Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'NMA News and Information' started by Dragula, Dec 9, 2022.
For the record, I like these questions and concerns.
This is some of the most original art direction I've seen in a minute, and I'm looking forward to playing the game soon'ish
Since when is roleplaying "not that important"? Sorry if i want ROLEPLAYING in my ROLEPLAYING GAME.
In bad RPGs they are.
We are in the forum that rightfully gives shit to Bethesda Fallouts for their next to no roleplaying elements in their games. Let's not be hypocrites and try to dismiss it in other games just because you happen to like them or think they might be good.
The problem is you think all RPG's should be the same. KotOR and Witcher did ok without that super vague backstory you guys love to have. If you want everything to be just like Fallout then you might be disappointed to know you came from a Vault in the first one so your roleplaying was pretty limited.
Oh I mean I am a mean guy or stupid guy or smart guy. So much wow. Games like Baldur's Gate allow more roleplaying but *spoiler alert* the dialog and quests suck.
Roleplaying games are about stats and how systems interact, not about roleplaying. You are all silly.
Also nobody is being a hypocrite I understand this game is not Fallout and I judge it based on it's own fucking merits not what I want shit to be due to autism.
The ones with character creation should leave the background ambigous and that should apply to all of them. Because why give the player the ability to make their own character if you can't make up the background? At that point just go for the Witcher route and make the character pre-established.
And the system interactions is roleplaying.
Jesus Christ, who's here saying that the game is supposed to be Fallout? No one and don't know why you keep bringing up Fallout.
You mean how you build your characters and how those systems are used? I agree. What I am less anal about is story and choices and consequences.
Story and choices and consequences are important because they are the things that react to the rpg systems, either through combat, dialogue, stealth and so on.
And we weren't even talking about that, we were talking about giving the player far too much background, which is a valid concern to have if your game is going to have character creation.
They are not, and choices and consequences is a fairly new thing in RPGs where as the main focus used to be combat, and systems.
Though I guess it depends on what era you grew up during.
It's all this ultra PC shit. The next James Bond is a one legged, black lesbian. The new Doctor Who is a fluctuating gender cross dressing East European psychiatrist who calls straight people ' Children of the damned '
Open-ended narrative is the main component and backbone of RPGs even in their original tabletop form. Not to mention all of the RPG video games that had C&C and multiple endings even back in the 80s like Ultima and Dragon Quest.
They are literally the thing that reacts to the systems, how are they not important? Choice and consequence isn't solely dialogue, it applies to combat as well.
You are saying this in a forum where the first game came out in 1997, 25 years ago, where it has plenty of choice and consequences. So not really new.
And all those RPGs made prior to that, late 80s, early 90s etc were not as story focused at all like RPGs has become today, where story and choose your own adventure has taken priority over combat and tactical gameplay.
It sucks because the ideal of a spy is basically to be as inconspicuous as possible. Not me, me, ME!
I don't like my RPGs to have strongly defined protagonists (Witcher, MassEffect) but I want intrigue, a curious promise. If you would give me an RPG where you are somebody somewhere without a context, I would not be drawn into the world and story.
That's why I think it is acceptable to write the player character into the story - as Fallout did. To play this game, this story, you MUST be a vault dweller, you MUST be present in this location at this time and you must have a background of someone who does not know anything about the outside world. That is already a pretty specific background right there if you think about it. But it is not a problem because Fallout gives you enough freedom to decide what kind of character your character is.
Sure, the circumstances are fixed but not the type of protagonist you decide to be.
That is the same philosophy we followed in Space Wreck. The circumstances are fixed - you are a captain, you are in this position - but what kind of captain, what kind of person/character you are, what are your motivations, or what was your life before or will be in the future - it is all open to players' decisions.
Congrats on the EA release. And it seems like it already has 90% positive reviews on Steam too.
I want to buy this game, but I will have to wait until it's out of EA and if I manage to get some spare money I can spend on games later.
Spoiler: "What is a real RPG?" Rant
People who say RPGs have to have "roleplaying" to be a RPG are perpetuating a common misconception because they are using the wrong meaning of roleplay given to the name of the genre.
People don't realize that the meaning of roleplay that everyone knows these days is not the same as the meaning of roleplay that originated both in the name and the genre.
There are more RPGs made that have no real roleplay (the one that everyone these days think about) than those that actually offer that type of roleplay.
The first game to create the name of the genre was Dungeons and Dragons (as everyone knows) and the name of the genre came from the 1st edition rule books from D&D, and D&D back then didn't offer any roleplay at all, or offer any tools for roleplay. Characters didn't have any social skills or attributes (Charisma was even only used to know how many henchmen a character could have), and the world/universe of D&D back then wasn't explored in a way to offer roleplay either.
Campaigns and adventures were all "go into this dungeon, survive at all costs, beat the traps/puzzles, reach the end and you will get treasures and loot. Rinse and repeat." There weren't people having in-character conversations, any NPC conversations or anything else like that. It was because of this that the term "hack and slash" was born because that was what you would do in the original RPGs all the way to the early 90's. This mean that for 20 years, there was no RPG that had the "pretend" roleplaying that people talk about today. That's 20 years and many 10's of RPGs released both in video/computer and tabletop format.
(More on the hack and slash will be addressed later on in this post).
The name "role-playing game" was not created because of the (other) "role playing" that's "pretend you're someone you're not" (as we associate it with these days), but about how the players are each playing a specific role in the campaign by using their characters.
Role-playing sounds much better than Character-playing and so the name was born.
Here's where the name for the genre came from, the first edition rulebooks of D&D:
As we can see, they explicitly make a point that each character (including henchmen and intelligent swords) is a role and how important that is. Role is pretty much a game's term in original D&D's rules. Actually, if you notice, the terms "role" and "character" are interchangeable and mean the same in all those times up there.
To add more weight to this position: The first RPGs were all Hack & Slash games. The first D&D rules were altered war miniature rules, the character sheets didn't have any skills or attributes related to roleplaying or social interaction at all, even Charisma was only used for rules on how many henchmen that character could have at the same time. The campaigns and modules were all about killing stuff and working out puzzles to get the treasure at the end, etc.
Only after 20 years of the creation of D&D (and RPGs) did roleplaying games start to have rules about actual roleplaying and proper world-building, and campaigns and modules followed the same trend. Some old players back then even thought that would be the death of the genre (or at least it would stop being as fun). The Hack & Slash days were (back then) considered the Golden Days of AD&D.
Excerpts from Dragon Magazine #146, June 1989:
It's true that "pretend" roleplaying is something that enriches the RPG genre, but it's not a requirement, and the majority of RPGs ever released in any format prove this, since the "pretend" RPGs are truly the minority even to this day. Saying that RPGs need roleplaying is excluding 80 or 90% of all the games in that genre, and that's just silly.
Thanks! Appreciate it!
As it was a valid criticism and easy to implement, in the latest update (1.2.21) we have added an option to change Your character's name in the char sheet.
Update for the ref: https://store.steampowered.com/news/app/1063540/view/3616985051944496754?l=english
Btw I gave the game another shot and tbh it is actually pretty cool. There is really a bunch of branching narrative stuff going on. I put all my points into tinker, hacking and sneak because they seem to be the most powerful skills, it was surprising to see how my character couldn't talk to people due to crippling social anxiety this time around xD. There's a few bugs here and there (I couldn't progress the quest about the mutiny after I killed the kidnapper, I could still talk to her over the intercom even though she was dead and I couldn't find where the second-in-command guy was, and the engineer still kept asking me for the engine part even after I had installed it on the engine myself already), but I suppose those are to be expected with early access and it's all going to be much smoother on release.