Egregoros

Signal feed

Timeline

Post

Remote status

Context

2
There's a fundamental problem with the "role play" in computer RPGs that the tabletop never had.

The "roleplay" in the tabletop comes from your character behaving as he does, and the content comes to you. This is the DM's job.
In the computer games, it's always the opposite. You must behave a certain way to access the content.

A crude example would be a mission that has people in a bar robbing drunks. How would you access this if your character was a non-drinker? Aha, you might say, well he just *witnesses* them doing it. But then how does his choice to get drunk or not matter? It doesn't.

The first-order approximation the early pioneers of the genre came up with was to just put in a branching path, with dialogue for each. Either you notice the last victim
>Dialogue.Start("Victim","Q423_DrunkardRobbers","Scene01_Victim")
or you're it.
>Inventory.BatchRemove(InventoryFilter("all"),{},+inf)
Both branches end with
>Questlog.add("A Drunk Fool's Errand")
But this becomes unwieldy, considering the many interdependent actions and dialogue choices that the player could have made. ("Didn't I have the accursed ring that can't be taken off, from that one quest?")

This is not a quirk. There is a fundamental combinatorics problem at the heart.
Ultimately why Mass Effect's promise of "choices that matter" fell flat, as it always does in these games. It's a simple impossibility.

How you could use AI to solve this is left as an exercise for the reader. Many are trying this.

Belated #MassEffectMonday post
@WandererUber I think this is related to why I always find it more compelling when a game gives you an established (more or less) character than when you make your own. Mass Effect (1) (mostly) does a decent job giving you choices that align with what Commander Shepard, given his history, situation, and conflicts of interest, might do. Without a concept of a pre-established character you're playing as, the choices would feel exactly as railroady as they technically are.

Replies

4
@PurpCat @WandererUber @nierenstein For complete details, according to what I heard, they were planning on an environmentalist message: Element Zero and mass effect technology produces dark matter, which is accumulating in stars, leading to increased mass and thus accelerated life cycle (hinted at in Tali recruitment and loyalty missions). The Reapers convert entire species into singular, giant machines as a means of preservation ("Each of us a nation.")

Then the ending in ME3 was allegedly leaked, so it was changed, but either the leak had no legs or the writers indeed left and they made it a Terminator plot. Either way, the environmental message about Eezo and the cycles being timed to prevent any permanent damage while preserving various species is actually pretty good. Logical, and most importantly understandable, if a bit generic. Solves the actual Terminator/Skynet problem by drawing a direct line to sentient self-destruction and the need to do something.