first anon here
"Computers, being things that compute after all, can''t do very much without numbers. When I say to get rid of stats, I don''t mean to remove them from the program. Instead I''d like to hide them from the player."
This has nothing to do with computers. People just like stats, to differing degrees. For every person out there who doesn''t like stats there is another person that does like them. You know in street fighter II (which one though?) the game has stats on height, weight, age, and yes even blood type for each guy. The stats don''t mean a thing, yet I''m sure there is some guy out there who knows em all. Most people like more practical stats, knowing exactly how many attacks it takes to kill a foe. The average person likes an average amount of information.
"1. The player won''t be able to figure out exactly how they work. Predictability puts players to sleep, and constant stats are an infestation of predictability. If you vary stats, it''ll be hard to play the game the same way twice."
Actually predictability allows for a wider variation in strategies. That is simply true. Starcraft has almost no randomness at all, yet there are an infinent number of outcomes. If you want unpredicability there is one proper place: the other player, or the AI. Stuff like attack rolls is acceptable though because without them well it would be just dumb. Not having them though would be nice.
"2. It''ll be more like real life. And in this case, that''s not a vague moral thing, but something that adds to playability. I''ll know that my thief is going to do best in the dark of night, in an alleyway, when stabbing from behind."
that has absolutely nothing to do with whether you show stats or not.
You can''t get away from the truth, only a small minority want to live in a murky haze. It is perfectly fine for you to not want to know stuff but saying that the rest of us are wrong is just silly.
🎉 Celebrating 25 Years of GameDev.net! 🎉
Not many can claim 25 years on the Internet! Join us in celebrating this milestone. Learn more about our history, and thank you for being a part of our community!
A crusade against constant stats!
quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster
Actually predictability allows for a wider variation in strategies. That is simply true. Starcraft has almost no randomness at all, yet there are an infinent number of outcomes. If you want unpredicability there is one proper place: the other player, or the AI. Stuff like attack rolls is acceptable though because without them well it would be just dumb. Not having them though would be nice.
I love it when people ruin their own arguments in the same posts
1. The talk about stats was about Role-Playing games. Starcraft is NOT a roleplaying game, it''s a RTS game. Completely different genre, one where the quantification of ability is very important to be able to accurately simulate the outcome of battles.
Role-Playing games are NOT strategic games. This is something most people have lost out on completely, and I guess the endless streams of stats has something to do with that. However, the "strategic whacking set in a fantasy setting" type game is NOT what we were trying to achieve when talking in the original "what''s with stats" thread. We''re out to promote roleplaying, not figuring out stats.
2. "Stuff like attack rolls is acceptable though because without them well it would be just dumb. Not having them though would be nice."
Now you have completely lost me - first you argue for stats, then you say not having them would be nice, what side of the argument are you trying to make?
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
(The Malcontent anon poster, not the last one...)
I think the other anon poster is somewhat unclear on the reasons for the player/character split, and on how certain kinds of satats differ. First of all, he''s confusing qualitive stats like starcraft unit qualities, with advancement stats like most RPGs. And he throws in some flavor stats from street fighter. Buddy, you completely missed me with that arguement.
We''re talking about ONE kind of stat here. Advancement. That''s it. All other stats pose no problem, because they are static. Problems only arise when you show the player a number, tell them "you should raise this number if you want to win/do well", and then say "here is what you need to do to raise that number."
Why are we suprised when this lends itself to abuse? It''s such and obvious performance reward system... you might as well see it as a skinnerbox. You can''t stick a rat in a cage with a food-delivering button and not expect it to press away like mad.
The ways around this behavior are SO obvious, but to implement them we must first stop being concerned about alientating powergamers. Let it go. If you design a system that they hate, so be it. Others will come and fill the gap. Maybe more, maybe less.
-The Masked Bandito
I think the other anon poster is somewhat unclear on the reasons for the player/character split, and on how certain kinds of satats differ. First of all, he''s confusing qualitive stats like starcraft unit qualities, with advancement stats like most RPGs. And he throws in some flavor stats from street fighter. Buddy, you completely missed me with that arguement.
We''re talking about ONE kind of stat here. Advancement. That''s it. All other stats pose no problem, because they are static. Problems only arise when you show the player a number, tell them "you should raise this number if you want to win/do well", and then say "here is what you need to do to raise that number."
Why are we suprised when this lends itself to abuse? It''s such and obvious performance reward system... you might as well see it as a skinnerbox. You can''t stick a rat in a cage with a food-delivering button and not expect it to press away like mad.
The ways around this behavior are SO obvious, but to implement them we must first stop being concerned about alientating powergamers. Let it go. If you design a system that they hate, so be it. Others will come and fill the gap. Maybe more, maybe less.
-The Masked Bandito
The Masked Bandito eh
Why don''t you register yourself on the boards? It''s easier, and people will start to know you after only a very short time.
Anyway, you are very correct that having stat advancement is just ASKING for stat advancement. That''s all that powergaming is, figuring out the most efficient way to improve your stats.
So really, if you have stats, you are NOT allowed to complain about power gaming, because you are encouraging it...
Even the way that gollum suggests won''t stop powergaming, it will just make outcomes less predictable. If you have higher stats, you will still do better.
( If you don''t do better with higher stats, why have stats in the first place, just randomise outcomes! )
The only way is to either hide the internal numbercrunching from the players ( which might still not eradicate powergaming, because just because they don''t SEE it doesn''t mean they don''t know its there ), or get rid of that type of "advancing the stat to get better."
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
Why don''t you register yourself on the boards? It''s easier, and people will start to know you after only a very short time.
Anyway, you are very correct that having stat advancement is just ASKING for stat advancement. That''s all that powergaming is, figuring out the most efficient way to improve your stats.
So really, if you have stats, you are NOT allowed to complain about power gaming, because you are encouraging it...
Even the way that gollum suggests won''t stop powergaming, it will just make outcomes less predictable. If you have higher stats, you will still do better.
( If you don''t do better with higher stats, why have stats in the first place, just randomise outcomes! )
The only way is to either hide the internal numbercrunching from the players ( which might still not eradicate powergaming, because just because they don''t SEE it doesn''t mean they don''t know its there ), or get rid of that type of "advancing the stat to get better."
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
What if I already *am* registered? (wink)
If this doesn''t give me away, nothing will...
There is a way to have stats and yet not have powergamers (be effective). Two actually.
1) Skill attrition: Have all skills ratings in the game atrophy slowly. This will guaruntee less of a spread between starting characters and supercharacters, hence making powergaming *less* worthwhile. Must be combined with other techniques to be at it''s most effective... like absolute death. =)
2) Skill Checking: Make a note of the times skills have been performed and the context in which they were perfomed (i.E., proximity to designated "targets") At the end of a day/ session (preferably day) grade skill improvement on a percentage of time spent. If the percentage reaches a certain point, progression starts to curve DOWNWARD, because less and less is left to be learned. This is combbined with a traditional skill curve (ie leveling). Essentially, your better off just playing the character, because grotesque repetition will get you nothing. You can only learn so much in a day....
I don''t know if that all made sense, or if anything is missing... but you''ve probably figured out who this is, huh? Oh well. One more moniker down the toilet....
-The masked Bandito
If this doesn''t give me away, nothing will...
There is a way to have stats and yet not have powergamers (be effective). Two actually.
1) Skill attrition: Have all skills ratings in the game atrophy slowly. This will guaruntee less of a spread between starting characters and supercharacters, hence making powergaming *less* worthwhile. Must be combined with other techniques to be at it''s most effective... like absolute death. =)
2) Skill Checking: Make a note of the times skills have been performed and the context in which they were perfomed (i.E., proximity to designated "targets") At the end of a day/ session (preferably day) grade skill improvement on a percentage of time spent. If the percentage reaches a certain point, progression starts to curve DOWNWARD, because less and less is left to be learned. This is combbined with a traditional skill curve (ie leveling). Essentially, your better off just playing the character, because grotesque repetition will get you nothing. You can only learn so much in a day....
I don''t know if that all made sense, or if anything is missing... but you''ve probably figured out who this is, huh? Oh well. One more moniker down the toilet....
-The masked Bandito
Eh eh.
I''m guessing it''s the Masked Landfishian Bandito!
I must say, I like the second idea.
( I have to say that, I designed a system like that for computer-supported pen and paper ).
Now, what if I said you can combine both ideas!
That would really be interesting, because you could rapidly improve a bad skill when you needed it, but it would atrophy rather quickly again, up to some normal point.
That way, your character is highly variable, but with a constant baseline ( those skills/abilities you use almost all the time are going to be higher ).
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
I''m guessing it''s the Masked Landfishian Bandito!
I must say, I like the second idea.
( I have to say that, I designed a system like that for computer-supported pen and paper ).
Now, what if I said you can combine both ideas!
That would really be interesting, because you could rapidly improve a bad skill when you needed it, but it would atrophy rather quickly again, up to some normal point.
That way, your character is highly variable, but with a constant baseline ( those skills/abilities you use almost all the time are going to be higher ).
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
In most cases, that''s a rather abstract idea, my Avatar friend... However, I think I see where it would be neat. What we really need to do is find a good way to classify different kinds of learning... Here''s a deconstruction of that last example you gave...
-There is ALWAYS residual knowledge of a skill. Skill attrition should never cause a skill to fall below a certain percentage of it''s highest every rating.
- There are several different ways to acquire skill. On can recieve actual experience, practice, or "education". Until we find a role and a technique for abstract skills such as chemistry and math, "education" might not be the best way to learn anything.
-The rules which would govern the rate of increase and attrition would vary so greatly that the system would need to be intuitive! This means character creation becomes less a matter of player decision, and more a series of player choices that mold the character unconciously to the player''s style of learning. Sounds tough, I know, but it could be done.
The attrition puzzle is a tough one, Keith. The more you pull on it, the more you realize how big it really is. It''s VERY close to the way things are in reality, so getting it right is crucial. I''ve been working on it non-stop for a month now, and I still haven''t been able to show Niphty how it works... But I KNOW that it does. The end result will be either horrendously complicated or incredibly simple. Or both.
-Mr. Hyde
-There is ALWAYS residual knowledge of a skill. Skill attrition should never cause a skill to fall below a certain percentage of it''s highest every rating.
- There are several different ways to acquire skill. On can recieve actual experience, practice, or "education". Until we find a role and a technique for abstract skills such as chemistry and math, "education" might not be the best way to learn anything.
-The rules which would govern the rate of increase and attrition would vary so greatly that the system would need to be intuitive! This means character creation becomes less a matter of player decision, and more a series of player choices that mold the character unconciously to the player''s style of learning. Sounds tough, I know, but it could be done.
The attrition puzzle is a tough one, Keith. The more you pull on it, the more you realize how big it really is. It''s VERY close to the way things are in reality, so getting it right is crucial. I''ve been working on it non-stop for a month now, and I still haven''t been able to show Niphty how it works... But I KNOW that it does. The end result will be either horrendously complicated or incredibly simple. Or both.
-Mr. Hyde
One way we here tried to solve the learning puzzle is like this:
( Using the dreaded-way-too-much-like-adnd notation )
You have Ability Scores. They determine your genetic makeup, hence, not changing all that much. You start off with these, perhaps random, perhaps chosen, it doesn''t really matter. Attrition doesn''t really take place here, unless in very serious circumstances ( muscle wasting disease, bone cancer, stroke.. )
You have Knowledges. They determine how much you "know" about something. Knowledge is hard to make yourself, because it''s research. Most knowledge is acquired from "teachers", someone who has some of that knowledge too. Generating knowledge yourself is not impossible,but it takes a long time, and a lot of effort. Improving knowledge is "learning".
You have Skills. Skills determine how good you are at something. Your maximum possible skill is determined by how much you "know" about it, through the related knowledge, and how good you "naturally" are at it, through your Ability Scores. Improving Skills is "practice" or "experience".
Now, in your post you distinguish between experience and practice, what makes this distinction?
Plus, I know I''m still making heavy use of stats here, and somehow, I''d like to throw them out, or at least make them more abstract than the way I''m thinking of them now, based on the ancient ADnD system...
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
( Using the dreaded-way-too-much-like-adnd notation )
You have Ability Scores. They determine your genetic makeup, hence, not changing all that much. You start off with these, perhaps random, perhaps chosen, it doesn''t really matter. Attrition doesn''t really take place here, unless in very serious circumstances ( muscle wasting disease, bone cancer, stroke.. )
You have Knowledges. They determine how much you "know" about something. Knowledge is hard to make yourself, because it''s research. Most knowledge is acquired from "teachers", someone who has some of that knowledge too. Generating knowledge yourself is not impossible,but it takes a long time, and a lot of effort. Improving knowledge is "learning".
You have Skills. Skills determine how good you are at something. Your maximum possible skill is determined by how much you "know" about it, through the related knowledge, and how good you "naturally" are at it, through your Ability Scores. Improving Skills is "practice" or "experience".
Now, in your post you distinguish between experience and practice, what makes this distinction?
Plus, I know I''m still making heavy use of stats here, and somehow, I''d like to throw them out, or at least make them more abstract than the way I''m thinking of them now, based on the ancient ADnD system...
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
Author
(Just cuz no one ever uses the Santa)
Ok, lemme start over.
I am pro-advancement . Even allowing for skill attrition, which I support because it encourages roleplay, I enjoy advancement. I think most other people do, too. Games seem to be an extension of our egos. So, make our egos feel good, eh? (Let's ignore morally instructive tragedies for now, shall we?)
Here's what I don't like:
- Predictability - it bores me.
- Games that play the same for every character.
Hiding stats and making them random take care of the first problem. Modding stats like crazy, based on as many factors as the computer can handle, takes care of the second.
This, however, creates a new problem. If you're hiding the measurements of how good a character is, how do you communicate that feeling of advancement that we like?
So, this is really a new thread, but my ideas go something like this:
Alternative ways of showing chracter skill
- NPC reactions.
- Character comments. --> "These guys are too easy. Let's find some real monsters." etc.
- Cool effects (graphical, sounds) when your stats and their mods hit optimal ratings, or "sweet spots".
Any other ideas? How do we give feedback to people about their characters, without reducing it to boring and predictable numbers?
- gollum
Edited by - gollum on July 7, 2000 10:09:03 AM
Ok, lemme start over.
I am pro-advancement . Even allowing for skill attrition, which I support because it encourages roleplay, I enjoy advancement. I think most other people do, too. Games seem to be an extension of our egos. So, make our egos feel good, eh? (Let's ignore morally instructive tragedies for now, shall we?)
Here's what I don't like:
- Predictability - it bores me.
- Games that play the same for every character.
Hiding stats and making them random take care of the first problem. Modding stats like crazy, based on as many factors as the computer can handle, takes care of the second.
This, however, creates a new problem. If you're hiding the measurements of how good a character is, how do you communicate that feeling of advancement that we like?
So, this is really a new thread, but my ideas go something like this:
Alternative ways of showing chracter skill
- NPC reactions.
- Character comments. --> "These guys are too easy. Let's find some real monsters." etc.
- Cool effects (graphical, sounds) when your stats and their mods hit optimal ratings, or "sweet spots".
Any other ideas? How do we give feedback to people about their characters, without reducing it to boring and predictable numbers?
- gollum
Edited by - gollum on July 7, 2000 10:09:03 AM
I think I mentioned this in another thread somewhere....
If you do advancement right, you don''t need to communicate ANYTHING to the player ( though visual/aural feedback is always good ).
Basically, getting better at something means that your success rate goes up. The player will find it''s easier to do things, perhaps even accidentally. For example: walking into that big rock that''s always been in the front garden in an awkward spot, but this time you uproot it, and think "wow, I really have been working out well".
Other things I''d have:
A few well-defined levels for certain abilities, specifically the ones that are visual in real life: for instance, a wimpy-looking graphic when you are weak, a normal when you are average, and a bodybuilder if you are strong. A fat character, a grey-haired character, you get the idea...
Some aural feedback: If your character gets exhausted, make it pant! If in pain, make it scream. Little clues, not too obvious, and only to enhance the visualisation/realism/immersiveness of the playing experience, in stark contrast to "communicating the level of your statistics".
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
If you do advancement right, you don''t need to communicate ANYTHING to the player ( though visual/aural feedback is always good ).
Basically, getting better at something means that your success rate goes up. The player will find it''s easier to do things, perhaps even accidentally. For example: walking into that big rock that''s always been in the front garden in an awkward spot, but this time you uproot it, and think "wow, I really have been working out well".
Other things I''d have:
A few well-defined levels for certain abilities, specifically the ones that are visual in real life: for instance, a wimpy-looking graphic when you are weak, a normal when you are average, and a bodybuilder if you are strong. A fat character, a grey-haired character, you get the idea...
Some aural feedback: If your character gets exhausted, make it pant! If in pain, make it scream. Little clues, not too obvious, and only to enhance the visualisation/realism/immersiveness of the playing experience, in stark contrast to "communicating the level of your statistics".
Give me one more medicated peaceful moment.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~
ERROR: Your beta-version of Life1.0 has expired. Please upgrade to the full version. All important social functions will be disabled from now on.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
