Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Food for Thought

Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
627
Location
Seattle, WA
Several questions to discuss:

1) Narrative Symbolism: Contrary to Codexian logic, I enjoyed Dark Souls for its minimalistic dialogue, and a story told through implication. Throwing dialogue in my face lacks subtlety, and implication. David Lynch is a master at storytelling with a "show-don't-tell" aesthetic. And am I the only one that detests screen glare, and characters that exposit their whole life story in one go. Witcher's minimalism worked to its advantage, simply because, in the same way I don't want a stranger to sob over his or her entire life, I resent characters that tell me theirs, like I'm not going to interrupt at some point with a gigantic, "F+kk you!"

Besides, without meaningful choices it becomes moot. "Do you want this quest or not!?" is not exactly a koan, it doesn't even reach the level of emergent gameplay that binary choices give, and binary yes/no questions are still banal. So, narrative symbolism instead of explicit details that lack subtlety, or direct exposition. Yes or No??

Silent Hill 2 is another great example of narrative symbolism, rather than explicit, shove-in-your-face storytelling.

2) I hate cut scenes. Half Life uno's silent protagonist never took me out of the game, and allowed me to play *through* cut scenes. The everyman approach worked well, but the silence, and a vulnerable character forced into extenuating circumstances allowed me to relate to the character. Silence allowed me to project my own personality onto the character, plus I was able to roam around during diatribic dialogue, giving me a sense of control. Unless you are God of War, and your game is heavily reliant on cinematics, interactivity is superior to cut scenes, in most cases, as they can be portrayed in-game, without drawing yourself out of character, and thus out of control. Doubly so, if the plot is banal. Interactivity > Watching a screensaver.

3) Where the *fudge* did my Eternal Darkness sequel go?? Even Wasteland, relatively unknown, got crowd funding, not to mention indie games with *ZERO* background, and untested, new developers, thus lacking quality reassurance, as they were relatively untested. Given the context, why would a niche game not achieve funding *twice,* when untested games achieve enough crowd funding to finance even all the tiers, with zero marketing, and no niche audience, nor prior experience in gaming. Logic just went out my window. Explain??

4) Since my other thread disappeared, might as well sneak in the question as to whether E.Y.E. was any good? Or a worthy investment at this period. Has it aged well? Simply put, it is so contorted, and lacking in balance, I feel as if someone mixed a handful of gravel into my potato chips, yet I still think it is either destined to become the new world religion, or a frisbee/disc coaster, were that medium still in use. Codexian opinion!??

5) Contrary to Codexian logic, is there anyone here that prefers first person perspective, with realtime combat, ala Underworld, to turn-based isometric. I realize the contingency, but I LOVED Dark Souls for its immersion, even without first person, and ALL the old Looking Glass games were favorites, as well as Lands of Lore #2. I simply find them more compelling, atmospherically.

6) Standard gaming cliches need to go. Anyone can rip off Tolkien, but after the zillionth time I feel like I am looking at the word "redundant redundancy" on paper, and suddenly getting a sexual appetite for Planescape, the setting. The same with that old chestnut, amnesia, which lacks innovation, and thus shows lazy narrative, lack of ideas, and is like borrowing ideas, rather than resorting to one's own. A strong narrative requires a strong mythology.

7) I am tired of being herded along long hallways, with mandatory puzzles, ala Skyrim. Corridor climbing should not be a simply process of following a ball of yarn from point A to point B, especially in an exploration based game like Skyrim. I felt as if I was being shepherded, rather than given freedom to explore. Puzzles should be tactfully hidden, not thrown in my face, and not necessary to proceed. It should be incentive to explore, as finding them is its own reward. LoL 2, again, showed mastery in this respect. I suspect the same of Realms of the Haunting. Remake, please?

8) If you have a strong Norse lore to explore, please don't resort to "arrow to the knee" jokes. With that much mythology, both the corridor crawling, and lack of mythology, show lazy design ethics. I was expecting Conan, and instead got Arrow-to-the-knee.

9) Speaking of Elder Scrolls, even having a plot is superfluous. Giving me an open world is encouragement enough.

10) Exploration should be encouraged through incentives, the same reason skill tomes worked in Diablo 1, and lack of findable runes worked against Diablo 3. Tactfully integrating skill tomes, you could still rely upon a skill tree, simply cap out how many tomes you can find. Okay, so I can increase this ability to "10" without skill tomes, but max it out to "15" with skill tomes, above the normal max via investing character points, thus encouraging exploration. Extra tomes could be sold for components, unique ones, towards crafting.

Or, they could simply provide unique perks via tomes, rather than perks simply being a leveling instance. Unique Legendary gems would also be nice, rather than this +20 strength, how about a "drain life" gem that is a legendary, albeit randomized drop.

11) Does anyone else find themselves an explorations driven gamer?? Western RPGs, even, seem to have diverged in two directions, narrative driven, and exploration driven--I prefer the latter.

12) Lastly, survival mechanics such as food, shelter, clothing, fire for thermal protecting, and higher water consumption in hotter environments, need to be reintegrated, thus adding an urgency to exploration. Finding fire in the cold, shelter during a blizzard, and being dealt damage per minute, as well as added hallucinations from dehydration when water runs dry, cooking your food, hunting, and the risk of disease in raw meat, if the choice between starving and eating raw meat, adds an element of urgency lacking in lazy exploration games. This could even be automated, if you stack cooked food and water, your character automatically consumes them, then warns you when out. This reduces micromanagement, while maximizing requirements, and limits on exploration.

Suspense is under rated.

I long for an ice age RPG, where survival is paramount, hunting and shelter are necessary. If you take refuge in a cave, during a blizzard, you risk ambush by a bear, or other creatures.

13) Interfaces could use refinement, if I double click to sell an item, I MEAN IT. Do not ask twice if I meant to sell it. Original Witcher, despite its layers of awesome, had flaws. Not being able to exit menus using escape, or scroll menus using arrow keys, much less sell stacks of items using arrow keys when determining amounts, sucked. Same with being forced to listen to a diatribe after selling, or exiting the entire dialogue after exiting a sale, rather than returning to the dialogue menu to rent a room, became tedious, clunky, and superfluous, disregarding quality of the game. It bogged the player down with superfluous options, and lack of versatility when navigating menu options. I felt the same about not being able to pause before combat, then set up a target, and layer initial commands, and also switching perspective using F1 and F3 automatically, much less the inability to switch perspectives when pause. The same with certain commands, which required a keystroke to enter, a second entirely separate keystroke to exit, or even a mouse stroke without using the escape key, must push "X." Most on/off functions can use a toggle switch rather than two entire separate keys, to scroll through menus, rather than a separate key to enter and exit. I am not dissing the quality of the game, only the refinement of the interface.

14) If you remove the treadmill from the RPG, you have just gutted the RPG. Diablo 1-2 thrived entirely on the treadmill. There are plenty of ways to make it more interesting than grinding, and killing rats. Also, if you remove customization, you've removed my incentive to play. The character never seems personalized, or unique. Congrats, Diablo 3. Blizzard gets more Pixar every year. :/

EDIT:

15) If you have to resort to generic races and classes, that is bad enough. However, racial specific abilities should be mandatory at this point. And I think every game should have some type of sword specialist, who delves into martial arts and precision, moreso than blunt trauma like a barbarian. Speaking of barbarian, you're referring to an ethnic group, not a class. I prefer the word berserker, not sure how many agree. However, even with cliche races and classes, I am tired of not seeing staple classes such as psionicists and swordmaster/samurai/kensai, monk, etc, in the same way I am tired of not seeing unstandardized races such as mindflayer, minotaurs, and naga, each with their own special abilities, such as underwater travel.

Speaking of which, Samurai, which delve into finesse, and agility, could use a healthy helping of chi or martial arts specialization, but having them minor in mage powers seems to lack context, whereas they could minor in psionic specialties, such as telekinesis, stunning or disarming an opponent, or vital strikes (even moreso with ninja/assassin types, which could paralyze an opponent, or cause them to drop a weapon, simply by hitting a nerve ending with precision.) It simply makes more sense to have a martial artists delve into psionic, rather than mage, abilities, since they emerged mythologically far more from eastern concepts, such as the samurai, whose entire specialization was one weapon, and whose culture centers around chi/prana. Perhaps even giving a swordmaster a choice between physics-based psionic abilities, and chi, such as the ability to surpass an opponent's guard, or hit a vital strike and cripple or deal more damage, would add variation. Or simply focusing on the martial aspect of martial arts, to make a more physical character, less environmental or based on Qi.

Moreso, in cyberpunk, where you could have laser katanas, capable of cutting steel. ;)

As for monks, vital strikes and bare-handed martial arts are a must, but in the modern tradition, a minor in clerical magic, such as buffs, or healing, or both, would also help, though they might not be as useful as a full-blown cleric in that respect, or simply specialize them in enchantments, rather than healing, such as the paladin auras in Diablo 2.

The same can be said of swordmasters, where certain stances, which cost mana-per-turn, could be used strategically against various foes, such as stances which grant the ability to parry blows, disarm your opponent, counterstrike every turn, or simply get past your opponents guard, much less raising strength or dexterity. Form of the Mongoose, for instance, might be an example, wherein you land a blow every turn past the opponents guard, whereas more defensive forms which cost mana-per-turn could be used strategically against heavier opponents, or ones that increase speed, or number of strikes per turn.

With the physics engines available nowadays, it would be completely possible to create a psionic class, as well as a samurai that specialized in minor psionic skills, dependent upon physics, in the same way Half-Life 2's gravity gun worked, simply to teleport or stun opponent, perhaps even freezing time in the case of a full-blown psionic class, whereas a samurai might struggle to freeze a single foe, a psionicists could do it en-masse, as well as move objects in the environment in the same manner, perhaps even teleporting themselves, or developing perception of nearby opponents, or even traps. Even "force push" is a staple in some games, though I see it as a more physics, psionicist-ability, rather than contingent upon throwing fireballs, which is a bit more of a sorceror gambit.

EDIT Again:

16) Azrael's Tear and Dark Heart of Uukrul need remakes. Now.

That, or just make that available on GOG, and steam, at the very least. I'd rather pay to play: more incentive. ;)

Also, no messing with DOSBox for a half-hour or so.

Rant over.

Opinions are welcome. :)

/Dawnrazor
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
627
Location
Seattle, WA
There really weren't that many questions. :avatard:

The title was "Food for Though." An implied statement can be held up to debate, even without a question mark connoting the end of the statement.

As far as RPGCodex goes, I've been a member for 10+ years. Simply changed my email and lost my password, so I doubt I am unfamiliar with the crowd. Nor did I want to use my original name, as my new one tends to be a newer handle, on Steam and various gaming outlets.
 

A horse of course

Guest
I enjoyed Dark Souls for its minimalistic dialogue, and a story told through implication

Stopped reading there. This is also why Half-Life 2 has a shit story.

Half Life uno's silent protagonist never took me out of the game

Half-Life's protagonist is the worst example of an immersive silent protagonist you can think of, because we know his unusual name, we know his background, and we know what he looks like (goatee, bright orange jumpsuit, glasses). Morons give shit to "generic brown-haired white men" as protagonists all the time, forgetting that the entire purpose of these characters is to make them as unassuming as possible and thus easily used as a template for the core audience to project themselves onto. This approach can be subject to legitimate criticism when the characters are meant to be distinct individuals themselves, but this is not the case in Half Life.

Hat tip: If you liked the Alyx romance in HL2, you are a cuck, because she's hitting on Gordon Freeman, not you.

If you have to resort to generic races and classes, that is bad enough. However, racial specific abilities should be mandatory at this point.

Fuck off Hitler



This isn't the 1970s. Asian culture is not cool.
 

No Great Name

Arcane
Joined
Jan 24, 2014
Messages
572
Location
US
6) Standard gaming cliches need to go. Anyone can rip off Tolkien, but after the zillionth time I feel like I am looking at the word "redundant redundancy" on paper, and suddenly getting a sexual appetite for Planescape, the setting. The same with that old chestnut, amnesia, which lacks innovation, and thus shows lazy narrative, lack of ideas, and is like borrowing ideas, rather than resorting to one's own. A strong narrative requires a strong mythology.
Planescape: Torment features a protagonist with amnesia. Which is it then?
 

pippin

Guest
Racial specific classes, items and even romances (BG2) were the norm in actual rpgs. But you can't do that today, because that hurts the sjw feelings, the same sjw that spews racist shit against black people on a daily basis.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
627
Location
Seattle, WA
No kidding. And just because amnesia was used in a number of games, Silent Hill 2 included, doesn't mean it isn't generic. There are plenty of better ways of starting a game. I would rather a game with no explanation than one that resorts to amnesia to explain away a lack of backstory. You can still have a story that unravels as it goes.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom