The Drunken Lizard Pub

So I noticed some difference of opinion in the suggestion thread on this subject. I wouldn't mind seeing what everyone thinks.

Here is my opinion: We have a enough games nowadays that are solo play. I miss being able to create a full party, like in Wizardry, M&M, etc. I really enjoy picking out a party where each member is valuable, but not necessarily for combat (a Rogue doesn't have to be fantastic at combat, but better be able to disarm a trap or pick a lock). This is why I'd like to see a party based game, there just aren't enough of them and I miss them.

I also don't like the idea of making it possible to solo. That means the game will be too easy for a full party. Now, I'm not saying that if you have an incredible amount of patience you can't solo it, but it shouldn't be considered as part of the design of the game. If there are mobs that turn you to stone and kill you solo... to bad, the answer is get another member that can unstone you.

One option for solo play is that after you finish the game with a party, you can create a super hero character that you can then solo the game with. Helherron did this, it allowed you to create a single character with high stats after you finished the game once. However, even then the character was not guaranteed to be able to solo it.

Another issue I noticed in the thread was that some people wanted to start solo and pick up members along the way. A lot RPGs have done this ... I was going to say recently, but that would just make me feel old(BG, etc). I really don't like this method because it doesn't allow me to build my party. I especially hate when I start with a class and the first party member I meet is the same class that I am. There could be some kind of hybrid system, where you create a full party but can swap them out with people along the way, that's fine with me as long as it isn't required. Or I suppose you could pick up members along the way, if you can "create" the character when you meet them. I also don't mind picking up a single member for quest related stuff. But please give me full control of what my party consists of.

What do you all think?

Modified poll.

I was going to run the exact same thing at some point. Effidian- your other two poll options, "build a party along the way" or "party optional, solo if desired" are not going to happen. That kind of balancing would be a nightmare for us, and would probably not result in a very good game.

The two options, as they stand, are Solo or Party, from the start of the game. I am going to post another poll soon regarding engine design.

Thanks Effidian.

No problem. It started as just solo v.s. party, but then I tried to incorporate all the feedback in that thread.

Turnbased combat makes more sense with a party. Also i love to have most skillsets (classes) all in one.

I voted solo. While as much as I LOVE games like Baldurs Gate, Planescape, NWN2 that have parties, I'm enjoying the good old school solo play.

When I think old school, I always think party based. Wizardy, Gold Box, EoB, M&M, etc. What old school are you thinking of with solo play? Roguelikes?

Effidian wrote:When I think old school, I always think party based. Wizardy, Gold Box, EoB, M&M, etc. What old school are you thinking of with solo play? Roguelikes?

Pagan

While true, most old games were all entirely party based, it was not until Fallout that I finally enjoyed a party based game, in that you could strategically move and control your NPC's.

Personally, I just enjoyed the game playing solo.

Jaesun wrote:While true, most old games were all entirely party based, it was not until Fallout that I finally enjoyed a party based game, in that you could strategically move and control your NPC's.

I loved the old Gold Box games because of the strategy you could use in combat. I still remember opening doors and casting a cloudkill into a room and then shutting the door so the creatures couldn't get out.

Well, if it can't be "party optional", then I'll have to opt for Solo - of course, this is nothing more than personal preference (I find it hard to "roleplay" five different people at once).

As for balancing, it might be difficult, but there are games that managed it, the Geneforge series being what immediately comes to mind.

Party based for me. "Hybrid".
The best would be like in the EOB series where you could choose 4 characters, and have 2 more NPCs to join when you met them if you wished. So you can create your own party, and have cool NPCs with personal side quests (Ã la Baldur's gate).
One of the first 4 characters could be the hero of Eschalon book one. It could be necessary to keep him in the party at all times, but you could choose another leader if you wished so. This way, people who didn't like EB1 hero could shift focus to another PC.
And as it has been said, tactical combat is far better with a party than solo. The turnbased combat of the gold box series was simply awesome.

if it wouldnt be party based, it wouldnt be the recreation of old school.
book 2 must be party&turn based like many crps from old days and then book 3 too. i voted party !!! wish book 1 were also party !!!

those holy eob and krynn series and legend of faerghail and dungeon master and ishar series .. WHERE ARE YOU i miss' em so much .....

Jaesun wrote: While true, most old games were all entirely party based, it was not until Fallout that I finally enjoyed a party based game, in that you could strategically move and control your NPC's.

ehm, wasn´t the "party" in fallout entirely controlled by the ai?
i hated the party aspect in fallout, because you could not directly access their inventories, or level them up, if i remember correctly.

vid wrote:

Jaesun wrote: While true, most old games were all entirely party based, it was not until Fallout that I finally enjoyed a party based game, in that you could strategically move and control your NPC's.

ehm, wasn´t the "party" in fallout entirely controlled by the ai?
i hated the party aspect in fallout, because you could not directly access their inventories, or level them up, if i remember correctly.

I think I'm starting to lose it. heh. You are correct. There was a turned based game where you could control all your characters, maybe I was thinking Arcanum?

Fallout was the party based RPG where you were in more danger from your own lunatic (the name escapes me) with a gatling gun than you ever were from the mutants, iirc.

Back to the poll - why no 'don't care' option? I'll cheerfully play either ..

If the build the party along the way is not an option, I would prefer party based but I'd like the possibility alreayd mentioned of a party of 4 where 2 more could joined for quest.