What Video Games Have You Been Playing #11: I should go

[Commodore]

I just don't like that in a true RPG, your success or failure is based solely on your character design, with your own skill as a player being completely irrelevant. So it creates a situation where if you screwed up your character design, you pretty much have to start over because you will eventually reach a point where fights are unwinnable.

That kind of gaming also encourages the use of "optimal builds" for characters instead of allowing players to explore and experiment with different builds while still being able to win with a suboptimal build.

A game like Mass Effect though, avoids this by adding in the third person shooter elements to allow the player to compensate for any character build deficiencies with their own skill at shooters. That allows you to build your Shepard however you damn well want and still be able to beat the game on the highest difficulty settings as long as you have some skill at shooters.

In short, I guess I just hate the number crunch that most RPGs tend to be.

 

[AdamCrock]

Been playin' Discworld 2 "Missing, presumed..." and I am stuck

I absolutely hate looking up the solution for adventure games because I always end up reading more than I should and it ruins a game for me ... soooo....
If anyone played it maybe will hook me up with the info on how to get bees wax ? I already gave them chilli, got rid of the bees keeper and got a "new improved burning incese (frog scented)" I am missing a veil or some means of protection. I thought bees keeper will drop his but he runned off and is nowher to be found. halp plis

 

[H4run]

@Commodore
Nope you don't need the best build to complete DAO, your character stats and item are about to be powerful anyway, you can pretty much roll with whatever you made up.

However I know what happened, in the middle of playthrough you check up the internet on what to chose for the next build, and you found out from the guides that you read or conversation that you followed that what you already build hit many red flags, and you need to reload quite far, etc etc. Feeling awful and restricted, you come to realization that you actually hate.the mechanic of classical rpg.

 

[PhroX]

Yeah, in even the most "RPGish" of Bioware games, it's hard to make a character that can't complete at least normal difficulty. The hardest setting take some amount of optimisation, but even then, you don't need to be even close to perfect if you have a good understanding of the combat systems. And player skill does make a big impact as you turn the difficulty up, it's just more about your skills at managing the tactical combat, rather than your skill at directly swinging your sword around. If you're good at the combat, you can pull off crazy stuff.

That said, I can understand Commodore's objection to it. Mainly cos I'm the rather the opposite - I generally don't like it when my skills at directly fighting affect my character in RPGs. Give me tactical combat where it's my brain and my characters' abilities any day.

 

[GoodSarmatian]

I love RPGs, but I completely understand Commodore's problems with them, especially the ones with a typical Bioware combat system.
Turn based combat is much better. You can still get screwed by bad skill allocation, but you can also compensate with good tactics.

Finished a Civ 6 games as Eleanor of Aquitaine. America was the worst warmonger on my continents. Teddy never attacked me directly, but I kept flipping the cities he conquered.
Eventually I started to take over American cities with a little help from spies. Took over most of my continent without ever fighting a war and won a diplomatic victory .

 

[PhroX]

I love RPGs, but I completely understand Commodore's problems with them, especially the ones with a typical Bioware combat system.
Turn based combat is much better. You can still get screwed by bad skill allocation, but you can also compensate with good tactics.

I don't see how turn based is really any different from the RTwP system Bioware typically used. Both allow you plenty of tactical options to overcome any flaws in your characters' designs.

 

[Yeekim]

Those who like turn-based combat should check out Age of Decadence, and its little cousin, Dungeon Rats.
The latter is basically just a turn-based combat puzzle.

 

[EgonSpengler]

I struggle with some of the real-time, 3rd-person games, whether RPGs or shooters. I sometimes dislike the perspective combined with the pace of real-time combat. The games that set your 3rd-person perspective slightly off-center from your character are the worst for me. I played Vampire: Bloodlines and the first Mass Effect just because I liked the settings, but the actual gameplay was a headwind the whole way through both games. (For some reason, the "isometric" ARPGs - Diablo, Path of Exile - don't cause me this trouble. I've never figured out what the difference is.)

In both of those games, I think I basically hand-waved the character-building stuff away, just quickly grabbing something whenever I was told to without thinking much about it, and it presented no problem at all. I have basically no memory of selecting a "character class" or building up stats or anything like that. I couldn't tell you now what vampire Clan or soldier type I played in those games, or what weapons or powers I selected, but I never felt that my willful obliviousness towards those systems was ever hindering my progress or enjoyment.

Many years ago, I did hit a hard wall in Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura because I'd evidently built my character in such a way that a combat encounter - one I couldn't ditch or go around - was so difficult that I couldn't do it. The setting seemed cool, and I thought I might go back and start over with a new character someday, but I never did.

To my memory, Deus Ex, Dishonored and the first-person Fallout games relied on some player skill, but I rarely felt like I was screwed because of it. As with the above games, I didn't feel like your character build was crucial, but more for flavor and play-style (with the one caveat that Powered Armor in Fallout 4 was over-powered and too easy to maintain and use more or less continuously, to the point that choosing not to use it just made me feel like I was being a dope - it wasn't game-breaking, but it was game-defining; once you got the good Power Armor, it was a Power Armor game that let you be silly and do something else if you felt like it).

I liked Age of Decadence. It seemed very short, though. I wondered if I'd rushed the main story without meaning to and missed a lot of side-dishes. I haven't wanted to go back and do it again, but I enjoyed it the one time.

 

[yung.carl.jung]

currently playing too much Teamfight Tactics and getting ready to try out Titan Quest again after a rly long break. can't be bothered to play any steam game currently, dk why.

 

[aimeeandbeatles]

OK I remembered wrong, if you want to replace the L/R switchs it requires removal of the top screen, in order to access everything. which is a complete disassembly probably a good 30mins work.
But you can pop open the top left and right switchs to check the internal switches mechanism without dissembling your 3ds.

L / R Shoulder Button $12
https://au.grandado.com/products/ni...5Yj9wEUmbarkXspGxtSspLR3vnt4jUoxoCi2MQAvD_BwE

I do not have the fine motor skills to do it.

A game like Mass Effect though, avoids this by adding in the third person shooter elements to allow the player to compensate for any character build deficiencies with their own skill at shooters. That allows you to build your Shepard however you damn well want and still be able to beat the game on the highest difficulty settings as long as you have some skill at shooters.

If you pick the right squadmates and give them the right weapons/skill points, it's possible for them to walk you right through the game. (The way the game paused when you brought up the tactical menu was good, too. It made it easier to keep track of where everybody is.)

Or you can just modify your savegame to give everyone Cains. It's hilarious. Your squadmates constantly knock themselves out by firing it at point-blank range.

Spoiler :

(I'm still working on that Mass Effect glitch video. It's slow work. There's some Cain shenanigans in it. )

 

[Akka]

I just don't like that in a true RPG, your success or failure is based solely on your character design, with your own skill as a player being completely irrelevant.

What ?
The gap between a good player and a mediocre one is just as big in RPG than in other games. Some people manage to solo games at the highest difficulty level while others struggle with a whole party at the average or even lower one. You simply can't say the skill of the player is irrelevent.

So it creates a situation where if you screwed up your character design, you pretty much have to start over because you will eventually reach a point where fights are unwinnable.

I don't think any game in the last 20 years was actually that punishing. MAYBE Divinity Original Sin 2, and even then I'm pretty sure some insane player can manage to pull it off.
Also, I'd say that designing a character IS part of the player skill.

In short, I guess I just hate the number crunch that most RPGs tend to be.

Yes, I think that's a better representation. I'd say it's more the amount of direct control relative to the amount of abstraction. But then, you're a Civilization player, which is all about abstraction, so how come you do like Civ ?

 

[Sommerswerd]

I'm gonna be pissed if Warcraft 3 reforged doesn't come out until after I finish my re-playthrough. I've been slow-playing it to try to give the remastered edition a chance to come out so I can play through that instead... I've been waiting all summer

 

[H4run]

Akka is right, in addition to that civilization is quite punishing if you made an early mistake, at least if you play the game up from prince difficulty. You just get rolled and kick around like a ball no matter what you do if you commit few blunder or even mistakes at the early game. Civ can be quite unforgiving.

ps: if you want an rpg like game that rest more on your combat skill, try Yakuza

 

[AdamCrock]

Many years ago, I did hit a hard wall in Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura because I'd evidently built my character in such a way that a combat encounter - one I couldn't ditch or go around - was so difficult that I couldn't do it. The setting seemed cool, and I thought I might go back and start over with a new character someday, but I never did.

Aaahh... good old Arcanum That game is an absolute gem ! I wish someone did a re-release with better everything I don't think that I've played an RPG like that before and after.. It was like Fallout just with magic and crafting and more emphasis on character development.

 

[Lexicus]

Akka is right, in addition to that civilization is quite punishing if you made an early mistake, at least if you play the game up from prince difficulty. You just get rolled and kick around like a ball no matter what you do if you commit few blunder or even mistakes at the early game. Civ can be quite unforgiving.

ps: if you want an rpg like game that rest more on your combat skill, try Yakuza

Indeed almost all games of Civ 4 are won or lost in the first fifty to a hundred turns.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Indeed almost all games of Civ 4 are won or lost in the first fifty to a hundred turns.

Same with Civ VI. Nothing much happens after that point. The game hits a kind of stasis, and you just have to keep pressing Enter until you fulfill the victory conditions. The devs don't want to upset the apple cart, I guess. With its friggin' sixth iteration, it's still just a good start on a great game.

 

[AdamCrock]

/\ Maybe that is why Master of Magic/Orion (the original games) start at a really, really slow pace - to avoid making to many mistakes at the beginning

 

[Lexicus]

Same with Civ VI. Nothing much happens after that point. The game hits a kind of stasis, and you just have to keep pressing Enter until you fulfill the victory conditions. The devs don't want to upset the apple cart, I guess. With its friggin' sixth iteration, it's still just a good start on a great game.

Doesn't mean that what happens after the first fifty to a hundred turns doesn't matter. In Civ 4 my games are almost always pretty fun right up until the end. I am also of the opinion that the series peaked with Civ 4 - which is unquestionably a great game - so make of that what you will.

 

[EgonSpengler]

Doesn't mean that what happens after the first fifty to a hundred turns doesn't matter. In Civ 4 my games are almost always pretty fun right up until the end.

Sure, yeah, it all depends on what you think matters, I guess. As you said, games are won or lost early. After that, at least in Civ VI, it becomes a kind of sandbox game, where the only active agent is the player. It's been a while since I've played Civ IV; I feel like my frustration with this issue in Civ VI is greater than it was in IV, but I don't know if that's because VI is worse in this way or because other games I've played in the meantime have been able to create more dynamic systems (the Paradox games, for instance, although I've only ever played Crusader Kings II) while Civ has fallen behind.

I am also of the opinion that the series peaked with Civ 4 - which is unquestionably a great game - so make of that what you will.

There's no question IV and V did some great stuff. One of my frustrations with the Civ series is that things that I like about each iteration get thrown out with the bathwater in the next.

 

[Lexicus]

Nah, Civ 5 (and by all I've been able to learn 6 is the same way) suffers from a much worse "coast to the end after clawing your way to parity with the AI" problem than 4 does. Not totally sure why that is - maybe because I usually reached parity with the AI more quickly in 5.