Vampire Preview

That's bad.

 

What's so wrong with it?
You think the game should reward you for not doing the basic shoot-em-up?
Giving experience for completing the mission is not bad at all, you can do it however you want and not suffer adverse affects due to style.
In Arcanum, there were certain things that would not fit in with the character at all that I would do simply because they gave more XP or a blessing.

 

I think its bad for the simple reason it tends to ignore player choice and focuses only on simple mission completion. Its bad in the sense that it doesn't matter if you got the greatest idea to solve a problem, you still get the same crumy reward. Different rewards aren't "adverse effects", they actually tend to promote different approaches to a problem (example: Deus Ex).

 

I think it's good that every way gives the same amount of xp, otherwise everyone will just solve the missions the same way, and it will be harder to roleplay your character, because one way gives the most experience. If every way gives the same amount diplomats will talk, sneakers will sneak and brutes will fight.

By the way, this is my first post here, but I've been watching this forum for quite some time, since this summer when I got Arcanum.

 

A good way for them to implement equal experience for each possible approach to a situation would be for them to not gauge the exp you recieve based on how ou did the job, but how well, i.e. through completion of multiple obectives for the more complex missions. I mean, for the noob beginer missions i could understand if there was only one objective etc. But if you need to break into baron von bloodsuckers home and kill him, they could give you bonus xp for making sure no one knew it was you, by either using stealth, killing all witnesses, using your cool malchavian dementation powers to make all viable witnesses into vegitables, etc.

 

Different rewards don't have to be better than others, though they can be. Also, i think that the problem is that, sure, i can play whatever character i want. But will i want to do it? Just because i created a gun-using vampire doesn't mean i won't be able to play, it just means my playing style will be different than others. But the point remains that there isn't a motivation to play differently; to me, anyway. I can play whatever character i want, provided there is a point to it. Otherwise it becomes a mechanical thing. As it stands i honestly can't see reasons to replay the game, or to try different character concepts. I strongly oppose the idea that this way gives players more freedom, or that different amounts of XP don't allow players to roleplay some of their character concepts, given that was one of the things that made quest-solving in Arcanum and Fallout interesting. Just because some players had a hard time being a certain character doesn't mean games should make it easier, otherwise the intention of roleplaying differently fades. That's like trying to find excuses for people who use auto-aiming in first person shooters.

And actually no, i don't plan my characters according to special events in games. I try to do my best to plan my character for the roleplaying concept i have; i can put rewards totally aside.

 

I actually think it's the other way around, atleast for new gamers. If the fight way gives the most xp then it's going to be played and sold like a FPS, if the sneak part is most valuable it will be like Thief.

If all parts give the same xp then it will be like (almost) seven different games, that are equally hard to finish, but (hopefully) with different storylines.

 

I understand that some people dislike it. In fact i'm not surprised that people prefer to get the same reward despite various ways to reach it. Its easier for them. They tend to get the idea that getting less rewards is apparently detrimental to their playing style, when in fact they just flesh out the type of character they're playing. Its kinda like complaining a sewer worker and a lawyer get different salaries, when different lines of work do pay off in different ways.

If anything, the limit one has in always getting the same kind of reward will remove interest on behalf of players in terms of trying different approaches. There won't be much point, if whatever you do nets you the same result. By contrast, if each way held different rewards, players would try out these other ways so they could see how easier, or harder, playing a certain character will be. Even if there would be one ultimate optimal way, the player would still be interested in the other ones. I think it would also come to actual importance given to your role in the gameworld. Convinving someone you are right is harder than busting a cap in someone's ass - and precisely because you pulled something harder, that's why you should get more of a reward.

 

If every way gets the same amount of xp then your character will be (almost) this powerfull at that point and it will be alot easier to balance.

The lawyer and the sewer worker still get the same amount of xp, but they put it in different skills. This way none of them becomes über powerfull before the other, when the lawyer is level 10 the sewer guy will be about the same. But they still live very different lives and get different secondary rewards, the lawyer get loads of money, while the sewer worker... uh, finds fun things in the sewers.

 

Balance can be achieved in multiple ways. Giving players the same reward despite what they do removes the interest in trying different things. Its weird we should expect a smooth-talker should get as powerful as someone who wields guns, considering they're completely different takes on equal situations. Essentially, that would lead to someone who talks his way out of all situations to be able to, in the later parts of the game, kill as efficiently as someone who's always let his guns do the talking because "balance" dictates they should have the same amounts of experience. I can't possible be the only one who finds this weird :???:

When what should be happening was both using different skills, and as such, getting different rewards/outcomes. A character that has to kill five thugs because he couldn't convince them, and a character that manages to convince them should be rewarded differently, no doubt. However, the experience difference shouldn't be that far apart - just different enough so players would know that there are differences.


@Dark Elf:

True, there can be other secondary rewards. I'm not against that possibility by a long shot. However, I think the point here is, having the same reward for different takes on a given situation destroys replayability in the long run. As it seems, you and others don't agree, and that's fine with me. Agreeing to disagree is just peachy. I'm merely pointing out that differen takes on different situations should have different rewards precisely because they're different, and they re-enforce the concept that your character is different, and that different actions have different outcomes. My silver-tongued vampire will achieve success in other ways than a brutal melee vampire. But the question is how is it preferable to have same rewards for experience? You can throw in personal investment into it as well. On one hand you have a well-mannered vampire who, in under two minutes, manages to convince a ten foot tall monster he is being sincere. On the other, you have a gun-totting vampire who takes five minutes to bring said monster down with his weaponry. You'll have different takes on the situation by both the character skills and your personal skills, yet the reward will be the same. You had almost minimal effort in one event, and had much more problems succeeding in the other, yet, regardless of your effort, the reward is the same. I have a problem with this, yes.

 

By giving the same amount of xp it will be harder to get to a certain part in the game on a too low level.

But I realize one bad thing with it, for example in Arcanum in the BMC you won't gain any xp by killing all the monsters, so running thruogh will be a much easier way. But this problem can be reduced by giving the monsters items they drop when they die, like Diablo, or having many chests along the way, that you don't have time to open if you run.through the dungeons.

The fighters will gain alot more items in the fightparts and have easier dialogue. And the talkers will gain more items in dialogue and have easier fightparts.

 

Lets hope it'll be actually balanced. Like we pointed out, balance can be achieved multiple ways. As it stands for now i oppose the idea (i doubt i'll ever accept it), but i'll wait until i can get into something more substantial for my next batch of comments.