Should companion and faction reputation meters be considered popamole now?

[Infinitron]

This discussion deserves its own thread:

The rep bar is a gamey system in the vein of the morality meter, they just switch the names around. You need logical outcomes for your actions, not meters or bars, or points, or whatever. Not that I want to sing the praises of Beamdog, but Dorn's personal quest has him lose his Blackguard abilities if you influence him to choose a specific option, that is logical and good (and also thematically coherent with the rest of the game!), and it's not tied to the reputation system which I also hate, just giving this as an example of a modern not-very-indie dev doing it right for once. I don't know, I don't understand Absurdian anymore.

They've been using companion influence meters for their entire existence and faction reputation meters for half of it.

Yes, they have been using them for forever, that isn't an argument in their defense, it's an indictment.

Maybe. For many years, Obsidian were praised on this forum and elsewhere for using companion and faction-specific reputation meters. They were considered more sophisticated than the universal morality meters found in BioWare games and evidence of Obsidian being a cut above other RPG developers.

That just shows how low the Codex' standards were back then :p

I'm p sure the reputation meters were well-received at the start because they used to be something "new"-ish that could potentially lead to proper intertwining of in-game agenda of various entities, etc. Unfortunately, the way it ended up was "suck up to everyone to get the best favour", with very little to no practical differences or mutual exclusions to be had, and much too easy possibilities to just max out flavour with everyone involved.

Vault Dweller, I'm interested in your thoughts on this.

 

[mutonizer]

Dark Roxor summed it up.
It should have led to something greater and more complicated/intricate, it led to mostly Collectotron_5.1 DoItAll Edition or just gamey shit that make no sense (ie: talk shit to faction_01 random dude_001 in the middle of nowhere then kill him afterward, you lose reputation with faction_01).

That said, it also leads to content (time & money) that will only be seen by hardcore replaying players while the rest (most) will never see it ever and wonder where the fuck their money went. For cRPGs though, content you will not see during a walkthrough based on your choices/actions/build/sex/race/whatever should be mandatory to even be called cRPG, but for a game studio, I understand the concerns.

Edit:
Actual meters being displayed is retarded in any case. That's a "GM"(computer/hidden/whatever) info, not player info.
Actual disposition should be self evident everywhere by shit happening.

 

[Vault Dweller]

There is nothing wrong with reputation meters in general, much like there is nothing wrong with stats. It's all about implementation. You can have stats and meters that do absolutely nothing other than displaying an ever growing number but serve no other purpose. You can have stats that define every aspect and meters that track and inform you of meaningful gameplay-affecting changes. Needless to say it doesn't work without those changes.

 

[Lacrymas]

This is a problem of the omniscient UI, it's funny how many problems stem from that. The UI giving us plot info that the PC can in no way know about is a crack in the logical construct that is the created universe. Not to mention that it makes no sense for a faction to base their opinions on you on a number scale. We also have to differentiate between mechanical and plot systems. Your standing with a given faction is a story concern, while your stats are a mechanical aspect (but muh story and mechanic symbiosis! If you find a way to hide stats from the player while giving them enough info to make their builds, go for it). The game can track your standing with numbers or bars, but the player shouldn't have access to that info.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Reputation meters are a one-dimensional representation of a multi-dimensional problem. This simplification sometimes works well (especially, when being "gamey" is part of the idea: EQ and kill on sight thresholds) and sometimes it does not (if it invites degenerate gameplay).

 

[Ranarama]

Edit:
Actual meters being displayed is retarded in any case. That's a "GM"(computer/hidden/whatever) info, not player info.
Actual disposition should be self evident everywhere by shit happening.

If you can't see it, it could be removed from the game and you wouldn't notice. Publishers notice that and stop allowing choice at all, just railroad you on the one path they've made content for. Because simulating this stuff is hard, apparently.

I'd rather it be a game, and show me how they feel. The alternative is the game tells me how they feel via the writing, and frankly that never works out. Oh the dialogue option led to me saying something insane that wasn't clear, and now you hate me? If the option had been labeled, I'd know what I was in for. I don't care about numbers though, I just want to know what effect it will have. Bob won't like it, and he's at the point where he'll leave the party if I kick this puppy? Well tell me that.

I don't trust the writers anymore. Not after the fanfic epic that was Tyranny with it's silly weak passive bonuses. I don't want TellTale either, with fake options, I want to see the difference and know what I'm saying. In game what I'm saying is "Negative to rep from Bob" then say so.

If a developer goes far enough with rep meters and showing the player what will happen from options, and it makes sense and they give the player enough levers to alter them, with enough players and factions in the game, you end up with something like the diplomacy in EU4, but on an RPG scale. And frankly, I'd be excited as hell to see a game where manipulating peoples feelings led to a result in game that hadn't been scripted.

I don't mind if it feels gamey in this instance, it's a good ersatz way of simulating being a social manipulator, and it sure as hell is a more accurate simulation than rolling a die is for hitting someone.

Because otherwise you're negotiating prewritten events, and they shunt down to a smaller number of choices very quickly. Like Tyranny's single pick 1 of 4 choice. One choice in that entire game. They say other stuff affects your standing, but ultimately nothing matters beyond that choice.

 

[Kalin]

Better without that shit, Planetscape: Tournaments and Geneforge did it right.

 

[Infinitron]

If you can't see it, it could be removed from the game and you wouldn't notice. Publishers notice that and stop allowing choice at all, just railroad you on the one path they've made content for.

This is an insightful point you're making, but don't you think it's a bit self-defeating that you're citing a game that does display all that info as an example of that negative consequence?

 

[Lacrymas]

Yes, we would notice, we aren't chimpanzees with a limited perception span. The goal here is to simulate a logical world, if something you say that makes Bob angry, it should be in tandem with Bob's personality. He wouldn't like you killing animals if he runs an animal shelter, that doesn't mean floating arbitrary numbers should tell you that, Bob himself should.

 

[Infinitron]

Yes, we would notice, we aren't chimpanzees with a limited perception span. The goal here is to simulate a logical world, if something you say that makes Bob angry, it should be in tandem with Bob's personality. He wouldn't like you killing animals if he runs an animal shelter, that doesn't mean floating arbitrary numbers should tell you that, Bob himself should.

I think the point he may be trying to make is that making numbers visible gives developers a more tangible and non-ignorable incentive to implement meaningful choice in their games. You might ask yourself why adventure games usually don't have as much choice and consequence as roleplaying games. Arguably, the stats create the demand. Once they're there and they're visible, the developer tells himself "Yeah, I need to let the player do something with these", and the player for his part asks for that ability. But if the stats had never been visible in the first place...out of sight, out of mind.

 

[vonAchdorf]

Even The Sims have separated romance/friendship meters for "companions". "RPGs" don't even have that. It's the same meter and then a binary choice is forced on the player. (Not advocating romances in RPGs, just pointing out that they are even simpler mechanics wise than in a game for girls and housewives.)

 

[Lacrymas]

Well, that's a psychological trick that affects the devs, not players. We are an outside force looking in, we don't care what happens in the kitchen as long as we have the good end result, it's like an author keeping his notes inside the book itself because otherwise he wouldn't do anything with his ideas, I'm sure you see how inane that sounds. Even if that author wrote the piece on a toilet paper and wiped his ass with it, we don't care, because the end result is the end result.

 

[Infinitron]

Even The Sims have separated romance/friendship meters for "companions". "RPGs" don't even have that. It's the same meter and then a binary choice is forced on the player. (Not advocating romances in RPGs, just pointing out that they are even simpler than in a housewife game.)

Not quite true - the recent fad in RPGs is to have separate friendship and rivalry counters which are independent of one another (so not binary)

 

[Ranarama]

If you can't see it, it could be removed from the game and you wouldn't notice. Publishers notice that and stop allowing choice at all, just railroad you on the one path they've made content for.

This is an insightful point you're making, but don't you think it's a bit self-defeating that you're citing a game that does display all that info as an example of that negative consequence?

I think it's an area full of pitfalls, and tyranny falls to others regarding rep bars not doing much. I think Tunon's affects one thing. And while it does have the option to display that info (and I remember instances of it being wrong as well) it's not default.

Which games have had misleading dialogue? I'm sure we've all found a few. The trend of games having single word summaries of choices essentially ensures it, so I guess I could cite Alpha Protocol or ME1-3. FO4 had some as well. But I remember Tyranny fell into the trap of having pages of dialogue beyond the first page that were things that you hadn't signed up for when you made your choice.

(In fact, I remember that's when the rep changes aren't shown - when they happen a couple of pages after the actual choice. So they're kind of inconsistent about it, but there's still time for them to patch I guess.)

Also, I might still be a little disappointed in that particular title.

I think this would definitely encourage movement in the direction of "dialogue matters" and as well "every line of dialogue matters".

#DialogueLivesMatter

 

[Lacrymas]

Knowing the outcome of a choice is completely undesirable, it's not a choice at all in that case. Not to mention the complete omniscience of the UI and the omnipresent hand of the devs pointing you in the right direction. One word summaries are shit, but that doesn't mean replacing them with absolute knowledge of events. The outcome should be logical, that's how you can relatively successfully predict the outcome.

Also -

Joined: Today

 

[felipepepe]

My problem with it is that it "game-fies" dialog and choices. Just look at this recent Obsidian interview on Tyranny:

I’ve watched a lot of people play – both within the Obsidian offices and over Twitch streams," he adds. "There’s a marked difference in watching players who have the reputation option enabled vs. those who don’t."

“Those who play without the option spend more time thinking about which [decision] their character would choose. Those who play with the option turned on talk a lot more about ‘Normally I’d pick X, but Y will give me this reputation’. It’s interesting to listen to them decide which way to choose, whether they play true to their character, or pick for the mechanical reward.

Basically, it turns interactions into a "I want this, should answer this" game. Even if the the dialog doesn't show the rep faction gain, it's always pretty obvious how to act to please a faction/waifu.

And I'm sorry F:NV fanboys, but it sucked there too. You could do shit like slaughter everyone in Camp Forlorn Hope by yourself, then do some dumb pro-NCR quests (or that "it's our last chance to join us!" dialog) and everyone would be cool.

Reputation should be event-based, not a meter - doing that crazy "I am Legion" quest should mark me forever as a Caesar's Legion hero and a NCR's Public Enemy Number One, just like Fallout's "child-killer" or "slaver" rep. Not give +10 Caesar's Legion, -20 NCR reputation.

But, of course, Obsidian went the Skyrim route of "be everything you want to be!". Cowards.

 

[Lacrymas]

Duh, I've been repeating that it's game-y and nonsensical like a broken record forever. It only works in MMOs where reps are mechanical systems that can be gamed, rather than a simulation or an attempt at a coherent world and actual roleplaying. Who are you roleplaying if you know all the information there is to know? God?

 

[Shadenuat]

It's always interesting to see game developers effectively simulating flying Boeing 747 or driving F1 car, but ever failing at simple human relationships.

 

[Trash]

I've always been partial to a mixed system. Have certain actions confer traits that are (nearly) impossible to lose and can dictate how a certain individual/faction/group acts towards you. Have others add to a more general reputation meter. Best of all when local reputation also plays a role instead of reputation being a single game-wide value.

 

[Vault Dweller]

This is a problem of the omniscient UI, it's funny how many problems stem from that. The UI giving us plot info that the PC can in no way know about is a crack in the logical construct that is the created universe. Not to mention that it makes no sense for a faction to base their opinions on you on a number scale.

The number scale is just an easy way to show progression (from good to great, for example). Let's say you're a contractor working for a company. While it's comprised of many people, it's the decision makers' opinion of you that counts. They can have a negative, neutral, or positive opinion of you, but there are different shades within each state. Maybe they like you just enough to extend the contract, maybe they like you enough to pay you top rate and let you work from home two days a week whereas every other contractor is required to come to the office, maybe they fucking love you and think you're an expert and your word is the final judgement. All this can be represented numerically. In fact, there is no better way to represent the transition from "he's alright" to "he gets what he asks for" to "we're lucky to have him" than via numbers.

And I'm sorry F:NV fanboys, but it sucked there too. You could do shit like slaughter everyone in Camp Forlorn Hope by yourself, then do some dumb pro-NCR quests (or that "it's our last chance to join us!" dialog) and everyone would be cool.

Reputation should be event-based, not a meter ...

All you need to do is use a proper scale. You slaughter everyone, you're an enemy for life (automatic max negative reputation overriding what you had before) who should be killed on sight and no amount of minor favors elsewhere should change it. Basically, a minor favor has a value of 1-2, significant action representing a choice - 10-15, a hostile action - 50. This way if you have -50 and you do a couple of favors you'd have -45 which is about the same thing.

 

[Lacrymas]

Just hide that information from the player, I know it's an easy way to show "progression" (that doesn't make any sense in the context of factions though, because it's not a progression curve, what are you progressing towards?), but the PC has no way of knowing that, do you have a machine that lets you know your "standing" with all the people you know?

Incurring a maximum negative rep by a hostile action also makes no sense, if you kill a low ranking member of that faction out of sight, nobody would even suspect you, they also don't have a machine that lets them know the ultimate truth. This is how you can be a social manipulator, because nobody ever can automatically know the truth. Pitting factions against each other wouldn't work if everyone just instinctively knew what you are doing.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Just hide that information from the player, I know it's an easy way to show "progression" (that doesn't make any sense in the context of factions though, because it's not a progression curve), but the PC has no way of knowing that, do you have a machine that lets you know your "standing" with all the people you know?

Of course you have a way of knowing unless you're deaf and blind. See my work example. While you don't know what they really think of you, you see the way they treat you and deal with you. I worked with different clients a lot and the goal is to go from - 20 (doesn't take your calls, doesn't want what you're selling) to +50 (repeat client who always takes your calls, pays on time, and listens to your suggestions). It's a very linear progression.

 

[pippin]

Reputation is cool, karma is not. The worst implementation of reputation has to be DAO's, if you consider the dating minigame to be reputation (which it could be, because it unlocks abilities for your companions, so it's not just worthless, but it still sucks).

 

[Lacrymas]

Then show that by the way people treat you! That's the whole point of this exercise - removing the number scales and replacing them with concrete in-game, in-universe, in-plot, in-whatever means.

 

[Prime Junta]

I've disliked visible faction reputation meters from the start. When they're invisible however, they can work really well. The dialog and other content must just shape itself around that.

IMO one of Pillars' bigger mistakes was to make all the reputation modifiers and requirements visible in the dialogs, even as an option. That shit should've been hidden. Even worse, it's not even necessary as it's fairly clear even in-game -- on my first paladin playthrough I had all the modifiers off (as usual) but still managed to rack up a respectable reputation in my favoured traits while completely avoiding my forbidden ones.