Forums » Suggestions
I see where the 'player is the character' people are coming from, and they have a good argument, but I think that they are missing a couple of important points.
1) One of the reasons people play RPG's is to be something other than what they are.
2) Stats help structure the player's thinking about his character. They give the player something meaningful to look at which tells them what thier character is about. They force the player to make design decisions which influence how they think about thier character.
3) Stats help channel a player into careers. If you develop a set of 'social' stats to the exclusion of other kinds of stats (like combat stats), then you are encouraged to make the most of your ability to excel in that field rather than in other areas. This makes you different. Without stats, the things you choose to do with your character are entirely arbitrary and will likely be inconsistant.
4) Freeform play may lead to realistic nuanced characters, but realistic nuanced characters are not good for RPG's. The problem with realism is that it typically doesn't lend itself to story telling. A typical RPG character - or for that matter the typical character of an adventure story or situation comedy - has a highly exagerrated unrealistic personality that makes him (or her) immediately distinctive and memorable. Simple character ideas lend themselves to impromptu storytelling. Vendetta doesn't help with that. Stat based systems do.
I'm by no means suggesting that combat become Everquest style stat contests, nor am I suggesting that the reputation system shouldn't be the primary basis for determining what items you can buy. I'm suggesting that the lack of structure leads to very unthoughtful play. For the most part, people not only do not have an idea in thier heads about what character that they are playing, but they have no idea that they should have an idea in thier heads about what character they are playing.
1) One of the reasons people play RPG's is to be something other than what they are.
2) Stats help structure the player's thinking about his character. They give the player something meaningful to look at which tells them what thier character is about. They force the player to make design decisions which influence how they think about thier character.
3) Stats help channel a player into careers. If you develop a set of 'social' stats to the exclusion of other kinds of stats (like combat stats), then you are encouraged to make the most of your ability to excel in that field rather than in other areas. This makes you different. Without stats, the things you choose to do with your character are entirely arbitrary and will likely be inconsistant.
4) Freeform play may lead to realistic nuanced characters, but realistic nuanced characters are not good for RPG's. The problem with realism is that it typically doesn't lend itself to story telling. A typical RPG character - or for that matter the typical character of an adventure story or situation comedy - has a highly exagerrated unrealistic personality that makes him (or her) immediately distinctive and memorable. Simple character ideas lend themselves to impromptu storytelling. Vendetta doesn't help with that. Stat based systems do.
I'm by no means suggesting that combat become Everquest style stat contests, nor am I suggesting that the reputation system shouldn't be the primary basis for determining what items you can buy. I'm suggesting that the lack of structure leads to very unthoughtful play. For the most part, people not only do not have an idea in thier heads about what character that they are playing, but they have no idea that they should have an idea in thier heads about what character they are playing.
word. welcome back, Celebrim!
Well, unless you did a 180 from your view in February, where you said "I am talking about whole spectrum of parameters that NEED to be here for this game to be classified as RPG.", I'm afraid I'll have to disagree a bit once more. Since crafting as seen in other MMOs is more or less directly dependant upon a game of numbers - unless you make that too into a skill element (harder, but can be done), our views on RPGing - as you put it, alternative ways of playing - are mutually exclusive.
That said, I have a hard time seeing Joe Pilot assembling his own lasers. In a fantasy game, crafting can make sense. In a space era game, less so. Some fashion of it makes sense - but the traditional MMORPG style where you (can) make your own equipment stuffs doesn't.
So, I think we agree on that crafting could be nifty. How to make it at least somewhat fitting (and, in my ideal world of worlds, not dependant upon player characteristics what so ever) is the real issue.
The only spontaneous thing that springs to mind would be missions a la Zelda (fetch me this, fetch me that) leading to funkier stuff (here, new and improved master sword). I'm sure there's more imaginative ways out there, though. Ideas?
That said, I have a hard time seeing Joe Pilot assembling his own lasers. In a fantasy game, crafting can make sense. In a space era game, less so. Some fashion of it makes sense - but the traditional MMORPG style where you (can) make your own equipment stuffs doesn't.
So, I think we agree on that crafting could be nifty. How to make it at least somewhat fitting (and, in my ideal world of worlds, not dependant upon player characteristics what so ever) is the real issue.
The only spontaneous thing that springs to mind would be missions a la Zelda (fetch me this, fetch me that) leading to funkier stuff (here, new and improved master sword). I'm sure there's more imaginative ways out there, though. Ideas?
>1) One of the reasons people play RPG's is to be something other >than what they are.
Very true. However, this game neither is designed to appeal to the majority of RPG denizens, nor is really based on the same idealogical landscape at all, save that the chars are virtual and can do things we can't.
>2) Stats help structure the player's thinking about his >character. They give the player something meaningful to look at which >tells them what thier character is about. They force the >player to make design decisions which influence how they think about >thier character.
Generally the 'decisions' of which you speak are forced onto the player because the player has 'X number of stat points' he can spend, which forces him to know in advance how he intends to specialize, and follow a regimen of character advancement to fufill that without "wasting potential."
>3) Stats help channel a player into careers. If you develop a set of 'social' stats to the exclusion of other kinds of stats (like >combat stats), then you are encouraged to make the most of your ability to excel in that field rather than in other areas. This >makes you different. Without stats, the things you choose to do with your character are entirely arbitrary and will likely be >inconsistant.
And this is bad, how? The entire point of VO is to be a self governing system. People will, as in real life, end up doing what they are good at and what they enjoy. This may not quite fit the over-exaggerated charactature profile we've come to expect of most games, but all in all, many playing styles lend themselves do specific spectra of roles, and it's into those roles the ones using those styles will fall.
>4) Freeform play may lead to realistic nuanced characters, but >realistic nuanced characters are not good for RPG's. The >problem with realism is that it typically doesn't lend itself to story >telling. A typical RPG character - or for that matter the >typical character of an adventure story or situation comedy - >has a highly exagerrated unrealistic personality that makes him >(or her) immediately distinctive and memorable. Simple character >ideas lend themselves to impromptu storytelling. Vendetta >doesn't help with that. Stat based systems do.
See my point above.
>I'm by no means suggesting that combat become Everquest style >stat contests, nor am I suggesting that the reputation system >shouldn't be the primary basis for determining what items you >can buy. I'm suggesting that the lack of structure leads to very >unthoughtful play. For the most part, people not only do not >have an idea in thier heads about what character that they are >playing, but they have no idea that they should have an idea in >thier heads about what character they are playing.
There are really three species of games. Everquest games, where hit die, stats, and enemy strength rule the way the game's to be played with an iron fist, and it's understanding the stats and rules which allows one to win; luck games, where you rely on random chance to benevolently grant you the break needed to win(different from EQ type games in that EQ games, while "random," rely on the laws of statistics to insure their regularity); and skill based games, like VO, where a hit is a hit, a miss is a miss, and the skill of the player is as much a factor as what the player knows about the mechanics of the game.
If one adds more than a miniscule amount of the dice or luck based aspect to a skill based game, it no longer is a skill based game, and becomes one of the other two; so while you may not 'want to make something quite like EQ,' if you try to emulate it AT ALL you will end up with something that is at its core very similar to it indeed.
Very true. However, this game neither is designed to appeal to the majority of RPG denizens, nor is really based on the same idealogical landscape at all, save that the chars are virtual and can do things we can't.
>2) Stats help structure the player's thinking about his >character. They give the player something meaningful to look at which >tells them what thier character is about. They force the >player to make design decisions which influence how they think about >thier character.
Generally the 'decisions' of which you speak are forced onto the player because the player has 'X number of stat points' he can spend, which forces him to know in advance how he intends to specialize, and follow a regimen of character advancement to fufill that without "wasting potential."
>3) Stats help channel a player into careers. If you develop a set of 'social' stats to the exclusion of other kinds of stats (like >combat stats), then you are encouraged to make the most of your ability to excel in that field rather than in other areas. This >makes you different. Without stats, the things you choose to do with your character are entirely arbitrary and will likely be >inconsistant.
And this is bad, how? The entire point of VO is to be a self governing system. People will, as in real life, end up doing what they are good at and what they enjoy. This may not quite fit the over-exaggerated charactature profile we've come to expect of most games, but all in all, many playing styles lend themselves do specific spectra of roles, and it's into those roles the ones using those styles will fall.
>4) Freeform play may lead to realistic nuanced characters, but >realistic nuanced characters are not good for RPG's. The >problem with realism is that it typically doesn't lend itself to story >telling. A typical RPG character - or for that matter the >typical character of an adventure story or situation comedy - >has a highly exagerrated unrealistic personality that makes him >(or her) immediately distinctive and memorable. Simple character >ideas lend themselves to impromptu storytelling. Vendetta >doesn't help with that. Stat based systems do.
See my point above.
>I'm by no means suggesting that combat become Everquest style >stat contests, nor am I suggesting that the reputation system >shouldn't be the primary basis for determining what items you >can buy. I'm suggesting that the lack of structure leads to very >unthoughtful play. For the most part, people not only do not >have an idea in thier heads about what character that they are >playing, but they have no idea that they should have an idea in >thier heads about what character they are playing.
There are really three species of games. Everquest games, where hit die, stats, and enemy strength rule the way the game's to be played with an iron fist, and it's understanding the stats and rules which allows one to win; luck games, where you rely on random chance to benevolently grant you the break needed to win(different from EQ type games in that EQ games, while "random," rely on the laws of statistics to insure their regularity); and skill based games, like VO, where a hit is a hit, a miss is a miss, and the skill of the player is as much a factor as what the player knows about the mechanics of the game.
If one adds more than a miniscule amount of the dice or luck based aspect to a skill based game, it no longer is a skill based game, and becomes one of the other two; so while you may not 'want to make something quite like EQ,' if you try to emulate it AT ALL you will end up with something that is at its core very similar to it indeed.
Soltis, that was such a good post I'm inclined to just agree rather than write something similar..
..so yeah, I agree.
..so yeah, I agree.
There is actually a third style of RPG's around, and one thats far more flexible than you think.
Its based on the same hit-die, chance, item strength and stats increase, except that unlike your average Everquest game, the stats increase slowly and automatically with every time you perform an action, leading to a cahracter who's traits are predominated by how much you do something.
This is the kind we actually have today. The player learns, Even though this is slower than most feel at ease with, we do learn. ( We also forget and start to suck again after a few thousand bots behind us :P )
Trade, bots, players, strategy and tactics. All are things learned in the game. A few are forseeable, a few aren't.
The problem I see with the current way is that at the moment, all people are more or less forced to evolve the same way due to constraints put on the devteam. I know they are doing their best to change this, and I seriously hope they will get it done soon enough for my restlessness sake.
Its based on the same hit-die, chance, item strength and stats increase, except that unlike your average Everquest game, the stats increase slowly and automatically with every time you perform an action, leading to a cahracter who's traits are predominated by how much you do something.
This is the kind we actually have today. The player learns, Even though this is slower than most feel at ease with, we do learn. ( We also forget and start to suck again after a few thousand bots behind us :P )
Trade, bots, players, strategy and tactics. All are things learned in the game. A few are forseeable, a few aren't.
The problem I see with the current way is that at the moment, all people are more or less forced to evolve the same way due to constraints put on the devteam. I know they are doing their best to change this, and I seriously hope they will get it done soon enough for my restlessness sake.
Spider, you are mistaken.
That is merely the old EQ style game in disguise. The only difference is HOW your stats change; the fact that your character's "skills," and not your own ability as a player, is what controls your strength and effectiveness ingame is unchanged.
In other words, while the game you outline is more organic and "natural," it's still controlled by hit die, and it's still you telling the character 'I want to do this' and the character doing it for you.
In a game such as VO, the character merely is capable of what you yourself are capable of, and thus ability, power, and effectiveness are directly derived from your own skill.
That is merely the old EQ style game in disguise. The only difference is HOW your stats change; the fact that your character's "skills," and not your own ability as a player, is what controls your strength and effectiveness ingame is unchanged.
In other words, while the game you outline is more organic and "natural," it's still controlled by hit die, and it's still you telling the character 'I want to do this' and the character doing it for you.
In a game such as VO, the character merely is capable of what you yourself are capable of, and thus ability, power, and effectiveness are directly derived from your own skill.
woo woo woo, i think you've gone too far with this dice and shti. nobody is saying that when you meet a player in game and you shoot to the left of him because of your stats you will win. if you, as a fighter, suck, you will suck and die no matter what XP you have. thing is, you will be able to get much more variation in weapons/ships/cargo if you could directly affect the stats of above mentioned items. and this is not even important part, what is major here is that you can do more than just trade to stations/NPCs or fight, you can produce goods and trade to players. you can earn money by having a job and assist people. you can do much more than simply carry cargo from point A to B and shoot bots/players on the way with standard weapons/ships. we only have around 10 ship models, they all look alike bar colour, only dozen or so weapons. granted, it's been a good step forward with MKII, MKIII and so on, but it is only touching a surface of what you should be able to do with items, cargo and ships, your character. and i am not alone in thinking so.
i'd like to hear what devs have to say on the matter. devs?
i'd like to hear what devs have to say on the matter. devs?
Hey, relax. The issue is not that we don't understand where you're coming from. We simply don't agree (And I'm saying "we" meaning "I, but I think I've got the idea of the other posters sharing my general sentiment")
I don't consider a numbers game as 'variation'. The point of roleplaying is immersion - in my book. Put numbers on it and you start losing bits of it. What you mention in your examples is in no way stat, XP or level dependant. I believe crafting is covered a few posts down (look for my previous post in this thread) and that too isn't neccessarily tied to a kludgy stats system.
I don't consider a numbers game as 'variation'. The point of roleplaying is immersion - in my book. Put numbers on it and you start losing bits of it. What you mention in your examples is in no way stat, XP or level dependant. I believe crafting is covered a few posts down (look for my previous post in this thread) and that too isn't neccessarily tied to a kludgy stats system.
Again, even though I'm sure i'm just repeating half of everyone else, I would like to just say this. I consider this game an MMO Space Sim, not an MMORPG. The difference being, in a space sim, player hand-eye skill matters more than anything else. You can upgrade your ship, and since we have the technology make it faster, stronger, and better. (sorry, had to include it) But it comes down to players playing the game because its a Space Sim, not an RPG. They want to dogfight people, or they want to set up a convoy to fly between planets to become the wealthiest being in the galaxy. But probably are originally drawn to the game, because you fly your ship around. You control the thrust, etc. This is a fundamental difference between games of (Don't jump on me for this) Skill vs a game of tactics.
This really is a game of reflexes, so if you need your levels in strafe+roll, please start practicing :P
That's my thoughts on "levels" influencing combat/control directly. On the other hand, we should have some form of crafting, whether by gaining research levels, and being able to put together rare elements into a new battery or something at a faction station. But this, probably can be balanced out. Possibly having some form of diplomatic skill to reduce prices a little. Though adding just a diplomatic skill would not make sense.
This really is a game of reflexes, so if you need your levels in strafe+roll, please start practicing :P
That's my thoughts on "levels" influencing combat/control directly. On the other hand, we should have some form of crafting, whether by gaining research levels, and being able to put together rare elements into a new battery or something at a faction station. But this, probably can be balanced out. Possibly having some form of diplomatic skill to reduce prices a little. Though adding just a diplomatic skill would not make sense.