Hmm, my opinion (if its worth anything ), is that if you want a statless RPg, do it in a manner similar to a FPS, but add in more storyline and freedom in actions. You can never totally remove stats, but what you can do is take out all thos estats that could be represented by a players skill. ie dont give the player a coordination value, let him aim himself. Don''t give him an intelligence value, let the player complete a ritualistic challenge to cast a spell. Weapons would still have stats relative to one another as may a few other elements of the game, but as has been said, some things you can never remove, only hide. I think a RPG done in the style of a FPS would be very cool. System shock (I forget which number... the latest one) was IMO a joy to play for example, tho that didnt do too much to hide stats.
The whole reason behind showing the player his attribute numbers is that so he can make a judgement call, or strategize, on how he would be putting his characters to use. If you had two characters, one with 5 Attack Power, and the second with 70, its an obviousness that tells you that the second should be the one that performs all of the hand to hand combat. Without some form a gauge, the player will mindlessly lead the first off into battle, maybe using alphabetic order with their names as to who goes first, and lose his weaker character simply because he didn''t know any better.
If immersion is your focus, perhaps some form of verbose dialouge telling you which character is the better at any given task would be a good idea. Though if you want your player to quickly strategize and get back to the gameplay, then a window with numbers or guages or some comparitive chart would be the way to go.
I have another example you could look into. On the SEGA Genesis, there was a game called Warriors of Rome 2 that showed bar graphs for your characters skills. Like, this one has a longer bar next to the shovel icon, so he would build a collesium faster. Also, the bars got longer (or the attribute increased, or the variable increased, or he got better, what ever you want to say) based on which actions you had them perform. Move a unit across the board and back again and he''d move faster than others that didn''t.
If I remember correctly AO didn''t have any stats such as str,dex, agil etc. but showed the difficulty of a monster by the colour of its hp bar. Much simpler than showing all stats and no number crunching for the player.
quote:
Original post by Inmate2993 If you had two characters, one with 5 Attack Power, and the second with 70, its an obviousness that tells you that the second should be the one that performs all of the hand to hand combat. Without some form a gauge, the player will mindlessly lead the first off into battle, maybe using alphabetic order with their names as to who goes first, and lose his weaker character simply because he didn''t know any better.
The judgement call should be based on experience, not any sort of information that is spoonfed to the player. Why not have both characters go into battle? The player will very quickly determine who is the stronger character. Let the learning happen naturally through observation, it will add depth to the game and make the players decisions more meaningful.
In real life, if I join a group of people playing cards/sports/videogames or whatever, no one has numbers magically floating above their heads. I have to dynamically determine the strengths and weaknesses of the other players, and thats part of the fun of playing.
Allow the player to use their own judgement and make the game more involving. Any fool can tell that 70 is better than 5, but where''s the fun in that?
I''m not saying that the player has to be shown 70 and 5. I''m saying that the player has to be shown something. Yeah, this character kills faster than that one, but if this is the type of game where bad strategic choices leads to death and gameover, it becomes very fustrating trying to figure out whos the strongest in each situation. How do you know that this character would be the better as shooting fire magic around. What if you tested on an enemy resistant to fire and you didn''t realize it? And just how large is your entourage. Are you going to individually test on your 70 playable characters?
All I''m getting at is that you wanted the player focused on gameplay, to do so, you have to make sure that the other areas are not overly confusing such that the player as to waste time going over asinine details when relative scales is all thats needed, because that detracts from gameplay.
How hidden the stats are depends on how much time you intend to spend hiding them.
Finding out that a certain character is good at Fire spells should become apparent through talking to other NPCs, observing the world around you. You could hear stories of their skill from other NPCs. Or you could sneak into the ice master''s lair and overhear him ordering this person killed, or something.
I know that was confusing, but think about it.
Next point: Gaining skill for running around for a certain period of time would(in theory) tell the player what their char''s were good at, but, that''s boring because it''s repetitive. A game should not force the player to run around for hours gaining experience in order to defeat the next boss. This is related to my next point.
PLOT:
The plot should happen independent of the players actions. How realistic does this sound?
A random soldier from neighbouring village comes running up to you in the pub, and says "Hurry sir knight, the grendel is less than an hour from my village! If you don''t hurry all the women and children will be killed! What''s more, I''ll lose my prize roses!"
You then notice that some of your characters are running low on hitpoints, so you go to the nearby inn and stay a night.
The next morning you begin your journey to the neighbouring village, you take you time, and on the way you fight several monsters to gain experience. When you reach the outskirts of the village you decide to camp for the night, to restore your char''s HP.
The next day(this is 2 days after you were called) you enter the city, where the grendel(conveniently) descends, and you engage him in battle. You defeat him and everyone is saved!
Hmmm...
If you did that, then when you arrived at the village you should find nothing but smouldering ruins.
That''s all for now. And remember I did say my opinion counted for nothing...
Way to go Jonoxon, that''s exactly what I meant. Skills are supposed to be built up, not through gaining levels, but by usage. Ofcourse, it shouldn''t be necessary to run around for skills, but if that''s what the player wants to do, he can do it. For instance, people nowadays run to improve their condition, or lift weights to improve their strength, so they should be able to do that. By the way, I agree with you about the player independent events.
Delphi is the best language around.(This is merely a statement, there''s no need to start a programming language war).
), is that if you want a statless RPg, do it in a manner similar to a FPS, but add in more storyline and freedom in actions. You can never totally remove stats, but what you can do is take out all thos estats that could be represented by a players skill. ie dont give the player a coordination value, let him aim himself. Don''t give him an intelligence value, let the player complete a ritualistic challenge to cast a spell. Weapons would still have stats relative to one another as may a few other elements of the game, but as has been said, some things you can never remove, only hide. I think a RPG done in the style of a FPS would be very cool. System shock (I forget which number... the latest one) was IMO a joy to play for example, tho that didnt do too much to hide stats.
