Do Gooder Press

I’ve been watching/listening to some reviews of the larger role-playing games available for computers/consoles, and while it does sound curmudgeonly to say “it’s not like the old days,” a few elements that were a staple of the older game workings have gone by the wayside. Some may argue it takes away from the “fun” to re-introduce these things, but I think its more of a case of “fun of the moment” vs. “fun of after-game satisfaction.” Anyway, I thought of a few things I believe might deserve resurrection from the grave of video games past.

– People who can steal your stuff. By this I mean people who steal your stuff without it being plot-related. In Fallout 2, there’s a bar with some kids by the door. If you pass through, they’ll try to pick your pockets (and often succeed), depriving you of currency, ammo, weapons, etc. I like having this around because it makes the game feel more alive, it means I need to keep a closer eye on my stuff, and maybe I should up my stats which allow me to prevent it from happening. If game developers wanted to go all out, items stolen from your inventory could be tagged as such (you can’t use ’em, but you see the ghost of where they were in your bag of holding), and maybe you could search for places they might be fenced or who’s carrying them so you can track down and “thank” the person who picked your pocket. I know that “quest items” being stolen could wreck a game, but maybe they could make an exception, since even Grunthar the Oblivious would probably keep a close eye on the glowing gem an elder god sent him to fetch.

– Messing up royally and not having the game tell you. This is a mixed bag for a lot of players. There used to be many an RPG that required Item X, Clue Z, and NPC #4435 in your immediate area during a final quest to win through and save the day. Except… you sold Item X, didn’t find Clue Z, and/or you sort of liked the armor #4435 was wearing so he came down with a severe case of The Dead when you ran into him a while back, and you didn’t save your game much around that time, so you’ll probably have to start over. While frustrating, that is a more realistic approach to game scenarios, and maybe there just needs to be another solution to the quest that increases in difficulty the more you mess up. About the only utter failure in games these days are side quests that don’t carry too much weight when the final showdown happens (you can still win, you just don’t get the “best ending” or whatever). What makes me think this might need a comeback is how fondly a lot of people talk about this kind of thing “back in the day.”

– Game content that you could, and probably would, miss out on. I ran into the opposite of this with Skyrim, though it’s becoming true for a lot of games where you can make different builds of characters. It appears that if a game has, say, a Wizarding Guild, the developers think you won’t play the game again if your warrior-dude can’t eventually claim Dumbedore’s corner office. This is after warrior-dude has also managed to become the Head Cutpurse in the Thievery Guild, in spite of barely being able to pick his nose, much less someone’s pocket. The bar is set so low for a lot of these supposed class-oriented quest threads that it almost seems lackluster when your Wizard does sit behind Dumbledore’s desk, because you know you really didn’t need all of your magical talent to get there. Vampire: Bloodlines does this well, as some quests (and solutions to obstacles) are only available to certain clans or skill levels.

– More random events. I don’t mean unbeatable monsters showing up out of the blue or other annoyances that could wipe out the party. I’m thinking along the lines of skill checks being actually random again, and not options with a minimum threshold for success. To harp back on Fallout, there are speech options that are available only if your score is 75. You see that you need 75 in speech for that particular option even if you don’t have it, which is kind of a giveaway that you’ll get something with that conversation choice, and that, for me, wrecks a lot of the role-playing involved with simulating a conversation. I’d prefer that it give you options based on your skill without any hints, and even if you did have enough skill to get a fantastic result, the dice would be rolled, and you could still fail. Sure, you could find out on the internet somewhere what all of the “best” options are, but by making the trees a bit more extensive (and by not going online with the goal of being a munchkin), talking to NPCs could be a bit more like combat; you can win big, win by the skin of your teeth, or get completely mowed down, but it was fun having something to lose and having to decide on the fly.

This would probably result in some cries of “too hard” or “I’d die over and over,” but that happens in game combat all the time. If it’s too hard, you change your strategy, get a better weapon, or decide that particular encounter isn’t worth it… until you can find an even bigger weapon (grin). It’s probably far too much to hope for given what’s going to be driving games in the coming years, but one can still dream…

A lot of this would require more modular voice acting scripts, allowing for a wider range of replies, responses, etc. beyond the go-to “whatever you did is irrelevant in the long run” speeches we usually get, but I think it’d be well worth the effort.