Large collection of the lack of arguments a dev would be barraged with when daring to tread away from the safe zone.
Erm… who are you to say who is and who isn't able to attack whom, both in real life and in-game? How exactly are you going to prove whether a character is significantly weaker or stronger than another creature? Do they all wear badges which state their exact level and skill set? As a PC do you not regularly take on challenges much higher than yourself for the incredible XP gain… and win.
Gameplay is based on repetition and a gameplay environment provides reliable information.
An enemy power might be assessed by trial and error. And a power range assigned to an enemy.
Back to Neo Scavenger, a forgotten feature. Bluff and threat.
Sporting gear or attire spread a threat aura. Sporting a wolfsman pelt sends the message that the guy who sports it might have killed a wolfsman and therefore is dangerous enough. It could be bluff as the corpse of a wolfsman could be found (killed by another NPC) and skinned.
Same thing with weapons. Sporting a rifle might hint at a dangerous threat. Or bluff (no bullet to fire)
Threatening with voice too.
An enemy could call out the bluff. Sporting a wolfsman pelt might not be enough to spook an enemy who is able to kill a wolfsman pelt. Reversed situation: the enemy keeps advancing, it must be strong. Time for the PC to be cautious, tables are turned.
All this to tell who is up to attack, be attacked etc
It is up to a player to tell through various gameplay mechanics.
People usually complain more when games are too rigid with matching equally levelled creatures, you know, like level-scaling. I do hope you're not one of those people who also complains about lack of freedom to engage whomsoever you want in a game… since we're on the topic of "argumental convenience hypocrisy".
Zero complaint. Far from it.
So really you're complaining that these games which 'copy' BG are not actually copies, but do their own thing? I thought you were making the argument for games to be their own thing…
Again no complaint.
Just the remark on this BG feature and how self proclaimed old school gamers state they strive to conserve old school gaming.
Improving on a feature is also not copying it.
Most importantly, nowhere written that products must be their own things.
The original point was certain features can not be because players do not like them.
Well, this is certainly spiralling into a mess for you isn't it.
Of course it is. That is the purpose of attributing to people words they have not said.
What now? I dunno, there are approximately 253 things I care more about in a game than whether nearly dead enemies decide to make a run for it or not & if the enemy provides XP upon death then I'd rather they didn't run anyway.
That is the point: dominating, prevailing etc
You might argue both these points are "a matter of personal taste", but I don't see either you or the other guy actually say what the benefit of fleeing opponents actually is. Hence you appear to be being contrarian for the sole pleasure of forum giggles, whereas people who don't care for the mechanic actually have reasons why it negatively effects their gameplay.
Examples of how all these features might benefit were given.
Now, once again, it is written in the first post: all these features are effectively impacting negatively depending on what players desire.
When reading testimonies of rapists, school killers and stuff, it appears they often desire their victims to resist a bit, they desire them to cower in fear, kick, try to get away. It adds to their enjoyment. What they do not want is getting frustrated by a victim that would knock them out, flee successfully...
That is the spirit.
Is a short single character roguelike that specialises in a realism environment, the time spent making it do one thing means that it is lacking in other areas. Do you see me raging at Neo Scavenger because of all the things that game doesn't have as a result?
Never been about realism. It was about Neo Scavenger displaying certain features about enemy behaviours.
Well obviously. The point is that the purchaser experiences no change in gameplay whether it's the same person or a different person, duh. Does it really matter to you
that much that a developer should go to point of making shop NPCs 'different' every X amount of hours? Like,
for real?
We're not talking about 'workers', we were talking about NPCs. Your refute here is just a generalisation, a classic example of an average that reflects barely anyone individually. It's called 'abstracting', and it's the same reason why when you go round a town or city in a game you don't encounter literally hundreds of NPCs, all with their own agendas and things to say - because that would be
ABSURD.
Abstracting, averaging... On a site that screams about Oblivion being voiced over by four actors, on a site that is bent on storytolding...
Here's a case of abstracting, averaging: make all NPCs coloured androgynous NPCs because meeting hundreds of NPCs. Races and genders abstracted and averaged in one and only NPC.
