• Create Account

Banner advertising on our site currently available from just $5! Phallic Compensation. Old topic! Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic. 46 replies to this topic #21Niphty Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 26 June 2000 - 03:50 PM What is the problem with Landfish''s wants? well.. they''re unrealistic! If you''re in a combat zone, and a bullet hits your foot. what happens? Well, the bullet pierces the skin, hot lead touches exposed nerve endings. These nerve endings send some chemicals along to the main nerve which sends a signal up your spine to your brain. your brain has some chemical displacement and suddenly your conscious hears a knock at the door "Sir! Right foot has been wounded, Sir!" Your consciousness thinks about this whilst your reactions go to work. You leap to the ground, screaming and grabbing your foot. Your eyes dart to the scene from a command from the subconscious. Look, blood! Yup, i''ve been hit. The exposed nerves feel the blood rushing past and debris as well.. sending even more chemicals along which say "dammit, help us!" You grab your foot, trying to stop it all. Why can''t this work in a game? the player doesn''t FEEL the character''s pain. We''re like the subconscious in a respect. An instinct almost. We either go to work fixing it, or something else. This is instinctual to people wounded. They often recall that they had no real clue as to what they were doing, but they were doing it. This is where training and SKILL comes in. The more skillful you are, the more instinctual it is to do something like this. You could easily break skills down into "book knowledge" and "field knowledge". Afterall, being shot at while you repair your foot is a bit different than having a simulated repairing in a classroom, yes? In short, the player doesn''t feel the character''s pain. They merely go "dammit!" as the character falls to the floor. "get back up you stupid character, get up!" is this how they''d react if THEY were shot? I doubt it Displaying the damage might not be enough. Afterall, who looks down at their foot whilst playing EQ? The N64 Goldeneye and Perfect Dark games both have a system where blood appears in the area where the person''s shot. You can''t look at yourself and see where you''re shot though. Unless you had an actual part in the frond end which displayed your body or something, and relative damage to parts like it does in mechwarrior games.. then it''s useless. If you do this, i could understand.. it''d be kinda cool, even but still, the player won''t feel the pain and usuallyjust becomes frustrated at the character because of it realize what role the player has in these situations and you can realize how to make a system that works correctly. knowledge IS power, afterall. J Sponsor: #22akujin Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 26 June 2000 - 04:30 PM Nice example. Reminds me of a game of Cyberpunk I played where my character died from shock after shooting himself in the foot. It wasn''t fun but it did add a bit more to the game than the usual, "Damn I just got shot. Where''s the medic so he can patch me up." As I was tossing those dice I was thinking, oh shit, I''m gonna die. I''m going to bleed to death and there''s not a thing I can do about it. It was great, my character died. I was pissed but it was fun in some odd twisted masochistic sort of way. If this could be done realistically in an online game than it would have been done already. It''s just not realistic. Even if I did have a little display of my character and the areas where he was hit at and bleeding from, I don''t think the experience would be quite the same as there seems to be a sort of detachment one acquired when playing any sort of computer based game to a degree. I''ve been doing table top for a while but it wasn''t until I introduced White Wolf to an avid computer gaming friend of mine that I ran into a minmaxer. THose wonderful powermaxing twinks that we all love to hate. For me the thought just never occured because I had been used to making a character and developing it over a long period of time. For him it was let''s see who gets to the end of the game first..only there was no real end. However, it didn''t stop him from finding a way to make a character who could get their first. Don''t get me wrong, I love computers and I even fancy myself a developer although someone''s SO keeps trying to curtail my creative energies with some blasted stat based d20 AD&D wanna be system but that''s okay. I''m not /too/ bitter. As I was saying, while the idea is nice, I don''t think it would float and it''d be more likely to piss more people off than it would please. Personally I say go for it but as someone keeps telling me, that''s not going to make you any money. Sucks, yes but that be life. A. #23Jeranon Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 26 June 2000 - 04:43 PM Go play Betrayal at Krondor. Oh look, a no level RPG, although there are still stats. #24Landfish Members - Reputation: 288 Like Likes Like Posted 26 June 2000 - 05:59 PM Intersting example, Nipht, but aren''t you relying on an extreme to illustrate a simple concept? How is noticing a change in physical characteristics any different than noticing a tiny number change or a bar go down? But back to the original issue... would static or near static statistics be any kind solution to powergaming? "The unexamined life is not worth living." -Socrates #25Landfish Members - Reputation: 288 Like Likes Like Posted 26 June 2000 - 06:00 PM Intersting example, Nipht, but aren''t you relying on an extreme to illustrate a simple concept? How is noticing a change in physical characteristics any different than noticing a tiny number change or a bar go down? But back to the original issue... would static or near static statistics be any kind solution to powergaming? "The unexamined life is not worth living." -Socrates #26Niphty Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 27 June 2000 - 03:55 AM Akujin, go for it man.. it never hurts to try Jeranon, it was also more strategy based, solve puzzles. Look at Myst, that''s TRUE RPG there. You played a person and ran around solving things. Or even other games which came before Myst. Landfish, I''m using the same example you did You said if your foot was wounded! ;p So, i ran with that. But it''s not gonna matter either way.. a picture of a body with it''s guts hanging out when your stomache explodes is likely the only way to make people feel something over it.. but they''ll likely only feel sick. hehe But hey.. that''d be the reality of it.. lol. I think it''d just be hard to do anything like the level of Mechwarrior. You don''t know EXACTLY how damaged your foot it. So how would you do it? Simply turn the foot red if bleeding, and yellow if bruised? It''s hard to decide what to do to make it come out right. The stats in D&D are static. You have to find SUPER RARE items to change them at all. The powermaxing there comes in from the best rolls and the best combo of skills and powers. With the vanilla D&D game, you can''t powermax too much. Skills and Powers offers you a WHOLE WORLD of minmaxing. So static stats might offer some hope, but only if skills don''t exist. What were you going to have along with the stats, if anything? J #27the_Senshi Members - Reputation: 122 Like Likes Like Posted 27 June 2000 - 04:49 AM Apparently my previous post was ignored (under my old nickname). Perhaps it''s because I forgot the landfish signal? Anyway, back to the topic: quote: But back to the original issue... would static or near static statistics be any kind solution to powergaming? No, at least not in a MMORPG unless you can figure out some other way to allow the players to gain status. That''s what it''s all about, status. Players like to know that they''re the best. And they want to flaunt it, and shove it down the other players throats until everyone is just about ready to kick the player''s @$\$ .

Personally I would like a static statistical system. But I''m an oddball. Most players enjoy advancing.

As I said before, the best approach is to let the players advance, but change the *way* in which they advance. If players are rewarded for ROLE-playing, then they''ll want to roleplay. For instance, if you decide to become the hiddeously evil goblin, then you shouldn''t show mercy. You should go destroy villages to your hearts content. And you should be rewarded for that. And un-goblin like actions should *not* be rewarded.

And at the opposite end, if your a hero, you should be rewarded for honorable deads. But you shouldn''t be rewarded for killing helpless animals.

getting to the point...

Stats aren''t bad. But the way we give them out is. Reward players for roleplaying instead of leveling helpless animals .

----------------------------------
"Death has come to your tea cup."

#28Nazrix  Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 05:04 AM

quote:

Reward players for roleplaying instead of leveling helpless animals.

I couldn't possibly agree more, but that would be incredibly difficult to implement completely in a game...especially an MMORPG. The mud Faerun (which IMO is a very good MUD) they have the imms watch people and reward the ones that RP a lot with RP points which they can use for special rewards like money and other stuff. The thing is, that mud has about 40 ppl or so at any given time, so it's not as hard for the imms to watch ppl. In a big MMORPG there's thousands, so it would be very hard for them to watch everyone. I guess what we need is a game that itself is designed to perpetuate RPing. I don't think that ALL players just want to show off how great they are...Most do however.

I used to play on a free-form RPG which was basically just a chat room. The cool thing there was to allow the char to have weaknesses and not just be all-powerful, so I know there are players that consider Role-play the priority.

The trick is to design the game with the players in mind that would not want to show off how great they are. One thing that would help is permanent death. It's harsh, but ppl wouldn't want to go around killing stuff to show how strong they are if it could mean their character is dead forever. Okay...that's enough of my ramblings...

Edited by - Nazrix on June 27, 2000 12:13:42 PM

#29the_Senshi  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 05:24 AM

quote:

One thing that would help is permanent death.

I like that idea. Just make it so that when you die, you lose your character. Or maybe you can give them 2-3 deaths before they lose their character, to safeguard against accidents. This will also allow players to become much more attached to their characters.

quote:

I couldn''t possibly agree more, but that would be incredibly difficult to implement completely in a game...especially an MMORPG.

I''m thinking more like things you can have a computer recognize. For instance, it''s pretty easy for the computer to figure out when your just killing things, or when your helping other players, or when your being a baddy, etc.

Also (pet peeve), maybe the computer could figure out when your talking out of character by looking for certain text statements. For example, you shouldn''t be rewarded for talking like this: "r u going to k1ll the D?". That''s just annoying in an RPG .

----------------------------------
"Death has come to your tea cup."

#30Nazrix  Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 06:00 AM

Yeah, as long as the computer can justly regulate those things...it's a great idea...

I know I've posted about this game before, but I really think they have the right idea when it comes to MMORPGs

Majik

Edited by - Nazrix on June 27, 2000 1:03:49 PM

#31pacman  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 07:42 AM

To answer your question, Mr.Fish, static attributes will not end minmaxing. I remember in one of the AD&D campaigns I used to play in, there was this one guy who did just that. As you know, AD&D has static attributes (unless your DM is really nice). He still had to have the best weapons, the best armor, the best horse.... you see my point. He didn''t care that the DM thought that his swashbuckler shouldn''t use a two-handed sword, it did the most damage, and that''s all he cared about.

Real role-playing is the only way to truly prevent people from minmaxing. There is no DM in CRPGs, so you have to hardcode all these things in and hope they work.

The Senshi is totally on track here. If someone makes a hero character, they should be penalized for attacking helpless/innocent beings. Evil characters should be punished for not doing these things. If heroes let the evil people do these things, they should be penalized again......

However, allowing charachters to grow will make heroes band together to fight the more powerful villian, and vice versa. There are tons of ways of MAKING people role play, why try to change something that aint broke. Sure, *urp* leveling is abused sometimes, but done right, it is rewarding and fun.

On another note, Landfish, I really hate hit points. They are so stupid, they make no sense, and they piss me off. I''ve always tried to avoid them, but I still don''t have a good system on paper (that isn''t too much like another game''s system ). I was just saying that player stats, weapon stats, etc. don''t have to be non-numerical to be effective.

I''m interested in everyone''s thoughts on this (3rd and 4th par).

/*initiates shouldn't have signatures*/

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 11:19 AM

Myst wasn''t an RPG. It was a visually stunning puzzle game. It''s roleplaying elements were really no greater then the roleplaying elements of games in any other genre. After all, in almost any game you buy, you do assume a role that is not equivalent to a person sitting at a computer playing a game.

It would be easy to look for text like R u a kewl dood? But how easy would it be to look for text like Did you hear about that nasty accident that happened yesterday? Not only is it not so easy to write code that accurately finds good or bad roleplaying, or people acting in a good or bad way, but it''s also highly subjective to one''s definition of those very things. I''m not saying it''s impossible, but it''s certainly improbable, and would indeed be a difficult task to do well.

#33Facehat  Members   -  Reputation: 696

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 11:31 AM

I see what your saying Raskell, but the point is not to make a perfect system, but rather to make one which encourages roleplaying and rewards it for the most part.

Heck, no system IS perfect. Even human ops wouldn''t work perfectly. The idea is just to make an incentive to keep players in their roles, not to make a police system .

-------------------------------------------
"Don't worry about it sir, it's an eye-dee-ten-tee error -- takes too long to explain -- have a nice day."
I d 10 t

#34Nazrix  Members   -  Reputation: 307

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 11:43 AM

quote:
Original post by The Senshi

I see what your saying Raskell, but the point is not to make a perfect system, but rather to make one which encourages roleplaying and rewards it for the most part.

Heck, no system IS perfect. Even human ops wouldn''t work perfectly. The idea is just to make an incentive to keep players in their roles, not to make a police system .

-------------------------------------------
"Don''t worry about it sir, it''s an eye-dee-ten-tee error -- takes too long to explain -- have a nice day."
I d 10 t

Yeah, again, I totally agree. What would be ideal is if the system would govern itself. If the actual players can possibly ifluence others to Role Play and not ruin the atmosphere. As long as the majority of the players understand what is trying to be accomplished and they Role Play, then new players will see that is the way they''re supposed to act. What seems to happen in MMORPGs is that the majority of the players speak OOC all of the time and it just perpetuates itself. New players mimic that behavior, and a vicious cycle is born.

#35Landfish  Members   -  Reputation: 288

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 11:59 AM

Senshi: I have to reiterate, I have no interst in preserving the kind of gameplay which powermaxers consider to be fun. Yes, I know I will lose most of the MMORPG audience, but those who remain will be pretty cool.

#36Facehat  Members   -  Reputation: 696

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 12:34 PM

quote:

Senshi: I have to reiterate, I have no interst in preserving the kind of gameplay which powermaxers consider to be fun. Yes, I know I will lose most of the MMORPG audience, but those who remain will be pretty cool.

...And the point I''m trying to make is that you don''t neccasarily *have* to lose that audience. Besides, you need someone to argue with, anyway. Victory is always best when you have critics, right?

Anyway, at risk of sounding like a tape recording, I''ll reiterate my point: stats aren''t inherintly evil. They can be good. The problem is that they''ve been abused horribly.

I realize that your trying to make something different, so feel free to completly ignore this post . I''m full of crap anyway .

Just realize that what you make might not appeal to many people other than yourself .

-------------------------------------------
"Don't worry about it sir, it's an eye-dee-ten-tee error -- takes too long to explain -- have a nice day."
I d 10 t

#37Silvermyst  Members   -  Reputation: 113

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 03:18 PM

Playing Everquest myself, I''ve long ago discovered what exactly it is that makes me play...friends in my group.

It is NOT gaining a next level (my last ''level-up'' last week didn''t even register until someone asked me an hour later out of the blue -stranger..yuck!- what my level was) it is NOT gaining items (I''m still running around with empty spots all over my body), it is NOT doing quests (give item to person whoever...give ''m more...and more...keep on giving).

I have to admit that I DO enjoy close fights (usually I hunt at about 30% health just to make fights more dangerous).

What does this have to do with the topic?

Well...I would be one of the players that WOULD play a no-advancement or low-advancement game. Why? Because I play a character...yup, I actually bond to my character. And my character bonds to me. Thus, usually my characters don''t care about material things, don''t care about power. They do care about friendships though...

And friendships is what a non/low-advancement game will thrive on. Social interactions will become more important. Certain players will not join in games like this...others will. And I think that when the game is good enough, those few that start it will quickly gain a larger following as other players start to catch on that there is a game out there that will give them something else, a relief from hack''n''slash.

Then, because the game is NOT based upon visible progress (levels) but on interaction, character development in a mental way more than in a physical way, you just might be able to keep gathering small numbers of gatherers while maintaining the ones you have.

A real virtual world might be a possibility (which actually sounds somewhat creepy, as people will more and more be able to ''escape'' real life, which isn''t necessarily a good thing), a world where characters really come alive, where fighting comes with a great risk, where death is not just ''respawn and lose some experience'' and where your reputation is worth more than your power. Politics might pop up and players might actually want to take part in it. A real history of the world might develop as player''s decisions and actions decide the course of events...

Silvermyst

#38akujin  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 03:37 PM

quote:
Original post by Jeranon

Go play Betrayal at Krondor. Oh look, a no level RPG, although there are still stats.

I''ve played it. Nice game but it had other issues that got to me, mainly the person playing it at the time. Same powergamer who could bring the most well designed game to it''s knees in his quest to create the ultimate god character. That and if I remember correctly(much like daggerfall which was in interesting level based system) it gave you numbers to play with and it allowed you to improve yourself from doing some of the dumbest, most inane things in the world like jumping in place for several hours on end(daggerfall). I''m just ranting and I believe I''ve forgotten whatever point I was trying to make, if I was even trying to make one at all.

A.

#39gimp  Members   -  Reputation: 142

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 04:20 PM

I was posed with a fiarly similar problem with a persistant actiojn quake liek game we were designing.

My solution was to make skills equal in importance at their highest level and to allow everyone to have a basic skill in everything. Then the idea was to have a sliding scale(imagine knots on a spline).

So,if you used your submachine gun skill very often your other skills say medic would suffer due to neglect. The skill allocation wasn''t linear either. The more you specialised the more skill you sucked from your other skills. A player with maximum skill in say sniping would be pretty useless at everything else.

I was planning on doing the same thing with attributes (running speed, pushing\kicking strength, jumping height).

All of this was calculated at runtime, so a player who spends most of his time running will become faster but will bulk down.

On futher thought I suppose I could have allowed some kind of training mode that will help accellerate the changing process.

The whole idea was to stop my players from becomming walking tanks with every conceivable item and max skills in everything. A ''good'' player just joining should have an equal opportunity of killing a llama who had been on for a while.

gimp

#40Paul Cunningham  Members   -  Reputation: 122

Like
Likes
Like

Posted 27 June 2000 - 05:59 PM

Ok here''s another one for the record.

As in a lot of RPG''s your able to kill the little enemies over and over in order to gain XP easily. This was your not really risking anything in the meantime. I think this is a "weapon" that game designers have not considered balancing in a game. I''ll call it XP vulturing for the sake of argument.

I think XP vulturing is probably a kick starter to players powermaxing. It teaches them to powermax from the start. They them start to think that this is what the game is all about.

There''s one idea i''ve had to control XP vulturing. XP must have temporary caps place on them. taking Diablo for explaination, in dungeon level one you should only be allowed to power up to level 2 XP. To get your character up to Level 3 you have to kill level 2 monsters, and the trend continues throughout the game.

Or if you attack a Level 6 monster with a level 2 character you should get 3x the xp. 6 / 2 = 3x. A simple equation that i think would work.

Another idea i had is about gaining skills. It''s an idea that i wish i''d used in my DM''ing days. In order to gain skills you must travel. There''s no one place that can teach you all the skills. You could even hang plot''s and subplots off this idea. Instead of searching for the Holy Avenger you want to learn Blind fighting. You must travel to find someone to teach you forien/exotic skills. Which are essential to game completion.

You bastards :-) i''m more interested in strategy but these damn rpg posts cloud every second of my thinking time. Arrh. I can''t help myself. Must.... come..... up.... with..... crazy..... ideas. must.... yes.... good.... yes.... good.... Hmmmmmm

Can someone give me a pointer to a thread or explain more clearly what you mean by attrition.

How about being able to turn skills on and off like a switch. The more skills you turn on the easier the killing. But when you kill something the xp gets spread amongst the skill that were turned on. Thus slowing down the levelling speed.

Or some skills are advantageous at one time and others are not. So it becomes more of an issue of which skills to use and when rather than the height of ones level.

WE are their,
"Sons of the Free"

Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

PARTNERS