Random loot and the revolution that never came

[somonels]

Melee can't incorporate "usability" because the skill involved is far too abstracted to have significant effects. I mean it's doable, but it would have to break down a sword swing to multiple parts and keep variables to control it, giving you a weapon stats of +10%upper movement arm swing and +30% wrist turning speed. In contrast to guns which are fairly accurately reduced into a point-and-click gameplay.

Most gun-shooters try to go in a more realistic route, so having bullets that twirl around, or weapons designed for planned obsolescence with embedded explosives aren't an option. How much can you do with a gun considering most games don't even cover ammunition types as separate entities? Damage falloff, rof, reload speed, clip size, recoil patterns, fire mode, velocity, reliability which everyone hates(FC2).

Speaking of components. What borderland does is use the old school D&D style of customization wherein alteration between similar weapons is permanently embedded into an item as "special properties". While most of gun-gaming has opted for a component based approach of a range of selected weapon types that can be accompanied with a selected range of modifications. Most notably scopes, but also suppressors, extended magazines, flashlights, whatever. While the selections are limited compared to random variable ranges you will be hard-pressed to convince me that a difference of +-10% damage is a significant enough difference to be considered a relevant feature.

A large part of why random loot had been phased out of gaming is player behavior. Games are now developed to a much larger audience now and the masses don't often handle that kind of stuff well. Component based systems offer a far safer option of requiring players to earn attachments and use them when desired, instead of requiring them to farm three different variations of a weapon to be effective in more than a few scenarios.

Even BL had predecessors for random stat FPS games. A notable flop was Hellgate: London, yes it is an FPS, developed by some of the people who worked on Diablo. And if you don't remember the borderlands marketing campaign that well, there was seemingly more commercial hype about their procedural generation of the look of the weapon, rather than the random stats which was just a big number Randy liked to cite as a showcase of how huge their pile of guns was.

 

[Quellist]

I see why we aren't getting through to each other, I wouldn't describe any of those games as RPGs except Witcher 3. Guess i'm showing my age but i don't really consider so-called "Action rpgs" or games with "RPG elements" to be worthy of the name and wasn't really referring to those in my initial post.

I wouldn't consider Witcher 3 an RPG either, there's not enough actual role-playing IMO, but that's another whole discussion. Regardless of whether a game is an RPG or not, no game should have elements that don't add to the game and waste the player's time. Constantly getting new slightly better gear adds nothing to the game and makes the player manage more than they have to. Giving me weapons that just do more damage just equates to busywork, give me weapons that do something different. It's been at least a year since I played the opening area in Divinity Original Sin, and that game has far too much inventory management as well. The reason I can't make myself get back into the game is literally the inventory management, and I freely updated to the Enhanced Edition so that means starting over as well.

I think we are just gonna have to agree to disagree on this. Random loot I can live without, Inventory Management in an RPG is to me an integral part of the game

I think you're sorta agreeing with me as games with random loot are the worst offenders as to what I'm talking about. Again, I have nothing against inventory management when it matters. Inventory management isn't integral to an RPG IMO. You can start a DnD game with a character at max level with buying everything you want and you're still playing an RPG because you're role-playing the character. A lot of things people feel are integral to an RPG really aren't like even leveling and combat. I've played pen and paper RPGs without leveling and combat. Why must almost every RPG have you role-play as a character that fights enemies? The vast majority of characters don't fight.

You might be talking about random loot now but if you read up the single sentence of yours I was commenting originally on was that Inventory Management needed to be removed from ALL games. My position is still that it doesn't, random loot is meh...take it or leave it

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

You might be talking about random loot now but if you read up the single sentence of yours I was commenting originally on was that Inventory Management needed to be removed from ALL games. My position is still that it doesn't, random loot is meh...take it or leave it

I guess my initial post came off that way, but I didn't say it has to go completely. I'm just tired of so many games turning inventory management into busywork. Simply tying damage increases to character leveling and/or weapon upgrading alleviates pretty much the entire problem without removing anything from the game. RPGs are already lengthy games (and usually padded with filler content and grinding), eliminating any unneeded busywork is only a good thing.

 

[MHR]

It's called a shoot-and-loot.

Not many other games do it because not many other games put such immense focus on trying to make different types of weapons. If you just tweak numbers on things, it's not that much fun, and people are liable to get frustrated when all the weapons are the same 'cept with different numbers.

 

[Quellist]

You might be talking about random loot now but if you read up the single sentence of yours I was commenting originally on was that Inventory Management needed to be removed from ALL games. My position is still that it doesn't, random loot is meh...take it or leave it

I guess my initial post came off that way, but I didn't say it has to go completely. I'm just tired of so many games turning inventory management into busywork. Simply tying damage increases to character leveling and/or weapon upgrading alleviates pretty much the entire problem without removing anything from the game. RPGs are already lengthy games (and usually padded with filler content and grinding), eliminating any unneeded busywork is only a good thing.

Heh maybe for you, i'm probably one of the few people who Loved the Inventory Management of ME1 and was devastated when it was all gone in 2. I'd spend ages tweaking weapon, ammo, armor and shield for each character not to mention biotic amps and engineer thingys (I forget the name).

 

[sXeth]

In borderlands, you can find two ARs one with a high recoil the other with a low recoil and your going to use the two differently. (This goes for most of the other stats. If you find a really good gun with only one bullet in the clip, then your going to be playing very differently for the next few levels.)

You are right about the scaling in BL2. That got out of hand. BL1 was better, but that also had it's own issues such as double anarchy.

While I've never been able to find a fun element in them long enough to finish one (have played all 3), I'm wondering what would you consider a unique "feel" weapon in Borderlands. I just remember the point and click til the things health bar depletes and it dies (and above mentioned annoying container looting and inventory management).

Recoil and Clip size variation ? Thats dime a dozen in prettymuch any shooter that doesn't just have 1 of each weapon. Everything from CoD to Far Cry to Titanfall to Rainbow Six to Destiny. You got your Bullet Hose (High fire rate and clip, high recoil) on one end of the scale and the One Shot-One Kill (Low Rate of Fire/Clip, Low Recoil) with 1 or more between. And you won't see a High Fire Rate/Low Recoil gun because it's OP as hell.

 

[American Tanker]

And you won't see a High Fire Rate/Low Recoil gun because it's OP as hell.

Modern Warfare 1 M4 Carbine, anyone?

 

[sXeth]

And you won't see a High Fire Rate/Low Recoil gun because it's OP as hell.

Modern Warfare 1 M4 Carbine, anyone?

Ah my barely playing CoD bites me in the ass.

Actually, there was one in Far Cry too. And Destiny's had a few roundabouts with them, but they throw the nerf bat around like its going out of style, so they didn't last long.

Most of Destiny's broken ones were actually a result of random loot gen. There were 2 perks, "Perfect Balance" (Massive recoil reduction) and Hidden Hand (increased auto-aim, or bullets that pull into hitboxes or whatever) that would end up rolling onto bullet hoses and basically nullifying the problems of the archetype (along with ones that added range and reduced spread to shotguns... which were balanced entirely around being short range near-melee weapons)

 

[nomotog_v1legacy]

In borderlands, you can find two ARs one with a high recoil the other with a low recoil and your going to use the two differently. (This goes for most of the other stats. If you find a really good gun with only one bullet in the clip, then your going to be playing very differently for the next few levels.)

You are right about the scaling in BL2. That got out of hand. BL1 was better, but that also had it's own issues such as double anarchy.

While I've never been able to find a fun element in them long enough to finish one (have played all 3), I'm wondering what would you consider a unique "feel" weapon in Borderlands. I just remember the point and click til the things health bar depletes and it dies (and above mentioned annoying container looting and inventory management).

Recoil and Clip size variation ? Thats dime a dozen in prettymuch any shooter that doesn't just have 1 of each weapon. Everything from CoD to Far Cry to Titanfall to Rainbow Six to Destiny. You got your Bullet Hose (High fire rate and clip, high recoil) on one end of the scale and the One Shot-One Kill (Low Rate of Fire/Clip, Low Recoil) with 1 or more between. And you won't see a High Fire Rate/Low Recoil gun because it's OP as hell.

Ya it's about CoD levels. Some times more some times less. (It's random yo.) It also dosen't care that much about being OP. There are weapons that have super high RoF with super low recoil. in a loot driven game it's OK to let the player get their hands on OP weapons.

So it is like CoD, but I am not comparing it to CoD, I am comparing it to diablo and other loot games. they tend to not have the differences of feel.

 

[TheVampwizimp_v1legacy]

I see why we aren't getting through to each other, I wouldn't describe any of those games as RPGs except Witcher 3. Guess i'm showing my age but i don't really consider so-called "Action rpgs" or games with "RPG elements" to be worthy of the name and wasn't really referring to those in my initial post.

I wouldn't consider Witcher 3 an RPG either, there's not enough actual role-playing IMO, but that's another whole discussion. Regardless of whether a game is an RPG or not, no game should have elements that don't add to the game and waste the player's time. Constantly getting new slightly better gear adds nothing to the game and makes the player manage more than they have to. Giving me weapons that just do more damage just equates to busywork, give me weapons that do something different. It's been at least a year since I played the opening area in Divinity Original Sin, and that game has far too much inventory management as well. The reason I can't make myself get back into the game is literally the inventory management, and I freely updated to the Enhanced Edition so that means starting over as well.

I think we are just gonna have to agree to disagree on this. Random loot I can live without, Inventory Management in an RPG is to me an integral part of the game

I think you're sorta agreeing with me as games with random loot are the worst offenders as to what I'm talking about. Again, I have nothing against inventory management when it matters. Inventory management isn't integral to an RPG IMO. You can start a DnD game with a character at max level with buying everything you want and you're still playing an RPG because you're role-playing the character. A lot of things people feel are integral to an RPG really aren't like even leveling and combat. I've played pen and paper RPGs without leveling and combat. Why must almost every RPG have you role-play as a character that fights enemies? The vast majority of characters don't fight.

The issue here is that Role-Playing Game is actually a terrible name for a game genre, especially for video games. If "playing a role" is the one and only requirement for an RPG then very few RPGs are actually RPGs, as "role-playing" just not the focus of almost all games. "RPG elements" and the inclusion of them in games expands the genre to include nearly everything these days, so under either definition the term becomes nearly useless. "RPG" does not actually reflect any particular aspect of gameplay anymore, not like "shooter" or "platformer" do, so we just argue in circles about whether a game is an RPG or not.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Heh maybe for you, i'm probably one of the few people who Loved the Inventory Management of ME1 and was devastated when it was all gone in 2. I'd spend ages tweaking weapon, ammo, armor and shield for each character not to mention biotic amps and engineer thingys (I forget the name).

XCOM basically has that without the picking up thousands of useless items over the course of the game.

The issue here is that Role-Playing Game is actually a terrible name for a game genre, especially for video games. If "playing a role" is the one and only requirement for an RPG then very few RPGs are actually RPGs, as "role-playing" just not the focus of almost all games. "RPG elements" and the inclusion of them in games expands the genre to include nearly everything these days, so under either definition the term becomes nearly useless. "RPG" does not actually reflect any particular aspect of gameplay anymore, not like "shooter" or "platformer" do, so we just argue in circles about whether a game is an RPG or not.

Mass Effect put role-playing as the core focus of the series regardless of how well or unwell you felt it was executed. I would still consider that to be gameplay, something unique to the genre. What other genre can have you decide to shoot a beloved character in the back when you feel it's the right choice? "RPG elements" are not what ever made the genre IMO, especially now with just about every game have some of those elements nowadays as you said. Even XCOM uses basically the tried and true combat system of DnD and just replaces heroes with soldiers and monsters with aliens. A combat system even straight out of DnD was never a distinguishing feature of the genre. I've always felt it's what you do outside of combat that makes a game an RPG and if the only choices you make in a game are literally just combat choices, then it's not an RPG nor was it ever an RPG. Combat is just easier to do in video games than role-playing and most people (developers as well) choose to do what's easier. Video game RPGs have lost their way and are now pretty much just bad action games parading as RPGs. The following Escapist Podcast at basically the 8 minute is spot-on in basically saying player agency is the one key defining factor of an RPG:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/escapist-podcast/5431-035-What-Defines-An-RPG-More-Mass-Effect