View Single Post

Default 

March 23rd, 2010, 08:24
Originally Posted by themadhatter View Post
Not at all, nor can I understand where you pulled this from.
You profess to have some knowledge about firearms and, thus, must be aware that no amount of expertise allows for a perfect shot every time, correct? The experience garnered from repeated use of guns, however, which we might infer a spy such as Thornton possesses, ought to be sufficient for him to utilize whatever weapon comes to hand.
I, for instance, had never handled a pistol until last summer. My experience with rifles and shotguns, however, allowed me to rapidly progress in skill, while proper gun-safety training, breathing and stance techniques allowed me to circumvent much of what bogs down newcomers.
The position I am coming from is that this is an rpg and you are saying the protagonist is already an expert so in rpg terms should already have maximum stats in everything right from the beginning which would make this not an rpg. To make this an rpg you can't be the best in what you do right from the beginning so that you can progress in your skills and abilities. Sometimes you miss even if you are an expert which translates to a critical miss from rolling to low in an rpg.


Originally Posted by themadhatter View Post
Now you are just flat-out wrong, mate.
First, the part about being "dead long before you get close enough" is a gross assumption. How could you or I possibly know that? Perhaps the NPC is unarmed and has their back turned? Perhaps they're asleep? Perhaps we're discussing an invalid armed with a knife in a wheelchair? Who knows?
Secondly, I already wrote this: "…if you're aware, as a player, that the shotgun you chance across will allow you to level the next few baddies with little to no effort, yet bring the rest of the compound forces down on your head, set off alarms like mad and generally turn your stealth approach from a master stroke into an utter waste, why do it? Stealth kills would be such players natural forte…"
Here I am going by the game and the situations presented so far and the enemies that have been presented are well armed and trained so if you run up to them in real life you would get your head blown off. In the game however you could run up to the enemy and take some damage and maybe heal yourself and then shoot them point blank. They could make it like real life where one or two shots could kill you and then you wouldn't get into point blank range to shoot but then it wouldn't be as much fun and would severely reduce stats and skills effect on the game. If you can absorb the damage and not get killed in one or two shots you could go and use stealth to sneak up to an enemy and shoot them point blank and absorb any shots that come your way. (instead of dying like in real life)


Originally Posted by themadhatter View Post
That's some convoluted and cyclical logic, given that it is based on your past assumption of the initial act being "unrealistic" (which I already addressed) and, even then, that a single unrealistic act validates all others. Come on, really? What's next? It's okay that you can ride around on a magical rainbow-unicorn because, after all, shotguns don't do damage unless you have skill in them?
I'm okay with some representations of real-world concepts, such as health bars and the like. That is game-design over reality, a concession that (generally) must be made in order to preserve the all-important "fun factor" (however you define it). Others, though, I just find bothersome.
The concept of shotguns not doing damage without skill in it is partially compensation for your ability to absorb damage in the game and heal yourself. In an rpg you are not playing yourself but are playing the role of the person in the game so their skill, ability, and weaknesses are what the game is trying to portray and not your own personal skills at shooting in a game. You may be able to shoot very well in a game with your personal skills but the character you are playing may not be as good or may even be better which is represented by stats and skills.


Originally Posted by themadhatter View Post
I'm going to stop you there, mate, as I'm in no mood to argue the semantics of the RPG genre. That's a minefield that no one escapes unscathed from. Frankly, where I'm concerned, RPGs are neither defined by their perspective (thus being an FPS does not matter), implementation or focus on select mechanics (thus a heavy emphasis on stealth does not matter), nor does realism even factor into the case.
Sorry maybe I should have said shooter/stealth hybrid with rpg elements or action adventure/stealth with rpg elements instead of fps. I was basing what I said on the game we are talking about (Alpha Protocol) which is and rpg with stealth and shooting elements. If you want realism of the kind you are speaking about you would be precluding the roleplay aspect of an rpg. Using your own skills instead of the skills of the the character your are playing to generate the outcome is playing yourself within the body of the character instead of playing the character.
guenthar is offline

guenthar

SasqWatch

#14

Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,543
Send a message via Skype™ to guenthar