Cheat my way into high replay value

[Rabie 39]

I'm sure most people who enjoy the creativity and customization of the RPG Maker Engines know what the 'choose your own adventure' style books are.  They are similar to video games because of the interaction with the story, but different because aside from the base decisions the actions were written out for me to enjoy.  It is an intuitive cross between gaming and literature.  I would call them books for the excuse to be "reading", but consider them games for my own entertainment.

 

They had a unique feel that was different from a video game; I wasn't constantly being bogged down with challenges and monsters.  Each 'leg' of the adventure did the work of the creativity and imagination.  All I had to do was make the choice and flip to page X.  My allowance of laziness while still being interactive was as attractive as the stories were.

 

Perhaps I was so interested in them because of all the potential outcomes; each decision led me down a path which either dead ended as a "game over" kind of result, or continued to slightly alter the events resulting in an alternate ending.  This got me thinking.

 

Many games have alternate endings, generally these are the result of choices being run through algorithms and spitting out a movie file which explodes just before the credits roll changing little more than who the main character kills or falls in love with.  There are a handful of games which exemplify my idea already (such as Mass Effect, Dragon Age, Far Cry, Dragon's Dogma, and Persona 4) however I want to take a shot at making it my own, and a little more dynamic.

 

Well, recently I have been writing a story.  It isn't lengthy, because I ended up re-writing it a few times.  As you can predict, this is because I want to give that feel of the 'choose-your-own-adventure' book.  However I think I've found a way of using it more as replay value in a game instead of making the entire game a visual novel with the 'choose-your-own-adventure' spin.

 

I want to give the player a new level of control over the game.  This isn't to say I won't be doing any work as the game's designer/developer/writer/please help me.  I intend to make the game write itself as the player makes choices.  Commonly decision based adventure results in open-world/sand-boxing the entire game.  I don't want to make a free roam game, I just want the player to feel alive within the game.

 

Allow me to give an example:

Each route is an example of a pathway which can be taken to complete the objective, or attempt to do so.

Route 1:

• PLAYER CHOICE:  The player embarks during the night to give the tactical surprise advantage.
  • RESULT:  As they draw near, they see no campfire, no guards, and hear a cacophony of manly snores emanating from the campsite.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  Upon their arrival the player decides to step through the trees and set their campsite ablaze.
  • RESULT:  Bandits come screaming out of flaming tents, half dressed, furious, and most weaponless.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party decides not to jump in to a fire and waits instead for the Bandits to deal with the fire.
  • RESULT:  The bandits with their lack-lust wits soak all their materials in attempts to extinguish the fire.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  Once the fires are extinguished and darkness returns to the campsite, the party leaps from tree-branches and shrubs to take advantage of the weakened and flustered bandits.
  • RESULT:  Some bandits run for the hills screaming while others take revenge on the party of attackers.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party lures the bandits away from their campsite and across a bridge.  Before the bandits make it across, the party disables the bridge and the bandits fall into the lake monster's grasp.
  • RESULT:  The lake monster is quite glad to have so much human flesh at it's disposal, and once it chases down the last morsel of bandit, it thanks the party by allowing them to return across the lake peacefully.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party returns to the abandoned campsite to claim any valuables left behind.
  • RESULT:  The party finds plenty of valuables and a note entailing the Bandit leader's plan to move camp to a nearby cave during the winter.

 

 

 

Route 2:

• PLAYER CHOICE:  The player embarks during the night to give the tactical surprise advantage.
  • RESULT:  As they draw near, they see no campfire, no guards, and hear a cacophony of manly snores emanating from the campsite.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  Upon their arrival the player decides to run charging head-long into the camp.
  • RESULT:  Bandits are rudely awakened and jump out of tents weapons in hand to meet the invading party.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party attacks immediately.
  • RESULT:  The bandits regroup and overwhelm the party.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party flees the camp.
  • RESULT:  The bandits chase the party out, forcing them across a bridge.  While the party is crossing the bridge, the Bandits collapse it.  The party falls into the lair of a vicious lake monster.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party battles the lake monster, and once victorious emerge from the lake.
  • RESULT:  The bandits are gone, most likely returned back to their camp while the party escaped the grasp of the lake monster.

 

 

 

Route 3:

• PLAYER CHOICE:  The player embarks during the day for the sake of vision.
  • RESULT:  On the way to the Bandit camp, they spot a small trail leading up towards a plateau.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party follows the trail.
  • RESULT:  A few malevolent forest creatures delay their progress until they reach an overhang above the bandit camp.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  Taking advantage of the birds eye view, the party studies the campsite and plans to initiate a battle by raining boulders and arrows onto the camp before descending to finish up the job.
  • RESULT:  A Bandit spots the players, but it is too late as the sky blackens with a storm of boulders and arrows.  Most of the campsite is destroyed, and what little is left of the Bandits attempts to flee with their possessions.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party allows the few Bandits to escape in exchange to salvage goods from the mostly destroyed campsite.
  • RESULT:  The party finds plenty of valuables and a note entailing the Bandit leader's plan to move camp to a nearby cave during the winter.

 

 

 

 

 

Route 4:

• PLAYER CHOICE:  The player embarks during the day for the sake of vision.
  • RESULT:  The party is halted at the entrance to the camp and demanded to leave all their possessions before they continue.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party claims they wish to join the bandits.
  • RESULT:  The party is laughed at by the guard until he realizes by their facial expressions that they mean it.  The guard summons an important looking character.  The man identifies himself as the leader.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party leader persuades the bandit leader to let them in peacefully.
  • RESULT:  The Bandits gather to witness the event.  The leader insists that each party member participate in a blood oath swearing their loyalty to him.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party co-operates until the ceremony is over.  Just as the leader shows his back to the party a party member leaps and slays the leader.
  • RESULT:  The Bandit camp erupts in fury as the leader is slain.  Bandits are caught off guard by the attack and left mostly defenseless.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party battles their way around the camp until each Bandit is confirmed dead or surrendered.
  • RESULT:  The camp is free to scour.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party searches the campsite for valuables.
  • RESULT:  The party finds plenty of valuables and a note entailing the Bandit leader's plan to move camp to a nearby cave during the winter.
• PLAYER CHOICE:  The party drags the submissive Bandits to the village for their lawful punishment at the terms of the officials.

 

 

 

There are still more possibilities, limited only by the developers' creativity and anticipation.  Also, each complete route is a result of the combined player choice set.  A player may decide half-way through a route to switch things up and cross over onto a similar route at a common decision.

 

All of the events marked PLAYER CHOICE are unique decisions and they are each their own idea.  After each result, the player can make any number of choices limited only by their imagination, eye for possibility, and my personal creative thinking.  I would be required to think up of everything the player might decide to do, and make them as possible and equally entertaining as I can, but would it not be worth it?

 

As I have no graphic options, the setting is currently in a medieval land, something between a peninsula and an off-coast Island.  The example system of events and choices is actually a leg of the story.  I intend to make the entirety of the game as comical as possible, instead of a very serious toned story.

 

Please give feedback, I need a wide audience of approval before I even attempt something this deep and time consuming.  It would also increase the speed at which I embark on this project.  I decided to post this in the Theory and Ideas sub-forum because there isn't so much to go on yet to give it a proper project blueprint, only the story and style.

 

On a final note, if this project lifts off and gets anywhere into development, I'll need an artist.  Just letting you know, I'm dreadful with art.  My forte is in Music, Story-writing, character development, game design, mapping, testing, event making, and somewhat scripting.

 

Thanks in advance, and I'll do my best to stay as dedicated to this project as you are excited about it, meaning the more excited you are, the harder I'll work to make it as good as it can be.

 

EDIT:  Removed the suggested smiley reply
EDIT:  Added more routes of decisions.

Edited May 17, 2013 by Rabie

[+ Titanhex 284]

These kinds of games, when used with a visual engine, have a lot more potential. But be weary. More player choice means more branches, which means more content. Each branch can exponentially raise the content the game uses. It also decreases the amount of content a player might see on each play through. In this way, you have to make sure replayability is a focus.

 

If you're looking for a name for this game genre, so that you might find examples, look for games termed as "Rogue-likes"

These are games that gave you a lot of freedom and a chance to stumble around. They use a lot of random generators, and the player can make a lot of choices by simply looking around the environment.

I'm working on a rogue-like design as well for one of my many projects. I found a pretty good layout to mimic that simplifies the graphics and design. It may or may not be what you're looking for.

Check out Final Fantasy Worlds, an RMVX game. I enjoyed it and found it interesting. Particularly how it handled the graphics and gameplay. It needed and still needs a lot of work, but it's a great starting place for creating a similar game.

 

 

The side-view graphics simplify the game while leaving a lot of potential for exploration.

 

Still if you want to imitate a game and stay true to the top-down aspect, you can try imitating say the Exile or Avernum series by Spiderweb Software. Great examples of Rogue-likes I enjoyed when I was younger.

 

By using a Rogue-Like design you keep the gameplay fresh. You can allow the player a lot of room and freedom. You can also generate your own story and instead of being forced by text to determine how it goes, you can use visual communication to ensure the player knows what options he has and considers them.

 

If you're not experienced with the RPG Maker software you can work side-by-side with me on my own Roguelike and I'll allow you complete use of the end engine and the graphics I create once the Roguelike is done.

[magic2345 252]

The first thing that came to mind when seeing all those player choices was Conditional Branches and lot and lots of switches. Its a great idea, but personally, when I finish a game, I'm not the sort of person who would play it again just to see the choices. This is unless you have game-changing choices, for example: "the choice to become a fighter or a mage".

 

Oh, also, when making the choices, be careful not to contradict the character's personality. For example, a person with pride and honor wouldn't burn the campsite and would rather just fight them head on or challenge them to a duel or something.

 

To be honest though, I'm looking forward to your game because of the way you write. 

[estriole 326]

nice idea. but will require lots of work. better to jot the choices and result down. then....

you need to draw the flowchart on the choices. it also would be great if with different choice could meet at certain 'page' but with different result

ex:

player choose to go to the forest. many more choices. then given choice that one of the choice could lead the player to a dark cave

player choose to go to the mountain. in that place he found some weapon. and after more choice taken. will be given choice that one of the choice lead the player to a dark cave.

 

if player goes to forest and then later go to dark cave. he will die when the monster inside the cave attack. game over

if goes to mountain and obtain weapon. he will slay the monster and gain another quest item. which will help tackling another path.

 

and if you make it in the form of game. player cannot cheat by peeking the page before making decision. (sometimes i do that )

[vladimirsan 3]

Just a few thoughts out of my mind....

As you said, the main challenge there would be that all the major paths are equally enjoyable to a player. Another challenge would choose a manageable number of branches, the paths can (and will) grow exponentially and if in the end they lead to 2-4 predetermined scenarios the player may just...rage.

I would be interested in a game like that but I do think that It's kind of the holy grail of digital narrative. Go for it though!

Edited May 3, 2013 by vladimirsan

[Jonnie91 1,149]

Just to pop in here and mention that you MUST NOT just reply with a smiley....It's classed as spam...so please don't ask people to do so in future

 

Away from that, I love games that are about choices. All of my projects have some aspect of choice involved What you have to avoid doing is putting in an OVERLOAD of choices. There is a fine balance, if you make a player choose something every 5 minutes, it will get repetitive and boring, unless you find new and interesting ways of doing it. 

[+ Titanhex 284]

Yeah choice is a difficult medium in games. Too much and you're overwhelming the player. Too little and you're confining them.

 

You're essentially going with the guided sandbox design from what I can tell. Clearly there's support for these kinds of games so I'm eager to get to work on my own.

 

Just to let you know don't focus on the narrative as much as the technical aspects. In this kind of game the technical design actually influences the narrative, which is different from your standard design flow for RPGs.

 

Once again follow the design of the roguelike and consider my offer.

[Rabie 39]

Sorry for the delayed reply, but I wanted to wait for a few replies before I posted more.

 

Also, i fell asleep yesterday right after school and slept until 10 this morning, so I got on right after breakfast.

 

First:  In reply to some of your worries/comments.  (I edited out anything that wasn't relevant to my response)

If you're looking for a name for this game genre, so that you might find examples, look for games termed as "Rogue-likes"

These are games that gave you a lot of freedom and a chance to stumble around. They use a lot of random generators, and the player can make a lot of choices by simply looking around the environment.

...

If you're not experienced with the RPG Maker software you can work side-by-side with me on my own Roguelike and I'll allow you complete use of the end engine and the graphics I create once the Roguelike is done.

Thanks, I didn't know there was a classification for this until you mentioned it.  I'll be sure to look into it.

...

Also, thank you very much for the offer, but I consider myself quite familiar with the engine.  I would however love the chance to take a look around yours when you're done.  

 

The first thing that came to mind when seeing all those player choices was Conditional Branches and lot and lots of switches. Its a great idea, but personally, when I finish a game, I'm not the sort of person who would play it again just to see the choices. This is unless you have game-changing choices, for example: "the choice to become a fighter or a mage".

...

Oh, also, when making the choices, be careful not to contradict the character's personality. For example, a person with pride and honor wouldn't burn the campsite and would rather just fight them head on or challenge them to a duel or something.

I don't mean to disagree with your personal opinion, but I think you misinterpreted what I meant.  If this game is finished to the specifications I have ready for it, then the only similarities between  each play-through will be key events like the initial conditions, major plot way-points (even these may be different), and some elements in the ending.  I intend for the player to be a variable in game, able to change at any moment the player intends to.

 

As for the character's personality... I know it's frowned upon, but this is going to end up being a mute hero, but only because you ARE the character.  Your actions depict the character's personality.  The only reason an action would contradict the player's personality is when you do something you wouldn't normally do.  Otherwise the hero could be anything from a loyal goody-two shoes to a deviant trouble-maker.

 

you need to draw the flowchart on the choices. it also would be great if with different choice could meet at certain 'page' but with different result

...

player cannot cheat by peeking the page before making decision. (sometimes i do that )

This is almost exactly what I meant by feeling alive within the game, and I will be flow-charting like no one's business.  Only see my next major post for what I meant by "any decision can be made at any time".

 

I might just release the decision flowchart as a walk-through/cheat-sheet if I ever finish the game.  I'll credit you for the idea.

 

"the paths can (and will) grow exponentially and if in the end they lead to 2-4 predetermined scenarios the player may just...rage."

Haha, I was thinking about bringing up the Mass Effect 3 rage event, but decided not to, but because you brought it up, know that I realize how frustrating that would be, and in my next major post you will see how I intend to avoid this.

 

Just to pop in here and mention that you MUST NOT just reply with a smiley....It's classed as spam...so please don't ask people to do so in future

Thanks for reminding me, I removed that bit.

 

Second:  I'll be making an example flowchart of any in game moment for a more detailed look on what I meant on the player feeling alive in the game.

 

Third:  To some of your dismay, the ending of the game will not be so dependent on your actions.  The entertainment of the game is to come primarily from the game's response to your actions.

 

Fourth:  However, this isn't to say that the ending will be the same no matter what you do, or some specific ending.

 

Everyone who graduates high school (in america) ends up in some auditorium/stage/gym at the end wearing a cap and gown with a diploma in their hand.  That isn't what makes it so rewarding.  The reward is your battle to that point, how you handled everything thrown at you, and the experiences you had all the way through.  I don't mean for this to turn out as a moral discussion, nor do i mean to quote miley cirus, but I believe in the value that it isn't the end that matters, but the journey to it.  That is the current theme to my game.  Stick close for the post on my flow-charting.

[Ocedic 249]

Choice that affects narrative is highly overrated in games. There's a reason why people have enjoyed plays, books and movies long before games ever existed (and still do for that matter.)

 

Also, 'replay value' is a very archaic term/concept. It was important back in the day when games were meant to last, especially arcade games in which you wanted to generate revenue by getting repeat business. Now, however, less and less people are even finishing a game once let alone booting it up again to replay it:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/08/17/finishing.videogames.snow/index.html

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=417616

 

I'm not saying replayability is a bad thing. In fact, my current project is a roguelike designed to be replayable. But choice/replay value can (and often does) dilute what should be a tight, focused narrative and experience. I'd rather play a short 5 hour game with a solid story that grips me from beginning to end than a 15 hour one with lots of uninteresting choices and a modular ending that makes me feel like none of it mattered.

 

For a good example of choice done right, look at Dragon Age: Origins.

[Rabie 39]

Choice that affects narrative is highly overrated in games. There's a reason why people have enjoyed plays, books and movies long before games ever existed (and still do for that matter.)

 

Also, 'replay value' is a very archaic term/concept. It was important back in the day when games were meant to last, especially arcade games in which you wanted to generate revenue by getting repeat business. Now, however, less and less people are even finishing a game once let alone booting it up again to replay it:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/08/17/finishing.videogames.snow/index.html

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=417616

 

I'm not saying replayability is a bad thing. In fact, my current project is a roguelike designed to be replayable. But choice/replay value can (and often does) dilute what should be a tight, focused narrative and experience. I'd rather play a short 5 hour game with a solid story that grips me from beginning to end than a 15 hour one with lots of uninteresting choices and a modular ending that makes me feel like none of it mattered.

 

For a good example of choice done right, look at Dragon Age: Origins.

Choice based narration/story are not overrated as can be seen with great examples such as Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Elder Scrolls, and Fallout.

 

Replay Value is an old concept, but not archaic at all.

There are players who do not quality replay value at all, and would rather play a good 2 hour campaign and be done with it.

There are players who wouldn't buy the game unless they know it will last even after they have beaten it one or more times.

Generally, the more dedicated players tend to be the ones who stick out for the long re-playable games, whereas players with a low attention span simply get tired of the game system quickly and want to move on to something else simply because it's different.

 

An 80% game completion rate is severely high.

Anything above 20% is also great.  You have to take into account how many players quit a game because of the sheer difficulty it presents late game.  Also consider how many short-attention-spanned players are counted in that score, who were told the game was great by a more dedicated player and jumped out after 40 min. because it wasn't for them, or didn't fire laser beams out of their computer screens.  I could understand the viewpoint being relevant if this was a business, however that is not the case.  Once you relieve the overwhelming proportion of unmotivated gamers and calculate completion rate it may be more attractive.

 

I pointed out already that my project would turn out to be a shorter game as opposed to a typical commercial RPG.  As a matter of fact it seems to be less attractive for that reason.  Besides, the choices specified in game are more often actions not dialog options, even I consider dialog options dull.  The choices are made by spur of the moment actions (keep your 'Z' finger at the ready).  Such as pushing stones off cliffs, running out of view of enemies, or investigating strange or out of place objects.  Consider it a very interactive environment.

 

If what you were doing was trying to demotivate me, then please don't; I have enough trouble staying true to a project without that dragging me down.

Especially considering the hypocrisy... you aren't helping, nor did you really give any proper feedback on my idea.  My idea is specifically designed to break the habit of boring choice-based games which offer small decisions as cheap gimmicks so they can categorize themselves.  My idea is to make the game-play revolve around choice.

 

EDIT:  Also, I call BS on the Red Dead Redemption statistic, everyone I know who played it finished that, including me.  I didn't even buy the game.  I just borrowed it from a friend.

Edited May 5, 2013 by Rabie

[magic2345 252]

I don't mean to disagree with your personal opinion, but I think you misinterpreted what I meant.  If this game is finished to the specifications I have ready for it, then the only similarities between  each play-through will be key events like the initial conditions, major plot way-points (even these may be different), and some elements in the ending.  I intend for the player to be a variable in game, able to change at any moment the player intends to.

 

As for the character's personality... I know it's frowned upon, but this is going to end up being a mute hero, but only because you ARE the character.  Your actions depict the character's personality.  The only reason an action would contradict the player's personality is when you do something you wouldn't normally do.  Otherwise the hero could be anything from a loyal goody-two shoes to a deviant trouble-maker.

 

Ahh I see, so the choices will just be in specific places. I thought you meant there would be choices in everything, like sidequests and stuff.

 

About the hero's choices, maybe you should limit them. For example, if earlier you picked a "good" choice, then the next choices won't have extreme "bad" choices and vice versa. If you are able to freely choose, be sure to make realistic reactions for the party. I mean, who wants to be with the hero when he doesn't act like one.

[Bunni89 85]

Definately gotta agree with magic. It'd be a little weird if the overall plot progress doesn't change at ALL despite what you do at each choice.. especially if it means that your character is getting into heroic situations even if they've always been a jerk and vice versa.

I'd reccommend something like a variable tracking any personality traits that could be relevant- at its basic level you could just record goodness/evilness. And then even if the basic story outline is the same, the individual bits could change depending on your morality level. (Like maybe a heroic character volunteers to go on a quest for the sake of goodness but a bad guy only does it cos there's a big reward or the king will pardon him of his crimes if he does this)

Maybe even have the choices slightly change? i know it'd definately help verisimilitude if I didn't constantly keep getting all the goody goody choices as a bad guy or the truly vile ones despite being a hero. (Wouldn't it be weird if a choice popped up saying "Murder the whole family and steal the house" when your character's never hurt a fly? They wouldn't even think of that!)

Something like... once you reach a certain point the generic choices are:

>Rob man >Hug man >Ignore man

but if you're evil they change to

>Kill man >Rob man >Ignore man

and if you're a saint then you get

>Hug man > Ignore man >Ask man to join the party

...or something. But it'd be have to be necessary to make sure there's always at least one choice that allows you to change morality- in this example the Ignore option would be that one and would act differently each time. When neutral it does nothing, when good it makes you more evil (cos you didn't try and be nice), when evil it makes you more good (because you avoided hurting him) Basically make it so that things change a little based on morality but make sure not to shoehorn people into a lack of choice because of it.

More examples of how to keep morality choices while framing them within morality! Maybe you can always choose to rescue a guy from being sacrificed to a monster, but your motivation depends on how good you are? Like the bad guy just wanted to kill a monster and doesn't care about the guy at all so he leaves him tied up and walks off XD But the guy still escapes on his own and still thanks you for saving him, so he still appears later on and tries to join the party.

[Rabie 39]

Ahh I see, so the choices will just be in specific places. I thought you meant there would be choices in everything, like sidequests and stuff.

 

About the hero's choices, maybe you should limit them. For example, if earlier you picked a "good" choice, then the next choices won't have extreme "bad" choices and vice versa. If you are able to freely choose, be sure to make realistic reactions for the party. I mean, who wants to be with the hero when he doesn't act like one.

Nononono, choices would be everywhere, at all times.  Not necessarily choices which affect anything, just little choices, like whether or not to kick a man who is fishing on a pier into the lake.  Or whether or not to sacrifice a party member to save a small child trapped in the lair of some foul beast.  And how to do so.

...

You're right, it wouldn't make sense for the hero to completely change demeanor, but my idea revolves around total freedom; I want to give the player the ability to do whatever he/she wants at any point no restrictions.  This means that they could sacrifice a party member for the child then turn around and malevolently kick the fisherman into the lake and watch him drown.  As I mentioned earlier, I want the player to feel alive in the game.  Not by providing a sand-box, but by providing so much interaction and responses to interaction, that they can do whatever they please (however they will have to progress through my story eventually, if I didn't give them a story then I kind of would just be making a sand-box).

 

Definately gotta agree with magic. It'd be a little weird if the overall plot progress doesn't change at ALL despite what you do at each choice.. especially if it means that your character is getting into heroic situations even if they've always been a jerk and vice versa.

...

I'd reccommend something like a variable tracking any personality traits that could be relevant- at its basic level you could just record goodness/evilness. And then even if the basic story outline is the same, the individual bits could change depending on your morality level. (Like maybe a heroic character volunteers to go on a quest for the sake of goodness but a bad guy only does it cos there's a big reward or the king will pardon him of his crimes if he does this)

Maybe even have the choices slightly change? i know it'd definately help verisimilitude if I didn't constantly keep getting all the goody goody choices as a bad guy or the truly vile ones despite being a hero. (Wouldn't it be weird if a choice popped up saying "Murder the whole family and steal the house" when your character's never hurt a fly? They wouldn't even think of that!)

...

Something like... once you reach a certain point the generic choices are:

>Rob man >Hug man >Ignore man

but if you're evil they change to

>Kill man >Rob man >Ignore man

and if you're a saint then you get

>Hug man > Ignore man >Ask man to join the party

...or something.

...

But it'd be have to be necessary to make sure there's always at least one choice that allows you to change morality- in this example the Ignore option would be that one and would act differently each time. When neutral it does nothing, when good it makes you more evil (cos you didn't try and be nice), when evil it makes you more good (because you avoided hurting him) Basically make it so that things change a little based on morality but make sure not to shoehorn people into a lack of choice because of it.

More examples of how to keep morality choices while framing them within morality! Maybe you can always choose to rescue a guy from being sacrificed to a monster, but your motivation depends on how good you are? Like the bad guy just wanted to kill a monster and doesn't care about the guy at all so he leaves him tied up and walks off XD But the guy still escapes on his own and still thanks you for saving him, so he still appears later on and tries to join the party.

You have many good points, but you misunderstand my idea a little bit, allow me to respond to your entire reply in parts...

1. The main story-line is quite solid.  What does change about the story-line is everything relating to the player.  For instance the ending could be anything from you fighting the rebel army protecting the evil king so that he may rule the world then getting back stabbed by him and end up fighting him too, or you step aside to watch the battle unfold, and while surveying on a cliff you are surprised by some stragglers who take you to the evil king's prison where you can either escape for you life or break out and battle your way to the Final Boss.  So the game doesn't have to end the same, but everything that does not depend on you happens either way because you are the only variable.
2. I don't really want to implement a karma system in which the system can determine what you are allowed to do.  I do however plan to track everything the player does because after the credits I want to have a kind of flashback section where it tells the story of what you did.  So I understand your plight with the ability to do less heroic things, but I feel like it's a necessary evil to let the player truly feel free/alive in game. (Don't worry though, severe actions like murdering a family or beheading the king at your first meeting with him aren't even an option currently, they would break the story a little too much.  I'd have to punish the player some-how.)  EDIT:  I started to think about this, and putting the player through a few side quests to penalize their actions doesn't sound like a bad idea, punishment for those who deserve it.
3. The choices are not text based.  If you want to rob some-one, set your rogue party member as party leader and press the action button when adjacent to the person and behind them.  I have no idea why you would want to hug random people on the street.  But there isn't much option when interacting with NPCs; hopefully the ridiculous amount of environment interaction and situation decisions will make up for it.  I don't think it needs to make up for a boring system of NPC interaction.  Of course that doesn't mean you can't make dialog decisions, they just aren't the base of my idea, they're a side-effect of the idea.  EDIT:  Note, not everyone interact-able with can/will join your party.  You can even ask some people but they can't.
4. The main character is you.  Meaning that he doesn't speak his thoughts, they're your thoughts.  You know what your own thoughts are.  When approaching an enemy, the character doesn't throw out a "this is for the gold" or "this is for the good of mankind".  You think it.  The same situation you gave an example of could happen, but you wouldn't say anything, it would just be your decision to leave him tied up and fend for himself.  Nice example, I think that may have been what a lot of people are getting confused with my idea.  I isn't a matter of changing the "Hero's" decisions, it's all your decision, not some sprite on the screen who spits out one-liners at every blink of the eye.

EDIT:  Sorry for my wordiness everybody.  It just happens.  I'm still working on that flow charting concept so you can better understand how my idea will affect game play.  It may end up as a demo because I can't quite write it out.

Edited May 5, 2013 by Rabie

[Ocedic 249]

 

Choice that affects narrative is highly overrated in games. There's a reason why people have enjoyed plays, books and movies long before games ever existed (and still do for that matter.)

 

Also, 'replay value' is a very archaic term/concept. It was important back in the day when games were meant to last, especially arcade games in which you wanted to generate revenue by getting repeat business. Now, however, less and less people are even finishing a game once let alone booting it up again to replay it:

 

http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/gaming.gadgets/08/17/finishing.videogames.snow/index.html

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=417616

 

I'm not saying replayability is a bad thing. In fact, my current project is a roguelike designed to be replayable. But choice/replay value can (and often does) dilute what should be a tight, focused narrative and experience. I'd rather play a short 5 hour game with a solid story that grips me from beginning to end than a 15 hour one with lots of uninteresting choices and a modular ending that makes me feel like none of it mattered.

 

For a good example of choice done right, look at Dragon Age: Origins.

Choice based narration/story are not overrated as can be seen with great examples such as Dragon Age, Mass Effect, Elder Scrolls, and Fallout.

 

I already said DA:O is a good example of choice. As for the other games: Mass Effect with its infamous ending of 3 different colors that players complained made their choices moot? Fallout just plays different snippets of a video as an ending based on your choices, and it really wasn't about choices but rather freedom. No one has a quandary about whether or not they want to blow up the town or not. They're either the type of person who will or they won't. I don't play Elder Scrolls, but I actually stopped playing Skyrim after a few hours because the plot (and sideplots that you inevitably end up on) didn't grip me at all. Also, your quote below even describes choice based games as boring and full of small decisions/gimmicks. You know why that happens? Because choice is overrated but people think adding it makes it a better game.

 

Fact is, your resources are limited, especially time. You can spend it writing one awesome, coherent and memorable storyline or trying to write dozens or hundreds of branching paths. If you don't actually create meaningful choices that aren't there just for the sake of being choices, players will see through that. Adding choice for the sake of having choice is NOT good.

 

As for replay value, you can argue hypothetical all you want (you don't actually present any data to back up your claims as to why people don't finish games) but the truth is gamers these days have both less time and patience. You can try to label the majority of people as 'having low attention spans,' but the real reason is we have so many choices these days and not enough time. See below to see that the majority of gamers are above the age of 18, having responsibilities like jobs, school and life. And no matter your age, there are a plethora of games available at your fingertips. Especially when it comes to RPG Maker, if a player gets bored he'll just delete your game and play a new one if he wants to.

 

Source: arstechnica

 

And none of the semantics change the fact that people simply don't complete games, let alone replay them. That doesn't stop them from buying them.

 

If what you were doing was trying to demotivate me, then please don't; I have enough trouble staying true to a project without that dragging me down.

Especially considering the hypocrisy... you aren't helping, nor did you really give any proper feedback on my idea.  My idea is specifically designed to break the habit of boring choice-based games which offer small decisions as cheap gimmicks so they can categorize themselves.  My idea is to make the game-play revolve around choice.

 

This statement here baffles me to no end. You were posting here for input on this, yet you find it demotivating that I don't consider it the greatest god's gift to gaming? Were you just seeking praise and approval when you posted this? The reason I talked about choice in general is that your idea didn't stand out to me as doing anything particularly interesting, and ironically I saw it as exactly as you described other games. It also seemed to be the general mindset that you approached the project was that choice and replay value were things to aspire to. For example, your thread title is "cheat my way into high replay value" as if replay value is a divine quality of games. I'm not trying to be insulting, but your example of crossing through a bandit camp was pretty typical fare. There were no quandaries or choice tension. Things like pushing rocks off of cliffs or running out of view are just quick time events. That's a not a choice, unless you consider Mario jumping into a pit versus completing the level to be a choice.

 

And in general, if you find me to be a negative voice, well I only comment on what I'm given. Don't try to guilt me into being responsible for whether you tackle this project or not. You're an adult, either make it or don't. It seems like you are 100% committed to this idea either way, and based on how you reject any criticism in this thread from anyone, you were not looking for feedback but rather our unquestioning approval.

[Rabie 39]

@Ocedic:  Your feedback continues to have little to no relevance to my idea​.  Your arguments and -I'll admit, frustrating-opinions give less response to my idea concentrating more on the popularity of decision in video games.  I'd be glad to continue the quote responses via messages, but if you want to post here please keep it relevant to the topic.

 

 

Let me try to respond while remaining relevant...

It bothers me that you comment on my status:

Fact is, your resources are limited, especially time. You can spend it writing one awesome, coherent and memorable storyline or trying to write dozens or hundreds of branching paths. If you don't actually create meaningful choices that aren't there just for the sake of being choices, players will see through that. Adding choice for the sake of having choice is NOT good.

I mean are you peeking in my window O.O ?  (how you know I got no time?)  Just me joking, but on a more serious note, I've clarified more than enough in the topic and replies that my choices are NOT added for the sake of choice.  They are added because that is the game-play style.  The game is being designed to respond to the player, allowing them to feel free without just making a sand-box game with so much to do it becomes listless.

 

You referenced a quote of mine which you failed to provide, I didn't ever mean to generalize choice based games as being full of small decisions/gimmicks, and I apologize if I made it seem as such, please direct me to where I led to this misunderstanding so I can fix the issue.

Also, your quote below even describes choice based games as boring and full of small decisions/gimmicks. You know why that happens? Because choice is overrated but people think adding it makes it a better game.

In response, if this is truly how you feel then you should read my idea.  It is all about fixing the problems with what makes choice based games so (in your opinion) overrated.  Especially considering how many times I've clarified that I'm not just adding choices to improve game-play.

 

 

 

"Cheat my way into high replay value"  This is what I named my topic, because the idea I pose in the post may have a side-effect of provided replay value to the project, or any project based on that idea.  If it pleases you, consider it a slight joke.  Obviously you think lowly of replay value.

Still, I insist on replying to everything I find relevant or critical.  Be warned of my wordiness.

As for replay value, you can argue hypothetical all you want (you don't actually present any data to back up your claims as to why people don't finish games) but the truth is gamers these days have both less time and patience. You can try to label the majority of people as 'having low attention spans,' but the real reason is we have so many choices these days and not enough time. See below to see that the majority of gamers are above the age of 18, having responsibilities like jobs, school and life. And no matter your age, there are a plethora of games available at your fingertips. Especially when it comes to RPG Maker, if a player gets bored he'll just delete your game and play a new one if he wants to.

 

and

It also seemed to be the general mindset that you approached the project was that choice and replay value were things to aspire to. For example, your thread title is "cheat my way into high replay value" as if replay value is a divine quality of games.

I don't care about what you think the importance of replay value in a game is, because that's not feedback on my topic idea.  I do not provide statistics for my claim because statistics (especially those gathered from wide audiences intending to simulate the entire target) are often flawed.  Such as your provided Average Game Player Age (it counts anyone who plays any type of game on any computerized gaming device for at least 1 hour a week).  However in compliance with your side of the argument, you are right.  From experience and some quick research most reviewers/players here on the RM sites are post-high school through adult aged.  Still, I am not concentrating on how well my game markets, I only care that it provides the entertainment I intend for it to provide.  Even if that is for less than the length of the story, if it's fun while it lasts I'm more than satisfied.

 

 

I'm not trying to be insulting, but your example of crossing through a bandit camp was pretty typical fare. There were no quandaries or choice tension. Things like pushing rocks off of cliffs or running out of view are just quick time events. That's a not a choice, unless you consider Mario jumping into a pit versus completing the level to be a choice.

My example of crossing through the bandit camp was to show one of many many paths you could take through the same objective.  (If you stick around long enough for me to finish the darn flow-chart example/demo, it may clear up some mis-communication of the concept of my idea.)  They will not be presented as quick time events.  The quandaries will be focused on what you can think of (each option isn't a list in a message box, it's an object on the map, you have to think it up yourself) and if you think that was the most entertaining way to handle each respective situation.  Besides, Mario jumping into a pit is suicide.  Failing to run out of view or push a rock off a cliff will simply result in the player finding a different method to handle the situation.  Not game over.

 

 

And in general, if you find me to be a negative voice, well I only comment on what I'm given. Don't try to guilt me into being responsible for whether you tackle this project or not. You're an adult, either make it or don't. It seems like you are 100% committed to this idea either way, and based on how you reject any criticism in this thread from anyone, you were not looking for feedback but rather our unquestioning approval.

I'm sorry for bringing my feelings in to the response before, I only meant to show you that your response did not give feedback on my idea.  Instead it seemed entirely created to attack my motivation, providing little to no response to my idea.  In light of your second response, I'm grateful that you understand how much this idea means to me, as I am less committed to this after reading your responses than you claim I appear.  And if you have been taking all of my responses under a dark light then I apologize for your inconvenience.  I am NOT looking for unquestioning approval.  I am certainly NOT rejecting all criticism in this thread.  I am just very questioning on how relevant your 'feedback' is to my idea.  Which is why I continue to reject a good bit of your replies as criticism on my idea.

 

None of my responses were intended to insult you as none of yours were to insult me.  I only wish to communicate my dissatisfaction with your relevance to my idea.  I did take things a bit personally on your first reply, but only because I misinterpreted the structure of your criticism to demotivate me rather than criticize my idea.  I'm actually quite thankful for some of the things you've pointed out.  The part about my bandit camp example was more than relevant, and I'd like more feedback in that manner.  It's helped me understand what you (as the audience) sees in my idea.

 

Sorry for the lengthy post.

[magic2345 252]

Nononono, choices would be everywhere, at all times.  Not necessarily choices which affect anything, just little choices, like whether or not to kick a man who is fishing on a pier into the lake.  Or whether or not to sacrifice a party member to save a small child trapped in the lair of some foul beast.  And how to do so.

...

You're right, it wouldn't make sense for the hero to completely change demeanor, but my idea revolves around total freedom; I want to give the player the ability to do whatever he/she wants at any point no restrictions.  This means that they could sacrifice a party member for the child then turn around and malevolently kick the fisherman into the lake and watch him drown.  As I mentioned earlier, I want the player to feel alive in the game.  Not by providing a sand-box, but by providing so much interaction and responses to interaction, that they can do whatever they please (however they will have to progress through my story eventually, if I didn't give them a story then I kind of would just be making a sand-box).

 

I do see a problem with the "total freedom" thing. I'm gonna take one of your example, "whether or not to kick a man who is fishing on a pier into the lake."

 

First of all, kicking a person into a lake should and would have dire consequences. I think you have to have some kind of karmic system in place. The man you kicked will go around telling people about it, no?

Second, kicking a person into a lake, I'd have to say its weird for someone to even think that. Kind of an illogical choice.

 

BUT, if you do back it up with a story, it would make more sense.

[Rabie 39]

@magic2345:  You're right, he would go telling people.  I just don't want the karma system to get in the way of possibilities.  If you can think of doing it, I want it to be possible.  And that was illogical XD it was just an example.  Sorry if I have a disturbing imagination.

 

EDIT:  Would it be too much like a karma system if I stored all of the actions the player makes to switches and variables which determine result conversations/dialogues that may appear later.  Continuing my ridiculous example, say the fisherman denies you entry to his fishing shop later because of it and his family won't talk to you.  Just without the overriding karma points bogging you down everywhere you go.

Edited May 5, 2013 by Rabie

[magic2345 252]

Actually no, that isn't a karma system, and that's a good idea. You could even meet someone who hates the fisherman and applauds you for kicking him, lol. You can even make it that you can get a sidequest only if you kicked him.

 

...

 

I just realized I also have disturbing imagination. ._.

 

Anyways, just be sure that the choices affect something, that consequences does exist, be it some kind of reward or punishment.

[Rabie 39]

@magic2345:  ...choices affect something... consequences exist... crap, here comes the strike of event page glitches.  I still don't understand which conditions take higher priority in event pages, I'll have to go look that up.  I feel newbish again.  I'll be sure to add rewards for the more negative moral actions now, can't make having a disturbing imagination too useless.

[Bunni89 85]

Ocedic, not to be rude but I really think you're derailing and you shouldn't be free of criticism just because you're staff. The OP asked for feedback on how this idea would be done, i don't think he wanted "no I hate choices in GENERAL, don't do it at all". I mean what is the point of even making a thread explaining a big idea and discussing how to pull it off, if you're even CONSIDERING the idea of not doing it at all? it's blatantly obvious that the dude has already DECIDED to do his idea- if you's hate it no matter what, then you have no purpose here. However if you have suggestions about what might be bad about how he's pulling off the idea of choices and how he can improve then that is what he asked for and what would be useful.

If this was a general thread about whether choice or story is better then your input would be very helpful, but it isn't. Step back for a second and realise that you are basically saying "you shouldn't have made this thread at all, you shouldn't even have thought about any choice-based idea and I'm not even gonna bother looking at what your idea even is" So you're shutting down everything everyone is saying.

I like choices. People who like choices are here to discuss how to do choices. It is derailment to just say "no choices, my pie charts prove they suck". The majority's opinion doesn't matter because this is obviously a game made for the sandbox genre, where people who like the sandbox genre will play it. Nobody would say "we should stop making rpgs because FPS games are more popular".

I think you entirely and utterly misinterpreted what he was asking for help with.

I'd totally accept any sort of punishment the mods would wanna give me for this post, because it would be worth it :< I think I was fairly polite and I can't see why I'd be punished for just telling a mod that he or she is incorrect.

 

Phew, ok now that that is over...

Thanks for the clarification, Rabie! It sounds a lot cooler as a sandbox sort of thing, from the way you initially described it, it sounded like one of those standard rpgs with literal choice windows instead of a more flexible system. I was imagining a visual novel kind of thing XD

Gotta say I definately like the idea of dealing with stealing by shuffling the thief to the front of the party and using a special map ability on NPCs! I've always liked games where your party members have different ways of interacting with the map.

Storing actions as variables would be way better than a karma system, I only suggested karma as a sort of shortcut to that kind of thing. Many people use it just because it's easier to create a general "you are good/you are bad" variable than logging a character's exact actions and looking at them to determine things. If you managed to pull off something like that, then it'd be truly amazing!

And @ magic2345: I love the idea of the fisherman's enemy rewarding you XD Unusual unexpected consequences are always funny! Maybe something like there's another guy who you can rob, but it turns out you stole a pouch of jewels that HE stole from the king, so now you have the king's guards chasing you? And other sorts of things to catch you out :3

[Rabie 39]

@Bunni89:  Thanks for the support, but I've cleared things up with ocedic.  I think it was just a misunderstanding of the point of this thread.  On the other hand I think you understand what I mean by this idea really well.  But I wouldn't say it's sand-box.  I do want you to have a lot of options at any given moment, but they're all options on how to handle the situation.  I don't mean that you'll be strolling around town doing your stuff, you'll have an objective most of the time and the stuff you can do is limited to the environment.  If your environment is in a town, then sure you have all that town stuff you can do.  But it's more like an adventure game where you're set on a course motion with a basic waypoint and given the opportunity to make the story your own on the way.  And rarely you're given the opportunity to change the waypoint entirely, and only at each of these points can the entire story branch to an alternate motion.  Still working on this flowchart, but it's getting harder and harder to fit stuff in it.  Plus I'm doing it by hand so i'll have to scan it in eventually.

[+ Titanhex 284]

You dont get warns for arguing with or pointing out mod or staff, unless you're mod or staff. We do warn if what you're saying is directly hostile.

So you're in the clear, but you're also massively off-topic. If you disagree with Ocedics approach and must put something that long, please simply PM him instead, or Jonnie if its directly in relation to his staff position.

 

On topic, the highest numbered page takes priority if its conditions are met. And not every action must have consequence. Some things exist purely as mindless fun. But these things have long lasting values so don't overinvest in them. And make sure they're easily discerned from things that do result in consequence.

 

Also try to keep the results clear and intuitive. No one enjoys guessing. No one.

 

Also have you considered a journal that fills in based on the choices you've made to a situation? Could be really cool.

[Rabie 39]

@Titanhex:

Thanks for clarifying.

Also thanks for saving me some time in the tutorial section.

That's exactly what I mean by feeling alive in game.  Those small decisions which don't truly impact story but are just fun to do.

Of course there'll be plenty of involvement for the more intuitive decisions which have long lasting effects in game.

I'm half tempted to put a hint system in that turns on sparkles on the intractable objects.  However there would be so many sparkles flashing on and off around the screen that the player may feel obligated to investigate everything.  Perhaps this will make them play multiple files even at the same time just to check out all the options.  I'm starting to like that idea, but I'll definitely make it possible to turn the sparkles off and just work on your creativity. (and mine)

 

As for the journal, I'm not a good enough scripter to pull that off.  However I'll go to a script shop and see what I can do.  Something like an updating journal and stat page showing the amount of and type of decisions you've made, (like the bunnies murdered in Skyrim).  Just as a gag.  However I had already planned to highlight the main game decisions made throughout in a scrolling story that kind of re-tells the game the way you played it.

[+ Titanhex 284]

If you can retell it the way you played it why can't you journalize it the way you're currently playing it?

 

I know it wouldn't be hard to do via events. Easier via scripts tho. Would just have to event a menu.

[Rabie 39]

Because there's a scrolling text option in events.  The journal system would have to be scripted into the menu.  I'm a very novice scripter.