does not deserve to be made in the 21st century

You could argue that almost exclusively shit gets made on the 21st century.

The fun is in overcoming the unfair shit.

This, a guard turning at a bad moment is something you should have to deal with. Especially in stealth, if you know you cant get caught it just kills it man, what a good stealth game does is give you a way to deal with the fuck ups, which is what thief did.

 

[King Arthur]

Roguey I think you and Josh Sawyer spend too much time philosophising about this stuff. I think when it comes to someone's personal taste in entertainment, it's too intuitive to express as an elaborate code of values. The reason you like certain things and not others is a complex mystery, unique to you. That's not to say that you cannot be social and say what you liked about certain things, just that going on big philosophical arguments to support your internal feelings is misguided and pointless.

 

[Roguey]

Difficulty is achieved through the management of unfair situations but not all unfairness is equal or good.

Gameboy Donkey Kong, World of Goo, Super Metroid, Super Mario Bros 3, Yoshi's Island, Flashback, Hitman: Blood Money, Devil May Cry 3.

^ Good games that I've completed that don't rely on random or unforeseen gotcha bullshit to provide challenge.

 

[Lhynn]

Roguey I think you and Josh Sawyer spend too much time philosophising about this stuff. I think when it comes to someone's personal taste in entertainment, it's too intuitive to express as an elaborate code of values. The reason you like certain things and not others is a complex mystery, unique to you. That's not to say that you cannot be social and say what you liked about certain things, just that going on big philosophical arguments to support your internal feelings is misguided and pointless.

Na, Sometimes there is just one way to approach something that is the correct one. That much is true, and it is noble of sawyer to look into what that is, sadly while he gets some things right, he also gets a lot of other shit wrong, call it shortsightedness or lack of experience. I can only hope he makes an enjoyable game tho.

Now, after i patched bloodlines i actually enjoyed its stealth.

Roguey
Those are good games, blood money especially did the stealth you like right, you could memorize npcs behavior and run past a level without anyone ever noticing your presence, like a ghost, it was cul.

 

[Athelas]

Throw in some relatively high-profile game designer who writes painfully obvious ("Like, mechanics that don't do anything shouldn't be there and stuffies") and painfully dumb things

- Don't put points into crafting at all. Just hold on to equipment that gives crafting bonuses, and equip it when you want to craft something. Jahan is good for this, since he comes with a +1 to crafting.

- Don't waste points on thief skills either. A few hours into the game, you'll have more money than you'll ever need.

As far as I can tell, non-combat skills are all trap options.

 

[Zeriel]

 

[Excidium]

DOS System is shit. More news at 11

It's obvious to good designers

 

[CyberP]

You screwed up and it's your fault = good game.
You screwed up because of random behavior or something unforeseen = archaic clunky bad game that does not deserve to be made in the 21st century

This shouldn't apply to an RPG so much. All other types of game, yes. Unforeseen negative consequences due to your choices is very much a part of what an RPG is, a part of C&C design. For example we meet a lone innocent traveller and murder him for his shit, later in the game we discover he was of the Super Secret Traveller's guild and now the majority of them dislike you. That's your fault for being a murderous bastard.
But by "screwed up" you likely simply mean bullshit deaths.

Roguey I think you and Josh Sawyer spend too much time philosophising about this stuff.

I do too. Sawyer at least gets paid for it

 

[Roguey]

Unforeseen negative consequences due to your choices is very much a part of what an RPG is, a part of C&C design.

No.

 

[CyberP]

Yes Roguey, for the most part consequences should be obvious, but there should be exceptions as it can seem more organic that way, more simulated. If you strive to create a simulated game world as many RPG devs do the occasional unforeseen consequences can help your world seem more alive. It doesn't have to impact gameplay negatively. If you wanted to murder and rob a poor helpless traveller for his shit, you should already know that there could be consequences for it.

 

[CyberP]

^Which conflicts primarily with "surprise the player, don't anger them". some players may be angered that they cannot reap the benefits of the super secret Traveller's guild. Well they shouldn't have been a murderous bastard. That's the role they decided to play and there should be consequences, especially since the murderous bastard role is often the most easiest.

 

[CyberP]

^Which conflicts primarily with "surprise the player, don't anger them". some players may be angered that they cannot reap the benefits of the super secret Traveller's guild. Well they shouldn't have been a murderous bastard. That's the role they decided to play and there should be consequences, especially since the murderous bastard role is often the most easiest.

Likewise if you play the good guy all game you shouldn't be able to join the Super Secret Dark Brotherhood.

 

[Lhynn]

Likewise if you play the good guy all game you shouldn't be able to join the Super Secret Dark Brotherhood.

why not?

 

[CyberP]

Let me guess, that was Sawyer's words of wisdom from the New Vegas design doc? Very agreeable for the most part, but it's too strict. The occasional unforeseen consequences can be very beneficial and doesn't have to impact gameplay negatively.