| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
| Side Quest: The 6 P's of Gaming |
|
After several Side Quests that primarily concentrated on game mechanics, we thought we'd change the pace this time and invite a guest writer along. This week, Mike 'txa1265' Anderson from <a href="http://www.gamerdad.com/" target="_blank">GamerDad</a> writes about the things that make some games special to him - even when it defies logic.
<br>
<br>
<br>How do you describe to someone what you like about games? Aside from telling someone “I want Fable” or “I like RPG’s” (which might net you a copy of ‘Asheron’s Call’ when you really wanted ‘Dungeon Siege II’), how do you give someone enough information about your likes and dislikes in games that they could actually buy you a game as a gift? I have endeavored to detail my ‘gaming preferences’ and would like to share them – and have you share yours in return.
<br>
<br>In order not only to provide some context, but also to frame the discussion let me say that I came to RPG’s through the ‘back door’: while many were playing Wizardry on the Apple ][ in the early 80’s, I was playing Castle Wolfenstein; while others had moved on to Ultima Underworld by the early 90’s, I was playing Wolfenstein 3D on my PC. On the advice of a friend (big LotR and ‘Renny’ types) my wife bought me Diablo when it came out. I slogged through it for a bit, decided I really hated it, then returned quickly to games like Duke Nukem 3D and Dark Forces. It wasn’t until Star Wars Knights of the Old Republic was nearing release in the summer of 2003 that someone suggested I get Neverwinter Nights to gear up for KotOR. In early August the Mac version was released, and I got it the day it came out. The rest, as they say, is history …
<br>
<br>At some point, you have probably come across the so-called ‘6 P's’ - proper prior planning prevents poor performance. This can be applied directly to gaming - for instance when developing a character in an RPG. Indeed, I think I spent longer developing parties for Wizards & Warriors when I ‘discovered’ it this spring than it took me to fully play many recent FPS games (e.g. Pariah). But that isn't what I'm thinking about. I've been replaying the entire Dark Forces / Jedi Knight series lately, and was playing the late stages of Jedi Knight II and the early missions of Jedi Academy while also replaying Half-Life 2 (HL2). Anyone who has played both HL2 and Jedi Academy can state pretty objectively that HL2 is a better game – better looking, performs about as well, better production values and so on.
<br>
<br>So why would I rather play Jedi Academy? In fact, why are there probably a dozen FPS games that HL2 is objectively superior to that I’d rather play? Finally, why would I willingly put well over 100 hours into playing through the buggy and unfinished mess that is Dungeon Lords *twice*? That premise has been bothering me for some time – and while the release of HL2 brought it to the fore, it has been particularly acute since the release of Dungeon Lords – so I figured I should look into what drives me to like games.
<br>
<br>When I say ‘like’, I don’t mean just games like XIII or Revenant that are enjoyable for a run and then tossed into the big storage bin under the guest bed; I mean games like Dark Forces that I continue playing at least twice a year ten years after I first got them.
<br>
<br>This is what I came up with. A list of parameters that define why I love the games I love. I spent some time trying to come up with six P’s for gaming, only coming up with five P’s and having to force the sixth to become a P. In the end, I like that sixth P – Possibilities – better than what I was originally thinking, which was ‘exploration’, because it captures more than just looking around.
<br>
<br><b>1: Plot </b> – we’re not talking about a need for every game to have some high-concept epic story like ‘Baldur’s Gate 2’, just some basic reason you should be playing the game. The Plot should be proportional with the scope of the game. Take a game like ‘Rune’, for instance. The basis of the story is pretty simple - the runes that protect the world are being taken by the Bad Guy, who has also taken people from your village. A large battle cutscene shows everything you care about being destroyed. The remainder of the game is you working back through conquered lands to your home and the final battle. The plot is simple and direct, but enough to keep you playing through to the end, and wanting to do the right things.
<br>
<br>What does <b>not</b> qualify as plot to me? Mission based games like ’Medal of Honor Allied Assault’ or ‘Call of Duty’. Sure they are fun, but they are all just loads of missions. ‘Painkiller’? No – that is like a new Quake for 2004! Just an excuse wrapped around a frag-fest.
<br>
<br><b>2: Personality </b> – I want my characters to have distinct personality. From way back before the Doom era, Castle Wolfenstein presented you with a hero who had to stop Hitler’s evil plans. That same hero returned for id’s Wolfenstein 3D. Later, Dark Forces presented a hero with loads of personality in Kyle Katarn. Soon after, we got Duke Nukem, who is still a very unique and quotable character. There are loads of great characters in gaming, both protagonists and non-player characters. Some – like HK-47 in Knights of the Old Republic – add flavor. Others – like Cate Archer from the ‘No One Lives Forever’ games – add a whole level of depth and humor as the main character.
<br>
<br>I like to feel immersed in the character, not just role-playing in a type. So in games like ‘Knights of the Old Republic’ or ‘Baldur’s Gate 2’, I am given loads of opportunities to define my character. In contrast, games like Icewind Dale leave me flat because of the lack of character interaction and personality development. Then there is Half-Life 2 – there are games like Doom where you are a nameless shooter, but Half-Life 2 takes it to a new level. By wrapping a gorgeous, living world around an absolute cipher, it makes the utter lack of personality even more striking.
<br>
<br>I also want the characters I deal with to be interesting. It seems like everyone in Planescape Torment is interesting, and I love so many of the characters in other games like Baldur’s Gate II, Gothic II, and so on. I very much enjoy moments such as when Bastilla uses the force to trip up Mission on Tatooine.
<br>
<br><b>3: Purpose </b> – why am I doing this? I am not engrossed for long simply running around shooting or slashing everything. Or, if that is my mission, I like some motivation – perhaps I’m escaping some evil empire, or freeing the oppressed masses, or destroying some dark force bent on world or galactic domination. Even still, I need more – why me?
<br>
<br>Some games actually try to tell you why you alone are the one person who can save the world – like in Arcanum, for instance. But many games just throw you in the middle of the action, telling you that you must save the world. Again, why me? Answer that one question, give me some reasonable motivation, and you have me for the game.
<br>
<br><b>4: Power </b> – I want to see my character grow in knowledge and power during a game. That is why the original Jedi Knight and Deus Ex games thrilled me so much – and why RPG’s have become such a major force in my gaming life.
<br>
<br>Specifically, I want to be able to grow my character – whether it is a ‘training’ method like Morrowind or Dungeon Siege I/II, or a more traditional statistic allocation method, I don’t want my character’s primary means of getting more powerful to be finding/buying better equipment. While that is certainly a valid method, I like to feel that I have chosen a path for myself.
<br>
<br><b>5: Preference </b> – I know what I like, and like games that wear their pedigree on their sleeves. Well, pedigrees that I like, anyway. Take Star Trek Elite Force II for instance – as a game it is just a solid shooter (~80%), but it is heaped with Star Trek love that transcends many of the flaws and makes it a game I love. It is certainly no better than the recent game Project: Snowblind, but I know which one I’ll go back to again and again – the one where my success is rewarded with a growling ‘almost as good as a Klingon’.
<br>
<br>That isn’t just about licenses, either. Again, think about Planescape Torment. That game is very serious about your ability to fully role-play, and the environs and settings just drip with an immersive universe. Or Fallout or Fate for that matter. Games that know what they are and stick with that theme. There are too many games that think they know what they want to be, but never get the courage of their convictions. Games like Metalheart that want to be Fallout but fail to realize what it was that made the game great are worse to me than games like Sacred with much lower aspirations that succeed in their goals.
<br>
<br><b>6: Possibilities </b> – I am looking for something that feels like what I do actually matters. In Deus Ex, you get extra ‘exploration points’ for discovering out of the way places. In Jedi Knight, you get extra ‘force stars’ for finding all secret areas in a level.
<br>
<br>In RPG’s, exploring areas can come in all sorts of forms, with all sorts of outcomes. I still revel in the difficult but rewarding ‘dialogue dance’ involved in successfully romancing Jaheira in Baldur’s Gate II. Wandering the halls in Dungeon Lords looking for a switch while dealing with constantly respawning enemies is not my idea of fun exploration.
<br>
<br>You might have noticed that I didn’t include ‘humor’ or ‘fun’ anywhere in the list. Why? Don’t I like fun in my games? Certainly I do – LEGO Star Wars was one of my favorite games in 2005, mainly due to the absolutely hilarious way it presented everything. But some games are just intense and frankly not ‘funny’ … but that doesn’t mean they aren’t fun. For me, a game that gives me an interesting character in engaging settings with some reason for me to pursue the goals I am given – that is fun.
<br>
<br>Are these your preferences? Most likely not – in fact you might strongly disagree with much of what I say here. But that is the point – we each have our own likes and dislikes, and reasons for those tastes. That is why – even within the RPG genre – we have 3D games and isometric 2D games, turn-based and real-time combat, and so on and so on …
<br>
<br>So, what are your defining rules for games? |
Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:06 pm |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
quote:
That is why – even within the RPG genre – we have 3D games and isometric 2D games, turn-based and real-time combat, and so on and so on …
You got my defining rule for rpgs. No twitch combat. Plnety of great action games with rpgs elements, such as bloodlines and arx fatalis.
If I had to write my own 6 p's i would have to go with this:
Challenge: every game I have really liked has challenged me mentally. Combat has been difficult, as well as character creation and devlopment. If there isn't a challenge the game can offer a little fun but will never really hold my interest.
Gimpability: I love when stupid choices leads to gimped characters that can't function.
Tactical Combat: I hate with a passion the "millions of weak enemy" combat model. i would much rather fight 10 really tough battles than 1 million stupid and easy ones.
Complexity: I like variables. I like spending hours building a perfect party or character, and having millions of choices. I also like when choices screw you. A la fallout. The special system pulls you to the center, one point up or down is a big choice. And the game makes even more vital to make a good choice as you will not be able to complete quests without certain attributes at certain levels. As well as not being able to get certain feats. This would also imply the world and game is complex also, and doesn't throw items and money at you. And presents you with certain, hard to make decisions.
Role:Playing: I like when the game is an rpg. there is character creation, and the game allows you to create a personality, imbue a character with life, and presents you with plenty of choices to support that personality. Or what is called role-playing.
Thats about it. so my 6 p's are actually CGTCR.[/quote]
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Sun Sep 18, 2005 1:51 pm |
|
|
JDR13
Magister of the Light
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 376
Location: Michigan, United States |
A very good article but I strongly disagree with one of his statements.
He wrote,
"Then there is Half-Life 2 – there are games like Doom where you are a nameless shooter, but Half-Life 2 takes it to a new level. By wrapping a gorgeous, living world around an absolute cipher, it makes the utter lack of personality even more striking."
Utter lack of personality? Did you even play Half-Life 2? |
|
Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:07 pm |
|
|
txa1265
Magister of the Light
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 390
Location: Marlborough, MA USA |
quote:
Originally posted by JDR13
Utter lack of personality? Did you even play Half-Life 2?
Twice fully, wrote the GamerDad review plus playing bits and pieces here and there since. I mentioned 're'-playing it in the article.
I stand behind it - when you look at the fully formed characters surrounding him, and the fact that he doesn't interact with *anything*, say *anything* or do *anything* but shoot stuff, what other possible opinion could there be - without HL1 for background, I'd call him the worst character ever.
Mike
_________________
Dopelar effect (n.) The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Check out my blog. |
|
Sun Sep 18, 2005 4:52 pm |
|
|
corwin
On the Razorblade of Life
Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 8376
Location: Australia |
Great article Mike. I like the way you think. Only thing you didn't mention that I'd like to ask is do you prefer solo characters, or parties and why!!
_________________
If God said it, then that settles it!
I don't use Smileys, I use Emoticons!!
 |
|
Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:21 pm |
|
|
Shimbatha
Village Leader
Joined: 15 Feb 2002
Posts: 78
Location: Jersey Shore |
This article feels weird to me. Too much comparision to FPS games. I really don't see the reason why you even need to bring them into the discussion. Maybe Deus Ex, SS2, and Vampire:Bloodlines...but HL2, XIII and Wolfenstien? Strange. |
|
Sun Sep 18, 2005 9:44 pm |
|
|
ShadowMoses
Head Merchant
Joined: 09 Jun 2005
Posts: 69
Location: UK |
quote:
Originally posted by txa1265
I stand behind it - when you look at the fully formed characters surrounding him, and the fact that he doesn't interact with *anything*, say *anything* or do *anything* but shoot stuff, what other possible opinion could there be - without HL1 for background, I'd call him the worst character ever.
Couldn't agree more, would be far better if you were more than a camera.
quote:
Originally posted by Shimbatha
This article feels weird to me. Too much comparision to FPS games. I really don't see the reason why you even need to bring them into the discussion.
like he wrote in the article:
quote:
In order not only to provide some context, but also to frame the discussion let me say that I came to RPG’s through the ‘back door’: while many were playing Wizardry on the Apple ][ in the early 80’s, I was playing Castle Wolfenstein; while others had moved on to Ultima Underworld by the early 90’s, I was playing Wolfenstein 3D on my PC.
The method by which you come to playing rpg's could dramatically influence the reasons for your liking them in the first place.
Briefly, i can only think of two main things that are important to me in games, everything else that is important can pretty much be lumped in with them:
1) meaningful choice and consequence - i hate it when you're given the option to go back on your choices, i want to suffer if i make a poor decision.
2) immersive story - it doesn't have to be epic i just need to believe it.
_________________
Dak’kon: "Your reasons for your incessant clicking are not *known* to me."
-=:ASHES:=- || -=:Xenus-hq:=- |
|
Sun Sep 18, 2005 11:15 pm |
|
|
txa1265
Magister of the Light
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 390
Location: Marlborough, MA USA |
quote:
Originally posted by corwin
Great article Mike. I like the way you think. Only thing you didn't mention that I'd like to ask is do you prefer solo characters, or parties and why!!
I like solo characters ... which I tend to think derives directly from my FPS heritage. But that certainly never makes me shy away from party games. Some of my all-time faves are party based - BG2, PST, KotOR. But I tend to minimize the party size when I can - like 3 in ToEE, for instance.
Mike
_________________
Dopelar effect (n.) The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Check out my blog. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:11 am |
|
|
corwin
On the Razorblade of Life
Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 8376
Location: Australia |
So, I assume then you prefer a game like Gothic to say Wizardry or M&M. For true roleplaying, I'd have to agree. One at a time is all I can handle effectively. Still, like you, I enjoy party games as well.
_________________
If God said it, then that settles it!
I don't use Smileys, I use Emoticons!!
|
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 4:11 am |
|
|
mogwins
Village Leader
Joined: 15 Jan 2002
Posts: 99
Location: Wales |
quote:
Originally posted by txa1265
Some of my all-time faves are party based - BG2, PST, KotOR. But I tend to minimize the party size when I can - like 3 in ToEE, for instance.
Mike
Oh, no, no, no. You can't minimise the party when playing PST - The characters and their interactions are the best thing about that (or any other!) computer game. I've played through it several times just to find out about some of the characters I missed the first time through. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 1:03 pm |
|
|
txa1265
Magister of the Light
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 390
Location: Marlborough, MA USA |
quote:
Originally posted by mogwins
Oh, no, no, no. You can't minimise the party when playing PST - The characters and their interactions are the best thing about that (or any other!) computer game. I've played through it several times just to find out about some of the characters I missed the first time through.
That's why I say 'when I can" - there are games when you *can't* (or certainly shouldn't if you plan on getting the full enjoyment out of it).
Games like the ones I mentioned (PST, KotOR and BG2) are certainly amongst them. Those are games where the dialogue and interaction are every bit as important as everything else in the game.
But in a game like Icewind Dale or Temple of Elemental Evil, that doesn't matter so much. Neverwinter Nights has become more party oriented as the expansions arrived - but even in the original I liked learning the henchmen stories.
But still, in a party oriented game like the above-mentioned, a favorite thing is how different combinations of party members yields different *Possibilities*.
Mike
_________________
Dopelar effect (n.) The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Check out my blog. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:05 pm |
|
|
JDR13
Magister of the Light
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 376
Location: Michigan, United States |
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by JDR13
Utter lack of personality? Did you even play Half-Life 2?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Twice fully, wrote the GamerDad review plus playing bits and pieces here and there since. I mentioned 're'-playing it in the article.
I stand behind it - when you look at the fully formed characters surrounding him, and the fact that he doesn't interact with *anything*, say *anything* or do *anything* but shoot stuff, what other possible opinion could there be - without HL1 for background, I'd call him the worst character ever.
Mike
I'm sorry, but that statement makes no sense whatsoever.
You seem to be basing your entire opinion of HL2 around the protagonist.
I might agree with you if you said "Gordan Freeman has no personality" but how can you say Half-Life 2 as a whole has no personality? There is quite a bit of personality when you take into account some of the NPC's in that game.
Look at Alyx Vance and her father, as well as Barney Calhoun. They were great characters. Lets not forget the snide and sarcastic G-man, or the crazy
Father Grigori. In fact, for an FPS, HL2 actually has a lot of personality.
For the record, I've played just about every decent FPS on the PC since 1992, including all the ones you mentioned in your article. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:10 pm |
|
|
txa1265
Magister of the Light
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 390
Location: Marlborough, MA USA |
quote:
Originally posted by JDR13
You seem to be basing your entire opinion of HL2 around the protagonist.
I might agree with you if you said "Gordan Freeman has no personality" but how can you say Half-Life 2 as a whole has no personality?
But that - Gordon Freeman has no personality - *is* what I'm saying. Under the heading of 'Personality' I state that I want to play characters with personality. I talk about Kyle Katarn, but could easily have mentioned Cate Archer, whom I love playing. But the complete and total lack of personality for Gordon Freeman - he could have been a robot or man-hack or whatever for all the difference it made - took away much of the immersion and dramatic effect of the game.
Bottom line - he wasn't someone I wanted to be. Or not be ... or care if he lived or died. Because he was a cipher, a non-entity ... the gunholder that responded to my key-presses and clicks. Nothing more.
Mike
_________________
Dopelar effect (n.) The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
Check out my blog. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:18 pm |
|
|
JDR13
Magister of the Light
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 376
Location: Michigan, United States |
Ok, I can agree with that. It was just the way you originally said that Half-Life 2 had an utter lack of personality that I couldn't understand. What you meant was Gordan Freeman has an utter lack of personality.
Gordan Freeman is a 'Silent protaganist'. It's just the way that Valve designed him to be. Not everyone likes that fact about the Half-Life games but some of us find it a refreshing change from the norm. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 2:36 pm |
|
|
mogwins
Village Leader
Joined: 15 Jan 2002
Posts: 99
Location: Wales |
quote:
Originally posted by txa1265
That's why I say 'when I can" - there are games when you *can't* (or certainly shouldn't if you plan on getting the full enjoyment out of it).
Mike
Phew. I'm glad. Wouldn't want anyone to miss out on such a high point in computer gaming. I have to say I didn't warm to the KOTOR or Balder's Gate characters nearly as much. Though HK-47 and Minsc both did make me smile. |
|
Mon Sep 19, 2005 3:45 pm |
|
|
|
Goto page 1, 2 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Tue Apr 16, 2019 6:23 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
