Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[LeoLeonardoIII]

I think it's easy to fall into the trap of "lets just wander around and get stuff". I found that in Morrowind I would go to a town, clean it out of anything not nailed down, pick up all the little side quests, and move on. It felt like if I hadn't sold every last spoon and saltrice I was leaving something behind.

But I think about UO and how they had RP guilds and group hunts and stuff, before there was really any framework for that in the code.

And LARP requires a lot of role-playing.

I've fantasized about doing a D&D campaign where there wasn't much direction at all. Meaning, the PCs aren't always approached by worried townsfolk and such. How does a real-life archaeologist find things? What about a sunken-ship treasure hunter? I don't know exactly what a game like that would be like. It would require more input from the players. One player might decide he wants to become a knight, and once he achieves that he might look around for things his knightly order would like to see done. Maybe start his own based on dragon-slaying? But then he has to go out and try to find a dragon or two ...

Point is, it would change the gameplay away from adventuring happening and coming to you, to you trying to find adventure. Of course once they're wrapped up in it I'd have no trouble twisting things up and making it interesting. But doesn't it seem a little cliche to have a grey-haired old man approach the group of characters in an inn and hand them a treasure map? It's almost as bad as the bartender offering them some money to kill the rats in his basement.

[Sergius]

Even in "real" RPGs done with pen & paper there can be a ton of railroading. It depends on play style more than "trueness and purity of RPG". I think the part where you can decide who to play from a long list of possible combinations is a possible factor, and while having a completely linear plot, you have the freedom to act. Just because the GM didn't set up any climbing-spots doesn't mean you can't climb, just because there isn't a campsite "spot" doesn't mean you can't camp. Just because there isn't an option in a multiple-choice conversation doesn't mean you can't tell some random NPC to "shut up and bring me some beer".

Railroaded linear plot doesn't mean extensively scripted. Writing in advance what happens when the thief "hides in the shadows" next to the "end boss", etc.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Well I think maybe we could see something with solid roleplaying variety if the game went through multiple testing iterations.

So the team would create the basis for the game, and the players would talk with them about what they would want to play in that setting.

The team would code a lot of the game, and create a plot. The players would talk about all the ways they would want to interact with the world and cultivate the plot, and what kinds of plot they want to see.

The team would script up all the options the players wanted to have, and make the decisions meaningful. The players would talk about side things they may want to do in the game.

The team would script up all the side quests and interweave them. The players would talk about anything else they think is missing.

The team would code through all the final updates, and start the debugging process. The same dev-playtesters would be involved in bug testing.

The company releases the bug-free demo and a beta test download for all the people who paid pre-release. The downloaded game has bug report systems and the pre-release folks get to play a slightly buggy game really early.

Finally the game goes retail.

But this game would never get to retail before giving players the ability to climb walls or tear manhole covers off the ground to throw at people and escape into. But it would require a whole lot more development time.

The idea is that while the end player might have ideas that he can't employ in the game, he has so many meaningful options that there is bound to be something close to what he wants to do. Not just two paths, not just four conversation choices.

[zagibu]

Never compare CRPGs with P&P RPGs. They are just two different things. Sure, CRPGs first tried to directly mimick their papery ancestors, but failed miserably. Then, they came back and concentrated on different things, and have been successful up to this day.

A CRPG can be summed up pretty easily, actually:
- small group of playable characters (1-7, usually)
- experience
- loot
- mostly linear main storyline with many branching sidestories

That's it, and this is also why Diablo is considered an RPG (which makes P&P RPG-Players cringe, but what can you do?).

[Cthulhu]

The idea is that while the end player might have ideas that he can't employ in the game,

Like jumping into the pit at the top of the temple, because he might float down due to magic?

[LeoLeonardoIII]

Link to the Past?

Yeah a back door with a riddle or code or key rather than building a big bomb might have been an interesting alternative. Or swim through the water-filled tunnels beneath it.

Side note: what damage did the big bomb cause, if anyone happened to stand right next to it rather than running down the stairs like I always did?