Just replayed the best RPGs ever made.. lessons to be learne

[Lightzy]

Just replayed Vampire: Bloodlines with Wesps patch. probably the best RPG ever except Planescape: Torment (though roughly equal).
Also, just played some more of Arcanum with the community patch
Add to this Fallout2 and you have the worlds 4 top RPGS.

What do they have in common that we can easily observe and learn from?
(aside from all being Black Isle games essentially)


1) Specific and unique setting that the game story AND MECHANICS are designed around to a very exacting degree.
Something that's new and not cookie cutter. Something refreshing, but not done half-assedly and with fear of innovation (like all other rpgs mostly).

All items, people, creatures, unique abilities and whatnot in these games is setting-based.

It's also easy to see in these games that the gameplay is designed around the setting, rather than taking 'stock gameplay' and hammering into any setting

2) Exceptionally good writing that stands out head and shoulders above everything else.
All characters in these games are CHARACTERS. They have their unique style, catch phrases and in short, character.
(I beg you all to go play vampire: bloodlines and see this again. it's incredible)

3) Mechanics that revolve around skills and player choice, rather than 'somewhat player affected' dice rolls especially outside combat.
Compared to other modern games (eschelon included) where skills just affect the chances of dice rolls when picking a lock or doing whatever other activity, in these games it's a very clear 'lock level 5 needs level 5 lockpicking skill'.
It appears limiting but in fact it's the other way around.

It's the chance mechanic kills the fun.
People drag themselves into a save/reload behavior when encountering chance games, and in addition it turns out that the skill point investments become very unsatisfying.
Yay, so now I have to save/reload 5% less, statistically, to beat that lock.
While with set skill checks, my choices actually matter.

I don't know where the hell computer game designers got the idea that random checks like this make any sense or are any fun. they are exactly the other way around.
They work for P&P where you can't save-reload and must move on constantly under DM pressure. In computer games it's total bullshit and I hope no game designer ever ever repeats this mistake (well, after book3 because it's designed on the same book2 engine. though I hope they change it for book3 too).
God, I hope they change it for book3.... it's such a small and simple change.
they already have specific named locks.. just set a SET difficulty level for them instead of a dice roll! so easy! so much better!

[Michi]

I agree with the whole % chance thing. Fallout New Vegas did away with it now for Speech, Barter, etc in conversations and it makes way more sense.

It is a mechanic from P&P that got mistakenly carried over into the world of computer games.

[Kreador Freeaxe]

Some of us still love the "even a blind squirrel finds an acorn sometimes" mechanic that random chance allows. It's always going to be a taste thing. I certainly am willing to play the game either way BW decides to do it, but I think that kind of change should really be revisited for his next game after the Eschalon series. For these games, I think he should stick with the old-school randomness.

[BasiliskWrangler]

I agree with the whole % chance thing. Fallout New Vegas did away with it now for Speech, Barter, etc in conversations and it makes way more sense.

It is a mechanic from P&P that got mistakenly carried over into the world of computer games.

I have a huge problem with the way F:NV handled this.

For example, a response choice may be:

[Speech 21/50] "Why don't you give me all your caps?"

So, you know that this response will FAIL every time. And failed responses, for me, never lead to new opportunities. So, I never choose them. Now, if it were:

[Speech 38%] "Why don't you give me all your caps?"

I'd likely give this a try and HOPE the dice roll goes my way, knowing that if I fail I'll likely trigger a fight. There should always be a glimmer of hope...hope that your last lockpick will work this time. Hope that your 20% chance to disarm this floor trap is successful because if not, you'll likely die. Where is the fun if you are simply told "despite your great skill, you are 2 points away from being able to unlock this chest, so we won't even let you try."

[Lightzy]

I agree with the whole % chance thing. Fallout New Vegas did away with it now for Speech, Barter, etc in conversations and it makes way more sense.

It is a mechanic from P&P that got mistakenly carried over into the world of computer games.

I have a huge problem with the way F:NV handled this.

For example, a response choice may be:

[Speech 21/50] "Why don't you give me all your caps?"

So, you know that this response will FAIL every time. And failed responses, for me, never lead to new opportunities. So, I never choose them. Now, if it were:

[Speech 38%] "Why don't you give me all your caps?"

I'd likely give this a try and HOPE the dice roll goes my way, knowing that if I fail I'll likely trigger a fight. There should always be a glimmer of hope...hope that your last lockpick will work this time. Hope that your 20% chance to disarm this floor trap is successful because if not, you'll likely die. Where is the fun if you are simply told "despite your great skill, you are 2 points away from being able to unlock this chest, so we won't even let you try."

I think the fun is where you succeed due to your choices and not because of lucky rolls. You may not have invested enough in a skill for a particular lock, but on the other hand you'll get the charisma dialogue that someone who invested in something else won't, so it all balances out for a different experience which plays out according to your choices instead of dice, which make your successes more empowering.
Also the need for 'just one more skill point for that lock' is a very good incentive for the player. on the other hand, 'just one more skill point will give me 3% more chances' is meh. no fun.

It's the same as the difference between, say, fallout2/arcanum/etc and the new bioware/elder scrolls games.
Whereas in the good old ones there were areas that you'd get totally slaughtered if you walked into, the new ones promote the 'always have a chance' idea and auto-level enemies so that you can go anywhere you please and beat any quest you please without any real challenge or feeling of character growth and empowerment.
In the great oldies you simply had to understand.. ah, I guess I can't walk into the devils incendiary armpit right now, I'll quest around a bit more and come back stronger..
In the end, it proves much more fun because you can actually feel how your character grows in power relative to the game world.

It's the same thing.

I don't think it's possible to go wrong by adopting mechanics from games like arcanum/fallout2/vampire:bloodlines

PS: In regards to dialogue, the good games just didn't let you see special dialogue choices unless you had the prerequisite level of whatever skill or trait that was required.
In bloodlines the special choices were even given special colors and fonts to make them seem all the more a reward for your choices.
Giving them chances to success would have ruined it.
And promoted save/reload on every conversation and action which is what the chance mechanic does.

[ManusDei]

There should always be a glimmer of hope...hope that your last lockpick will work this time. Hope that your 20% chance to disarm this floor trap is successful because if not, you'll likely die. Where is the fun if you are simply told "despite your great skill, you are 2 points away from being able to unlock this chest, so we won't even let you try."

That's what has made me like Eschalon Book. That and the "if guile doesn't open the door/chest, use strength "