 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] dev null> wrote:
> > If you've never heard of D&D, I'm going to have to side with Warp and
> > ask that you hand in your nerd card.
> I've /heard of/ D&D. I just don't get why anybody would bother playing
> it. It sounds incredibly boring.
Tabletop role-playing games can be real fun, with a competent game master.
While the overall story is more or less predetermined, the details are
determined by the players themselves. Players choose what they do, and the
game master has to adapt the events and the storyline to suit (which is not
always trivial, as you have to keep the balance between avoiding the story
from derailing too much, and avoiding the players feeling that they are just
playing a prewritten script and are not free to do whatever they want).
How much a playing session can deviate from the script outline (which
the game master usually has on paper, either purchased/copied from
somewhere, or in some cases written by himself) depends on how much the
players ignore the GM's hints and do what they want instead, and how much
the GM is willing to bend. Sometimes the GM has to refuse to accept some
action (eg. if someone wanted to suddenly kill a very plot-relevant NPC,
the GM could say "your character wouldn't do that").
Which of course means that a good game not only requires a good GM, but
also good *players*. The players have to act and react according to the
personality of their characters. A good-tempered librarian would not
suddenly kill someone in cold blood for no reason whatsoever. A player
seriously wanting for this character to do that, completely destroying
the mood, is not a good player.
One of the great things about this dynamicity is that players can come
up with new things that were not in the original script. It can sometimes
become quite imaginative. There's much more freedom to do things than with
a computer game, which is by necessity very limited. (Just from the top of
my head, a player could come up with something like "I'll stack these chairs
in front of the door so that if someone attempts to come in, the pile will
fall, alerting us", or something along those lines.)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 31/08/2011 02:15 PM, Warp wrote:
> Tabletop role-playing games can be real fun, with a competent game master.
I can't say that I've ever actually tried it, but it doesn't sound like
something that would appeal to me. Maybe it's because seeing and hearing
exotic things is far more interesting to me than talking about social
interactions between semi-human creatures, I don't know.
> While the overall story is more or less predetermined, the details are
> determined by the players themselves. Players choose what they do, and the
> game master has to adapt the events and the storyline to suit (which is not
> always trivial, as you have to keep the balance between avoiding the story
> from derailing too much, and avoiding the players feeling that they are just
> playing a prewritten script and are not free to do whatever they want).
>
> How much a playing session can deviate from the script outline (which
> the game master usually has on paper, either purchased/copied from
> somewhere, or in some cases written by himself) depends on how much the
> players ignore the GM's hints and do what they want instead, and how much
> the GM is willing to bend. Sometimes the GM has to refuse to accept some
> action (eg. if someone wanted to suddenly kill a very plot-relevant NPC,
> the GM could say "your character wouldn't do that").
That sounds like an almost exact description of why designing a computer
game with a good story is so hard.
On the one hand, you're written a story, and that's how the game has to
play out. On the other hand, if the player(s) can't influence the game
at all, why bother playing? But if you take that too far, you end up
with something like Frontier Elite II, a game with so much "freedom"
that it's pointless to play.
In all, it's just one axis along which game design is really, really hard.
> Which of course means that a good game not only requires a good GM, but
> also good *players*.
If finding good D&D players is even remotely like finding good TF2
players... yeah, good luck with that one.
> One of the great things about this dynamicity is that players can come
> up with new things that were not in the original script. It can sometimes
> become quite imaginative. There's much more freedom to do things than with
> a computer game, which is by necessity very limited. (Just from the top of
> my head, a player could come up with something like "I'll stack these chairs
> in front of the door so that if someone attempts to come in, the pile will
> fall, alerting us", or something along those lines.)
It would be nice if computer games could be a bit more open-ended like
this. There are a number of reasons why they can't (in the foreseeable
future):
- The real world is far too expensive to simulate accurately. You have
to simplify it down, which basically means removing lots of possibilities.
- In the real world, you're generally fighting against other humans. AI
still cannot even begin to approach that level of intelligence. (E.g.,
if I *did* use chairs to block the door, the AI would be utterly
baffled, and would never figure out a solution.)
- In the real world, I can use anything I can lay my hands on. In a
computer game, I've got, like, a dozen buttons and a mouse. Very hard to
come up with a general control framework with such limited controls
available.
Those are the ones that immediately spring to mind, beyond "it would
also totally screw up the story" (which is also intractably hard for a
mere computer to sort out).
I note that while it's completely 100% possible to play computer games
with other humans, I tend to prefer playing them by myself. I guess
because that way it's more like reading a book. Or maybe just because
finding decent people to play with is so hard.
OK, I have to ask: How many times per week does this happen?
http://xkcd.com/244/
Does it ever get to more than 3 levels deep? Is it like Inception?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 31.08.2011 10:39, schrieb Invisible:
> Quake 2. No XP.
>
> HalfLife. HalfLife: Opposing Force. Nope, no XP.
>
> HalfLife 2, EP1, EP2... No XP.
>
> Portal. No XP.
>
> Team Fortress 2. No XP.
>
> Call of Duty 4: No XP.
>
> Modern Warfare 2: No XP.
>
> OK, so that's a list of almost every computer game I've ever played. :-P
Ah, so the only computer game genre you've ever played is ego-shooters,
plus one ego-shooter spin-off. Granted, they only very rarely have the
concept of experience points.
Actually, the concept of XP is, to my knowledge, indeed limited to the
so-called "RPG" (roleplay game) genre.
The basic idea behind XP (and the common element in computer "RPG") is
that as you progress in the game, you unlock new skills (or improve
existing ones) over time; but instead of unlocking all of them according
to a fixed schedule as you go ahead, RPGs let you choose from a number
of various skills; you'll typically never be able to choose all of them,
so you'll usually specialize in some area(s) to fit your style of play.
For instance, you may choose skills that will typically allow you to
pick off your enemies one by one without them knowing what hits them (or
even avoiding them altogether), while limiting your options in case they
do spot you. Or you may choose to not bother about stealth, and instead
choose to improve your strength and stamina to carry heavier gear and
sustain more damage. (Just to give an example; usually the skill system
of an RPG is much more elaborate than this. Imagine a concept like the
player classes of TF2, but with lots more fine-tuning and improvement
over time.)
In virtually all RPGs, you acquire "experience points" for accomplishing
tasks, such as killing monsters or solving puzzles; once your
accumulated XPs reach a certain threshold, you advance to a new
"character level" (also known as "leveling up"), which means that you
may add or improve skills again.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Am 31.08.2011 16:50, schrieb Invisible:
> OK, I have to ask: How many times per week does this happen?
> http://xkcd.com/244/
> Does it ever get to more than 3 levels deep? Is it like Inception?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fiTEHqAeanw&feature=related
Make sure to also see parts 2-5 of 5...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30/08/2011 10:54 AM, Invisible wrote:
> I don't know how big the game actually is, but I spent about 7 hours
> playing it yesterday and I don't /think/ I'm anywhere near the end yet
> (though I can't really tell).
OK, so apparently Steam records how long you've been playing. And it
took me 12 hours to complete this game. I could actually have completed
it faster, but I actually bothered playing and replaying some of the
"challenges" over and over trying to get a good score.
It turns out, if you replay the same part of the game enough times, the
narrator *does* begin becoming repetitive after a while. During normal
gameplay, this never happens. It's almost like having a real human
there. Only if you grind the same part of the game again and again do
you start noticing it's a recording.
You know I said that Bastion has no jumping puzzles, and in fact you
can't actually jump? Well, the last 20 minutes of the game is nothing
*but* jumping puzzles! >_< Ever tried jumping at an angle of 60 degrees
when the only movement controls are arrow keys? Hint: it's tricky.
The final level is actually like 6 normal-sized levels. Complete with
transitions from one to the other. It's just that usually at the end of
one level, you return to the hub, rearrange your inventory a bit, and
then select the next level. In the final "level", you go through 6
levels one after the other without a break.
This final level also has some pretty steep difficulty. Quite apart from
the fact that the last 3 sublevels are basically endless jumping
puzzles, there's a hitherto unseen level of close combat involved. To
describe it as "challenging" would be an understatement.
The ending provides absolutely no sense of closure. You get given two
options at the end of the final level. Once you complete the level, you
get given two options back at the main hub. I picked an option, and I
saw a freeze-frame painting and heard some lines of dialogue. Then the
image faded to black, and the credits roll.
As best as I can tell, if I'd chosen the other way, exactly the same
thing would have happened. (I haven't scientifically verified this yet.)
I would probably have got a different painting, and a different set of
lines. I doubt I would have got any more closure.
In short, a disappointing (but not disastrous) ending to a really cool game.
Before you start the final level, it actually warns you that there's no
going back once you begin. Interestingly, after the credits finish
rolling, you can return to the hub. (And from the canned dialogue lines,
it appears that the game save is from just before the final level. In
particular, I levelled up during the final mission, but going back in,
I've done back down a level.)
I had assumed there was much more of the game remaining because I
haven't completed more than a fraction of the optional stuff. You can
earn money to upgrade weapons, and I never earned enough to upgrade more
than a fraction of my arsenal. (Not that there's much point; once you
have a really powerful weapon, why would you bother upgrading the weaker
ones?) And if you earn enough "XP", you gain a level. The only effect
this has is that you can activate more powerups at once. (Which you have
to return to the hub to do.) You can activate any powerup at any time,
it's just you can only use so many at once.
The highest possible level is level 10, and by the time I completed the
game I had only reached level 5. Similarly, most of my weapons had been
upgraded to level 2 or 3, out of a maximum of 7. There's still a
stackload of "vigils" I haven't got yet, and a bunch of items I
collected which I didn't have the cash to "repair" yet.
Still, I guess that's better than Assassin's Creed II. Initially I
couldn't afford anything, but by about half way through the game, I had
literally purchased every item that you can purchase. Even the useless
ones. (There's an "achievement" for purchasing everything. Obviously I
initially only purchased stuff worth having. But eventually I purchased
everything, all at once, just for something to spend my money on.)
I guess having unfinished stuff gives me a reason to keep playing the game.
For example, Bastion has several "challenges". Basically you wake up in
a room, and increasing numbers of enemies pop up out of the ground and
attack you. You earn "XP" for killing them, and if you survive a whole
wave you earn a crock-load of money. (It's unclear to me whether you get
to keep all this stuff, or only if you survive all the way to the end.)
You can also visit the shrine and activate "idols" to make the challenge
mode harder. It makes the enemies faster or more health or whatever, and
you get more XP when you kill them.
I found the easiest challenge, and then activated *all* the available
idols. At the same time. (Interestingly, I'm short of two idols. No idea
how you get those, given that I've searched every level...) I fired up
the easy challenge. I lasted 12 seconds. Literally. Damn!
I've yet to complete either of the other two main challenges. (Mainly
because I've yet to discover a way to kill Anklegators.) I've had a go
at all of the "proving grounds". (There's one for each weapon, and since
I've collected all the weapons, they're all open to me.) They range from
quite easy to laughably difficult. Difficulty isn't directly related to
how powerful the weapon is.
Completing the game also actives a "special new game option". I haven't
tried it, but apparently it lets you do things like start a new game
with level 10 skill, all weapons available, all upgrades unlocked, etc.
I quite like the way that for each weapon upgrade, you can choose
between two options. You can make reloads faster, or you can increase
clip capacity. You can increase damage or increase rate of fire. You can
increase accuracy or increase spread. Things like that. (My personal
favourite is the upgrades that make hits continue to deal damage for a
short period afterwards...)
The thing with the distillery is interesting. You have a selection of
"spirits" available, with names like "Stabsynthe", "Cinderbrick Stout",
"Bastion Bourbon" and so on. When activated, each one gives you some
advantage. (E.g., there's one that gives you +15% health. Another lets
you carry more potions with you. Another makes stray coins magnetically
attracted to you...) Each time you earn enough XP, the number of spirits
you can activate at the same time goes up by one.
They could have just had a menu with a tickbox for "add 15% health" and
so forth. But instead, they made it a "distillery", and they make you
collect the various spirits before you can use them, and so on. It's a
nice touch. (Although one that isn't /explained/ especially clearly.)
I wonder if there'll be a Bastion II? I'd buy it...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 30/08/2011 10:59 AM, Invisible wrote:
> Also... Is it just me, or does the music in that video sound
> suspiciously like it's a rehash of Seven Lives by Enigma?
Hmm.
> This music doesn't appear anywhere in the game, as best as I can tell.
Yeah, it does.
> The in-game music appears to be completely original - and rather good.
I still stand by that assessment.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/31/2011 12:05 PM, clipka wrote:
> In virtually all RPGs, you acquire "experience points" for accomplishing
> tasks, such as killing monsters or solving puzzles; once your
> accumulated XPs reach a certain threshold, you advance to a new
> "character level" (also known as "leveling up"), which means that you
> may add or improve skills again.
Mind, there are some exceptions. Eve Online, for example, doesn't have
XP, but it does have a sort of equivalent. As you add skills to the
training queue, those skills improve, a set number of points over time,
eventually giving you a "level" in that skill. Literally everything from
how well you mine ore, to which ships you can fly, and how accurate your
weapons are, effective your armor/shield, etc. may be, and so on, is
determined by which of these you spent time "studying".
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 8/31/2011 7:50 AM, Invisible wrote:
> It would be nice if computer games could be a bit more open-ended like
> this. There are a number of reasons why they can't (in the foreseeable
> future):
>
> - The real world is far too expensive to simulate accurately. You have
> to simplify it down, which basically means removing lots of possibilities.
>
> - In the real world, you're generally fighting against other humans. AI
> still cannot even begin to approach that level of intelligence. (E.g.,
> if I *did* use chairs to block the door, the AI would be utterly
> baffled, and would never figure out a solution.)
>
> - In the real world, I can use anything I can lay my hands on. In a
> computer game, I've got, like, a dozen buttons and a mouse. Very hard to
> come up with a general control framework with such limited controls
> available.
>
> Those are the ones that immediately spring to mind, beyond "it would
> also totally screw up the story" (which is also intractably hard for a
> mere computer to sort out).
>
> I note that while it's completely 100% possible to play computer games
> with other humans, I tend to prefer playing them by myself. I guess
> because that way it's more like reading a book. Or maybe just because
> finding decent people to play with is so hard.
>
Well, an alternate to a "game" is an RP sim. Second Life has a number of
them. The one I am in, when work isn't screwing that up, is post a
apocalypse world, set "loosely" in the remains of LA. A coven of
vampires is nominally in control over some parts of the city, demons are
wandering around every place, angels have shown up, but can't quite work
out what is going on (the closest answer anyone can get out of them is
that the 'throne of heaven is currently vacant'), and every other sort
of thing that goes bump in the night has come out of the woodwork. The
major of those later groups being Lycan, Undead, Neko (cat people), and
cyborgs.
The skill system works a bit like Eve, in that the longer you are
"online and interacting" the more advanced your skills become (in this
sense XP is being used, but except for turning in recordings of things
you have done in the roleplay, and getting rewards for that, its mostly
just ticking along at a set rate). Once you "level", you can pick from a
number of skills for that level. Melee is possible, as is guns, but..
there are some issues with Second Life's servers which can lag the
later, so, when possible, the RP has tended to avoid a lot of combat.
Sane people also stay out of the main city, and in the outliers, due to
similar lag issues... Too many people in one sim, basically, but its
improving, slowly.
Basically, as a 'game' its pretty damn open, with the only rules being
to stay "in theme" with what is going on in CoLA. But, there are several
other similar systems around, and probably close to a thousand (or more)
sims running some sort of combat system, with roleplaying going on,
hundreds of them based on the same Community Combat System as CoLA has.
http://ccs-gametech.com/
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 02/09/2011 12:21 AM, Patrick Elliott wrote:
> Basically, as a 'game' its pretty damn open, with the only rules being
> to stay "in theme" with what is going on in CoLA. But, there are several
> other similar systems around, and probably close to a thousand (or more)
> sims running some sort of combat system, with roleplaying going on,
> hundreds of them based on the same Community Combat System as CoLA has.
That sounds more or less like the FI2 syndrome: A game that's so "open"
that not only can you do anything, but that's even what you're
/supposed/ to do. In other words, there's no goal. You just make one up
and try to attain it. Which is incredibly unsatisfying. (Or maybe it's
just that FI2 was a really bad game, I don't know...)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
> This final level also has some pretty steep difficulty. Quite apart from
> the fact that the last 3 sublevels are basically endless jumping
> puzzles, there's a hitherto unseen level of close combat involved. To
> describe it as "challenging" would be an understatement.
I found the last level rather trivial, but that's because I had upgraded
the Calamity Cannon all the way.
> The highest possible level is level 10, and by the time I completed the
> game I had only reached level 5. Similarly, most of my weapons had been
> upgraded to level 2 or 3, out of a maximum of 7. There's still a
> stackload of "vigils" I haven't got yet, and a bunch of items I
> collected which I didn't have the cash to "repair" yet.
That's because...
> Completing the game also actives a "special new game option". I haven't
> tried it, but apparently it lets you do things like start a new game
> with level 10 skill, all weapons available, all upgrades unlocked, etc.
This option doesn't start you at level 10, it leaves you where you are
and lets you continue to level up and upgrade your weapons.
> I've yet to complete either of the other two main challenges. (Mainly
> because I've yet to discover a way to kill Anklegators.)
Run or roll over them to make them pop up, then turn around and do some
damage quickly.
> (Interestingly, I'm short of two idols. No idea
> how you get those, given that I've searched every level...)
I think they're in the shop.
- Slime
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
