Editorial RPG Codex Editorial: Where Journalism Goes to Write Itself

[Spectacle]

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

I am a bit sceptical about the existence of "unfun obvious exploits" in a single player game.

Anything that makes combat both trivially easy and horribly repetitive would qualify.

 

[evdk]

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

I am a bit sceptical about the existence of "unfun obvious exploits" in a single player game.

Anything that makes combat both trivially easy and horribly repetitive would qualify.

Those usually aren't exploits, but fucked up design. See Septerra Core.

 

[Infinitron]

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

I am a bit sceptical about the existence of "unfun obvious exploits" in a single player game.

Well, in situations like that, I often find myself thinking "Hmm, that was way too easy and cost-free. And they gave me all those tools, too. All for nothing. This isn't really the right way to play this game, isn't it?"

Basically as an experienced gamer I expect every action I perform in a game to have a significant tradeoff, and when it doesn't I feel ripped off because the game isn't challenging me enough.

For some reason, games with "simulation" pretensions seem especially vulnerable to issues like these, although I can't say with 100% certainty that it's an inevitable consequence of simulation.

 

[evdk]

Well, if we're taking about transporting a barrel through an entire level to force open some door as an example - that's something that's never even occurred to me, so I'd say it's a reward for out of the box thinking.
I seem to remember to bringing a hacked minigun turret to the final boss fight in the DX:HR DLC, which made it significantly easier, but the only feeling I felt was satisfaction on using the sandbox to screw with the AI.

 

[Lancehead]

The major advantage of simulating a game world through its mechanics, instead of them existing in separate spheres, is free-form problem-solving. And free-form problem-solving is desirable because it accommodates and encourages player creativity. Having said that, I can understand Obsidian not going the simulation route; because it requires a sacrifice in robustness of story and characters, which would be under-utilising Obsidian's main strength, the writing. But for Sawyer to not see the advantages of simulation is unfortunate.

"Free-form problem-solving" is something that emerges in any sufficiently complex system, regardless of how "simulating" it is.

Maybe it's not the kind of freedom you're looking for, though.

Please provide real or hypothetical examples.

Lancehead Here's an image that succintly demonstrates the pitfalls of games that go for a heavily simulated approach:

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

I did not state nor imply one can't botch simulation. But (to paraphrase DraQ) games are made great by doing things right, not by not doing anything wrong. Much like Deus Ex. Also, agree with evdk, I don't see what's wrong or unfun about that solution in the picture.

 

[Infinitron]

Also, agree with evdk, I don't see what's wrong or unfun about that solution in the picture.

Because at some point you have to ask yourself:

1) Is "barrel-scavenging" what I'm supposed to be doing in this game? Is that what this game is actually about?
2) Is it in any way a challenge?

And remember, it's only thinking outside of the box the first time you do it.

Please provide real or hypothetical examples.

Insert tiresome chess reference here.

 

[Lancehead]

Also, agree with evdk, I don't see what's wrong or unfun about that solution in the picture.

Because at some point you have to ask yourself:

1) Is "barrel-scavenging" what I'm supposed to be doing in this game? Is that what this game is actually about?

It's simply one possibility if the player can come up with it.

2) Is it in any way a challenge?

More than actually using the lockpick which requires neither intelligence nor effort.

And remember, it's only thinking outside of the box the first time you do it.

Right, but I fail to see how that's an argument against simulation. That you can mindlessly repeat the obvious (or what has become obvious after the first time) does not mean there aren't other possibilities for the creative, nor that any other solutions aren't rewarded.

Please provide real or hypothetical examples.

Insert tiresome chess reference here.

Chess is its own simulation. What is it not simulating?

 

[Infinitron]

More than actually using the lockpick which requires neither intelligence nor effort.

No, because the lockpick is a resource that you need to maintain over the course of the entire game, which is attached to a character skill that needs to be upgraded.

Barrels don't need skill - they always open the door in one shot. And in many Deus Ex levels, exploding barrels are actually easier to find than lockpicks.

Chess is its own simulation. What is it not simulating?

wat

Chess isn't a simulation. It's the gamist's favorite example: http://twofoldsilence.diogenes-lamp.info/2012/11/the-queen-needs-no-advocate.html

 

[Lancehead]

More than actually using the lockpick which requires neither intelligence nor effort.

No, because the lockpick is a resource that you need to maintain over the course of the entire game, which is attached to a character skill that needs to be upgraded.

Barrels don't need skill - they always open the door in one shot. And in many Deus Ex levels, exploding barrels are actually easier to find than lockpicks.

Come on, I replied to this right in that post.

And remember, it's only thinking outside of the box the first time you do it.

Right, but I fail to see how that's an argument against simulation. That you can mindlessly repeat the obvious (or what has become obvious after the first time) does not mean there aren't other possibilities for the creative, nor that any other solutions aren't rewarded.

Chess is its own simulation. What is it not simulating?

wat

Chess isn't a simulation. It's the gamist's favorite example: http://twofoldsilence.diogenes-lamp.info/2012/11/the-queen-needs-no-advocate.html

Here's a comparison to help you understand.

Chess rules simulate chess.
PE rules do not simulate the world of PE. (I'm presuming here.)

If you simulated a match of chess using the rules and mechanics of chess, you'd get a chess match. If you tried to simulate the world of PE using its mechanics, it would fall apart.

 

[Infinitron]

Chess rules simulate chess.

What does this even mean? Who cares if it simulates something that isn't real?

Right, but I fail to see how that's an argument against simulation. That you can mindlessly repeat the obvious (or what has become obvious after the first time) does not mean there aren't other possibilities for the creative, nor that any other solutions aren't rewarded.

What do you mean, "mindlessly"? There's nothing mindless about repeating the obvious, superior solution.

Generally, explosives in Deus Ex are overpowered. But in the simulationist mindset, they HAVE to be overpowered, because in real life, explosives really ARE that powerful.

As I said, simulationist games seem particularly vulnerable to issues like this.

 

[Zeriel]

That's kind of the point, though?

Certain things being overpowered is interesting. Powerful wizards are fascinating in traditional fantasy because they are powerful. If a powerful wizard is equivelant to a trained warrior, it loses a lot of its cachet--why not just send in a Roman legion?

The majority of BG2's interesting elements are the ways in which 2E D&D is broken and imbalanced, and exploiting those broken elements. If I have any concern about P:E being a fun game, it is because Sawyer appears to believe that un-fun design is fun.

Balanced gameplay is a necessary evil in multiplayer games, but it is boring as fuck in singleplayer titles.

 

[Infinitron]

Certain things being overpowered is interesting. Powerful wizards are fascinating in traditional fantasy because they are powerful. If a powerful wizard is equivelant to a trained warrior, it loses a lot of its cachet--why not just send in a Roman legion?

Because he's not actually equivalent in the sense of "same ability with a different name", just powerful in a different way, against different obstacles and enemies. Much like the knight and the bishop from Sawyer's chess analogy.

The majority of BG2's interesting elements are the ways in which 2E D&D is broken and imbalanced, and exploiting those broken elements.

I don't agree. Or rather, their brokenness and imbalancedness isn't what made them good.

 

[Lancehead]

Chess rules simulate chess.

What does this even mean? Who cares if it simulates something that isn't real?

That's the whole point I've been making, that it's not about realsim, it's about simulating the game world being created. That a game should exist as a whole instead of a separation between how the world functions and how the pc is able to function.

 

[Infinitron]

That a game should exist as a whole instead of a separation between how the world functions and how the pc is able to function.

Yeah, well, guess what, in Faerun, people aren't actually limited to moving around in groups of six members or less.

We are all guilty of crimes against verisimilitude

 

[Roguey]

Yet it remains a fact that most people are willing to sacrifice realism/believablity for improved gameplay. Quantifying a point where you've gone too far is futile because you're not going to find a consensus. Better to just focus on making the best game possible.

Verisimilitude isn't the same thing as realism.

http://spring.me/JESawyer/q/235453118601509661

No, I think I get it pretty clearly: players want realism when it's enjoyable, and they don't want it when it isn't enjoyable. It's not too hard to figure out.

The game you're using as a model of verisimilitude also has regenerating health.

http://spring.me/JESawyer/q/374603143389921481

From reading your opinions on SomethingAwful and the Obsidian forums, it seems you favor a minimalist approach towards worldcrafting. No "useless" weapons, no mundane conversations, etc. Don't you think this will have a harmful effect on verisimilitude?

I don't think it will harm verisimilitude, no, because none of the source games came anywhere near being simulators of reality.

I think it's my job to design things, not be a content creator for the sake of making the biggest list of "stuff" possible.

 

[Cosmo]

We are all guilty of crimes against verisimilitude

I think you mean verisimilitude, i.e. the feeling that things are real, is by essence a crime against realism.
And as it is a feeling, it can be manipulated and changed to a certain degree, sometimes extremely so. Basically it depends where your suspension of disbelief will begin and end, which artificial convention you'll question and which one you'll be blind to...

 

[dnf]

Lancehead Here's an image that succintly demonstrates the pitfalls of games that go for a heavily simulated approach:

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

The jewish way of playing Deus Ex.

 

[Surf Solar]

What if the loot is unguarded by raiders in the same building that raiders are chilling? Derp.

They're not going to be watching everything.
http://fallout.wikia.com/wiki/Khan_Base

20 .44 magnum rounds in the eastern most tent.

There's also a dead ghoul in the sewers of necropolis who has a plasma pistol. No one cares where or how he got such a rare weapon. It exists in this location for weapon progression purposes.

It's a lser pistol.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

I am a bit sceptical about the existence of "unfun obvious exploits" in a single player game.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

http://spring.me/JESawyer/q/235421846139320996

What an absolutely retarded answer.

The question was retarded to begin with. Lol bro, why do you sacrifice realism for the sake of making the game more fun, bro?

 

[evdk]

morrowindfubarlevellingsystem.gif

I don't see how jumping like a tard for three days straight is on the same level is an "exploit" (unless you count the game exploiting you).

 

[Grunker]

"Creative free-form problem solving", or unfun obvious exploit?

I am a bit sceptical about the existence of "unfun obvious exploits" in a single player game.

You're barking up the wrong tree. Ever since Sawyer started making controversial statements, saying that "you know, maybe balancing different game elements matters" has been close to sacriledge 'round these parts.

It is much like the retarded attitude of the political left towards arab immigration. Because the far right are racist, generalizing conspiracy theorists with regards to islam, the far left must welcome mysoginist, anti-democratic, arab imams with open arms

 

[evdk]

Grunker
Come on, I've already admitted that you can do a stupid overpowered design in a SP game and that it should be avoided (again, see Septerra Core), it's just that Sawyer as always takes his crusade too far throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

 

[tuluse]

Grunker
Come on, I've already admitted that you can do a stupid overpowered design in a SP game and that it should be avoided (again, see Septerra Core), it's just that Sawyer as always takes his crusade too far throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

He's never actually done this with a game that he's made.

 

[evdk]

Grunker
Come on, I've already admitted that you can do a stupid overpowered design in a SP game and that it should be avoided (again, see Septerra Core), it's just that Sawyer as always takes his crusade too far throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

He's never actually done this with a game that he's made.

He's never really had an opportunity.