Taking turn base action out of RPGs...

[J.E. Sawyer]

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.

I use my mind more in a single game-day of Pikmin than I did in most ToEE battles. Pikmin isn't a particularly good looking game. In fact, it's very simple and cartoonish. Despite this, it was often very tricky and hard to figure out.

 

It was pretty rare that something in the original Fallout caused me any sort of pause where I had to really figure something out. Legend of Zelda: The Minish Cap (GBA) completely stumped me multiple times. I just had to stop and try it again after a few hours. Neither game is "twitchy". Neither game has visible statistics. Neither game is particularly good looking. I think both required more intelligence than even older CRPGs demanded.

 

I think games like Front Mission 4 and Advance Wars have far superior sequential turn-based combat than pretty much any turn-based CRPG, and those systems fundamentally are not complex. The situations are the things that have complexity and demand deep thought.

 

On a very fundamental level, chess is not a complex game. It has very few rules and not very many statistics. Despite this, it is situationally so complex that its masters are unapproachable by a novice.

 

What experience are you looking for in a CRPG?

[J.E. Sawyer]

The Thief and Splinter Cell titles are also terrific examples of games that require very basic motor skills but also often present complex environments for interaction. The Thief games are particularly good about this. I don't think there's any reason why those games couldn't have an underlying statistical advancement system that supports the visceral/environmental gameplay mechanics.

[Judge Hades]

What I would like in a CRPG?

 

Lets draw from other games as an examples. Where it comes to story complexity I would like to see more games like Planescape Torment made. Where it comes to tactical combat and varied options I like to see a merger of ToEE and Fallout. Not necessarily turn base as those two games but it allows me that levelof control and options for my entire party. As for environment interaction and game physics, Silent Storm would be good to draw from. Lastly when it comes to character customization and building the d20 System or a classless-levelless version of it would be nice.

 

Oh and most importantly the game needs to be a challenge while focuses on my characters' abilities and not my own. In other words presented in a traditional fashion and not action oriented.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Hades_One

[Janmanden]

I've been thinking about it a while, and I have some theories about why CRPGs have evolved/devolved to their current state. 

Excuse me your longwindedness, but you completely failed to address the ONE point that would have made any sense in this context:

 

The view has changed AND you virtually only have the control and the view of one char at a time instead of them all at once.

 

It's a very important change, because you thus lack the strategical layout of the combat area, environment and enemies and the ability to effectively move around your chars...as you do with a birds eye view of an isometric game where you can move your chars around in squads, smaller teams or separately.

 

But there is also the concept of time coupled with impatience as you do manage to mention. I too hated all that mindnumbing slowness of Pool of Radiance(2) especially when dealing with critters and monsters I killed fast.

 

I just couldn't resist.

[Commissar]

What experience are you looking for in a CRPG?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm not sure, to be honest. But I know it when I see it.

 

Primarily? Character building, I think. That's the main reason I do not like the original KotOR, and would have preferred if II wasn't in a similar vein. In a roleplaying game, I'm looking to create a wholly original character and take him through a good story. It doesn't have to be an epic story, either, though that seems to be another, very much understandable trend. One of the things that pleased me in a brief reading of a NWN II preview was that the character doesn't start out as the son of a god/an amnesiatic Sith Lord/whatever super-cool, pre-generated backstory. I likely won't play it, since I've never been a huge fan of the swords-and-sorcery setting, but I'm glad to know that you gents haven't gone with a stock backstory, allowing the player to fill in his or her own.

 

Now, you'll notice that nothing I said above involves so much as a single number, yet character building in a roleplaying game is inevitably going to involve some sort of system, and a system almost always involves statistics. Bringing your character through however many levels is what appeals to most RPG gamers, I imagine. Perhaps not. It's certainly one of the things that appeals to me. You know, I've never played a tabletop game of anything in my life, but from the sound of it, that's probably what I'm looking for; a port of the tabletop experience to the PC, as faithfully as it can be done.

 

The reason I went after your initial post is because I don't know quite how you change the emphasis of CRPG battles from statistics and slower-paced combat to more behavior- and action-oriented combat without losing that vital RPG element of character building via a game system. KotOR II certainly wasn't the most difficult game I've ever played, though I greatly enjoyed it because it did a good job for me, personally, of giving the impression that the character really was a pretty damn good Jedi. The involvement in the story - despite the multitude of questions I'd still like answered - trumped challenging battles for keeping me going.

 

Chess isn't a complex game, it's true. It's also true that, despite its simplicity, it still has a system of rules that must be known in order to play the game. If you guys can figure out how to create a meaningful character building system and mate it to more situational or behavioral combat, go for it. Worth a shot, right? I just don't know how you'll do it without tossing what I tend to think of as the heart of a roleplaying game out the window in favor of a more visceral experience. It's obvious you're looking to expand beyond whatever market you currently have, and from a business perspective, that can't be faulted. Nor can the manufacture of action-RPG console dross that's never remotely piqued my interest, if that's what sells. You guys are the developers, I'm just one lone customer who wouldn't mind if you made what you've been making until either I drop dead or my wife finally manages to break me of the habit. Perhaps certain genres just don't have the legs for perpetuity.

[J.E. Sawyer]

Excuse me your longwindedness, but you completely failed to address the ONE point that would have made any sense in this context: 

Sorry if I didn't directly address concerns that you had, but I think what I wrote is relevant to the main thread subject. Turn-based (and many real-time) CRPG combat systems are often based in pen-and-paper systems which are, by necessity, turn-based. They're also often very complex. Moving to simultaneous real-time didn't really make the rules more complex or simpler as much as it made combat messier.

 

The view has changed AND you virtually only have the control and the view of one char at a time instead of them all at once.

 

It's a very important change, because you thus lack the strategical layout of the combat area, environment and enemies and the ability to effectively move around your chars...as you do with a birds eye view of an isometric game where you can move your chars around in squads, smaller teams or separately.

Those are certainly nice elements of tactical combat games, but I think it gives you a lot of "god's eye" advantages. It's difficult, because ultimately giving you control over all of the characters and a good viewing perspective gives you a lot more to work with, but I think it also feels less intimate and less like you're playing one "guy" and more like you're a general playing with miniatures.

 

But there is also the concept of time coupled with impatience as you do manage to mention. I too hated all that mindnumbing slowness of Pool of Radiance(2) especially when dealing with critters and monsters I killed fast.

 

I just couldn't resist.

I didn't dislike the slow pace of the original Pool of Radiance. Those battles could actually go amazingly quick if you speed up the pace to max and could read the combat feedback that flashed by in a couple of frames.

[Judge Hades]

Of course if you play them now on max settings the battles are over before they even begun. HAHAHA!

 

I do have to say the number one thing that irks me with today's game the easiness. I have been going through some of the old games of late such as Fallout and PST and playing them along side NWN and KotOR2 and the difference is mind boggling. Making a stealthboy type in Fallout 2 you can still get yourself killed very easily in the beginning areas of the game if you don't play smart while playing a stealthboy sentinel in KotOR 2 I could kill those droids in the opening areas with one hit with a vibrosword. These are the same droids that supposedly took out a bunch of miners. Something is defeintely wrong with that picture.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

What experience are you looking for in a CRPG?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I'd split it into two.

 

With a pregenerated character I'm looking for a story. Thats the catch 22 of pregens, since the story and the character go hand in hand. You just have to cross your fingers and hope. Best story I've played FFX (and I've played a lot of them) it just works on so many levels that span both the personal and the epic.

 

In a choice based RPG I'm looking for two things. My own character and choices that actually mean something to that character. Freedom to create my own character and not have the game come along and contradict it later. And no more bloody amnesiacs.

 

Combat that dosnt take too long. I dont want to fight 10 goblins for an hour and combat that dosnt require I go too into "tactics mode" because if the combat is forcing me to play mini mathematics test in my head then thats tactical combat and not an RPG.

 

Exceptions would be where you have very distinct seperation like in the Fire Emblem games.

Edited December 12, 2005 by ShadowPaladin V1.0

[Commissar]

With a pregenerated character I'm looking for a story.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well, I'd just say never, ever utilize a pregenerated character - nor even a pregenerated backstory. That smacks of action-RPGism to me. Personal preference, of course.

[Judge Hades]

The pregenerated character aspect of Planescape Torment was the only thing I really hated in that game.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Well, I'd just say never, ever utilize a pregenerated character - nor even a pregenerated backstory.  That smacks of action-RPGism to me.  Personal preference, of course.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

And prior to playing FFX I would have likely completely agreed with you.

 

I dont think it has anything to do with action RPGism. But it does allow for a designer to have much tighter control on where a story will go and to be able to have each character play out their part.

Edited December 12, 2005 by ShadowPaladin V1.0

[Judge Hades]

THen we are playing the designer's character and not our own.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

The pregenerated character aspect of Planescape Torment was the only thing I really hated in that game.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Not to beat a dead horse again. But without a pregen you couldnt have had PST. Same goes for KOTOR.

 

I just hate the whole amnesia to make them playable thing since it's so obvious.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

THen we are playing the designer's character and not our own.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Very much so. In the same way as when we read a book we are experiencing the book through the authors characters.

 

One of the key problems with your own characters is having the game relate to them. Since you as a designer wont know anything about them in advance, you cannot personalise the story at all.

[Judge Hades]

And your point? A tighter story is not always a good thing. Also that wasn't a problem with Fallout or Baldur's Gate.

Edited December 12, 2005 by Hades_One

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

And your point?  A tighter story is not always a good thing.  Also that wasn't a problem with Fallout or Baldur's Gate.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Wasnt really trying to make a point

[J.E. Sawyer]

The reason I went after your initial post is because I don't know quite how you change the emphasis of CRPG battles from statistics and slower-paced combat to more behavior- and action-oriented combat without losing that vital RPG element of character building via a game system.

Well, it's certainly much simpler than the system found in most CRPGs, but Ninja Gaiden actually does have a character advancement system. I'd like to use it as an example, but I certainly think that NG is much more on the raw action game side of things than the statistical side of things.

 

In NG, Ryu starts out with basic skills in all melee weapons that he finds. These skills give him access to the basic movesets of any weapon. To begin with, he has the Dragon Sword. Yay. A little while later, he finds Lunar, a staff weapon. He can also find the Vigoorian Flail (nunchaku-style weapons) and Dabilahro (a huge sword). Each weapon has its own strengths and weaknesses. The Dragon Sword is a good all-around weapon. It does good damage, is reasonably quick, and has a huge moveset. Lunar is extremely fast, hits a large area, and does low damage. Dabilahro is slow and does not have a large moveset, but it will annihilate enemies in very few hits.

 

As you defeat enemies, they drop "essence", which is the game's single currency. It can be used to power ultimate attacks (charge attacks that "spend" the value of the essence), to buy items, and to increase Ryu's weapon levels. Each weapon level unlocks new moves in the weapon set. However, the player still has to be able to use the moves properly. It's a combination of character ability and player ability, though very weighted toward player ability.

 

I think something less hectic and more forgiving than Ninja Gaiden would be a nice experiment. I've written before that I think it would be great if a game took the lockpicking mechanic from Splinter Cell and added a time factor to it that were linked to character skill. The physical demands are low, but they are more involved than just hitting "pick lock" and watching an animation play. I'd like to see more things like that, more balanced elements of player and character skill.

 

You guys are the developers, I'm just one lone customer who wouldn't mind if you made what you've been making until either I drop dead or my wife finally manages to break me of the habit.  Perhaps certain genres just don't have the legs for perpetuity.

I think genres only lack the legs for perpetuity if they don't evolve. All genres evolve. Well, except for adventure games. I think CRPGs have evolved very slowly and, to be honest, I think we now cling to things that are the least interesting elements of our historical antecedants.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

I think something less hectic and more forgiving than Ninja Gaiden would be a nice experiment.  I've written before that I think it would be great if a game took the lockpicking mechanic from Splinter Cell and added a time factor to it that were linked to character skill.  The physical demands are low, but they are more involved than just hitting "pick lock" and watching an animation play.  I'd like to see more things like that, more balanced elements of player and character skill.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Genji.

 

Easy game with the character/item elements damm near impossible when you dont level up and your stats dont change (option opens after you complete the game).

 

What I think seperates RPGs is that you just have the ability to remove so much of the difficulty yourself (intentionally or otherwise). Cant think of any other genre that allows that without a cheat code. I cut my teeth on the goldbox games champion level. Although I'd call them tactics games today not RPGs.

 

For Ps2 owners NG is pretty similiar to DMC (in how you buy attributes and open skill paths) but like NG DMC is mostly about how good the player is.

[kumquatq3]

I think genres only lack the legs for perpetuity if they don't evolve.  All genres evolve.  Well, except for adventure games.  I think CRPGs have evolved very slowly  and, to be honest, I think we now cling to things that are the least interesting elements of our historical antecedants.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think they have been doing alot more than evolving, they have been mutating altogether. Via blending with other genres (FPS: Deus Ex, V:tM, Boiling Point; Action/Adv: Fable; and even things like Pirates! or The Sims to an extent, etc)

Edited December 12, 2005 by kumquatq3

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

This also demonstrates on of the weird things in RPGS (especially games like FF).

 

As you fight, you earn experience and your health, defense, and attack stats will increase. You can also earn and find essence of Amahagane as you play. If you have three of these, you can increase the level of one of your attributes. Yo****sune and Benkei gain experience independently, so if you neglect one of the characters, he'll remain relatively weak. When you kill several enemies in a row you'll get a combo. If you manage to string together several kills, your efforts will be rewarded with an experience bonus. In addition to buffing your character with experience, you can find all kinds of items, weapons, and armor hidden throughout each level that will give your character a significant stat boost. You can also find pieces of these items, which you can take to a blacksmith, who will create the item for you as long as you have all of the required ingredients.

 

So the more skilled you are, the easier the game is. Its a lot like Insane was on the IE games. Once you crack the curve and prior to reaching the cap insanes actually easier because the extra levels give you area spells (and more of them) at earlier levels.

[J.E. Sawyer]

What I think seperates RPGs is that you just have the ability to remove so much of the difficulty yourself (intentionally or otherwise). Cant think of any other genre that allows that without a cheat code. I cut my teeth on the goldbox games champion level. Although I'd call them tactics games today not RPGs.

 

I think they have been doing alot more than evolving, they have been mutating altogether. Via blending with other genres (FPS: Deus Ex, V:tM, Boiling Point; Action/Adv: Fable; and even things like Pirates! or The Sims to an extent, etc)

This is sort of why I like to believe that CRPGs "should be about" giving the player many ways to meaningfully interact with the world and its characters -- outside of combat, that is.

 

Fallout is great. Planescape: Torment is great. But you know, I don't think combat is really want made Fallout great (although it was very satisfying, the system wasn't so hot) and I don't think word count is what made Torment great. The amount of options for what kind of a character you could be -- that's what was important, I think. That's why people remember those games. CRPG developers really want to cling to old tyme conventions about how stats work because CRPG die-hards flip out if they aren't followed, but observation of statistical conventions is not what separates the great CRPGs from the good ones.

[Janmanden]

1. Excuse me your longwindedness, but you completely failed to address the ONE point that would have made any sense in this context: 
    
   
2. The view has changed AND you virtually only have the control and the view of one char at a time instead of them all at once.
    
   It's a very important change, because you thus lack the strategical layout of the combat area, environment and enemies and the ability to effectively move around your chars...as you do with a birds eye view of an isometric game where you can move your chars around in squads, smaller teams or separately.
    
   
3. But there is also the concept of time coupled with impatience as you do manage to mention. I too hated all that mindnumbing slowness of Pool of Radiance(2) especially when dealing with critters and monsters I killed fast.
   I just couldn't resist.
   

1. Sorry if I didn't directly address concerns that you had, but I think what I wrote is relevant to the main thread subject. Turn-based (and many real-time) CRPG combat systems are often based in pen-and-paper systems which are, by necessity, turn-based. They're also often very complex. Moving to simultaneous real-time didn't really make the rules more complex or simpler as much as it made combat messier.
    
   
2. Those are certainly nice elements of tactical combat games, but I think it gives you a lot of "god's eye" advantages. It's difficult, because ultimately giving you control over all of the characters and a good viewing perspective gives you a lot more to work with, but I think it also feels less intimate and less like you're playing one "guy" and more like you're a general playing with miniatures.
    
   
3. I didn't dislike the slow pace of the original Pool of Radiance. Those battles could actually go amazingly quick if you speed up the pace to max and could read the combat feedback that flashed by in a couple of frames.
   

I really hate this kind of intertwined quoting crap that you returned to me, please don't do it again.

1. That I had?! Well excuse me, but I saw a different context here that you picked up on and contemplated further upon later. So, what exactly do you mean by 'current' state then if not referring to the imminent context of KOTOR or NWN and that 'current' state of close-up 3D fps views and tactics found in 'current' CRPGs and which are these?
   
2. I sense no disagreement here since you only address the latter part to which I agree. You still ignore the shift of view, which I regard as a major part of the current state, as one of the reason behind why it has both been made easier for the casual player and harder for the tactician. But I am starting to get the feeling that you are not at all concerned about tactics in your context.
   
3. Shifty. Now I think you are having a Fall out with yourself (please make FO3 instead, haha) "It took so many tries and the battle took a really long time" in a context where you use Pool of Radiance to illustrate a time consuming game. I read that as your way of saying it was a bad thing, but you don't think that?
   

[alanschu]

Hate to burst in here disagreeing, but it is possible to play D&D real-time, it doesn't need to be turn-based. Sorry Mr. Sawyer

 

 

Check it out here!

 

You will all thank me later!

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Biggest difference between POR and PORII as well as old and new TB games in general is the animation. Because the old gold box games were representative in the way game pieces are (rather than realistic) you didnt lose anything by cutting out the animations.

 

Compare that to PORII where a zombie will take upwards of 30 seconds to shuffle it's way into position and you have a problem.

 

Fallout wasnt too bad because for the most part you had very small numbers. However if someone tagged an innocent and the whole place turned hostile the time shot up (at which point the reload button comes into play).

 

Another factor is time in general. While a "gamer" might have enough time to replay the same hour long battle ten times till they work it out. Most casual gamers dont have that luxury.

 

By removing the "dead time" RTWP speeds things up considerably. Which makes it better suited to the modern market in general.

[ShadowPaladin V1.0]

Hate to burst in here disagreeing, but it is possible to play D&D real-time, it doesn't need to be turn-based.  Sorry Mr. Sawyer

 

 

Check it out here!

 

You will all thank me later!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

How well would they manage to play more than one character at the same time though

 

D&D is TB so that a DM can regulate a groups actions (human limitations and all that).

 

On a computer in order to simulate the same level of tactical prowess in a single player game, one person needs to control more than one character. Which is what a TB system allows them to do. Of course you can argue than an RTWP system does exactly the same and hence TB is rendered obsolete.