Are you suggesting I didn't fix it? I personally see it as an upgrade.
I might be wrong, but there was only mage or noble (warrior), as separated classes. I hated how diplomacy worked in DA:O... You have a skill, so now you can convince somebody, because you pick up this option. I think Fallout had it better. As far as I recall it highlighted options in a certain way, but didn't limit them (adding another dialogue is limiting player, in a dumb way).
The only human option was Noble, regardless of what class you were still a Cousland, you just didn't get the bit with Howe attacking the family home as a mage.
You needed a stat (cunning) and a skill (coercion) to convince someone in DA:O (well, beyond the first time or so).
What's the problem with that?
Last edited:
No, I was playing as human mage on my first playthrough and didn't have noble's background.
My point is you needed the skill while it should be completely optimal and perfectly possible to convince people without needing to pick up some skill. Stats exposing dialogue options (due to knowledge, charm or intelligence) are fine. Completely separate skill that serves only convincing NPCs in conversations - because there is no other way of doing so - is ridiculous.
But that would seriously reduce the point of investing in that skill in the first place. I haven't played DA:O, but you know, if you decide you want to play someone who isn't as strong or skilled in combat but who has social skills to compensate for it, you also have to have the players who haven't invested in it wish they had. I don't think it's ridiculous. The game is already writing the words for you, it has a limited set of options, etc. If you see one of these sentences read as something that is supposed to convince this person, that's because they programmed the option in and it will most probably work. In PnP GMs are sometimes torn between what they should enforce: rules or roleplay. If the most imaginative player hasn't invested in charisma skills and the least imaginative one wants the fantasy of being Tyrion Lanister then we have a problem. You can have though the player roleplay a little (even lower the threshold if he did it good) and then roll the die. If he fails you could say that the words sounded a lot better in his mind, but when he said them out loud it sounded like a joke or he stuttered. With a videogame it's a little more complicated. Maybe we could have two recordings: one in which the player character sounds convincing and one in which he fails at convincing, being dependant on the stats. But these things tend not to involve dice rolls in videogames: if they did, the player may be tempted to reload until he passes the threshold. Videogames instead make it like you don't have enough level in a skill you automatically fail.
dedatonkeil pretty much covered it.
The whole point of an RPG is your character has skills you as a player may or may not have.
And those skills, not the players choice of option A or B, or their ability to put a crosshair on a target, should govern what the character is capable of doing.
The whole point of an RPG is your character has skills you as a player may or may not have.
And those skills, not the players choice of option A or B, or their ability to put a crosshair on a target, should govern what the character is capable of doing.
I disagree.
That's not the whole point of an RPG. Not the RPGS I run and play in.
It's also not how RPG mechanics play out. Some players are more tactically aware, some read the rules, some are good with number crunching and maximization of their characters, some are wittier and more clever with their words. Some are better role-players and enjoy more XP because they are better actors.
None of those things are measured by or controlled by the stats on the character sheet, save perhaps wit, and that is a limiting factor, rarely an enhancing one for the player.
Why, then, should those players who are good at understanding imaginary combat or stat optmization enjoy an advantage over those players who are better at mouse control or 3D awareness?
Optimally, we will blend these abilities across the Roles, so that to be a good Solo in a CRPG, you should have both solid 3D awareness, good character building skills and solid mouse control, whereas to be a good Fixer, you will have a strong imagination, solid knowledge of the game setting and gear options and a certain..flair in your playstyle that the game makes use of.
In the end, players like to be actively engaged in the game, as much as possible. At least in CDPR games. No one wants turn-based Geralt that I'm aware of - no one at CDPR anyway.
I don't believe I've ever hinted anywhere at any time I think CP2077 should be turn-based.
But I am strongly opposed to it being entirely player-skill (vice character-skill) based.
There are games out there that blend player and character skills fairly well, rather then it MUST be player or character skill that governs the game how about looking at inventive/creative ways to incorporate both?
I'm fully aware some players are better at some things then others, none of us is Buckaroo Banzai and incredibly talented at everything.
I guess rather then making simple easy-to-follow statements such as "The whole point of an RPG is your character has skills you as a player may or may not have." I'll have to elaborate on all the possible permutations of everything
But I am strongly opposed to it being entirely player-skill (vice character-skill) based.
There are games out there that blend player and character skills fairly well, rather then it MUST be player or character skill that governs the game how about looking at inventive/creative ways to incorporate both?
I'm fully aware some players are better at some things then others, none of us is Buckaroo Banzai and incredibly talented at everything.
I guess rather then making simple easy-to-follow statements such as "The whole point of an RPG is your character has skills you as a player may or may not have." I'll have to elaborate on all the possible permutations of everything
Yes. This. Every time. EVERY. TIME. Forever.I guess rather then making simple easy-to-follow statements such as "The whole point of an RPG is your character has skills you as a player may or may not have." I'll have to elaborate on all the possible permutations of everything
Your statement was pretty misleading and if you didn't say turn-based, you certainly implied it with your focus on character skills over player skills, exclusive of their ability to put crosshairs on target.
Nothing else really gives that kind of safe, steady control back to the player. Real Time with Pause or Real Time all rely on reflexes, awareness, intuition, knowledge of the controls, speed with same, etc. Only turn-based or some version of turn-based lets the character ability supersede the player skillset so much as to make moue skill nearly irrelevant.
Deus Ex is held up as an example of blended, both good and bad. It will take a lot of work to find a combo that doesn't frustrate a generation of people raised on
First and Third Person shooters while at the same time satisfying the RPG enthusiasts who believe that it's your character, not you, who should determine how gameplay results play out.
As much as Fallout's VATS had it's problems it did allow for both FPS and character-skill gameplay.
Can't say as I've tried Alpha Protocol or Transistor but I was pretty happy with the way combat worked in Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines.
Even tho the Elder Scrolls is first-person it's not a clickfest nor does combat require split-second timing or perfect aim, so again it worked fine for me.
But yes, I am vehemently, rabidly, totally and completely opposed to "typical" FPS combat.
For instance I decided to give Saints Row IV a try, the over-the-top humor and not taking itself or the player seriously appeal to me.
But I find I have to:
1 - Hold down the <Space Bar> for not too long nor too short a time
2 - Release the <Space Bar> while simultaneously hitting and holding down <W> followed immediately by tapping <Left Shift>
3 - Immediately release "W" and reorient your camera view so you can see the target area while repeatedly taping <W>, <A>, <D>, and <S> in order to land on it
4 - Repeat the entire process with slight variations in timing 20 or so times to get to the top of a tower
5 - Or course any failure in timing or misjudgement means starting the entire process over again (at least from the last teleport point)
No doubt some people find this sort of thing fun, I find it annoying.
And how on earth is this at all related to the characters skills?
Can't say as I've tried Alpha Protocol or Transistor but I was pretty happy with the way combat worked in Vampire the Masquerade: Bloodlines.
Even tho the Elder Scrolls is first-person it's not a clickfest nor does combat require split-second timing or perfect aim, so again it worked fine for me.
But yes, I am vehemently, rabidly, totally and completely opposed to "typical" FPS combat.
For instance I decided to give Saints Row IV a try, the over-the-top humor and not taking itself or the player seriously appeal to me.
But I find I have to:
1 - Hold down the <Space Bar> for not too long nor too short a time
2 - Release the <Space Bar> while simultaneously hitting and holding down <W> followed immediately by tapping <Left Shift>
3 - Immediately release "W" and reorient your camera view so you can see the target area while repeatedly taping <W>, <A>, <D>, and <S> in order to land on it
4 - Repeat the entire process with slight variations in timing 20 or so times to get to the top of a tower
5 - Or course any failure in timing or misjudgement means starting the entire process over again (at least from the last teleport point)
No doubt some people find this sort of thing fun, I find it annoying.
And how on earth is this at all related to the characters skills?
Torchlight (and therefore, I assume, Diablo? Haven't played the latter). Superficially a twitch-based hack and slash/shooter, but it's actually all about the strategy on the build.
NOT that I'm in any way suggesting Torchlight as the model for CP77
No it didn't. When you shot at something, it didn't even hit half the time even at point blank range. Even if you were looking down the iron sights. That's not FPS and it plain sucked.
What the old school shooters did was not so bad.
There would be a crosshair/targeting reticule that would get smaller and smaller if you held still and didn't move the mouse. Some hybrids (first deus ex) had a skill determining the speed at which this reticule got smaller.
Terrible/frustrating/unfun FPS. Those were the words that you were looking for.
Worst part of Bloodlines, worst part of Alpha Protocol, worst part of Fallout 3/NV. Combination of 100% stats based accuracy, and real time combat/aiming simply does not work together.
No, lets hope that CDPR will stick with the idea of player skill based aiming with stats based hindering factors.
The last thing I want to see out of CP2077 is "yet another" FPS game.
But we each have our tastes.