Reputation done right.

[Kz3r0]

Until now reputation has always been a cosmetic addition for the overinflated ego of the player, but seriously, who's going to trust an absolute stranger as usually happens in RPGs?
It would make more sense that before people will put their fate in your hands you should have already proven yourself in some way, and with a better reputation more rewarding quests will be available.
Also with a very bad reputation must be possible that certain areas will be off limits, and should also be possible to be arrested, and having bounty-hunters coming after your head.
Your thoughts?

 

[oscar]

One thing that bugs me is how do people know that you killed that travelling merchant in the wilderness and stole all his stuff? You ought to be able to be a dick but still have a good reputation if you're smart about it.

 

[Kron]

One thing that bugs me is how do people know that you killed that travelling merchant in the wilderness and stole all his stuff? You ought to be able to be a dick but still have a good reputation if you're smart about it.

 

[Kz3r0]

It was already discussed in other threads, obviously you can try to conceal your evil deeds while having contacts with the underworld, in this case it would be interesting to create quests that will rise your reputation while making enemies that can expose or blacmail you.
Failed quests and the way you perform them should affect your reputation too.

 

[CreamySpinach]

GTFO of this topic. You bitches should be posting in mine. Also to answer the OP, just fucking program. You could do these calculations so fucking fast.

The only reason this topic could stay open is if you actually tell us you will make a game with your reputation idea. BUT MUTHA FUCKA, YOU DON'T NEED TO MAKE A GAME TO TEST YOUR IDEA.

FUCK. you could, but don't fucking trick your other lazy codex friends that these sort of ideas aren't a dime a dozen.

 

[SoupNazi]

It annoyed the fuck out of me in New Vegas when I killed a patrol of Powder Gangers and I received infamy with that faction. I understand with factions like the NCR where theoretically they could communicate it unless I killed them all very quickly, but with more primitive factions it was really annoying.

Otherwise, the game did what the OP mentioned fairly well. Factions won't let you do some quests if you're not at least fairly liked by them (I recall the NCR in Camp McCarran or whatever the airport camp is called won't let you engage in most of their quests unless you're above neutral standing with them), and some areas are off limits (i.e. you'll get shot at) if the faction that's controlling the area hates you.

You also get "bounty-hunters" - well really just elite troops of the factions - sent after you occasionally if you piss them off even more.

 

[Kz3r0]

Seems that New Vegas is real incline then.

 

[Kraszu]

It annoyed the fuck out of me in New Vegas when I killed a patrol of Powder Gangers and I received infamy with that faction. I understand with factions like the NCR where theoretically they could communicate it unless I killed them all very quickly, but with more primitive factions it was really annoying.

On other hand the game would be too forgiving if you could kill anybody as long as nobody would see you doing it, AI will not do the investigation.

 

[SoupNazi]

Admittedly that is a good point - and New Vegas itself is already too forgiving as I'm pretty sure you can kill everyone in the entire game except for the [essential] tagged NPCs and still finish it with relative ease. Still, in some cases (two Powder Gangers in a small camp, NCR troops in a very remote camp, Brotherhood scout on the surface when the rest of the chapter is hidden in the underground bunker) it just gets very annoying. Also, I can't imagine it would be all that hard to just flag some NPCs with an extra tag that will make it clear to the game that if you kill them, nobody will ever know. It wouldn't be the perfect solution but it sounds relatively easy to implement and would certainly be better than what we have now.

 

[Erebus]

Mind you, having an awful reputation should also have positive consequences, such as making it easier to intimidate people.

 

[Kz3r0]

Well you should also consider the stranger effect, if people got killed or robbed usually the first suspect is always someone newly arrived in town.
Also should be apparent to anyone that such feats as killing a powerful mage or a mighty warrior, or breacking into an impregnable keep can be done only by few people, and if you are the only one around capable of such feats that will surely arise suspicion.

 

[Kraszu]

Admittedly that is a good point - and New Vegas itself is already too forgiving as I'm pretty sure you can kill everyone in the entire game except for the [essential] tagged NPCs and still finish it with relative ease. Still, in some cases (two Powder Gangers in a small camp, NCR troops in a very remote camp, Brotherhood scout on the surface when the rest of the chapter is hidden in the underground bunker) it just gets very annoying. Also, I can't imagine it would be all that hard to just flag some NPCs with an extra tag that will make it clear to the game that if you kill them, nobody will ever know. It wouldn't be the perfect solution but it sounds relatively easy to implement and would certainly be better than what we have now.

Still there isn't many people in FO:NV who could kill those NPC, and each fraction can have some intelligence on other fractions movement so you will be the main suspect with no alibi, and you could been seen in populate place long ago to get to the Camp, and kill NPCs. Then they could find you search you for missing loot, and if there is something missing ask merchants if you had sold it to them. Hah they could actually program NPC to say you all of that, and you would get -reputation then, not for killing but for being a main suspect, for killing there would be a bigger penalty.

 

[Kraszu]

Mind you, having an awful reputation should also have positive consequences, such as making it easier to intimidate people.

That should be separated, you can be loyal to your guild, those that give you quest, and pay for them, and have little nerves for anybody else.

 

[zeitgeist]

To do this properly, you'd have to implement at least a basic model of NPC social interaction, and dissemination of information through NPC->NPC communication.

For example: you kill a guy from faction X, NPC Y sees this, and how he has this information, and can choose to divulge it to someone from faction X or not. Or, they share this information with NPC Z, who informs faction X of it for personal gain. Or sits on it and blackmails you through NPC Q. Or writes it in a diary that is read by NPC N. Or, you just kill NPC Y preemptively.

So essentially you need two things: the ability for NPCs to hold and share information about the gameworld (including the player character), and naturally occurring opportunities for NPCs to do so (so, in other words a simulation of a "living" word on some level at least). As far as I know, this hasn't been attempted on a significant scale in any game yet. Would love to hear any examples Codex knows of, if I'm wrong.