/v/ - Video Games

>>15521653

>so many

Can you name 10?

B. I want permanent active effects most of the time. % chance systems have their place, but I don't like overuse of them. I also like having classes get well defined roles and uses.

>>15521653

>RNG vs semi-realism

Gee I wonder

RNGesus killed my enjoyment of WoW long before pandaria did

Both are bad. Too many rules in the A and numbers look like they were fine tuned by some autist in excel, completely inelegant. B is too vague and that crit description is even worse than what A does.

>NPCs don't talk to you usually

What does that mean? Could be something like "You have lower reputation with NPCs." assuming that reputation is a measurable stat in the game.

>High resistance to normal attacks

30% resistance to normal attacks. Nothing bad with using numbers as long as they are not 199.99$ type of bullshit.

>Crit often one-shots most non-elite monsters your level

That one is simply retarded. It's an interpretation that's fit for a build guide not an in game description. The rest is gibberish.

>>15521739

Thread destroyed, all replies past this point are moot

>>15521702

RNG is good for some games, but when so many of them have added randomness for no reason on top of everything else going on, it just kill it for me.

It keeps out casuals like wowniggers who are scared of fucking up their builds and it allows for interesting builds you personally craft for a specific purpose or situation even if it's just vanity builds that do nothing except exist for fun rather than practicality.

>shadow damage

psssst

I prefer system C. See: Hexen and other early-class based shooters.

>>15521739

I didn't wanted to be too specific, because as you can see that "semi-realism" the other anon was talking about, has different approaches.

I want to talk about the overall system BEHIND these numbers and not talk about one specific appliance for them.