Various role-playing RPG game stuff not deserving its own thread

[Acrux]

I'm not ********, you're just being a clown. But no you're right, let's not strive for higher levels of art and aesthetic beauty, and let's just stick with Pong because as this "enlightened" frenchman (lol) says, "Shits only good if you can't strip anything else off yo!". Which to any reasonable person (i.e not a jackass) means "do just enough to get by". I don't know what sort of mental gymnastics you have to do to read that as anything else, but okay. I'll humor you this one time.

Pss...I actually work in design, so I know exactly what the quote means - and it's NOT what you seem to think it means. At all.

You're talking out of your unwiped ***, ******. Nobody has to work in design to know what that asinine quote supposedly, "truly means!". And if you work in design, I suppose I should hold you responsible for creating the globohomo art style. After all, you couldn't possibly remove anything else from such an artistic style, so it must be perfect!. It's just enough right, just enough to be whatever it needs to be. This random fr*nch ******** would be proud.

Have you ever played a game where you thought this has too many different systems that don't work that well together in it?

Also, you moron design and art are not the same thing. You do know that engineers use the design process to create things, right?

[KnightoftheWind]

Pss...I actually work in design, so I know exactly what the quote means - and it's NOT what you seem to think it means. At all.

You're talking out of your unwiped ***, ******. Nobody has to work in design to know what that asinine quote supposedly, "truly means!". And if you work in design, I suppose I should hold you responsible for creating the globohomo art style. After all, you couldn't possibly remove anything else from such an artistic style, so it must be perfect!. It's just enough right, just enough to be whatever it needs to be. This random fr*nch ******** would be proud.

Have you ever played a game where you thought this has too many different systems that don't work that well together in it?

That quote has no business being applied to video games, because video games are an artistic medium. If you do the bare minimum, as random jackass fr*nchie would have you do, you would end up with the same old tired slop that constitutes the vast majority of the AAA gaming market today. The very same sort of games we point and laugh at on a daily basis. And if a game is too complicated, it's either made for a very niche audience, or isn't put together all that well. If fr*nchie was alive to play video games in 2024, I bet he would love a game like Call of Duty. Hey, it does just enough right?. It excites the senses and gives you a rush, so it must be the perfect video game according to him. You can't really simplify Call of Duty any more than it is, after all. And why bother making or playing anything else?, it accomplishes everything a video game sets out to do- offer up a fun distraction.

[Gastrick]

This one looks a lot cooler than his other game anyway, better use of stylization:

[A Chinese opium den]

I don't even understand what you two are mad at eachother about in the first place.

[KnightoftheWind]

Tried the demo for Scarmonde. An indie RPG that takes after the NES Final Fantasies, apparently. I'm not sure how long I have to go to complete the demo, but for what it is it's fairly solid. It's aim is to give you a classic JRPG experience, without all the needless dialogue and story exposition. You get to customize your party, and from what I gathered you and a host of others are trapped in the town of Scarmonde, having lost all of your memories, and your goal is to descend into the depths of a dungeon in order to awaken the "Dragon god" and have your wish granted. There is a bit of a surprise early on, and it's a bit more than your traditional dungeon.

https://store.steampowered.com/app/2769210/Scarmonde/

[TheFumblingKnight]

This seems interesting.

Honestly, after familiarizing myself with some OSR and old D&d manuals, I am puzzled by why dungeon crawlers never picked up other easily adaptable mechanics such as monster reaction tables, wilderness exploration and high-level domain play. While one can't expect reams of writen dialogue in a DOS/NES game, those interactions imo weren't really that complex.

[Kalarion]

You're talking out of your unwiped ***, ******. Nobody has to work in design to know what that asinine quote supposedly, "truly means!". And if you work in design, I suppose I should hold you responsible for creating the globohomo art style. After all, you couldn't possibly remove anything else from such an artistic style, so it must be perfect!. It's just enough right, just enough to be whatever it needs to be. This random fr*nch ******** would be proud.

Have you ever played a game where you thought this has too many different systems that don't work that well together in it?

That quote has no business being applied to video games, because video games are an artistic medium. If you do the bare minimum, as random jackass fr*nchie would have you do, you would end up with the same old tired slop that constitutes the vast majority of the AAA gaming market today. The very same sort of games we point and laugh at on a daily basis. And if a game is too complicated, it's either made for a very niche audience, or isn't put together all that well. If fr*nchie was alive to play video games in 2024, I bet he would love a game like Call of Duty. Hey, it does just enough right?. It excites the senses and gives you a rush, so it must be the perfect video game according to him. You can't really simplify Call of Duty any more than it is, after all. And why bother making or playing anything else?, it accomplishes everything a video game sets out to do- offer up a fun distraction.

This is TRVE SOVL according to @KnightoftheWind:


> lots of colors (including characters, SLAY!)
> sharp lines
> shiny surfaces
> invasive and verbose interface
Knightofthewind:
> OH GOD ITZ HEAVAN

You might not like it boys, but this is peak graphics and design

[KnightoftheWind]

Have you ever played a game where you thought this has too many different systems that don't work that well together in it?

That quote has no business being applied to video games, because video games are an artistic medium. If you do the bare minimum, as random jackass fr*nchie would have you do, you would end up with the same old tired slop that constitutes the vast majority of the AAA gaming market today. The very same sort of games we point and laugh at on a daily basis. And if a game is too complicated, it's either made for a very niche audience, or isn't put together all that well. If fr*nchie was alive to play video games in 2024, I bet he would love a game like Call of Duty. Hey, it does just enough right?. It excites the senses and gives you a rush, so it must be the perfect video game according to him. You can't really simplify Call of Duty any more than it is, after all. And why bother making or playing anything else?, it accomplishes everything a video game sets out to do- offer up a fun distraction.

This is TRVE SOVL according to @KnightoftheWind:


> lots of colors (including characters, SLAY!)
> sharp lines
> shiny surfaces
> invasive and verbose interface
Knightofthewind:
> OH GOD ITZ HEAVAN

You might not like it boys, but this is peak graphics and design

Huh?. No this is an ugly image because the art design is terrible, it in no way DEBOOOONKS what I've been saying. This game, by virtue of being terrible, 'should' have aspects removed but only so that they can be replaced by a proper art style that isn't zoomer vomit.

[KnightoftheWind]

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Uncanny valley with the stiff plastic face and the jittery character movements.

[Schizoid1488]

I don't even understand what you two are mad at eachother about in the first place.

[A Chinese opium den]

This cutscene is scary...

[SoLong]

This is TRVE SOVL according to @KnightoftheWind:


> lots of colors (including characters, SLAY!)
> sharp lines
> shiny surfaces
> invasive and verbose interface
Knightofthewind:
> OH GOD ITZ HEAVAN

You might not like it boys, but this is peak graphics and design

God, every time I see that image it just hurts my faith in the gaming industry. Why did they **** up Dragon Age? Why did they put a mobile gaming ***** in charge of it? Ugh.

[Schizoid1488]

This is TRVE SOVL according to @KnightoftheWind:


> lots of colors (including characters, SLAY!)
> sharp lines
> shiny surfaces
> invasive and verbose interface
Knightofthewind:
> OH GOD ITZ HEAVAN

You might not like it boys, but this is peak graphics and design

God, every time I see that image it just hurts my faith in the gaming industry. Why did they **** up Dragon Age? Why did they put a mobile gaming ***** in charge of it? Ugh.

I just pretend that the entire franchise ends when I leave in the portal with Morrigan. At the very least BioWare made sure Origins ending feels satisfying and game conclusive as a standalone. I will pirate and cope through playing Veilguard in some delusional mechanism pretending that there's something in there that will be good and remind me of Origins just like I did for II and Inquisition, but inevitably it will be pure ****. At least It'll be useful for shitposts. Watching that cinematic trailer they made was equally hilarious as it was painful, fortnite-esque experience that healed BioWare. I'm pretty sure they also panicked from seeing the terrible reception of the BEST trailer they could muster after SEVEN (7) (SIEBEN) (SEDAM) ******* years, so they told all the advertisers to instead shill the gameplay trailer and that's why it has double the views. The absolute STATE.

[SoLong]

I just pretend that the entire franchise ends when I leave in the portal with Morrigan. At the very least BioWare made sure Origins ending feels satisfying and game conclusive as a standalone. I will pirate and cope through playing Veilguard in some delusional mechanism pretending that there's something in there that will be good and remind me of Origins just like I did for II and Inquisition, but inevitably it will be pure ****. At least It'll be useful for shitposts. Watching that cinematic trailer they made was equally hilarious as it was painful, fortnite-esque experience that healed BioWare. I'm pretty sure they also panicked from seeing the terrible reception of the BEST trailer they could muster after SEVEN (7) (SIEBEN) (SEDAM) ******* years, so they told all the advertisers to instead shill the gameplay trailer and that's why it has double the views. The absolute STATE.

I won't even bother pirating it. Why? None of the characters look interesting or appealing to me, either as concepts, personality or even bog standard eye-candy.

Yes yes, Dragon Age: Inquisition was challenged in the pretty department too (unless you were a female player or gay) but this is just so much worse in so many department. I can see that someone else might think Josephine is attractive (at least she has manners and a nice hairstyle) but who the **** thinks these technicolor abominations look even remotely appealing? Only the rogue guy looks bland enough to not make me want to turn down the screen saturation.

[Schizoid1488]

I just pretend that the entire franchise ends when I leave in the portal with Morrigan. At the very least BioWare made sure Origins ending feels satisfying and game conclusive as a standalone. I will pirate and cope through playing Veilguard in some delusional mechanism pretending that there's something in there that will be good and remind me of Origins just like I did for II and Inquisition, but inevitably it will be pure ****. At least It'll be useful for shitposts. Watching that cinematic trailer they made was equally hilarious as it was painful, fortnite-esque experience that healed BioWare. I'm pretty sure they also panicked from seeing the terrible reception of the BEST trailer they could muster after SEVEN (7) (SIEBEN) (SEDAM) ******* years, so they told all the advertisers to instead shill the gameplay trailer and that's why it has double the views. The absolute STATE.

I won't even bother pirating it. Why? None of the characters look interesting or appealing to me, either as concepts, personality or even bog standard eye-candy.

Yes yes, Dragon Age: Inquisition was challenged in the pretty department too (unless you were a female player or gay) but this is just so much worse in so many department. I can see that someone else might think Josephine is attractive (at least she has manners and a nice hairstyle) but who the **** thinks these technicolor abominations look even remotely appealing? Only the rogue guy looks bland enough to not make me want to turn down the screen saturation.

Yeah I personally thought Inquisition was just as **** in the companion cast, honestly maybe even worse when I think of Dorian, Iron Bull and Sera that genuinely made me seethe every time I saw their ****** faces on the screen, pretty much the only companions/advisors I like in Inquisition are Varric, Josephine (Nowhere close to Morrigan sadly) and maybe Cullen. In this game It's probably just gonna be Lucanis, Varric, and whoever the brown girl is after mods fix her as I imagine she is the designated "romance for chuds" character. I doubt I will enjoy it or rate it higher than 6/10, but I just love playing slop and shitposting about it. I don't feel bad about it as long as I pirate.

[rusty_shackleford]

I just pretend that the entire franchise ends when I leave in the portal with Morrigan.

Honestly is as good of an ending as one could expect. There's no need to explain what happens.

iirc they never actually do anyways

[rusty_shackleford]

Seen a couple people — presumably new to the genre — state that they haven't played enough RPGs. To those that fit in this category, I'd recommend playing Dragon Age: Origins if you haven't. It's new enough to be approachable in terms of UI/UX, has no real rough edges you have to look past, has character building & party management to some degree, a decent enough story, doesn't require any mods to be playable(but has some), and so forth. The game itself is just good, it's a culmination of a lot of above-average mechanics coming together to make a decent experience.

Jumping right into really older games might be difficult due to them not having the best user experience. If you work your way backwards it will probably be easier. Dragon Age: Origins is probably the easiest older game to point to where UI/UX is very similar to current-day RPGs.

[Rand]

Daggerfall Unity is the bare minimum for a really old RPG that is playable because it allows WASD + mouselook, something the original did not.
It's still rough for modern players, though.

[1998]

This seems to be a real game.

[Mondain]

This seems to be a real game.

Soul

[rusty_shackleford]

Rather dislike when games ask you to create a character and allocate attributes, but you have no idea which attributes are optimal for your character. There will be an attribute like 'might' which makes you do more damage but wait there's also 'speed' which makes you attack faster and 'agility' which increases your critical.
Yeah, it sounds decent on paper, but idk. Obviously anyone who has played RPGs before is going to look at it and try to min-max it anyways, so what's the point? It's not like you found an item with those attributes and each is its own bonus, you're directly trading them for each other in point allocation. At best, you pick optimally. At worst, you mess your character up and get to either reroll or respec depending on the game. What's the point?

This is especially true whenever point allocation is 'flat', no increasing cost. With increasing cost as least you have a reason to spread your points around.

[Acrux]

That was one of my biggest complaints with Black Geyser. There's very little documentation on how stats interact or optimal allocation.

[Rand]

Rather dislike when games ask you to create a character and allocate attributes, but you have no idea which attributes are optimal for your character. There will be an attribute like 'might' which makes you do more damage but wait there's also 'speed' which makes you attack faster and 'agility' which increases your critical.
Yeah, it sounds decent on paper, but idk. Obviously anyone who has played RPGs before is going to look at it and try to min-max it anyways, so what's the point? It's not like you found an item with those attributes and each is its own bonus, you're directly trading them for each other in point allocation. At best, you pick optimally. At worst, you mess your character up and get to either reroll or respec depending on the game. What's the point?

This is especially true whenever point allocation is 'flat', no increasing cost. With increasing cost as least you have a reason to spread your points around.

Then you get Pillars of Eternity, in which attributes are not as they seem.
Might, for example, is not physical strength because it empowers both a warrior's strikes and mages's spells.
Whereas intellect just makes some skills slightly better and gives mages more spell knowledge.
While dexterity is still ability to dodge and reflexes for both.
So in this deranged system, a belt of giant strength needs to either be coded in such a way that it only affects weapon damage or it somehow makes mages' spells more powerful if it adjusts the might stat.

[Rand]

That was one of my biggest complaints with Black Geyser. There's very little documentation on how stats interact or optimal allocation.

Dumbest set I've ever seen...

[rusty_shackleford]

Rather dislike when games ask you to create a character and allocate attributes, but you have no idea which attributes are optimal for your character. There will be an attribute like 'might' which makes you do more damage but wait there's also 'speed' which makes you attack faster and 'agility' which increases your critical.
Yeah, it sounds decent on paper, but idk. Obviously anyone who has played RPGs before is going to look at it and try to min-max it anyways, so what's the point? It's not like you found an item with those attributes and each is its own bonus, you're directly trading them for each other in point allocation. At best, you pick optimally. At worst, you mess your character up and get to either reroll or respec depending on the game. What's the point?

This is especially true whenever point allocation is 'flat', no increasing cost. With increasing cost as least you have a reason to spread your points around.

Then you get Pillars of Eternity, in which attributes are not as they seem.
Might, for example, is not physical strength because it empowers both a warrior's strikes and mages's spells.
Whereas intellect just makes some skills slightly better and gives mages more spell knowledge.
While dexterity is still ability to dodge and reflexes for both.
So in this deranged system, a belt of giant strength needs to either be coded in such a way that it only affects weapon damage or it somehow makes mages' spells more powerful if it adjusts the might stat.

How is that related to what I posted tho?
pillows has the same issue, multiple stats that effectively do the same thing: increase your damage output. Because these stats all share the same 'category', there's no real choice to make: pick the one that makes you do the most damage.
And the dexterity(or similar) stat is either busted or useless depending on whether it gives parity in damage output to whatever the damage stat is. For example, look at STR-based classes in 3.5e/PF, they're (mostly) junk and inferior to DEX-based.

---

The more I think on it, the more I think just choosing between archetypes would be better than jerking off to the idea of optimizing attributes. Anyone have any examples of point-buy not sucking and actually involving a real choice? I think Daggerfall might be an example as it was inspired by Rolemaster, but I don't remember off-hand.

[Rand]

Rather dislike when games ask you to create a character and allocate attributes, but you have no idea which attributes are optimal for your character. There will be an attribute like 'might' which makes you do more damage but wait there's also 'speed' which makes you attack faster and 'agility' which increases your critical.
Yeah, it sounds decent on paper, but idk. Obviously anyone who has played RPGs before is going to look at it and try to min-max it anyways, so what's the point? It's not like you found an item with those attributes and each is its own bonus, you're directly trading them for each other in point allocation. At best, you pick optimally. At worst, you mess your character up and get to either reroll or respec depending on the game. What's the point?

This is especially true whenever point allocation is 'flat', no increasing cost. With increasing cost as least you have a reason to spread your points around.

Then you get Pillars of Eternity, in which attributes are not as they seem.
Might, for example, is not physical strength because it empowers both a warrior's strikes and mages's spells.
Whereas intellect just makes some skills slightly better and gives mages more spell knowledge.
While dexterity is still ability to dodge and reflexes for both.
So in this deranged system, a belt of giant strength needs to either be coded in such a way that it only affects weapon damage or it somehow makes mages' spells more powerful if it adjusts the might stat.

How is that related to what I posted tho?
pillows has the same issue, multiple stats that effectively do the same thing: increase your damage output. Because these stats all share the same 'category', there's no real choice to make: pick the one that makes you do the most damage.
And the dexterity(or similar) stat is either busted or useless depending on whether it gives parity in damage output to whatever the damage stat is. For example, look at STR-based classes in 3.5e/PF, they're (mostly) junk and inferior to DEX-based.

---

The more I think on it, the more I think just choosing between archetypes would be better than jerking off to the idea of optimizing attributes. Anyone have any examples of point-buy not sucking and actually involving a real choice? I think Daggerfall might be an example as it was inspired by Rolemaster, but I don't remember off-hand.

Because it's the opposite.
They dumbed down attributes so the dummies don't have to read or think.
It's the Bethesda ideal. Why have stats in an RPG when you can just have armor with silly magic powers in Fallout?

[Rand]

Anyone have any examples of point-buy not sucking and actually involving a real choice? I think Daggerfall might be an example as it was inspired by Rolemaster, but I don't remember off-hand.

Daggerfall's does suck.
Almost all the skills are useless for most characters.
All those language skills for example.

[rusty_shackleford]

They dumbed down attributes so the dummies don't have to read or think.

What's the point of just adding a choice that's suboptimal?

[Magick]

Rather dislike when games ask you to create a character and allocate attributes, but you have no idea which attributes are optimal for your character. There will be an attribute like 'might' which makes you do more damage but wait there's also 'speed' which makes you attack faster and 'agility' which increases your critical.
Yeah, it sounds decent on paper, but idk. Obviously anyone who has played RPGs before is going to look at it and try to min-max it anyways, so what's the point? It's not like you found an item with those attributes and each is its own bonus, you're directly trading them for each other in point allocation. At best, you pick optimally. At worst, you mess your character up and get to either reroll or respec depending on the game. What's the point?

This is especially true whenever point allocation is 'flat', no increasing cost. With increasing cost as least you have a reason to spread your points around.

Better when it shows you a real-time calculation of how the stat changes affect the different types of damage you can do.

And D&D is one of the sillyest. Imagine someone new to it coming and picking a sorcerer, and of course banging a load of stats in INT and not knowing that most are ******* charisma based LOL.