Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.
It's a game based on numbers, the dm is the lead dev and sets up the encounters, if the rules are the same then you could have the same experience in a virtual game
That's not at all how most tabletop RPGs work, and certainly not how D&D was intended to work by Gary Gygax and the others who got the ball rolling. The rules -- numbers etcetera -- are there to structure things and give people something to do. The Dungeon Master's Guide explicitly defines "rules lawyering" as being against the rules, and gives the DM pointers on how to deal with it.
The meat of the game is in storytelling and improvisation, the DM and the players riffing off each other, pretending to be characters in a story, and making the story happen around them. It's totally possible to have completely rule-free tabletop sessions -- I ran one for Delterius in the shitbox the other day as a matter of fact.
Disco Elysium attempts the impossible, namely to recreate the feeling of a tabletop gaming session in a computer game. This is impossible. It simply cannot be done. Of any game I have actually played, however, this is the closest it gets to it, warts and all. And -- the "metric" system used for the game would really have to be radically changed to work at all in a tabletop session, because there's no way those internal voices could work there.
Perhaps this is also why I'm pretty forgiving of plot holes and such. Tabletop campaigns always end up with fairly humongous plot holes if you look at them closely enough, because they're not really plotted -- it's people improvising and riffing off each other. If they're good enough it can make for hellaciously good stories and sometimes remarkably vivid settings, but damn will there ever be leaps of logic, plot holes, and other inconsistencies. It's just the nature of the beast.
Except that in tabletop, the creation happens as you play. With a computer game, everything has to be designed and created beforehand. The player can never step outside those bounds.
Say we just crawled out of Irenicus's dungeon. In a tabletop game, our party could decide just to say fuck Imoen, never liked her anyway, let's sneak on the first ship to Chult, then throw the captain overboard and be pirates. Can't do that in BG2.
Except that in tabletop, the creation happens as you play. With a computer game, everything has to be designed and created beforehand. The player can never step outside those bounds.
Say we just crawled out of Irenicus's dungeon. In a tabletop game, our party could decide just to say fuck Imoen, never liked her anyway, let's sneak on the first ship to Chult, then throw the captain overboard and be pirates. Can't do that in BG2.
Except that the whole point of being a DM is to adapt to what the players are doing. A DM that blocks actions that ought to be reasonable in-world is a shit DM. You just don't say "nuh-uh, can't get on a ship now, you have to get 20k gold to save Imoen and you need to stay in Athkatla to do it" is a shit DM, not running the game as it's intended to be run.
Of course it can be fucking frustrating for a DM if you've spent weeks working out the factions and politics in a town, and then the party decides to go adventure with the steppe raiders instead, but that's the nature of the beast -- and a good DM will always find a way to put that background work to use later.
I mean, there are canned modules that the DM can run for the party, and beginning DMs often do, but I don't know anyone who's stuck with the hobby more than a few months who hasn't graduated past that PDQ. And of course sometimes the DM and the players can just agree beforehand that cool, we're gonna stick to the bounds of this module for these sessions. But these are side dishes, not the main event.
Except that the whole point of being a DM is to adapt to what the players are doing. A DM that blocks actions that ought to be reasonable in-world is a shit DM. You just don't say "nuh-uh, can't get on a ship now, you have to get 20k gold to save Imoen and you need to stay in Athkatla to do it" is a shit DM, not running the game as it's intended to be run.
Of course it can be fucking frustrating for a DM if you've spent weeks working out the factions and politics in a town, and then the party decides to go adventure with the steppe raiders instead, but that's the nature of the beast -- and a good DM will always find a way to put that background work to use later.
I mean, there are canned modules that the DM can run for the party, and beginning DMs often do, but I don't know anyone who's stuck with the hobby more than a few months who hasn't graduated past that PDQ. And of course sometimes the DM and the players can just agree beforehand that cool, we're gonna stick to the bounds of this module for these sessions. But these are side dishes, not the main event.
Neways, game complete. Steam says 37 hours for doing everything possible like a good little autist with OCD should. Minus 5 hours for the one re-rolled start and a couple hours for various interruptions. And I didn't even read everything possible (books, board game, phasmid lore).
I was highly sceptical about the game, especially since its biggest proponents have(had?) a natural propensity for being tragically wrong about what is a good game.
I'll gladly eat crow now. It is good. One of the best role-playing games out of the 300+ cRPGs I've played. Not a fucking easy feat to pull off.
Is it perfect? Fuck no. I could nitpick about a dozen things that could've been improved upon. It isn't something that I'll be replaying seven times.
But it does things that a no game before has done. And it is not a game that I will forget.
I've been reading through this thread a bit and I don't really have anything to say as I haven't played the game yet personally, despite buying it near release, but holy shit,
I've been reading through this thread a bit and I don't really have anything to say as I haven't played the game yet personally, despite buying it near release, but holy shit,
Prime Junta with all due respect, I admire your patience, but the only important distinction that REALLY needs to be made here is that if you have no experience with tabletop RPGs, your opinion on a game that has explicitly set out to mimic the feel and experience of a tabletop game is going to be crippled. You can comment on the game all you like but the one thing you can't do, if you don't have that experience, is speak to how closely Disco came to that experience. Or how much the devs succeeded in their goal of making their cRPG feel like a tabletop experience.
All else about the differences is just static, honestly. Just put the dumbfuck on ignore. I've ignored all of three people since 2007. Two of them have come in the last two days and both from this thread. Make of that what you will.
But there's the rub -- you can't, and if you program that in, then the players are going to think of something else they're not able to do. Hey, how about setting up an interplanar trading company in the interplanar sphere?
That's the crucial difference between cRPGs and tabletop RPGs right there. Tabletop RPGs are really not about the rules at all, the rules are there just so all the fun stuff can happen. Computer RPGs are largely about the ruleset because computers are really good at rules but can't improvise for shit; the content is necessarily limited to whatever the designers were able to design and implement, and players cannot step outside those bounds -- there is nothing there.
But anyhoo, I'm starting to think the comrades are right and I had better let this drop; you can lead a horse to water and all that.
I've been reading through this thread a bit and I don't really have anything to say as I haven't played the game yet personally, despite buying it near release, but holy shit,
Prime Junta with all due respect, I admire your patience, but the only important distinction that REALLY needs to be made here is that if you have no experience with tabletop RPGs, your opinion on a game that has explicitly set out to mimic the feel and experience of a tabletop game is going to be crippled. You can comment on the game all you like but the one thing you can't do, if you don't have that experience, is speak to how closely Disco came to that experience. Or how much the devs succeeded in their goal of making their cRPG feel like a tabletop experience.
All else about the differences is just static, honestly. Just put the dumbfuck on ignore. I've ignored all of three people since 2007. Two of them have come in the last two days and both from this thread. Make of that what you will.
All I said is that a game and a tabletop can offer a similar experience, I'm actually agreeing with you, I wasn't here for water convoy you had with fantastic, I'm just saying an ambitious dev can create something with choices like you think disco does, we actually agree
I've been reading through this thread a bit and I don't really have anything to say as I haven't played the game yet personally, despite buying it near release, but holy shit,
Asshurt, the dm is the lead dev of a game, in a tabletop you have to pretend something visual happens, yet in a virtual game the dm can actually show you something visually, the same experience can be made in both settings
Asshurt, the dm is the lead dev of a game, in a tabletop you have to pretend something visual happens, yet in a virtual game the dm can actually show you something visually, the same experience can be made in both settings
A game dev and a dm can set up a fight with goblins or let you sneak around, what's the difference, what can a game dev not do that a dm can, they both setup encounters and you play them
That is an inside joke (one of many) that I guess few people got. One thing I like about this game is that for the factoid inclined there are LOTS of inside jokes / references etc. I picked out half a dozen through my playthrough.
The rich guy is a very obvious allusion to Steve Jobs. It was said that Jobs had a 'reality distortion field' that would emanate from him and get people to buy his 'visionary' ideas about tech and how to make gobs of money. This was largely true as angel investors were just handing the guy millions of dollars on nothing more than his slick talking. Given the way that whole dialog went about the guy always looking for amazing business opportunities, etc. it was fairly obvious who that was referring to. You can google this and will get a dozen articles talking about this phenomenon w/ Jobs.
A game dev and a dm can set up a fight with goblins or let you sneak around, what's the difference, what can a game dev not do that a dm can, they both setup encounters and you play them
Game devs have a budget and have to put more effort into creating levels than a DM has to.
You want a player in a PC game to be able to enter every house in a city with 200 houses? That's 200 interiors for the level designers to build.
You want there to be NPCs in those houses that have quests for you?
Great, let's say 20% of these houses have a side quest in them, that's already a shitload of quests for the writers to come up with.
A DM can just quickly improvise and say "Yeah ok you can go in this house." Describes the interior of the house in two sentences. Describes the NPCs sitting inside.
Boom, it's that easy. Content created on the fly in the DM's head with zero budget.
A game dev and a dm can set up a fight with goblins or let you sneak around, what's the difference, what can a game dev not do that a dm can, they both setup encounters and you play them
Your head seems to be running on loop. Have you considered giving it a sharp rap with a hammer? Might get it unstuck. Works with my fridge when the compressor starts making that annoying RRRRRRR noise.
A game dev and a dm can set up a fight with goblins or let you sneak around, what's the difference, what can a game dev not do that a dm can, they both setup encounters and you play them
Game devs have a budget and have to put more effort into creating levels than a DM has to.
You want a player in a PC game to be able to enter every house in a city with 200 houses? That's 200 interiors for the level designers to build.
You want there to be NPCs in those houses that have quests for you?
Great, let's say 20% of these houses have a side quest in them, that's already a shitload of quests for the writers to come up with.
A DM can just quickly improvise and say "Yeah ok you can go in this house." Describes the interior of the house in two sentences. Describes the NPCs sitting inside.
Boom, it's that easy. Content created on the fly in the DM's head with zero budget.
Took me 30 hours to finish this great game.
I hope this games inspiresmore developers to do different and more mature settings in a RPG. Not just fantasy or save the world shit.
Investatigating the "paranormal" stuff was the best.
