Codex Interview RPG Codex Interview: Colin McComb on Writing for Torment: Tides of Numenera

[Haba]

Maybe dying should be optional "hardcore" mode?

What's so great about losing the game. Justify its existence, Colin. What fun is it adding?

 

[Zed]

Pissing off your customers is actually a bad thing.

Except that in this case, most of their customers have already purchased the game. They're like a second-term president now.

You're mistaken if you think Kickstarter backers will represent a majority of their total costumer base. It may represent a majority of diehard fans, yes, but not sales.

 

[RedSocialKnight]

Maybe dying should be optional "hardcore" mode?

What's so great about losing the game. Justify its existence, Colin. What fun is it adding?

Makes choices weightier.

Seems to me that as Colin describes it, these game-overs would be the result not of bad luck in combat or whatever (which we know DOESN'T cause game-over, but just sends you on a detour to the netherworld), but of choosing to take the storyline in certain directions.

If that's the case, it's integral to the structure of the game and couldn't very well just get switched on and off.

 

[Mrowak]

It was annoying that every question started with "PST was shit in this regard...how will you do it in TToN2". grotsnik do you even like the game? Apart from that, good interview.

Well, when Crooked Bee suggested we try and do something with Colin (and this was back when the Kickstarter was still active), I trawled the Codex a bit for questions/angles that might not have been brought up or fully explored in the main slew of interviews. I spotted a few people talking about the inconsequentiality and isolation of the factions in PS:T (particularly how the Godsmen and Anarchists fell apart) and how they hoped this wouldn't be replicated, another few talking about how things went rapidly downhill post-Sigil (which is so often discussed, and which I do wholeheartedly agree with) and why that might have been, and then Grunker suggested asking about the problem of combat as an arbitrary obstacle, so I tried to bring up all of those. They may have brought a bit of a negative/critical slant to the interview, since there were only ten questions overall, but I definitely wasn't trying to come at it from a personal perspective, no!

I'll be restating the obvious, but this interview was conducted as every Codexian interview should have been. It was very polite and positive while remaining inquisitive and relevant. It was easy to notice you've done your homework owing to which you've asked the right questions your audience would be interested in while leaving your interlocutor enough leeway to express himself in an adequate manner. It was neither whiny, submissive pandering, nor it was, so called, sensationalist, "aggressive" style of journalism.

In fact this and Gragt 's latest article are the finest pieces of gaming journalism I've seen this year. Keep them coming!

 

[Konjad]

Ah, yes, I log on into facebook and what do I see?

I wonder if people who 'like' this are codexers... well, surely some of them. I'm pretty sure the dude who shares it is

 

[Haba]

Where do you think I got my hitlist data in the first place?

 

[Grunker]

grotsnik, please become content staff. That shit was baller

It's refreshing how your interview is extremely inquisitive and critical but always polite, and the result is very honest answers.

 

[Cosmo]

grotsnik, please become content staff. That shit was baller

It's refreshing how your interview is extremely inquisitive and critical but always polite, and the result is very honest answers.

My thoughts exactly. That was a very good job.

 

[janjetina]

Timers should be present in the game if they make sense within the game world. Good examples where timers and limits made sense were the Spirit eater curse and the Spirit meter in MOTB and the Water chip time limit in Fallout (however mutant invasion timers affecting ending slides as well as the 'final' mutant invasion timer needed more work to communicate urgency to the player). Sliding of Curst into Carceri subplot in PS:T could have used some kind of timer, as well as much more detail and multiple outcomes but, as we know it, the whole subplot was railroaded into a single outcome. If the developers want to impose urgency on the player, the urgency should be real. If the PC encounters an NPC bleeding to death (which is clearly communicated to the PC) and PC chooses to explore the area and collect loot instead of trying to stop the bleeding, the NPC should bleed to death (or maybe be helped by another character), which could (should) have some far reaching consequences on the game world.

One important note, that needs to be repeated: timers should always be in game world time. They should never be in real (player) time, like in action games.

 

[Rake]

Timers should be present in the game if they make sense within the game world. Good examples where timers and limits made sense were the Spirit eater curse and the Spirit meter in MOTB and the Water chip time limit in Fallout (however mutant invasion timers affecting ending slides as well as the 'final' mutant invasion timer needed more work to communicate urgency to the player). Sliding of Curst into Carceri subplot in PS:T could have used some kind of timer, as well as much more detail and multiple outcomes but, as we know it, the whole subplot was railroaded into a single outcome. If the developers want to impose urgency on the player, the urgency should be real. If the PC encounters an NPC bleeding to death (which is clearly communicated to the PC) and PC chooses to explore the area and collect loot instead of trying to stop the bleeding, the NPC should bleed to death (or maybe be helped by another character), which could (should) have some far reaching consequences on the game world.

One important note, that needs to be repeated: timers should always be in game world time. They should never be in real (player) time, like in action games.

I don't disagree that Fallout's and espesially Spirit Eater were good timers, but the point is that both were hated by most people. You can argue why they are good with examples, that a blanket "time limits sucz" is idiotic etc. but the fact remains that people in general hate this feature. They are used to taking their time, sleep after every fight, go resque cats from trees etc. while the world is burning. And they don't want to change their behavor.

 

[Roguey]

Maybe dying should be optional "hardcore" mode?

What's so great about losing the game. Justify its existence, Colin. What fun is it adding?

Avellone had similar thoughts regarding dying, hence Planescape Torment ("the idea of saving and reloading, for example, struck me as pointless and nothing more than an excuse to stop playing the game rather than continuing to have fun").

Makes choices weightier.

Seems to me that as Colin describes it, these game-overs would be the result not of bad luck in combat or whatever (which we know DOESN'T cause game-over, but just sends you on a detour to the netherworld), but of choosing to take the storyline in certain directions.

If that's the case, it's integral to the structure of the game and couldn't very well just get switched on and off.

Seems like a clumsy way of forcing "replayability" to me from the way he described it. Informed choices are better than uninformed choices. I can't think of any RPGs that force you to abandon content because you took too long or or did too many. No, not Fallout, the only pressure there is from traveling and resting-to-heal, not doing things in the hubs themselves.

 

[Infinitron]

I can't think of any RPGs that force you to abandon content because you took too long or or did too many.

Although maybe the game would allow you to return later on.

 

[janjetina]

I don't disagree that Fallout's and espesially Spirit Eater were good timers, but the point is that both were hated by most people. You can argue why they are good with examples, that a blanket "time limits sucz" is idiotic etc. but the fact remains that people in general hate this feature. They are used to taking their time, sleep after every fight, go resque cats from trees etc. while the world is burning. And they don't want to change their behavor.

In an RPG, plausibility and consistence of the setting should be high priority. People who like RPGs should appreciate that, and the fact is that sometimes timers (hard or soft, depending on a situation) are needed to maintain setting plausibility and consistence. People who prefer their 'press an awesome button to win' comfort to consistency and plausibility of the setting are not RPG players, and are irrelevant when Kickstarted RPGs are concerned, as they don't want and probably can't afford (by virtue of being to stupid to breathe autonomously, let alone earn spare cash) to donate.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Maybe dying should be optional "hardcore" mode?

Are you being serious? Just curious.

 

[evdk]

He's making fun of Roguey using reductio ad absurdum.

I hope.

 

[Barghest]

People who prefer their 'press an awesome button to win' comfort to consistency and plausibility of the setting are not RPG players, and are irrelevant when Kickstarted RPGs are concerned, as they don't want and probably can't afford (by virtue of being to stupid to breathe autonomously, let alone earn spare cash) to donate.

I'm still waiting for examples where time limits made the game better?

In my opinion the time limits on Fallout and MotB made them worse, and it seems the developers picked-up on this. I'm sure that there are a lot of people like myself who don't to be pushed by time limits, and I really don't like fighting against a ticking clock.

 

[Infinitron]

The MotB timer was good for one thing - it stopped rest spamming.

Anyway, I don't think there's any chance that Torment is going to have a timer in the traditional sense. See my posts earlier ITT.

 

[Barghest]

The MotB timer was good for one thing - it stopped rest spamming.

That I can agree with, but it could have been dealt with by other game mechanics. MotB combat was terribad anyway.

 

[Barghest]

And before any meme-spouting morons say anything, I'm not against time limits on quests. There should be multiple success and failure states, not a simple binary win/lose on quest time limits.

But the whole game tied to a ticking clock? Fuck that shit.

 

[Gozma]

MotB and Fallout would be my examples of games that were better for their time limits. They create game tension (game tension as in, they can be lost) and more importantly, they create the possibility of opportunity cost in the game. I remember having a real sense that "time is getting short" and was forgoing time burners like caravan escorts when I finally found the lead to Necropolis in my original playthrough of FO. I think a no-craving run of MotB does nothing good with the mechanic, but a full craving run has a unique and interesting effect on how you are playing an RPG and how you interact with NPCs.

Most people complain about them because their digestion has become accustomed to Bethesda style comfort food RPGs at this point where time is locked in a perpetual twilight and you can't quite remember after playing if you became president of the dogfuckers guild before or after you were president of the anti-dogfucker league

 

[Cowboy Moment]

People who prefer their 'press an awesome button to win' comfort to consistency and plausibility of the setting are not RPG players, and are irrelevant when Kickstarted RPGs are concerned, as they don't want and probably can't afford (by virtue of being to stupid to breathe autonomously, let alone earn spare cash) to donate.

I'm still waiting for examples where time limits made the game better?

In my opinion the time limits on Fallout and MotB made them worse, and it seems the developers picked-up on this. I'm sure that there are a lot of people like myself who don't to be pushed by time limits, and I really don't like fighting against a ticking clock.

MotB doesn't actually have a time limit, it has a choice between becoming more powerful and having to maintain that power (by eating more and more spirits) or ignoring the whole thing. Which is an awesome idea, one of the few examples of proper integration between story and gameplay in an RPG. But no, says the explorefag, if narrative logic gets in the way of me aimlessly walking around for two hours without doing anything, then too bad.

Seriously, you can all but ignore the Spirit Eater mechanic if you just suppress your hunger. It's the best example of C&C MotB has, and if you think removing it would make a game whose narrative and C&C are its best features better, then maybe you shouldn't play MotB, but Oblivion? You can ignore the demonic invasion happening around you and just look for herbs in a forest instead, the Daedra will wait.

 

[evdk]

I've played Fallout for the first time at the tender age of fucking-puberty-hormones-induced-idiocy years old and the time limit was not a problem for me, in fact I am pretty sure I didn't even get close to it. For desperate people there's even the possibility of supplying the vault with water via caravans from Hub (which does not even have any negative consequences for some reason). The limit helps you to feel like there is a real urgency to your quest but it's soft enough not to fuck up your game unless you are an absolutely terrible player, in which case I have little sympathy for your plight I'm afraid.

 

[Roguey]

MotB doesn't actually have a time limit, it has a choice between becoming more powerful and having to maintain that power (by eating more and more spirits) or ignoring the whole thing. Which is an awesome idea, one of the few examples of proper integration between story and gameplay in an RPG. But no, says the explorefag, if narrative logic gets in the way of me aimlessly walking around for two hours without doing anything, then too bad.

Seriously, you can all but ignore the Spirit Eater mechanic if you just suppress your hunger. It's the best example of C&C MotB has, and if you think removing it would make a game whose narrative and C&C are its best features better, then maybe you shouldn't play MotB, but Oblivion? You can ignore the demonic invasion happening around you and just look for herbs in a forest instead, the Daedra will wait.

http://www.formspring.me/GZiets/q/324386699893296027

But here’s the problem. Many – possibly most – RPG players like to take their time exploring the world, talking to NPCs, discovering secret areas, and completing side quests. The spirit meter actively discourages this style of play, encouraging the player to stick to the main quest and resolve the curse as quickly as possible. So unless players found a way to “cheat” the curse (which many did), they were discouraged from exploring our side content and enjoying the game the way they wanted to enjoy it.

Years later, I had some discussions with Josh Sawyer about this, and I now find myself on the opposite side of the debate. I think a player’s sense of being “cursed” could be reinforced in other, less heavy-handed ways – for example, NPC reactions, scripted events, visual changes, and settlements that won’t admit the player (forcing you to find a more dangerous way inside and be “on edge” at the prospect of discovery whenever you are there). I think we could also have found less fatal ways to create the sense of a curse that is “draining” the player – for example, your abilities deteriorate if you don’t feed, but you don’t actually die, making the curse impactful but not a game-stopper. Or maybe even a “hard core” mode where the curse was fatal, and a “normal” mode where it wasn’t.

Ultimately, I want players to be able to enjoy the game without having to resort to cheats or exploits, and for many players, I feel like the spirit meter became an obstacle to enjoying our content.

 

[janjetina]

For desperate people there's even the possibility of supplying the vault with water via caravans from Hub (which does not even have any negative consequences for some reason). The limit helps you to feel like there is a real urgency to your quest but it's soft enough not to fuck up your game unless you are an absolutely terrible player, in which case I have little sympathy for your plight I'm afraid.

If I remember correctly, there is a negative consequence of shortening the mutant invasion time limit, but that one was even more generous than the water chip one.

 

[Cowboy Moment]

MotB doesn't actually have a time limit, it has a choice between becoming more powerful and having to maintain that power (by eating more and more spirits) or ignoring the whole thing. Which is an awesome idea, one of the few examples of proper integration between story and gameplay in an RPG. But no, says the explorefag, if narrative logic gets in the way of me aimlessly walking around for two hours without doing anything, then too bad.

Seriously, you can all but ignore the Spirit Eater mechanic if you just suppress your hunger. It's the best example of C&C MotB has, and if you think removing it would make a game whose narrative and C&C are its best features better, then maybe you shouldn't play MotB, but Oblivion? You can ignore the demonic invasion happening around you and just look for herbs in a forest instead, the Daedra will wait.

http://www.formspring.me/GZiets/q/324386699893296027

But here’s the problem. Many – possibly most – RPG players like to take their time exploring the world, talking to NPCs, discovering secret areas, and completing side quests. The spirit meter actively discourages this style of play, encouraging the player to stick to the main quest and resolve the curse as quickly as possible. So unless players found a way to “cheat” the curse (which many did), they were discouraged from exploring our side content and enjoying the game the way they wanted to enjoy it.

Years later, I had some discussions with Josh Sawyer about this, and I now find myself on the opposite side of the debate. I think a player’s sense of being “cursed” could be reinforced in other, less heavy-handed ways – for example, NPC reactions, scripted events, visual changes, and settlements that won’t admit the player (forcing you to find a more dangerous way inside and be “on edge” at the prospect of discovery whenever you are there). I think we could also have found less fatal ways to create the sense of a curse that is “draining” the player – for example, your abilities deteriorate if you don’t feed, but you don’t actually die, making the curse impactful but not a game-stopper. Or maybe even a “hard core” mode where the curse was fatal, and a “normal” mode where it wasn’t.

Ultimately, I want players to be able to enjoy the game without having to resort to cheats or exploits, and for many players, I feel like the spirit meter became an obstacle to enjoying our content.

Erm, so? He's saying that it was a good idea, but the penalties were perhaps too harsh. Which is a roundabout way of saying the audience is a bunch of drooling retards, which is likely true.

I don't really get it though, my first playthrough of MotB was as an evil character with maxed hunger, and I explored everything just fine. In fact, I often explored stuff very meticulously in search of more spirits to devour. The one annoying thing about it was how you needed to carefully bring humans down to low health before being able to devour them, I wish you could just do it to fresh corpses instead.

 

[Infinitron]

For desperate people there's even the possibility of supplying the vault with water via caravans from Hub (which does not even have any negative consequences for some reason). The limit helps you to feel like there is a real urgency to your quest but it's soft enough not to fuck up your game unless you are an absolutely terrible player, in which case I have little sympathy for your plight I'm afraid.

If I remember correctly, there is a negative consequence of shortening the mutant invasion time limit, but that one was even more generous than the water chip one.

Mutant invasions of every town except Necropolis were removed in the patch. (although confusingly, mutant invasions still occur in the endgame; the endgame will tell you that mutants invaded towns, even though ingame they were still intact)