Could an action-RPG work without leveling up?

[deathbydeath]

Wait, what? What does Zelda have to do with anything? Which Zelda are you talking about? Why is X-Zelda not an rpg?

Sure, Stalker isn't the poster child of rpg's and character building, but it's an interesting way to mimic those same effects while removing xp meters and levels.

You said STALKER is an RPG because
-There are different levels of weapons, something Zelda has.
-You can tell what level you are in by what gear the enemies have, which Zelda has by having stronger monsters in the latter dungeons.
-Your level advancement comes from killing those higher than you and taking their stuff, buying equipment, or finding it in stashes. Also something Zelda does.

By your definition Zelda is an RPG for the same reason STALKER is, and yet neither of them are.

No Zelda game is an RPG, they are action adventure games.

When did I say that Stalker was an rpg? I said that Stalker included many rpg staples and that it wasn't the rpg "poster child". Besides, this thread is about ideas for rpg's without leveling mechanics. Just because you think Stalker isn't an rpg doesn't mean that your definition of an rpg (whatever it is) can't mimic mechanics from GSC's franchise.

Also, you still haven't proved why Zelda is relevant to the discussion and which Zelda game you were using for your argument.

 

[Andrewtheeviscerator]

I wish RPG's would die.
So these threads could die as well.

Would you rather discuss FPS #78657448576567598987 ?

RPGs have been dead, btw. At least until we start getting some of these kickstarter projects coming out.

Funny some people would say RPGs started becoming good once they started abandoning the archaic D&D system, but hey that's just my opinion.

Those are the type of newshit gamers that have ruined the genre and the reason we haven't been able to have nice things in the last 10 or so years.

LARPers coming on here to enlighten us about how Role PLaying is being able to dress up your character and go anywhere you want in some crappy 3D gameworld, and the rest is UP TO YOU or the ones who need to get IMMERSED by emotionally engaging cinematic cutscenes and romanceable elf/alien butt sex.

Hell, even the final fantasy 7 or diablow fandom back in mid-90s weren't as disgusting and humiliating to be associated with as the "herp me plays a roles games derp" populace of today.

Different strokes for different people. People are buying these new RPGs and enjoying them so obviously they're good and have value, if their not your type of thing then maybe its time to go find a different hobby. Also I have to ask, why can't both exist, too say every RPG should just be like the old school ones is basically saying that video games shouldn't innovate and should always stay the exact same until we get one huge generic blob.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Umm, why has no one mentioned Stalker yet?

STALKER isn't an RPG, its a FPS with a inventory menu.

No, Stalker has levels, quests, and other rpg staples. The levels aren't conveyed through xp and number crunching, but rather through implied tiers of weapons, armor, and gear.

I said STALKER wasn't an RPG, you said no, and then offered a refutation to my statement.

When someone makes a statement such as "STALKER isn't an RPG", then you spend an entire post refuting that statement, it really kinda seems like you are saying STALKER is an RPG.

Besides, this thread is about ideas for rpg's without leveling mechanics. Just because you think Stalker isn't an rpg doesn't mean that your definition of an rpg (whatever it is) can't mimic mechanics from GSC's franchise.

Right, this is a thread about RPGs without leveling mechanics, STALKER isn't and RPG, so it is pointless to the discussion.

Also, you still haven't proved why Zelda is relevant to the discussion and which Zelda game you were using for your argument.

How is saying how Zelda isn't and RPG, and then showing how STALKER is exactly like it, and thus not an RPG also, thus showing how STALKER is irrelevant to the discussion about RPGs without leveling mechanics, not showing how Zelda is relevant to the discussion?

Also ALL Zelda games... they all pretty much work the exact same, it's like Pokemon, I don't need to specify one because they all pretty much work the exact same.

 

[MeChaNiZ3D]

You want to know what I think would be cool?

No? Well imma tell you anyway - building a network of accomplices over the course of the game, so instead of levelling up, you just have much easier access to good gear and weapons. They would begin prohibitively expensive and get cheaper and more available the more favour you have with whatever faction. Also in-mission bonuses like having a sniper as backup as opposed to nothing, or intelligence on enemy positions, or satellite streaming of the base and its inhabitants. But if you fall out with a faction, you're back at square one with a handgun and the clip it came with.

That said, levelling is a very easy way to progress the player's abilities. Incredibly easy in fact. It might not even be worth getting rid of for sheer ease of use.

 

[DoPo]

You want to know what I think would be cool?

No? Well imma tell you anyway - building a network of accomplices over the course of the game, so instead of levelling up, you just have much easier access to good gear and weapons. They would begin prohibitively expensive and get cheaper and more available the more favour you have with whatever faction. Also in-mission bonuses like having a sniper as backup as opposed to nothing, or intelligence on enemy positions, or satellite streaming of the base and its inhabitants. But if you fall out with a faction, you're back at square one with a handgun and the clip it came with.

That idea I like. It's a bit like GTA but with more progression involved. Faction reputation unlocks you more stuff, so you can even have more exotic things, for example prototype weapons, if you work for some mad scientists, or a steady cash flow, you involve yourself with the mafia. Throw in warring factions, and you'll have to juggle responsibilities - do you want some new weapons, and some cash and some backup, or would you decide to be a poor, lone, hyper weaponized (wo)man. Just don't try to screw over your buddies or you'll be left with nothing.

 

[GamemasterAnthony]

RPGs really aren't RPGs without some way to show that the character is improving in some way throughout the game. Like Yahtzee said, "it's all about numbers".

So...without some sort of leveling, you really can't call it an RPG in any way. It becomes more of an action adventure like the Mario games or Uncharted. Heck...even the Zelda games can be considered RPGs due to the way Link gains new Heart Containers and abilities throught the game. (With Adventure of Link for the NES being a more blatant example with its EXP system.)

 

[black_omega2]

What I would rather see, and I'm not sure if it has been done (better yet, done well) as I don't play video games nearly as much as I used to, is instead of a leveling-up progression, a more story/choice driven progression and have the combat be more player skill based. I feel this would be more organic, but it would have to make some sense otherwise it could be botched easily.
For role-playing purposes I think this would work well because the player knows their character's background and the choices they made up to the present and the characters skills and power should match accordingly. Yes, you would be more limiting than say, Skyrim, but it introduces a more emotionally involved constraint like "Its about three hours before the enemy attacks the village. Should I go hone my personal fighting skills, help the villagers train, prepare traps, ect." instead of "I have x amount of points to spend on skills."
Hopefully, it would also eliminate the possibility of being over/underleveled for something. Your character grows as the story does.
The main drawback of something like this I feel would be that since it's more story-driven it would be difficult to somehow have an open world without having things not make sense (I'm the well-known ruler of this town and somebody on the street wants me to go kill wolves for pelts.) So, people looking for a huge open world to explore would probably complain as gamers will.

Yea this sounds pretty cool to me theoretically. No idea how it would be done in practice though.

 

[SajuukKhar]

But in the last decade, both haven't existed. So the variety that you say we should have, we haven't gotten. Why do you think this whole kickstarter thing even came about ?

The reason why Obsidian needed Kickstarter to get funding for the game isn't because no company would fund that kind of game, it's because no company would fund Obsidian because they are known around the industry for failing to met goals.

Obsidian is known to make games that fail on a technical level, and fail to get both critic, and fan, reviews that can even attempt to match whatever series they are leeching off currently.

Obsidian needs kickstarter because hardly any company left wants to associated with them.

Hell they are reduced to making a South Park game, if that's not a sign of how much people don't want to be associated with them, them nothing is.

 

[Glademaster_v1legacy]

Why would you want to base a game off the TES progression system. It is probably the worst I've seen in any game ever and certainly one of the worst aspects of their games. Levels are too important to ignore as it can let you gauge your strength to that area or boss so it lets you know how easy or hard you want to make the game for yourself.

 

[SajuukKhar]

LOL. Wut ? I'm not even talking about Obsidian. I'm talking about neglected genres in general (traditional style rpgs, adventure games...)

And your full of it, cause you know ALOT of ppl prefer their sequels (KotoR,NWN,NV) to the originals, me included. It's so ironic that all you is talk about bugs, yet your a Bethesda fan. It doesn't make any sense.

Because, traditional style RPGs usually don't sell that well, and neither do adventure games. The sole exception to that is when they draw on some big name like BG, like DAO did by spouting how its basically the new BG, or how the BG enhanced edition is probably going to do moderately well because its just a remake.

Obsidian's 1 million dollar budget is a laughably small amount compared to the cost of video games today, and in all likelihood, had they been given that same amount by a large company, they wouldn't make that money back in sales.

Kikstarter exists for niche gamers to fund niche games that normally wouldn't be profitable had they been made by a large company.
.
.
Also, I don't deny that Bethesda games have bugs, but Bethesda's game bugs have never prevented me from beating the game.

Compared to NWN2 which, to this day, I cant beat the end, because of a CTD every time I try to enter the final bosses lair, or Fallout New Vegas which still crashes nearly every 30 minutes, or Alpha Protocol whose enemy AI was so broken I was able to walk up to half the enemies in the game and kill them point blank with no reaction from them.

With Bethesda games I get the occasional broken quest, or the backwards flying dragon, but compared to Obsidian games I can actually BEAT Bethesda's games, and the bugs they do have, like the backwards dragons, aren't anywhere near as bad as crashes ever 30 minutes or having half the enemies in the game not do jack. Bethesda's games may be buggy, but I don't have to jump through 10million hoops to get through 1/5 of the game.

 

[SajuukKhar]

You must be unlucky then because I've never had any game breaking bugs where i couldn't even play/finish the game. Maybe you should try patching it, instead of crying and giving up so quickly.

I have fully patched versions of NWN2, Fallout: New Vegas, and Alpha Protocol. Still unplayable.

Though New Vegas did become half-way playable after downloading the unofficial New vegas patch, and about 10 other mods that fix bugs, and even then its still jonky.

 

[SajuukKhar]

Which means the money will actually be put to good use and not wasted on cutting edge graphics, celebratory voice actors and bullshit like this..

Or it will mean Obsidian will, once again, be entirely unable to finish development on half the features in their games and thus leaving the game a broken mess.

Or it will mean
-Their character's dialog will be text only, meaning any sort of depth, tone, or emotion will be unable to be expressed making their character be very flat.
-The voice actors they do get will be really cheap, sound like crap, and make the game overall worse.
-The game will reuse tons of assets to extreme levels, making the world seem very bland, repetitive, and uninteresting.
-Many quest lines will be left in unfinished states with several side-stories being unresolved due to the fact that they didn't have the budget to flesh them out anymore.
-Most of the so called "consequences" of your actions will be unable to expressed in the game itself, and instead have to be thrown in tacked-on post-game slideshow cutscenes.

 

[blazearmoru]

I'm gona be a fan of that but it's also incredibly difficult. Not only will the level designer need to be proficient in balancing but also psychology. Last thing you want is the thought "This isn't what I wanted my character to be like" poping up in the player's head.