Cheating is endemic in rpgs. Being forced not to reload puts you on disadvantage

[DakaSha V]

Can somebody explain to me what op is even saying

 

[Sykar]

Can somebody explain to me what op is even saying

He doesn't understand rng.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[DakaSha V]

ill try to use very simple english this time

Can somebody explain to me what op is even saying

you finish char gen. Your chance of failure in single fight is 1%. You reload after each failure. Is your chance of failure 1%?

no

edit: but for the record this is still ambiguous

 

[Sykar]

ill try to use very simple english this time

Can somebody explain to me what op is even saying

you finish char gen. Your chance of failure in single fight is 1%. You reload after each failure. Is your chance of failure 1%?

Ok just to make sure, what is the chance to win the maximum at lotto?

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Can somebody explain to me what op is even saying

Deterministic system>rng

 

[DakaSha V]

None of this shit even matters in these types of games. So you make your game deterministic and fuck up. What happens now? You uninstall? No you fucking load all the same.

Its inherent to the design of this shit (and a very large reason why i wont touch any of it)

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Sigourn]

The majority of people do not save scum.

That is hard to believe, because every time the subject has been brought up (in other than hardcore circles) the answer is the same: people like to savescum. This is especially noticeable when it comes to stealing in RPGs.

No gamer I know save scums.

You don't know enough gamers, then.

You are making up this ridiculous shit in the vain hope to have the faintest hint of an argument. Newsflash, you don't.

What the fuck are you talking about? What argument are you speaking of?

And no, reloading is not cheating.

Remember that time I said reloading was cheating? Me neither.

Don't get so touchy just because you like reloading.

 

[DakaSha V]

None of this shit even matters in these types of games. So you make your game deterministic and fuck up. What happens now? You uninstall? No you fucking load all the same.

Its inherent to the design of this shit (and a very large reason why i wont touch any of it)

to repeat myself, there is a difference in
- reloading, doing exactly same thing and succeeding
- reloading, changing strategy

Yes. if you play rpg and you did screw up as far away as char gen, you should start over.

You could just as well try every possible deterministic move until your "strategy" succeeds. Yes its different, I get that, but to me, as somebody who never wants to repeat any encounter due to a load, its cheating all the same. So i guess what we have here is:

Emergent-Gameplay-Ironman-Roguelike-and-4x-Playing-God (me) > Deterministic-Puzzle-Gamer (you) > RNG-Story-Fag (everybody else)


Seriously who gives a fuck

 

[Master]

I don't get it, how is reloading cheating? If I die in a game I have to uninstall it and throw away the disc?

Reloading should be done only when necessary, i.e. when it's Game Over. People reloading incessantly over the slightest of issues is what, in a way, caused Bethesda to go full essential companions in Fallout 4.

Though you can chalk it up to companions being added very late in development (and thus shallow as hell) I never bothered reloading if any of them died in Fallout 1. That is why, a year later after I last played Fallout, I remember Tycho dying to Set's army of ghouls. Companion deaths, amongst other failures, are very important to have a game be memorable.

I pity those who reload when it isn't necessary. They will never experience the sweet taste of landing a natural (not forced) critical hit and winning a fight.

What utter nonsense. Unless you are save scumming every damn action anyone will have a "natural" critical hit, what an idiotic term, so do pray tell where are these people because frankly I never met anyone who save scums that extreme. As to Tycho, a bad example. The companions in FO 1 were terrible from a gameplay perspective. Not only was their AI awful they did not scale at all in the game. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge knows that they were implemented as an experiment to see if they can pull it off. They did, just barely. The companions have a little to say early on but as the game progresses Ian in his leather jacket essentially becomes destined to die since the most you can do is gift him a better weapon but without at least Combat Armor you will have a very hard time surviving at the later stages. To top it all of their deaths are meaningless to the story. I never found it "memorable" at most annoying but usually forgettable. I for sure cannot remember where they died and the main reason that I did not reload was that they had become dead weight anyway.

But its better that way. It fits the harsh setting... I don't want to solve their issues or hear them banter incessantly like children. Them dying should be at best unfortunate, not some holy shit event. I liked Ian but thats as far as it goes, im not going to build him a monument when he dies and yeah im not going to reload either.

 

[Sykar]

I don't get it, how is reloading cheating? If I die in a game I have to uninstall it and throw away the disc?

Reloading should be done only when necessary, i.e. when it's Game Over. People reloading incessantly over the slightest of issues is what, in a way, caused Bethesda to go full essential companions in Fallout 4.

Though you can chalk it up to companions being added very late in development (and thus shallow as hell) I never bothered reloading if any of them died in Fallout 1. That is why, a year later after I last played Fallout, I remember Tycho dying to Set's army of ghouls. Companion deaths, amongst other failures, are very important to have a game be memorable.

I pity those who reload when it isn't necessary. They will never experience the sweet taste of landing a natural (not forced) critical hit and winning a fight.

What utter nonsense. Unless you are save scumming every damn action anyone will have a "natural" critical hit, what an idiotic term, so do pray tell where are these people because frankly I never met anyone who save scums that extreme. As to Tycho, a bad example. The companions in FO 1 were terrible from a gameplay perspective. Not only was their AI awful they did not scale at all in the game. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge knows that they were implemented as an experiment to see if they can pull it off. They did, just barely. The companions have a little to say early on but as the game progresses Ian in his leather jacket essentially becomes destined to die since the most you can do is gift him a better weapon but without at least Combat Armor you will have a very hard time surviving at the later stages. To top it all of their deaths are meaningless to the story. I never found it "memorable" at most annoying but usually forgettable. I for sure cannot remember where they died and the main reason that I did not reload was that they had become dead weight anyway.

But its better that way. It fits the harsh setting... I don't want to solve their issues or hear them banter incessantly like children. Them dying should be at best unfortunate, not some holy shit event. I liked Ian but thats as far as it goes, im not going to build him a monument when he dies and yeah im not going to reload either.

It is ultimately a game. You can chose to play it "harsh" if you want to. Me? I want to relax and have fun when I play a game. That does not mean I want to run brain dead through a game but it also does not mean I want no reload Ironman game. There are middle grounds. That does not make me or anyone else who does a couple of reloads a cheater. Saving and reloading were implemented for a reason. Like many game mechanics it can be abused. Likewise they can also be ignored.

 

[lukaszek]

deterministic system > RNG

 

[Master]

I don't get it, how is reloading cheating? If I die in a game I have to uninstall it and throw away the disc?

Reloading should be done only when necessary, i.e. when it's Game Over. People reloading incessantly over the slightest of issues is what, in a way, caused Bethesda to go full essential companions in Fallout 4.

Though you can chalk it up to companions being added very late in development (and thus shallow as hell) I never bothered reloading if any of them died in Fallout 1. That is why, a year later after I last played Fallout, I remember Tycho dying to Set's army of ghouls. Companion deaths, amongst other failures, are very important to have a game be memorable.

I pity those who reload when it isn't necessary. They will never experience the sweet taste of landing a natural (not forced) critical hit and winning a fight.

What utter nonsense. Unless you are save scumming every damn action anyone will have a "natural" critical hit, what an idiotic term, so do pray tell where are these people because frankly I never met anyone who save scums that extreme. As to Tycho, a bad example. The companions in FO 1 were terrible from a gameplay perspective. Not only was their AI awful they did not scale at all in the game. Anyone with an ounce of knowledge knows that they were implemented as an experiment to see if they can pull it off. They did, just barely. The companions have a little to say early on but as the game progresses Ian in his leather jacket essentially becomes destined to die since the most you can do is gift him a better weapon but without at least Combat Armor you will have a very hard time surviving at the later stages. To top it all of their deaths are meaningless to the story. I never found it "memorable" at most annoying but usually forgettable. I for sure cannot remember where they died and the main reason that I did not reload was that they had become dead weight anyway.

But its better that way. It fits the harsh setting... I don't want to solve their issues or hear them banter incessantly like children. Them dying should be at best unfortunate, not some holy shit event. I liked Ian but thats as far as it goes, im not going to build him a monument when he dies and yeah im not going to reload either.

It is ultimately a game. You can chose to play it "harsh" if you want to. Me? I want to relax and have fun when I play a game. That does not mean I want to run brain dead through a game but it also does not mean I want no reload Ironman game. There are middle grounds. That does not make me or anyone else who does a couple of reloads a cheater. Saving and reloading were implemented for a reason. Like many game mechanics it can be abused. Likewise they can also be ignored.

No i do reload too. FO isn't that suitable for iron man as you can die in all sorts of unpredictable ways. The "middle ground" is the best way to play it. I meant "harsh" just in the way companions were done.

 

[Sykar]

It is ultimately a game. You can chose to play it "harsh" if you want to. Me? I want to relax and have fun when I play a game. That does not mean I want to run brain dead through a game but it also does not mean I want no reload Ironman game. There are middle grounds.

'easy' is perfectly viable difficulty

If that is how you enjoy the game go for it.

 

[FeelTheRads]

to repeat myself, there is a difference in
- reloading, doing exactly same thing and succeeding
- reloading, changing strategy

Such a huge difference. Wow, it's so totally fair and not cheating to keep reloading until I find a solution that works.

Also, you (and other deterministfags) apparently really think that everyone savescums every hit until they get an instant-kill critical hit. You are fucking deranged and if you calculate the hit chance based on reloads you are possibly retarded and/or autistic.
I somehow feel that it's you, deterministfags, that are the worst savescummers and you're projecting your disease on everybody else (durr if if I do it everyone else must do it too) asking for developers to "fix it so EVERYBODY benefits", when you just want to be put out of your misery because you can't stand it if your character doesn't always have the same perfect outcome.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Such a huge difference. Wow, it's so totally fair and not cheating to keep reloading until I find a solution that works.

What, you die to an encounter and burn the CD? Bullshit, of course it's different.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Such a huge difference. Wow, it's so totally fair and not cheating to keep reloading until I find a solution that works.

What, you die to an encounter and burn the CD? Bullshit, of course it's different.

It's technically different, but the result is the same, you failed and after reloading you succeed.

Also, the parallel is retarded anyway. It assumes that non-deterministic games have only one way of dealing with a problem so on reload you just keep trying that while deterministic games have a billion of amazing solutions and it's just up to you to find the right one!

Because deterministfags are sick in the head and the worst save-scummners and indeed, they probably think that if you can kill someone in one hit then why shouldn't you just reload until you do. Their deranged view on reloading games can only result from that kind of thinking and behavior.

 

[FeelTheRads]

with ability to reload each time i dont like result?

Yes, even "with ability", no matter how many times you reload your chance of winning will still be 1 in however many million each time you play. Reloading doesn't increase the chance of each consecutive instance. Dumbfuck.

 

[Master]

Remember kids, winning is not the important part.

 

[Sigourn]

It is ultimately a game. You can chose to play it "harsh" if you want to. Me? I want to relax and have fun when I play a game. That does not mean I want to run brain dead through a game but it also does not mean I want no reload Ironman game. There are middle grounds. That does not make me or anyone else who does a couple of reloads a cheater. Saving and reloading were implemented for a reason. Like many game mechanics it can be abused. Likewise they can also be ignored.

Feel free to play the game however you want. You are still gaming the system if you reload to your advantage.

I've said it earlier: I proudly gamed Baldur's Gate when my companions died, because the economy was absolutely fucked in that game. You can't consistently make money, and while you can bypass healing services using an inn, you can't bypass resurrection.

 

[Sykar]

It is ultimately a game. You can chose to play it "harsh" if you want to. Me? I want to relax and have fun when I play a game. That does not mean I want to run brain dead through a game but it also does not mean I want no reload Ironman game. There are middle grounds. That does not make me or anyone else who does a couple of reloads a cheater. Saving and reloading were implemented for a reason. Like many game mechanics it can be abused. Likewise they can also be ignored.

Feel free to play the game however you want. You are still gaming the system if you reload to your advantage.

I've said it earlier: I proudly gamed Baldur's Gate when my companions died, because the economy was absolutely fucked in that game. You can't consistently make money, and while you can bypass healing services using an inn, you can't bypass resurrection.

And I am also playing at a disadvantage due to my self imposed restrictions like only one rest in a dungeon. Anyone doing more than that is "gaming" a lot more than me doing a reload because I refuse to use any kind of cheesy resurrection. Likewise I refused to cheese with spells like Chain Contingency (triple Abi Dalzims at enemy sighted) or the hilariously broken Simulacrum (endless scrolls) or Project Image (multiply your spell pool by a factor of x times Project Image used). Those were far worse than any occasional reload because a companion died if I even did that.
Or abusing the fact that the AI was too stupid to open closed doors and then just throw a Cloudkill or two in a room and then close it. Or the endless summons in BG thanks to Wand of Summoning. Etc. All far worse than reload because they are essentially an autowin with little to no thought. All a reload enables you to do is try another time at best.

 

[groundhog]

Why does anyone care how other people play a game? At the end of the day everyone should play in the way that gives them the most pleasure. If that means you play ironman mode or savescumming before every single event with an uncertain outcome, then best of luck to you.

For myself, I'm looking for a certain level of challenge and if I need to impose my own restrictions to attain that, I'm more than happy to do so. Like Sykar, this may involve limiting resting, avoiding certain overpowered weapons or spells or picking sub-optimal character classes. However I don't ever play ironman, as although I can see the attraction, there's no way I'm replaying the previous X hours of a game just to retry a combat.

Reloads for me are normally just due to failure in combat and I tend to view it as an indication that I need to rethink my tactics, rather than just hoping for better luck.