When I ran that system as a tabletop campaign, that personality system was an absolute bear to GM. It was kinda funny to see people trying to role play some of the various traits, like Arbitrary. That's why I wanted to incorporate a system to allow other players to evaluate these kinds of things. There's no way any company could afford enough GMs to judge everything.
It would be interesting to try to incorporate player groups into this scheme. Right off the top of my head, having a 'trait' for a guild be something like a one-ended scale, i.e., Lore of the Wastelands like in your examples. What would be on the opposite end of a two-ended scale, though? I could see it more as group/guild 'ideal', and even specify what personality 'traits' they valued. Maybe even to generate guild-only 'rewards' to tie into a standardized loot distribution system.
I'll think on it.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
In single-player games I would always build up speech or whatever it takes to try to talk my way out of something over killing. It's just not many games let you do that.
I hit the agree button because I agree with the broad point. I am not a fan of Witcher 3 (or 2 or 1).
The thing that I absolutely need and means the most to me and will make up for a ton of other faults is the depth of and choices of the rpg systems. I like character generation to be choice heavy and I love leveling up to be choice heavy.
I skip most games that people now consider rpgs because I know they will have a sophomoric system that requires no thought and is geared towards six year olds, people that don't enjoy thinking, or people who don't mind big blockbuster games with a tiny bit of what they consider an rpg system as long as it is simple and does not require any or much thought. I didn't even bother checking into the new Assassin's Creed because I knew it would be sophomoric and moronic and an insult to rpg fans to give it the label of rpg.
There are some exceptions to this. WoW through WotLK is probably the only really major game I can think of that also had a decent rpg system. I also can't get into pure dungeon crawlers when they have no content (quests, NPCs, shops, etc.) like the two Grimrocks, or Vaporium, even when they have decent rpg systems.
The absolute best for me is getting a new game with complex systems and great chardev and figuring out the system and testing builds, etc. I had a ton of fun in Champions Online for instance.
The absolute best for me is getting a new game with complex systems and great chardev and figuring out the system and testing builds, etc. I had a ton of fun in Champions Online for instance.
CO is indeed really good in the character building department, especially if you have access to Freeform.
ATs have a moderate amount of adjustment available (talents, specializations, and the advantages of each power), but the "real deal" is when you can build your own powerset as well.
The absolute best for me is getting a new game with complex systems and great chardev and figuring out the system and testing builds, etc. I had a ton of fun in Champions Online for instance.
CO is indeed really good in the character building department, especially if you have access to Freeform.
ATs have a moderate amount of adjustment available (talents, specializations, and the advantages of each power), but the "real deal" is when you can build your own powerset as well.
I agree. I should have expanded I liked CO a lot because of the great chardev and despite content and combat. The content wasn't too great. PvE or PvP. But I still enjoyed it a ton because of the rpg systems.
Another example would be the Etrian Odyssey series. The chardev carried the games for me. The combat could be pretty good once in a while, but was mostly grind, grind, grind. I dislike looking up what to kill x mob with to get the special part, the story content was very lite, but I really enjoy creating my own party and building them, etc.
The Witcher is a fantastic videogame, but I can’t get into it. Too much (great) story, not enough sandbox, it just feels too much on rails, even if you ignore the main story.
On the other hand I just love Bethesda (buggy) RPGs, all of them. It’s the only developer that makes RPGs the way I like it.
I played Skyrim 10+ times and only finished the main story once at my second play through. Same for Fallout 4, but I actually never finish the main story once. I am just not interested in the storylines.
Of course I also played Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion to death.
I wish there were more RPGs like Bethesda, possibly with less bugs.
I'm playing the
Witcher 3 again. Great rpg, infact one of my best. Been at it for
weeks. I'll admit I'm skipping most dialog for the long winded story and could
tell its quality stuff if your into story.
Graphics are great, world is beautiful music is tops. I love the combat, the lock on target was
crap and hated it at first but learned to love it. On max difficulty the boss fights are on par
with Dark Souls and yes I'm saving and dying a lot. Doing the "contracts" seems to lead to the best boss fights, LOVE THEM.
So the question is…
why am I getting board !!!!
I'm 3/4 way through I have most all ability slots filled. For
the most part my character is built just how I like it. I don't need anymore tips and other player
suggestions from Youtubes. I daydream of ideas to make myself be better and have more fun by changing things around...... I'm where I
want to be....... All of a sudden it all stops, it's like I'm done.
This is why !!!!!
I'll continue
playing because of the Dark Souls combat….. But this is how most rpg's go for
me.
I wish I played
RPG's for the roll-playing-part, but I don't.
How about you ?
Fallout 4 is just as good as a game, but character building ends faster, and Assisions Creed in not good at all. It's the deep reason I like a game or not... Now that I think about it.
Very well put delete. Once I’ve reached the pinnacle, pushed all boundaries I lose interest.
I prefer a system to not put artificial boundaries on a player -- IE in everquest you could get EVERY trade skill. It was insanely pricy difficult and time consuming to attain such a goal, but if you were crazy enough, you could attempt it, or more likely be a diletante at every trade skill.
The opposite was WoW where you had to choose two. Usually this meant a character avoided crafting altogether in favor of gathering skills. It wasn't all that hard to max most of these skills -- your limits were that you could only have two.
The very worst is when if you decide to go deep into crafting, you aren't as good a fighter.
Optimally doing everything should be available but it shouldn't be practical. IE your character might be good enough at herbalism and potion making to make basic healing potions for yourself at a cheaper rate (say 50 gp) than a dedicated crafter would likely sell them for (say 60 gp) but that crafter is making them for 30 gp and getting critically good ones occasionally. That little dip into herbalism/potion making shouldn't make your true crafting focus of helmet making any more difficult, but there aren't enough hours in the day to be a master at everything.
Like many of us you are a grinder. This is something old school mmos did exceptionally well.
Maybe It's because my taste changed in my old age but I hate grinding in MMOs now. I love a good story I can level up to like in FFXIV,
ESO. Even if I have to do dungeons, at least it's something other than
playing mob wack-o-mole with no real point for hours upon hours. I don't really rush through dialog as long as it's a read or listen. I do understand some games just do terrible jobs telling stories and get why people want to skip it, which is what I found myself doing in Tera.
As for grinding I think Baz Nitches on Dathomir and Piket lairs on Dantooine while leveling my Jedi killed the love of
grinding for ever. I tried to do it in other games later, I just can't do it
anymore.
I can still remember the day it hit me that grinding sucks. It
was in Aion while spending 4 hours trying to ding that next level so I
could get better gear and continue with the story...I thought, wth do I
need to grind to continue the story? Shouldn't the story provide the XP I
need? Now SWG had no story, it was all grinding, but since the game had no story, I didn't feel I was missing anything. Different expersince. I tried playing swg emu and the MBH grind is real, I just can't bring myself to do it.
I'd like role playing games to focus more on the character's emotions and feelings rather than their gear or skills. The more interesting character can be lonely, cold, humorous, generous, or afraid, but no games really focuses on acting those kind of traits out. These all occur in your mind, and by not reacting to the character, these worlds feel small and lifeless.
Gear and skills are fun, but that shouldn't be all to a character. A character is more than the sum of their HPs, Mana, and End.
But how do you apply that to a game? The only way I can see is for NPCs to say things about them as they walk by. (Which I think would be great.) "There's that man, the one in the green cloak and red hat. He's a dour one, that one!" "Aye, he depresses me just lookin' at him."
Or...
"Oh my, that lass with the golden helm, she makes my day." "Oh yes, she is such a bright one."
Got any ideas? Most of that stuff is RP, and pretty much only in that player's mind, as most other players just ignore and forget it.
Have you played Hellblade?
The key to adding additional emotional depth to a character in a game is to allow for the alteration of the environment as it responds to the character or altering the perspective of the environment by the character.
Hellblade is one of the few games that actually portray a character's emotions "right."
Like Skyrim? Need more content? Try my Skyrim mod "Godfred's Tomb."
Character building isn't the only thing that matters, but it's definitely a competitor for top spot. Having a character gain new abilities and ways of solving problems (whether combat, new dialogue options, abilities that help solve puzzles, etc.) is incredibly important to my enjoyment of a game.
Dark Souls for example, I enjoy knowing that after this boss I'll have enough souls to level up and use a new weapon/spell, or that there's a drop coming up that is going to change the way I play. Or in D&D when a spellcaster hits a new spell level and unlocks a whole world of possibilities. Milestone levels in WoW where you unlock important talents that give you new strategies (e.g. unlocking the traits needed to AoE grind on mage).
If I go too long without gaining new abilities the game starts to feel stale. You master your skills, use the best wombo combo and then lose interest. A new ability can change everything. Not just the order you use skills, but the challenges you chose to confront. Unlocking an AoE or Lay on Hands type ability suddenly makes areas that you couldn't possibly handle before seem feasible.
Sometimes I'll even use a worse option just to spice things up. Like using Witch Suckcession in BDO. It's a dumpster fire with lower damage, less protection, less CC, smaller AoE, and requires way too many skill points to train your abilities, but it's new and interesting so I like it because I have new ways to approach old fights.
Just grinding for raw numbers doesn't interest me, but having my character constantly mature and become more complete is very satisfying. Especially if it's a game with a lot of customization where you get to build your unique little snowflake and play exactly how you want to. A good character advancement system can make up for a lot of holes in content and story.
I'd like role playing games to focus more on the character's emotions and feelings rather than their gear or skills. The more interesting character can be lonely, cold, humorous, generous, or afraid, but no games really focuses on acting those kind of traits out. These all occur in your mind, and by not reacting to the character, these worlds feel small and lifeless.
Gear and skills are fun, but that shouldn't be all to a character. A character is more than the sum of their HPs, Mana, and End.
But how do you apply that to a game? The only way I can see is for NPCs to say things about them as they walk by. (Which I think would be great.) "There's that man, the one in the green cloak and red hat. He's a dour one, that one!" "Aye, he depresses me just lookin' at him."
Or...
"Oh my, that lass with the golden helm, she makes my day." "Oh yes, she is such a bright one."
Got any ideas? Most of that stuff is RP, and pretty much only in that player's mind, as most other players just ignore and forget it.
Have you played Hellblade?
The key to adding additional emotional depth to a character in a game is to allow for the alteration of the environment as it responds to the character or altering the perspective of the environment by the character.
No, I haven't. I don't even understand what you are saying here, lol. Can you give me just a basic example so I can get on the right track of thought?
When I ran that system as a tabletop campaign, that personality system was an absolute bear to GM. It was kinda funny to see people trying to role play some of the various traits, like Arbitrary. That's why I wanted to incorporate a system to allow other players to evaluate these kinds of things. There's no way any company could afford enough GMs to judge everything.
It would be interesting to try to incorporate player groups into this scheme. Right off the top of my head, having a 'trait' for a guild be something like a one-ended scale, i.e., Lore of the Wastelands like in your examples. What would be on the opposite end of a two-ended scale, though? I could see it more as group/guild 'ideal', and even specify what personality 'traits' they valued. Maybe even to generate guild-only 'rewards' to tie into a standardized loot distribution system.
I'll think on it.
Yeah, I saw that one ended scale you are talking about as an issue, too.
1. After some thought, I think that one way to go is to average the scale scores out, and grant rewards or penalties evenly based on average.
2. Another way would be to take that average and reward overall points, that are then issued out by the Guild Master as rewards to members. But that gets back to the one ended scale issue again.
3. Then again, if a Guild's dedication (what they do, "Lore of the Wastelands" for example) would benefit from being positive in the eyes of a Deity and rewarded, maybe nature can take it's course on an individual basis? Maybe a Shrine, Altar, or Temple owned by Player or Guild can give a bonus on the scale score of any individual Player Character? This last one, I think, is a pretty good way to go. It's natural and has synergy in a worldly way.
Like many of us you are a grinder. This is something old school mmos did exceptionally well.
Maybe It's because my taste changed in my old age but I hate grinding in MMOs now. I love a good story I can level up to like in FFXIV,
ESO. Even if I have to do dungeons, at least it's something other than
playing mob wack-o-mole with no real point for hours upon hours. I don't really rush through dialog as long as it's a read or listen. I do understand some games just do terrible jobs telling stories and get why people want to skip it, which is what I found myself doing in Tera.
As for grinding I think Baz Nitches on Dathomir and Piket lairs on Dantooine while leveling my Jedi killed the love of
grinding for ever. I tried to do it in other games later, I just can't do it
anymore.
I can still remember the day it hit me that grinding sucks. It
was in Aion while spending 4 hours trying to ding that next level so I
could get better gear and continue with the story...I thought, wth do I
need to grind to continue the story? Shouldn't the story provide the XP I
need? Now SWG had no story, it was all grinding, but since the game had no story, I didn't feel I was missing anything. Different expersince. I tried playing swg emu and the MBH grind is real, I just can't bring myself to do it.
What I pick up from this:
"Even if I have to do dungeons".... You don't like to play with others.
"4 hours trying to ding".... You only want 30 days of content.
Why play an online game ?..... For years now, I'm trying to find the attraction for people like this.
I like rpg games with build variety that changes the way you play but I can't stand level progression that gives you +X in most/all combat stats and where all swords/axes swings the same. Every level should feel important because you gain something new, filler levels are pointless.
Many mmorpg falls into the level filler trap at the higher level, +3 levels often means the only change is that you get to equip +3 level gear, get a +3 level modifier so you can fight +3 level bears and go to a +3 level dungeon.
I played witcher games for the overall story so I wasn't bothered about the game being light when it came to rpg combat elements.
Iselin: And the next person who says "but it's a business, they need to make money" can just go fuck yourself.
Like many of us you are a grinder. This is something old school mmos did exceptionally well.
Maybe It's because my taste changed in my old age but I hate grinding in MMOs now. I love a good story I can level up to like in FFXIV,
ESO. Even if I have to do dungeons, at least it's something other than
playing mob wack-o-mole with no real point for hours upon hours. I don't really rush through dialog as long as it's a read or listen. I do understand some games just do terrible jobs telling stories and get why people want to skip it, which is what I found myself doing in Tera.
As for grinding I think Baz Nitches on Dathomir and Piket lairs on Dantooine while leveling my Jedi killed the love of
grinding for ever. I tried to do it in other games later, I just can't do it
anymore.
I can still remember the day it hit me that grinding sucks. It
was in Aion while spending 4 hours trying to ding that next level so I
could get better gear and continue with the story...I thought, wth do I
need to grind to continue the story? Shouldn't the story provide the XP I
need? Now SWG had no story, it was all grinding, but since the game had no story, I didn't feel I was missing anything. Different expersince. I tried playing swg emu and the MBH grind is real, I just can't bring myself to do it.
What I pick up from this:
"Even if I have to do dungeons".... You don't like to play with others.
"4 hours trying to ding".... You only want 30 days of content.
Why play an online game ?..... For years now, I'm trying to find the attraction for people like this.
You aren't very good at guessing. All wrong. If that were it I wouldn't play FFXIV. I just hate the queues some days, luckily unlike some MMOs I've played I always have a group to get in with instead of pushing it off to another day.
Just to add you obviously never leveled a Jedi in SWG. PreCu you had to play alone to avoid visibility. It wasn't until a little into the CU they allowed no visibility grouping. As for Aion, it was just shit back in the day. Eventually they fixed the leveling issues since everyone was complaining about the grind. Bashing away on the same mob for hours and seeing little level bar
movement just to resume your story is tedious any way you look at it, even while running macros.
Good thing most MMOs evolved passed that.
Character building is very important...i believe that is why I find so many of the newer MMOs so shallow...It's also why the battle royales will never appeal to me.
Like many of us you are a grinder. This is something old school mmos did exceptionally well.
Maybe It's because my taste changed in my old age but I hate grinding in MMOs now. I love a good story I can level up to like in FFXIV,
ESO. Even if I have to do dungeons, at least it's something other than
playing mob wack-o-mole with no real point for hours upon hours. I don't really rush through dialog as long as it's a read or listen. I do understand some games just do terrible jobs telling stories and get why people want to skip it, which is what I found myself doing in Tera.
As for grinding I think Baz Nitches on Dathomir and Piket lairs on Dantooine while leveling my Jedi killed the love of
grinding for ever. I tried to do it in other games later, I just can't do it
anymore.
I can still remember the day it hit me that grinding sucks. It
was in Aion while spending 4 hours trying to ding that next level so I
could get better gear and continue with the story...I thought, wth do I
need to grind to continue the story? Shouldn't the story provide the XP I
need? Now SWG had no story, it was all grinding, but since the game had no story, I didn't feel I was missing anything. Different expersince. I tried playing swg emu and the MBH grind is real, I just can't bring myself to do it.
The "Whack-A-Mole" had randomness, called RNGeesus. That made them interesting to me and also "downtime", which allowed for chatting between rounds. MMOs today don't have that at all, or at least not the player's' mindset. You hit if facing the right way. You block or dodge if you hit the right button at the right time. 100% success rate.
Whack-a-mole camp sitting is still not my preferred design choice, but I prefer it to many of the "new innovations" MMOs have gone to
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I'd like role playing games to focus more on the character's emotions and feelings rather than their gear or skills. The more interesting character can be lonely, cold, humorous, generous, or afraid, but no games really focuses on acting those kind of traits out. These all occur in your mind, and by not reacting to the character, these worlds feel small and lifeless.
Gear and skills are fun, but that shouldn't be all to a character. A character is more than the sum of their HPs, Mana, and End.
But how do you apply that to a game? The only way I can see is for NPCs to say things about them as they walk by. (Which I think would be great.) "There's that man, the one in the green cloak and red hat. He's a dour one, that one!" "Aye, he depresses me just lookin' at him."
Or...
"Oh my, that lass with the golden helm, she makes my day." "Oh yes, she is such a bright one."
Got any ideas? Most of that stuff is RP, and pretty much only in that player's mind, as most other players just ignore and forget it.
Have you played Hellblade?
The key to adding additional emotional depth to a character in a game is to allow for the alteration of the environment as it responds to the character or altering the perspective of the environment by the character.
No, I haven't. I don't even understand what you are saying here, lol. Can you give me just a basic example so I can get on the right track of thought?
I haven't played it (released on some console only, but now on Steam for PC), but Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice is an action adventure game about a Pict woman dealing with Psychosis while trying to retrieve her dead lover from Hell.
From the wiki: The game's narrative serves as a metaphor for the character's struggle with psychosis, as Senua, who suffers from the condition but believes it to be a curse, is haunted by an entity known as the "Darkness", voices in her head known as "Furies", and memories from her past. To properly represent psychosis, developers worked closely with neuroscientists, mental health specialists, and people suffering from the condition.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
I hit the agree button because I agree with the broad point. I am not a fan of Witcher 3 (or 2 or 1).
The thing that I absolutely need and means the most to me and will make up for a ton of other faults is the depth of and choices of the rpg systems. I like character generation to be choice heavy and I love leveling up to be choice heavy.
I skip most games that people now consider rpgs because I know they will have a sophomoric system that requires no thought and is geared towards six year olds, people that don't enjoy thinking, or people who don't mind big blockbuster games with a tiny bit of what they consider an rpg system as long as it is simple and does not require any or much thought. I didn't even bother checking into the new Assassin's Creed because I knew it would be sophomoric and moronic and an insult to rpg fans to give it the label of rpg.
There are some exceptions to this. WoW through WotLK is probably the only really major game I can think of that also had a decent rpg system. I also can't get into pure dungeon crawlers when they have no content (quests, NPCs, shops, etc.) like the two Grimrocks, or Vaporium, even when they have decent rpg systems.
The absolute best for me is getting a new game with complex systems and great chardev and figuring out the system and testing builds, etc. I had a ton of fun in Champions Online for instance.
"Either/Or" is a choice I like. "Now or Later" is not. Remember the traits in the original Fallout games? Both good and bad modifiers. Made me think hard about my choices.
Now, most RPGs are just a matter of "when" you get a skill or ability, not a real choice. Now NPC dialogue has been watered down to "Yes.", "No.", "Insulting." NPCs don't react to player character with any semblance of intelligence.
City of Heroes did a really simple thing where as you passed by NPCs on the streets, they'd say some quip about you and some accomplishment (mission completed) you did ("Did you hear about Skybolt36 defeating The Lost?". Skyrim kind of did something like that, but for some reason it felt "fake" or unnatural. Skyrim also had the "big world decisions" that effected the world not at all, or very little (yay... the Jarls changed out).
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse. - FARGIN_WAR
City of Heroes did a really simple thing where as you passed by NPCs on the streets, they'd say some quip about you and some accomplishment (mission completed) you did ("Did you hear about Skybolt36 defeating The Lost?".
Loved that, it was a really good idea, and a few games implemented it later - besides Cryptic, I mean, since they naturally used it again in CO, maybe even updated it a bit, random civilians go to you and ask your autograph, etc.
Sometimes even talk among each other about you, like when two stand near you and you hear
"-Look, isn't that Skybolt36?
-I don't think so, they say he has a cape..." (using your hero name example )
The "now or later" is a good point, sadly a clear consequence of today's gamer has to have everything, that's why the streamlined and generalized games where everyone's a sturdy dps with self heals just so they could be independent and self-reliable.
Mini in LotRO is a good example, I miss the original one... now it's a ranged dps killing machine, a full healer, and an above average tank/off-tank, rolled in one. At start it was a healer in the old, EQ-esque meaning, squishy, group-dependent, painful to level, but in return a very useful member of the group and a rewarding play. Good times...
I prefer a system to not put artificial boundaries on a player -- IE in everquest you could get EVERY trade skill. It was insanely pricy difficult and time consuming to attain such a goal, but if you were crazy enough, you could attempt it, or more likely be a diletante at every trade skill.
The opposite was WoW where you had to choose two. Usually this meant a character avoided crafting altogether in favor of gathering skills. It wasn't all that hard to max most of these skills -- your limits were that you could only have two.
The very worst is when if you decide to go deep into crafting, you aren't as good a fighter.
Optimally doing everything should be available but it shouldn't be practical. IE your character might be good enough at herbalism and potion making to make basic healing potions for yourself at a cheaper rate (say 50 gp) than a dedicated crafter would likely sell them for (say 60 gp) but that crafter is making them for 30 gp and getting critically good ones occasionally. That little dip into herbalism/potion making shouldn't make your true crafting focus of helmet making any more difficult, but there aren't enough hours in the day to be a master at everything.
I'm the exact opposite. If every character can max everything, what is the point? There is no builds. There is just one build it takes a while to get.
Also, how is it artificial? How many master chefs are also master blacksmiths? To become a true master of something means you focus on that at the exclusion of other things.
I wouldn't mind a system with some choices, like you have six trade skills with four tiers (apprentice, journeyman, master, grandmaster). You get twelve points to put into tiers, so you get get journeyman in all six trade skills (jack of all trades, master of none) - or grandmaster three.
That was a simple example, but you get my point. I just can't fathom how anyone could thing restrictions are artificial, especially in an rpg. What if we apply that to the generic trinity? Where tanks are also the best healers because restrictions would be artificial? Or dps the best tanks or healers? Why have builds? Why have roles? Restrictions are bad so everyone can do anything at anytime equally well as anyone else?
Restrictions make absolute sense, especially in rpgs. An NBA player will never be a great at gymnastics. Gymnasts are usually shorter and have a specific body type that supports the needed center of gravity, etc. Again, just a simple, not-in-depth example. But you get my point.
Comments
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
The thing that I absolutely need and means the most to me and will make up for a ton of other faults is the depth of and choices of the rpg systems. I like character generation to be choice heavy and I love leveling up to be choice heavy.
I skip most games that people now consider rpgs because I know they will have a sophomoric system that requires no thought and is geared towards six year olds, people that don't enjoy thinking, or people who don't mind big blockbuster games with a tiny bit of what they consider an rpg system as long as it is simple and does not require any or much thought. I didn't even bother checking into the new Assassin's Creed because I knew it would be sophomoric and moronic and an insult to rpg fans to give it the label of rpg.
There are some exceptions to this. WoW through WotLK is probably the only really major game I can think of that also had a decent rpg system. I also can't get into pure dungeon crawlers when they have no content (quests, NPCs, shops, etc.) like the two Grimrocks, or Vaporium, even when they have decent rpg systems.
The absolute best for me is getting a new game with complex systems and great chardev and figuring out the system and testing builds, etc. I had a ton of fun in Champions Online for instance.
Another example would be the Etrian Odyssey series. The chardev carried the games for me. The combat could be pretty good once in a while, but was mostly grind, grind, grind. I dislike looking up what to kill x mob with to get the special part, the story content was very lite, but I really enjoy creating my own party and building them, etc.
Too much (great) story, not enough sandbox, it just feels too much on rails, even if you ignore the main story.
On the other hand I just love Bethesda (buggy) RPGs, all of them.
It’s the only developer that makes RPGs the way I like it.
I played Skyrim 10+ times and only finished the main story once at my second play through.
Same for Fallout 4, but I actually never finish the main story once.
I am just not interested in the storylines.
Of course I also played Daggerfall, Morrowind and Oblivion to death.
I wish there were more RPGs like Bethesda, possibly with less bugs.
The opposite was WoW where you had to choose two. Usually this meant a character avoided crafting altogether in favor of gathering skills. It wasn't all that hard to max most of these skills -- your limits were that you could only have two.
The very worst is when if you decide to go deep into crafting, you aren't as good a fighter.
Optimally doing everything should be available but it shouldn't be practical. IE your character might be good enough at herbalism and potion making to make basic healing potions for yourself at a cheaper rate (say 50 gp) than a dedicated crafter would likely sell them for (say 60 gp) but that crafter is making them for 30 gp and getting critically good ones occasionally. That little dip into herbalism/potion making shouldn't make your true crafting focus of helmet making any more difficult, but there aren't enough hours in the day to be a master at everything.
Hellblade is one of the few games that actually portray a character's emotions "right."
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Godfred's Tomb Trailer: https://youtu.be/-nsXGddj_4w
Original Skyrim: https://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/109547
Serph toze kindly has started a walk-through. https://youtu.be/UIelCK-lldo
Once upon a time....
1. After some thought, I think that one way to go is to average the scale scores out, and grant rewards or penalties evenly based on average.
2. Another way would be to take that average and reward overall points, that are then issued out by the Guild Master as rewards to members. But that gets back to the one ended scale issue again.
3. Then again, if a Guild's dedication (what they do, "Lore of the Wastelands" for example) would benefit from being positive in the eyes of a Deity and rewarded, maybe nature can take it's course on an individual basis?
Maybe a Shrine, Altar, or Temple owned by Player or Guild can give a bonus on the scale score of any individual Player Character?
This last one, I think, is a pretty good way to go. It's natural and has synergy in a worldly way.
Once upon a time....
"Even if I have to do dungeons".... You don't like to play with others.
"4 hours trying to ding".... You only want 30 days of content.
Why play an online game ?..... For years now, I'm trying to find the attraction for people like this.
Many mmorpg falls into the level filler trap at the higher level, +3 levels often means the only change is that you get to equip +3 level gear, get a +3 level modifier so you can fight +3 level bears and go to a +3 level dungeon.
I played witcher games for the overall story so I wasn't bothered about the game being light when it came to rpg combat elements.
Whack-a-mole camp sitting is still not my preferred design choice, but I prefer it to many of the "new innovations" MMOs have gone to
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
From the wiki:
The game's narrative serves as a metaphor for the character's struggle with psychosis, as Senua, who suffers from the condition but believes it to be a curse, is haunted by an entity known as the "Darkness", voices in her head known as "Furies", and memories from her past. To properly represent psychosis, developers worked closely with neuroscientists, mental health specialists, and people suffering from the condition.
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Now, most RPGs are just a matter of "when" you get a skill or ability, not a real choice. Now NPC dialogue has been watered down to "Yes.", "No.", "Insulting." NPCs don't react to player character with any semblance of intelligence.
City of Heroes did a really simple thing where as you passed by NPCs on the streets, they'd say some quip about you and some accomplishment (mission completed) you did ("Did you hear about Skybolt36 defeating The Lost?". Skyrim kind of did something like that, but for some reason it felt "fake" or unnatural. Skyrim also had the "big world decisions" that effected the world not at all, or very little (yay... the Jarls changed out).
- Al
Personally the only modern MMORPG trend that annoys me is the idea that MMOs need to be designed in a way to attract people who don't actually like MMOs. Which to me makes about as much sense as someone trying to figure out a way to get vegetarians to eat at their steakhouse.- FARGIN_WAR
Also, how is it artificial? How many master chefs are also master blacksmiths? To become a true master of something means you focus on that at the exclusion of other things.
I wouldn't mind a system with some choices, like you have six trade skills with four tiers (apprentice, journeyman, master, grandmaster). You get twelve points to put into tiers, so you get get journeyman in all six trade skills (jack of all trades, master of none) - or grandmaster three.
That was a simple example, but you get my point. I just can't fathom how anyone could thing restrictions are artificial, especially in an rpg. What if we apply that to the generic trinity? Where tanks are also the best healers because restrictions would be artificial? Or dps the best tanks or healers? Why have builds? Why have roles? Restrictions are bad so everyone can do anything at anytime equally well as anyone else?
Restrictions make absolute sense, especially in rpgs. An NBA player will never be a great at gymnastics. Gymnasts are usually shorter and have a specific body type that supports the needed center of gravity, etc. Again, just a simple, not-in-depth example. But you get my point.