Poll: RPG's, why do we, or DON'T we, love them?
- Thread starter AdeptaSororitas
- Start date
Recommended Videos
1) Stat building, 2) the grind, and 3) making characters (which is just reiterates the first two).
IMO, those are the specific attributes that define whether or not a video game is an RPG.
Any game can have strong and compelling narrative, an explorable world and NPC's to interact with.
Now, I see both good and bad things with the modern trend in game design. While introducing RPG elements to the masses by integrating them into non-RPG games (shooters, sports, etc.) is good, there is also a disturbing trend todumb-down "streamline" RPGs so they appeal to a wider audience.
I understand that RPGs aren't for everyone, but I fail to understand why there are people who are demanding that RPGs should change simply because they don't like the aspects that define the RPG genre.
IMO, those are the specific attributes that define whether or not a video game is an RPG.
Any game can have strong and compelling narrative, an explorable world and NPC's to interact with.
Now, I see both good and bad things with the modern trend in game design. While introducing RPG elements to the masses by integrating them into non-RPG games (shooters, sports, etc.) is good, there is also a disturbing trend to
I understand that RPGs aren't for everyone, but I fail to understand why there are people who are demanding that RPGs should change simply because they don't like the aspects that define the RPG genre.
I'm an explorer at heart. Give me a world to explore (and a reason to do so *cough*TwoWorldsII*cough*), and I'll spend hours.
right behind that is character building, though. Let me build the character and play how I want and I'll love it.
You can probably guess what my favorite franchise is.... (hint, the fifth installment releases this year)
right behind that is character building, though. Let me build the character and play how I want and I'll love it.
You can probably guess what my favorite franchise is.... (hint, the fifth installment releases this year)
Personally, I love exploring an open world. The more nooks, crannies and POIs for me to get my claws into the better. I really like making a character, too - fine tuning their features, speccing them up accordingly, maybe writing a little backstory to give drive and motivation to their actions. But at the end of the day, this character is just my avatar so that I might work through him or her and delve headfirst into the world that someone's built for me.
It really depends on the game for me. RPG is such a broad genre... For BioWare RPGs I like(d) the characters, story and strategy. But The Elder Scrolls games are different entirely, and I enjoy them more for the freedom, exploration and immersion. Those games are almost a simulation of what it would be to live and adventure in that world.
I think that overall I prefer the latter (I'm really psyched for Skyrim), but it's really close.
If it's done right though, it can be really awesome. And I think that for a lot of actions, the consequences should maybe not really affect the gameplay significantly. If you kill a random hobo in the streets with no witnesses, it would be stupid if people would view you differently. But it would be awesome if later you hear some other hobo talking about it, or the police investigating it. It wouldn't really affect you, but you would know that the game noticed and that there were logical consequences. I know some people scoff at those consequences, because in the end it doesn't matter to your character, but I like it.
I think that overall I prefer the latter (I'm really psyched for Skyrim), but it's really close.
I agree that it is really nice when you see some consequences to your actions. However, I don't always like it. For instance, when it seems that the game doesn't care about you being a kleptomaniac, but at the end there is some major consequence for stealing from one guy ages ago. I realize that in real life consequences are not always foreseeable, but in games it can often feel completely arbitrary, unfair or frustrating.Goatmeat said:
If it's done right though, it can be really awesome. And I think that for a lot of actions, the consequences should maybe not really affect the gameplay significantly. If you kill a random hobo in the streets with no witnesses, it would be stupid if people would view you differently. But it would be awesome if later you hear some other hobo talking about it, or the police investigating it. It wouldn't really affect you, but you would know that the game noticed and that there were logical consequences. I know some people scoff at those consequences, because in the end it doesn't matter to your character, but I like it.
I love to hate RPGs.
There's a couple great ones like the original Fallouts, Gothic2 and Tactics Ogre, but most of the time RPGs are a bad compromise between not good enough gameplay and a weak interactive story.
Even the great titles are flawed.
Fallout 1&2 have very poor combat and that's a very common flaw in RPGs.
Gothic2 becomes dull and too easy in the final chapter. Also typical.
Tactics Ogre avoids most of the grind common in Japanese titles, but crafting items is the dullest chore I've ever experienced in a singleplayer game.
There's a couple great ones like the original Fallouts, Gothic2 and Tactics Ogre, but most of the time RPGs are a bad compromise between not good enough gameplay and a weak interactive story.
Even the great titles are flawed.
Fallout 1&2 have very poor combat and that's a very common flaw in RPGs.
Gothic2 becomes dull and too easy in the final chapter. Also typical.
Tactics Ogre avoids most of the grind common in Japanese titles, but crafting items is the dullest chore I've ever experienced in a singleplayer game.
Sounds like you're more of an action-adventure type when those games remember to do their stories right. No harm, no foul. Most of my personal favorites from that genre started on the PS2: God of War 1 and 2, Okami, ICO/SotC. Nier is awesome on the PS3, though, and I liked Hunted: The Demon's Forge.Zhukov said:
As for RPGs, I can't honestly say that I play them for any one feature. Whatever group of features an individual game focuses on, I want them done well. The Witcher 1 and 2 are my favorite rpgs because they push almost all of the right buttons for me. Demon's Souls is a very close second for completely different reasons. I'll give narrative my vote, but it's really not the only reason I play RPGs.
I pretty much enjoy all the different aspects of RPGs when they're done to great effect in games. Been playing for a while now(nearly 2 decades), and I've found RPGs to be the most rewarding, diverse, and interesting genre around. Its faded from its former glory, but there are still standout examples that come around every so often.
I might have said story, or character building....but I've played games that are strong in every aspect you've mentioned, and they are all really fun.
I might have said story, or character building....but I've played games that are strong in every aspect you've mentioned, and they are all really fun.
Depends on the RPG, really. Most of the time, it's the narrative and/or the world itself. I don't necessarily enjoy every bit of story in Oblivion, but I adore the world as a whole. Simply being in it makes me happy.
With other RPGs, however, it's the combat. Grandia II's combat had me looking forward to random encounters, and Dragon Quest is all about the very enjoyable grind.
Persona 4 offers the best of both worlds and throws in demon fusion and friendship building on top of it. So many things to enjoy with that one.
With other RPGs, however, it's the combat. Grandia II's combat had me looking forward to random encounters, and Dragon Quest is all about the very enjoyable grind.
Persona 4 offers the best of both worlds and throws in demon fusion and friendship building on top of it. So many things to enjoy with that one.
I like making things. Mainly charatcers. I love freedom, and thus my favorite RPGs are the ones with the most. Games like The Elder Scrolls, and Dungeons and Dragons. (I favor DMing in DnD since that is the epidomy of freedom in an RPG)
Things I like about RPGs:
-The ones I enjoy have big open worlds to explore.
-People to interact with are typically better than other genres.
-Developing a character style and personality such as it can be.
Things I really dislike about RPGs:
-RNG. A lot of RPGs are really random in terms of various skills.
*Disarming traps? Would rather there be a puzzle to disarm the various difficulties of trap for the first few times and then automatic.
*Combat skills. I like the feeling of my swing connecting actually meaning that my swing connected. Stats can scale up my character, but I like the main focus to be player skill.
*Diplomacy skills. Talking to people. It should either be based on skill level how convincing you are, with different results for different levels in the skill, or just a logic puzzle to figure out how it'll go.
-Shared combat skill and non-combat skill exp. You should get better at fighting by fighting, you should get better at talking by talking.
-Diplomacy skills in general. A lot of the time they're really poorly implemented and just a token thing. Neverwinter Nights (both 1 and 2) had Bluff, Intimidate, and Diplomacy sort of off to the side not doing anything. You could spend points in them, but they'd only really affect conversations that the map-maker decided to make them apply. It was arbitrary and tacked on and since, despite what some claim, those games were primarily combat focused they were essentially a trap.
-Skills that are traps. A lot of RPGs have at least a few of these. Skills that are like "Hey. I could be a smooth-talking bard and get my way out of trouble with my charming personality!" and it turns out it just means that you aren't going to do particularly well in the next forced fight.
-Morality systems. More common now than before, but eh. Still there. If they're going to implement these it should be more of an opinion+reputation system or a lot more shades of gray should be involved.
I definitely enjoyed Oblivion. While the characters and story were... Ehhh... at best, it got a lot of things right by me. Playing a sword and board character actually felt rather fun as I moved around blocking attacks, swinging my blade in certain ways to make the most of my Master in Blade abilities. That was fun!
Morrowind didn't really have the same deal. Though the magic was a -lot- more powerful (except the lack of mana regen without enchanted items), swordsmanship was really just hammer the attack button until the target falls over.
I really enjoy playing a character who is designed around keeping himself and his comrades safe and when the systems in place allow me to do that well I tend to have a good time. If the combat feels too random while I'm in it, I wonder if it was actually my lack of skill in the situation or just my luck running out.
Demon's Souls, from what I've seen, is exactly the sort of combat I'd enjoy. It could stand to have a more open world and a lot more story to it, but it actually looks to take skill to play and have your characters stats and skills affecting the combat without defining it.
...That was wordier than I thought it'd be. Anyway. That's essentially it.
-The ones I enjoy have big open worlds to explore.
-People to interact with are typically better than other genres.
-Developing a character style and personality such as it can be.
Things I really dislike about RPGs:
-RNG. A lot of RPGs are really random in terms of various skills.
*Disarming traps? Would rather there be a puzzle to disarm the various difficulties of trap for the first few times and then automatic.
*Combat skills. I like the feeling of my swing connecting actually meaning that my swing connected. Stats can scale up my character, but I like the main focus to be player skill.
*Diplomacy skills. Talking to people. It should either be based on skill level how convincing you are, with different results for different levels in the skill, or just a logic puzzle to figure out how it'll go.
-Shared combat skill and non-combat skill exp. You should get better at fighting by fighting, you should get better at talking by talking.
-Diplomacy skills in general. A lot of the time they're really poorly implemented and just a token thing. Neverwinter Nights (both 1 and 2) had Bluff, Intimidate, and Diplomacy sort of off to the side not doing anything. You could spend points in them, but they'd only really affect conversations that the map-maker decided to make them apply. It was arbitrary and tacked on and since, despite what some claim, those games were primarily combat focused they were essentially a trap.
-Skills that are traps. A lot of RPGs have at least a few of these. Skills that are like "Hey. I could be a smooth-talking bard and get my way out of trouble with my charming personality!" and it turns out it just means that you aren't going to do particularly well in the next forced fight.
-Morality systems. More common now than before, but eh. Still there. If they're going to implement these it should be more of an opinion+reputation system or a lot more shades of gray should be involved.
I definitely enjoyed Oblivion. While the characters and story were... Ehhh... at best, it got a lot of things right by me. Playing a sword and board character actually felt rather fun as I moved around blocking attacks, swinging my blade in certain ways to make the most of my Master in Blade abilities. That was fun!
Morrowind didn't really have the same deal. Though the magic was a -lot- more powerful (except the lack of mana regen without enchanted items), swordsmanship was really just hammer the attack button until the target falls over.
I really enjoy playing a character who is designed around keeping himself and his comrades safe and when the systems in place allow me to do that well I tend to have a good time. If the combat feels too random while I'm in it, I wonder if it was actually my lack of skill in the situation or just my luck running out.
Demon's Souls, from what I've seen, is exactly the sort of combat I'd enjoy. It could stand to have a more open world and a lot more story to it, but it actually looks to take skill to play and have your characters stats and skills affecting the combat without defining it.
...That was wordier than I thought it'd be. Anyway. That's essentially it.
