Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
Which is probably the exception, not the rule.
Why choices and consequences have become an illusion
- Thread starter Dragula
- Start date
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
Of course... but what is your point for that?―that most people cannot read comfortably well enough that large books are not a chore?
Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
Well Dragula said that shorter is better for choose your own adventure books which is analogues to RPG design we were talking about and an example of something lengthy, writing wise, is LOTR which not a whole lot of people are going to re-read. To which you said that some do. To which I said that it is probably the exception not the rule. Meaning that in terms of RPG design while you can get people who do want to replay an RPG that takes 60 hours to finish they are probably in a small minority. Books were just used analogously.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
Notice that those RPGs mostly come from the same developers. RPGs well done by people who could.
Sadly, IMO, with the modern audience the bar has dropped sharply for all but spectacal. They laud the particle effects and bikini armor, while scarcely noticing narrative support as anything but a nuisance, when it prevents them from excercising their whims; meaning that they cannot interact in ways that their actions have [logically] closed off.
Modern designers just don't have to 'bump the lamp' to impress and turn a profit now. Doing so might not even be appreciated anymore. It's why we can't have nice things.
Worse still... it's the developers now too; they can't appreciate it either. I was corrisponding with an InXile developer about Torment, and he could not even see the point of including separate walking and running states for the PC; the PC only runs in their game.
Last edited:
Mr Fish
Slippy sloppy, The
I suppose that depends entirely on the level design of the game though and if what he is currently working on isn't suitable for walking then the idea of developing mechanics that require it (could be as to not draw attention from NPC's in case you want to blend in or steal or if you're trying to infiltrate some place so you're disguised but if you start just legging it down the hallways other faction members will notice that there's something up) doesn't seem worthwhile. Though if you literally cannot walk, ie tap the caps lock button or hold down the analogue stick slightly to walk then that's just plain weird not to include. Even in a top down perspective.
Gizmojunk
Antediluvian as Feck
That's what it was.
Also Planescape:Torment did have walk & run.
*Technically it had a disguise too; running ruined the disguise.
Eumesmopo
Learned to love the bomb
I loved Disco Elysium too. I still feel like it came short on the side of player choices and the thing that holds it up is the quality of the writing. Almost all of the choices are simply cosmetic and have no long term impact, the ones that do have long term impacts are most often simply quirks that get referenced latter on in a few lines of dialogue or give you access to some unique item with minor stats boost. Unfortunately it's nowhere near comparable to something like Fallout New Vegas where you actions will determine the fate of an entire war and every single individual community in the game world. I can remember at most some half a dozen decisions that actually felt like they had some kind of real impact. Most of all I was very disappointed with the ending (major spoilers warning ahead):
There was no option or alternative whatsoever to not arrest the sniper in the isle. He was one of the characters that I most sympathized with in the whole game, and the only crime which he committed was killing a guy who absolutely had it coming. The "victim" of the murder was a really despicable mercenary who had countless war crimes under his belt, was in town solely for the sake of busting unions for one of the local corporations and, by the accounts of one of his colleagues you can talk to, had even rapped a child and made a tattoo on his body to commemorate that. If anything the guy who killed him made a favor to the world. I reloaded my saved game again and again and tried exploring every nook and cranny in the isle and restarted the full conversation with him again and again, only to be disappointed time after time realizing that no matter what I choose or do, Harry will always arrest the last true revolutionary in Revanchol.
One particular thing that annoyed me very much was the fact that the game seemed to suggest that there was something wrong or sleazy about him solely because he was infatuated with the girl the mercenary was fucking and was jealous because of it, as if some lonely guy in an island having some natural human emotions such as passion and jealously left in him was some kind of deviancy. I suspect that it's because of some feminist bias because at a previous point in the game you meet a lesbian woman who was also in love with blonde girl the merc was fucking (seriously I can't remember her name) and, at that point in the game, you have very strong reasons to believe she was the one who really was responsible for the murder, yet not only on this particular situation you actually have the full option to just let her go, but it is also set up in such a way that it is strongly suggested to be the better decision for that situation.
Why couldn't the developers let go for even just a second of their own judgments of value and let the player to be the one who decides what is right? Why was I not, as player in a RPG game who tries to offer alternatives to the player, allowed to make a choice in arguably the most crucial event in the entire game (that is, the conclusion of the investigation that started the whole plot)? Why was I not allowed to sympathize with a character that I liked and roleplay as a detective who decided it better to just let him go? It was just so incredibly frustrating.
One particular thing that annoyed me very much was the fact that the game seemed to suggest that there was something wrong or sleazy about him solely because he was infatuated with the girl the mercenary was fucking and was jealous because of it, as if some lonely guy in an island having some natural human emotions such as passion and jealously left in him was some kind of deviancy. I suspect that it's because of some feminist bias because at a previous point in the game you meet a lesbian woman who was also in love with blonde girl the merc was fucking (seriously I can't remember her name) and, at that point in the game, you have very strong reasons to believe she was the one who really was responsible for the murder, yet not only on this particular situation you actually have the full option to just let her go, but it is also set up in such a way that it is strongly suggested to be the better decision for that situation.
Why couldn't the developers let go for even just a second of their own judgments of value and let the player to be the one who decides what is right? Why was I not, as player in a RPG game who tries to offer alternatives to the player, allowed to make a choice in arguably the most crucial event in the entire game (that is, the conclusion of the investigation that started the whole plot)? Why was I not allowed to sympathize with a character that I liked and roleplay as a detective who decided it better to just let him go? It was just so incredibly frustrating.
Disco has a lot of choices and things that can happen or not happen based on it. I've given up on most main stories having more than two choices or any choices. It's moot sometimes and you need to drive plots forward correctly to get to parts or set up sequels effectively or tie things up neatly.
I'll take major main story choices and all when I can but I've given up being upset about them. I too, did not want to arrest the sniper but oh well. It didn't bother me much either.
I'll take major main story choices and all when I can but I've given up being upset about them. I too, did not want to arrest the sniper but oh well. It didn't bother me much either.
Morgan_
Duckerz
There's a Goldilocks zone for player choice with the best examples being New Vegas on the side of lots of player choice and then games like Rayman Legends on the side of choices being you wont see parts of levels or will get different items and endings.
There are probably better examples, but going past either of these whether increasing choices or decresing choices I think is usually not advisable. Might be better suited as a tabletop adventure at that point. I don't know how much I will appreciate a game that leans too far into the choose your own adventure and you're seeing only a third of the game or some such. I'd go through it and think it should have been a more cohesive whole instead. 25% differnce between playthroughs for me I think is preferable. I don't replay games unless they're more sandbox in design though. Like Minecraft or TES. Vegas was an exception and I was also a teen at the time. I played ME1 twice.
There are probably better examples, but going past either of these whether increasing choices or decresing choices I think is usually not advisable. Might be better suited as a tabletop adventure at that point. I don't know how much I will appreciate a game that leans too far into the choose your own adventure and you're seeing only a third of the game or some such. I'd go through it and think it should have been a more cohesive whole instead. 25% differnce between playthroughs for me I think is preferable. I don't replay games unless they're more sandbox in design though. Like Minecraft or TES. Vegas was an exception and I was also a teen at the time. I played ME1 twice.