(no subject)
Sep. 20th, 2011 05:24 pmPlaying Dragon Age II. You know what I miss, that should be standard in every video game forever?
Mount And Blade And Sequels lets you hit "tab" to leave the current area, period.
If there's a reason you can't (enemies too near, etc) it tells you so.
If there's a cost to leaving (you're clear of enemies, but you'll be retreating from a battle and your troops will fight on their own), it tells you so and gives you the option of saying yes or no.
If there's no cost, it drops you right back to the map and lets you pick a new location to go to.
And yet, in Dragon Age, a MUCH larger and more polished and more expensive-to-make game, I can be in the barracks, see on the minimap that there are no more quest items in the barracks area, wish to leave the barracks.... and I have to walk it. I have to jog to the exit. I have to worry about stairs and passageways and corners.
I want to be able to click "take me to the map or bloody well tell me why!". Why is that not standard in every game?
Mount And Blade And Sequels lets you hit "tab" to leave the current area, period.
If there's a reason you can't (enemies too near, etc) it tells you so.
If there's a cost to leaving (you're clear of enemies, but you'll be retreating from a battle and your troops will fight on their own), it tells you so and gives you the option of saying yes or no.
If there's no cost, it drops you right back to the map and lets you pick a new location to go to.
And yet, in Dragon Age, a MUCH larger and more polished and more expensive-to-make game, I can be in the barracks, see on the minimap that there are no more quest items in the barracks area, wish to leave the barracks.... and I have to walk it. I have to jog to the exit. I have to worry about stairs and passageways and corners.
I want to be able to click "take me to the map or bloody well tell me why!". Why is that not standard in every game?
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 09:29 pm (UTC)I tend to like games that have environments that are enjoyable to traverse and contain potential for interesting encounters rather than the super streamlined fare that is currently popular.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 10:01 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 10:24 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 10:26 pm (UTC)If the journey is simply filling time in my /played count, its not so interesting.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 10:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 11:02 pm (UTC)But if I want to quick-travel, dammit, I would like to be able to do so from indoors.
---
[1] I killed Caesar! I killed Caesar on hardcore mode without console-modding! And I am not a combat monkey, and I do not go to games looking to shoot things. I am just very very delighted that I got to stop the bad man. Even if I stayed up until 2 a.m. on a worknight to do it. Space Nazi deserved to die.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 11:03 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 11:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 11:22 pm (UTC)Why the FUCK should I spend two more minutes of my time seeing it again, especially when to get to the quest point to collect my rewards is going to require a third pass since I have to go from the entrance to the quest-giver's location, again?
If there's something new and weird there, it can be presented as an interruption to my fast-travel, or a reason to not fast-travel.
If there's nothing new and weird there, I HAVE BEEN THERE AND DONE THAT, and requiring me to traverse it again is only wasting my time.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-20 11:23 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 12:37 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 12:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 01:08 am (UTC)An important note is that you can move between zones of the city automatically. They _partially_ accommodate you and you only have to walk a certain distance before you can teleport to anywhere in the game world.
Like I said, the overheard conversation reflecting on the fact that your actions had an effect on the world? Damn _good_ design IMO.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 01:18 am (UTC)So, "lousy game design", right.
you only have to walk a certain distance before you can teleport to anywhere in the game world.
Which is to say, I'm forced to retravel pre-cleared bits where nothing happens, because of bad game design. Right.
the overheard conversation reflecting on the fact that your actions had an effect on the world? Damn _good_ design IMO.
No, having those thing happen *in the background* would be good game design. Having to waste time so that you can possibly hear the same news you heard the last five times the game forced you to waste time in this place? Bad design.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 01:20 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 01:21 am (UTC)This is two steps up from saying "But it's good that the pages of the novel[1] come in one at a time and you can't flip forward to see how long the chapter is or jump quickly back to check a data point! I think that the trade off of spending a little more time reading each page in exchange for the full immersive experience is worthwhile!" Bully for you, but I would like to be able to know if I can finish a chapter before I need to sleep without reading every page in it, or go back to check a name without reading through every page between where I am and where it was last mentioned.
---
[1] Or gaming rulebook, for another example.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 01:45 am (UTC)That's just basic shit. That's "don't make the player take notes on paper when the game can take notes *for you*."
And if I *want* to go looking for stuff not on the map, I can do that. Nothing *stops* me from going wandering and checking out all the corners and shit or rewandering through the pretty area with the lava flows and the waterfalls or whatever - what I object to is the need to spend aggregate hours of my life re-watching past scenery go by to get to stuff that is new, in my extruded entertainment product.
I don't watch TV with commercials.
I skip credits sequences and "previously on".
I hit "stop" when the show ends, even if there's "here's some previews of what's on next!" playing.
Why should putting up with technically-inadequate 1950s bullshit in my *video games* when I don't put up with it on TV?
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 02:13 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 02:19 am (UTC)Once again, nothing but my personal opinion and perspective here.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 04:29 am (UTC)It's not the outlook which enjoys downtime and poking around which is being problematic (as you may have noted, here, it's possible for people who enjoy fast-travelling to sometimes also like that, and in fact to prefer it).
It's the way you respond to someone saying "I would like the option to do otherwise" with "But this is good, look how awesome it is!" Not even "That option doesn't interest me because X." It's dismissive. Possibly moreso from you because I've seen you be really prone to doing that IRL, possibly not, but either way.
It's the kind of thing which, TBH, fills me with the desire to look at you all wide-eyed and say "Really? I know I have only been playing computer RPGs for thirteen years[1], but I had never noticed that there is background detail! Obviously this hidden gem of a fact is relevant to my expressed desire to not go places in the game if I don't want to."
---
[1] That "only" is not sarcastic.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 04:31 am (UTC)What's under discussion is the lack of an option to chose a different trade-off.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 05:56 am (UTC)I just wanted to briefly mention that it's not a feature that every game should have, and better design would in many cases be a solution I'm happier with.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 10:44 am (UTC)I mean, I love world-building and good examples thereof, but if I suddenly realize that I left That Item (which, due to good game design, was pretty clearly flagged as Possibly Important Later) halfway across the map because I stashed a lot of things that weren't immediately useful when I was low-level and needed the carry space, there is no benefit to my not being able to fast-travel to the item and back ASAP. There's already an option to hit the map rather than spend a quarter-hour walking, why not make it as convenient an option to access as possible?
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 12:22 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 12:34 pm (UTC)You should try the MMO Fallen Earth. Could use more polish, but one of its big draws is that it's world map is of a post-virus-apocalypse Arizona and New Mexico, and by design overland travel from place to place is pretty much required - fast travel between major cities is pretty new, and very limited.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 12:40 pm (UTC)Enjoying it: Pretty well, so far. The interface took me a little to get used to, and movement and combat are faster than most similar games (a good thing, since there's so much POINTLESS WALKING ARGH) so that was a little jarring, but I'm realy liking the characters and the stories so far.
Not going to play it again for a few days, though - someone who shall remain nameless bought me Fallout: Lonesome Road at midnight last night and it's kinda going to eat my life for a while.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 03:49 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 05:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 05:57 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 06:10 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 06:45 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 06:46 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 06:57 pm (UTC)It's going free to play at some point in the near future, but in the meantime there's a free trial: http://www.gamersfirst.com/fallenearth/?q=trial
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 08:32 pm (UTC)If stashing stuff and quick traveling to the stash is possible then why put a restriction on carry space to begin with?
I'm also not a fan of "Here's an arbitrary quest item that you must carry around that is going to be important later" it smacks of linear design and "find the red key for the red door" game play, which I find incredibly dull.
I'm not an expert game designer, nor does my subjective preference necessarily reflect the views of many people, I just don't like fast travel :P
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 08:41 pm (UTC)This is, for the record, why I simply tell Fallout that I can carry an infinite amount of stuff.
Even then, I still make stashes. Know why? Because I find it annoying to scroll through nine screens of stuff to find the thing I want, but sometimes it's really useful to have, say, a stack of all the canned food you've found so far.
The important part, gameplay-wise, is that *if nothing is going to happen while I do something it is a waste of my time to make me do it more than once*.
It's like saying "later that evening" instead of sitting around - or not requiring the player to wait two years for Ezio to get from 1500 to 1502.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 08:50 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-21 11:46 pm (UTC)And congrats! I will only play hardcore (not a combat monkey either), but I've spent weeks in that desert without getting close to Caesar. I frankly don't even care if I ever finish the game.
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-22 12:17 am (UTC)1) Listen to someone make a statement I agree with.
2) Try to determine why rational and competent game designers (aka. Bioware) would not act in that way.
3) Share what I have noticed so that people have all of the data in front of them when making decisions.
I also spend my time echoing that exact same complaint for other games that are much worse then Dragon Age 2. Gods, the amount of time it takes to move around in Guild Wars is obscene.
Anywho, thanks!
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-22 12:31 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-22 12:59 am (UTC)And thank you. :D I was planning on ignoring him a little longer, and then I actually visited the Fort and talked to a few people there, particularly one of the slaves, and it's just...
Utter space Nazi. It took Boone, ED-E, and a Jet addiction, but I got him.
Ahem. Yes.
I don't want to finish the game, exactly, and I still have three DLCs I want to explore, but at the same time I want to see the finale. The Mojave is an awesome setting, and I have worked to make certain things happen, you know?
(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-22 06:12 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2011-09-22 04:36 pm (UTC)From what you describe, you're assuming that
(1) the game designers and producers were rational and competent, but
(2) the person expressing the opinion needed your input to be sure that they had all the data--although actually, I would not call your maybe-because-this rationale data; it's more of a hypothesis--implying they aren't capable of, good at, or willing to think about something relevant to their statement.
You see why this might be a bit of a problem?
And moving on to the bit about something being relevant to their statement: if someone is expressing a point of view about what they do or don't like in their entertainment, why it is available is not likely to change their preferences. Might make them more willing to accept that they can't have it, or more frustrated, or more hopeful that they will get it soon, but is not a conversation that tends to flow well or occur often.