sawyer wants rpg to evolve

[JarlFrank]

F:NV is proof positive that you can make an FPS that’s also a legit RPG.

You can make an FPS that is also a legit RPG if you use an engine that isn't pure shit and create a system of RPG mechanics that interplay well with the FPS gameplay.

 

[Delterius]

Dark Messiah proves you don't need RPG systems as long as your right foot is a good kicker.

 

[Grampy_Bone]

Dark Messiah proves you don't need RPG systems as long as your right foot is a good kicker.

They really should have had a Kicking skill tree and allowed you to equip different boots with different speed, reach, and knockback ratings.

 

[FeelTheRads]

F:NV is proof positive that you can make an FPS that’s also a legit RPG.

Not really.
NV is a shit FPS. Only thing it's proof of is how badly you can ruin a game by putting it into a genre it doesn't fit. Or that Bethesda is shit at gameplay. Whichever.

This. The cool things like the skill/stat checks and reactivity involving the factions are cancelled by the sandbox approach. The world is so big that most people don't have the patience to walk through all that again in order to reveal what they are missing,

Not what I meant, but sure, that too.

In fact, I didn't even have the patience to complete it once. Maybe if I had discovered the console command to speed up walking earlier I could've made it, but in the end I just gave up. I stopped being impressed by someone's ability to script different paths, and didn't really care about the "written assets".. erm, I mean themes of the quests and the story or whatever to bother finishing it.

Horrible gameplay, avoid it whenever you can.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

Yeah, roasts aside, 90's era throwback RPGs are basically a dead end.

AODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODURAODUR

goddamnit

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

You can make an FPS that is also a legit RPG if you use an engine that isn't pure shit and create a system of RPG mechanics that interplay well with the FPS gameplay.

I don't see how that can be possible if you are a turn-based-fag. You need to rely on RT combat systems for that to happen, but it would be a waste of mechanics to invest on RT with engrossing mecahnics. You also need to consider the limitations and expectations in the FPS genre, that is, usual playthroughs of 80-100hs. That, plus the costs of alternative choices, means that any serious investment on reactivity is either costly or pointless. This is not just a matter of implementation of ideas. The alternative gameplay prevents certain things to shine.

 

[Citizen]

F:NV is proof positive that you can make an FPS that’s also a legit RPG.

But what is a FPS? Most of the good RPGs have first person perspective, and World of Xeen, for example, allows shooting distant enemies (in real time, turn-based combat doesn't start untill they get close). EotB and LoL are action games with FPP and shooting, and they are also considered RPGs. Post-mandate-of-heaven M&Ms play like shooters, and they are also considered RPGs. People consider pure FPS games like Deus Ex and Ultima Underworld/System Shock RPGs. So I guess it was proved more than two decades ago.

 

[Quillon]

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

So Sawyer is assuming that the essence of RPGs is C&C because of the words "role-playing" in the abbreviation. That's retarded heideggerian reasoning. By that logic, we should think that Calculus should be about the use of small pebbles from an abacus, because that's the etymology of the word. Brilliant. Let me repeat this post:

The risk with these discussions about cRPG definitions is giving too much importance to the elements of the definiens of your definition at the expenses of actual gameplay elements that are integral to the genre. Let’s suppose for the sake of argument that cRPGs are attempts to surpass unnecessary challenges where players’ abilities are represented by stats and skills in a gameplay that involves narrative choices. By that definition T:ToN is a genuine cRPG, but Wizardry is not genuine cRPG. However, and that’s the catch, T:ToN has shallow character building, bad character progression, awful exploration, bad combat system, horrendous itemization and superficial gameplay, whereas Wizardry has engrossing character building, excellent character progression, rewarding exploration and good itemization. So at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter that T:ToN does fit our definition of genuine cRPGs, but Wizardry doesn’t, because the first one fails in everything that we should expect from a cRPG, whereas the last one does so many things well in a way that is consistent with one would expect from a stat/skill informed gameplay that is a much more real cRPG. Another way you can think of it is that pure combat heavy stat games are like heavy combat P&P campaigns designed by a DM that focus on combat. No one would be retarded enough to suggest that your session was not genuine RPG because it was all combat, because the gameplay was stat/skill determined, etc.

I could also spend the whole day discussing how some of these gameplay elements (character progression, levelling, etc) are not essential to a cRPG in the strict sense of the term, but should be implemented in every cRPG because they are fulfilling for this type of gameplay. Once again, the rational reconstructions we can come up have little importance compared to the realities and specificities of the type of gameplay that we are trying to reinforce and flourish. Unless, of course, we are interested in something altogether different, like FPS. In that case, we should throw in the trash all that AD&D and PnP bullshit about dice, stats, etc. But then again, why bother calling this cRPG if we are obviously doing something else?

Tl;dr It's not a matter about the meaning of words RPG considered in abstract, but a matter of knowning the history of the genre and their distinctive characteristics. Instead of labelling everything that we want to play or sell as cRPGs (FPSs, action games, etc) and trying to make them into something they are not, we should be focusing even more on their PnP origins and refining the traditional formula.

 

[FreeKaner]

A game is a RPG if it has roleplaying, duh. If a game does not provide agency to the player to play as their character, it's not a RPG. That's why diablo isn't a RPG while KOTOR2 is.

 

[Quillon]

So Sawyer is assuming that the essence of RPGs is C&C because of the words "role-playing" in the abbreviation. That's retarded heideggerian reasoning. By that logic, we should think that Calculus should be about the use of small pebbles from an abacus, because that's the etymology of the word. Brilliant.

Yeah he should have assumed that the essence of RPGs is combat cos the word "game" in the abbreviation :ehue:

 

[Latro]

A game is a RPG if it has roleplaying, duh. If a game does not provide agency to the player to play as their character, it's not a RPG. That's why diablo isn't a RPG while KOTOR2 is.

rpgs kinda suck now that I think about it

 

[AwesomeButton]

And I would say it's still not as traditional as I would have liked.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

A game is a RPG if it has roleplaying, duh. If a game does not provide agency to the player to play as their character, it's not a RPG. That's why diablo isn't a RPG while KOTOR2 is.

But it is not just any role-playing is it? You need things such as stats, skills, etc. Besides, what really matters is whether some of the things we expect from a cRPG are well implemented (character progression, exploration, combat system, etc). A game that is mostly linear and is "not a real cRPG" can be more true to the genre than a shallow game that provides tons of choices, but it fails in everything.

 

[FreeKaner]

A game is a RPG if it has roleplaying, duh. If a game does not provide agency to the player to play as their character, it's not a RPG. That's why diablo isn't a RPG while KOTOR2 is.

But it is not just any role-playing is it? You need things such as stats, skills, etc.

There should be some element where mechanics should have impact on the resolution of narrative, yes. However that's the tool of execution in the roleplaying, not the roleplaying in and itself.

 

[Blakemoreland Hybrid Boss]

A game is a RPG if it has roleplaying, duh. If a game does not provide agency to the player to play as their character, it's not a RPG. That's why diablo isn't a RPG while KOTOR2 is.

But it is not just any role-playing is it? You need things such as stats, skills, etc.

There should be some element where mechanics should have impact on the resolution of narrative, yes. However that's the tool of execution in the roleplaying, not the roleplaying in and itself.

It's not just that. See the modification of the post above. You guys are giving too much importance to one aspect (narrative choice) at the expense of everything else. Character progression, character building, exploration, combat systems and a bunch of other elements are just as important. If the gameplay revolves around narrative choices in dialogue trees and bad combat system and fluffy character building, you have a lame cRPG.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

However that's the tool of execution in the roleplaying, not the roleplaying in and itself.

One could argue that it is. The perfect cRPG would let your build guide the game, not the game guide your build, no? Notice the assumption that "builds" are inherent to cRPGs
WHICH THEY ARE GODDAMNIT

not the point obviously but couldn't resist

 

[CptMace]

 

[AwesomeButton]

Let him (do whatever he wants). Let him ignore traditionalists, let's hope that the mainstream and traditionalists both won't ignore him after he is done.

 

[Infinitron]

Wild felipepepe and Marat Sar appear

 

[JarlFrank]

You can make an FPS that is also a legit RPG if you use an engine that isn't pure shit and create a system of RPG mechanics that interplay well with the FPS gameplay.

I don't see how that can be possible if you are a turn-based-fag. You need to rely on RT combat systems for that to happen, but it would be a waste of mechanics to invest on RT with engrossing mecahnics. You also need to consider the limitations and expectations in the FPS genre, that is, usual playthroughs of 80-100hs. That, plus the costs of alternative choices, means that any serious investment on reactivity is either costly or pointless. This is not just a matter of implementation of ideas. The alternative gameplay prevents certain things to shine.

I'm not a turn-based-fag. I love turn-based like any other Codexer, but it's not the only valid combat mechanic for an RPG. It's definitely not a waste of mechanics to invest in good action RT combat with engrossing mechanics, completely disagree with you there. I love good FPS games, both oldschool (Quake and Unreal) and WW2 military (Red Orchestra 2), and the basic shooter gameplay can easily be combined with meaningful RPG mechanics. Heck, 3D action RPGs can offer some incredibly awesome dungeon design and exploration. Morrowind had amazing exploration, Gothic 2 had amazing exploration, Deus Ex had top notch level design and meaningful differences based on your character build.

Yeah Morrowind and Deus Ex both had shit combat, but it doesn't have to be shit. Just do a skill progression like Gothic where your actual physical skill with the weapon becomes better (in case of a shooter: less weapon sway, faster reloading, quicker transition to aim-by-sights, higher accuracy when hipshooting, etc etc etc) and it's gonna be a great game both as an RPG and as an FPS.

I don't see how an FPS would inherently make alternative choices in quests more expensive to implement, unless you specifically mean that the close perspective of first person makes voice acting every dialogue line absolutely necessary (it doesn't - see: Morrowind). Heck, Gothic 2 has a bunch of quests with multiple approaches, and three different factions that are mutually exclusive to join. Deus Ex has plenty of different approaches and some minor story choices, and different endings. And both of these games have full voice acting and animated conversations. Same with VtM: Bloodlines. Here you got not one, not two, but three games that prove a high degree of reactivity is very much possible within 1st or 3rd person action RPGs.

I don't see any inherent limitations or expectations of the FPS genre holding first person action RPGs back, quite the contrary. The fact that those games are primarily RPGs changes the expectations of the potential audience for the game to be more RPG-like than pure FPS-like when it comes to game length and interactivity with the world.

 

[FeelTheRads]

Wow, he keeps saying more and more retarded shit. Somebody shut up this fucking retard.

herp derp genre gatekeeping

Why the fuck do we have genres then? Why the fuck you insist putting a genre label on whatever the fuck you do if you don't like gatekeeping? Just call it JSG or whatever the fuck.

And wow, Mass Effect got flack for being a shooter pretending to be an RPG. Yeah, I wonder why people who want RPGs don't want games that are not RPGs.

It's like waah waah I can't extend the definition of a genre so I can slap it on whatever I do... BUT I TOTALLY HATE GENRES!!!

 

[Fairfax]

Bethesda's "new direction" in Obsidian's hands = New Vegas so only worry if you don't like NV.

Except most people responsible for FNV being good no longer work at Obsidian.

 

[Elex]

So Sawyer is assuming that the essence of RPGs is C&C because of the words "role-playing" in the abbreviation. That's retarded heideggerian reasoning. By that logic, we should think that Calculus should be about the use of small pebbles from an abacus, because that's the etymology of the word. Brilliant. Let me repeat this post:

The risk with these discussions about cRPG definitions is giving too much importance to the elements of the definiens of your definition at the expenses of actual gameplay elements that are integral to the genre. Let’s suppose for the sake of argument that cRPGs are attempts to surpass unnecessary challenges where players’ abilities are represented by stats and skills in a gameplay that involves narrative choices. By that definition T:ToN is a genuine cRPG, but Wizardry is not genuine cRPG. However, and that’s the catch, T:ToN has shallow character building, bad character progression, awful exploration, bad combat system, horrendous itemization and superficial gameplay, whereas Wizardry has engrossing character building, excellent character progression, rewarding exploration and good itemization. So at the end of the day it doesn’t really matter that T:ToN does fit our definition of genuine cRPGs, but Wizardry doesn’t, because the first one fails in everything that we should expect from a cRPG, whereas the last one does so many things well in a way that is consistent with one would expect from a stat/skill informed gameplay that is a much more real cRPG. Another way you can think of it is that pure combat heavy stat games are like heavy combat P&P campaigns designed by a DM that focus on combat. No one would be retarded enough to suggest that your session was not genuine RPG because it was all combat, because the gameplay was stat/skill determined, etc.

I could also spend the whole day discussing how some of these gameplay elements (character progression, levelling, etc) are not essential to a cRPG in the strict sense of the term, but should be implemented in every cRPG because they are fulfilling for this type of gameplay. Once again, the rational reconstructions we can come up have little importance compared to the realities and specificities of the type of gameplay that we are trying to reinforce and flourish. Unless, of course, we are interested in something altogether different, like FPS. In that case, we should throw in the trash all that AD&D and PnP bullshit about dice, stats, etc. But then again, why bother calling this cRPG if we are obviously doing something else?

Tl;dr It's not a matter about the meaning of words RPG considered in abstract, but a matter of knowning the history of the genre and their distinctive characteristics. Instead of labelling everything that we want to play or sell as cRPGs (FPSs, action games, etc) and trying to make them into something they are not, we should be focusing even more on their PnP origins and refining the traditional formula.

i think that he litterally talked about nothing.