WETMATTOS'S PROFILE

Reading this discussion makes me think of plenty Extra Credits videos, the ones about Counter Play, The Fighting Game Problem and Balancing for Skill. The idea that a battle should be done so that a move creates a myriad of subsequent possible choices, in a way that doesn't exclude less skillful players while gives them tools to master complex strategies - that's pretty much it, isn't it so?

And, about creating a game which cater not only to power seekers, but to other kinds of players as well, wouldn't it be possible to create an RPG that allow multiple completion paths and as such multiple experience values not correlated to each other? I was conceptualizing a game, some days ago, in which you don't gain levels - stat gaining is done by doing specific actions tied to their use, so to gain battle related stats you do battle and battle simulations, which allow you to master the system and to learn new in game skills, and to gain, I dunno, conversation related stats you have conversation with NPCs, and try to understand their motives and desires - and, since the power creep between low level items and end game items is negligible, instead relying on intelligent deploy of resources and understanding of the game system and its possibilities to progress, one can reach the end of the game with the first weapon and plenty battle experience and not be much weaker than someone who has unlocked all weapons and fightings skills - the second player may have "more possibilities", but in the end their performance and understanding of the system is what will be measured, not the ammount of in game artifacts they've collected - and one with sufficient conversation exp may be able to bypass completely the final battle by understanding the motives of their antagonist and maneuvering to have the items/alliances/circunstances which allow them to win without fighting (Sun Tzu would be proud).