Gaming features which should be common, but aren't

[Tassadar500]

WoW has done mounts pretty well, from what I've heard anyway.

[Dis]

Originally posted by Lord Nuclear
WoW has done mounts pretty well, from what I've heard anyway.

yep, they have. And the game came out in 2004.

Only now do we have the graphical technology to even think about doing horses and such.

So there's no reason to complain about them in older rpg's. But I expect rpg's in the future to have them.

[Tassadar500]

That's very true. Oblivion is also introducing mounts into the TES series, which I think will be an excellent game.

[Sandman]

Glad to see Jaguar and Lord Nuclear think that mounts aren't a petty detail.

Here's Indy brushing his teeth:

[DrSpike]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Depends on the genre. Interesting how in flight sims realism is a big factor, but not so much in driving sims. Kinda makes sense, huh? Flying, to really do it, takes scads of money for lessons, plane rental and all that. And then you only get to fly a Cessna, or whatever. Instead for the price of a game and a joystick you can fly your choice of planes. Driving OTOH, is something we all do - if i want to drive around the streets of a city, i can get in the car and do that (assuming youre old enough) Otherwise theres racing - (which I DONT really get the appeal of) or driving around crashing - which loses its appeal if its not spiced up with unrealistic elements, i suspect.

It's exactly the same. If you care about realism there's a market for you. If you just want to move the plane about a bit and shoot stuff there's also a market. People who complaining about lack of realism in the latter type of games puzzle me.

As for driving, yeah, I agree realistic games suck. But it's all a matter of taste. My mate used to drive zillion lap grand prix on Geoff Crammond's and love it.

Personally I'd take a game where you can crash a bit and still survive any day.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Lord Nuclear
Simply because, mounts can add more fun and depth to the game, while cleaning, going to the washroom, shaving, and the like, are just boring, tedious tasks that we do in real life all of the time.

How so? Adding horses to an RPG doesn't add much. Okay, so you move faster in the wilderness, and that's it.

Sandman doesn't even like exotic mounts - now those are more fun. Some can even fly, literally giving the game a whole new dimension.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Jaguar
Mounts are important in movement and combat, which are part of the focus of RPG games. The things you listed aren't the focus of the game.

Um, no. The focus of any RPG is playing the role of your character. Not movement, not combat. As Diss pointed out, you add a lot of complexity to the game without an equivalent increase in benefits.

[Dis]

yes but it does affect combat. Attacking from a horse gives a much greater advantage. Assuming you have long weapons. A thief carrying a dagger isn't going to do much.

But then to be realistic, you have to have hitpoints for the horse. Any creatures will then have to be programmed to attack the horse and kill it.

It does add complexity. Some people want that complexity. I'm really not sure how it affects combat in EQ2 and WOW. I didn't progress far enough in either game to afford a horse.

I would like to see horses in certain games. It all depends on the setting. A game with many wilderness areas (and a low magic type setting) should have horses. But a game such as Planescape: Torment (which takes place on other planes) or even NWN: Hordes of the Underdark (all underground and in hell) would not be better served with a horse.

[Urban Ranger]

Originally posted by Dissident
yes but it does affect combat. Attacking from a horse gives a much greater advantage. Assuming you have long weapons. A thief carrying a dagger isn't going to do much.

But then to be realistic, you have to have hitpoints for the horse. Any creatures will then have to be programmed to attack the horse and kill it.

It does add complexity. Some people want that complexity. I'm really not sure how it affects combat in EQ2 and WOW. I didn't progress far enough in either game to afford a horse.

A lot more complexity would be involved.

For example, you need various sorts of horses: quarterhorse, warhorse, mule, etc. Then you need to define the behaviour of various horses in different situations in addition to other characteristics. For example, a horse might panic or spike under certain circumstances.

Then you have things like all sorts of combat situations. For example, a rider is higher and thus is easier to hit by arrows. But he might also be faster, making him harder to hit. You also have things like people may want to trip up the horse and all sorts of other actions.

[Urban Ranger]

0.00000001/10

[Fake Boris]

A forum better than Apolyton

[Sandman]

I can just imagine the reviews:

"'Riders of Iskandar' is a new RPG that bravely tries to incorporate horseback exploration and combat. Unfortunately it fails on a number of counts. Firstly, the designers forgot to include any eating, washing or urinating for either the main characters or the horses. This blatant disregard for realism left me wondering why they bothered to include horses in the first place.

Secondly, you can steal horses in the game. This doesn't make sense, as they would be well guarded, and most people don't steal horses anyway.

Thirdly, the designers included warhorses, wild horses, mules and ponies, but forgot to include carthorses. What were they thinking?

Finally, the rules for mounted combat are quite different from the typical rules of an RPG, and are thus confusing and off-putting for the typical player. Unless you like learning new things, it would be better to play an RPG without any confusing new features. It's not as if horses add anything to the game beyond 'atmosphere' and 'originality'."

[Jaguar]

UR is so pwnd.

[Skanky Burns]

[RGBVideo]

I would like to see horses in certain games. It all depends on the setting. A game with many wilderness areas (and a low magic type setting) should have horses.

This worked very well in Avernum 3: horses were sort of expensively bought nuisances, but the idea in buying them was that you could travel two times faster on them than on foot.