Richard Garriott Unveils 11-Minute Shroud of the Avatar Demo

[RandV80]

So this is an MMO? I'm generally not too fond of MMO's but this looks like something I'd try out. One thing I gotta say though, I really really hate the WoW style questing that freakin every game uses now. I know you typically need a quest journal to keep track of these things (not sure about the others but Ultima IX had one) but I don't like the utterly robotic process Blizzard has created. Run to the NPC with the question mark, click through some dialog, run to the spot pointed out on your map, fetch something or kill some things, run back, receive reward, repeat x1000000. I would wager that one of the reasons it's been so heavily adopted is it's a very easy and cheap way for developers to manage things, it's all systematic with little to no creativity.

For the game here though, a lot of people are commenting on the inventory system. Considering that what we see here has been thrown together in 3 months, I would imagine that they're re-using 'assets' in a lot of places. I wouldn't be surprised if Lord British did pull those bags straight from one of the older Ultima games for this demo. That convoluted system would certainly be a minus to this game but I'd say hold off on judgement until we're sure that's what we're getting here. I wouldn't be surprised to see it overhauled later on.

 

[AD-Stu]

One thing I gotta say though, I really really hate the WoW style questing that freakin every game uses now. I know you typically need a quest journal to keep track of these things (not sure about the others but Ultima IX had one) but I don't like the utterly robotic process Blizzard has created.

The previous Ultima titles didn't have quest logs - I know, because I used to keep an exercise book next to the computer while I was playing them so I could write all the stuff down. It's one of the things that I was always nostalgic about when looking back at those games, but having gone back to try to play Ultima VII in recent years... n'yeah, rose coloured glasses and all that. It's actually a massive pain in the arse. Especially in a games a BIG as the Ultima games were.

Full text interaction with NPCs is another thing that sounds great when you've got the nostalgia glasses on, but the reality is that ditching that system was one of the many improvements Ultima VII made over its predecessors. Though if LB is staying true to form, I'm sure there's at least going to be some amusing responses when you run up to people and shout "NAME", "JOB", "SHRINE" at them

 

[RandV80]

One thing I gotta say though, I really really hate the WoW style questing that freakin every game uses now. I know you typically need a quest journal to keep track of these things (not sure about the others but Ultima IX had one) but I don't like the utterly robotic process Blizzard has created.

The previous Ultima titles didn't have quest logs - I know, because I used to keep an exercise book next to the computer while I was playing them so I could write all the stuff down. It's one of the things that I was always nostalgic about when looking back at those games, but having gone back to try to play Ultima VII in recent years... n'yeah, rose coloured glasses and all that. It's actually a massive pain in the arse. Especially in a games a BIG as the Ultima games were.

Full text interaction with NPCs is another thing that sounds great when you've got the nostalgia glasses on, but the reality is that ditching that system was one of the many improvements Ultima VII made over its predecessors. Though if LB is staying true to form, I'm sure there's at least going to be some amusing responses when you run up to people and shout "NAME", "JOB", "SHRINE" at them

It wasn't necessarily a 'quest log' but Ultima IX did have a journal. I didn't have a gaming PC until later so I never really played any of the older Ultima games, though I did play Ultima IV on the Sega Master System. All the way up to the very last question of the game which I was never able to figure out, and being the pre-internet days...

But anyways what I was more getting at is that along with the convenience of quest 'logs' in modern games what we're getting is an increasingly rigid quest 'structure'. In a game like Ultima IV you start with a broad quest then head out into the game world and have to put some effort in exploration and talking to NPC's to figure out what to do. In FXIV you start in a city and begin by going to all the NPC's with question marks above them to collect quests, follow map markers to specific locations to complete quests, then follow the map marker back to where you get rewarded for the quest. Like I said in my other post the whole setup is just so robotic. I feel like I'm indulging in an obsessive compulsive disorder, and not actually playing a game. A lot of this has to due with the fact that WoW made 'the game' be all about the end game content, so developers are really just mailing it in on everything before.

Playing the FFXIV beta starting in the desert city the first main story quest kind of illustrates how bad this is. I forget exactly how it went but you join a conversation between NPC's discussing a young noble women that's gone missing. The lead guy turns to you and says there's a whole bunch of people out looking for her, would you be willing to lend a hand as well? Except when you start playing again there isn't anyone out looking for her, and you're given a quest marker that leads you straight to where she's conveniently waiting for you. There's no real 'gameplay' involved here and the story perspective is kind of ruined from all the 4th wall breaks. Like a collection of other players standing still around the NPC you're looking for because they're doing the exact same thing you are and are in 'video mode'.

I know there are problems with the old school design, it's not much of a game if you have to consult an FAQ every step of the way. But in my strong opinion the ultra convenience we have in modern games has become shit.

 

[briankoontz]

I'm pretty sure the game won't be a MMO. It has both an online and offline, single-player mode.

There's a trend right now of "old school" RPGs with some new innovations - Project Eternity and Divinity: Original Sin being two others in development. I'm hopeful about these games since even excellent modern RPGs like The Witcher 2 have abandoned "pure" RPG style in favor of extensive combat and cinematics. This has left the true RPG market open.

The development of the RPG genre has been really disappointing - we've had largely technical improvements, not fundamental design improvements or innovation. There's tremendous space for game design improvements, and with some luck we'll get some with these upcoming RPGs.

 

[DarthFennec]

Honestly, people who think that such features exist merely to pander to the lazy or stupid and thus should not exist .... are simply portraying themselves as some manner of snobby elitist who thinks that people should have to "work" for your fun or else they haven't earned it.

Of course you have to work for your fun. Otherwise, what's the point of playing the game at all? Just plug in a gameshark and type in a code and win without doing any work, right? Isn't that more fun than grinding through the game? No, because in order for things to be fun and fulfilling, and not utterly boring and pointless, you have to put forth a little effort. That's how it works, and that's how it's always worked.

That said, that's not even my argument. I never said "people should have to work for their fun, therefore games shouldn't have conveniences". I'm all for convenience, I love it. Just, not these particular conveniences, and not in an RPG. Keeping track of your own inventory and maps and logs, those are fun, in my opinion. Those are the things that make RPGs fun, for me. An RPG without those things is just plain boring. If you're not doing those things yourself, if the game does them for you, then why even pay attention to what's going on in the game? There's no point anymore, and it changes the game from an interesting roleplaying experience into a boring, tedious following of a grocery list. That's why I don't like those things. That's why those features suck. And that's why most RPGs are terrible.

I've been playing RPGs and enjoying fantasy games most of my life, and I like all of these features. Not because they mean I don't have to do any thinking, but because they mean I can spend my time focusing on the parts that are actually FUN. If you feel it's necessary for you to have to keep logs to have fun, then that's fine. But don't push your opinion on others.

I'm ... not. I'm simply stating my own opinion. When did I try to make other people share it?

And as I said in the prior post: If Garriott wants to pander to your elitist audience, that's just fine. But let's not pretend that it's the best game out there simply because it requires log-keeping in order to play (it's not). And hopefully Garriott's content with having a small player base, because he's not going to attract a lot of players with this dated model.

I never said it was the best game out there, I just said it was refreshing because this is the first time in a while that someone has done this kind of thing. How the hell is anyone supposed to make a statement about how good or bad a game is if they've only seen an 11 minute video of a 3-month alpha?

And my point is that expecting players to keep a pen-and-paper journal in an age where quest logs are common is ridiculous. And it's especially ridiculous when one of Garriott's more popular dungeon crawlers included an in-game journal system, but for some reason, Garriott didn't think it necessary to include in this brand new game over a decade later. That suggests he's not improving his game, but rather going backwards.

Okay, the journal system isn't the issue. A journal system is exactly the same as a pen-and-paper journal. The problem I have with a quest log is that it logs quests automatically. And who knows, maybe he will include a journal system in this. I think it's kind of a given that he will. Why wouldn't he? I think that would be fantastic.

1) Talk to one particular NPC about a topic that the NPC just throws out of nowhere because Garriott engaged with him in a discussion about chairs. How many players are going to know to do that without a guide?

The NPC (and other NPCs) would probably mention it through other dialog as well. I don't see how you can expect that particular dialog to be the only possible way to get information that there's a cave with some monsters in it. From the roundabout and awkward way the NPC brought it up (because of chairs, leading to the "throne of bone" which honestly has no significance whatsoever), it seems like Garriott programmed that NPC to mention that dungeon no matter what conversation route you take. You could probably just ask something like "Hey, anything weird going on around here?" and he'd tell you about it.

2) Locate the dungeon somewhere in the vast world of Brittania totally original fantasy land without any real clues given about where it is. The NPC says nothing about where it is except that it's "not too far". Garriott gets there immediately because he knows where it is, but to every other player, that "dungeon" looks like a generic white hill.

It's not that hard to find if you just look around. It would probably have a bunch of people going in and out of it as well, considering it's an MMO. It really wouldn't be that hard to find. And part of the fun of an adventure game is the "adventuring" part, the looking around and finding cool things like caves and shit. If the game just tells you where everything is, that's just boring. It's homework.

Do I really have to explain why a puzzle that can be completed simply by clicking torches at random until one combination works is not a good puzzle that involves any sort of conscious thought?

An infinite number of monkeys at typewriters will eventually write Hamlet. Any puzzle, no matter what it is, can technically be completed by clicking randomly until a combination works. I never said the torch puzzle required any great thought, I mean of course it doesn't, it's in a 3-month alpha, and the point is to show off the engine, not Garriott's puzzle-making prowess. All I'm saying is that you're wrong when you say the torch puzzle is impossible to figure out without either a guide or just random thoughtless clicking.

 

[DarthFennec]

Did you seriously just compare a quest log system to CHEAT CODES?

Um, no, I didn't. All I did here was bring your argument to its logical conclusion. You implied that "working for your fun" is a "snobby, elitist" concept, and that you shouldn't have to play parts of the game (such as, logging quests) in order to have fun with it. I was showing you that that's not the case, because if it were, you could just cheat and have the same amount of fun as you would have if you just played the game normally. This had nothing to do with my argument against the quest log system, as I explained in the next paragraph: "That said, that's not even my argument."

You're precisely the sort of elitist I was referring to, the kind who looks down on games and the people who play games the way they want to play them, simply because they're not playing the game your way.

Um ... not really, no. I'm perfectly fine with other people playing their own games their own ways. If people don't have fun with RPGs unless the game does things for them automatically, I may not understand it, but I don't condemn it. Whatever floats your boat is great with me. No, if anything, you are the one here who has been freaking out about my play style being "an unforgivable sin" (among other things), and this entire conversation has been about me defending it and explaining why it's just as valid as your style. So if anyone here is an "elitist who looks down on games and the people who play games the way they want to play them", it's the person I'm talking to.

You essentially admitted that you look down on games and gamers which utilize conveniences that you don't like to use yourself. So any argument that I could offer is a waste of time. It's talking to a brick wall. A brick wall that has already decided he's better than everyone else because quest logs are "teh sux".

I wouldn't say "look down". I look down upon most MMORPGs for plenty of reasons, to be sure, but "it has a quest log" isn't ever one of them, by a long shot. As I've said, if someone else sees logging their own quests as a tedious venture, and would have more fun with the game if that was done automatically for them, then by all means, incorporate a quest log. I have no problems with that. Now, I may have said that I personally don't understand those people, and that I personally can't play those games without bashing myself over the head with a keyboard, but "don't understand" and "don't have fun with" are entirely different things from "look down upon".

Something I haven't directly addressed yet, but have seen you mention, is that quest logs are "optional" (as in, I guess, that you don't necessarily have to look at the quest log menu screen if you don't want to). Believe me, I've tried this approach. It rarely works, and here's why: Most RPGs that I've played notify you on your HUD when a quest is added to your log, and that's something you can't turn off. That entirely defeats the purpose of ignoring the quest log screen, and turns quest logging into tedium such that it's honestly better just to use the menu (quest logging should be "pay attention to what people tell you and write things down when they have interesting things to say or a favor to ask", but now it's just "record message when computer beeps at you", in which case why even bother). Furthermore, those games are still designed with the built-in quest log in mind, and so the quests are always these set "go here and do this shit" kind of thing. If the game is designed with no automated log system, it allows for more freedom in quest design, because it allows for quests that can't necessarily be clearly represented in the automated log. Basically what I'm saying is, designing a game without a quest log (or at least, with a completely optional quest log, with a little tick box in the options that says "turn off quest logging"), would be leagues better than just ignoring the quest log menu screen.

If Garriott expects to sell this game to a broad audience, he's got another thing coming. His decision to be dismissive of features many people depend on in an age where RPGs have become exceedingly complex will result in him retaining a much smaller, more "elitist" audience of RPGers who think themselves "better" than the rest of the community because they do things "old-school". The other 90%+ of the community will ignore his game and move on.

It's fairly obvious from the start that he's not trying to sell to the modern MMORPG crowd. That doesn't necessarily mean that he's not selling to a broad audience, because I'm sure there are plenty of people (such as myself) who agree with his concepts of what an RPG should be. I don't play MMOs, but I think I would if they were like this, and there are probably a bunch of people with the same mindset. If there weren't, the game wouldn't have gotten two million dollars on kickstarter, yeah?