Games in which your character matters

In the whole Fallout 3 controversy, the talk about the S.P.E.C.I.A.L system (Strength, Perception, Endurance, Charisma, Intelligence, Agility, Luck) I came to the conclusion that the last two games beyond Obsidian/Bioware, that pays any kind of attention to social skills and personality traits, was Fable (2005) and Vampire: Bloodlines (2004), the latter can be understood since it's actually produced by ex Black Isle staff.

Most "roleplaying games" still do not care at all about who you play. It's all about combat statistics. As far as I remember, the Gothic series did not have any social skills, nor a place where Intelligence had a function beyond boosting magic damage. In Oblivion, nobody cared about who you were. You could be the leader of every guild on the map, it did not matter. You could be a great wizard or a barbarian, and dialogue was the same. The Final Fantasy series are the same… you often have no way to effect your characters personality except swapping inventory.

I came to the conclusion that in most well known roleplaying games, there are no roleplaying.

With the return of the SPECIAL system in Fallout 3, I have some faint hope that Bethesda can put the Roleplaying back in Roleplaying Games. I do realise that's an absolutely crazy idea though considering the lack of roleplaying there was in their earlier games.

Yeah, its pretty rare to see social attributes matter much at all. Of the top of my head I can only think of Icewind Dale 2 (plenty of attribute checks for dialogues), Arcanum (lots of dialogue restrictions depending on alignment, intelligence, personality, and beauty scores) and to some extent the Neverwinter Nights games. It's an aspect I'd like to see improved, but not in the sense that you simply are robbed of part of the game if your personality score is gone, but rather that different sets of attributes open up different paths…

Somebody's borrowing roqua's soapbox.

With the "mainstreaming" of RPGs in the market (call it "dumbing down" or "console-izing" or "genre-blending" or something else entirely, but we all know what we're talking about), I wouldn't hold your breath for a game complex enough to truly play differently based on your character build.

Originally Posted by Zaleukos
Yeah, its pretty rare to see social attributes matter much at all. Of the top of my head I can only think of Icewind Dale 2 (plenty of attribute checks for dialogues), Arcanum (lots of dialogue restrictions depending on alignment, intelligence, personality, and beauty scores) and to some extent the Neverwinter Nights games. It's an aspect I'd like to see improved, but not in the sense that you simply are robbed of part of the game if your personality score is gone, but rather that different sets of attributes open up different paths…

All three are basicly from the same guys.

Originally Posted by dteowner
Somebody's borrowing roqua's soapbox.
With the "mainstreaming" of RPGs in the market (call it "dumbing down" or "console-izing" or "genre-blending" or something else entirely, but we all know what we're talking about), I wouldn't hold your breath for a game complex enough to truly play differently based on your character build.

Fable actually tried and had alot of social functions despite being a console game… even if I cannot say that thoose social functions really mattered as you had almost everything in the end regardless what kind of characterbuild you did.

In the end, you can kill things with swords or you can kill things with spells. I'm not saying that has to be a bad thing, but it certainly means that Charisma Boy (remember that from your Fallout manual) is dead.

There's actually a catch-22 working in the shadows here. Gamers whine constantly about wanting freedom to go where they want and do what they want. That's all fine and dandy, but that means games have to be coded to allow that. Since the possible game experiences (quests, NPC interactions, character improvements, etc) rapidly spiral toward infinity, it becomes impossible to code games to react. So, rather than do it "half way", developers seem to have gone to the other extreme where there's zero reaction from the game to the character's experience. Leaves more time to code pretty water effects, doncha know.

I'm proud to say I've never griped about playing a game that has me on rails. Yes, as roqua will point out, that means I'm not a true roleplayer. I'm not creative enough to create some living breathing entity. I'm a spreadsheet RPGer- always have been and probably always will be. All you "freedom" whiners can have your Morrowind and Oblivion and see the consequences of receiving what you ask for.

By supporting stuff like the Charisma Boy, Fallout 2 had alot of replay value. You replayed the game just to see the stuff you could not see on your first run through because you did not have the statistics. That was brilliant design, since you actually wanted to replay and try another characterbuild. My first character could not get a robot since you needed like 10 intelligence for that. I also think my charisma was too weak to get the best outcome with the mafia. After the end in Fallout 2, a npc said to me that I should consider replaying and try something else, like a survivalist. The game saw that my survivalskill was weak and suggested to replay and try a character with high survival skill just to see the difference!

I'll be interested to see how The Witcher measures up here.

At this point it sounds like it is patterning itself more on the old Black Isle and Bioware games than anything else. Even though you can only play one named character who already has a role cut out for him, it seems like they are stressing consequence and allowing you to develop only 60% of available skills in any one playthrough, so you can go back and replay the character in a different way.

Time will tell how successful it is, I guess .

Originally Posted by magerette
I'll be interested to see how The Witcher measures up here.

At this point it sounds like it is patterning itself more on the old Black Isle and Bioware games than anything else. Even though you can only play one named character who already has a role cut out for him, it seems like they are stressing consequence and allowing you to develop only 60% of available skills in any one playthrough, so you can go back and replay the character in a different way.

Time will tell how successful it is, I guess .

Isnt Bioware the publisher for that game?

No. Atari is going to publish The Witcher in North America.

Originally Posted by Zaleukos
Yeah, its pretty rare to see social attributes matter much at all.

The Dark Eye RPG system 4th edition contains social attributes built-in. So, I expect Drakensang to do something with them.

(Or better: I hope they are used within the game.)

Originally Posted by dteowner
All you "freedom" whiners can have your Morrowind and Oblivion and see the consequences of receiving what you ask for.

I'm perfectly happy with my MWs and Oblivions, but I play my Final Fantasys, too.
Video/computer games just are no replacement for real = pen & paper RPGs, which is fine with me. These are different types of gaming, and I play and experience them as something different. I just don't expect a computer game to be anything like a p&p game.

The last games I played where a character's social traits featured were Fable and Planescape: Torment. Spmehow. At least those are the games I remember.

Originally Posted by JemyM
All three are basicly from the same guys.

Huh? Icewind Dale 2 was made by Black Isle after the Troika crew split off, Arcanum was made by Troika, and Neverwinter Nights by Bioware. There's very little overlapping in the the credits, if any.

You state that Oblivion doesn't care what type of character you play and Fallout does, is that because you get 2 options instead of 1 if you have 10 intelligence?

If you have over 100 intelligence in Oblivion then people are going to comment about how smart you look. How is that any different?

Originally Posted by JemyM
In Oblivion, nobody cared about who you were. You could be the leader of every guild on the map, it did not matter. You could be a great wizard or a barbarian, and dialogue was the same.

I seem to recall people reacting to you differently based on your guild ranking in Oblivion. I also seem to recall people always saying the same thing in Fallout, care to give an example?

Originally Posted by KazikluBey
Huh? Icewind Dale 2 was made by Black Isle after the Troika crew split off, Arcanum was made by Troika, and Neverwinter Nights by Bioware. There's very little overlapping in the the credits, if any.

Black Isle & Bioware have often worked together. Troika consisted of ex Black Isle guys, so do Obsidian. They all shared the same philosophy in how to make RPG's.

Originally Posted by bjon045
You state that Oblivion doesn't care what type of character you play and Fallout does, is that because you get 2 options instead of 1 if you have 10 intelligence?

If you have over 100 intelligence in Oblivion then people are going to comment about how smart you look. How is that any different?

I seem to recall people reacting to you differently based on your guild ranking in Oblivion.

I also seem to recall people always saying the same thing in Fallout, care to give an example?

You get no extra content for picking a specific character over another in Oblivion. With 10 intelligence in Fallout 2 you get some content unavailable to other characters, including another companion. With 10 charisma you can end conflicts in some places that is impossible to end without violence, giving an alternate ending. The game is also forcing you to pick between factions, it's not possible to join all at the same time, giving you a reason to replay and try something else later.

Arcanum was the best of this kind, in my opinion. Baldur's Gate 1-2/PS:T also has various social skills that matter, but not in the same way as in Arcanum.

Originally Posted by Moriendor
No. Atari is going to publish The Witcher in North America.

But CDProjekt did get their engine from Bioware(Aurora), and apparently some guidance in how to modify it here and there as well, so there is a tie.

Originally Posted by JemyM
You get no extra content for picking a specific character over another in Oblivion. With 10 intelligence in Fallout 2 you get some content unavailable to other characters, including another companion. With 10 charisma you can end conflicts in some places that is impossible to end without violence, giving an alternate ending. The game is also forcing you to pick between factions, it's not possible to join all at the same time, giving you a reason to replay and try something else later.

If you want to roleplay a "fighter" in Oblivion you simply do not join the mages guild etc. If you pick a Khajit you cannot wear boots. I can't think of any other examples

I think Oblivion does allow choices, it's just if you want to create a character that can do everything you can do that.

Fallout has more restrictions and a far more sophisticated dialogue system which reflects these restrictions, but it is quite possible to build a character that can do everything. In Fallout 2 it is easier to create a character that can do everything, although if you make certain choices during the game you are precluded from doing certain things i.e. if you work as a slaver you cannot join the rangers. This is probably where Fallout 2 excels over a game like Oblivion in my opinion.

Originally Posted by magerette
But CDProjekt did get their engine from Bioware(Aurora), and apparently some guidance in how to modify it here and there as well, so there is a tie.

Yes, there is. They have also licensed SpeedTree so there is another tie. To IDV. Also, the game is going to be published on Microsoft Windows operating systems using the DirectX API so there is yet another tie. To Microsoft. They are also probably using 3D Studio Max in one way or another for the creation of the models or something so there is another tie. To Autodesk. Then there's the fine arts of texture crafting which is probably done in Photoshop so -yay- we have another tie. To Adbobe.
And now… if anyone can find the tie between all of this and what it has to do with the distribution or publishing of the game, well, you'll get a nice round cookie from uncle Mo .