"A new recipe for the roleplaying game formula" - Guido Henkel

[V_K]

so what's putting you off combat in one place in the game but not the other? It's certainly not difficulty.

It's monotony. Even with the best combat design, if all you do is fight, and fight, and fight, it gets real tired real fast.

The more elements you put into non-combat approaches, such as stealth options, diplomatic options, bribing options and all the etc, the more you motivate the player to take the path of least resistance, especially if the rewards are equal (If the rewards are not equal then why would someone gimp themselves before the next, even harder fight).

In a good game, it's not just rewards that have to be considered, but costs as well.

By your logic, essentially, RPGs should be corridor shooters - because why bother with different approaches to problems when some of them will inevitably end up being better than others?

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Guido is my guy. I appreciate what he did with the Realms of Arkania series, which still stands as a few of the most unique and rewarding RPGs you can play. I wish his Deathfire game was funded as we need more of these styles of RPGs that really no one else is doing right now, retro Kickstarters included.

Go play Realms of Arkania HD if you want to try a modern remake of the game. Spare me the flaming, the game has been patched up and is totally playable. If you play for awhile, you will start to wonder why these types of RPG experiences simply don't exist in modern gaming.

 

[TalesfromtheCrypt]

His essay is spot on most of the time, especially when he talks about how modern automatic systems remove all the tiny details like having to pay attention to dialogue in order to advance, navigating the game world, figuring stuff out on your own etc.
This was really what makes the magic of old RPGs for me in comparison with new ones.

Too bad Guido himself is a such a pathetic cuck.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

"Modern conveniences" have essentially removed what used to be actual RPG mechanics. Those mechanics actually draw you into the game more as you do have to actually pay attention rather than playing on auto-pilot because you know the game will take care of most things for you.

I hope more RPGs try to add these mechanics back into modern RPGs, but it is risky if you want to make a profit or have a larger base play your game. It is going to be the super-indie/super-niche RPGs that do this sort of thing since they are not employing tons of people, beholden to investors and this sort of thing.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

so what's putting you off combat in one place in the game but not the other? It's certainly not difficulty.

It's monotony. Even with the best combat design, if all you do is fight, and fight, and fight, it gets real tired real fast.

I don't think even in hyper-combat focused games all you do is fight-fight-fight, combat is broken up by looting, trading, character management, NPCs, walking around discovering stuff. What you've described is propaganda, nothing more. There has never been an RPG which has just been fight-fight-fight and that's all you do without a breather, it's an utterly retarded statement.

The more elements you put into non-combat approaches, such as stealth options, diplomatic options, bribing options and all the etc, the more you motivate the player to take the path of least resistance, especially if the rewards are equal (If the rewards are not equal then why would someone gimp themselves before the next, even harder fight).

In a good game, it's not just rewards that have to be considered, but costs as well.

By your logic, essentially, RPGs should be corridor shooters - because why bother with different approaches to problems when some of them will inevitably end up being better than others?

I fail to see how having combat as the primary focus automatically turns your game into either corridors or shooters, that is an utterly retarded statement. Corridor shooters evolved from dumbed down blobbers, why would doing what those blobbers did suddenly turn said blobbers into something that derived out of them? Again, you're speaking pure propaganda that's just... well, utterly retarded.

In answer to your loaded question of why bother with alternative approaches, well a good RPG already offers you thousands of alternative approaches to combat, they are all just combat variations. Adding a "bribe this one particular group of enemies" as an 'alternative' is exceptionally restrictive, because there's only one way you can bribe someone, that option has zero, read ZERO, alternatives to its playstyle and, in just being there, NEGATES the 1000s of possible combat 'alternatives' from a plethora of different character builds. Again, you're using propaganda speak by suggesting combat is non-alternative based when combat has unlimited 'alternative approaches' whereas bribing has zero alternatives.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

I don't think even in hyper-combat focused games all you do is fight-fight-fight, combat is broken up by looting, trading, character management, NPCs, walking around discovering stuff. What you've described is propaganda, nothing more. There has never been an RPG which has just been fight-fight-fight and that's all you do without a breather

Agreed. This "criticism" is basically a disguised way of saying "More story, less gameplay". IMO.

 

[IncendiaryDevice]

And the fucker just rated me retarded...

 

[I ASK INANE QUESTIONS]

I bet that when it came to PnP Guido was a very """"""""fun""""""""" guy to have in your party. Especially if you were the GM.

What is it with the oldtime designers being out of touch, anyway? You don't see it with entrepreneurs like Fargo - they're still pretty sharp. For most part.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

What is it with the oldtime designers being out of touch, anyway?

Guido is presenting an alternate opinion of how RPGs could be. He is very much "in touch" with that as he helped create a series of RPGs that still stand today as some of the best pen-and-paper style RPG video games ever made.

Calling him "out of touch" seems to me like a code word for saying he simply isn't going along with what everyone else is doing in modern RPGs. I don't see that as a bad thing at all, as it shows he is someone who thinks a bit differently than most. Plenty of room in the RPG world for various approaches, and more people like Guido developing RPGs would be a great thing, IMHO.

 

[CptMace]

I feel it's about time I finally confess my crime, for I too stole a piece of Guido's genius.
I went to take a shit about 15mins ago, and while I went all the way through the process, I had to bear the shame and culpability of my theft. Once I was finally done, I didn't feel any bit better about myself, as I was peeking one last time at Guido's genius before flushing it all away.

 

[Shinji]

Well, he's right about world reactivity though, not many games ackowledge the player's actions in the game world.

The first time I played Gothic 2, I was surprised that everyone around the player would get angry if you pulled your sword while around them, or would remember that you beat the crap out of them before. This is something that you don't see in any AAA RPG nowadays with 100x bigger budgets.

In Skyrim, you can beat the crap out of someone, go to jail, and go back and talk to the person as if nothing had happened, over and over again.

 

[Skittles]

So, general question: does DA:I have a dialogue system that compares favourably with TW3's? I haven't played it and I'm wondering if he has a point or not. Is it different from DA:O's?

 

[Sacred82]

Guido has some real issues. Thanks for posting that Infini.

He's certainly the hero we deserve.

 

[Severian Silk]

Guido writes a rambling manifesto about how much modern RPGs suck, but when it's time for him to choose a favorite he goes with Skyrim. Now we know for sure that he's a Codexer.

Nope. Codexer would say Fallout 4

Can you explain what is wrong with Fallout 4?

 

[Iznaliu]

If you're playing a game with combat worth avoiding because it's quality, then why are you avoiding it?
If you're playing a game with combat that you desperately want to avoid because it's crap, why are you playing that game?

Different enemies can be different, and one of the best feelings in games is tension, so you could have challenging combats that deplete your non-renewable resources, but enemies will only accept bribes above a certain randomly-generated amount, and some enemies may be more difficult to persuade than others.

If a developer wants to make a game where both combat and non-combat characters can enjoy the game equally then they'll be making two games in one, something that's highly prestigious, but vastly multiplied in complexity way beyond a simple doubling of workload, it's more of a multiplying increase of workload than a additional. Even Fallout, which is praised for its vast array of different approaches, still doesn't have a strictly cannon 'peaceful option'.

I'm advocating a few preset options such as 'bribe enemy', 'persuade enemy', and 'get the mage to charm the enemy' rather than unique dialogue and options for each enemy.

I get what you're saying though, in that it can add some flavour if... sometimes... you can choose an alternative to combat, however, at some point in the game you'll require combat, so what's putting you off combat in one place in the game but not the other? It's certainly not difficulty.

Enemies can vary in their difficulty and tediousness, and sometimes you may have limits (e.g. resources, time, money, health) that prompt you to try and avoid combat. Sometimes these choices can be non-obvious, but require player judgement

The more elements you put into non-combat approaches, such as stealth options, diplomatic options, bribing options and all the etc, the more you motivate the player to take the path of least resistance, especially if the rewards are equal (If the rewards are not equal then why would someone gimp themselves before the next, even harder fight). If you alter the combat too much, like having a stealth character pre-paring a trap (like a falling chandelier or whatever), then you're moving into adventure game puzzle territory.

Non-combat options can have their own risk (e.g. chance of failure), and prerequisites (e.g. skills, money, items)

Much as I welcome alternative ideas and out-the-box thinking and appreciate how much people bang on about these little 'extra' choices, the first and foremost element of any RPG is going to be combat, unless the game is, from the ground up, a non-combat 'talky' RPG in its entirety, and encouraging someone to 'improve' a combat game by adding non-combat options is, IMO, inherently retarded. In the long-view.

A good RPG is about managing and maintaining resources through a variety of encounters, not just taking each encounter seperately. Sometimes that can be made better by offering options to avoid combat, as otherwise the game is effectively linear.

 

[Iznaliu]

Can you explain what is wrong with Fallout 4?

RPGs as a genre are fundamentally about choice. Fallout 4's choices are illusory and meaningless, making it a poor imitation of an RPG. It is like buying a car, but getting a toy car.

 

[kris]

Didn't he also write an article or a blogpost complaining how Shadow of Mordor stole his ideas or something?

He also says Sawyer stole his name "Deadfire" for Poe2.

Everyone is a thief of his genius ideas.

Reposting

At least four names, two on persons and two on cities that I came up with in my PnP days I later found in fantasy literature and those sure weren't generic-sounding name consisting of two of the most overused words in fantasy.

most interestingly the starting city/country in my world was named "Sendarien", when I later picked up Eddings "the Belgariad" I was surprised to see that the starting city/country was named exactly the same (swedish print, it was named Sendaria in English print). I never accused him of stealing

 

[LESS T_T]

Guido Henkel moans about modern AAA RPGs while conveniently (and admittedly) leaving out recent "retro" CRPGs: http://www.gamasutra.com/blogs/Guid...w_recipe_for_the_roleplaying_game_formula.php

Oh, the comment section is booming, along with developers of the cancelled The Dark Triad: Conspiracy (remember that?) and Archmage Rises.

Archmage Rises does, indeed, seem like a project to keep an eye on. It will be interesting to see how all their plans pan out and how engaging the end result will be. Right now it all still feels very static in terms of actual gameplay, but that may change, of course, as the development progresses.

I still disagree and I think we are talking about two different things. Of course, you cannot match a human GM. That was never my posit. But we can create mechanics that are more responsive and more receptive than what we currently have. There is absolutely nothing preventing anyone from doing that. In fact, I have a conceptual solution for it here on my hard drive, and it is not beyond the possible—not even remotely. All I need is a game project to put it into practice.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Someone please give Guido money to design a new RPG.

 

[Skittles]

Someone please give Guido money to design a new RPG.

Why? I'll get the same game if I give it to Bethesda.

 

[Deleted Member 16721]

Why? I'll get the same game if I give it to Bethesda.

Huh? I'm talking about letting him design an RPG without limitations. Unfortunately, Deathfire's Kickstarter failed but he really should try again at some point.

 

[Skittles]

Why? I'll get the same game if I give it to Bethesda.

Huh? I'm talking about letting him design an RPG without limitations. Unfortunately, Deathfire's Kickstarter failed but he really should try again at some point.

Sorry for being unclear. I'm just butthurt about:

An approach that is much more in line with roleplaying sentiments is that found in The Elder Scrolls: Skyrim, where the character has (invisible) attributes that increase through usage and translates them into potential skill advancements. You still have to deal with the clutter of twenty unrelated skill trees, but at the very least, the game really invites you to use skills and grow them through play. (In fact, Skyrim is the game that has, perhaps, created the most roleplaying-like experience in any CRPG to date on numerous levels.)

In other words, my takeaway from the article is that "a more believable Skyrim" is what Henkel would aim for if he had a budget.

 

[Glop_dweller]

In other words, my takeaway from the article is that "a more believable Skyrim" is what Henkel would aim for if he had a budget.

I liked him on Matt Chat, but I would not like a game planned as "a more believable Skyrim".

 

[Ismaul]

Fucking Guido. You want to give the guy a chance but it's like he doesn't want to let you.

The "new recipe" is the most abused shitty recipe that Beth has been doing forever.

I get the feeling he's trying to apply for a job, but doesn't really want it.

 

[Ismaul]

In Witcher 3: Wild Hunt, for example, dialogues are really just window dressing...
Dragon Age: Inquisition, on the other hand, has a more complex approach...