Interview The Pleasures of Age of Decadence at RPS

[Serus]

...underwater city where the consequnces are different locations to go through which isnt a good consequence acording to your interpretation(?) but in my opinion actually more important than consequences which are "rewards/sacrifices" of some kind (micro).

There are many different issues here, but basically, any player would prefer an extra location to pretty much anything else, which makes the "go left - get an extra location, go right - get, uh, nothing, sorry" design dumb by default. It's not really an example of C&C well done. It's an example of poor design.

"It is not an exemple of C&C well done. It is an exemple of poor design."
ergo
It is an exemple of (poorly designed) C&C in BG2.
QED (i think...)

 

[Volourn]

"NWN's story is pretty much set in stone, no matter how you play it. No matter what you do, you can never save Fenthick. As mentioned before, you can also never kill Desther early, because the end of Act I must have Desther betray Neverwinter and be executed. Because of this, you're powerless in the story. You'll never make the slightest difference until the bitter end because the story can't be changed."

You just prove dmy point. BIO is known for their stories, and their characters. It doens't even matter if you like them. That's justa fact.

And, yes, the NWN story is basically 'set in stone'; but there is choices and consequences in the game. It's a falt out lie to suggest otherwise. Again, just because a game doesn't have C&C at the level of FO does NOT mean it has none. Dumbass. FO series is at the top of the C&C world; but that doesn't mean you have to have the same amount of C&C to have C&C.

But, hey, keep alternating between 'BG2 is a RPG', 'BG2 is a 'story driven RPG', 'BG2 is a RPG', and 'BG2 is an adventure game'. You are bound to figure out what youa ctually think it is.

Again, as always, ther eis also such things as good RPGs and bad RPGs. Argue all you wnat that BG2 and NWN are bad RPGs but they are RPGs. Just like MW, TOEE, and the SW games are poor RPGs but theya re RPGs nontheless.

 

[Vault Dweller]

"It is not an exemple of C&C well done. It is an exemple of poor design."
ergo
It is an exemple of (poorly designed) C&C in BG2.
QED (i think...)

Is choosing between something and nothing a choice?

 

[Volourn]

Yes.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Thanks for clarifying!

 

[Kos_Koa]

In Oblivion Ichose not to fallow teh mainee quest. that smeans its an RPG's game.

Rofles

 

[Vault Dweller]

I bet there were consequences too. Like if you followed the main quest, you'd have all kinda main quest quests, but if you didn't, then you wouldn't get these quests. Pretty deep.

 

[Volourn]

Deep or not, good or not, Oblivion is still a RPG. Not all RPGs are created equal, and not alla re good. Dumbass.

Just like not all action, sports, or puzzle games are of equal quality or enccessarily are made in the same exact way with the same exact focus.

 

[Joe Krow]

So choice and consequences are a Pnp convention? What if my D&D sessions were more like a hack n' slash then the Choose Your Own Adventure ass faggery you seem to prefer? I never much got into wearing tights and talking with a funny accent so we focused mainly on building up our characters. I guess we missed all the fun.

The main reason I know you are full of shit is that we used these things called modules, you see? There was a ton of them. Suprisingly, they are all pretty much hack n' slash type affairs. Why is that?

We didn't wear the tights.

 

[Tardvapor]

I really like those old Gran Turismo console RPGs.

They had C&C, like if you chose a slow car you would probably lose the race. The cars had stats too. Great RPG.

And Super Mario Brothers was a good RPG too, I chose not to fall down the hole.

And Madden NFL games, you get a party of 11 characters, all of them chock full of stats! And every play you get to choose run or pass. This will affect the course of the game, and make every single playthrough different. Deep rpg.

I guess we missed all the fun

Not all, just most. Especially since your ilk spends 75% of every hour gaming arguing over the rules.

 

[almondblight]

Again, just because a game doesn't have C&C at the level of FO does NOT mean it has none. Dumbass. FO series is at the top of the C&C world; but that doesn't mean you have to ha

Top? It seems to be on par with BG2, with the meaningless choices. Help Bohdhi/Thieves guild but you still have to confront Irenicus. Same with Fallout. Help Gizmo/kill Gizmo, you still have to find the waterchip and kill the master (yes, you can join him; that's more than a game over than anything else though, see the lack of end cutscenes). It seems like the difference is Fallout has cutscenes at the end that tells you, because you did X,Y, and Z, this happened. BG2 lacks thoughs. Ergo, we have found what makes a true RPG. Cutscenes at the end that tell you what your actions were.

(oh I never finished BG2)

Compare to Geneforge. You can just leave the island if you want. You can help any one of the 3 factions, or not. You can join those other humans, or not. It doesn't say "you have to do X and Y to win, but along the way you can choose if you want to do A or B to get there." Hence, if you want to consider C&C, much more than Fallout and BG2.

(oh, I never finished Geneforge)

 

[MisterStone]

So choice and consequences are a Pnp convention? What if my D&D sessions were more like a hack n' slash then the Choose Your Own Adventure ass faggery you seem to prefer? I never much got into wearing tights and talking with a funny accent so we focused mainly on building up our characters. I guess we missed all the fun.

The main reason I know you are full of shit is that we used these things called modules, you see? There was a ton of them. Suprisingly, they are all pretty much hack n' slash type affairs. Why is that?

Because TSR figured out that most 11-year-olds just weren't clever enough to design their own campaigns, and pretty much only cared about fighting lotz of kool monsturs and getting kool weaponz.

 

[Joe Krow]

I wasn't 11 yet.

So now we are defining crpgs while ignoring the first half of their history and PnP rpgs without TSR?

We're off to a good start here.

 

[MisterStone]

I wasn't 11 yet.

So now we are defining crpgs while ignoring the first half of their history and PnP rpgs without TSR?

We're off to a good start here.

So now we are defining CRPGs as something that should be designed according to the needs of a 10-year-old gamer? (actually, they already are)

 

[St. Toxic]

I asked them to donate my pay to 'Help a Retard' foundation. So, hang in there, you'll probably be contacted soon.

Haven't you learned, that you simply can't trust Bethesda, by now? I probably won't see a dime out of that money.

Proof?

You want me to prove to you that you have a particular characteristic, one which you cannot reasonably be proud of? One that entails you being unable to partake in a serious debate, or admit defeat? Yeah, I'm just waiting for that retard foundation money to come my way, because I'd have to be a well funded retard to put myself in that situation willingly.

You don't even have to admit it VD. I've never been wrong about anything in my entire life and, with a track record like that, I feel content to make these kind of statements and can reasonably expect people to take them at face value.

 

[Joe Krow]

So which PnP rpg are we supposed to be referring to? Which one inspired the choice and consequences that are supposedly the root of PnP rpgs? Since you've decided to exclude the one that made up 99% of the market you should probably come up with an alternative.

There's a certain stupid logic to what you're saying... It's easier to exclude the majority of crpgs when you ignore the PnP game that inspired them.

 

[MisterStone]

It's not a function of the PnP ruleset, dumbass, it's a function of the interaction between players and a creative, intelligent and skilled DM. We refer to C&C in CRPGs because there is no DM, but hopefully the game can at the very least present a compelling set of challenges and options to the player rather than railroading him along a serious of combats.

 

[Joe Krow]

So now we ignore the rule set, the modules, and all the original crpgs? You're a freeckin genius!

 

[MisterStone]

Are you a moron or something?

 

[GeneralSamov]

6 pages of arguing what is an RPG? Again? Forsooth!

Nice article though.

 

[Joe Krow]

Are you a moron or something?

The funny thing is that I didn't have to ask you that question. Why is that?

 

[Vault Dweller]

I asked them to donate my pay to 'Help a Retard' foundation. So, hang in there, you'll probably be contacted soon.

Haven't you learned, that you simply can't trust Bethesda, by now? I probably won't see a dime out of that money.

You've bested me, Toxic. Hats off to you!

So choice and consequences are a Pnp convention? What if my D&D sessions were more like a hack n' slash then the Choose Your Own Adventure ass faggery you seem to prefer? I never much got into wearing tights and talking with a funny accent so we focused mainly on building up our characters. I guess we missed all the fun.

The main reason I know you are full of shit is that we used these things called modules, you see? There was a ton of them. Suprisingly, they are all pretty much hack n' slash type affairs. Why is that?

Way to miss the point, Joe. What did you expect to see there? A list of approved actions and expected outcomes per character? Here is the right answer:

It's not a function of the PnP ruleset, dumbass, it's a function of the interaction between players and a creative, intelligent and skilled DM.

 

[Joe Krow]

Yes. I wanted dialogue trees. Where were the damned dialogue trees. In truth, I expected to see exactly what I saw: dungeons, monsters, and loot. The heart of PnP roleplaying and the inspiration for truly "classic rpgs" like Might and Magic and Wizardry.

 

[DarkUnderlord]

And for the record, I agree with his definition of RPG but I haven't played BG2 so can't really comment.

What consists of a "meaningful" choice is way too subjective to be considered as the single one factor that decides a game's rpg status. And VD's example was such. When in a game the stats of the character decide how successful or unsuccessful he/she is in a number of gameplay aspects (which happens in BG 2) then this game is an rpg.

I think "meaningful choice" is fundamental to an RPG. If I have an "RPG" where your entire game consists of choosing what colour shirt to wear and that depending on which shirt you choose, it affects the colour of shoes you're allowed to buy, is that an RPG (bad example but I'm about to head off and can't be assed spending time on a better one)? I mean, I have choices! They change things!

Compare that to a choice mid-way through a game which dumps right in the middle of the enemies lair facing a boss battle you're definitely not prepared for (Harry, take me to Lou). That changes shit right there. Instantly you find out what's going on and unlock the entire plot. Something that previously might've involved going into the secret military bas and retrieveing an old holodisk.

I think meaningful choice and consequences are fundamental because it's the issue I have with The Witcher. Those choices aren't meaningful because all it changes is the character model standing next to you. That's not "meaningful" to me. To be meaningful, my choice actually needs to have a big impact on what I'm doing. If the alternative is ultimately the same outcome, then the choice simply doesn't have any meaning. A meaningful choice alters things. A meaningful choice actually presents you with a difference that alters what you experience in the game.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

So what are the meaningful choises in F1 that affect the gameworld?

I'm guessing the quests that relate to the ending slideshow, where it goes through the aftermath of some of your quests and the impact it had.

Trouble is, I didn't really feel one way or another about any of that. Maybe it was more complex than I thought, but saving a town or reuniting people is just the usual quests in lots of RPGs. Summing it up in the end as if those are major impacts on the game world is just a bit of iceing on the cake, not the lynchpin of whether its an RPG.

On another note, VD, I'll accept your opinion for what it is, but I can't wait to play AoD and see such meaningful C&C that it passes even your own tough standards. This is one time
where someone has the opportunity to put their money where their mouth is.

This bothers me when people say that the only consequences are from the end game slide show. I have vivid memories of going to the raider place at night to save Tandi while dressed in leather and the main raider guy thinking I'm a ghostly visage of his father which you can use to your advantage in getting Tandi released or it may fuck you over since he never liked his dad. Please tell me if you ever experienced that? Also what about when you go to that doc I think from junktown and hes not in the building so you go downstairs and see him working on some questionable stuff and you could either confront him about it or just do whatever and he will take out one of your eyes. Did you experience that?

Those are just the little stuff through out the game. There is also the major ways to finish the game that aren't just making a last minute choice to get a different ending like in so many other games. Towards the end of fallout there a lot of choices in how to do shit that isn't just "kill with laser or flame thrower?" You should check out a good guide like Per's and see all the options in the game. The fact that a lot of guides miss the different options that you can do is a testimate to the shit you can do. Hell, people didn't believe me many years after Fo/fo2 came out that you can trick the Raider guy into thinking oyur his father.