Development Info Tim Cain at Reboot Develop 2017 - Building a Better RPG: Seven Mistakes to Avoid

[Lhynn]

For about a week which is the time it takes for some autists to figure it out. It's all going to be numbers under the hood, all you achieve is forcing people to waste time googling to make informed choices.

Informed choices are easy choices. Just do a better job at hidding your shit.

 

[Excidium II]

please never design an rpg.

 

[luj1]

The moment you hide your system for the player you free yourself from the shackles of balance. The moment you hide your system you create one more element to explore in your game.

It should be an extremely intuitive system to do that, ergo a simulationist one, which im fine with.

I like the abstraction of it however hiding numbers under the hood (i.e. going away from system-heavy RPGs) is neither good or bad imho, but rather its only changing the target-audience.

Hard core people love theory-crafting, casuals just want to play. Its obvious they desperately want to indulge both (balancing between a well-designed RPG and profit - which are inversely related things) , but playing both sides doesn't turn out well imo

 

[Lhynn]

please never design an rpg.

I can do a better job at it than you can.

 

[Irenaeus]

Obsidian is hiring fresh new young talent to replace them

"talent"

Have you seen their new writers?

 

[Excidium II]

please never design an rpg.

I can do a better job at it than you can.

Extremely doubtful. With such stupid ideas.

 

[Lhynn]

Hard core people love theory-crafting, casuals just want to play. Its obvious they want to indulge both sides but playing both sides doesn't turn out well imo

Theorycrafting is fun, but its not gameplay. And its something you have to do before you start your character.
Both hardcore and cashuls can enjoy exploring the game and the systems, you dont need to force optimization or minmaxing before they start playing.

 

[luj1]

I don't mean meta-gaming in the sense of using the internet. Theory crafting on your own while playing can be an extension of gameplay imho, it can be a sign of a well-designed system, just look at Underrail

 

[Lhynn]

If you dont know exactly what you are doing in underrail you are going to end up shit. And character creation is the single most important thing in the game, because the entire game is about reinforcing your character creation choices.

 

[luj1]

True maybe its gameplay was too punishing, its fine with me though. I think one should give player more possibilities, not to rely on seeking tips on the forums. You ought to strike a balance between challenging gameplay and independent theory-crafting.

 

[Namutree]

Spoiler

Mistake #1 - Steep Learning Curves: Tim thinks character creation in Fallout, Arcanum and other RPGs was too complex. He's experimenting with creating a completely numberless character system that uses geometric shapes to visualize attributes.

Stupid, but can be forgiven.

Spoiler

Mistake #2 - Letting Math Trump Psychology: Revealing the influence of the years he spent developing Wildstar, Tim wants to develop mechanics that are psychologically satisfying and addictive, even at the expense of mathematical elegance. For example, he says the player's first attack against an enemy should always hit even if his overall hit percentage is the same regardless, and that rather than allow players to increase their critical hit chance, they should only be allowed to increase their critical hit damage.

Not a bad idea really.

Spoiler

Mistake #3 - Conflating Player Skill With Character Skill: This one will be familiar if you've watched some of Josh Sawyer's talks. Aiming and hitting in an action-RPG should not be determined by character stats. On the other hand, things like the impact of recoil can be affected by stats, as well as the aforementioned critical hit damage.

Agree.

Spoiler

Mistake #4 - Misunderstanding Randomness: Here Tim lays out his frustration with the sorts of people who can't believe they could miss a 95% chance-to-hit attack three times in a row. His conclusion is that when people talk about "randomness", they often mean selecting a token rather than rolling a dice (ie, events can't repeat themselves).

Meh.

Spoiler

Mistake #5 - Forcing Linearity: This one is pretty self-explanatory. Tim says games are not movies, using Fallout's Tandi rescue scenario with its multiple solutions as an example of the sort of non-linearity he prizes

Good, but it's also important to just let player do what they want. A good example of this done right is Baldur's Gate. As soon as you leave Candle Keep roughly 3/5ths of the game is available to the player. This gives the player a lot of ways to approach the game, and makes it much more replayable. A great example of what NOT to do is what Pillars did; where only about a 1/5 of the game's content is available. The rest is locked off until to get your stronghold. Very restricting, and weakens it's replay value.

Spoiler

Mistake #6 - Being Non-Reactive: Tim seems particularly interested in the sort of reactivity where characters in the world have different dispositions based on your character's background, clothing and attributes, as seen in Arcanum. He also loves having different end slides based on the player's choices in the game, using Temple of Elemental Evil's evil ending as an example.

Calling this a 'mistake' is dumb. Reactivity is a feature. Calling it's lack of inclusion a mistake is like saying not having a stronghold is a mistake. How much a game would benefit from it compared to the resources it would take to add such a feature varies wildly. In some RPGs adding reactivity would be a mistake.

Spoiler

Mistake #7 - Telling Horrible Stories: Tim uses this to emphasize again that games are not movies. Not every character in a game has to be important or advance the plot. Tropes likes the Chosen One protagonist and amnesiac protagonist are tiresome and should be discarded.

Really depends on the situation. Sometimes the use of tropes can save developers a lot of time brainstorming a plot, and help avoid coming up with a "unique and creative" plot that is pure cancer. Whether using tropes is a good idea strongly depends on how important the plot is to the game.

Spoiler

He also expresses his approval of not granting experience points for combat to make alternate playstyles more attractive, as seen in Pillars of Eternity.

So retarded. The lack of combat XP in Pillars of Eternity was a huge problem for the game, and actually serves to restrict viable player options; contradicting one of the previous 'mistakes' (number 5). Experience should be awarded for overcoming challenges. Combat XP isn't something all RPGs need, but any combat oriented RPGs (like Pillars of Eternity) do need it.

 

[Fenix]

I wish there were dota and cs go, they might be better rpg who knows.

 

[luj1]

Spoiler

He also expresses his approval of not granting experience points for combat to make alternate playstyles more attractive, as seen in Pillars of Eternity.

So retarded. The lack of combat XP in Pillars of Eternity was a huge problem for the game, and actually serves to restrict viable player options; contradicting one of the previous 'mistakes' (number 5). Experience should be awarded for overcoming challenges. Combat XP isn't something all RPGs need, but any combat oriented RPGs (like Pillars of Eternity) do need it.

He had to shill a lil' for Cucksidian

 

[Kev Inkline]

Such features are nerdy and prestigious, leading to lowly casuals feeling better about themselves, in a "oh look, im playing a RPG, I'm so cool and prestigious" type of way, when he is only playing a watered-down hybrid. Hybridizing anything with RPG elements seems to increase the gameplay value somewhat, and can even increase sales by calling it a "RPG" or adding some phrases like "open-world" etc.

I think you're assuming something that is not necessarily true: that someone casual would think playing RPGs is somehow cool and prestigious. I don't think many people outside Codex attach any such meaning to a particular class of computer games.

 

[Black]

I don't think many people outside Codex attach any such meaning to a particular class of computer games.

Fucking unwashed masses.

 

[belowmecoldhands]

To whom is Fallout 1 overwhelming? How retarded do you have to be not to get some simple stats and skills? I guess such a faggot would die if he tried to play Underrail, instant mind blown! Better put warning labels on non-accessible games for these dorito manboons, millions of lives are at risk!

I finished Fallout 1, but hated the instant kills from crits. Disliked the merc system and percieved lack of content in late-game. My solution for those things wouldn't be to remove the numbers or the skills or dramaticaly change character creation, as argued by him.

I don't agree with everything he says there, rather strongly. I think a lot of veteran game designers are too old and too mainstream to understand anymore. It's left to those who're on the fringes or the young to explore where they won't.

I think there's some merit to things he says. I'm not saying it's all wrong. Sometimes I wonder though how much game design reflects the popular likes/dislikes of gamers, or the popular likes/dislikes of game designers, as opposed to empirical method. The latter can't be changed, but the former only reflects POPULAR attitudes. It can't be applied to everybody. So I might be able to play a game and enjoy it but another person hates it. I might be in the minority or in the majority. Games would be more diverse on that road. By contrast if most game design is influenced by empirical method then ther'es not much hope for didversity, as inevitably all games will lead to one.

Another thing is FAllout isn't really MY kind of game. I prefer JA2. Fallout is too much story/plot/conversation. I far prefer just having an open world and tactful plentiful combat and comprehensive management of my character and resources. What I haven't figured out is do people who tend to like story-based RPGs also tend not to like combat or comprehensive management? What to me is engaging and enjoyable (and yes sometimes frustrating), is to them unbearably frustrating and grindy. We like different types of games.

In all reality Tim might be exactly right.... for the majority of gamers, but not all.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Seems that the vast majority of butthurt posters in these 16 pages didn't even have the patience to watch the video and understand what Tim was saying.

Which is extremely ironic because he touched upon that very aspect of psychology and its effect on game design.

cuckhold expert...

 

[belowmecoldhands]

Hard core people love theory-crafting, casuals just want to play. Its obvious they want to indulge both sides but playing both sides doesn't turn out well imo

Theorycrafting is fun, but its not gameplay. And its something you have to do before you start your character.
Both hardcore and cashuls can enjoy exploring the game and the systems, you dont need to force optimization or minmaxing before they start playing.

Theorycrafting IS exploring hte game. I've always considered exploration gameplay, including the dead ends. There seems to be a divide here. What causes it I don't know. Some players CAN'T tolerate dead ends. Whether it's trying to figure out how a skill works or judging its value or exploring a mine and coming up empty handed, some people have no patience for that.

So the bottom line getting rid of numbers won't solve the problem if the system itself is still difficult. If players are hitting dead ends or wondering how it works or having their patience tested, the results will be the same as before.

 

[l3loodAngel]

I wish there were dota and cs go, they might be better rpg who knows.

We should make a public walk of shame to those who gave TW3 4 or 5...

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

I bought KOTC but now feel bad that I didn't make it a 'million seller'

I bought KotC twice. AoD also twice. Underrail. But I also bought DA:O (once).
I mean I clearly let my wallet vote here men, why doesn't the industry listen?

 

[l3loodAngel]

I bought KOTC but now feel bad that I didn't make it a 'million seller'

I bought KotC twice. AoD also twice. Underrail. But I also bought DA:O (once).
I mean I clearly let my wallet vote here men, why doesn't the industry listen?

Your wallet was not big enough to stimulate the industry.

 

[FeelTheRads]

So retarded. The lack of combat XP in Pillars of Eternity was a huge problem for the game, and actually serves to restrict viable player options; contradicting one of the previous 'mistakes' (number 5). Experience should be awarded for overcoming challenges. Combat XP isn't something all RPGs need, but any combat oriented RPGs (like Pillars of Eternity) do need it.

We even have here those that think if you remove combat xp you suddenly fix RPGs. All RPGs were shit until someone came with the brilliant idea of removing the biggest incentive in going through the main activity in the game! Brilliant design!

Removing combat xp doesn't make alternate playstyles more attractive. It forces those playstyles on you and makes combat an utterly pointless activity which serves just as a way to slow down your progress.

It also supposedly stops grinding... which of course is a fucking retarded way of stopping it, even if it needed stopping, but never actually considering that quest xp farming is essentially the same as combat xp farming. Can't discuss this with those who think playing the FedEx guy for some peasant is intellectually superior to fighting, though.

 

[Infinitron]

Infinitron Steam Index:

Skyrim - 186
Dragon Age: Origins - 46
Dragon Age: Origins Awakening - 13

There's also an Ultimate Edition of DA:O but it's not viewable in my region and I can't get the ?cc=us thing to work anymore.

 

[l3loodAngel]

Infinitron Steam Index:

Skyrim - 186
Dragon Age: Origins - 46
Dragon Age: Origins Awakening - 13

There's also an Ultimate Edition of DA:O but it's not viewable in my region and I can't get the ?cc=us thing to work anymore.

I applaud you honesty:

 

[Infinitron]

What? Those are the numbers of Codexers on my Steam friends list who own those games, moran