Gamecast - 53 - "Nook shot first"

[Link Antilles]

In this show, we discuss if RPGs have grown up with their audience, agree Han shot first, and ponder if Nook is a serial killer.

Download the show directly from here:
http://www.linkantilles.com/podcasts/caagamecast/Gamecast_53_04-18-09.mp3

[uc pseudonym]

Curse you all. My only remaining joy in life was spitefully not answering your questions.

As always, I'm interested by discussions of RPGs. I've been playing more than normal recently (especially a huge run of many of Bioware's games) so I've actually given some of these topics thought.

Amid the western RPGs I also started FFVIII, which has led me to reflect on the series overall. What I realized is that I've never really cared about the central characters. FFX, for example, pulled me in with an overall plot to the degree that I just rolled my eyes and waited for the Tidus/Yuna scenes to be over. Because VIII is more focused on relationships, in my opinion the worst-written parts, I'm not sure I'll finish it, even if I had more time and fewer games.

At the same time, I've realized what I like about FF and clones: the sense of being integrally involved with a narrative. Though I appreciate many things about western RPGs, I think the reason I've tended toward eastern is the lack of this. BGII has a fascinating storyline, but only for 10% of the game - the majority is running around doing sidequests that could be interchangeable with any other game.

The narratives of many eastern RPGs, however, are somewhat lacking. Though I typically enjoy a story combat event more than another generic dungeon, oftentimes the plot doesn't involve me enough for the event to have any real weight. I'm often just happy to see anything vaguely outside of the usual tropes (in FFXII, for example, the war doesn't end when you kill the final boss).

I'm fine with young characters... but not stupid ones. There are times when it feels like the majority of gamers want both.

[Omega Amen]

At the same time, I've realized what I like about FF and clones: the sense of being integrally involved with a narrative.

I guess I need some elaboration on what do you mean by integrally involved in those games. Because I have the exact opposite impression, that I have no sense of being involved in their narrative at all. Gameplay-wise I only really provide brains for the characters in battle and asking for the next line of pre-determined dialog. Story-wise, they usually do not explore substantive themes/subjects sufficiently to engage my brain, or explore any of the conflicts to engage my sympathy, or give me characters that I can relate in a meaningful way to my experiences.

Though I appreciate many things about western RPGs, I think the reason I've tended toward eastern is the lack of this. BGII has a fascinating storyline, but only for 10%]While I have not played the Baldur's Gate series yet, I do know that in the Neverwinter Nights series that quite a bit of sidequests were nods to hardcore D&D fans. Since they are made by the same developers, I assume that may be the case in the BG games. Also Bioware and Obsidian (f.k.a. Black Isle) see their system of multiple moral choices to add replay value to their main plot. So some of their intended appeal is about replaying that small fascinating storyline a little differently and see what happens. It is not for everyone though.

One thing I like about Mask of the Betrayer is that a good amount of sidequests (or companion-driven quests) seem to reinforce some central/unique aspect of the storyline or major theme. I appreciated that since that is a sign of literary technique.

I'm fine with young characters... but not stupid ones.

I am not sure if I expressed this clearly in the recording. My issue is not necessarily whether a character is young or even stupid. It is the developers presenting a justification for their major presence in the game to the satisfaction of my adult mind.

I brought up the age of the main protagonist because I am suspicious that the developers, in their efforts to target their game to a younger audience with a young protagonist, are not attempting to leave anything for older audiences to engage their interests. If they forced themselves to use an older protagonist, they might put in situations, themes, etc. that might be engaging to an older audience. No guarantee, of course, but it seems more possible with that route.

[ich1990]

While I have not played the Baldur's Gate series yet, I do know that in the Neverwinter Nights series that quite a bit of sidequests were nods to hardcore D&D fans.

I can corroborate. I am not very well versed in the Forgotten Realm mythology, but I did notice a lot of crossover between BGII and D&D storylines/locations/characters. In fact, it was BGII's easter egg inclusion of characters such as Drizzt that inspired me to look into D&D in the first place.

[uc pseudonym]

I hope my post (and this one) didn't come off as combative. Just to be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating east or west, I'm just fairly disillusioned in general at the moment.

I guess I need some elaboration on what do you mean by integrally involved in those games. Because I have the exact opposite impression, that I have no sense of being involved in their narrative at all. Gameplay-wise I only really provide brains for the characters in battle and asking for the next line of pre-determined dialog. Story-wise, they usually do not explore substantive themes/subjects sufficiently to engage my brain, or explore any of the conflicts to engage my sympathy, or give me characters that I can relate in a meaningful way to my experiences.

Ah, there is significant ambiguity there and I should have said things differently. "Involved" is definitely the wrong word, as it has the connotations that you mentioned (and I don't really disagree with those statements). However, I'm struggling to find a better word, so I'll use a paragraph.

I didn't mean my actions were involved with the plot or that my mind was engaged. Rather, I meant that gameplay is integrally related to a plot that is not wholly dependent on player input. The opening of FFVII, for example, puts the player in the middle of an event. As you go through the essentially unbranching path, that event unfolds. I'd prefer that players could actually impact the situation, but I still find a static event more interesting than the usual quest format (get mission, go somewhere and do something, go back and get reward).

A comparable example is KotOR. I especially enjoyed the beginning, as you wake in the middle of the attack and start to figure out what's going on. But once you arrive on the first planet, it feels more like everything is sitting around waiting for me to engage it. Note that I'm not done with KotOR yet, so perhaps I am judging too early.

While I have not played the Baldur's Gate series yet, I do know that in the Neverwinter Nights series that quite a bit of sidequests were nods to hardcore D&D fans.

Many were, and I appreciated that aspect for what it was.

Also Bioware and Obsidian (f.k.a. Black Isle) see their system of multiple moral choices to add replay value to their main plot. So some of their intended appeal is about replaying that small fascinating storyline a little differently and see what happens. It is not for everyone though.

I tend to reload a lot while playing Bioware games, simply because I'm interested in seeing all the possibilities. The level of agency they allow players to have in their games is without peer among major RPGs.

At the same time, I'm finding this model of game somewhat unsatisfying. For all the dialogue options players are given, very few of the choices have any real impact (at times even resulting in the same response). Or when they do, it is usually at the end of an event and doesn't have many consequences beyond some irrelevant NPC living or dying. I really feel as though I'm experiencing a linear story that makes attempts to trick me into thinking I play a role.

One thing I like about Mask of the Betrayer is that a good amount of sidequests (or companion-driven quests) seem to reinforce some central/unique aspect of the storyline or major theme. I appreciated that since that is a sign of literary technique.

I have yet to get into NWN2, but actually from what I have read I think that Mask of the Betrayer would meet my expectations in regard to this. It seems relatively tightly written.

I am not sure if I expressed this clearly in the recording. My issue is not necessarily whether a character is young or even stupid. It is the developers presenting a justification for their major presence in the game to the satisfaction of my adult mind.

For my part, I didn't intend that statement to be a response to yours. I actually agreed with the majority of the things you said about ages.

What I was trying to say, however, was that I am concerned about whether or not a character engages with serious issues. An older character can offer just as shallow a look at the world, depending on how they are written. Obviously it's not good if a younger character exists as a narrative crutch, either. In other words, I think we're actually getting at the same thing, but I stated it poorly.

[Omega Amen]

I hope my post (and this one) didn't come off as combative. Just to be clear, I'm not necessarily advocating east or west, I'm just fairly disillusioned in general at the moment.

Just to let you know, I did not find your post combative. I was just perplexed by your diction in your first post, and you have just addressed it.

I didn't mean my actions were involved with the plot or that my mind was engaged. Rather, I meant that gameplay is integrally related to a plot that is not wholly dependent on player input. The opening of FFVII, for example, puts the player in the middle of an event. As you go through the essentially unbranching path, that event unfolds. I'd prefer that players could actually impact the situation, but I still find a static event more interesting than the usual quest format (get mission, go somewhere and do something, go back and get reward).

A comparable example is KotOR. I especially enjoyed the beginning, as you wake in the middle of the attack and start to figure out what's going on. But once you arrive on the first planet, it feels more like everything is sitting around waiting for me to engage it. Note that I'm not done with KotOR yet, so perhaps I am judging too early.

Hmmm... in your FFVII intro example there, I would say it is actually the quest format just not presented in an obvious fashion.

Get mission = Barret: "Yo, Cloud! Hit dat reactor!"
Go somewhere and do something = Barret: "Yo, Cloud! Hit dat reactor!... and dat big @!%! scorpion!"
Go back = Barret: "Yo, Cloud! Hit dat ramp!... to get out of dat reactor!"
Get reward = Tifa

Joking aside, the common thread I see between your examples is that you were primarily occupied with getting a grasp of the nature of the situation thrown at you. You were actually fulfilling a quest, but at that moment, that was not on your mind. This is a presentation issue. In those examples, not everything was revealed to you from the start, and small revelations/twists were given at the right pace to keep you immersed in the game universe. This makes the act of fulfilling a quest less mundane... and "game-y."

I tend to reload a lot while playing Bioware games, simply because I'm interested in seeing all the possibilities. The level of agency they allow players to have in their games is without peer among major RPGs.

At the same time, I'm finding this model of game somewhat unsatisfying. For all the dialogue options players are given, very few of the choices have any real impact (at times even resulting in the same response). Or when they do, it is usually at the end of an event and doesn't have many consequences beyond some irrelevant NPC living or dying. I really feel as though I'm experiencing a linear story that makes attempts to trick me into thinking I play a role.

Yeah, they are tricking you. Because to have major changes in plot and develop all permutations well is nightmarish for video game development. It is a losing proposition as well. Why risk developing an alternate path that most likely a majority of players will not experience? From a business perspective, that sounds unwise.

However, I do like how this choice/influence model was utilized in NWN2 by Obsidian. In the original campaign, the plot itself was not extraordinary, but your companions' interaction with your character and with each other based on your choices was a huge draw to me. It allows you to see the companions three-dimensionally and reveal interesting aspects of them that you could not experience without the ability to make choices on situations or your character.

[uc pseudonym]

Joking aside, the common thread I see between your examples is that you were primarily occupied with getting a grasp of the nature of the situation thrown at you. You were actually fulfilling a quest, but at that moment, that was not on your mind. This is a presentation issue. In those examples, not everything was revealed to you from the start, and small revelations/twists were given at the right pace to keep you immersed in the game universe. This makes the act of fulfilling a quest less mundane... and "game-y."

That is correct. Though I enjoy games, when I play RPGs I tend to play for story, which I judge by the same criteria as I use for literature or film (which may not be properly differentiating between genres). I always appreciate games that present their stories well instead of a format that I feel is weak.

Perhaps the most important part to me is that the quest you are initially given is modified during its process. Even though any given set of requirements can be deconstructed into a set of quests, from the story perspective it is nice to have things interrupted occasionally. It feels more like a narrative instead of a set of hurdles that was tacked on for fun.

Yeah, they are tricking you. Because to have major changes in plot and develop all permutations well is nightmarish for video game development. It is a losing proposition as well. Why risk developing an alternate path that most likely a majority of players will not experience? From a business perspective, that sounds unwise.

I realize all of these things as sad truths. It's just that the tricks feel obvious enough to me that it distracts from games I find otherwise enjoyable.

However, I do like how this choice/influence model was utilized in NWN2 by Obsidian. In the original campaign, the plot itself was not extraordinary, but your companions' interaction with your character and with each other based on your choices was a huge draw to me. It allows you to see the companions three-dimensionally and reveal interesting aspects of them that you could not experience without the ability to make choices on situations or your character.

Naturally I can't comment on this specifically because I haven't played it. My computer meets the minimum specs for NWN2, but I suspect that wouldn't really be adequate.

[Omega Amen]

Perhaps the most important part to me is that the quest you are initially given is modified during its process. Even though any given set of requirements can be deconstructed into a set of quests, from the story perspective it is nice to have things interrupted occasionally. It feels more like a narrative instead of a set of hurdles that was tacked on for fun.

Dude... you should play Persona 4 some time. Granted, I have not finish it yet, but I think this strange murder mystery might be appealing to you.

Or you could also wait for Alpha Protocol.

Naturally I can't comment on this specifically because I haven't played it. My computer meets the minimum specs for NWN2, but I suspect that wouldn't really be adequate.

NWN2 simply does not look good on its lower settings, and that's a shame, honestly.

I had some examples dancing in my head, but Link still has not finished the game. Maybe a spoilercast....