Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Name three things you don't want in a new D&D game

killerrabbitkillerrabbit Member Posts: 402
I decided to set up a thread about things we don't want in the next game. While the discussions in the three things you want thread are good I'm wondering if the disagreement aren't discouraging people from posting their wants.

So, I propose that we discuss and argue in this thread and let the other thread just be just about what we want.

I don't want:

1. Never Winter Nights

Many of the comments is the other thread indicate an easy modifiable game with multiplayer support. To my mind this sounds like NWN -- a game I didn't like. I mean it was okay but if someone made NWN EE is would yawn and go about life.

Why not go for easy to mod? Because this comes at a cost -- I've never seen an easy to mod game that didn't look terrible and have a generic feel. Looking at you Sword Coast Legends.

2. Evil Edition

I never play evil and that content is just lost for me. If you go for 50 percent evil, I'll miss 50 percent of the game.

Yes, let the people who want to play evil put together a party but don't make it half the game and don't create quests like Dorn's where people who don't play evil can never experience them.

BG2 got it right -- evil options should be there as potential failures on the charname's part.

Now what I did like about BG2 were the redemption stories -- that fit perfectly with the plot. Can you overcome the evil inside you? Can Viconia, born in the dark, come to appreciate the light? I even thought someone was working on Mazzy redeems Korgan plot . . .

And 5th edition makes it clear that evil alignments are for villains and monsters. And I'm glad to see the game return to the roots.

3. Multiple Camera Angles / Shooter view.

Isometric, god's eye view.

Post edited by Dee on
Vbibbimf2112ButtercheesekanisathalolienCalmar
«1345678

Comments

  • Papa_LouPapa_Lou Member Posts: 264
    I'm going to have to disagree with you, for the most part.
    I haven't played a ton of NWN or NWN2, but what I did play of them I loved. I would have kept playing if my old computer didn't die on me. I'd be 100% down to see something done with them in the future.
    As for the evil thing, I often play good characters as well, but that doesn't mean it's all I enjoy doing. My next playthrough of the BG saga I intend to use an evil character. Why leave that option out of future games? Tons of games these days give you options to do evil things, and it'd be a shame to totlly exclude that style of playing.
    I do agree with your third point, though. Isometric view is what's up.
    Maybe you should say, "Hey David Gaider, here are three things I don't want".

    smeagolheart
  • killerrabbitkillerrabbit Member Posts: 402
    Papa_Lou said:

    Maybe you should say, "Hey David Gaider, here are three things I don't want".

    Or you could add three things you don't want. Or we could discuss the merits of what we do want. And that way people can still contribute to the what we do want in a positive manner and not avoid the thread because they don't want to get in the middle of argument.

    Thread 1 -- Positive. We want this.

    Thread 2 -- Critical. We don't want this.


    Yes, lots of games that I don't play have evil protagonists. If they make a game like that I won't buy it. Please reread what I said -- I said make it like BG2.

  • killerrabbitkillerrabbit Member Posts: 402


    You realize of course that you are choosing a somewhat arbitrary default position here, and essentially trying to negate the other one completely.

    I don't agree that it is an arbitrary default position. I think most people play good most of the time. The "more evil options" grew out of the modding community that had already played the game a gillion times. It's like someone who has been eating the same thing for a month wanting a different flavor -- the problem is that most humans don't eat the same thing for month or replay a game a gillion times. I'm strange, we're strange -- in a good way. Mostly.

    And I'm not saying negate evil completely -- I'm saying don't make it 50 percent of the content. Because it's all very nice to think of everyone getting what they want but, with such a small company, this is a zero sum game -- this content comes at the cost of other content. More evil content means less good content means less content I will enjoy. It's inevitable.

    And you know I'm just bored of the dark hero. I want to play The Flash -- the person who gets super powers and decides to save the world. I want play Rey who masters the light side of the force and resists the pull towards the dark.

    lolien
  • spacejawsspacejaws Member, Mobile Tester Posts: 369
    edited June 2016
    I want them to make the game and not listen to the fanbase too much. We all think we know what we want but when the creativity of designers is hampered by us telling them what we like and don't then what we'll end up with is something generic that doesn't impress rather than something that might exceed our expectations.

    I'm more willing for them to dive into what they think the could make. I loved Black Pits and Siege of Dragonspear is fantastic, have a little bit of faith :p

    Feedback after things have been brought to light and explained? That I'm all for.

    lolienFinnTheHumansparkleav
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,198
    edited June 2016
    I agree that it might be an interesting compilation to see what people really do not like. Of course, critical debate is always required and encouraged (for anything, really).

    For me, right at the top of things I absolutely do not like is...

    Manual Dexterity

    I just don't enjoy games where my success depends on twitch responses and hand-eye-coordination. I'm not a body person, I'm a mind person. Reaction time is one thing (I'm fine if it's not strictly turn-based, or has no at-will pause) but trigger-finger button-dancing is quite another. None of that, please.

    Aside from that, most of my no-no's actually just boil down to "no bad *insert feature*" - no bad writing, no bad alignment system, etc. I find it hard to narrow those down negatively, so I've put my most precious ones into the positive thread.

    killerrabbitdunbarlolienMagpieRandoms
  • TarlugnTarlugn Member Posts: 204
    deltago said:


    What I don't want to see:
    1. Vampires
    2. Werecreatures
    3. Zombies

    :D You just made my day!

    1. Drow
    2. Vampires
    3. Demi-Liches

    killerrabbitCrevsDaaklolienjobby
  • killerrabbitkillerrabbit Member Posts: 402
    shawne said:

    I2. Evil Edition

    Pfft. I don't know who this "we" is that you think you're speaking for, but I've played BG, HotU and NWN2 evil - a scenario all three games allowed - and I had a blast. You want a game that doesn't allow alignment roleplay, go play Sword Coast Legends or Icewind Dale.
    Perhaps because you didn't read my posts? It becomes 'we' when you add to it. Although to be fair you could only understand that if you read what I wrote.

    Papa_Lou said:

    Maybe you should say, "Hey David Gaider, here are three things I don't want".

    Or you could add three things you don't want. Or we could discuss the merits of what we do want. And that way people can still contribute to the what we do want in a positive manner and not avoid the thread because they don't want to get in the middle of argument.

    Thread 1 -- Positive. We want this.

    Thread 2 -- Critical. We don't want this.

    So, what three things don't you want to see?

  • batoorbatoor Member Posts: 677
    edited June 2016
    I don't want them to follow the PoE development process by offering too much at once. I still think Od Nua and the stronghold at the same time was a mistake. Od Nua should have been left as content for a potential expansion pack. Although I haven't actually tried the white march yet, but I'm just thinking a few years back when the kickstarter was just launched.

    Don't let potential emphasis on balance cripple the ''fun'' of the game.

    killerrabbitlolien
  • JustLeftJustLeft Member Posts: 76
    I never play evil and that content is just lost for me. If you go for 50 percent evil, I'll miss 50 percent of the game.

    That's good for replay, even if you don't want to play it, a lot of people will be happy to experience new things in their next playthrough.

    Now what I did like about BG2 were the redemption stories -- that fit perfectly with the plot. Can you overcome the evil inside you? Can Viconia, born in the dark, come to appreciate the light? I even thought someone was working on Mazzy redeems Korgan plot . . .

    What about corruption, just like a good guy trying to help party members redeeming themselves, an evil guy should be able to corrupt or sacrifice their party members to gain something. I highly recommend trying MotB for NWN2 as evil.

    I disliked the gameplay of NWN1 and 2 but I did enjoy a lot of the modules for the NWN1, if they can make the game moddable without sacrificing the gameplay that will be grand.

    killerrabbitArdul
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,198
    JustLeft said:

    I never play evil and that content is just lost for me. If you go for 50 percent evil, I'll miss 50 percent of the game.

    The same is true for anyone with any sort of preference that doesn't translate into every part of the game. There is nothing wrong with not seeing everything if you only go down one path. Many people enjoy multiple paths. You do not, and that is cool; but that doesn't mean the other paths shouldn't be there for the people that enjoy them.

    Me, I don't like druids. The druid parts of the game will be lost to me. That doesn't mean though that I don't want druids in the game.

    CrevsDaakkillerrabbitNoobaccaArchaos
  • Mr2150Mr2150 Member Posts: 1,170
    I'm sure it's no fun/disheartening for developers if they create content that a percentage of people will actively choose to avoid so they should try to find a way that encourages people to play as Druids, or evil, or whatever. Making it fun, engaging, rewarding and challenging would do that.

    That way the content is likely to be seen by more people ... and everybody wins.

    killerrabbit
  • batoorbatoor Member Posts: 677
    I don't think the numerous evil and good alternatives in MotB ever diminished the experience for people who usually only go 100% one way or another.

    Kilivitz
  • Lord_TansheronLord_Tansheron Member Posts: 4,198

    Being evil in games usually just means being a humongous dick, not evil per se.

    I have to very much agree with this. It's difficult to write alignment well. Evil paths too quickly turn into Sith sociopath spree-killings, while good paths often stink of goodie-goodie paragon schmaltz. Neither is good writing, but the latter is more established because many "heroic" stories have worked that way for a long, long time.

    At the core of everything is, I believe, the problem of making choices. Especially hard ones. People have trouble with that. Many, many games soften things up there, creating illusions of choice instead of actual decisions with consequences - choose A or choose B, you still get item X out of the deal, just maybe it has another name or you see a different cutscene or two.

    Games (and other storytelling media, too, for that matter) need to be bolder. Make people take chances, make them CHOOSE, and I mean really choose. Choices that have impact, and meaning, and wide-ranging consequences. Choices that shape the story, instead of simply offering justification for a path the story was going to take either way. I know this is very hard to do, both mechanically and narratively. People will complain, and kick and scream and resist because they can't have their cake and eat it, too. Don't listen. Show them what they can gain from a story with actual choice in it, show them how their actions have consequences and impact, and how their presence and engagement as players actually MATTERS. In the long run, that will do more than spreading the candy all around.

    killerrabbitdrakir
  • VbibbiVbibbi Member Posts: 229
    Wow a lot of negativity and criticism from people responding. The OP clearly stated their personal preference in the post by saying "So, I propose that we discuss and argue in this thread and let the other thread just be just about what we want.

    I don't want:"

    Nowhere did OP claim that they're speaking for everyone. They are in fact mirroring the other thread asking for people's contributions. So I don't understand the knee jerk reaction of people shooting the thread down.

    I will agree with #2 in that I would prefer less of the 50/50 split of good and evil content. Since we're appealing to Gaider, I would say emulate Dragon Age more than Baldur's Gate (or even more strongly any Star Wars game). Don't have pure good and pure evil, make most things shades of grey. I personally don't think evil aligned characters should be PCs if the storyline is heroic, which most RPGs end up being. The plot can boil down to saving the world/land/city and it becomes a massive headcanon to explain why an evil aligned PC would care enough to stick around rather than skip town.

    killerrabbitlolien
  • JarrakulJarrakul Member Posts: 2,029
    Three things I don't want (which may or may not have any relationship to the majority opinion):

    1. Turn-based combat. If I wanted to play a turn-based game, I'd grab a bunch of friends and play some D&D. If you want to make combat interesting, take advantage of the computer and run things in real time. Pausing is fine, though.

    2. Any sort of character alignment system. NPC influence or faction reputation systems are fine, but any sort of arbitrary "this thing you did was evil" label handed down from on-high stifles roleplaying like nothing I've seen. If, for some reason, you do choose to use some sort of alignment system, do not hide classes or abilities behind arbitrary alignment point walls. The only purpose this serves is to force me to roleplay my character in a way that I don't want to.

    3. I can't think of a third, so I'll just second the OP's preference for the isometric camera and associated BG-like control scheme.

    killerrabbitloliensarevok57
  • CrevsDaakCrevsDaak Member Posts: 7,153
    What I don't want to see:
    1. Game not being suited for Chaotic Neutral Mind-Flayer Polygnomedmorphed Dwarves.

    Seriously now, I don't like it when the dialogue options make you choose between stuff that you don't want to say nor your character would even mean (for example, the saving Imoen/going behind Irenicus in BG2 when you recruit an NPC). I play the game as Evil, Neutral, Lawful, Chaotic and even sometimes Good. I don't stop replaying the game, but what I mean is: when I don't play the "gonna kil evry1 brb" evil character or the "Oh noes I should help!" good character I don't feel most of the dialog is suitable (on the other hand, Ps:T was. But let's put Ps:T aside, because we all know Ps:T is Ps:T after all, and it lacks combat gameplay soooo heavily). I don't care if some of the options are for Human Druids with 16 Charisma (no more no less) and that have Imoen, Jaheira and my mother in their party (which compose a party of three people actually D: guess who my mother is, lol jk), because if so I could play the game again as such character with such party, and I'll still be interested in the game.

    2. Stupidly overpowered items.

    We all know the Stupifier and how easily you could get it. I could solo the Demon Knight with that thing, as a Cleric. Stuff like that doesn't make the game less fun nor anything (after all it's a single player game and if I don't want to, I don't have to pick it up), but it makes other weapons look bad and blah blah.

    3. Ambushes of 10+ Ranged Creatures in the Early Stages of the game.

    Seriously, when you get ambushed by Bandits in early BG1 you just get killed instantly, unless you luckily have killsw01 or an Invisibility Potion, there's no way you can save yourself.

    mf2112Southpawkillerrabbit
  • PohjanmaalainenPohjanmaalainen Member Posts: 35
    My I do not wants:

    1. Saving the world or even some sizable part of it. Not that I have anything against the world or it's societies, but there is so many other stories that can be told about bunch of armed friend venturing forth and killing things. I've mentioned this before, but Seven Samurai is a excellent movie of a seven membered adventuring party, gathered at a tavern. Minor stuff like that somehow tied together. And yes, chapter 2 of SoA is the best part of the game in my opinion.

    2. Crafting. I am quite sure there must exist a blacksmithing simulator there somewhere, for net is truly vast and infinite, and I can play that if I want to craft my own sword. Plot, setting and rules of the game might still be under work but premise is still about adventurers far as I know, and adventurers you know...adventure. Legendary stuff and some normal quality equipment should be obtainable by artisans and adventurers themselves could and even should know how to make simple potions and other vital stuff in the field but thats it.

    3. Party size restriction. This is somewhat stupid pet peeve of mine and I understand it might be hard to avoid, but are sleeping bags and extra tent that expensive? I know that this easily messes up balance, destroys replay value and all that good stuff but I would still like to see it. Make the party splitting a game mechanic or something. I am only half joking here.

    killerrabbitlolienCrevsDaak
  • FardragonFardragon Member Posts: 4,511
    edited June 2016

    My I do not wants:

    1. Saving the world or even some sizable part of it.


    If there isn't something significant that needs saving, what is the motivation for a good aligned non-mercenary character to get involved at all?

    If it wasn't for the Ring, Frodo would have been quite happy to spend his whole life in the Shire smoking and getting fat.

    sarevok57
Sign In or Register to comment.