Fortuente Logged in and smoked out.

20Oct/090

GAMING ROOOOUNDUPPPP!!!

The older I get, the more and more amazed I am at how time flies. Combined with my penchant for history it is easy to see what people mean when they say tempus fugit.

In the past two weeks I have been doing naught more than usual, with one exception - I decided to give Fallen Earth a shot. Sorry Ryzom, I'm sure I'll return someday (because you are a genuinely good game) but there is just too much going on right now. On top of Fallen Earth, Torchlight is coming out in 10 days and Dragon Age not long after that. And of course, most of my free time is being spent working on my own RPG project, WOTAN.

Fallen Earth

What can I say? If I was going to spend $50 on an MMO I should have got Darkfall. Seriously, though, Fallen Earth is a great game so far despite its warts. I am currently level 9 and doing my obsessive compulsive rounds of all the starter towns looking for the bonus AP missions. If you are not familiar with FE, that is I am trying to complete all the missions (quests) that award bonus skill points which are used to raise my character's skills.

FE has no classes, only skills, and so far that is my favorite aspect of the game. It is a marvelous antidote to the cookie-cutter EQ/WoW/etc. model where customization is done secondarily through "talents" or "traits" or whatever semi-arbitrary label they are assigned. I am focusing predominantly on crafting, which basically means I am by default a melee character, as melee and crafting have stats that overlap the best.

And that is fine with me as future wasteland ninja. Or, well, maybe. I am already fidgeting around with the cancel subscription button. But it is not because of any problem I have with the game, though the game does need some work - in my opinion it should have a more advanced economy, free-for-all zones like EVE's 0.0 space and there are lots of glitchy little bugs that need to be squashed.

But I, perhaps oddly, am not worried about any of those things. So far Icarus has been one of the more communicative studios I have seen, even going so far as to have a GM active on their global help chat channel all hours of the day. Wouldn't it be nice to live in a world where that was considered normal? I also like that at least one more game has come out that isn't a generic class-based themepark grinder.

This is going to likely be the only time you ever see me mention the game Aion on this site. I don't bear it any animosity, but I also have absolutely zero interest in that game. It is practically by definition a themepark grinder. I have no desire to even participate in a free trial of that game, were it available.

This is maybe why even though I am not sure FE will hold my fickle and buffeted-from-all-sides attention, I have no regret at least giving it a shot. If the Aion bug had crawled up my butt, I think I would be singing a different tune, however.

Torchlight

I am not a huge ARPG fan, but when the 'ol repetitive-stress-injury isn't agonizingly inflamed I enjoy a little Diablo/Titan Quest action. Of course my tendons are soon fire within minutes reminding me why I play those games only very rarely.

Tennis elbow aside, I was really, really, really looking forward to Mythos. So much so I was practically on an Internet candle-light vigil trying to get into the beta. Of course, that game was canceled around the same time flagshipped became a verb. So it wasn't meant to be.

Now imagine my joy at hearing about Torchlight, which is essentially Mythos reborn. And it's a single-player game priced under $20? I am so on this it isn't even funny, to use a favored turn-of-phrase of an adolescent Fortuente. If you read the link, apparently the Torchlight single-player will also be released with full modding tools intact.

Dragon Age

I have considered this a must-buy for quite some time now. Like since 2003. That said, the more I have been thinking about it, the stronger I feel that I am actually going to take a pass on this one for now.

WHAT?!? YOU ARE GOING TO MISS OUT ON THE BIGGEST FANTASY RPG GANGBANG SINCE BALDUR'S GATE 2????

Yes, I actually am. I have my reasons, and they all revolve around perception.

Perception 1: Money. It's expensive. Is it going to break my bank? No, but is $60 still a sizeable chunk when I am already throwing around $20 here and $30 there and even that $50 on Fallen Earth? Yes. It is going to be Christmas soon, after all and I have a child as well as utility bills.

Perception 2: Electronic Arts. Do I really need to elaborate on this? Bioware may be good 'ol same as always (which is doubtful regardless as both they and the industry have grown a lot in the past 12-odd years), but it's a simple fact that they are now an EA brand. And EA is on a weekend bender of a downloadable-content binge the likes of which might make Charles Bukowski proud.

Which means probably having to deal with some sort of asinine EA download manager or even having to use the wretched EA online store. No thanks.

So I am adopting a wait-and-see approach, perhaps even a wait-and-yarrr approach if I have the extra time. If I yo-ho-ho and the game turns out to be a genuine work of genius, I would probably feel compelled to fork over the cash out of respect, even if I continued to use the swashbuckled edition. More than likely, I will probably just pass until it has been out a few months or so.

DDO

OK. I had some issues with DDO. Namely, the Turbine customer service department could not service their way out of a wet paper bag. Or something like that. Whatever the reason, be it drastic overwork, incompetent management, utter lack of morale, plain laziness or all those things (can you tell I have worked in customer service in the past?), they are not getting the job done.

Basically I had a ticket on hold for about a month. All I wanted was for the points I purchased during the summer beta to be applied to my original account. I mean, really. No response for a month. If it wasn't for my increasingly incessant bitching, I can guarantee you I would still be waiting.

In true comedic fashion, the first time they "resolved" this issue also, I was not awarded the points I paid for but rather a large number of points - for being a founder account or somesuch reason - which I had no idea I was entitled to. Alas, in my hasty reply was elicited the mighty F-bomb. However I am confident the reason my actual purchased store points were alotted to my account  was due to my having the original transaction IDs. PayPal +1.

All of that being said, it is partly DDO's fault I am considering leaving Fallen Earth. Damn Dungeons and Dragons with your complex, gamist character system, marvelously atmospheric dungeons and interesting, semi-twitch combat.

Wait, Fallen Earth has all of that too (after some fashion)! Oh the conflicting emotions! Wait, no. Fallen Earth has a $15/month subscription and DDO no longer does. I guess we have found out together the mystery of why I'm willing to cast Fallen Earth to the side though I basically enjoy it.

Grand Ages Rome

Ah, City Builders, my true (and truly nerdy) love.

Grand Ages Rome continues to prove itself to me as an interesting side-track from the traditional city-builder formula while still keeping a lot of that formula intact. The thing I enjoy the most by far is the horde-less resource system. What I mean is that the lack of warehouse or stockpile which is in virtually every historic city builder, at least every one I can name off the top of my head.

Managing resources as a streaming figure changes the game up in a refreshing way, though it's not necessarily something I would studios other than Haemimont try to copy. Because I do find myself missing the need to manage roads and resource transportation. But it's OK.

I never mentioned it before, but I play the game at the highest graphic settings and the textures they use are friggin' exquisite. I sat with my three year-old today for a while zoomed in on the city I was working on (Cyrene free-build). I invented dialogue and little stories to go with the various citizens going about their virtual lives and he ate it up.

LOTRO

I basically unsubscribed in a fit of pique relating to the DDO debacle related above. I thought I had uninstalled it as well, but it was still on my computer. Strange, as I am certain I didn't imagine that. Perhaps Gandalf snuck into my interwebs.

I am not sure what my future with LOTRO holds. On one hand I am not excited with the themepark structure of the game - and increasingly so - and I am just not of the mind with all this subscription stuff. In addition, I am yet more fearful of the potential introduction of a "LOTRO Store." While I think the RMT business model naturally works out well in DDO, I really do not think it would work in LOTRO (or many other games like LOTRO).

I'm also not terribly taken with the idea of the Adventurer's Pack. It bears the hallmark of crappy marketing. Plus the Mirkwood "expansion" sounds thoroughly underwhelming. But that is all my opinion. More objectively speaking, they are doing what they have always done which is to make WoW for a different crowd. They did it well and I have no doubt Mirkwood will continue that trend.

I myself am just past that style of game for the most part. Of course this saddens me a bit, because I have a really big boner for J.R.R. Tolkien just like any other fantasy nerd with plastic pointy ears. More internal conflict ... all these emotions over ridiculously abstract things like online video games. Well, no matter. My subscription runs out on December 18th, so we shall have to see what the next two months hold in store for yours truly.

That sounded ominous for some reason.

3Oct/090

Grand Ages: Rome

Oh, I am very, very bad. Why am I very bad? I broke down and bought both Left4Dead and Grand Ages: Rome yesterday. Both were on sale and combined were still less than a single new release.

I don't really plan on playing L4D much in the near future, but at $15 I couldn't pass up the deal. I'll probably do the same thing with L4D2 as well, I'm just like that. I played it a bit, and honestly, while it is a good game and all, I was hoping for a bit more of the classic Romero zombie (or at least the 28 Days Later-style fast zombie) rather than the super-hero 12-feet tall, giant fangs, semi-intelligent monster pseudo-zombie. No Valve designers, I do not need Brawndo to mutilate my thirst, I come from a far-off land called Subtlety.

I put some decent time into Grand Ages: Rome, and have to say I felt challenged on the very first level of the campaign. The basic of goal, which is to build 15 insulae and achieve a food satisfaction rate of 50% is not hard at all. But I had a rather devilish time achieving the supplementary 20% entertainment rate. Kudos to Haemimont Games on that one.

Although I also have to say I had a hard time with it initially owing  to the fact Grand Ages is much, much different game from Imperium Romanum. Resource allocation, population, supply distribution ... all much different. Though the game still has a feel to it that makes it seem very much like an Imperium Romanum 2. Looked at in that way, I also appreciate how Haemimont seems to be hitting a stride, as its differences make it both like and unlike its predecessor in ways one can still appreciate both.

One thing that is still "missing" is a supply-route mechanic. Meaning you do not need to build roads at all. In IR the lack made the game feel a little shallow, but it actually works quite well in GAR. It no longer feels like a core mechanic was left out.

Both a character system and technological research system have been added, which adds welcome layers of strategy to the mix. Very briefly:

  • You character has talents which will add various bonuses (bonii, lol?) to  your cities. Talents are unlocked by spending points you receive upon completing scenarios.
  • You also receive money a.k.a. denarii ("personal wealth") which you can spend on estates which function similar to talents, except they add material supplies to your cities. These can be both purchased and sold, as you are given a limited number of estate slots to use.

The difference that was causing me so much trouble in the beginning is that of supplies and their creation and distribution. IR is much like any other classic city-builder - you set up a wood shop and your warehouse fills up. Then you use what is in the warehouse for new buildings and maintenance. In GAR the warehouse is done away with and you are forced to balance your production levels directly with your needs with no intermediary.

I found building position becomes much more important with this as a factor and over-building (something I usually guilty of, lol) is heavily punished. So far I have found this to be a really interesting system, and not the less for it's tripping me up all last night as I was thinking I was still playing IR.

So far I have two main criticisms of the game, both aesthetic but both heavily affect the game.

  1. The weather. I'm sure Haemimont spent a lot of time and put a lot of love into making the weather look as nice as it does. But I personally can't stand it, it just makes everything too hard to see. In IR you can turn it off through a shrine, but I haven't got that point in GAR yet. My point is that it should be able to be turned off from the options, not from an in-game building. So someone like me can just be done with it completely.
  2. GAR's left-click build menu is not as good as IR's menu. I like both much more than many other city-builder menus, but GAR's menu is unnecessarily hard on system resources, it is too big and because sub-menus open up on-hover (as opposed to on-click) it is cumbersome to use. The menu in IR was essentially the same, but did not suffer the defects I just listed.

One last, very minor, criticism: I don't like the illustrative artwork in GAR as much as IR. This is pretty minor, but the general skill in representing human proportions is not as good. I also think the painterly style of both IR's and GAR's illustrations was better represented by the IR artist(s) than the GAR artist(s). If it happens to be the same artist, then dude you are slipping.

But that is just my opinion, all in all I'd say GAR is shaping up to be a quality title that I am enjoying quite a bit.

29Sep/090

Of Dice and Men

WOTANIn my last post I talked about my first steps into Ryzom's world of Atys. Sadly I have not logged into Ryzom since last I wrote so I don't have the follow-up I said I would write. Instead I spent the weekend and Monday working and researching on project WOTAN. To blow off steam I played myself a rare game of Civilization 4 on a huge ring map on Prince difficulty ... and got stomped. I never was all that good at Civ, but oh well I still love that game.

What I want to talk about in this post is the dice system I have finalized for project WOTAN. While putting the finishing touches on the character system, I became highly unsatisfied with how the  DnD/GURPS hybrid I was creating was turning out in regard to stat progression and potential inflation. I am also now free to more finely develop the roll system for the dice.

Rolls and Skills

First, if you haven't read my previous posts on WOTAN or I wasn't clear (happens a lot), let me talk about the original system. It was based heavily on a GURPS-like 3d6 roll-under mechanic for use with a character system that ... I'm not sure that it is based on anything, the character sheet is sort of growing on its own accord, ameoba-like ... is based around unlimited skills and roughly 14 stats which are also determined with a 3d6.

So, for instance, your character (we'll call him Fang) has Strength of 15 and needs to move a large boulder. The boulder is pretty big but nothing amazing, so we'll set the difficulty at -3. This means to move the boulder Fang must roll at or below a 12 (15-3) on 3d6.

This is fine and all, and I could work controls into the character system to make sure point distribution is not abused (i.e. trying to roll initial 18s on as many stats as possible), but somehow for me it feels inelegant. And that might not be the best way to put it, but in trying to come up with proper skills in my system I was running into a brick wall.

Do I make a skill a modifier to a stat roll? Example: If Fang has a weightlifting skill of 2, then in the previous example he would need to roll 14 (15+2-3) 0r under. That would be the common-sense way to handle it. But then what about skill skills? If Fang also has a Dexterity of 17 but no sleight-of-hand skill (i.e. +0), could he still pull off a pick-pocket?

It doesn't seem logical as tricks, lock-picking or pick-pocketing are all greatly benefited from high Dexterity but require practice and instruction. Anyone can still basically move a big rock with no training if their physical muscle allows it, but can't necessarily pick a lock just because they have good hand-eye coordination.

I am at a loss somewhat because one thing I am very much set against is using modifiers based on stat levels. The old "12-13 +1, 14-15 +2, 16-17 +3, 18 -19 +4," et cetera. When I act uptight about using modifiers, this is what is causing it - I basically just dislike those for reasons which largely come down to personal preference and opinion.

image from Wikipedia

There are also some technical reasons for my not wanting to use this. For one I want to shy away from the use of signed operators (the + and -) in the code just because that is me. It's not a big deal and there will be some, I would prefer to not have to scale difficulty with ever-expanding negative-levels.

Also, and more importantly, I would like to avoid having to add in a special logical check to see if Fang has the skill needed to perform an action in the first place. This is not a huge deal, but it seems like there could be a more elegant way of handling it. But maybe not, this is something I am not confident I can avoid.

Probability Curves

While the six-sided die is the most common and can be found everywhere and the math of a 3d6 system is not that hard, at higher levels I think it becomes less easily-intuitive. For a computer this is not a problem, but sadly I suck at math and I am the one who is going to have to figure it out for the computer to run it in the first place.

The aspect of the 3d6 dice system that I want to preserve is the basic distribution of results -- a bell curve. Here you can see it plotted out on the AnyDice Calculator. Why is this important? You should read this article on dice systems - it helped me really refine my ideas and come up with the new system. You will see on that page that the outcomes for a dice roll on a linear system like a d20 will be more evenly distributed. In other words you have a much better chance of rolling a 20 on a d20 than you do of rolling an 18 on 3d6.

To me, at least, this makes the job of implementing both criticals and rare loot and random occurrences easier. If you want an item or occurrance or outcome to be "common" then assign the difficulty to the middle range, if "rare" then assign it to the fringes. The basic dice probability of the bell curve takes care of the rest.

Jumping in the Dice Pool

So I am basically satisfied with the 3d6 system as it stands except for two considerations:

  1. I do not like how character stats are initially determined.
  2. Character skills become more complex to implement.
  3. I do not like the basic difficulty qualifier system as it stands.

What I have done is tweak the system more to my liking, and in the process changed to dice system, which I will call Xd10. The X is an integral part of my tweaking both afore-mentioned issues of mine, it stands for the fact I am now using a Dice Pool system. And if you didn't read the Darkshire link above or are not already familiar with dice mechanics, that means the number of dice rolled is a variable. A situation might require a d10 roll or even a 8d10 roll.

The reason I chose the d10 (it could have been Xd6 after all) is mainly out of mental laziness on my part - honestly, a decimal system is just far more intuitive to me than base-6. It is also has a higher granularity of outcomes - a 3d6 has 16 outcomes with 216 combinations while a 3d10 has 28 outcomes with 1,000 combinations.

The reason I have decided upon a dice pool system is primarily due to its easy and elegant ability to scale a character to a situation. The difficulty of an action is determined by number of dice in the pool. And therefore it also allows me to start every stat and skill at ZERO.

This also allows me to keep to one of my initial design principles which was to use as few modifiers as possible. A skill can be looked at as a specialized stat, in that while it might have a modifier it does not itself modify anything. This is a concept I want but am not wedded to.

What the dice pool difficulty scaling means for the character is that his stats and skills will grow organically over his or her life and I will be able to refine the leveling process to a fine degree. It will make it easier to make (i.e.) d10-level mobs and loot or 8d10-level versions of the same. I will likely address from the character's standpoint by dividing levels into tiers, where the tier level is the same as the number of dice the character will mainly encounter.

For progression, what I am planning at the moment (very basically) is that every character will start off with X stat points and X skill points, to be assigned as they wish - stats will begin at one and skills begin at zero. Lets say we give fang 20 stat points and 10 skill points, he now distributes his 20 stat points between 10 stats and if he is wise he will now have all stats in the range of 1-10 with a few key stats close to 10, a few non-essential ones near 1 and others somewhere in the middle - remember, he has 30 stat points total as all stats start at one. When he gains a level he will be presented with X new stat points (depending on whether I want lots of high levels or low levels) to distribute as he sees fit.

When designing obstacles for Fang, I will now keep in mind that a level 1 character is going to have 30 stat points, so I will design most of them as d10 difficulty with a few really hard ones at 2d10. This means that most of his stats are going to be between 1-10 and most rolls are going to need between 1-10 or less. A few will require between 2-100 or less, making the roll improbable but not impossible. And help Fang out a bit if he put all his points in one stat and has been having an extremely hard go at everything else not related to that one super stat.

Skills work in a similar way, except that they start at zero and you choose them for the character, where the stats are pre-determined standards for all. This also allows for easier customization on the GM end. It's just as easy to have either an archery skill, a laser rifle skill or both at the same time. Stat modifiers influence skills through the use of two skill levels:actual and virtual.  A skill's v-level is equal to the average of its actual level (the points you have put into it) and a governing stat. So if you are Archery level 5 and Dexterity level 15, your Archery v-level is 10. Likewise at later levels, if you are Archery level 50 but you neglected to build Dexterity and it is only level 10, your Archery v-level will only be 30. For almost all instances of skill rolling, the v-level will be what you are rolling on, so it will be important to define the key stats for your character and stick with them as he/she progresses.

A drawback of the system at this point is that a master archer could not shoot a rifle at all if he had never bothered to take an initial point in the skill. This arbitrariness and the skill/stat interaction are the current weak links in the system, but I'll be revisiting them when I am at the stage really fleshing out the various roll types. I am afraid I still may have to end up using a logical check for every single obstacle. Maybe that's not such a big deal and I'm just being anal.

To overcome the skill-exists logic check, I may have to define characters as already having every skill in game, but starting at level 0, which would effectively nullify "knowing" them all. So to specialize your character, rather than selecting skills to learn then upgrading them through points, you merely upgrade skills on a universal skill list. The end result would be mechanically identical but it would alter the player experience a bit. And if a game utilizes 100 or more skills, that could get too unwieldy.

Anyway, it's a cold rainy day here. Perhaps when I get a spare free hour I will revisit Ryzom. However, if I am going to make my January deadline, I suppose I should get in every minute of work I can.