but the way it is structured and presented is different from most RPGs, which irritates some people due to unfamiliarity and a perceived lack of freedom.
Comparisons between the structure of an AoD quest and a quest in any other RPG show what the difference is, and it's not harshness or lack of options, it's mainly in presentation of those options.
In other words, some cRPG players were spoiled by other developers and can’t deal with the pushback of the game world. This “presentation” statement speaks volumes. The criticisms come from players who don’t want an unforgiving world and the possibility of failure at every turn. They want an egotistical theme park where they can tell who is the boss.
What the fuck does my presentation statement have to do with being against an unforgiving world and the possibility of failure?
If sneak is a skill you use actively rather than just a dialog option with skill check, is the chance of failure lower? No, it can even be higher since it's not a one-time thing but something you have to look out for constantly (you passed the guard on patrol the first time, but have to be quick enough in lockpicking the backdoor because if you take too long he returns and could spot you). Underrail had a very advanced stealth system, for example, that took light and shadow and line of sight into consideration, but it was only easy when you maxed your stealth skill and you could often screw up and end up in combat even though you wanted to avoid it, all because of a misstep.
In my examples, you would have similar or the same options, and they'd be just as skill dependent as in AoD. Wanna lockpick the door? You need a high lockpick skill. Some games even prevent you from trying lockpick on a door too many times by jamming it after failure. Too bad, you failed, better find another way.
I don't get your mental jump from how a more interactive structure automatically leads to less failure or a higher degree of forgiveness. How does it turn into an "egoistical theme park" when the way you interface with the world comes through actively clicking on things and using a Fallout-like skilldex instead of picking options from a dialog window? How is the one more or less forgiving than the other if the mechanics are the exact same?
You can pick between 3 possible approaches.
Or you can climb the walls and enter though the window, thus presenting a different scenario. Of course, you didn’t know that because the game will only highlight the available choices according to your available build. The fact that you are confident that these are the only choices betrays a superficial understanding of the game. And this can be said about the whole game. If you think this about this quest, you think the same thing about the whole game, which suggests you ignored half the content, if not more.
I was just using a simple example, rather than accurately listing every option from an AoD quest from memory. It's been over a year since I last replayed AoD so forgive me if I don't remember every option by heart.
And you're missing the point. I could have listed half a dozen more options, yes, but the point of the comparison was just an illustration of how AoD differs in structure from other RPGs, not to accurately quote an entire AoD quest.
AoD = here's a list of options; pick one
other games = click on stuff to interact with it
Other RPG gives you the same quest.
Which cRPGs? Most cRPGs are pretty linear. Even games of which you are fond of, such as Arcanum, are 90% linear. It seems you are indulging in a fantasy of the perfect game where developers have infinite resources and can implement all kinds of systems to please players. Besides, if you take the most reactive game you can think of and do things the way you consider interesting, they will not implement 10% of the number of choices AoD provides because it is too time-consuming. And even if they did that, players would bitch all the same if the stat and skill checks were unforgiving as they are in AoD.
Just because we don't have many (or any?) RPGs that do it perfectly doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to get them. Isn't the Codex all about pursuing perfection rather than accepting design flaws as a necessity?
Funnily enough implementing options systemically is easier than implementing them as individual checks every time. Once you have, say, a climbing system integrated into the game you just have to construct level geometry in a way that allows for climbing at certain places and you're good. No need to script anything. Thief's rope arrows are a great example. Wanna allow the player to enter the manor through the balcony? Make the balcony wooden, which allows rope arrows to stick in it, then an observant player can shoot such an arrow into the balcony, pass a climbing check (if he fails he falls down, receiving damage and alerting the guards - again, something that can easily be coded systemically) and get in. Now you can use variations of this approach at every single location and in every single quest in your game if you want to.
Sure, that takes more programming time to implement the systems, but once the systems are in, adding content that makes use of them is incredibly easy. Yeah, AoD was a game made by a small team on a small budget and they switched engines at some point in development and they didn't have much experience yet etc etc, there are many reasons why AoD didn't go for a more systemic approach. But that doesn't mean a more systemic approach is unfeasible, especially in today's day and age where fancy engines with easily implementable physics systems are readily available for anyone.
Tldr;
- You are pretending that we have plenty of cRPGs with reactive quests. This is false.
- The few cRPGs who do implement this kind of quests don’t provide one-tenth of the choices that AoD provides.
- Even in such specific cases, players don’t want harsh stat and skill checks. So even if ITS had infinite resources to avoid text-adventure quests, players like you would still bitch and complain because you don’t like harsh stat and skill checks.
"Players like me", huh? I have repeatedly stated that I enjoy playing through AoD and have re-played it multiple times. And yet whenever I (or other people) lever legitimate criticisms towards it, you blame "not liking harsh stat and skill checks" as the reason for our criticisms, which is simply not true. Nowhere in my post have I complained about the difficulty or the harshness of the checks or the consequences of failure. It's as if you're intentionally misinterpreting everything you read just so you can deflect all criticisms as "you guys just don't like it when the game is harsh on you."
