Taking turn base action out of RPGs...

[Janmanden]

To be contrary. Putting TB into a game such as Might & Magic VI was a total exploit disaster especially outdoors and when flying. Just hit the enemy and fly up out reach or dodge incoming magic b(u)y going up and down.

 

edit: (neither selling nor buying)

Edited December 12, 2005 by Janmanden

[Volourn]

Lists rock!

 

 

1. BG2

1. FO2

1.NWN

4.BG1

5.FO1

 

RU: FF8, FF6, and JE.

[Musopticon?]

They do!

[Judge Hades]

Oh boy, another list.

 

1. Fallout

2. Planescape Troment

3. Fallout 2

4. Ultima 4

5. Baldur's Gate

[Baley]

Torment

Fallout

Arcanum

Fallout 2

Bloodlines

[Musopticon?]

Eh, I forgot Torment. :">

[Janmanden]

One shouts "lists" and all the Geeks come running :D

 

Same as Grunker except Vampire The Masquerade: Bloodlines, VTM: Bloodlines and VTMB is on the first 3 places after PS:T, followed by K1, Fallout and K2.

[Gabrielle]

BG

Fallout 2

Fallout

BG2

IWD

Bloodlines

Kotor 2

Kotor 1

[Hurlshort]

I can kinda tell the age of people based on thier lists...I'm surprised no one is throwing any gold box D&D games out there. RPG's had a solid renaissance in the late 80's-early 90's with Might and Magic, Ultima, Wizardry, Bards Tale...I'm sure I'm missing a few.

 

There's one Final Fantasy on my list, it was IV (I think) and it was on the SNES. Beautiful story...there was actually an entire Opera scene.

[Musopticon?]

^That was FF6, by the way. I love that scene.

[Kalfear]

I can kinda tell the age of people based on thier lists...I'm surprised no one is throwing any gold box D&D games out there.  RPG's had a solid renaissance in the late 80's-early 90's with Might and Magic, Ultima, Wizardry, Bards Tale...I'm sure I'm missing a few.

 

There's one Final Fantasy on my list, it was IV (I think) and it was on the SNES.  Beautiful story...there was actually an entire Opera scene.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

LOL, gold box games would be me!

[Plano Skywalker]

not to be a stickler but I wouldn't call KOTOR/BG-style combat "real-time with pauses"....yes, I think I understand what the posters who say that mean but if it were real-time with pauses then you still would not be able to queue up feats and that sort of thing.

 

KOTOR/BG-style combat is what BioWare calls "multilayered" combat. I like to call it Active Turn Based. For the most part, this is my favorite. However, it is this type of combat (more than the others) that really reveal poorly-written AI scripts. However, with good AI, this type of combat is my favorite, hands-down.

 

Real time is fun (JE) but not my favorite for an RPG.

 

Multilayered combat with really good, customizable AI and Tom Clancy-style SQUAD COMMANDS would be the Holy Grail IMO.

[Musopticon?]

Yeah, but I wouldn't call it A-TB. I call it real time with pause. :D

[Janmanden]

I call it Continuous Turn Based combat (CTB). Because that's what it is. You still have a limited amount of attacks pr round or second or whichever way you chose to measure it and it's based on level and skill and so on.

 

The RT system in Arcanum is what I call CHAOS (Continuous Hack And/Or Slash).

 

edit: added an arcane ritual...

Edited December 12, 2005 by Janmanden

[Volourn]

"I'm surprised no one is throwing any gold box D&D games out there. RPG's had a solid renaissance in the late 80's-early 90's with Might and Magic, Ultima, Wizardry, Bards Tale..."

 

Eh. I played all those games or at least mostly the early ones in thats eries. Outside of the Ultimas, those series are horrible role-playing wise. They're basic exploration + levelling games. Fun; but not role-playing espicially matched up with the more modern type role-playing game starting with the Fallouts. I'd have put a few of the Ultimas on my list; but frnakly, I don't remember much about them. Hehe.

 

Even games I pick on for their lakc of role-play like TOEE, IWD2, or even POR2 are as good or even better at role-playing than most 'old skool' CRPGs like M&M and Wizardry.

 

P.S. FF games are a different type of role-playing game if you are wwondering why i put them on the list.

[Moose]

Top RPGs, erm.

 

1. Baldur's Gate

2. Fallout

 

(those two are so close)

 

3. Final Fantasy (no particular one although I found 8 so boring I couldn't bring myself to complete it)

 

4. Planescape

 

5. Morrowind (cos it's impossible for me not to appreciate that game)

Edited December 12, 2005 by Moose

[Kaftan Barlast]

5. Morrowind (cos it's impossible not to appreciate that game)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

 

I played it for 45min, then got disgusted and deleted it.

[Moose]

Fixed

[Janmanden]

"I'm surprised no one is throwing any gold box D&D games out there. RPG's had a solid renaissance in the late 80's-early 90's with Might and Magic, Ultima, Wizardry, Bards Tale..."

There is no way (like the highway to) in hell that I am gonna mention Might & Magic 1, since M&M VI is the best in the series, imo, but it still rates low (even though I do recognize the value) as all the M&M's do on my RPG lists. Dialogue and choices are just as important as action in itself as roleplay defining elements and those old games are really lacking in the first aspects.

[Darque]

5. Morrowind (cos it's impossible not to appreciate that game)

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

 

 

 

I played it for 45min, then got disgusted and deleted it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[J.E. Sawyer]

not to be a stickler but I wouldn't call KOTOR/BG-style combat "real-time with pauses"....yes, I think I understand what the posters who say that mean but if it were real-time with pauses then you still would not be able to queue up feats and that sort of thing.

 

KOTOR/BG-style combat is what BioWare calls "multilayered" combat.  I like to call it Active Turn Based.  For the most part, this is my favorite.  However, it is this type of combat (more than the others) that really reveal poorly-written AI scripts.  However, with good AI, this type of combat is my favorite, hands-down.

It's really just a bunch of different ways to describe queued action inputs. "Multilayered"? That makes it sound very innovative.

 

Fighting games and a lot of action games (usually... not good ones) have been using queues for a long time. I actually think action queuing removes a lot of tactical ability and choice from games -- RPGs or otherwise.

[Judge Hades]

Well, there hasn't been much need for tactical thinking in the recent rash of CRPGs for the most part. KotOR 1, NWN 1, KotOR 2, and the such have just been too easy to begin with. Why use tactics when you are only facing critters that die when you sneeze on them?

[Janmanden]

Well, there hasn't been much need for tactical thinking in the recent rash of CRPGs for the most part.  KotOR 1, NWN 1, KotOR 2, and the such have just been too easy to begin with.  Why use tactics when you are only facing critters that die when you sneeze on them?

That's a pretty shallow view, but it's also based on a rather limited (ingame) view in itself, I'd admit.

 

Fast tactics and combat smarts are just as important. When you need to talk with the enemy before you engage them and the game otherwise focus on close combat as well it does pose some limitations on positions, elements of surprise and tactical layouts, since they are not really possible on the grand scale, but there are other tactical elements like incapacitate and disperse enemies as well as different roles for your team.

 

Some of the old RPG and PPG (Proffession playing games like Silent Storm or Fallout: Tactics) can be dealt with pretty fast without much (apparently) tactical thinking (thanks to experience) as well.

 

Critters are critters in any game.

[J.E. Sawyer]

I've been thinking about it a while, and I have some theories about why CRPGs have evolved/devolved to their current state. I think it is accurate to say that CRPGs are a lot easier now than they used to be. They are also a lot less time consuming. I remember trying to defeat the horde at Sokal Keep in the original Pool of Radiance. It took so many tries and the battle took a really long time. Many of the Ultima games were incredibly vast. The battles weren't that difficult. In fact, the game system in most Ultimas was very simple. They can't really compare to the complexity of a game system like D&D (almost any edition). But still, the Ultima games took a really long time to beat. The same with the Phantasie games, Darklands, and the Dark Sun games.

 

I think that CRPGs used to rely on tabletop RPGers and their spawned brothers, CRPGers, to support the entire market. Okay, some of this may be obvious, but I think it's different than it is with other "genres". The CRPG market was really derived from another. That isn't necessarily the case with other game types. Pen and paper RPGs usually require knowledge that is based on accepted conventions. Even if you switch from one system to another, many of the conventions are retained or at least referenced. For people who aren't familiar with the conventions, they are confronted with a barrier of information. They need to understand the information to succeed at the game. Veteran CRPGers can stroll in and essentially wing it because the conventions are so easy to understand.

 

I don't honestly think it's a matter of intelligence. Obviously a certain amount of intelligence is required to understand any game system, but I don't think we're talking about Mensa-levels here. I've met a lot of dummies who have no trouble memorizing RPG rules. They're even capable of registering accounts on message boards. A genius, confronted by the entirety of D&D rules upon the installation of ToEE, would probably have a tough time. Ultimately, D&D games (and a lot of other CRPGs) do not test intelligence as much as they test knowledge. You can blow over any of the IE games with a solid understanding of (A)D&D rules and reasonable intelligence. I don't think you could do the same if you had high intelligence and no experience with RPG/D&D rules -- not without a lot of failure along the way.

 

"Casual" games rely more on visible, visceral environmental challenges than invisible, statistical challenges. This is why a game like Pikmin can be very challenging on a mental level despite having very basic tools and rules. It's also why a game like Ninja Gaiden can be very challenging mentally and physically despite having fairly limited tools and rules.

 

Honestly, it's been a long time since I felt as satisfied at the end of a CRPG battle as I did when I beat the horseman boss in Ninja Gaiden. I had to think, move, and react constantly during the battle. It took me several very frustrating tries to get it right. I'm now going through Ninja Gaiden Black right now and the changes they made to the enemies are significant. They have almost nothing to do with statistics and almost everything to do with behavior. Behavior is what drives and distinguishes most good action game critters. In turn, that behavior drives tactical choices from the player.

 

Now, I'm not saying that CRPGs should become as fast-paced and brutal as Ninja Gaiden. However, I do think that less emphasis on statistics and more of an emphasis on behavior and "visceral" capability would allow casual gamers and seasoned role-players to feel similarly challenged by games.

[Commissar]

Isn't that essentially an "action" CRPG? That certainly seems to be the direction developers are moving, towards less depth and thought and much more eye candy.

 

Why not remove the statistical system altogether? Just take the plunge to twitch-based skills. I like first-person shooters as much as the next guy, but when I play a CRPG, I'm looking for a different experience.