Off Topic Discussion Megathread

[Vyrerus]

Sounds rough, Storm Churro. :/

Kind of reminds me of how I used to play games like Dragon Age or Knights of the Old Republic. I never deleted characters that were very far along, but I'd delete a character right away if I got bad vibes from them or something didn't feel right. Or if I lost a tough encounter early on.

Finally got broken of that in Mass Effect 1 with the asteroid DLC. The Batarians were gonna drop an asteroid on a human colony with like 4.4 billion people. The way I read what was going on the first time, the option presented was to stop the Batarian and let the science team hostages die, or let the asteroid hit the planet. I was quite miffed when the Renegade option was saving the 4.4 billion colonists(you'd think saving 4.4 billion vs. saving 5 individuals would be Paragon, but nooooooo). Turned out that saving the scientists was Paragon, and all that happens is the Batarian leader gets away. We succeed in stopping the asteroid. It pissed me off, because it made me realize it was really a non-choice, especially when in the third game, you can run into that Batarian again, only now he's dying painfully and slowly in a refugee camp from some illness.

Like, yeah, that was me misreading the situation. Still made me realize that the choices we get to make, particularly in video games, can never really communicate right and wrong choice. They can show it, to some extent, but they lack proper consequences for most of the choices. The other thing that goes with the Batarian getting away, is that he could have setup with another batch of raiders, and ran more attacks on future colonies, which is why they tie him up all nice and neat in a, "Dying from the Space Plague" bow. And he makes sure to mention that he couldn't get back up and running and junk, even before the space plague. It's infantile when you analyze it. God forbid we're forced to think in a game where we're supposed to be weighing our choices heavily at each and every venture.

[SturmChurro]

..

Well, I don't mean 'right' or 'wrong' in sense of morality necessarily, but literally out of order. For example, when I hit whiterun in Skyrim, I always have to talk to certain NPCs out of routine. If I don't.. it makes no sense. My character always has to go there in this order, and everything has to be organized this way. I cannot play alternate start mods, because it makes no sense in the majority of dialogues; the game wasn't made for it. So I spend 6 hours every single character doing the same thing, because it's the the right way to do it.

My characters in any game will not wear or use items that do not match - whether they are BiS or not. Luckily games like FFXIV allow me to glamour over it. I should say, morality choices can be an issue. If I cannot resolve a situation the way I think this particular character would do it: that's a deleted character. In other RPGs if I don't do things in the right, meticulous order, I might not be able to resolve a situation the way I think that character would do it. If I want to play a game like the Witcher 3, I have to play The Witcher 1, and 2 first, so I can have continuity. Any RPG with direct sequels. In pillars of eternity 2, I had a character I spent over 100 hours that I transferred to it from 1. It made one choice I didn't like after further thought. So I deleted it, and restarted anew in 1, and have been working on that character for a couple years now, and I cannot play the second again until I finish it in the first.

In FFXIV, it doesn't hit as hard because it's actual canon or whatever that they have this weird time thing, so I can go back and complete old content out of order. Choices are effectively non-existent (let's be real), I can glamour most things acceptably, etc. I have put so much time in this game, that I can ignore a lot of what would stress me out in other games. That isn't to say I don't get annoyed by some things. Like on my character profile, I have BLU leveled to like 16 or something. It's an ugly number, it's bad. Same with some of the crafters. I either need to finish it, or not do it at all. That's part of the reason I haven't touched others (they are also boring to me). That, and my inventory organization is really bad, I've been ignoring that for a very long time, and that needs to be cleaned up badly. I don't want to touch crafter/gatherers because it will only make that worse, and I'll have to actually deal with it to play them. I do get annoyed by the lack of organization, but as long as I can ignore it, I don't have to stress about it as much. Once I start actively having to look at it, like finding crafting mats, that's when I have to stress about it.

[Vyrerus]

Well, I don't mean 'right' or 'wrong' in sense of morality necessarily, but literally out of order.

Oh. Well, I suffer from that too. Just not in every game. It's definitely why I don't like speed running either.

In Dark Souls, the NPCs have very convoluted questlines that you probably won't figure out your first time through without a guide. Once I knew about them, it was sort of a death knell for speed. I can only barely force myself to ignore certain NPCs and move on. I like to save all of them, and get them to Firelink Shrine. Buy their wares, chat them up, and listen to them talk. It's a compulsion.

Even if I'm playing a STR based Himbo who will never use Sorcery, I will raise my sorcery to the point where I can buy Bighat Logan's spells right off the bat.

I always go save Rhea of Thorolund from the Tomb of Giants, even if I have no intention of using Miracles in the playthrough.

Sometimes when I force myself to break the mold, I won't delete the character... at least not for a long while. They'll sit there, taking up space, and by the time I want to play the game again I'll look at them and think, "Oh, they killed so and so, and they didn't talk to this one NPC, so now their options are limited. Might as well start a new character."

I definitely don't suffer in the way or as bad as you, but I kind of get what you're saying.

[Lauront]

Well, I don't mean 'right' or 'wrong' in sense of morality necessarily, but literally out of order. For example, when I hit whiterun in Skyrim, I always have to talk to certain NPCs out of routine. If I don't.. it makes no sense. My character always has to go there in this order, and everything has to be organized this way. I cannot play alternate start mods, because it makes no sense in the majority of dialogues; the game wasn't made for it. So I spend 6 hours every single character doing the same thing, because it's the the right way to do it.

My characters in any game will not wear or use items that do not match - whether they are BiS or not. Luckily games like FFXIV allow me to glamour over it. I should say, morality choices can be an issue. If I cannot resolve a situation the way I think this particular character would do it: that's a deleted character. In other RPGs if I don't do things in the right, meticulous order, I might not be able to resolve a situation the way I think that character would do it. If I want to play a game like the Witcher 3, I have to play The Witcher 1, and 2 first, so I can have continuity. Any RPG with direct sequels. In pillars of eternity 2, I had a character I spent over 100 hours that I transferred to it from 1. It made one choice I didn't like after further thought. So I deleted it, and restarted anew in 1, and have been working on that character for a couple years now, and I cannot play the second again until I finish it in the first.

In FFXIV, it doesn't hit as hard because it's actual canon or whatever that they have this weird time thing, so I can go back and complete old content out of order. Choices are effectively non-existent (let's be real), I can glamour most things acceptably, etc. I have put so much time in this game, that I can ignore a lot of what would stress me out in other games. That isn't to say I don't get annoyed by some things. Like on my character profile, I have BLU leveled to like 16 or something. It's an ugly number, it's bad. Same with some of the crafters. I either need to finish it, or not do it at all. That's part of the reason I haven't touched others (they are also boring to me). That, and my inventory organization is really bad, I've been ignoring that for a very long time, and that needs to be cleaned up badly. I don't want to touch crafter/gatherers because it will only make that worse, and I'll have to actually deal with it to play them. I do get annoyed by the lack of organization, but as long as I can ignore it, I don't have to stress about it as much. Once I start actively having to look at it, like finding crafting mats, that's when I have to stress about it.

I have the same compulsion to sometimes replay games from earlier saves if I don't like the outcome and to look up how to achieve specific outcomes in the game. Like you say, in XIV it matters far less (and if the story is boring me at any time I can just mostly ignore it anyhow), but in single player RPGs I'm much more driven to play the story the way I want my character to, and if the game forces storylines or decisions I don't like, I will eventually bore of it and jump to something else. It definitely does make it harder to play many RPGs concurrently; bit less of an issue with genres where the story is secondary, like city sim, TBS, 4x or RTS games, which I tend to play on the side.

The MMO market is super saturated and aren't as profitable vs. maintenance cost. So the risk of a bust is real in an age of gaming where companies are scared to innovate and want to stick with formulaic titles or just go for the easy money with gacha games and Surprise Mechanics in $60 releases.

When(if) it comes out, I think the League of Legends MMO is gonna show what the future entails for the MMO genre. Riot has the money, the expertise, the lore to supply a online world(even if you don't like the LOL or Legends of Runeterra). Do they stick to the current MMO formula, go the more RPG-MMO route like 14 or try to strike at something new and original and take that big chance. If it succeeds maybe another AAA sized company or two with a storied series(wishful thinking Nintendo doesn't have a mainline MMO) will give it a go.

Yes, I'm eager to see what they do with that one.

[TheMightyMollusk]

Finally got broken of that in Mass Effect 1 with the asteroid DLC. The Batarians were gonna drop an asteroid on a human colony with like 4.4 billion people. The way I read what was going on the first time, the option presented was to stop the Batarian and let the science team hostages die, or let the asteroid hit the planet. I was quite miffed when the Renegade option was saving the 4.4 billion colonists(you'd think saving 4.4 billion vs. saving 5 individuals would be Paragon, but nooooooo). Turned out that saving the scientists was Paragon, and all that happens is the Batarian leader gets away. We succeed in stopping the asteroid. It pissed me off, because it made me realize it was really a non-choice, especially when in the third game, you can run into that Batarian again, only now he's dying painfully and slowly in a refugee camp from some illness.

That's not the same Batarian. The one in the refugee camp is an unnamed terrorist who's lashing out because he blames humanity for the fall of the Batarian Hegemony. Balak (the guy from Bring Down the Sky in ME1) shows up in a different side quest, where you find out what really happened to them.

Of course, as so many things ended up in ME3, the only difference that really happens if you do or don't kill Balak in 1 is a notch on your galactic readiness rating (if Balak dies, you can't get the Batarian Fleet asset).