Forked Thread: GTS 2009 D&D Seminar - 4e video game

[xechnao]

I still don't understand what you mean by developing yourself as a player.

If you mean growth in player skill, then FPSs do that best, and they're usually completely linear.

If you mean growth as a human being... I've only ever felt that one game did that for me. That game was Immortal Defense, an indy game, and the biggest mind screw you will ever experience in your gaming life. Also its completely linear. Its linearity is part of what blows your mind- you kind of want to get off the train, but the train is dictated by your character's personality, and you can't really argue with it... its not something that can be explained instead of experienced. Its the only game that ever made me feel... complicit.

Having more fun with this game as a player, within the competition of the video game market, but always in a way that ties it to D&D. The game should manage to hook you from start to end and leave you with a feeling to seek for more, especially in the tabletop realm.

And a game should manage this feat to the most broad audience possible: not mostly hardcore fans excited by their special relation with the game's theme.

 

[hong]

Having more fun with this game as a player, within the competition of the video game market, but always in a way that ties it to D&D. The game should manage to hook you from start to end and leave you with a feeling to seek for more, especially in the tabletop realm.

And a game should manage this feat to the most broad audience possible: not mostly hardcore fans excited by their special relation with the game's theme.

It is only the hardcore fans who would see a half-hourly fade to black as an essential part of the gameplay experience.

 

[Cadfan]

Having more fun with this game as a player, within the competition of the video game market, but always in a way that ties it to D&D. The game should manage to hook you from start to end and leave you with a feeling to seek for more, especially in the tabletop realm.

And a game should manage this feat to the most broad audience possible: not mostly hardcore fans excited by their special relation with the game's theme.

I understand that the game should be fun, and should leave you with the urge to explore the game world further.

I don't know what this means in terms of a player developing himself.

I don't know what this means in terms of resource management issues.

You mention above that "when to rest" was one of the open ended decisions that helped make the game feel open ended. That may be true. But "when to rest" is not the only open ended decision a game can offer, and frankly, its often a really awkward one.

Generally speaking, resting gave you a reward, and a punishment.

The reward was in game. Your characters were more powerful the more often they rested.

The punishment, however, was out of game. You, as a player, had to perform a rote task in order to boost the power level of your party.

I do not think this is a good system. Were I to create a 4e game and port in the at will / encounter / daily system, I'd turn daily into "scenario" or some other term that the player would never have to deal with. You'd have encounter powers every fight, at wills all the time, and dailies would recharge whenever you reached the end of a specific scenario.

Then, having done that, I'd completely ax the concept of raiding a dungeon, fighting through half of it, then retreating to rest, so that you can return completely recharged to a dungeon that hasn't changed in the least while you were gone. I know that was a decision in the hands of the player, but there are other decisions that can be placed in the player's hands, and there's no reason a game needs to allow this one.

 

[xechnao]

And this

1. Does not change with 4E

2. Is still not something that was part of BG's core appeal. It was there because it was part of how AD&D worked, and that's about it.



Well, you are the first person I know to ever make such a song and dance about the resource management side of things. I mean, I've even seen ppl refer to "YOU MUST GATHER YOUR PARTY BEFORE VENTURING FORTH" in affectionate tones, but the half-hourly fade to black? Nope.

Well we disagree, on both ends, but I think mostly on the 1st one. Regarding the second point I would say that the game decorations became so important because of the game structure they were build upon. Without this resource management to tie them upon, they would not give the pleasure they did: the pleasure they gave was upon the gameplay contest.

 

[xechnao]

It is only the hardcore fans who would see a half-hourly fade to black as an essential part of the gameplay experience.

I am not saying that you need to have specifically this. I am saying that you need to have various things like this that can be balanced together. And I am also saying that BG had such a pool of things to balance and that was the pool of the D&D rules.

 

[hong]

I believe what Xechnow is fumbling towards is the player developing the skill of knowing when to stop and rest, and when to carry on.

Honestly, this was one of the easiest decisions you could make in BG. If you still had powerful spells and plenty of hp, you rested. If you were feeling particularly gung-ho, you kept going. If you knew that you were facing a tough monster, you saved, rested, then saved again.

Often, you would know that you were facing a tough monster because you blundered into it, and then restored. So I don't know just what "skill" got developed anyway. The take-home lesson was, as with most videogames, "save early, save often".

And I certainly didn't feel that having to rest made the game feel open-ended. What did this was the profusion of maps to explore, the different ways you could talk to NPCs, and the piles of monsters to kill. (Never mind that the game was definitively closed at the end, with a climax and a BBEG and all.)

 

[hong]

Well we disagree, on both ends, but I think mostly on the 1st one.

You... really think that daily resources are not a part of 4E?

Regarding the second point I would say that the game decorations became so important because of the game structure they were build upon.

What you call "game decorations" the vast majority of Bioware fans would appear to call "core elements of gameplay". I believe there was even a poll to this end, in fact, not that long ago pertaining to Dragon Age.

Without this resource management to tie them upon, they would not give the pleasure they did: the pleasure they gave was upon the gameplay contest.

I guess it takes all kinds.

 

[xechnao]

I understand that the game should be fun, and should leave you with the urge to explore the game world further.

I don't know what this means in terms of a player developing himself.

I don't know what this means in terms of resource management issues.

You mention above that "when to rest" was one of the open ended decisions that helped make the game feel open ended. That may be true. But "when to rest" is not the only open ended decision a game can offer, and frankly, its often a really awkward one.

Generally speaking, resting gave you a reward, and a punishment.

The reward was in game. Your characters were more powerful the more often they rested.

The punishment, however, was out of game. You, as a player, had to perform a rote task in order to boost the power level of your party.

I do not think this is a good system. Were I to create a 4e game and port in the at will / encounter / daily system, I'd turn daily into "scenario" or some other term that the player would never have to deal with. You'd have encounter powers every fight, at wills all the time, and dailies would recharge whenever you reached the end of a specific scenario.

Then, having done that, I'd completely ax the concept of raiding a dungeon, fighting through half of it, then retreating to rest, so that you can return completely recharged to a dungeon that hasn't changed in the least while you were gone. I know that was a decision in the hands of the player, but there are other decisions that can be placed in the player's hands, and there's no reason a game needs to allow this one.

It is not important what you think a good game should be and what it should be not in terms of individual gameplay assets. What is important is to manage to make a good video game overall that also ties and pushes people to the tabletop game.

Also a nitpick regarding resting: it did punish you in-game too: it had its risks.

Your idea regarding how to handle dailies is a good one to consider. But the fact is that dailies would come into play as many times as you could manage to script encounters that made it sensible and interesting to use them and inform the player about this.

 

[hong]

I am not saying that you need to have specifically this. I am saying that you need to have various things like this that can be balanced together. And I am also saying that BG had such a pool of things to balance and that was the pool of the D&D rules.

And if a 4E version of BG were to be made, it would still have such a pool of things, that being the D&D rules. Heck, it would be a BIGGER pool, because D&D now has skills like Diplomacy and Intimidate.

 

[xechnao]

@hong
I remember resting was a thing to consider in the countryside when traveling-exploring and in dungeons when exploring.
Anyway, you are suggesting that a 4e video game should not have any resting. I am not sure about that. You do realize that you have to have a structure of some standard variables tied to exploration to make a game open ended gameplay wise and not browsing wise right? Does 4e has enough of this? It has more than enough on the tactical side of things, on the tactical combat map but not out of it.