Where is the interacttivity in RPG

I wanted to write about something that I find very boring in RPG today.

Every time I attempt some acion in a game like smithing armors or weaponery, cooking stuff, picking a lock, repairing an item or healing myself, all I basicaly do is to use an item, or choose a dialogue option then the game tells me "awright dude, you succeded, you definitly kick ass !" or " you failed poor little bastard, you suck !"

That makes me face nothing but a lack of interctivity 'cause:
-First I don't do nothing beside imagining I'm smithing/picking/healing etc.
-Second the computer doesn't show me any result of my action except saying me that I rule or that I screwed it up.

In my opinion, in order to identify myself to my character and play his role, I need to be able to act like he would act and be involved in every step of his adventures. I need reactivity, to see what happends when I did stuff. I want to these actions to be entertaining, not to be repetitive action-reaction scheme where there is no diference between cooking, smithing, picking locks and so on... I'm bored of the choose action => stat check => display result.

So far and as far as I can remember the Ultima series attempted to fufill my request: when baking bread, you had to combine flour and water and then bake them in an oven that you lit first... or you had to draw a pentacle on the gound, lite some candles in order to perform some magic related task I don't remember...

Problem is, it is always the same task you can perform , you had no choice while and the result is either a complete faliure or a complete succes. Let's take another exemple. in most of the games let a skilled character to be a pickpocket. I don't know much about stealing people's wallets but I can guess I would first try to talk to them in order to let them lower their guard, to distract them or try to suddenly bump in them. Just waking by my victim, robbing him by having the computer check my stats and walking away is boring. I don't feel entertained, I just feel chalenged upon my skills to level up a character, to evaluate my chances to succesfully perform some mindless repetitive task.

I understand it would represent a huge amount of work to widely emplement all the features i described in a game but would also represent a big step toward immersion in a game and a great piece of gameplay.

That was my today's piece of theoric game design-junk, thank you for reading so far unless you skipped the text straight to the end, in which case you will be senteced to ten thousand years of hard labor on pluto in a future life for having such a bad karma.

So am I definitly insane or is ther still hope ?

What do you want? To wait for an NPC to run close, bump in to him by pressing a button and then hitting the space bar at the exact moment your hand is over his pocket or something?
You want to put Iron into a forge and cast it and hammer the smoldering product at an anvil for hours upon hours until you're finished?

That's twitch gaming. Some of it could be in a classic adventure game, combining and using items to solve a puzzle.

In my opinion it does not provide entertainment. If I want to spend hours forging a sword I'll do it in real life.

If I want to pick people's pockets..well..I don't. It provides a thrill to steal something in real life, but it does nothing when doing it virtually. It's just a bunch of boring tasks that sound an awful lot like work. Roleplaying is supposed to be fun.

You could creatte a pickpocket simulator, which could even be a wonderful game. But then, there's even a game about throwing people from stairs which is fun to play. It doesn't provide a decent RPG experience though.

The point is your character is NOT you. Your character has dexterity, allowing him to pickpocket. If the pickpocketing success is based on your ability to time a wham on the spacebar, the dexterity statistic for your character will be useless, and the essence of the roleplaying game is lost.

If you don't have the imagination to create that which you do not see in your mind and enjoy it, perhaps RPG's are not for you. Neither are books, then.

Then, you're right about the simple 'you rule/you suck' respones. You should actually be able to gather materials and 'forge' the items in a system pretty similar to Arcanum. (which could be improved a lot, in ways I will not elaborate on here)

What do you want? To wait for an NPC to run close, bump in to him by pressing a button and then hitting the space bar at the exact moment your hand is over his pocket or something?

Click to expand...

What I was talking about isn't about player's dexterity, it's about taking some decision on the way i should proceed to steal stuff from some guy's pockets, like getting involved in a conversation and choosing the moment to attempt an act of thievery without rising suspision. I don't want to have my own capacity to execute some action sequence with perfect timing to be involved, but i want to be in charge, to take some decision to make every attempt a different experience.

You want to put Iron into a forge and cast it and hammer the smoldering product at an anvil for hours upon hours until you're finished?

Click to expand...

I wrote that don't want these actions to be repetitive I might be interested in casting some kind of ore to make a sword and let the character hammer it until he's done then I would put it in an barrel of water, it would produce a nice cloud of vapor and a satisfing "pshhh" sound. I would be done with the sword unless... I lay it on some altar and let the character pray for some divinity or some demon to endorce it with his power. I assume you have guessed that when I refer to the character doing something it means that the games isn't in realtime anymore but instead it represent some "Fade to black - Fast forward - Fade in" sequence in order to get past the repetitive actions like forging a weapon or praying for hours. The game would focus on various possibilities for the player to ashieve his goals instead of just having him to creat a sword by clicking on some button.

It provides a thrill to steal something in real life, but it does nothing when doing it virtually

Click to expand...

Of course it doesn't if you just click on some guy in the game screen and the game displays you have stolen two silver coins from that guy's purse. But if you have to think, to outsmart the guy, to push him into believing you're the coolest guy that walked on earth or that you're the most charming girl he ever met, and then try to rob him, maybe it would...

Your character has dexterity, allowing him to pickpocket. If the pickpocketing success is based on your ability to time a wham on the spacebar, the dexterity statistic for your character will be useless, and the essence of the roleplaying game is lost.

Click to expand...

No timing, no spacebar whaming, just thinking and deciding how to do it. Bumping in the guy was just an exemple, what I really meant was about being an active part in most of the game's mechanics. If I wanted to use my skill instead of the character's skill, I'd rather go play some quake or something. Concerning the essence of role playing, it's not about dexterity or strength or numbers or stats or whatever. Your character is not a bunch of number's, statistics are not even essential in a RPG. Roleplaying is about the goals and the motivations of your character, it's about his personality not about his abilities.

If you don't have the imagination to create that which you do not see in your mind and enjoy it, perhaps RPG's are not for you

Click to expand...

If I want to use my imagination I just have to play a Pen and Paper RPG. I don't need a computer to use my imagination. CRPG have to provide more then just a basical action-reaction scheme. I enjoyed using my imagination, thinking my character in Fallout was smoothly fighting some guy, dodging bullets Jet li style and sweeping him while all that happend on screen was as simple as a slaver shooting and missing the PC at point blank range then the PC threw the causual fallout kick aimed at the knee, and he did a critical hit. I have no problem using my imagination but computers can provide more than just telling you a story and showing you the scenery, letting you imagine the rest.

Neither are books, then.

Click to expand...

What Was That Supposed To Mean ??

Computers don't do anything. In RPG's they're just extremely fast DM's that can calculate complicated statistics on the fly.
The developers create the content.

What I was talking about isn't about player's dexterity, it's about taking some decision on the way i should proceed to steal stuff from some guy's pockets, like getting involved in a conversation and choosing the moment to attempt an act of thievery without rising suspision. I don't want to have my own capacity to execute some action sequence with perfect timing to be involved, but i want to be in charge, to take some decision to make every attempt a different experience.

Click to expand...

Outsmarting/distracting your 'victim', wouldn't that rely on the characters intelligence or charisma? It would be good if you as a player were given options based on the characters stats, of course. But beyond dialogue and active timing, what is there?
There could be an assessment abillity which will, if the character's skill is high enough, show a little icon/bar on the screen showing the victim's 'attention level' or something, I agree to that. That would make it more interactive while still relying on the character's abilities.

The game would focus on various possibilities for the player to ashieve his goals instead of just having him to creat a sword by clicking on some button.

Click to expand...

How many ways are there to forge a sword without indulging the player in endless forays into metal casting, smithing and basically educating the player on things that are mostly useless and often boring. I would like to know, but for that, I'll read a book on the matter. The game should provide entertainment, not education. Some tasks are simply not fun. They're repetetive jobs. The fading out system you describe is exactly what happens now, in RPG's. You just want a visual representation of something. You want to see the character put the sword in the fire and forge it? Sure, nice visuals, you'll get bored after seeing it thrice, but it's a nice feature. But WHERE is the choice in that? What is so groundbreaking and exciting about seeing a character do a dull chore? Some things are just better left completely to the imagination. I would hate to manually do the chores each time I wanted to forge something, and I would also get bored with a repetitive visual of a character performing such an action.
Making choices as to what you forge, with which materials and making the quantity and quality of the opions provided dependent on your characters abilities is good. Arcanum had such a system. But actually seeing the character create it? Mere eyecandy.

Your character is not a bunch of number's, statistics are not even essential in a RPG. Roleplaying is about the goals and the motivations of your character, it's about his personality not about his abilities.

Click to expand...

Your personality is largely defined by your abilities. You have to roleplay within the constraints of your abilties. For the personality to remain consistent with itself, abilties and statistics are not only helpful, but almost entirely necessary. Your character is also a physical appearance, which has a deep inpact upon the way other perceive the character.

A charismatic handsome peace loving, lawful figure with a lazy attitude and a complete lack of muscles will not kill someone in order to steal their goods. Nor will such a person forge a sword. He will ask someone else to forge it.

You gave the wrong reply here. I said "the player's ability with a spacebar should not determine the character's ability to steal" and you reply with "roleplaying is not about statistics but about personality." Which has nothing to do with what I said.

If I want to use my imagination I just have to play a Pen and Paper RPG. I don't need a computer to use my imagination. CRPG have to provide more then just a basical action-reaction scheme. I enjoyed using my imagination, thinking my character in Fallout was smoothly fighting some guy, dodging bullets Jet li style and sweeping him while all that happend on screen was as simple as a slaver shooting and missing the PC at point blank range then the PC threw the causual fallout kick aimed at the knee, and he did a critical hit. I have no problem using my imagination but computers can provide more than just telling you a story and showing you the scenery, letting you imagine the rest.
..
What Was That Supposed To Mean ??

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I misunderstood your 'plea for extra choices and options' for a 'cry for more twitch interactivity'.

I misunderstood at first beacuse of your pickpocketing example. I immediately got the idea of a game with a hand hovering over a pocket you had to guide in order to steal something. Pretty horrible as part of an RPG

The thing is that in PNP RPG's you have a descriptive way of portraying a characters actions by providing everyone with a bit of improvised prose. In CRPG's, you can have these descriptions/visual representations, but they'll always be pre-programmed and static, no matter how many varieties you make.

For instance, you failed forging a sword.
Why? Because you dropped it. (a pretty critical failure). That would provide a little more enjoyable description. Better would be
"As Joe picks up the nearly finished sword to admire the fruit of his labour he stumbles over a hammer lying on the floor, dropping the sword deep into the fire. Joe is unable to recover it in time to save it from melting down." (not technically accurate but who cares)

Such a description would be nice to see, but seeing the same description upon every critical failure of forging a sword gets dull. Even when you create a dozen descriptions for every possible outcome of 1 action, which would take remendous resources, it still has a tendency to be repetetive.

In order to provide the player with enough things to do, you simply can't flesh out the world and every possible outcome of every possible action in this manner. Ideally, it would be possible, but it's not.

It's a good thing to pursue this goal though. At least to a certain extent where it does not harm playability and quality/quantity of content.

MF said:

Outsmarting/distracting your 'victim', wouldn't that rely on the characters intelligence or charisma? It would be good if you as a player were given options based on the characters stats, of course. But beyond dialogue and active timing, what is there?

Click to expand...

I agree. This is definitely the area where the player's intelligence should be key. I've never liked it when CRPGs allow dumb players to solve complex puzzles, using the player's brain instead of the brain of the character. There should be some attribute interaction here.

That's why it's nice to have dumb dialogue just for the dumb characters. If they don't have the brain power, then they shouldn't be given the opportunity to go do that puzzle. An NPC shouldn't ask Ogg the Dumb Ogre to run and solve the Puzzle Cube of High Intelligence. The NPC should know Ogg is a dumb ogre, and treat him accordingly.

There could be an assessment abillity which will, if the character's skill is high enough, show a little icon/bar on the screen showing the victim's 'attention level' or something, I agree to that. That would make it more interactive while still relying on the character's abilities.

Click to expand...

That's definitely a good idea.

Making choices as to what you forge, with which materials and making the quantity and quality of the opions provided dependent on your characters abilities is good. Arcanum had such a system. But actually seeing the character create it? Mere eyecandy.

Click to expand...

Pretty much the case. Also, it might be interesting the first few times, watching the character toil over a sword for a few minutes, but it's eventually going to become something to do so you can take a bathroom break.

Your personality is largely defined by your abilities. You have to roleplay within the constraints of your abilties. For the personality to remain consistent with itself, abilties and statistics are not only helpful, but almost entirely necessary. Your character is also a physical appearance, which has a deep inpact upon the way other perceive the character.

Click to expand...

Agreed. You can't play a clever, sharp witted person when you have a Wisdom and Intelligence of 5. The numbers are there for more than just dice rolls, they're there to guild the player on how that character does with what his abilities are.

That's why it's nice to have dumb dialogue just for the dumb characters. If they don't have the brain power, then they shouldn't be given the opportunity to go do that puzzle. An NPC shouldn't ask Ogg the Dumb Ogre to run and solve the Puzzle Cube of High Intelligence. The NPC should know Ogg is a dumb ogre, and treat him accordingly.

Click to expand...

Actually, I figure Ogg would just smack the NPC over the head and tell him to solve the puzzle for him.

I think Planescape: Torment handles puzzles and intelligence quite well. If you're not smart/wise enough to solve one of the puzzles in the game, you get a text message saying, "you try to solve the puzzle for a few minutes, but to no avail. You shrug and put it away," or something to that effect. If you've got the brains, it tells you you've succeeded. And it's all done with excellent writing so it's quite seamless. It works.

I wrote a couple of pages worth of rant yesterday, but wound up with an invalid session by the time I tried to post it. Anyways...

I see no reason why "peripheral" skills in CRPGs should have simple binary outcomes. If the choice of non-combat skills is just as valid the choice of combat skills, then there's no reason why the actions involved in the skill use should be simpler and less enjoyable.

There are two models currently in use fairly prolifically across various RPGs. There's the die roll skill check style binary outcome, which works well in P&P games where simplicity is a boon, but becomes kind of pointless when the ability to save and load is introduced, and when the scripting and functionality of the game means "lock jammed, never open." SImply put it seems to be one of those things that is carried on from the legacy of P&P roots without enough thought put in.

The second model used for skills such as forging, baking, etc, for simplicity's sake we'll call them trade skills. Trade skills generally work by the principle that time = money. They're a timesink that allows the player to earn a few more coins here and there. For noe this is fairly useless in most CRPGs where ph4t l3wt far outweighs a couple of coins, and so the element of fun needs to lie elsewhere.

There are a few things that I feel can improve in trade and non-combat skills. Firstly, binary outcomes need to go. Skills should have more than just a use functionality. Give the user more control over their outcome (based entirely on character stats in case there's any confusion) using combat as a yard stick for complexity.

Another important aspect to introduce is an element of risk, preferably one the player can choose to take. Give the player critical actions that they can perform for greater reward but with the trade off of greater risks. Also ensure that the penalties of failure hurt a little, but not too much, unless the player does something exceedingly idiotic. The constabulary shouldn't necessarily send a group of burly men to violate my character just because I got caught with my hand in somebody elses pocket.

If the skill use itself has a peripheral gameplay aspect, such as resource gathering, make sure that this is not merely a time sink either. If the skill involves the player finding raw materials, don't let finding be the challenge. It's far better to let the player be aware of exactly where they need to go, but have other challenges, based around combat, stealth, or other skill use. If the player can't surmount said challenge, then they should be able to take the low risk option of purchasing the raw materials, which obviously cuts the profit yield.

Consider what kind of reward the player gains from effectively using the skill. Making a profit is mildly compelling, but only if money is hard to come by. Creating items that provide mild buffing of the player stats, such as potions or some kind of magical bread is also a start, but not incredibly exciting. If there's one thing to learn from comparing and contrasting System Shock 2 and Deus Ex, it's that a more tightly restrictive system provides a great deal more incentive to not only advance within the game, but also to try out new characters, approaches, ect when replaying the game. ie allow someone skilled at forging to create weapons beyond the standard available set.

While we're thinking about things that only a character proficient in a certain skill can do, quests should be mentioned. Allowing certain skills to be used as a means to an end in certain quests, such as lacing a meal with poison to assasinate somebody adds extra dimension to the game, but even moreso if there are additional quests that can only be solved with a certain skill use. You can rest assured there's likely to be combat based quests, so give the non combat players a little more than extra pocket change.

I also like the idea of using something like baking as a diplomatic tool. If you can't turn on the charm, then turn off an NPCs ability to gauge your charm. "Want some rye? Course ya do!"

Basically, I think that given the contrast between P&P and CRPGs, that CRPGs should work toward more complex actions for any skills, combat or otherwise.

as in the housing?

Section 8,

You said it better than I've ever heard it said before. The idea of non-combat interactions being as rich and complex as combat interactions does my heart good. The idea that any one of a dozen skills might help a situation if properly applied sends shivers up that thing I like to call a spine!

~Aldin

::EDIT::what the heck's a "sned"?

I see you pretty much got my point.

Your personality is largely defined by your abilities. You have to roleplay within the constraints of your abilties. For the personality to remain consistent with itself, abilties and statistics are not only helpful, but almost entirely necessary. Your character is also a physical appearance, which has a deep inpact upon the way other perceive the character.

Click to expand...

First, concerning the numbers, when I say they are not essential, it means that the rules can still be based on numbers but the player doesn't need to know them. "You have 98% in Kick Boxing and 18 in strength" only helps the player to understand the game mechanics and bypass them. A description like "you are as strong as a oak and you have mastered the art of fighting with your hands and feets" would help the player to determine the abilities of his PC. If he wants to compare his strenght with some other character, he can challenge him at arm wrestling in the nearest tavern.

"So, Morkoth the Destroyer, we meet at last. It is time for this to end! You die here! Flaming Dragon Stance!

"Uh, but before we start, could we have a quick armwrestling match so I can know whether or not I'm tough enough to beat you? Please?"

If an RPG is well designed, you should simply be powerful enough (be it in combat, speech, or other skills) to get past whatever challenge you're up against.

Spazmo said:

If an RPG is well designed, you should simply be powerful enough (be it in combat, speech, or other skills) to get past whatever challenge you're up against

Click to expand...

Meaning that if you weren't powerful enough to handle the challenge then you wouldn't be offered the chance to take the challenge?


Sounds good...

No, but if you're level one and you show up at the end boss' front door, there's a design flaw somewhere in there.

So you wouldn't be allowed to show up at the end bosses front door, until you were capable of handleing the chalenge?

Spazmo said:

If an RPG is well designed, you should simply be powerful enough (be it in combat, speech, or other skills) to get past whatever challenge you're up against.

Click to expand...

I, for one, would like a game where you can find hard oponents that you're not suposed to fight against but flee from them.
Why not?

I find kind of artificial these "enemies are stronger the stronger you are or the farthest you advance" games. It would be strange that a bunch of ogre thought "We better not go there, those people are so low level that we could kill them all, better stay here were everybody is as strong as us".

The tension you'll have when going through the forest, killing little goblins, because you could be ambushed by a party of orcs with a pair of trolls going with them would be priceless.

It would be much more difficult for those of the hack'n'slash type, but the ones who use their brains (uhm.. a dragon and I'm level 1, better run and hope he eats just my horse) will be more rewarded with a thrilling and "realistic" world (if such a thing is possible).

Just my 0.02€.

I find kind of artificial these "enemies are stronger the stronger you are or the farthest you advance" games

Click to expand...

Right on, Fallout:Tactics is the worst example of that. I like the way it was handled in Gothic. You can go anywhere, even the orc lands, but you are warned against it. After that it's your judgement. Just like a modern city, there are safe areas, there are dangerous areas, you use your own judgement where to go (without the comfort of a reload button )

If an RPG is well designed, you should simply be powerful enough (be it in combat, speech, or other skills) to get past whatever challenge you're up against.

Click to expand...

May be, may be not. In my opinion, when I try to imagine what it's like being an adventurer, entering a long-forgotten temple abandoned by all but its deity or walking down the empty halls of an undergound vault in total darkness, 2 things come to mind: sense of unknown and danger. You never know what the passage gonna end up with,
a wall for you to put your back against and rest, a door leading into unknown, or an unclear shape that might be a friend or a fiend.

When designers take it away making sure that at any given time you can deal with whatever "challenge" they prepared for you, a sense of danger is replaced by a sense of boredom.

Well, it's still a challenge, but it's not so overwhelmingly hard that it's simply impossible to do it.

Well, it's still a challenge, but it's not so overwhelmingly hard that it's simply impossible to do it.

Click to expand...

I guess it's a matter of personal preference and balance to some degree. One one hand, I woudn't want to take a wrong turn and spend hours trying to overcome an impossible challenge, on the other hand, I don't want to know that at any given point in the game I can do whatever I set my mind to. Somehow it feels phony.

Everybody likes non-linear RPGs. Well, by default, non-linear means that you are free to do anything, go anywhere. In that case you are bound to meet a challenge that's way over your head, be it a tough critter or a tricky lock. That motivates you to increase your skills and advance your char.

Well, yes. Take Fallout as an example. When you get to Junktown, you essentially have two options. You can either use game logic and do the Junktown quests in order to toughen up, or you can just go straight to the Hub and indulge some exploration urge. Odds are it'll be too tough for you (particularly Deckard. I hate that guy with the Spiked Knuckles...), but you can still do it, or try to, more like it, if you so wish.

Take Fallout as an example

Click to expand...

I thought you'd never ask :D

Seriously though, I agree, great example, and by the way, one of my favourite fights of all time. But like I said, it's a matter of balance. You chose to skip Junktown and go straight to the Hub, and managed to handle the local fauna. Somebody else can choose to go exploring, meet a supermutant patrol and end up as a pile of goo. I don't believe you can handle supermutants before you made it to the Hub.

Yeah, I love games where the enemies just are what they are. It does give you motivation to become stronger, and the feeling of level treadmilling is not quite as strong. It makes the world seem more real, too. I think more games are doing this now, at least the ones that are at least a little non-linear.

I also loved the Deathclaw in the Hub and how everyone was so scared of it, and if you had just got into town and were lucky to have a hunting rifle, you probably should have been, too. I just ignored everyone's warnings the first time and assumed I could take on anything at that stage of the game, then I found out what fear was when I tried to take it on with a shotgun.

Walks with the Snails said:

I also loved the Deathclaw in the Hub and how everyone was so scared of it, and if you had just got into town and were lucky to have a hunting rifle, you probably should have been, too. I just ignored everyone's warnings the first time and assumed I could take on anything at that stage of the game, then I found out what fear was when I tried to take it on with a shotgun.

Click to expand...

I got my ass beat by the Mama Deathclaw the first time through.. I mean, seriously thumped.

I'd glady trade my safety for nonlinear, open ended gameplay. In Morrowind, I wandered in to a tomb at level 2 and got murdered by some nasty critters there. I learned right away that tombs were bad places. Likewise, in Geneforge, I learned that my ass would be handed to me if I just went straight north from the Awakenned village, but you're free to enter there if you'd like.

Games you can't lose are nothing more than glorified magazine articles.

~Aldin

Unfortunatly in Fallout difficulty was handeled by putting the wimps in junktown and the bad asses in mariposa, I loved the Deathclaw in the hub but that was an anecdotic episode.

In most RPG palces have some difficulty level that is commended by the idea the game designer had about the level of the PC when he would eventually get there. In the rare case you have to flee from a certain death, it is most certainly caused by your lack of appreciation of the level needed to achieve in order to get in there. That provides a linear progression in the game world, since the difficulty might be excessive if you deviate from the ideal path.

Or, otherwise, the enemies level up along with the player, like the generated critters in Morrowind. Let's take the tomb exemple; you can usually raid any tomb you want because the critters are very close to your character's level. That provides constant challenge since you can get raped and slaughtered by ghouls at any level but the character progression doesn't make sense then

Personnally i like the fact that my character might be in danger in some creepy place but unaware of it. Danger is an important immersiion factor, but the game must be designed to let the player know what are the risks of being involved in a specially dangerous adventure. Imagine you are exploring some cave taking out rats and kobolds an suddently a huge troll bursts trough the wall and bashes your party fellow with a tree trunk. Or in a cheaper way you walk into a room with the huge freak in it. The problem is you have no choice but to wet your pants and run your ass off but that's an acceptable situation if the game lets some nice backup solution like convincing the guards of a remote village that the troll is a nasty threat to their village and lead a party to slay it, or hire some badass troll slayer dwarf in exchange of x% of the eventual loot.

Most of the games tend to try to convince the player that they can be the one, the hero the saviour, letting you be either Chosen One, Nameless One, Son of Bhaal, The reincarnation of Nasrudin, Nerevarine, etc. Wouldn't it be better not to be the only badass on earth, that solves every freakin' problem around, let the character relie on someone else once in a while or face an insolvable issue.

Wouldn't it be better not to be the only badass on earth, that solves every freakin' problem around, let the character relie on someone else once in a while or face an insolvable issue.

Click to expand...

Much better. I've been playing CRPGs for a long time, and by now, I saved everything that could be saved, from lost kids to to Earth and beyond . Everytime that I'm being informed about forces of darkness / universal evil / some really bad mofo who threatens everything that is good and holy my eye starts twitching. Feels like full time job saving them stupid motherfuckers.

Anyway, an ideal game _in my opinion_ is a game about a nothing (kinda like Seinfield ). The first part of Fallout1 is a great example. You are not a saviour, you are an unlucky bastard who drew the short straw. Your job is to find a waterchip for a small vault forgotten by everyone. The only people who care whether you succeed or fail are those you left behind. The rest of the world does not care, even you don't care, your first priority is to survive, try to fit in, then if time did not run out, you would look for the chip. Expect no help from nobody, even if you find a god damned chip, they will likely to kick you out as you've changed too much. And then you fully realize that you risked your life not to give your people a chance to live, but to prolong their bleak underground existence. Hell of a story, worth living, worth playing.

Just for the record, I like supermutants (who doesn't) but I prefer that the Chosen One did not have to destroy the whole supermutant threat all by himself, but did something on a smaller scale that would be feasible and realistic and fitting, like infiltrating the military base and erasing vaults records and locations, locating and elliminating a supermutant camp that intercepted the water caravan, i.e. making sure you vault would not be found. Then you can go and help surface cities organizing their defences if you care. In the end, you vault survives, the country is divided between the mutants, ghouls, and norms. Both the Brotherhood and the Enclave could have been conflicting factions in human controlled areas.

Wow, was that off topic or what. Sorry fellas, my bad

Yeah, an idea I had a while back was to create rival parties or PC's that are pretty much your equals. Not only are you trying to compete against the bad guys, you start to get a good rivalry going on with your peers. You could perhaps cooperate on occasion, but your rivals are mostly concerned with showing you up. So there's pressure to find all the wrongs that need righting and doing so quickly if you want to get the credit (and the spoils). Or, you can just kick back and let them save the world while you concentrate on having a good time or making money or something like that. Basically anything is going to get done, with or without you, the game-appointed Savior of the Gameworld. If you die, instead of the typical statement that the world crumbles to dust without you, someone else just picks up the torch, and you're basically forgotten except by the people whose lives you impacted. It would really take away all the cliched savior bit and also give you the option of just plain refusing to save the universe and let someone else do the heavy lifting. There's even the possibility of being the 11th hour hero who swoops in at the last minute and saves the day (and steals all the credit) while letting others do the grunt work. It might be tough to pull off, but I think it would be interesting.