Interview Davie Walgrave does a 2004 wrap at HomeLAN Fed

[Saint_Proverbius]

Tags: Larian Studios

<a href="http://www.homelanfed.com/">HomeLAN Fed</a> offers up a <A href="http://www.homelanfed.com/index.php?id=28308">2004 wrap up interview</a> with <b>David Walgrave</b> of <A href="http://www.larian.com/">Larian Studios</a>. They're the guys who made <A href="http://www.beyond-divinity.com">Beyond Divinity</a>, by the way. Anyhoo, here's the disappointment question:
<br>
<br>
<blockquote><b>HomeLAN - What video or PC game that was released in 2004 that you played was the most disappointing and why?
<br>
<br>
David Walgrave</b> - I'm not going to name names, but a lot of games these days aren't challenging anymore. You don't need "skills" or practice anymore, just a lot of time to go from point A to point B (unhindered) and then the game ends. It's as if they forgot to implement a "Game Over" screen, and a lot of games aren't replayable because of that. People are always talking about how long it takes them to finish a game. I'd rather see people talking about how long a game still lasts after you've finished it. Working for a developer though, I do see the pro's and con's of both types of games...</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
So, errr.. What kind of skills should a CRPG require of a player?

 

[Whipporowill]

Not counting crpgs he's certainly on the money. And what crpgs did he have to comment on in 2004 anyway? Heh.

 

[Dan]

The ability to click really fast on the mouse for a long period of time, while moving it in a slow arc?

Fuck. Can't I just play my cRPGs without straining my wrist?

 

[Avin]

wait a minute, Ultima Underworld I and II demanded some mouse skills and are far better CRPGs than recent ones. just compare combat in UW versus crappy bloodlines. whoever has played these games would remember jumping looking for hard-to-get places or the hit and run tactics in combat.

i certainly won't be against improve my hand cordination skills if developers are intending to create games like that.

but, you know, they won't.

ps. at xmas a friend of mine pointed something i haven't thought about crpgs: games such as fallout and ultima rewarded player's curiosity, looking for hidden places or details such as find a way to get to the car in FO2 or how to hit a hidden switch in UW2.

he finished saying that fresh crpgs understand that roleplaying are just 3 different dialogue options. interesting...

 

[Eron]

Most games today, not just CRPGS provide little to no challenge.. It's simply a matter of how much time you have to spend on it.

For example, world of warcraft, everyone's praising that game through the heavens, and although I agree it's design is very well done, and thought out, what skill is there really needed to play the game successfully? Well, it helps if one can read I suppose to follow the quests.. Other than that... Cllick, right click, click right click.

We're going over the same motions time and time again.. We need a revolution in gaming.. I wonder when it will arrive..

 

[Elwro]

I wonder when it will arrive..

I hope it will be when Thomas Biskup's "JADE" gets released. He's the guy who made ADOM.

 

[Karl]

Outside of combat, actions in games seldom have any consequences whatsoever - this results in no challenge. See, if you give your Mighty Sword +5 to the poor peasant, he might become a robber in result - this would be a consequence of your action and you have to think about that before you give the sword to him. Point is, nowadays, it doesn't really matter what you do. You might give him the sword, or not, he will just stand there doing nothing - maybe saying: Thank you, noble Hero. That's all. And it sucks.

For consequences and the challenge they can be, think of Fallouts Necropolis. There it actually does matter what you do. It's a prime example of how consequences should be done in RPGs.

Oh, and on another sidekick: Combat could be more challenging if saving would be disallowed. There is this nice Iron Man Mode in Jagged Alliance 2. It is another good way to force the player to think about what he's doing, before he's doing it.

Conclusion: There are other skills besides mouse clicking. They are of mental nature. And it is these that Mr. Walgrave probably meant.

 

[Elwro]

Oh, and on another sidekick: Combat could be more challenging if saving would be disallowed.

That's why you should play roguelikes, e.g. ADOM.

 

[dojoteef]

I think it's wrong to expect all games to require skill in order to play. Most people tend to play games in order to have fun, while a smaller group tend to play both to have fun and to be challenged. There have to be games for both groups of people. Take for example a game like Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. It was a fun little waste of time. It didn't require much skill at all to play, but while you were playing the game you didn't worry about the amount of skill/lack of skill required (which is due to good design). On the other hand some people enjoy playing any of a number of online FPS games that definitely require skill. The fact that fewer and fewer games seem to necessitate a lot skill has to do with more and more casual gamers joining the ranks; they tend to be part of the group that just want to have fun, but not necessarily have a challenging experience.

Also, the idea that a game has to have replay value is also a bit of a thorny area. WHY does it have to have replayability? I'd say most people want to be able to replay a game simply because they don't feel they are getting their money's worth or they want to replay a great experience. The heart of the matter is, games with in depth stories don't tend to have much replayability while non story games do. That's why you don't see people replaying HL single player to death, but you do see them playing the multiplayer component like it's going out of style. That's why I don't understand how people can complain so much about replayability. Don't get me wrong, I love games that you can replay and still have a unique and fun experience, I just don't expect all the cRPGs I play to have that. I think pretty much the only way to get such replayability would be to make combat extremely fun/tactical, but then if that's all you have in terms of replayability in a cRPG it might as well be a strategy game with units able to gain levels/XP.

Oh and on a side note, developers that tend to try to increase replayability in their cRPGs by adding randomness (such as random quests, dungeons, etc) tend to get bitched at because the "randomness" is so predictable and gets boring. In my opinion it's really not the developers' fault, I think most gamers just tend to be too critical of games that can't replay while having a unique experience everytime.

I could probably go on for a while, but I'm going to end my rant here and wait for some intelligent responses before I add anything more to my argument.

 

[protobob]

someone needs to invent a pill
that you can take
that erases your memory of playing a game
then you could play
your favotire crpg whatnot
over and over and over
and over
again
like a virgin

but then who would spend money on new games?
or spend money on crappy games out of frustration that no new masterwork crpg was avialable?

rule 1
don't give the junky a junk bag that never runs out of junk

 

[Mendoza]

I think it's wrong to expect all games to require skill in order to play. Most people tend to play games in order to have fun, while a smaller group tend to play both to have fun and to be challenged. There have to be games for both groups of people. Take for example a game like Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time. It was a fun little waste of time. It didn't require much skill at all to play, but while you were playing the game you didn't worry about the amount of skill/lack of skill required (which is due to good design). On the other hand some people enjoy playing any of a number of online FPS games that definitely require skill. The fact that fewer and fewer games seem to necessitate a lot skill has to do with more and more casual gamers joining the ranks; they tend to be part of the group that just want to have fun, but not necessarily have a challenging experience.

Yes and no. If a game requires no skill then you might as well be reading a book or watching a movie, albeit with a bit more freedom to decide the outcome in some cases. For me at least, a big part of what makes games fun is the challenge in overcoming a problem, whether it involves me thinking, my reactions or a combination orfthe two. PoP had some challenge, but what it did really well was let you perform a series of complicated and flashy looking manoveurs without making it complicated to execute them. The skill was in figuring out what to do, not fighting against the control system to try and do the moves.

Also, the idea that a game has to have replay value is also a bit of a thorny area. WHY does it have to have replayability? I'd say most people want to be able to replay a game simply because they don't feel they are getting their money's worth or they want to replay a great experience. The heart of the matter is, games with in depth stories don't tend to have much replayability while non story games do. That's why you don't see people replaying HL single player to death, but you do see them playing the multiplayer component like it's going out of style. That's why I don't understand how people can complain so much about replayability. Don't get me wrong, I love games that you can replay and still have a unique and fun experience, I just don't expect all the cRPGs I play to have that. I think pretty much the only way to get such replayability would be to make combat extremely fun/tactical, but then if that's all you have in terms of replayability in a cRPG it might as well be a strategy game with units able to gain levels/XP.

Agree.

Oh and on a side note, developers that tend to try to increase replayability in their cRPGs by adding randomness (such as random quests, dungeons, etc) tend to get bitched at because the "randomness" is so predictable and gets boring. In my opinion it's really not the developers' fault, I think most gamers just tend to be too critical of games that can't replay while having a unique experience everytime.

Yeah, I'm not a big fan of random elements, since they often just make it hard to see all of the game (e.g. I encountered very few of the special encounters in FO2). I'd rather I could just have an event/encounter trigger through a mechanism that I could replicate.

 

[Llyranor]

"David Walgrave - Just one? Hm, I think I spent most of my free time on "Soldiers: Heroes of World War II". That game just sucked me right in, and I think it kept me going because it's very challenging without ever getting frustrating. There's a lot you can do in the game, and there are so many different ways of tackling a mission... Nearly every time you play it, something unexpected happens."

That guy rocks for mentioning Soldiers, my pick for GOTY alongside HL2.

 

[Surlent]

I'm not going to name names, but a lot of games these days aren't challenging anymore.

Funny, I just thought this the other day when I played old NES classics like Castlevania and Metroid. Those games were hard mostly because saving was scarce, if there even was a possibility to save a game and the game controls were terrible.
But still those games required skill and had challenge which made them interesting, can't say the same about most of the stuff publishers keep lugging out nowadays.

So, errr.. What kind of skills should a CRPG require of a player?

umm, tactics ? Player skill and brain to use character's abilities in right spots to proceed in the game or just maximize benefits ?
Like in DnD you use your mage carefully calculating every fireball that it hits most enemies but not allies.

 

[xemous]

homelan fed, wtf kind of shit name is that. typcial gamers...

 

[Visceris]

Skills for a CRPG gamer:

Tactics. Proper tactics in controlling a character or group of characters to have successful win or survive combat.

Making the Right Choices: Be able to make smart choices during character design and development, may they be for role playing or metagaming purposes.

Riddle and Puzzle Solving: Being able to decipher riddles and puzzles is a definite must.

Deductive Reasoning: To figure out clues and being able to piece together evidence so that you may continue the game by making the right choices, depending on the character you are playing.

There are more but this is a start of list one needs to be a successful gamer of the CRPG genre.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

I think the problem with a lot of the CRPGs released over the last few years is they don't actually cater to the skills the typical CRPG player looks for in a game. The ability to spreadsheet character development has been removed from a lot of games in favor of a more strealined, EASY system that even average gamers can grasp. Even CRPGs which a lot of people think are pretty damned cool, like Gothic, has been streamlined down to a few attributes and a few skills. Bloodlines character system, which was kind of fun to mess around with, was pretty streamlined.