quote: Original post by Cahaan
Ingenu: Yeah sure, the number of sells is really determining the quality of a game. That''s why Britney Spears is soooo damn talented.

Bullshit.

Excatly where did I spoke about quality ?
I said you''ll have more consumers with something more like Final Fantasy, and from what I asked in the beginning you can see I don''t recommend a FF copy.

Wonder why I even took the time to reply to this...

quote: Scaught:
I *loved* Darklands. In fact, I''ve been meaning to buy it again - you used to be able to get it from this site...but it''s not loading for me now.

His ISP went under, and he''s looking for a new one (from what I hear). You can often find it on ebay for under $20.

I''ll have to look into Hengband. Picked up ADOM a few months ago. It''s fun, but I keep playing until midgame and then I just stop playing. The small quests in the beginning (and the repercussions) are great, but the midgame is just "keep slogging thru until you''ve maxxed out stats and gotten enough artifacts that you can live through the nasty endgame". Wheee..

scaught: I did try ogre battle, but only being able to change the ai bothered me. Also, I thought the interface had too many problems.

quote: Original post by Merle
I''ll have to look into Hengband. Picked up ADOM a few months ago. It''s fun, but I keep playing until midgame and then I just stop playing. The small quests in the beginning (and the repercussions) are great, but the midgame is just "keep slogging thru until you''ve maxxed out stats and gotten enough artifacts that you can live through the nasty endgame". Wheee..

Well, I don''t want to get your hopes up. Hengband is pretty much nothing but slogging. But, it''s the kind of slogging I very much enjoy, even if I do end up dying quickly most of the time. (My poor Skeleton Death Paladins never seem to last very long...)

Come to think of it, it''s really just the semi-tactical combat and all the random items that draws me...and the fact I can play for 15-20 minutes at a time, save (or die), and come back to it whenever. Hmm. I guess that really says a lot about my tastes...

quote: Original post by wraith20
scaught: I did try ogre battle, but only being able to change the ai bothered me. Also, I thought the interface had too many problems.

It definately was clunky. Someone told me it actually worked with the PS1 mouse, but I was a) never bothered enough to look for the little icon on the back of the jewel case, or b) never bothered enough to look for a PS1 mouse.

I actually liked the abstraction of the battles - it made the game more casual to me, and at the time, casual gaming was what I needed. Of course, when it came to deploying more than a couple armies simultaneously, then I started to lose interest.

I feel that the same ideas are just circling around over here

anyway...

quote: I said you'll have more consumers with something more like Final Fantasy

not true. you see final fantasy already has a foothold in the market. If their next game is shit! they'll still have millions of sales, becuase everyone _knows_ final fantasy. But say a game like xenogears was amazing (best rpg ever in my opinion) dosnt have a chance against final fantasy even though its better, cause its not *famous*. Just like movies, say you have a choice of renting one of two movies. one by your FAV actor, another by this new actor who looks really ugly, and teh cover is really bad. Even though that second movie could be much better, you wouldnt give it the time of day. right?

quote: That's why Britney Spears is soooo damn talented.

She *is* talented heh

quote: "Most of the drivel that passes for RPG these days is very little RP, very little G, and a lot of story that you get to pretend to interact with."

story IS RP. You get to play the role of someone else, it's pretty simple. Maybe what you meant to say was that the games nowadays are too linear? And there is a hell of a lot of game...Exploration/Interation/Emotion/Battle/MORE, it's all there, how can you say there's no game?

quote: Second, I want a FUN tactical combat system. From what I've seen of FF games, there doesn't seem to be any tactics involved, except choosing attacks. But since the only thing that changes is your opponent, it seems like it's hella easy to choose the optimal fighting style.

It's not juet choosing attacks. What do you think they have all that choice in skill development and weapons/armors. It's cause You need to know which accessory/armor/weapon/spell/team-mate would be the most useful in battle. The wrong combination of these things and you'll die. This is all tactics. Now I admit that the tactics are pretty easy. I think square tries to be too careful with tehir FF series, they're maybe scared that if they make the games tougher people will lose early on and just not play it again. While this *may* be true, note that it is also true that in teh FF games you can go on mini quests where teh enemies are EXtremely hard to defeat, but once you're at a really high level eveything becomes easy. In FF8 they seem to have improved this problem by making the mosters level up _with_ you. I personally think this was good for balance, nothing else. It also kinda dosnt make sense that a plant creature can do max 10 hp damage then come back at teh end of teh game it can do around 1000 hp damage. They dont give an explanation for this which makes it kinda stupid.

quote: I don't want the game to tell me my role - that does not mean that I don't want to play a role. Playing the developer's idea of a main character is doing just that - it limits your imagination by forcing you to identify with preconceived notions.

Then I suggest you play pen+paper rpgs. Cause with the level of AI these days I dont think this is possible. You will always be *put* into a role if you play an rpg (unless you make one). If all you want to do is play your own role then why not write a story with you as the main character? Besides I'd rather play the role that the developer has created, cause it's all worked out, the world in an rpg _works_ (most of the time)

:::: [ Triple Buffer V2.0 ] ::::

[edited by - IFooBar on February 4, 2003 5:56:02 PM]

quote: Original post by IFooBar
story IS RP. You get to play the role of someone else, it''s pretty simple. Maybe what you meant to say was that the games nowadays are too linear?

Sure, story is RP, but it''s P''ing a specific R. Best case, it''s like acting in a play, worst case, it''s like reading a book in the first person. Even if the game is non-linear, being forced into a specific role kills part of the appeal P&P RPGs have taken for granted all these years. Sure, you can identify with someone else''s persona, but never as closely as you can identify with your own. (at least, I hope not)

quote: And there is a hell of a lot of game...Exploration/Interation/Emotion/Battle/MORE, it''s all there, how can you say there''s no game?

Because the exploration is limited, the interaction is forced, the emotion is spoonfed (fnord). Heck, even some of the battle sequences are unavoidable - worse, most are designed in ways so that you''ll get through them sooner or later. All of these things take away the "fun" for me.

quote: Then I suggest you play pen+paper rpgs. Cause with the level of AI these days I dont think this is possible. You will always be *put* into a role if you play an rpg (unless you make one).

It doesn''t take THAT much AI to get a semi-workable system going. Look at the aforementioned Darklands. That game is 11 years old and still manages to present concepts other RPGs ignore. Quests, political environments, the perception of your character - these all can be modelled fairly simply and maintained to the point of decent immersion with VERY little data and VERY little effort.

quote: If all you want to do is play your own role then why not write a story with you as the main character?

This not only misses the point completely, but illustrates why other people often miss the point. I don''t want my GAME to have a set story. I want something new and exciting to happen each time I play it. I want to build up reputation, or fall down a stupid pit trap, or get mad because the shopkeeper decided Skeleton Death Paladins weren''t welcome in his store any more. The point is, I don''t want to know what happens ahead of time. I don''t want ANYONE to know what happens ahead of time. I want a game where I can share my experiences with other game players and have them be intrigued as much as I was when I played it, not "Hey, what was it like when you fought Boss-guy-18? Huh, me too."

quote: Besides I''d rather play the role that the developer has created, cause it''s all worked out, the world in an rpg _works_ (most of the time)

So you''re basically saying, "I want them to do the imagining for me?" That''s too bad - and really, you might be better served getting a good book or movie instead of your next RPG in this vein - there''s plenty out there with far better writing and/or visuals than what you can get out of a game.

I had a nice long post written out but my computer ate it. There are some comments I'd like to rewrite, but I won't take the time to package them as well.

- Somebody mentioned that FF made a lot of more money and concludes that the game is thus better. My opinion is that a game that you can learn something from, relax with and look forward to without forcing an obsession for levelling is a better game.

- Also the system of leveling / equipment is a very effective and easy to use tool to reward playing time. However this is character improvement, not development. Character development is when Alice really starts fearing water when she loses two of her friends to unexpected undercurrents or when Bob decides that dwarfs aren't half bad when they are being generous to him. (and maybe later get a worse grudge towards dwarfs because they scammed him). Character development has to do with personality. Character improvement with ever becomings stronger, smarter, more charismatic or more skillful in any other way. Ussually you become this for killing monsters. Please keep the two apart.

- Last point: I think we should really explore alternatives to a levelling system that would make a game rewarding. Yes it's effective and relatively easy to use. Yes it eliminates lots of balancing because to go to the next area you "need just a little more xp". But there are plenty of games that are fun for other reasons than becoming stronger and these should be explored better in RPG's.

>"Hey guys let's make a RPG...."
<"Yeah sure. We're going to add some big scary beast the player gets to kill right?"
>"Of course, just let me see what we need... a level formula, a to hit formula and some skills you can learn"
<"Skills?"
>"You know, fighting with a sword, casting a spell, that sorta thing. You just gain more of these everytime you level. You know what annoys me in other rpg's? Leveling sometimes takes a lot of work. What about making instant teleports to all monster sites, to save the player the walking time?"
<"Good idea. You know what we could eliminate the cliking, just let the character develop herself."
>"What if we call it progressquest?"

Note: that is not the actual story I made it up and am completely unaffiliated with the link. I just like the satire.

[edited by - Taco on February 4, 2003 7:20:04 PM]

I actually really liked ProgressQuest. (I don''t know how far back their MB archives go, but I had a picture of my first Trans-Kobold Slow Poisoner on there. heh.) I think it would''ve been absolutely great if the equipment/monsters were truly random and you had a chance of dying. In fact, the total abstraction of the adventure aspect is a key option in my (eventual) game.

Don''t get me wrong, progress quest, although sometimes amateurishly maintained/ marketed, is still one of the most innovative games there. I just don''t like games such as dungeon siege that try to be imitate progress quest but don''t offer the same freedom. That and progress quest is humorous. Generally though, you want your own game as far from this as possible. This is a one time hit.

Anybody who still does not see the difference between ''character development'' and ''character improvement'' should try out this game. This game, without describing these two terms, will explain you the difference. You''ll get it. Trust me.