Not ready for numbers? The dumbing down of RPG mechanics.

[Raapys]

A better example would be the Football Manager series( previously Championship Manager). It's got more stats and numbers than any RPG, really.

But yeah, it's all about the targeted audience. FM has been going since like '94 or something, with a new game every year. And each year the fans demand more and more. They have, at times, tried to made concessions to widen the targeted audience by making simpler tactics systems and implemented 3D matches and whatnot, but they've always done so while still keeping all the old options intact; want the more advanced tactics system? It's still there. Want 2D matches instead? Still an option.

That said of course, their older games were arguably more fun to play since they ran much quicker and had less stuff you needed to click through to get to the actual matches and such. An entire season can take ages in the new games, while in the previous ones it could be done in a single sitting.

 

[Squeek]

In NBA2k11 your character role is determined by more factors than those I listed and you need to do several things well...snip.... So god damnit, if NBA can do it, why can't modern rpgs?

Basically- WHERE ARE MY NUMBERS?!?

Again, I think you make a very good point. I haven't played NBA2K11, but it does sound more RPGish than many so-called RPGs.

You wondered why. I wonder too. Myself, I've read a lot of very good posts over the years relating to that, here and at other places. Today I'm convinced that the window of opportunity for creating games like the ones many of us played and loved is closed (and that's too bad).

As far as I can tell, the folks who make significant decisions in this genre, and this goes for the indies as well, think like Windows appllication programmers , not like software designers. And the particular genre we enjoy happens to be particularly demanding.

If scientists can seriously consider theories involving multiple universes, then programmers can consider similar ideas. Because their worlds would only ever exist in code (vs. physical reality), their work is much easier. Within a software multiverse, how difficult would it be to create a system of rules that would enable individual player characters to tunnel through on a path enabled by individual choices?

That's my opinion, anyway.

 

[ironyuri]

A better example would be the Football Manager series( previously Championship Manager). It's got more stats and numbers than any RPG, really.

But yeah, it's all about the targeted audience. FM has been going since like '94 or something, with a new game every year. And each year the fans demand more and more. They have, at times, tried to made concessions to widen the targeted audience by making simpler tactics systems and implemented 3D matches and whatnot, but they've always done so while still keeping all the old options intact; want the more advanced tactics system? It's still there. Want 2D matches instead? Still an option.

That said of course, their older games were arguably more fun to play since they ran much quicker and had less stuff you needed to click through to get to the actual matches and such. An entire season can take ages in the new games, while in the previous ones it could be done in a single sitting.

While Championship Manager (the only one I've played is 99-00, the golden era) does have alot of numbers and stats, that is less RPG and more sports simulation.

See my original post on the creation of your personal player in NBA2k11's "My Player" mode. You create a character, choose his role and stats and then play only as your personal player within the team and within the NBA.

You develop your player-character as he gains experience points and develop his personality through press conferences.

I could review NBA2k11 as an RPG and treat the opposing teams each game as "encounters", depending on the level of opponents (say, Kobe Bryant), some encounters are more challenging than others and require you to change your tactics slightly.

The narrative of the game is a rookie on his way to becoming MVP or winning the NBA (your ultimate quest).

The fact that the game allows for the mechanics it does, makes it possible to review it as an RPG eventhough it is not an rpg.

Championship manager, on the other hand, rests firmly within strategy/simulation, as you do not create a personal player-character and develop his talents, rather you are a team coach and use your player knowledge to influence events in game based on the numbers being crunched over your team. Player knowledge however, plays a much larger role than character skill, which is the important delineation.

 

[Raapys]

Well, it's hard to lose with the best players. I mean, take a comparison with a isometric multi-character RPG; You control your tactics, you choose how your character should develop, how they should 'act' in combat, etc. All of that is available in Football Manager as well. You choose how to use your players, you develop talents and can choose areas they should focus on. So I think it's a valid comparison. In both games you make strategic and tactical choices for your team or group and develop your players/characters, and in both game types winning a battle/match is a lot easier if you have the 'best' players/characters.

Granted, you aren't actually one single character yourself and you make most the decisions before the actual match, but that's not all that different from multi-party RPGs either. Take IWD1&2 for instance, where you make an entire group and not just a single character, and usually prepare for an encounter you know that's coming beforehand.

I do know the 'Play a pro' mode you're talking about though, they have it in the Fifa games as well. And to be fair, more and more not-previously-RPGs are going that route as well. Just look at most online shooters these days for instance; Battlefield, CoD, etc., they're almost all implementing experience, level-ups, unlocking abilities/weapons, etc.

 

[SlowLane]

Edit- Just so we're clear: You come in and derail one of my fucking threads again, I'll fucking shiv you.

That's cool, though digression and tangent are very much my nature, in fact... err, no.

The crux or the matter:

Players cannot handle numbers, they make games unwelcoming and disorienting.

Most people can handle numbers, certainly at the simplistic level presented in cRPGs. When did adding up become such a chore? Who the hell cannot multiply by 2 or, universe forbid four? Ask them to comment on their favourite sport and, as NBA2k11 shows, they will quote totals and statistics until the cows come home. Ask them about their allowance, they have it planned, MPG of their car off the top of their head. Yes, people can handle numbers when they have an interest or requirement to do so.

Where does this leave the 'Players cannot handle numbers' statement? I certainly find it insulting, "we don't think you are capable of doing the add ups", but for some reason 'the target market' disagrees. And here is the crux, 'the target market' don't want to play RPGs. They like the setting, they like the combat but they want mindless slaughter, uninterrupted by story or stats or consequences and preferably in 20 minute doses. None of this is news here.

'Players cannot handle numbers' is a marketing euphemism for "we know you don't like our old games and while we secretly consider you to be some sort of retard, we want your money so we'll change our game".

 

[Raapys]

I think they're actually underestimating their targeted audience. The success of games such as Morrowind on the console supports this theory. Oh, you'll certainly have some frustrated fans which come to the forums desperately begging for tips with their characters, but you'll always have those.

No, I think if they'd used, say, the IWD2 D&D ruleset in Dragon Age, it would be just as popular, if not more so. What makes these games popular is the (crappy) graphics, (crappy) epic story, (crappy) cutscenes, gay romances and endless combat. And the fact that they're on consoles, of course, and the huge advertisement budgets. It's not the dumbing down, the quest compass or the simplified character progression, those things merely keep frustrated fans who already bought the game from whining too much on the forums.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Players cannot handle numbers, they make games unwelcoming and disorienting.

Most people can handle numbers, certainly at the simplistic level presented in cRPGs. When did adding up become such a chore? Who the hell cannot multiply by 2 or, universe forbid four?

Ironyuri's statement, while being something I would type up to mock any number of press releases or interviews from the last two years, has actually missed the point.

Players understand numbers just fine, and probably basic math. It's the fact that numbers are doing something they're not used to. They're confronted by the fear of the unknown at the moment these things come to their attention.
Having to comprehend abstract game mechanics to do better at a game is a barrier to entry and sales figures. It's something akin to inverting the seam between floor tiles for old school rpg gamers, but it's there. Simple as that.

Have you seen how well Bejewelled has done relative to its budget? It's that kind of sales clinching ease of use that RPG companies wish their games had.

 

[RPGMaster]

Go easy on BioWare lads. Playing Snakes and Ladders gives them headaches.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Go easy on BioWare lads. Playing Snakes and Ladders gives them headaches.

To be fair that shit is brutal.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Numbers are only a problem if they aren't explained. Purpesfully obscuring mechanics by not explaining them is bullshit.

 

[SkepticsClaw]

Nice thread and good points. CM/FM has more in common with a wargame than an RPG - and it is formidably complex in current iterations, possibly the most complex mainstream game around.

I think sports games are able to succeed in this area because real-life sports are already so tied up with statistics. Sports fans lap them up; player scoring is added up and divided into categories, teams literally earn points for winning games, goal difference is tracked, disciplinary points are totted up and suspensions dolled out, and so on and so on. Stats are a massive part of sports already, so it's a natural extension for the sport fan to accept these conventions. Sports fans are already familiar in working with such a framework, and their brains are easily able to extrapolate out to more abstract and RPG-like mechanics within that context.

However, when people think of a fight, what they categorically do not think of is people rolling dice. They think of blood, adrenaline, machismo, giant fucking swords cleaving people in half. When they think of epic quests, the think Lord of the Rings or Star Wars; big stories, big action. What they don't think about is spreadsheets, hundreds of dice rolls, complex physical calculations and so on.

Bridging that cultural gap is something that isn't happening; in fact it's probably getting wider. In the 80's, D&D was big, probably bigger than video games were - or at least comparable in size. The statistical, number crunching association was there and accepted. Nowadays p&p role playing games are far more niche than video games, so that link has become eroded.

/musing

 

[SlowLane]

Ironyuri's statement, while being something I would type up to mock any number of press releases or interviews from the last two years, has actually missed the point.

Players understand numbers just fine, and probably basic math. It's the fact that numbers are doing something they're not used to. They're confronted by the fear of the unknown at the moment these things come to their attention.
Having to comprehend abstract game mechanics to do better at a game is a barrier to entry and sales figures. It's something akin to inverting the seam between floor tiles for old school rpg gamers, but it's there. Simple as that.

Have you seen how well Bejewelled has done relative to its budget? It's that kind of sales clinching ease of use that RPG companies wish their games had.

You are far more generous to your fellow man than I.

We live in a world where everything is rated on a scale of 0 to 10 or 1 to 100 or 'f' to 'a++' for exams or 'a' to 'h++' for breasts. Music, literature, domestic goods, intelligence, I have trouble believing there is even a significant minority who cannot grasp the abstract. Gamers especially, some of whom will happily rate their enjoyment directly through the abstract of totally arbitrary achievements.

I do have some sympathy for those put off by the sudden appearance of grids of text and figures, but at their worst are such grids so much more intimidating than a league table or the program guide of the average modern T.V.? I accept there are some who struggle with programming the recording function on their PVR, but surely this is most common among the older generation? The younger generation that dominates the world of computer gaming are surrounded by toys and switches and buttons and swipes and interfaces, not only that, they are perfectly equipped to adapt and learn and do so quickly. The only 'barrier' I see stems from the fact that they do not want to spend the short time and small effort required to learn. And that, as I said before, is the target market.

Bejewelled is an interesting example. The obvious question is once reduced to such ease of use what sort of RPG would remain? Less obvious, Bejewelled is driven entirely by dice rolls, random numbers. Given the vocal crowd demanding more and more direct player control, would a streamlined Bejewelled allow the player to select the exact (shape?) colour for each new gem? heh, that is descending into farce.

Not ready for numbers? I still call bullshit.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

a streamlined Bejewelled allow the player to select the exact (shape?) colour for each new gem?

Bejewelled Tactics

A grid based match-3 game of strategy

Choose your gems

Change your destiny

 

[Overweight Manatee]

Numbers are only a problem if they aren't explained. Purpesfully obscuring mechanics by not explaining them is bullshit.

The worst is mechanics that are both unintuitive and unexplained, which applies to DA. The system is just ridiculously counterintuitive. Cunning? Well, aren't mages supposed to be crafty individuals? Isn't a warrior's ingenuity rather than brute strength supposed to be his greatest weapon when facing things like giant dragons and enemy mages? No, cunning is actually 'Rogue Strength'. Magic? Adding more magic should give me more magic, right? No, willpower gives you more magic. How does that make sense? Shouldn't willpower be improving the spell damage while magic gives you greater stores? Guess not. Whats the difference between stamina and mana? Pretty much nothing except they are colored differently, by gameplay standards. How exactly is stamina different from health anyway? Wouldn't it make sense to combine them both under something like 'energy', which is at least tangibly separate from health and could apply to both spells and abilities? No, lets split into mana and stamina just because we like to fuck with players.

 

[sgc_meltdown]

Numbers are only a problem if they aren't explained. Purpesfully obscuring mechanics by not explaining them is bullshit.

Mike Laidlaw is bullshit.

ftfy

 

[Mastermind]

Whats the difference between stamina and mana? Pretty much nothing except they are colored differently, by gameplay standards.

You can use lyrium potions to restore mana.

 

[muffildy]

cunning

actually, cunning does in fact help all classes. If i am remembering correctly (deleted the demo) Cunning was the stat which determines your chance to dodge attacks for everyone. They even helpfully tell you exactly what your chance to dodge is vs each type of enemy. Eg 80% chance vs grunt, 30% vs minor boss, 5% vs big boss - not their exact wording. But each statistics importance is explained in detail.
Im not sure why the author of this is saying DA2 is dumbed down just because it explains exactly what each statistics importance is. Perhaps he is upset that all rpg developers went the route of higher number is better unlike in bg2 where lower numbers are better and you needed to calculate your chances of attack/defence yourself rather than it be calculated for you. The numbers are still there - they are just better explained.

 

[Kaanyrvhok]

I think they're actually underestimating their targeted audience. The success of games such as Morrowind on the console supports this theory. Oh, you'll certainly have some frustrated fans which come to the forums desperately begging for tips with their characters, but you'll always have those.

No, I think if they'd used, say, the IWD2 D&D ruleset in Dragon Age, it would be just as popular, if not more so. What makes these games popular is the (crappy) graphics, (crappy) epic story, (crappy) cutscenes, gay romances and endless combat. And the fact that they're on consoles, of course, and the huge advertisement budgets. It's not the dumbing down, the quest compass or the simplified character progression, those things merely keep frustrated fans who already bought the game from whining too much on the forums.

Agreed. Take NBA 2k11... The actual gameplay is much better than 2k9 and 10 which both kinda took a step backwards. Its the first one in ages that I could play online without it degenerating into a fastbreak dunk fest. The My players stuff would be a decent diversion at best if the gameplay wasn't sparkling. Simply put, they made a better game and they did it by smartening it up. The My player mode even has dialog in press conferences to round out the roleplaying but thats not really where RPG devs could take a cue. 2k11 has gameplay that was improved by making the CPU smarter and the players more realistic. Matter of fact a lot of the reviews smacked the game for being too realistic but the metric scores were still 7 points higher than 2k10s. Its like I said before on this site the sports games that sell the most in relation to the popularity of their sport are the ones that deliver depth.

 

[VentilatorOfDoom]

Having played through the DA2 demo twice, it feels as if Bioware are easing the players into the game mechanics, introducing the combat, the spells, the abilities, the level up system etc. little by little. If this is streamlined or dumbed down, so be it. To me, it is about making the game more accesible from the get go... the start of the game.

As a side note, the pathfinding in still horrible...

r00fles? You know what else is awesome? That they removed this to-hit crap. Stats determining your chance to hit? Preposterous! It's not very welcoming bro, so it's good this nerd crap is gone for good. I can just jump into the fray and immediately start 'sploding dorkspawn as it should be.

 

[tindrli]

stop using nummbers in RPG??



GOD DAMN RETARDS!!!!

 

[baronjohn]

Well the numbers are just a tool because past computers weren't strong enough to simulate actual physics. With today's powerful computers we don't need stats any more, we can just use a physics engine.

 

[halflingbarbarian]

The sad thing for me is that there isn't even an equal ground of argument between 'numbers vs no-numbers' because I believe there is no real definition of an rpg. However, most of my best experiences with gaming are with games called 'rpgs' and hell were they fun. Simply put, nowadays rpgs are not even fun and not entirely 'games' and I feel trying to dissect individual components of the mechanics will turn out quite fruitless. Ultima 7, for example, had as bad statistical definition (or worse) than DA, and the stats also were not especially crucial. The game was just fun. There was thinking, there was action, there was planning; basically immersion and player involvement.

Maybe after all it is the changing definition of 'fun' in the gaming world and what older players regarded as enough intellectual exercise is now considered tedium, even though new gamers are as intellectually capable otherwise. (this theory is shaky due to the existence of certain forums crawling with certifiable braindead shit like ESF or Bioware or arg Gamefaqs.)

P.S: Snake and Ladders is fucking brutal agreed. Those that say otherwise never played the game.

 

[Roguey]

r00fles? You know what else is awesome? That they removed this to-hit crap. Stats determining your chance to hit? Preposterous! It's not very welcoming bro, so it's good this nerd crap is gone for good. I can just jump into the fray and immediately start 'sploding dorkspawn as it should be.

Can you explain why glancing for 10% damage is such a travesty? I mean,, if you normally hit for something like 20-40 damage, a glance is a mere 2-4. That's still punishing but without making you feel like the game itself is wasting your time (more than it already is). It's like applying a bandaid to a gash, but this seems preferable to "your character's sword went through the target without any visible changes but the dice says you missed, who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes nyaaaaah".

 

[hoverdog]

Having played through the DA2 demo twice

Having played through the DA2 demo twice

Having played through the DA2 demo twice

 

[Hobo Elf]

A true codexer would've played it at least 7 times.