| |
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
|
|
|
|
Moriendor
Black Ring Leader
Joined: 19 Jul 2001
Posts: 1306
Location: Germany |
| Elder Scrolls 4: Oblivion - Preview @ Gamesradar |
|
Gamesradar UK (which is in some way or another related to PC Gamer) has whipped up a copy of an 'Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion' <a href="http://gamesradar.msn.co.uk/previews/default.asp?pagetypeid=2&articleid=36698&subsectionid=1599" target="_blank">preview</a> that was once published in the print mag not too long ago.<blockquote><em>We had the barely-concealable joy of seeing Oblivion first hand at E3, and at a show bristling with scripted renders of what games might look like next year, this demo - being played on a PC as we watched - was the visual treat of the show.</em></blockquote> |
Fri Jul 22, 2005 11:49 pm |
|
|
cecirdr
Head Merchant
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 66
Location: Newport, OR USA |
Well, this preview along with the other one posted today both stress that oblivion is going to be action based combat, not rolls and statistics. They look like an awesome action adventure...one I won't be able to play though since I'm too clutzy. I'm bummed. I can sort of play Morrowind now (early stages are hard for me and I can only play a tank, not a nimble fighter/magic user/archer) but I can't control the physical actions of my character deftly enough in combat to be really able to play it well. If they take out all rolls for oblivion to decide hits or misses, I'm screwed. If a game progresses to much toward an action based engine, then I can't roleplay. It's just crappy, uncoordinated me trying to pretend I'm in a fantasy land...and failing miserably. With stats and rolls of dice, I get a chance to be someone else. But I don't see how that can happen with pure action based combat.
Oh well...action appears to be the wave of the RPG future. I guess the new rpg trains will be leaving the station without me. I'll keep playing my older games. I guess this post sounds like sour grapes. I'm not trying to be that way ...really. I'm actually starting to get over it. Maybe this is just a way for life to let me know I need to be moving on to other things and games are taking too much of my time. 'Course..I still have a ways to go with my replaying of MM7 right now and Wizardry 8 soon.  Ahem...I could move onto new/non-RPG things after a finish these older games. Yeah, I'll do that..... |
|
Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:03 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
I understand your point cecirdr but I'm not necessarily sure your conclusion automatically follows. I was going to comment about your other post too, so I'll just lump it all here. 
First, I absolutely, completely, utterly understand where you are coming from. For me, the role is enabled by separating the player from the game character through the character's stats and skills.
However, Morrowind's combat just wasn't very good. I'm not a MW fan, so I'm sure others will see it differently but Bethesda needed to find some way to improve combat signficantly. One of the difficulties is the first-person perspective exacerbates the gap between what you see on the screen and the outcome of those dice rolls: you clearly hit on the screen but the roll says you missed. This has long been a problem with RPG animation but with a near photo-realistic FP view it's all the more jarring for many players. In the end, I think a action-based hit system is probably the best choice to make first-person combat work (which is one reason I am sceptical of FP views in RPGS).
Anyway, while it may diminish the role for people like you and I, it won't necessarily be harder. It all depends on the implementation, of course, and I haven't seen it.
In MW, you had to manouevre your character yourself, right? Regardless of the hit rolls, you have to move in or out of range/position with a system that is completely under your direction. Then, when you pressed the button, a series of to-hit and block rolls determined the result. So, with poor character skills or a series of bad rolls, it is perfectly possible to stand there missing constantly.
In Oblivion, you have the same responsibility to position the character, only if you are in range and press the button, you will hit unless the enemy successfully blocks. Depending on the difficulty scale and implementation, even your poor reflexes might successfully connect more often than your equivalent character in MW.
Ot not. It depends on how they do it. The point is, you don't need to write Oblivion off yet as being too difficult. It's possible it might end up easier.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Sat Jul 23, 2005 12:41 am |
|
|
cecirdr
Head Merchant
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 66
Location: Newport, OR USA |
Yeah...I remember that Morrowind's combat had "issues". I also remember that I was pretty bad at it unless I played a tank kind of character. I get too excitable in real time combat and tend to spaz...not good for nimble archer types or magic types...and aiming...what's that?
I guess what it boils down to is the *almost* age old question of just what is an RPG anyway? It's a bit off topic here to say it, but to me Oblivion is likely to be more of an action adventure along the vein of a Zelda type game. (which I also stank at playing btw. I wanted to like the game and I thought it to be extraordinary in execution, but I didn't have the physical prowess to complete windwaker. I literally got to a spot that I couldn't manipulate the controller well enough to allow me to progress.)
If a game relies on my *real world* skills/ability with a controller or keyboard and to top it off, it also doesn't take into account rolls of a dice which are affected by equipment, stats and training, then to me, it's not allowing roleplaying and ergo not an RPG. Instead it's an action adventure. I was under the impression that Oblivion was being marketed as an RPG, yet the previews state how combat works and it seems to point away from roleplaying. So as much as it appears that I'm concluding something about how "hard" Oblivion might be, I'm not. To me the games that are real time might be hard, but to others they may not be. I'm just questioning why Oblivion is being classed as an RPG when the preview states that the combat will not be based on rolls of dice. |
|
Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:00 am |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
Well, again I agree with your broad point.
As to why it is classified as an RPG, I wouldn't disqualify it on the basis of one missing roll/calculation. Doesn't that elevate combat to the final arbiter of "RPG-ness"? Equipment stats and training will affect damage and possibly what equipment you can use, so they are not removed from the equation altogether - just from the "to hit" calculation. If Oblivion offered (just for arguments sake) good support for non-combat characters and branching dialogue affected by skill checks, isn't that as much (more?) of an RPG than another game that has to-hit rolls but is entirely linear and combat-centric?
I do think it has probably moved into the realm of "Action-RPG".
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:37 am |
|
|
cecirdr
Head Merchant
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 66
Location: Newport, OR USA |
So one roll is removed from the calculation. At what point does removing a dice roll shift a game from being labeled an RPG versus being an action adventure game? Removing that one dice roll means that lil ole me has to control whether my character hits an enemy or not. That's not gettig to play someone else with different skills than myself. That's me *piloting* an entity. So "real life" skills or lack thereof affect the game...ergo, it's not a role playing game (IMHO). How can I become someone else who's a clever magic user, if I can't pilot the character in a battle to get them to strategic locations. It's all well and good that I know what I'd like the character to do (role playing), but to say that you can't accomplish that goal because you (real life you) can't maneuver the character into position quickly and precisely enough is to have created an action game not a role playing game.
Having stats, training, equipment (even Zelda has this),and branching dialog is part of the equation of a role playing game. But an equally valid one is if you're going to focus on combat, then a person's real life controller skills should *not* have any impact on combat prowess. If it does then you're not playing a completely different character than yourself. Part of you has spilled over into the game world and you're not completely in a new role.
For example...in a game from a few years ago...Arcanum...you could choose to play a metally retarded brute if you wanted to. There are consequences to this of course that are easily dealt with via stats and rolls and removing dialog choices from what the character can choose...or even adding some dialogs that other (smarter) characters won't get to see. Now, one wouldn't expect a retared orc character to make brilliant strategic moves in a battle. He'd be a tank, but not likely to out maneuver his enemies. If you leave the battles to how well someone can control a keyboard or controller, then they might end up completely out of character for a mentally retarded orc. They might be unable to hit the broad side of a barn, they might end up moving him around as if he's nimble, they might set him up strategically to better handle the fight. All of which I would contend are rather out of character for a metally retarded Orc. That's what I'm getting at. Taking *any* actions out of the realm of stat based rolls and you've taken role playing out of the game and it's now an action game, maybe a danged good one, but still an action adventure.
Ah well....I guess I'm swimming up stream with my comments. Thanks for the dialog. I realize we're on the same sheet of music with our understanding of RPGs. I'm just less willing to consider the new action games RPGs. I guess I'm just hung up on waiting for a game to come along that incorporates new features, but doesn't abandon what I consider to be almost sacred RPG elements for action, action, action. Morrowind and Oblivion are almost that kind of game. It hurts to see that I probably won't be able to play Oblivion. Like I said earlier. I could barely get through Morrowind. The only reason I had characters that could survive in it was because of the rolls to hit. That prevented my character from getting torn to shreds in battles because an enemy had only a certain probability of hitting me (and I him). That compensated for poor coordination on my part and allowed my character to be unique from lil ole me. |
|
Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:40 pm |
|
|
Rordog
Keeper of the Gates
Joined: 13 Feb 2004
Posts: 111
Location: kelowna |
That's pretty rough cecirdr.
Sounds like turn-based combat is more your cup of tea. Then you can just sit back and watch the stat based battle unfold with as little imput from you as is possibly imaginable.
I will certainly agree with you on the sense that a skilled keyboarder can fight battles that they more than likely should not be able to survive in the "action" catagory. That's one of my favorite aspects of many games though.
Like in gothic (which you proly wouldn't like, sadly) I really enjoy fighting characters that are 5+ lvls above you and winning as long as you fight with pure skill, where one mistake on your behalf means death.
Society is progressing down this path though; we want things faster, better looking and easier for that matter. Sadly I haven't played a difficult game in years, but I am lucky to be very adept with the keyboard and the mental side of games too, so that's a double advantage.
I personally hate turn-based combat and probability determined fighting can be acceptable to a point. But with better graphics there is no need for rolling dice in a fight. I higher level enemy should visually block, or parry every one of your attacks. In the case of magic they can absorb or redirect, or something of the like. Likewise they should simply overpower your defenses. This can be done by probability, but should never be visible to the player. If I swing and nobody blocks that attack and it passes through the enemy without connecting then I get upset. I can only tolerate phantom swings for so long before it destroys the illusion of the role-play.
Imagine if you were truly the fantasy being that you are playing to become: you could fight someone stronger than yourself and win if you were excellent that day (this seldom to never happens in dice calculated games). Additionally you would never swing right through your opponent because he rolled his dice and said you don't get to connect that time.
Which leads me to my long-winded conclusion. Oblivion probably will have stat based probabilities working behind the scenes that govern many aspects in a fight, but instead of phantom swinging the attack will be blocked or something to the like.
Ultimately it is up to the individual, you don't like being forced to control your character's actions after you have inserted the cd. I love to control each and every aspect of my avatar, dice don't run my life and they wouldn't run my life if I lived in a fantasy world. As to what determines an RPG the definition is continually evolving and difficult to pin-point.
On a brighter note there are numerous older games that would probably appeal to you: fallout and the final fantasy games just off the top of my head. The market is not catering to you now, which is unfortunate for you, but there is a huge older section containing some of the most acclaimed games of all-time that are right up your alley.
later, rordog
_________________
Winning isn't everything it is the only thing! |
|
Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:44 am |
|
|
roqua1
Guest
|
I'm with you 100% cecidr, you are a very bright lady. |
|
Sun Jul 24, 2005 11:24 pm |
|
|
Guest
|
If I understand information correctly, I think stats are related with effectiveness of each action. In a simplest melee combat's case, our character's damage will depend on his/her stats while each hit depends on players' "stats". So, even if we are clumsy, if we spend time with melee, eventually, we will be able to defeat tougher enemies. Different from Gothic II, considering respawn-ability of enemies in Morrowind, I think even the clumsiest can finish the game. Also, the devs are working on balancing each activity. Stealth is being dealt with a member of Thief II and magic becomes more varied such as telekinesis.
As an action RPG, I think some problems of Morrowind are already covered to some extent. So, I think this is simply a matter of taste again. We can expect an action RPG for TES but not stats and roles only CRPG. Bethesda is supposed to be making Fallout 3. We can only hope that they know the difference.
My concerns are related with the latter part of cecirdr's opinion. Morrowind NPC interaction is based on stats. Even in the main quest, charming characters can get some special lines but it is never complex. Branched from Fallout, NPC interactions of Arcanum, Planescape: Torment are interesting and even if they are based on skill system/pseudo skill system (PST), they are not learn-by-doing and never integrated with AI. Unfortunately, AI at the moment is at most level of animals. I know CRPG has a long way to reach the level of Startrek holodeck and there will be always demands for better AI interactions not concerning the level of it. Means, designers need to do some effort in this way but Oblivion NPC interaction reminds me of Fable. Listening to the MP3 files about NPC interaction in Oblivion, I thought it would be difficult to deal with NPC without feeling stupid. And yet, 50 hours of recorded dialogues including Patrick Stewart is not a bad call. |
|
Mon Jul 25, 2005 8:19 am |
|
|
Mystery Guy
Guest
|
She reminds me of my ex. We met because of our love for Daggerfall and during the four years I was with her, she used to say the same thing. She couldn't play RPGs that required lots of Keyboard mashing. She suffered through MW, but never beat it...whereas I beat it four times. (Once with a thief/archer type character)
Personally, I prefer the turn-based RPGs simply because they require more thought and are on the whole, more challenging. Of course, I am also an accomplished FPS gamer and have sailed through games like gothic and Arx Fatalis on sheer keyboarding skill alone. Still, I know where she is coming from.
I think you'll be seeing more of this action-oriented Roleplaying as time goes on. This is due to the fact that the old-school "I grew up playing the goldbox games on my C64" crowd (Like myself) is getting old and doesn't find the time (or the money) for gaming. To the white shirts running the show, it looks like those turn-based, stat-heavy games don't sell because they are complicated, when in fact it's just that most of the audience has grown out of gaming altogether. This is why games like geneforge have such a huge following: Low system requirements and cheap pricing.
Anyway, I feel really bad for her and other gamers like her, because they are being punished for not having fast keyboard fingers.
Though I have to tell you, Wizardry 8 is the best RPG ever...I've gone through it 3 times and it's still as mind-numbingly challenging as the first time. You'll need every last brain cell to make it through that puppy. It's a shame there aren't more CRPGs like that. |
|
Tue Jul 26, 2005 8:02 am |
|
|
crpgnut
Captain of the Guard
Joined: 22 May 2002
Posts: 197
Location: St. Louis |
I think that cecirdr could play Oblivion if she wants to. Maybe not as a melee character, because of her lack of quick reflexes, but I think she could play a thief or mage/thief combo. In her case the type of roleplaying is limited by her physical deficiencies. In Morrowind, I avoided most combat with my mage character. I would use custom spells that drained a creature's stamina while boosting my speed to get away. I would also levitate or use invisibility if the situation demanded it. My character was an explorer, not a fighter.
_________________
'nut |
|
Tue Jul 26, 2005 4:47 pm |
|
|
cecirdr
Head Merchant
Joined: 14 May 2002
Posts: 66
Location: Newport, OR USA |
Thanks for the support gang. I really feel bad that I may choose to not play oblivion. The gaming world appears to be leaving relics like me behind. There's nothing wrong with the types of games being made, but they're just being made to the exclusion of turn based RPGs. Companies are also upping the action content, making things faster and more intense every year.
FWIW, my problem is actually not poor reflexes, it's excessive reflexes. I get so intense a shot of adrenalin that I make way too big a moves. My heart rate goes way up, I sweat, and I bang away on the keyboard like a brute....not a happy, fun place. My reactions are as if the events were real and are way too intense. I can't watch horror movies for the same reason. I literally get a fight or flight reaction going and I can't stand it. I want to save my life, but there's no one attacking me so the hormones keep washing through my veins with no outlet. My body just reacts with too much intensity.
I don't think many people are like this. That's why intense movies, games and even carnival rides have gotten so popular. I can't do any of 'em. Remember that kids story of the princess and the pea? I think that's me. I lament that games are getting to intense for me, but I don't think that's wrong that they are. I just wish they wouldn't completely abandon turn based play. At least make it an option like the active turn based system used in NWN. I could play that game just fine. Oddly enough, I could also play dungeon siege, but then again, they did have that one quite automated didn't they. I seem to just have problems with first person games like Zelda. (actually, I did have problems with bad timing/reflexes on that game. I couldn't do some of the tricks required to navigate even when you weren't in a battle.)
Right now I'm replaying MM7. I had to go to great lengths to get it to work in XP pro SP2....a patch coded my someone named Mok was required. No other "trick" posted on the web worked to get the game running. Older games are going to get harder and harder to run on the new systems coming out. I bet Longhorn (windows vista) will be the death of many old games. I'm probably going to always hang onto this machine so I can play older games, but even so, there's a limit to how long that will last as an option too.
But on a positive note, for now I'm enjoying playing MM7 at the moment and I own Wizardry 8 too. I'll put that one in next. I may also take crpgnut's advise and try Morrowind as a mage. I tried to play a light armor nimble character and managed to survive (barely) but only because I succumbed to the "dark side" and killed a merchant who had the glass armor. I wasn't thrilled that I had to resort to that...really bummed actually. I didn't steal or kill a non-agressive character again, but I would rather have not done it at all. So I'll try it as a mage and see what I can do.
Ceci |
|
Tue Jul 26, 2005 7:14 pm |
|
|
Ryder
Eager Tradesman
Joined: 11 Jul 2001
Posts: 33
Location: Australia |
Just finished playing MM7 myself cecirdr, and before that MM6 and before that World of Xeen and before that MM3 and before that MM2. Okay, so I still havent finished MM2 or MM3 but they are works in progress. I installed MM8 but couldnt bring myself to play it. I dont like the idea of characters in MM8, much prefer classes.
Anyway, I decided to install Morrowind (having played Arena and Daggerfall previously, although not very well) and I must say I am enjoying it. I always found the fighting in these games to be more difficult than Might and Magic games but that goes without saying. Turn based vs real time is a big difference but both are good to play.
I am now looking forward to Oblivian as it looks fantastic but I am more looking forward to MM10, when and if Ubisoft make it. |
|
Tue Jul 26, 2005 9:45 pm |
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is Sat Apr 13, 2019 4:02 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
