Preview Oblivion - a game for Casual Joe

[MrSmileyFaceDude]

'cause he speaks of the pompitous of love.

 

[HardCode]

I'm a winner.
I'm a sinner.
I'm a lover,
and a grinner.

 

[Pr()ZaC]

And this thread has reached a new low...

 

[MrSmileyFaceDude]

Connery: "I'll take 'The Rapist' for 500, Alex"
Trebek: "That's THERAPIST, Mr. Connery. Therapist."
Connery: "Then how about 'Anal Bum Cover' for 300?"
Trebek: "An Album Cover. An Album Cover."

 

[Naked_Lunch]

Steve Miller rocks.

 

[Pr()ZaC]

...and the day is mine!

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

I've never upgraded my computer. I went from a DOS 286 to a Win 95 486 to my current Win XP whatever-86 with a Pentium 4 processor. I could count the number of games I've purchased in the past few months on zero hands, (the last one was Freedom Fighters, which I saw sitting around for cheap) and only started playing Planescape: Torment again after about a month of no games a week ago. So I guess that makes me one of the dreaded casual gamers.

 

[Chefe]

Rough, just the way your mother likes it Trebek.

 

[Section8]

"Get... to.. the.. back... of the boat!"

 

[Sol Invictus]

... a game that is more approachable to a casual gamer, yet still maintains depth and complexity that a more "hardcore" (for lack of a better term) expects and appreciates

That's one of them urban myths you are talking about, pardner

a game that is, from beginning to end, tailor-made for a casual gamer with no depth or complexity, nothing more than meets the eye?

Sure as hell sounds like Oblivion to me, at least based on what we've been told about the game so far. I know, I know, it's loaded with good stuff but you can't tell us because otherwise they will have to kill you. Well, I suppose we shall find out soon enough.

The problem with terms like 'hardcore' and 'casual' is that they mean different things to different people. Too many people have come to associate 'hardcore' RPGs with grinding and levelling up, with no reference to the amount of choices you're allowed to make or the variety of character development paths.

Of course, Oblivion's rather 'changed' (and some would say simplified) in regards to the skills system but it hardly changes the fact that the skills system was a terrible to begin with. It needed a certain amount of simplifying, but if you ask me, it needed to be completely overhauled.

In regards to the article and the use of the terms 'hardcore' and 'casual' in this case, I think that they're referring to the interface more than anything else. I don't expect to play something as simplistic as Fable when I play Oblivion.

For the record, Korean MMORPGs are considered "hardcore" whereas games like WOW are considered "casual". Korean MMORPGS suck. All you do is spend time levelling.

 

[Sol Invictus]

Here's a list of hardcore things I've noticed in various games throughout the years, and how you can streamline them (a.k.a. dumb down).

Hardcore vs Dumbed Down:
* Graph paper vs automaps
* A shitload of hotkeys vs automation
* RTS related - Micromanagement vs pathfinding
* RTS related - a bunch of different movement options (attack, attack move, move, defend, guard, etc) vs situational AI
* clicking one item at a time to move stuff around in your inventory vs autosort
* spending a scroll of identify on each unidentified item or identifying one item at a time vs paying X amount of money to identify all unidentified items
* Talking to every NPC in town to find out where the quests are vs having a few interesting looking characters (BG, Prince of Qin, KOTOR, NWN, etc)
* Joysticks only (Wing Commander) vs mouse and keyboard (Freespace, Freespace 2, Freelancer)
* Micromanaging each NPC vs having AI routines

I could go on, but the point is that streamlining and 'dumbing things down' isn't always a bad thing. It's only a bad thing when it's taken to the extreme, like Bard's Tale.

 

[Section8]

* Graph paper vs automaps
* clicking one item at a time to move stuff around in your inventory vs autosort
* RTS related - Micromanagement vs pathfinding
* spending a scroll of identify on each unidentified item or identifying one item at a time vs paying X amount of money to identify all unidentified items

All of which are time/effort saving measures for actions that have very little impact on the game.

* A shitload of hotkeys vs automation
* Micromanaging each NPC vs having AI routines
* RTS related - a bunch of different movement options (attack, attack move, move, defend, guard, etc) vs situational AI

Which completely alter the dynamic of the game. I remember the first time I played Dark Reign, and my reaction was "Er, all I'm really doing is setting build queues, and the AI is doing the rest. Luckily, Total Annihilation was released in the same week.

* Talking to every NPC in town to find out where the quests are vs having a few interesting looking characters (BG, Prince of Qin, KOTOR, NWN, etc)

I don't mind this, as long as it's inobtrusive. Giving "important" NPCs names or interesting descriptions and to giving generic NPCs generic names works well. However, obvious visual indicators and map labels are a bit much for me. It takes the focus away from exploring a locale and socialising along the way to a very goal driven system, which isn't a bad thing in games like Dungeon Siege 2, but detracts from RPGs.

* Joysticks only (Wing Commander) vs mouse and keyboard (Freespace, Freespace 2, Freelancer)

I think the main complaint here, was that most space flight games, like the Wing Commander series gave options, so you could use joystick, keyboard, mouse, or any combination. Freelancer didn't offer joystick support at all. That's not "dumbing down" or "streamlining", it's taking away what you'd expect to be a valid input option.

But as you say, it's not always bad, I just wish it were easier to draw the line on what constitutes tedium and frustration.

 

[bryce777]

Now if your alchemist could whip up a batch of addictive mummy juice and then use it to addict a stable of juice whores....

 

[Sol Invictus]

All of which are time/effort saving measures for actions that have very little impact on the game.

Yeah, and each of those measures I listed were regarded as 'dumbing down' by the elitist PC gaming crowd.

Which completely alter the dynamic of the game. I remember the first time I played Dark Reign, and my reaction was "Er, all I'm really doing is setting build queues, and the AI is doing the rest. Luckily, Total Annihilation was released in the same week.

That would depend on how well the developer implements it. TA implemented AI routines fairly well, by allowing your units to act autonomously by patrolling and searching for enemy units. As a commander, you shouldn't be charged with squad leader duty. Warcraft 3-style micromanagement is tedious as hell.

 

[Section8]

I definitely prefer the idea of Real Time Strategy over the Real Time Tactical focus that Blizzard have been pushing more and more of in their "RTS" games.

As a commander, you shouldn't be charged with squad leader duty.

But likewise, you shouldn't just be "the Build Queue Guy." From my hazy memories of Dark Reign, you could set default unit orders to "Seek and Destroy" and they'd do just that as soon as they were built. No need to set waypoint paths or even explore the fog of war on your own, they'd be completely autonomous, and given the pace of the game, that was far more effective than actually directing them yourself. A very shallow gaming experience.

Yeah, and each of those measures I listed were regarded as 'dumbing down' by the elitist PC gaming crowd.

True enough, but hey, fear breeds totalitarian measures, and so I can understand the resistance, not that I agree.

 

[Greatatlantic]

As long as thread has brought us to RTS, I'd like to say I think squads being the base unit (a la DoW) is the future for RTS. There are a lot of ways in which Dawn of War could be improved, but not having to highlight just the right amount of footsoldiers to bind to a hotkey to create a squad is a welcome relief. Now I'm not sugesting this just to make the gameplay easier on noggin, i.e. dumbed down. I think controling units automatically on the squad level can be a stepping stone (my current buzzword) to more strategic and tactical options. In DoW we already see things like moral and "cover". However, there isn't anything like suppressive fire. Dawn of War would be a lot more interesting if a unit in cover could shoot at a unit in the open and greatly reduce its speed, accuracy, and morale. That would make unit transport vehicles actually worth something other than a campaign gimmick. One of these days after I get my millions of dollars of funding, I'll create this RTS... right after I create Hamburger: the RPG.

 

[crufty]

What I think a lot of the dumbing down complaints stem from are not so much implementation related but story related. If I steal, do I get caught, and go to jail? Can I plead my case--and get assistance from the thieves guild if I'm a thief? If I'm adventuring in fractured lands, will different provences go to war? Are there dynamics beyond me as a character?

The classic example of deep gameplay:
Nethack: You're a starving mage, you can't #pray. What to do? You have a scroll, maybe it is a map or detect food spell. You read it --its a scroll of cursing, a ball and chain appears and is attached to your leg. Oh well. You pass out. Waking up and wandering into the next room, you see a lizard. You need an instant kill. You drop your +0 dagger and wield the ball. The lizard presses the attack. You smash the lizard, and proceed to devour its corpse....

The classic example of non-deep gameplay:
NWN: You and the half-orc barbarian lay waste to a host of fire giants. Use the stone of recall, heal. Let the orc-barbarian go, hire on the thief. Pay some gold, return to the fire giant lair. Thief disarms a trap here, unlocks a chest there. Get phat loot. Use stone of recall. Drop thief off, pick up half-orc Pay some gold, return to the fire giant lair. Repeat.

I would claim both are for the casual gamer, although one is certainly more casual than the other.

 

[Chefe]

The classic example of deep gameplay:
Nethack: You're a starving mage, you can't #pray. What to do? You have a scroll, maybe it is a map or detect food spell. You read it --its a scroll of cursing, a ball and chain appears and is attached to your leg. Oh well. You pass out. Waking up and wandering into the next room, you see a lizard. You need an instant kill. You drop your +0 dagger and wield the ball. The lizard presses the attack. You smash the lizard, and proceed to devour its corpse....

Yes, but does the dungeon feature soil erosion and is the lizard voiced by Patrick Stewart? I think not!

The classic example of non-deep gameplay:
NWN: You and the half-orc barbarian lay waste to a host of fire giants. Use the stone of recall, heal. Let the orc-barbarian go, hire on the thief. Pay some gold, return to the fire giant lair. Thief disarms a trap here, unlocks a chest there. Get phat loot. Use stone of recall. Drop thief off, pick up half-orc Pay some gold, return to the fire giant lair. Repeat.

This is my non-sarcastic response here. What I don't understand is why this is casual. It's mindnumbingly tedious. I thought casual was supposed to be easier and quicker to the fun. Who the fuck would find this fun? It's a complete waste of time.

I'm beginning to think it's not the casual gamers who are stupid, it's the developers. What you just described in NWN... people play those because there's really nothing else. I'd bet any amount of money that anyone with at least half a brain would prefer the nethack way. Hell, it's fun! It's also alot less tedious, complicated, and requires you to actually use your brain in a creative way. IMO, it's alot more casual than the NWN example.

 

[Saint_Proverbius]

Connery: "I'll take 'The Rapist' for 500, Alex"
Trebek: "That's THERAPIST, Mr. Connery. Therapist."
Connery: "Then how about 'Anal Bum Cover' for 300?"
Trebek: "An Album Cover. An Album Cover."

Connery: I've got to ask you.. about the Penis Mightier...
Trebek: What? No! That's 'The Pen Is Mightier'.
Connery: Gussy it up however you like, Trebek! The question is, does it work? Will it really mighty my penis, man? I've bought similar products in the past, I don't mind tellin' ya..

 

[Claw]

I wasn't talking about you. I don't know anything about you. I said average PC gamer.

I guess I meant average gamers who plan on playing games, like Oblivion, released in 2005.

I am an average gamer. I know plenty of gamers who have PCs as or even less powerful than mine.

I play games released in 2005, although not Oblivion obviously. The first game that gave me trouble due to technical inadequacy was F.E.A.R. which I shall resolve with a new video card soon, and I'll still be a far cry from spending alot of money every year. The whole idea is delusional.

 

[truekaiser]

As long as thread has brought us to RTS, I'd like to say I think squads being the base unit (a la DoW) is the future for RTS. There are a lot of ways in which Dawn of War could be improved, but not having to highlight just the right amount of footsoldiers to bind to a hotkey to create a squad is a welcome relief. Now I'm not sugesting this just to make the gameplay easier on noggin, i.e. dumbed down. I think controling units automatically on the squad level can be a stepping stone (my current buzzword) to more strategic and tactical options. In DoW we already see things like moral and "cover". However, there isn't anything like suppressive fire. Dawn of War would be a lot more interesting if a unit in cover could shoot at a unit in the open and greatly reduce its speed, accuracy, and morale. That would make unit transport vehicles actually worth something other than a campaign gimmick. One of these days after I get my millions of dollars of funding, I'll create this RTS... right after I create Hamburger: the RPG.

depends on the size of the army's you control in the game. the bigger the army the more time you have to spend controling it if you can select all the way down to the unit.

 

[bryce777]

I wasn't talking about you. I don't know anything about you. I said average PC gamer.

I guess I meant average gamers who plan on playing games, like Oblivion, released in 2005.

I am an average gamer. I know plenty of gamers who have PCs as or even less powerful than mine.

I play games released in 2005, although not Oblivion obviously. The first game that gave me trouble due to technical inadequacy was F.E.A.R. which I shall resolve with a new video card soon, and I'll still be a far cry from spending alot of money every year. The whole idea is delusional.

What I like is the idea of a 'casual' pc gammer who has a 300-500 dollar graphics card and gig of ram it will take to run a new game like oblivion or bllodlines when it came out.

 

[TheGreatGodPan]

I'm a below-average gamer. I need to take some remedial classes.

 

[Sol Invictus]

As long as thread has brought us to RTS, I'd like to say I think squads being the base unit (a la DoW) is the future for RTS. There are a lot of ways in which Dawn of War could be improved, but not having to highlight just the right amount of footsoldiers to bind to a hotkey to create a squad is a welcome relief. Now I'm not sugesting this just to make the gameplay easier on noggin, i.e. dumbed down. I think controling units automatically on the squad level can be a stepping stone (my current buzzword) to more strategic and tactical options. In DoW we already see things like moral and "cover". However, there isn't anything like suppressive fire. Dawn of War would be a lot more interesting if a unit in cover could shoot at a unit in the open and greatly reduce its speed, accuracy, and morale. That would make unit transport vehicles actually worth something other than a campaign gimmick. One of these days after I get my millions of dollars of funding, I'll create this RTS... right after I create Hamburger: the RPG.

The future of RTS? Come on. There's no reason as to why the ENTIRE GENRE has to take a leap in that direction. While there will always be a place for the "ubermicro" addicts, there's no reason why people who prefer grand scale strategy have to be neglected or relegated to playing Medieval: Total War for the rest of their lives.

If that was the case, games like Supreme Commander and Warhammer: Mark of Chaos would not be in development.

 

[LlamaGod]

medieval total war will end up being better then both supreme commander and warhammer.