Originally Posted by sublimeclown
What I was trying to say is that the developers should be testing the game and getting feedback to make it the most fun experience it can be without relying on each individual player to figure out for themselves how the game should be. If something is a cumbersome mechanic, the developer should fix it, not the player. Like I said, I'm ok with the options existing, it just indicates a lack of clear direction from the developer, IMO.

Developers do usually have a clear direction, otherwise games would never come to fruition. And, developers do usually put together a "default" experience that they assess to be appropriate for most of their audence.

Unfortunately, game audiences are VERY broad nowadays, but often quite shallow as regards tolerance of complexity and detail. So when a developer gets this "default" assessment wrong, it can be very difficult to rectify, particularly if there are no alternate ( optional ) ways of playing the game that can be readily switched in as a new default ( CP2077 for example ).

You have to remember that the primary reason that most games are made is commercial rather than artistic, so it is generally very important for a developer to match their "vision" to as many audience preferences as can be accomodated. A game has to be satisfying to play, whether or not you reach the intended "end goal" of the game, which ( for a variety of reasons ) most game-starts never reach.

Originally Posted by sublimeclown
I'm confused by this. My understanding of RPGs is that they are about roleplaying as a character through a narrative story, which may involve customizing your character. I've never thought of RPGs as being defined by being able to change the core game mechanics/rules. In a game like FF7 for instance, I don't recall being able to change the max number of characters in your party or how often random encounters occur. You just had to play by the rules of the game. That's what makes it fun and challenging.

No, most players of book-and-dice based RPGs routinely change rules to suit themselves. This was always positively encouraged by the inventors of D&D and other early RPGs.

Most computer RPGs do contain a primary narrative arc, mostly because it is not currently possible to provide enough interesting play options that offer an interesting world to RP in more generally. Bethesda games are probably the least narrative RPGs, and have the most community expansion and following due to mod friendliness.

I would also note that "fun" and "challenge" are quite subjective terms, which most players would disagree on. For example, my main interest in BG3 is probably the degree to which it can be community expanded after the game releases, in the same way NWN1/2 are still being used today, which may be unlikely to interest you.