In any case, on the subject of game-buying I live in Superjail and are thus arbitrarily charged more than others for the same product despite living in a global market because regional pricing is a corrupt institute that should be torn down but hey what can ya do, GOG exists and that's something at least. It's almost handy I haven't figured out how to change Steam's price displays to AUD so I can instantly tell when I'm getting ripped off without having to currency-convert. Clearly I am morally justified to pirate anything and everything :V
It's becoming cheaper to import my games from Singapore than buy in AUD now.
 
The stylised aesthetics of Persona 4 are a really double edged sword. Although they certainly look good and give the game its own identity, I do sometimes wish they'd gone for more conventional monster designs and names for spells as they can take me out of them game at times.

Also, on the topic of having an older computer, try out GOG.com, can get some old classics there for real cheap and can run on more recent computers.
 
...the heck you live in? I'm in Spain and most new console games are absolutely 60 euro, with 70 not being at all unusual especially when it comes to PS4 games, and this has been the status quo for a while. Nintendo was notable for putting the base price point at 50 instead of 60 in their games!
Near the very centre of Europe.
 
Stop buying games month one if you have money issues. Games have insane novelty depreciation; they drop in price very quickly as time goes on if you're not trying to collect Nintendo first party games
 
Stop buying games month one if you have money issues. Games have insane novelty depreciation; they drop in price very quickly as time goes on if you're not trying to collect Nintendo first party games
Depends where you live? In my area, stores hiss and spit like an angry, bitter cat dunked in ice water at the thought of selling a game for less than 60, ever. Far Cry 5 is on the shelves for 80 bucks still, and it's been a year and a half, and that game was little more than this:



AAAAUGH WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE EVERYONE IS DEAD AAAAH AAAH NORTH KOREA TRUMP AAAAAAUGH
 
Depends where you live? In my area, stores hiss and spit like an angry, bitter cat dunked in ice water at the thought of selling a game for less than 60, ever. Far Cry 5 is on the shelves for 80 bucks still, and it's been a year and a half, and that game was little more than this:



AAAAUGH WE'RE ALL GONNA DIE EVERYONE IS DEAD AAAAH AAAH NORTH KOREA TRUMP AAAAAAUGH

Don't buy in store either! Spend 10 minutes shopping around; retail price is a laziness tax much of the time!
 
I am growing to dislike Speech/Persuasion in WRPGs. I remember even in my first one, Dragon Age Origins, I refused to make Alistair king because he had been adamantly against being any type of leader all game. Picking [Persuade] felt like I was using PC Power to force him to act out of character.

And right now, in a New Vegas LP where they did the escorts quest, I just watched a guy who said his history in prostitution left him feeling dead inside get Speech Checked into doing it again.

Speech is just the Player forcing their will on people, often people who do not deserve it. A Threaten option would be more honest to the gameplay mechanic.
 
I'm curious what your take is on the New Vegas Lanius Speech option, because while I generally agree with you that some Persuasion Checks can feel a bit like you're hypnotizing someone, I consider it a matter of either poor implementation or byproduct of mechanical limitations. Ideally you'd always have 2-3 Persuasion checks to bring someone around to your way of thinking, but thats not always feasible due to how much extra content that would force the developers to make so you're forced to settle for one big check.
 
Last edited:
How is this different than any skill check? As much as people love the Lanius speech, and how it utilises either speech or barter, convincing Ullyses he is wrong from learning about him is way more effective mechanically.
 
Speech is just the Player forcing their will on people, often people who do not deserve it. A Threaten option would be more honest to the gameplay mechanic.

I find the speech checks in the Shadowrun games (or at least Hong Kong) to be a lot more convincing for a couple reasons:

- A lot of them are based off of non speech skills, others are etiquette tags that are less about magically convincing people than using the corporate etiquette to convince corporate people you know what youre talking about and shit.

- alot of more important checks need you to learn other information or have certain items.

- the checks for the actual charisma stat are 90% straight up fucking lying to people on order to infiltrate stuff.

- a lot of the time if you don't convince someone, tough shit, they try to kill you and the nonviolent route is fucked.
 
Last edited:
I think it would be better if charisma checks aren't announced, and certainly not beforehand. Of course, that would also require speech options to which the NPC will always react negatively, no check involved.
 
I am growing to dislike Speech/Persuasion in WRPGs. I remember even in my first one, Dragon Age Origins, I refused to make Alistair king because he had been adamantly against being any type of leader all game. Picking [Persuade] felt like I was using PC Power to force him to act out of character.

And right now, in a New Vegas LP where they did the escorts quest, I just watched a guy who said his history in prostitution left him feeling dead inside get Speech Checked into doing it again.

Speech is just the Player forcing their will on people, often people who do not deserve it. A Threaten option would be more honest to the gameplay mechanic.
An alternative to this is the actual detailed discussion with each character of which you convince, exerting pressure on him/her, addressing his/her morals and the like. This however is not so simple and not so cheap to do, the only game that i know does this is Deus Ex Human Revolution, with its personality analysis system. Even if it is probably unscientific.

I personally do not see anything bad in this in order to have simple one-level persuasion options for side quests. I do not see this as a magical hypnosis of the characters to go against their beliefs, rather just a squeeze in order to save money and player time. You can convince people to do things that they do not agree with without threatening them, usually it takes a long time, which the RPGs often do not have.
 
An alternative to this is the actual detailed discussion with each character of which you convince, exerting pressure on him/her, addressing his/her morals and the like. This however is not so simple and not so cheap to do, the only game that i know does this is Deus Ex Human Revolution, with its personality analysis system. Even if it is probably unscientific.

I personally do not see anything bad in this in order to have simple one-level persuasion options for side quests. I do not see this as a magical hypnosis of the characters to go against their beliefs, rather just a squeeze in order to save money and player time. You can convince people to do things that they do not agree with without threatening them, usually it takes a long time, which the RPGs often do not have.
eeeeeh, in Fallout and Dragon Age, it's pretty much outright magic due to implementation.
 
Another way to look at it is you actually are having a lengthy conversation, but the game decided to gloss over it and only show the final bits of closing dialog. I try to interpret the more hypnotic persuasion options that way to make them feel less like mind control.
 
I liked the way that Fallout 1 and 2 did speech checks where if you weren't or charismatic or smart enough, they straight up don't appear.

New Vegas is kind of better then most RPG's because you can use other skills other then speech which other RPG's need to do.
 
eeeeeh, in Fallout and Dragon Age, it's pretty much outright magic due to implementation.
I've never seen it like this. Maybe I just have a very strong barrier to the suspension of disbelief. Or I do not know much about how people work. In any case, for me it looks like convincing people that you are right using the right argument, where Speech represents the ability to choose the right words, correct posture, tone, articulation ... All that.

Do not get me wrong, I hate persuasion that magically impact NPCs in tabletop games. In any case, the problem is that you can not put ten pages of discussion between your character and the NPC in side quests about economic theory and why they can not just let the alien industry into the planet that ends in nothing ... Because you have a budget, and even such a thing as time compression in order to preserve the attention of the audience.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, budget constraints, scene pacing and lackluster writing are the biggest contributors to the perception of persuasion as mind control. Better writing and dialog planning could probably mitigate that, but then you have to pay for better writers, which leads back to the whole budget part of problem.
 
I am growing to dislike Speech/Persuasion in WRPGs. I remember even in my first one, Dragon Age Origins, I refused to make Alistair king because he had been adamantly against being any type of leader all game. Picking [Persuade] felt like I was using PC Power to force him to act out of character.

And right now, in a New Vegas LP where they did the escorts quest, I just watched a guy who said his history in prostitution left him feeling dead inside get Speech Checked into doing it again.

Speech is just the Player forcing their will on people, often people who do not deserve it. A Threaten option would be more honest to the gameplay mechanic.
The point of the speech check is that you're role playing via stats as someone who is convincing enough to get their will done; it could be from charisma or threats depending on the situation
 
I'm reminded of an encounter with a bandit early on in Gothic... 2, I think.

Most of your conversation options lead to your first fight with a human, but if you choose the right conversation options, you can end up resolving things peacefully. This made the persuasion much more compelling than just passing an arbitrary skill check- Persuading the bandit was the result of your actions as the player, not succeeding on a magical dice roll.
 
It's one thing if the service is shite or the games are old, the devs dead, but if you can buy it off Steam, do so. You can refund it as long as you don't hit the two hour mark.

You also forgot games that cost and arm and leg to get a copy of ie. Little Samson, Magical Pop'n, Hagane. I be willing to pay but not $1300 (for little samson). Or if the company refuses to release the game in a region Mother 3 and many JRPGs that made to the Virtual Console but only in Japan a serious WHAT THE HELL moment (mostly directed at Nintendo and Square).

This is why I consider pirating older game to be good because it has been the only way many games have been saved because right now publishers and developers don't give a crap about saving their games for future generations.

But for current titles BUY IT or wait for a sale then BUY IT.
 
You also forgot games that cost and arm and leg to get a copy of ie. Little Samson, Magical Pop'n, Hagane. I be willing to pay but not $1300 (for little samson). Or if the company refuses to release the game in a region Mother 3 and many JRPGs that made to the Virtual Console but only in Japan a serious WHAT THE HELL moment (mostly directed at Nintendo and Square).

This is why I consider pirating older game to be good because it has been the only way many games have been saved because right now publishers and developers don't give a crap about saving their games for future generations.

But for current titles BUY IT or wait for a sale then BUY IT.
Oh yeah, that's the other thing. If it's a 30 year old game, who cares.
 
Back
Top