Daggerfall & Other Roll Playing Games' "Realism", Another Gripe
Joel
I agree with most of the posts about Arena's flaws:
random treasure bugs, the ability to create much
too powerful spells, etc. Another thing that
bothers me about most CRPGs is the ability to pack
huge numbers of items into a dungeon and then
find just the item you need from your pack instantly
during a battle.
Most games work like this: You stumble open a fire
elemental. What better way to fight a fire elemental
than with your wand of cold! Too bad it's in the
bottom of your backpack. No problem. The monster
will politely wait while you shuffle through your pack
for five minutes. If a game designer were to make the
game "realistic" the player would be penalized several
attacks while he dug through his pack. It's been
several years since I played Arena but if I remember
correctly, it suffered from this problem. You could
freeze combat to find an item in your pack. A player
should be required to have any weapons readied or else
suffer a penalty.
Joel
Bethesda01
In combat in DAGGERFALL you are penalized for digging in your backpack.
The monster does not wait for you to find your new weapon!
Bethesda Softworks
Joel
In <4uscu9$h...@newsbf02.news.aol.com> bethe...@aol.com (Bethesda01)
writes:
Glad to hear that! Thanks for answering my post.
Joel
Jared M Meaux
What is the deal with the resolution. I heard that Bethesda did a
rewrite of the graphics engine for Daggerfall and it now suports SVGA.
Is this true Bethesda?
Jared
Gavin Scarman
Bethesda01 wrote:
>
> In combat in DAGGERFALL you are penalized for digging in your backpack.
> The monster does not wait for you to find your new weapon!
Bad, bad, bad!
I'd agree with Joel if this were the real world - it's not! The clumsy
interface DF has means you are penalised by the programmer not by your
own actions. I hope this is an option setting else there will be those
horrible reloads happening all the time.
eg. find fire elemental, get killed, reload, have wand of ice ready,
then go back and fight him - dumb!
--
-----------------------------------------------
Gavin Scarman http://www.satech.net.au/~scarman
mailto:sca...@satech.net.au
-----------------------------------------------
Doc Gross
Bethesda01 wrote:
>
> In combat in DAGGERFALL you are penalized for digging in your backpack.
> The monster does not wait for you to find your new weapon!
So much for Joel's _gripe_. Way to go Bethesda! It seems to help when
you get the info from a good source before posting threads such as
this. Hehehe...
:)
--Doc Gross--
ku...@ior.com
John Hoffman
In article <4uscu9$h...@newsbf02.news.aol.com>, bethe...@aol.com (Bethesda01) wrote:
>In combat in DAGGERFALL you are penalized for digging in your backpack.
>The monster does not wait for you to find your new weapon!
> Bethesda Softworks
Bzzzt, wrong answer.
Seriously, let's not get carried away with realism. The game is afterall to
have fun. If it is overly difficult it won't be much fun. Perhaps some of
these Real time aspects can be optional.
John
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Johh Hoffman jhof...@ix.netcom.com
My opinions do not necessarily reflect Netcom's http://shadow.ix.netcom.com/
Bethesda01
DAGGERFALL will run in VGA. The X(n)gine supports both VGA and SVGA.
SkyNet which uses the X(n)gine will be an SVGA game.
Bethesda Softworks
kazooli
gree...@cluster.cwu.edu wrote:
>but Daggerfall will not have SVGA because in the making of the game they >made all the textures low res.
> -Ryan
Crap! 1990 is still with us. SDH
gree...@cluster.cwu.edu
The X-nigine has always had the ability to do SVGA, but Daggerfall will
Brent Burkholder
In article <321298...@satech.net.au>,
Gavin Scarman <sca...@satech.net.au> wrote:
>Bethesda01 wrote:
>>
>> In combat in DAGGERFALL you are penalized for digging in your backpack.
>> The monster does not wait for you to find your new weapon!
>
>I'd agree with Joel if this were the real world - it's not! The clumsy
>interface DF has means you are penalised by the programmer not by your
>own actions. I hope this is an option setting else there will be those
>horrible reloads happening all the time.
>eg. find fire elemental, get killed, reload, have wand of ice ready,
>then go back and fight him - dumb!
You know, you COULD do what you'd do in "real life" and run away if
outclassed... :) Find a place to dig into the pack and pull out your
trusty "Sword of Flame-snuffing" before meeting him again.
--
--------------------------- ------------------------------------------------
Brent Burkholder < < "To coerce God is to coerce reality and answer
Brent.Bu...@amd.com > > your own prayers." - Diamond Mask, Julian May
-------------------------- -------------------------------------------------
Ian Roberts
Jeez, even an ancient version of Omega I used to play
on the Amiga covered this point. You had equipment slots
for armour, main weapon, second weapon and various general
items -- belt, shoulder pouch and so on. These items you
could use instantly. Everything else was in your pack.
Retrieving a pack item involved a few seconds' delay to
reach in -- and items were stored as a stack, so if what
you were after was buried deep, you were handing several
free moves over to your opponent.
Moral? Keep your goodies within easy reach. Simple, logical,
frustrating when you screw up. But I'd rather have that
than instant-accessiblity. All these flashy graphics and
sounds... and yet the designers are unable to learn from
text-based games? Leaves me wondering.
-- Red
Jaliya Jayawardena
On 14 Aug 1996 02:05:09 GMT, joe...@ix.netcom.com(Joel) wrote:
>Most games work like this: You stumble open a fire
>elemental. What better way to fight a fire elemental
>than with your wand of cold! Too bad it's in the
>bottom of your backpack. No problem. The monster
>will politely wait while you shuffle through your pack
>for five minutes. If a game designer were to make the
>game "realistic" the player would be penalized several
>attacks while he dug through his pack. It's been
>several years since I played Arena but if I remember
>correctly, it suffered from this problem. You could
>freeze combat to find an item in your pack. A player
>should be required to have any weapons readied or else
>suffer a penalty.
That's just a little too realistic for me. I remember what a
pain it was feeding the guys in Ultima VII ("Methinks I am hungry,
Avatar" "Eat, for !@#$'s sake! Don't !@#@ing bother me!") and so many
people've written about how painful the wearing-out of weapons and
disease are in Star Trail. Games are escapist experiences: if we want
realism, we should go outside.
Jaliya
John Hoffman
escape. I want to be an awsome hero in a fantastic epic saga. I don't think
reality plays a part in this picture. If I want reality I can just turn my
computer off. I don't like doing game mechanics (eating, note taking, and
other mundane obvious things.) Let me direct the exploration, interaction,
and strategy of combat. I really hate food based games or games that
you only scrape by in. I like challenging battles I just don't like
insufficient food or money where this becomes the overriding factor in
survival in the game. Again I don't want survival I want to be a hero in an
epic story!!!
John
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Johh Hoffman mailto:jhof...@ix.netcom.com
Gussel Timer
Jaliya Jayawardena wrote:
>
> On 14 Aug 1996 02:05:09 GMT, joe...@ix.netcom.com(Joel) wrote:
>
> >Most games work like this: You stumble open a fire
> >elemental. What better way to fight a fire elemental
> >than with your wand of cold! Too bad it's in the
> >bottom of your backpack. No problem. The monster
> >will politely wait while you shuffle through your pack
> >for five minutes. If a game designer were to make the
> >game "realistic" the player would be penalized several
> >attacks while he dug through his pack. It's been
> >several years since I played Arena but if I remember
> >correctly, it suffered from this problem. You could
> >freeze combat to find an item in your pack. A player
> >should be required to have any weapons readied or else
> >suffer a penalty.
>
> That's just a little too realistic for me. I remember what a
> pain it was feeding the guys in Ultima VII ("Methinks I am hungry,
> Avatar" "Eat, for !@#$'s sake! Don't !@#@ing bother me!") and so many
> people've written about how painful the wearing-out of weapons and
> disease are in Star Trail. Games are escapist experiences: if we want
> realism, we should go outside.
I agree completely. I'm constantly amazed at people who gripe that computer
combat isn't "realistic". It's not SUPPOSED to be! How realistic is it to
fight an monster by manipulating a mouse and pressing a few letters on the
keyboard? The only thing that should be "realistic" should be the excitement
level that comes from playing.
If you want realism combat, train as a boxer or play paintball, or some other
combat-based sport...NOT computer role-playing games. :)
Desslock
--
I don't agree - I don't think I'm stating a total oxymoron when I state
that I want to have a "realistic" fantasy role playing game.
I love the Ultima games, which create a realistic world, with day/night
cicles, lots of interactivity, believable behavior from NPCs, and lots
of attention to detail - frankly I agree with your complaint re: Ultima
7 and food - but that problem was caused by "unrealistic" game design.
How believable is it that Iolo and the boys would sit there begging for
food when they have a backpack full of munchies. I think the more
realistic a world the computer game creates, the more involving the game
becomes - it is easier to "escape from reality" when a game creates an
atmosphere that really makes you think that "you are there". That said,
good game design involves balance as well - ain't a lot of fun if you
have to stop off every 3 hrs to take the boys to the restroom....
Gussel Timer
Desslock wrote:
> Gussel Timer wrote:
> > I agree completely. I'm constantly amazed at people who gripe that computer
> > combat isn't "realistic". It's not SUPPOSED to be! How realistic is it to
> > fight an monster by manipulating a mouse and pressing a few letters on the
> > keyboard? The only thing that should be "realistic" should be the excitement
> > level that comes from playing.
> >
> > If you want realism combat, train as a boxer or play paintball, or some other
> > combat-based sport...NOT computer role-playing games. :)
>
> --
> I don't agree - I don't think I'm stating a total oxymoron when I state
> that I want to have a "realistic" fantasy role playing game.
Wrongo! The gripe being discussed is computer role-playing COMBAT. Naturally,
it's preferable to have realistic worlds and graphics (if they don't come at
the expense of gameplay) , but there's no way computer combat can ever
"realistic" using a mouse and keyboard.
Desslock
--
Oops.
To properly address the thread - I like both real time combat in RPGs
and turn based combat. I liked the turn based combat of the Gold box
ad&D games by SSI (I love wargames), but I also thought the real time
combat of Dungeon Master and the Ultima Underworld games was really
exciting and did enhance my feeling of "being there". I must admit
though, I have yet to see real time combat implemented well in a role
playing game which was not from a "first person perspective" - I thought
the combat in Ultima 7 was a bit of a disaster, with companions killing
each other extremely frequently (if you gave them large or explosive
weapons), but am hopeful that Diablo (an action oriented game with RPG
elements) will create a good engine. I also thought the real time
combat of Star Control II was exciting and increased my enjoyment of an
excellent RPG.
Jared M Meaux
I like the idea of a rpg where you are penalized for having to rumage
through your pack to get an item. But, this just does not seem to work
the way it should when it is implemented in a game. The problem is the
interface for the game is never as good as your ability to get an object
in real life. Herin lies your problem. Until VR is here and you have
your power glove, This idea is too hard to implement it properly. The
game either penalizes too much time or not enough.
Jared
Scott Milne
John Hoffman wrote:
>
> In article <322a1439...@news.brandeis.edu>, jal...@cs.brandeis.edu wrote:
> >On 14 Aug 1996 02:05:09 GMT, joe...@ix.netcom.com(Joel) wrote:
> >
> >>Most games work like this: You stumble open a fire
> >>elemental. What better way to fight a fire elemental
> >>than with your wand of cold! Too bad it's in the
> >>bottom of your backpack. No problem. The monster
> >>will politely wait while you shuffle through your pack
> >>for five minutes.
> >
> >pain it was feeding the guys in Ultima VII ("Methinks I am hungry,
> >Avatar" "Eat, for !@#$'s sake! Don't !@#@ing bother me!") and so many
> >people've written about how painful the wearing-out of weapons and
> >disease are in Star Trail. Games are escapist experiences: if we want
> >realism, we should go outside.
> >
> escape. I want to be an awsome hero in a fantastic epic saga. I don't think
> reality plays a part in this picture. If I want reality I can just turn my
> computer off. I don't like doing game mechanics (eating, note taking, and
> other mundane obvious things.) Let me direct the exploration, interaction,
> and strategy of combat. I really hate food based games or games that
> you only scrape by in. I like challenging battles I just don't like
> insufficient food or money where this becomes the overriding factor in
> survival in the game. Again I don't want survival I want to be a hero in an
> epic story!!!
>
> John
If what Bethesda01 has been saying is true then the monsters do not wait
for
you to look through your pack they keep on attacking in real time. I
haven't
heard anything about food, but it seems reasonable that they will
include it as
they had a fatigue(?) bar in Arena.
Tyranon
Desslock wrote:
> I thought
> the combat in Ultima 7 was a bit of a disaster, with companions killing
> each other extremely frequently (if you gave them large or explosive
> weapons)
This was by far the biggest gripe I had with U7 (an otherwise solid game). From previous
games I was used to having Iolo use a crossbow from the rear, so I tried this again.
Apparently Iolo was a wee bit jealous about getting old while the Avatar stayed young
since he managed to shoot him in the back pretty consistently. Every once in a while,
for laughs, I would equip the party with nasty ranged weapons and watch them massacre
each other instead of the sigle headless they were fighting :) The turn based games
might not provide the "realism" of real-time, or the heart-thumping excitement, but if
they are more fun to play, so what. Plus I don't want heart-thumping excitement from
wondering whether or not my "allies" are going to skewer me from behind!
--
Brian DiNunno
gt7...@prism.gatech.edu
http://www.prism.gatech.edu/~bd42/
Ryan Greenwell
Scott Milne wrote:
> If what Bethesda01 has been saying is true then the monsters do not wait
> for
> you to look through your pack they keep on attacking in real time. I
> haven't
> heard anything about food, but it seems reasonable that they will
> include it as
> they had a fatigue(?) bar in Arena.
Your character is not required to eat in Daggerfall
-Ryan
Stevie Lee Martin
Tyranon wrote:
>
> Desslock wrote:
> > I thought
> > the combat in Ultima 7 was a bit of a disaster, with companions killing
> > each other extremely frequently (if you gave them large or explosive
> > weapons)
>
> wondering whether or not my "allies" are going to skewer me from behind!
>
Makes it sound more realistic to me (=:
Stevie Lee Martin
Gregg Abbott
Scott Milne wrote:
>
> If what Bethesda01 has been saying is true then the monsters do not wait
> for
> you to look through your pack they keep on attacking in real time. I
> haven't
> heard anything about food, but it seems reasonable that they will
> include it as
> they had a fatigue(?) bar in Arena.
Last I heard, there was no food implemented in Daggerfall, however, I,
too heard of the ability for monsters to attack while you're in
inventory. Will the monster still attack while you're selecting a
spell? I heard that some features (like clothing effecting NPC
reactions, and house burgerlary) could be enabled or disabled. If this
is the case, the ability for monsters to attack while you're in
inventory, should also have a toggle (not everyone would appreciate
monsters munching on you while you're digging in your pack).
Stephen Di Ciano
Scott Milne wrote:
> If what Bethesda01 has been saying is true then the monsters do not wait
> for
> you to look through your pack they keep on attacking in real time. I
> haven't
> heard anything about food, but it seems reasonable that they will
> include it as
> they had a fatigue(?) bar in Arena.
Fatigue, I believe is a very good as part of any CRPG and can easily be used
in place of eating. Eating also be included but should have the effect of
restoring lost fatigue.
Dungeon Master had a EXCELLENT fatigue system !!
Stephen Di Ciano.
Stephen Di Ciano
John Hoffman wrote:
>
> > That's just a little too realistic for me. I remember what a
> >pain it was feeding the guys in Ultima VII ("Methinks I am hungry,
> >Avatar" "Eat, for !@#$'s sake! Don't !@#@ing bother me!") and so many
> >people've written about how painful the wearing-out of weapons and
> >disease are in Star Trail. Games are escapist experiences: if we want
> >realism, we should go outside.
> >
> Agree 100%!!! Don't bog me down with reality thats what I'm trying to
> escape. I want to be an awsome hero in a fantastic epic saga. I don't think
> reality plays a part in this picture. If I want reality I can just turn my
> computer off. I don't like doing game mechanics (eating, note taking, and
> other mundane obvious things.) Let me direct the exploration, interaction,
> and strategy of combat. I really hate food based games or games that
> you only scrape by in. I like challenging battles I just don't like
> insufficient food or money where this becomes the overriding factor in
> survival in the game. Again I don't want survival I want to be a hero in an
> epic story!!!
>
> John
Don't agree 100%...
I don't know about you but in my pencil and paper RPG's there are many aspects that
I try to make very realistic...especially combat...but then again I know many role players
who don't like realistic combat and opt for RPG's like AD&D. It then seems obvious why I play
GURPS which allows me this realism.
Even you have to admit that there must be some realistic things when playing the hero...I mean
you will probably have to sleep ! or maybe not...but I find sleeping an essential part, let alone
obvious part of RPG's....otherwise I would be playing Mortal Kombat instead.
Many realism situations are a matter of personel choice...hell even I was pissed by the diseases
I got in Realms of Arkania, but I lived with them and found a way to avoid them.
Considering ROA again...I thought the combat could be much more realistic and thus I emailed Sir-
Tech and posed some ideas. So I do not see ROA as being too realistic...just annoyingly realistic
in some parts and not beneficially realistic in most others.
The wearing out of weapons would have satisfied me if it happened to my enemies TOO...But what I most
hated was having a large variety of weapons but no point in using most of them, I mean did a pike allow
you to attack from 3 squares away !?!?
How does a programmer cater to every gamers wants...damned I know...maybe have an option to turn
off all the realistic stuff, which in turn adds to the immense complexity of creating the RPG in the
first place.
Stephen Di Ciano.
John Hoffman
What I'm trying to get across is that there are some realistic characteristics
that add little value to the game and make the game tedious. For example,
some games have food as a key element to survival. In some of these games
there is barely enough food to keep your party alive. Thus, a major part of
the game is rushing through looking for food. I just don't find this to be
very fun. If food is plentiful than what is the point in worrying about it.
Now you mention desease. I like desease in games as long as it is realistic.
There was a real sad game released a couple of years ago which had several
major problems but implemented deseases quite well. If you traveled in the
bad part of town or sewers your could get sick. If you fought with deseased
creatures you could get sick. You wouldn't necessarily die from being sick,
it would reduce your stats and could get better or worse. I don't like
desease when it is random. It should be avoidable.
I like tactical combat systems in role playing games. I like them to be
simple. I prefer multi character parties to single character games. I don't
consider single character adventurers very realistic. At a minumum the buddy
rule would apply. Realtime combat tends to be difficult for multicharacter
battles and I find the slashing to be boring. The current doom like combat
system used in Arena, Anvil, stonekeep, and presumably daggerfall provides no
enhancement to realism and makes the game unrealistic. The key flaw is that
they are all single character systems. I would never go into a dungeon
without several buddies to back me up. Once I was in a dungeon if my party
hoped to survive it would be a strategic activity not just a slash activity.
I would have a couple of people with bows, some strong guy in front, and a
magic caster protected in the back. This is far more realistic.
Hacking and slashing does not contribute to the realism of the game but
instead detracts. The reason is suppose that I'm a poorly coordinated
slasher. Now I take my wonderful 20th level fighter up against a giant rat.
Since I'm unable to control my slashing my 20th level fighter dies. Is this
realistic? Ah you say, anyone could slash well enough to kill the rat. My
point is that my slashing ability can effect that outcome of the combat but
has little to do with the capability of my 20th level fighter. So clearly
realtime slashing interfaces are very unrealistic.
Good combat systems that I think enhance realism are the BAK system and the
albion system. ROA was pretty good too. The SSI systems were good but like
ROA were becoming games in themselves which were overly complicated. I think
you should be able to resolve combat in 5-10 minutes tops.
Trav10000
Many of you say that eating as an essential is tedious and boring. You say
you want to be the "hero" and do the "exploration". Look at it this way, I
don't care who you are, if you play games it's to escape reality in some
fashion. Roleplaying games were really designed to mix the "reality of
life" with the "magic of fantasy". Some people only care about the "magic
of fantasy" part of that equation (ie., heroes,mythical villains,exotic
animals,etc..), others not only care about the "magic of fantasy", but
also the "reality of life" (ie., eating,sleeping,hunting,etc...). Is it
really so strange that some people like both? I personally think that the
"reality of life" part of games is an essential element, and beatifully
compliments the "magic of fantasy".