Page 10 of 11 FirstFirst ... 891011 LastLast
Results 181 to 200 of 216
  1. #181
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Unaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus_Phish View Post
    Really not seeing it though. You still have to cycle through each member, you still have to click to tell them where to go. Having a pause button to stop action to do all this isn't going to make the process that much, if at all, shorter.
    No... it's not going to make the process shorter FOR YOU. Whether it's paused or not, you'll still have to do all that clicking and moving the mouse etc.

    But, and call me crazy here, I don't think the pause function is to make the process shorter FOR YOU, but instead to make the process more synchronised (and shorter) for your team/squad. If the game is NOT paused and you start giving out the orders, by the time you get to the 4th guy, the 1st guy is already in position (and might possibly be in the fight etc). If you CAN pause the game to give out orders, because it's paused when you give the order to the 4th guy, the 1st guy is still standing, waiting for the game to be unpaused, so they can go and do what's been asked. You want that pause ability, if you want to try and synchronise people... otherwise you give an order to 1 and they start doing it immediately (because the game isn't paused).

    You should read Drake's example again, if you don't see the difference between the two.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    I just have an opinion different to your own. Circle jerking is good for no one, be glad somebody isn't afraid to disagree with women on the internet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    No, you are literally the cancer that is killing gaming.
    Quote Originally Posted by Serenegoose View Post
    Nobody's ever lost sleep over being called a cracker.

  2. #182
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    While the pause and give orders might have greater verisimilitude, it seems to me that without it the game has introduced a system of tactical tradeoffs. Under a pause and issue orders command you could play a lot of edge games with line of sight, which lets the player have a pretty unfair advantage. It also drastically reduces the importance of initiative/ the order in which characters go. On an simpler note, it makes it harder to surprise the player and introduce them to bad fights they have to run away from / react to. If every encounter is set up as an ambush, they are far less special.

  3. #183
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Drake Sigar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Jolly Ole England
    Posts
    3,385
    Quote Originally Posted by Internet View Post
    While the pause and give orders might have greater verisimilitude, it seems to me that without it the game has introduced a system of tactical tradeoffs. Under a pause and issue orders command you could play a lot of edge games with line of sight, which lets the player have a pretty unfair advantage. It also drastically reduces the importance of initiative/ the order in which characters go. On an simpler note, it makes it harder to surprise the player and introduce them to bad fights they have to run away from / react to. If every encounter is set up as an ambush, they are far less special.
    You could make a similar argument against the birdseye camera, the ability that lets you see an opponent's field of vision in the first place, or a number of other mechanics. When you're playing a squad-based party, you want your squad to feel like... a squad (Enemy Unknown did this quite well). And it's much harder to do that when you're ordering single units to move one by one in real-time. A squad should be faster than that, synchronised, precise, trained. There are ways to curb player advantage and bring balance without removing proven elements. The fog of war being one of many examples.

  4. #184
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Jesus_Phish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    4,429
    Quote Originally Posted by Unaco View Post
    No... it's not going to make the process shorter FOR YOU. Whether it's paused or not, you'll still have to do all that clicking and moving the mouse etc.

    But, and call me crazy here, I don't think the pause function is to make the process shorter FOR YOU, but instead to make the process more synchronised (and shorter) for your team/squad. If the game is NOT paused and you start giving out the orders, by the time you get to the 4th guy, the 1st guy is already in position (and might possibly be in the fight etc). If you CAN pause the game to give out orders, because it's paused when you give the order to the 4th guy, the 1st guy is still standing, waiting for the game to be unpaused, so they can go and do what's been asked. You want that pause ability, if you want to try and synchronise people... otherwise you give an order to 1 and they start doing it immediately (because the game isn't paused).

    You should read Drake's example again, if you don't see the difference between the two.
    I read his example and I've read your example and I still don't think I'll use a pause function.

    I'll move people where I want to, carefully in hope that they don't get into combat. Then once everyone is in position, I'll strike. If someone gets jumped, I deal with it. As I said, I don't care if there's a pause feature and if there is one, great, the people that want to use it can use it.

    I managed to get through all of Fallout 1, 2 and Tactics using a large enough squad of people most of the time and I never had an issue. Also if guy A has to to further than guy B, then using pause means guy B has to wait on guy A to get there before he can kick off, where as without pause guy B sets off, I go back and start moving guy A and they arrive at their points around the same time. Both pause and no pause have their advantage but I say again, if people want it I hope they put it in for them.
    Last edited by Jesus_Phish; 12-02-2013 at 02:53 PM.

  5. #185
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Unaco's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    1,924
    Quote Originally Posted by Jesus_Phish View Post
    I read his example and I've read your example and I still don't think I'll use a pause function.
    That's cool and all, but do you understand why some people might want to use it? You didn't seem to understand why Drake (and others) was asking for it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    I just have an opinion different to your own. Circle jerking is good for no one, be glad somebody isn't afraid to disagree with women on the internet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Hypernetic View Post
    No, you are literally the cancer that is killing gaming.
    Quote Originally Posted by Serenegoose View Post
    Nobody's ever lost sleep over being called a cracker.

  6. #186
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Fumarole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,911
    JA:BiA had the best of both worlds as far as real-time and pause combat is concerned.
    The Medallion of the Imperial Psychopath, a Napoleon: Total War AAR
    For the Emperor!, a Total War: Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai AAR

  7. #187
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus b0rsuk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    1,358
    Apparently the WL2 First Look video has violated Vimeo's Terms of Service, and has been deleted. They've re-uploaded it to youtube (Ha, I have an excuse to flush a few lurkers out of the bushes!).

    pass

  8. #188
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus DaftPunk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Posts
    4,322
    Anyone read the latest article on main page about game mechanics where you can just kill who ever you want,even major npc,and do what ever you want. In one way this really sounds awesome but i can't let myself hyped to this because you know that allot of the times big names like to brag about their games and at the end they don't deliever :/

  9. #189
    Lesser Hivemind Node squareking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by DaftPunk View Post
    Anyone read the latest article on main page about game mechanics where you can just kill who ever you want,even major npc,and do what ever you want. In one way this really sounds awesome but i can't let myself hyped to this because you know that allot of the times big names like to brag about their games and at the end they don't deliever :/
    I think if anyone can make and subsequently follow up on this (and similar) promises, it's Brian Fargo's team — especially if they're not under external publisher pressure. If they don't deliver on key features, they have to answer to us, which might make it harder to point fingers as to why they didn't deliver. But heck, I know nothing about any of this. WL2 could end up being a post-apocalyptic Match 3 and inXile will go "haha suckers" and leave for the Caymans.
    Last edited by squareking; 31-07-2013 at 03:42 AM.
    steam


  10. #190
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    You mean like Ken Levine had to "asnwer" for Bioshock? Or Warren Spector had to "answer" for Thief: Deadly Shadows and Deus Ex: Invisible War?

    FWIW, "kill everyone, still finish game" has been done, and not by Brian Fargo(since when is he relevant?). It was a feature in Arcanum that basically boiled down to this: if you kill a major NPC, on his body there will be a key, which will open a locked container in the room, in which there will be a note of some kind telling you exactly what the NPC would tell you himself(minus the obligatory "but first do x for me") as to what to do next.

    A ham-handed solution to a ham-handed approach. Worked brilliantly. Only really relevant to put up as a meaningless hype blurb.

  11. #191
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Jesus_Phish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Dublin, Ireland
    Posts
    4,429
    Quote Originally Posted by DaftPunk View Post
    Anyone read the latest article on main page about game mechanics where you can just kill who ever you want,even major npc,and do what ever you want. In one way this really sounds awesome but i can't let myself hyped to this because you know that allot of the times big names like to brag about their games and at the end they don't deliever :/
    In Morrowind (the 3rd elder scrolls) you could kill absolutely everyone, anyone you wanted it. From guards, to the barman, to gods themselves. If you did kill an npc who was part of the main quest line, you got a message that your actions have caused ruin to the main quest line, but you're free to continue to play in the world you've just created or reload a previous save game to correct the problem.

    So it's not actually that big a thing to let you murder everyone.

    Arcanum did it much better though. You could murder everyone in that game and keep going with the main story.
    "Halo is designed to make the player think "I look like that, I am macho sitting in my undies with my xbox""

    Steam ID

  12. #192
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    You mean like Ken Levine had to "asnwer" for Bioshock? Or Warren Spector had to "answer" for Thief: Deadly Shadows and Deus Ex: Invisible War?

    FWIW, "kill everyone, still finish game" has been done, and not by Brian Fargo(since when is he relevant?). It was a feature in Arcanum that basically boiled down to this: if you kill a major NPC, on his body there will be a key, which will open a locked container in the room, in which there will be a note of some kind telling you exactly what the NPC would tell you himself(minus the obligatory "but first do x for me") as to what to do next.

    A ham-handed solution to a ham-handed approach. Worked brilliantly. Only really relevant to put up as a meaningless hype blurb.
    I think that it informs design pretty heavily. On the one hand, it limits the importance of plot unless you resort to notes or whatever (which frequently make sense anyways). But it also means that the game is designed as a cohesive world and the player is an agent within it that follows its rules. This allows a degree of emergent gameplay that might not otherwise be present.

    Think about how Dragon Age 2 might be altered if you could kill certain plot-specific people in the second act.

  13. #193
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    That will be rather difficult as I never played Dragon Age.

    But you give it too much credit... it changes nothing, at least the way Arcanum did it and WL2 likely will. You still have to reach the room with the important NPC, which usually is the hardest thing to do, and it doesn't really change how the story develops. You just replace a dialogue with an item.

  14. #194
    Lesser Hivemind Node squareking's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    611
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    You mean like Ken Levine had to "asnwer" for Bioshock? Or Warren Spector had to "answer" for Thief: Deadly Shadows and Deus Ex: Invisible War?

    FWIW, "kill everyone, still finish game" has been done, and not by Brian Fargo(since when is he relevant?).
    Levine and Spector weren't funded by fans to create their opus in Bioshock, Thief or Deus Ex:IW. This is why Fargo is relevant — not necessarily because of who, but where he is. If they can pull off hyped promises, it means developers can do what's been quoted in the press release because they're leading the show. Comparing those three games to an unprecedented crowd-sourced product like WL2 is missing the point at best and asinine at worst — they're incompatible. Potentially, anyway. Like I said, they could totally fuck this up, shrug and say "welp we tried, some people love it, so deal I guess?" and move on.

    And yes, I know it's been done before, they're not treading new ground, modern games allow it to a degree; I'm not making that point. It's the reactivity and consequence they're hyping and to what most readers are responding.
    steam


  15. #195
    Network Hub Squirly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    That will be rather difficult as I never played Dragon Age.

    But you give it too much credit... it changes nothing, at least the way Arcanum did it and WL2 likely will. You still have to reach the room with the important NPC, which usually is the hardest thing to do, and it doesn't really change how the story develops. You just replace a dialogue with an item.
    But that's just it. They're trying to make it more than just that. And I don't understand why you decry them for trying. God knows we have enough ho-hum developers out there churning out "what works" because if they try and break boundaries they'll probably break the game and that's not something they can afford. inXile can say 'screw all that, we're going full retard' and it might suck. And it might be glorious.

    Ever play Witcher 2 where the entire second act changes completely depending on your decision in the first? That's not a note left behind to take the place of an NPC. That's ambitious, and it's great.

    Also, and I can't stress this enough, even if a note in a locked box remains to solve the issue of missing or killed NPCs that's still better than getting no reaction from shooting them, or getting a message that you're "not allowed" to kill them or half a dozen shitty and lame cop-outs used by Bethesda, Bioware and other once-ambitious RPG powerhouses.
    Last edited by Squirly; 31-07-2013 at 02:52 PM.

  16. #196
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    1,574
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    That will be rather difficult as I never played Dragon Age.

    But you give it too much credit... it changes nothing, at least the way Arcanum did it and WL2 likely will. You still have to reach the room with the important NPC, which usually is the hardest thing to do, and it doesn't really change how the story develops. You just replace a dialogue with an item.
    It changed a hell of a lot in every one of the fallout games. Yes the plot hits some of the same points, but the way people react to you is very different. Even in Arcanum, most of the endings account for killing or not killing various plot important people.

  17. #197
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Posts
    2,069
    Quote Originally Posted by Squirly View Post
    But that's just it. They're trying to make it more than just that. And I don't understand why you decry them for trying.
    I don't decry them for trying, I just say it's been done, it's not a big deal, and ultimately it's a pointless feature that only serves as something to put on the "game features list". I mean honestly, I'm all for allowing people to play RPGs hovewer they want, but the amount of players who do "kill everything on sight" runs is so small it's more effort than it's worth.

    And as for them trying to make it more than that... nobody said that, as far as I see here.

  18. #198
    Secondary Hivemind Nexus Fumarole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    California
    Posts
    2,911
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    mean honestly, I'm all for allowing people to play RPGs hovewer they want, but the amount of players who do "kill everything on sight" runs is so small it's more effort than it's worth.
    It's not aimed so much at the players who kill everyone in sight so much as making the game not enter a failstate if any one particular person is killed. I applaud this.
    The Medallion of the Imperial Psychopath, a Napoleon: Total War AAR
    For the Emperor!, a Total War: Shogun 2: Fall of the Samurai AAR

  19. #199
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    You mean like Ken Levine had to "asnwer" for Bioshock? Or Warren Spector had to "answer" for Thief: Deadly Shadows and Deus Ex: Invisible War?

    FWIW, "kill everyone, still finish game" has been done, and not by Brian Fargo(since when is he relevant?). It was a feature in Arcanum that basically boiled down to this: if you kill a major NPC, on his body there will be a key, which will open a locked container in the room, in which there will be a note of some kind telling you exactly what the NPC would tell you himself(minus the obligatory "but first do x for me") as to what to do next.

    A ham-handed solution to a ham-handed approach. Worked brilliantly. Only really relevant to put up as a meaningless hype blurb.
    No mention of New Vegas? The only NPC it would not let you kill was Yes Man; beyond him, anyone at any point is fair game. All without ever breaking the game.

  20. #200
    Network Hub Squirly's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Posts
    190
    Quote Originally Posted by Mohorovicic View Post
    And as for them trying to make it more than that... nobody said that, as far as I see here.
    Did you miss the part where entire towns can get murdered if you don't respond in time? About how players will see about half the game on one playthrough simply because certain choices will not just change dialogue but close off entire areas?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •