RPG Mechanics Made Pointless By Game Features

[Denim Destroyer]

Torches in the Pathfinder games provided you have a caster in the party.

 

[SomeGuyWithAnOpinion]

The design of Dark Souls makes most consumables completely pointless. If I use a consumable buff before a battle, then die, all I have done is waste the consumable.

As a result, they tend to sit in inventories going completely unused, because you want to be skilled enough in a fight to use them without instantly dying - but by the time you reach that level of confidence in a fight, you don't need the consumables anymore.

Things like divine blessings are useful in a pinch, but it's such a rare occurrance (and they are so rarely found in the game) I think I have only ever seen one used once.

To fix this they would either have to move to a standard save-load model, or somehow regenerate consumables. Most are farmable, but a lot are not, and farming isn't really enjoyable or meaningful gameplay anyway.

This was especially noticeable in Sekiro. You are supposed to use Snap Seeds against lady butterfly to completely counter her summoning phase. However, up to that point, the game only gives you about 10 or so, and most people, especially on their first playthrough, are going to die a lot more than 10 times to lady butterfly, so they will have to learn her summoning phase anyway, and so the snap seeds become pointless.

Also, to answer a previous question in this thread: Why are AI teammates always frustrating when they are controlled by the same AI as the enemies?

Usually it's because teammates are far more important and valuable than an enemy. Most mooks go down relatively easily, then have no bearing on the game whatsoever once they die. As a result, them being suicidal or acting stupidly is less of an issue. In a game like New Vegas, where you can miss out on entire questlines because your idiot AI decided to run in and die, is far more frustrating than when an enemy decides to charge me like an idiot. It's also why I recommend everyone who plays NV on hardcore disable companion death, because sooner or later they will do something dumb and get themselves killed, and you will miss out on quests, items, and story as a result.

It gets worse in normie AAA games where a huge consequence is tied to friendly teammates. Like an instant fail if the idiot scientist you're escorting dies. Giving them no self preservation instinct at all makes these sections extremely frustrating to play.

In something like an RTS, having stupid teammate AI is considered part of the game, usually because individual units are less important than an instant fail state. Even then, it can be frustrating in, say, a MOBA, when your character runs in and does something stupid because of bad pathfinding. This is exactly why a significant number of Dota 2 players disable auto-attack and other "AI" mechanics, because the computer is usually too stupid to make decisions, and a single death can sometimes throw the entire game.

The frustration of AI almost entirely relies on how important said AI character is. If you can lose the game instantly because they do something stupid, that's frustrating. Most games use the same terrible AI for teammates that they use for enemies, and so it naturally comes across as more frustrating when there's more at stake.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

advertising skill-checks in games where you can save/load anywhere and trivially game the system

 

[octavius]

Any RPG with consumables such as health potions, scrolls, etc. rendered redundant by inflation in the game economy. You either earn way too much money that there are no hard choices in what you decide to purchase or the items drop too frequently for the items do add a strategic layer to the gameplay.

Out of curiosity, anyone knows an RPG where consumables were not broken? For me, it was either "don't use it because it's too precious, and I will need it later" or "who cares, those can be replenished for cheap in any shop".

The Magic Candle.

 

[Nortar]

Water in Ravenloft : Stone prophet. As longs you have a cleric to cast create water, it is pointless.

Torches in the Pathfinder games provided you have a caster in the party.

If your party is not guaranteed to have a cleric regardless of player's decisions, it's not an obsolete mechanic, it's a benefit of taking a proper class.
It's like saying it's pointless to have enemies as long as you have a warrior who can kill them.

Same with the torches.
Besides, in early stages they can be used as a blunt weapon with a bit of fire damage on top.
Wielding a torch was the only way I could relatively easy deal with the first gelatinous cube in WotR Through the Ashes DLC.

 

[eli]

Every RPG mechanic in a single-player computer game is useless in trying to improve gameplay since RPGs are tabletop social games.

 

[Serus]

Any RPG with consumables such as health potions, scrolls, etc. rendered redundant by inflation in the game economy. You either earn way too much money that there are no hard choices in what you decide to purchase or the items drop too frequently for the items do add a strategic layer to the gameplay.

Out of curiosity, anyone knows an RPG where consumables were not broken? For me, it was either "don't use it because it's too precious, and I will need it later" or "who cares, those can be replenished for cheap in any shop".

The Magic Candle.

KotC2 makes you wan't to use the consumables too. Not perfectly so but it is better than most.

 

[Zombra]

Every RPG mechanic in a single-player computer game is useless in trying to improve gameplay since RPGs are tabletop social games.

Yeah, and books are a stupid invention that fail to recreate the personal performance of campfire stories.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

Every RPG mechanic in a single-player computer game is useless in trying to improve gameplay since RPGs are tabletop social games.

Yeah, and books are a stupid invention that fail to recreate the personal performance of campfire stories.

Thoughts, ERYFKRAD?

 

[SomeGuyWithAnOpinion]

advertising skill-checks in games where you can save/load anywhere and trivially game the system

Certified Bethesda moment

Every single TES game (and Fallout 3) suffers from this a lot.

In fact, save scumming basically renders ALL mechanics pointless (in all games, not just RPGs). What is the value in overcoming an obstacle when there's no cost to failing? You just reload, try again, ad nauseum until you succeed. More often than not in hard games, it's even worse because people save scum until they get a free win because the AI screws up or they get a lucky shot, rather than actually using skill to overcome an obstacle.

The federal government needs to pass a law banning quicksaving/quickloading in all games. It fundamentally undermines their design in all cases.

Checkpoint Saves are the one good thing console gaming actually contributed to the medium.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Certified Bethesda moment

AFAIK this is basically a trend that Obsidian started with FNV.
It's much more recent than people seem to think but every developer seems to do it now.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Level scaling makes the core of RPG gameplay, i.e. levelling, pointless.

 

[Darth Canoli]

The federal government needs to pass a law banning quicksaving/quickloading in all games. It fundamentally undermines their design in all cases.

I've never played a game which reloads for you when you fail a skill check.
So, yes, it's on you, if you lack the mental fortitude to stick with your choices and failures, play FPS instead.

Level scaling makes the core of RPG gameplay, i.e. levelling, pointless.

I'd rather not have level scaling but in open worlds, some smart, limited, area based level scaling like in wizardry 8 (could be improved) would save the day.
Because what's worse than fine-tuned level scaling?
Exploring an area with level 1 monsters and cheap loot when you're level 10...

 

[rusty_shackleford]

I've never played a game which reloads for you when you fail a skill check.
So, yes, it's on you, if you lack the mental fortitude to stick with your choices and failures, play FPS instead.

agreed, games should come with all cheats pre-enabled and hotkeyed, it's your fault if you choose to use godmode after all

 

[HansDampf]

From the Fallout 1 manual:

Save Often
You have ten save game slots. Use them well. Before you get to
a new location, save your game. Before entering a dangerous looking
building, save your game. Before talking to an important looking
NPC, save your game. And use all of your save game slots. Don’t
keep saving over slot 1. If something goes drastically wrong, it’s better
to be able to move a couple of saved games back and restore from
there instead of having to start over from the very beginning.

RPGs want you to savescum.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

advertising skill-checks in games where you can save/load anywhere and trivially game the system

Are there any games that roll all dialogue skill checks in advance at the start of the game and just add modifiers at the time of use?

 

[antimeridian]

From the Fallout 1 manual:

Save Often
You have ten save game slots. Use them well. Before you get to
a new location, save your game. Before entering a dangerous looking
building, save your game. Before talking to an important looking
NPC, save your game. And use all of your save game slots. Don’t
keep saving over slot 1. If something goes drastically wrong, it’s better
to be able to move a couple of saved games back and restore from
there instead of having to start over from the very beginning.

RPGs want you to savescum.

 

[Bastardchops]

Reputation and karma, usually.
Resting in most D&D-inspired games.

What's good about Knights of the Chalice is that you can only rest at campfires.

 

[SomeGuyWithAnOpinion]

Certified Bethesda moment

AFAIK this is basically a trend that Obsidian started with FNV.

Hard disagree

FO3 and FNV are very similar in terms of gameplay, so Obsidian likely inherited a lot of bad from Bethesda, but what they DID change was usually for the better.

For example:
Fallout 3 speech checks are a quicksavers wet dream. Have 1 point in speech and so have a 1% success on a check? Just quickload a bunch of times. Meanwhile in FNV, unless you have the skill, you will NEVER pass the check.
Pickpocket is equally fucked in both games, though, which was basically directly imported (in it's broken state) from Oblivion.

I guess FNV might be more on the nose for some people, because FNV is considered good while FO3 is considered bad, despite inheriting a lot of the horrible gameplay design of Fallout 3

Reputation and karma, usually.
Resting in most D&D-inspired games.

What's good about Knights of the Chalice is that you can only rest at campfires.

Pillars of Eternity also has a pretty decent camping system too. For those not in the know, you have a separate special item slot for camping supplies, the max amount being dependent on difficulty, which you can buy or (rarely) find in the world. Every time you rest, it uses a camping supplies.

I also really like the resting system in Darkest Dungeon, but that's about the only good thing in that game.

PoE has a lot of flaws and suffers from a lot of problems (many inherited from bad infinity-engine game design from "back when games were good", at least according to neckbeards), but it's resting system is miles above any DND CRPG

 

[Nano]

From the Fallout 1 manual:

Save Often
You have ten save game slots. Use them well. Before you get to
a new location, save your game. Before entering a dangerous looking
building, save your game. Before talking to an important looking
NPC, save your game. And use all of your save game slots. Don’t
keep saving over slot 1. If something goes drastically wrong, it’s better
to be able to move a couple of saved games back and restore from
there instead of having to start over from the very beginning.

RPGs want you to savescum.

Sometimes you needed to go back to previous saves because of bugs, you know.

 

[Norfleet]

Are there any games that roll all dialogue skill checks in advance at the start of the game and just add modifiers at the time of use?

Yes, there are games that essentially used a pre-seeded generator so that you know what's going to happen before it happens. Of course, this lends itself to its own peculiarities.

The lesson here is that immediate macroscopic effects should never be chance-based in a single player game unless you WANT people to save-scum it. Unless the effect happens too frequently and has too small of an individual effect for the player bother with (individual attack and damage rolls, for instance, in an environment where many are made), you can assume that the player has a specific goal in mind, to either intentionally succeed or intentionally fail. Usually the former, since the latter pretty much never results in interesting gameplay. Which is itself its own topic: The lack of interesting failure mechanics: NOT succeeding at something pretty much never leads to interesting gameplay, merely in being locked out of content. In a tabletop game, if you fail at it, you end up going into an entirely different branch of gameplay that the DM now makes up (otherwise he's not gonna let you fail because it would be a huge headache for him). In a CRPG, the only result tends to be that you get locked out of gameplay. There is no failure state to explore, thus, no reason not to reload because otherwise you're experiencing a diminished experience.

 

[Cyberarmy]

Skillchecks, but you have a party that can cover every skill easily.
Limited rests, but lots and lots of consumables.
Consumables, but with minor effects and low uptime.
Skill trees, but early skills, spells became useless after you pick an upgrade one.
Crafting, but you get better stuff easily, quickly.
C&C, but you got the same outcome anyway.

 

[gurugeorge]

You're never going to get away from the "meta" problem, it's perennial. Yes, not saving is the most immersive way to play, but we all have real lives that occasionally call at awkward moments. The best compromise is to have a rolling autosave (with say 5 slots in case of accidents and bugs) with at the very least autosave on exit as well as autosave after resting at sensible specific in-world spots (inns, campfires). Autosave after combats and important skill checks should also be mandatory, I think. With that combination, you still have the benefit of the player not having to think about saving at all.

The benefit of a manual save/quicksave system is really just to be able to try out alternative responses to see what happens, but some people love that (and of course reviewers and people making guides desperately need it). So you should have both, and the player can then just forget about saves (and let the autosave system do its thing) or use the manual save system, with an option to turn the manual save system off.

Then you can have checks made on percentage chance, which is the proper simulationist way to do it (higher skill stat-wise increasing the chance of success but never totally guaranteeing it - just like in real life).

 

[Forseti]

TBS/Xcom style gameplay, but it's never challenging enough to require varied tactics, so it's just tedious turn-passing - thinking of the Harebrained Shadowruns here.

Also, re: save scumming, I thought Fallout 4 survival mode did this perfectly, at least early game before your character gets too OP. That awful feeling of "fuck. I just lost an hour of progress and some great items" is painful but exactly what games should strive to achieve. High penalty for failure makes your successes feel rewarding.

 

[SomeGuyWithAnOpinion]

You're never going to get away from the "meta" problem, it's perennial. Yes, not saving is the most immersive way to play, but we all have real lives that occasionally call at awkward moments. The best compromise is to have a rolling autosave (with say 5 slots in case of accidents and bugs) with at the very least autosave on exit as well as autosave after resting at sensible specific in-world spots (inns, campfires). Autosave after combats and important skill checks should also be mandatory, I think. With that combination, you still have the benefit of the player not having to think about saving at all.

The benefit of a manual save/quicksave system is really just to be able to try out alternative responses to see what happens, but some people love that (and of course reviewers and people making guides desperately need it). So you should have both, and the player can then just forget about saves (and let the autosave system do its thing) or use the manual save system, with an option to turn the manual save system off.

Then you can have checks made on percentage chance, which is the proper simulationist way to do it (higher skill stat-wise increasing the chance of success but never totally guaranteeing it - just like in real life).

Quicksaving is very abusable and people saying "well just don't abuse it then" don't realise how easy it is when it's RIGHT THERE, and once you've done the same section 3-4 times it can become REALLY tempting.

I largely think some sort of checkpoint or accomplishment based saving is the way to go. It usually means you can redo large, game changing decisions if you change your mind, but you can't do things like reroll chests (unless they are right near a checkpoint, but that's a separate issue).

Ideally a checkpoint saving system that lets you save freely at the cost of resources or risk is usually better than a "do a thing, get a checkpoint save" in non-linear games as you may return to an area, and "save on travel" type system are usually both boring and abusable (just travel for free save points, etc)

This is basically my tier list for save systems:

• God tier: Save points/rooms with inherent risk when saving (Alien Isolation), Save points/rooms with resource cost (Resident Evil)
• Excellent Tier: Save freely at points/rooms with no resource cost (Metroid?, Fallout 4 Survival Mode), Limited manual saves per level (Hitman). Time based saving, such as X free saves per hour (Fallout: NV Limited Game Savings mod)
• Pretty Good tier: suspend saving with world resets and resource permanence (Dark Souls. It's only in this tier because it has implications for single-use or limited resources, meaning they usually get hoarded or wasted which I don't like. Others may put this in higher tiers though.). Checkpoint saves with additional save or respawn points that cost resources (System Shock 2 with manual saving disabled).
• Decent Tier: Checkpoints with 1 or limited number of lives (Halo, millions of other games), suspend saving with permadeath (roguelikes).
• Shit Tier: Manual Saving with Autosaves but no quicksave key (a small handful of games), suspend saving with very limited resource lost on death (Diablo 2, WoW, most MMOs and "multiplayer focused" games). Limited lives with Infinite continues with little consequence (modern Mario games). Checkpoint Saving with permanent progression (Doom 2016, Doom Eternal)
• Irredeemably insanely shitty tier: Free respawning with enemies maintaining health values (Sven Coop, most other older coop games including Doom), manual saving with a dedicated quicksave button and autosaves (Bioshock, Skyrim, System Shock 2, almost every other PC game in existence). Restart level with nothing on death and free saving (Doom)