Game News Wasteland 2 Kickstarter Update #28: Progress Report, Weapon Design

[Curious_Tongue]

What makes a skill useful?

That it can be used to overcome challenges thrown at you by the game to a decent degree, as compared with other skills.

You're familiar with the concept of a "dump stat", right? That stat or skill that, at the end of the day, everybody realizes just ain't worth it? Well, those aren't actually a good thing to have.

I think it is YOU who is unfamiliar with the idea of a dump stat. This is not a stat that everyone can drop. It is just a stat a BUILD can drop. Another build can use it and needs it.

A stat that's nearly useless in gameplay, yet fits the build you make?

LARP stat?

 

[Roguey]

The fuuuck are you talking about Fallout 1 and 2? Other than going for style and "must have big plasma gun" feel, small guns were more than viable. Combat Shotgun, .223 pistol, Sniper Rifle. Fallout 2 had Gauss.

Those guns aren't very good against the enemies you'll find in the military base or Cathedral. Fallout 2's additions did make them better, but I vaguely recall the pulse rifle being a much better weapon to use against Horrigan than the gauss rifle.

 

[MasPingon]

The fuuuck are you talking about Fallout 1 and 2? Other than going for style and "must have big plasma gun" feel, small guns were more than viable. Combat Shotgun, .223 pistol, Sniper Rifle. Fallout 2 had Gauss.

Those guns aren't very good against the enemies you'll find in the military base or Cathedral.

What's wrong with that? It's not that you walk into Military Base and suddenly you see that your pistols and shotguns are useless against Super Mutants. The game gives you a hints now and then that if you want to be a new sheriff in town, you need to invest some points into energy weapons. It's perfectly logic and clear to me. That is one of Fallout biggest advantages over other crpgs - that you need to adjust you skills to a way you are role-playing your character, otherwise you are fucked. Fallout:NV destroyed it by making energy weapons and conventional guns equal, so you no longer needed to react on a game world with changes in your character build

 

[Infinitron]

"Perfectly logical" doesn't mean it's a good or interesting design. You invested in the Small Guns skill. Why should it become obsolete? What's so good about a skill that you suddenly have no use for? What's so interesting about replacing it with another skill that works in the exact same way except with MOAR DPS? Why not add more depth to the combat instead?

It's false difficulty. False hardcoreness.

 

[FeelTheRads]

So in other words you admit that you agree with Roguey and want them to be perfectly equal. Because seems like if the balance hangs just a little bit to one side then the other side is automatically obsolete.

Why not add more depth to the combat instead?

What's that got to do with it?

 

[Infinitron]

So in other words you admit that you agree with Roguey and want them to be perfectly equal. Because seems like if the balance hangs just a little bit to one side then the other side is automatically obsolete.

It's not a "little bit".

Why not add more depth to the combat instead?

What's that got to do with it?

It has everything to do with it. Fallout's combat had no depth, so the only way to inject (false) difficulty into the system was to force the player to switch from one weapons skill to the other, even though they both worked the same in basically every way except for damage.

The Small Guns skill could be renamed "LOW DAMAGE GUNS".
The Energy Weapons skill could be renamed "HIGH DAMAGE GUNS".

And you know, that might actually be better, because then you can be sure players would upgrade their "HIGH DAMAGE GUNS" skill ahead of time, and they'd also probably know they wouldn't find any at the beginning of the game.

 

[FeelTheRads]

It's not a "little bit".

Ah, yes, they shouldn't be equal, just not have more than 2 points of damage difference between them. Seriously, when you say that they get obsolete, even though they are still perfectly usable, you're pretty much saying that they should be equal or very close to equal.*

because then you can be sure players would upgrade their "HIGH DAMAGE GUNS" skill ahead of time

So this skill is just perfect for you if the players are told ahead of the time? Since when is documentation good design? It's just good documentation. And once you find out they're better you can benefit from it in the subsequent playthrough.

And why would you need to upgrade ahead of the time? Isn't that actually sperging and not wanting to play the game by yourself? Of course, I found a weapon that I can't perfectly use.. waaah, waaaah, not fun anymore, why do I miss waaah, fuck RPGs man, nothing like that Halo.

*Edit: And no, the difference is not just a "little bit", but if it was then it would have been pointless to switch except for a change of death animations which is the only thing you get when you make them equal.

 

[Infinitron]

It's not a "little bit".

Ah, yes, they shouldn't be equal, just not have more than 2 points of damage difference between them. Seriously, when you say that they get obsolete, even though they are still perfectly usable, you're pretty much saying that they should be equal or very close to equal.*

See, you've fallen into the trap of viewing everything through the lens of damage. DPS, bro! Totally radical!

I wasn't talking about damage. I was talking about usefulness and viability. There are ways to balance combat such that a low damage weapon can be as or more useful than a high damage weapon in some situations. That's something that Fallout sorely needed. It would have added depth to the combat and prevented Small Guns from becoming obsolete. That's what good game design is, as opposed to aspie "THIS IS REALISTIC, DEAL WITH IT" design.

 

[Kirtai]

There are ways to balance combat such that a low damage weapon can be as or more useful than a high damage weapon in some situations.

Sort of like how only certain small, compact weapons can be sneaked into the casinos in New Vegas?
Or more generally when more powerful weapons can't be silenced or concealed for sneak attacks?

 

[Commissar Draco]

^Exactly it made sneaking skill useful too.

 

[grdja]

Guys I cba to google actual perk names, but taking crit and sniping related perks could give you huuuge crits with .223. And I'm certain you could fire 2 or 3 times a round. So bang, that supermutant's head just exploded, or he is at least blind and can't hit anything any more, next customer. I think maybe issue with Fallout 1 was that upgraded Turbo Plasma rifle was really strong, but it was a end game weapon. Once again, F2 had gauss pistol and rifle.

 

[MasPingon]

The Small Guns skill could be renamed "LOW DAMAGE GUNS".
The Energy Weapons skill could be renamed "HIGH DAMAGE GUNS".

And you know, that might actually be better, because then you can be sure players would upgrade their "HIGH DAMAGE GUNS" skill ahead of time, and they'd also probably know they wouldn't find any at the beginning of the game.

I can't believe you call it a good design, this is just like in-game quest compass. I liked how new guns were introduced in Fallout. Every time you found a better weapon, your PC couldn't handle it properly. If you wanted to use it, you got to learn how to.

Getting a plasma rifle in Fallout - "What's this? Jesus fucking Chris, what a damage! Goodbye living the life of junkie hobo, now it's time to teach people some respect".

First enemy encounter - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHG4fPkGpDM

That was Fallout way of preventing a situation when you find the best in-game equipment and instantly become invincible badass motherfucker

 

[Infinitron]

I can't believe you call it a good design,

I was being sarcastic.

That was Fallout way of preventing a situation when you find the best in-game equipment and instantly become invincible badass motherfucker

There are ways of doing that without making the game's skill system "tricky". For example, if the game has just one gun skill, make energy weapons very inaccurate compared to small guns, unless you keep on improving that skill.

Besides, having "best in-game equipment" as powerful as the Turbo Plasma Rifle is probably not a very good idea in the first place.

 

[Crooked Bee]

Besides, having "best in-game equipment" as powerful as the Turbo Plasma Rifle is probably not a very good idea in the first place.

Depends on how powerful you're supposed to be at the level you get it and how deadly the enemies are, really. Wizardry gave you access to TILTOWAIT (the nuke spell) pretty late in the game so it felt like a completely justified reward for your effort -- plus the enemies remained dangerous enough no matter how high level you were. So it really felt like a good idea, despite the sheer power at your disposal when you gained access to it.

 

[Infinitron]

plus the enemies remained dangerous enough no matter how high level you were.

Well, exactly.

With the Turbo Plasma Rifle you can melt roomfuls of supermutants with ease.

That's my problem with Fallout - most of its difficulty comes from the player's initial unfamiliarity with what skills are useful. So maybe in your first playthrough your energy skill will be gimped and you won't be able to do that. After that, it's an optimized charismatic plasma rifle sniper character, every time.

 

[MasPingon]

There are ways of doing that without making the game's skill system "tricky". For example, if the game has just one gun skill, make energy weapons very inaccurate compared to small guns, unless you keep on improving that skill.

On the other hand, why improving your energy weapons skill should make you an aimbot with small guns? I agree that 3 types of gun skills are too much, but having just one wouldn't be any solution. I liked that F:NV joined small guns with big guns, so there were just guns and energy weapons. But the way they implemented it in-game was god damn awful

 

[CappenVarra]

Gosh, debates really never get resolved on the codex... I've only been here 2 years and the "energy weapons in FO1" thread bores me to tears every time it inevitably pops up again... and again... and again. At least now I know why the 10 year (or whatever) achievement includes "Congratulations on not killing yourself yet"

Nobody in their right mind thinks the FO1 skill system was the best thing ever. But that has nothing to do with the fact that players who don't want to play pre-defined characters are able to tag any skill they damn please - what else would you want for a skill-based system after the player selects the "thanks for suggesting those pre-gens, but I'll create my custom character" option? Any restrictions on that freedom of character building would be pure dumbing down and can GTFO.

I mean, assuming you want to have 3 shooter skills and the following 6 weapons (just 6 for demonstration purposes): A) 10 mm pistol, B) sniper rifle, C) minigun, D) laser pistol, E) laser rifle, F) gatling laser - grouping them into Small, Big and Energy as they are (Small: AB, Big: C, Energy: DEF) is an intuitively worse system than grouping them into Skill 1: AD, Skill 2: BE and Skill 3: CF. Intuitively because of that whole verisimilitude thing, you know. But let's talk about how unsuspecting players can tag Energy Weapons and be less effective at the start of the game or not raise Energy Weapons at all and be less effective at the endgame instead. Seriously, who cares? The easiest playthrough ever had me using the .223 pistol in the Military Base (before Sniper) and the 10 mm SMG in the Cathedral (after Sniper).

cRPGs are about figuring out the mechanics. If you figure out the mechanics, you win. If you don't figure out the mechanics, you fail. As simple as that. And if any idiot not bothering to rub two brain cells together can figure out the relevant mechanics at the character creation screen (which Roguey's beloved balancing entails), what remains? (I'm not punning Surf Solar, really I'm not...) So you laugh at an imaginary "cRPGs as adventure games" crowd, Infinitron - but didn't I quote you recently for saying that "nobody cares about mechanics that much"? Should the codex care about the people who don't care about the mechanics? Really?

Or, like some people ITT, if you CBA to figure out the mechanics you can go online and complain, then read that aimed shots are OP and repeat it ad nauseaum. When in fact it's not the aimed shots that kill people - crits kill people. And yes, aimed shots give you an increase in crit chance at the cost of a CTH penalty (along with nifty debuff options - disarming, making Deathclaws kiteable with leg shots, knockout, blindness - which are fun but non-essential). But guess what else increases your crit chance? Shooting out x10 as many bullets in the same time (measured in AP). Or increasing your Luck and taking Finesse. And it works just as well or better if you build your character right. Etc. etc. (Aside: you could argue that having crits be the end-all thing that kills opponents or kills your character is sub-optimal, and not hear a word of complaint from me... but that's not what this is about).

But no, we can't have games where the player does well if they figure out the game mechanics and build their character well, it has to be balanced. Because a skill list at character creation is a most solemn promise that a player can select any skills at random ("but that's how I imagine my character") and never be less effective in the endgame than any other choice. Bullshit. And guess what - if the player is in charge of building the character(s) and some choices are better than others, some players will stumble on the "better" choices on their first playthrough by pure luck while others will get unlucky. And this is unfair - but who cares, and whose bright idea is it that it needs to be fair in the first place? Who would want to play a game that is fair like that in the first place?

Also, all this talk about OP skills and nobody mentions Stealth, which allows you to fight most battles 1 on 1 (or at least against drastically reduced opponent numbers at a time)? But sure, aimed shots are OP and won't somebody please think of the children poor first-time players who don't want to figure out the game mechanics but only want to win...

 

[Infinitron]

cRPGs are about figuring out the mechanics. If you figure out the mechanics, you win. If you don't figure out the mechanics, you fail. As simple as that.

I completely disagree. The tough battles in Baldur's Gate 2 are still tough even if you know the rules of AD&D by heart.

never be less effective in the endgame than any other choice.

I don't know what "effectiveness" means.

I think all the skills, stats, etc in an RPG should be broadly useful throughout the game. I don't see what's so controversial about that. I don't understand the butthurt.

 

[CappenVarra]

cRPGs are about figuring out the mechanics. If you figure out the mechanics, you win. If you don't figure out the mechanics, you fail. As simple as that.

I completely disagree. The tough battles in Baldur's Gate 2 are still tough even if you know the rules of AD&D by heart.

I know you do. And I don't care :D

never be less effective in the endgame than any other choice.

I don't know what "effectiveness" means.

Ehem http://rpgcodex.net/forums/index.ph...eport-weapon-design.82486/page-9#post-2627189

 

[Infinitron]

 

[Lancehead]

cRPGs are about figuring out the mechanics. If you figure out the mechanics, you win. If you don't figure out the mechanics, you fail. As simple as that.

cRPGs are about figuring out content, be it combat type or non-combat type. Systems and mechanics are there to give you the flexibility to do that.

 

[Hobz]

If a game rewards meta-game knowledge more than sensible educated tactical and strategic decisions, it is poorly designed.

I don't think crpgs are about "figuring out" mechanisms, i.e. knowing because of a previous playthrough or quick read on a forum which mechanisms you're supposed to ignore and which one you're supposed to abuse.

Designers should make knowledge accessible so that the difficulty lies in how you are using it rather than if you have it.

 

[St. Toxic]

That's my problem with Fallout - it's an optimized charismatic plasma rifle sniper character, every time.

 

[Broseph]

That's my problem with Fallout - most of its difficulty comes from the player's initial unfamiliarity with what skills are useful..

This is actually quite true though.

 

[Clockwork Knight]

That's my problem with Fallout - it's an optimized charismatic plasma rifle sniper character, every time.

That's a problem because playing as anything else means you're gimping yourself for roleplaying reasons*, which I'm fine with but some here tend to see as LARPing.


*as opposed to playing as another character which is better in some areas but worse in others, as you'd expect from a good system. But charismatic sniper is the best at everything, there's no competition.