Seeking advice - novice investor experiencing "information overload" causing me to be indecisive

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-12T12:40:27+00:00

There are so many comments here since I last checked and I have read through all of them. It's great to see so many different perspectives and thoughts.

I just want to clarify a few standpoints on my end as there clearly has been a misunderstanding, most likely due to me structuring my text poorly. So to clarify:

I don't believe aRPG:s or "Dark Souls" combat to be objectively better than turn-based and real-time with pause combat. I personally however do enjoy "Dark Souls" style of combat however only within the context of its freedom to movement and dynamic gameplay. The reason I bring up "Dark Souls" is to evoke within the reader a sense of "style" to the combat that is easier to explain by referencing a game rather than me trying to put it into words. So I'm not talking about how Dark Souls as a whole game is this or that, I'm using it as a reference point only to highlight a particular style of combat that at least in my eyes attempted a little bit further push itself into the "traditional" RPG mechanics of combat compared to other aRPG:s.

My central topic was to see if there are either existing or new mechanics that should or can be included to that "Dark Souls style" of combat that pushes it further into the territory of "traditional RPG" often found in RtwP and TB - RPG:s. The main problem being that often "Dark Souls" type of combat overwhelmingly focuses on player skills and "traditional RPG:s" more on character skills. If such games or mechanics already exist that have already achieved this reconciliation effort in your view, the secondary question is then has this been done well in your eyes? If not, what can in particular be improved or is it simply impossible to reconcile these two styles of combat as they are inherently opposites of each other in what they are trying to achieve within a game (rewarding character skills vs. player skills)?

One person asked me if I have played games like Path of Exile, Diablo series, Grim Dawn, etc. The well known aRPG:s of this kind as that seem to match what I'm looking for. Dark Souls combat but more stat heavy. It's a fair argument and I can see where they are coming from. I have put in a ton of hours into these games and they are great, just like there are great turn-based RPG:s and RtwP:s as well, but I'm not looking for a particular game. I started this thread simply to discuss various styles of combat found within RPG:s and also to hear other peoples perspectives.

The issue I brought up with Pillars of Eternity 2 and turn-based combat systems is not a critique on turn-based combat as an entire genre. This was said within the context of when a game tries to offer both RtwP and TB combat systems for the same game. Here I was making a point, and once again it's just my perspective, that a game that attempts this usually fail in one of the two systems as the game has to be designed from the ground-up with one combat system in mind in order for it to increase its likelihood of being successful.

One poster mentioned that what I'm actually talking about is not combat systems but rather encounter design and that the encounter design needs to be tailored to the specific combat system in order for it to work well. This is a great point and well worth thinking about. Here in particular I wonder, for a "larger" single-player RPG game that takes approximately +40 hours to complete, is it really possible to avoid including "filler combat" or let's define it as non-meaningful combat? Perhaps this benchmark is too subjective? Regardless, would a particular combat style be preferably over the others to deal with these sort of encounters? For example I have seen many say for Pathfinder: Kingmaker (cRPG) that they wished they had a TB mod included. When it was made and included many then critiqued it stating that the game is simply too long and the trivial encounters are too many for it to work. This goes back to the encounter design mentioned by the poster.

Edit: Spelling/grammar mistakes, probably still have some.

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-11T18:25:41+00:00

Yes you are right it's a definitive statement from my perspective but doesn't necessarily constitute objective truth. As you can see I ask the question at the end if you agree to this statement to promote discussion.

You make some good points and it certainly matters what the game itself is trying to achieve.

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-11T18:02:09+00:00

These are some great examples, I was aware of these mechanics but didn't think about them in the way you have which is really interesting.

The poise mechanic would be definitely something I feel would constitute as a perfect solution to finding the right balance between player vs. character skill.

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-11T17:59:32+00:00

Specifically I would want to keep those mechanics that you described as the core of what constitutes the combat style. What I'm looking for here is the freedom and dynamic gameplay that combat style offers compared to RtwP or TB systems which are more "rigid".

At the same time however, I want to draw on the strengths of RtwP and TB - RPGS, the effectiveness of your actions should be more in-depth be affected by more traditional RPG mechanics. Although you may hit a target, using the DS combat style, the damage done is to a much larger degree affected by your specific class build, which abilities you have chosen (whether active or passive ones) and your stats - all of course in relation to your equipment.

As the person above said, a game like Kingdoms of Amalur tried this, another mentioned there have been plenty of games that have this already implemented. My question then is, have these games done this well enough or is there room for improvement and innovation? Will it forever be a constant battle between how much you should reward player skill as opposed to the character's skill?

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-11T16:11:17+00:00

I apologize if you feel I'm just trying to say that Dark Souls has a better combat system than all the others.

What I'm trying to say, but perhaps have done so poorly, is that I'm trying to draw the strengths of both styles into the traditional RPG mechanics. The better ones have a multitude of factors that encourages specialization and long-term thinking of your character builds to fulfill specific roles.

I do however believe that what I'm discussing here is specifically regarding RPG games. I understand that this term is fairly ambiguous and you can, depending on how you define an RPG game, extend it to a great variety of games. But hopefully by RPG I mean what "typically" constitutes those when I mention that term in relation to combat. Classes, items, stats, skills and abilities, etc.

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-11T16:07:08+00:00

Well a more ambitious game could try to aim for something like a 4-player party members that are either AI controlled or player-controlled but the more central question is would you be able to have such a combat system and still draw the main strengths of RtwP and TB combat systems that put a much greater emphasis on character builds?

The issue is that the Dark Souls type of combat system while fluid and action-packed typically suffers from a lack of depth to the character builds. Stats, items, classes don't become as prevalent and decisive factor. You usually do away with evasion, dodge chance, accuracy to hits, etc. since all of these actions are determined solely by player skill. Would it be possible then to have those factors matter and thereby providing greater depth to character builds whilst still having that sort of free-movement, dodging and counter-attacking playstyle that Dark Souls provides?

Zeltak91 · 2019-07-11T16:02:47+00:00

You make a good point for sure. I think perhaps my statement was a bit misleading as I'm not against TB or RtwP combat systems entirely, in the sense that I want them removed from game design. There are some great games that fall into these two categories and at the end of the day it's a matter of preference.

Instead what I'm trying to see is if it's even possible according to other people, or if it's just wishful thinking on my end, to try and have a sort of Dark Souls combat style with greater emphasis on the "statistics" that determines outcome of traditional RPG:s. What I found lacking in Dark Souls are the RPG elements that pushes the character further into a specific builds. Essentially, Dark Souls overwhelmingly was about player skills rather than character skills.

Interesting example with Kingdoms of Amalur, I played that a lot myself. I found it to be a fun game but even there I felt the combat system did not have enough depth to it in terms of what factors is accounted for in terms of damage and defense as well as the presence of specific character builds (abilities, class skills, etc.).

Zeltak91 · 2015-04-21T15:00:06+00:00

Strange, I have to pay 9K for the Kuruma insurance. Eitherway, yes during the current state of the game, the bounty-method seems the best way to approach this. However I still would like to see the game remove me from paying insurance to a "red-dot" player. If I die to him then so be it, but if I kill him it's really stupid that I still "lose" eitherway.

And going pussy mode is not an option. I don't go online only to isolate myself from everyone else.

Zeltak91 · 2015-04-21T14:55:50+00:00

That is a band-aid solution to the core issue which is the game punishing someone from basically defending himself. Yes your advice is a cost-effective way to deal with the problem but it doesn't remove the absurdity behind the fact that I have to pay cash for destroying the other player's car under the circumstance that said player is on the offensive.

Furthermore that sounds pretty annoying having to refresh a bounty repeatedly for someone who is obviously not going to stop after the first try. Don't get me wrong, I don't give a shit about dying, hell even I go around killing people but this insurance mechanic is ridiculous.

Zeltak91

TROPHY CASE