Quote:

Original post by Funkymunky i feel like the reason these are cliches is that at some point, some game did one or more of these things extremely well.

I believe it's because of a lack of empathic perception. It's being used often, it will expand the features of the game, I can't see how it will hurt, so let's use it. It's hard to imagine a designer actually enjoying looting every generic sword that's laying on the ground, or not needing the funds those swords would have provided.

Hi guys, this is my first post here ever, though I signed up a little while ago.

I agree with most of your points to one degree or another.

One of my pet peeves with many RPGs, is that there is just way too much to do.
Now that may sound like a great thing at first, and in some cases it is, but I find sometimes having a whole lot of things to do can be smothering.
I end up distracted from the main plot line, feeling like I'm not getting the most out of the game unless I spend 30+ hours ignoring the story, just doing side quests and missions. This kind of thing is fine in a game like Fallout or Oblivion, where open world exploration and experience is the whole point of the game, but a game that wants to be more focused on it's plot ends up feeling diluted by the dozens of other things there are to do at any given time.

As much as I like a game that gives me plenty of choice, I long for a game that is more concerned with telling me a great story than it is with giving me every possible option at every turn of events.

Though I agree, it is all opinion, many people love being able to choose everything.

The 5 points of the OP would enhance realism, but I'm not so sure as of how it would enhance fun. This is one of the traps I'm seeing more and more game designers fall into. Assassin's Creed had a lot of realism, but, in my opinion, was more repetitive than fun.

Exploring is slow and some players (not necessarily me, it depends on the game) would rather have every quest clearly indicated to level up faster. One of the kicks in playing RPGs is making a monster out of a level 1 weakling. Having to find your quests by yourself would slow that down.

I agree with 5 though. Isn't it ironic how the cliché of the "tomboy princess that doesn't want to be a queen" so common in RPGs while you, as a player, are never given the opportunity to refuse becoming the king or queen?

Quote:

Original post by Kest 5. Climbing to the top This one is probably the most personal, and there may be more players who will disagree than agree. In an RPG, I'm often a soldier. A grunt. A spectacular grunt, maybe, but still a grunt. I don't want to be arch mage of the wizard guild, or president of hippy town, or emperor of Jewel Kingdom. Regardless of the terrific things I've done for the game world, I want to remain a grunt, wandering the wasteland, saving random humanity. If it makes sense to crown the player for achieving something spectacular, then at least give them a choice. Don't just assume they would want that power and recognition. There are at least a few that don't. EDIT: spelling and typos

Would you rather them being a high ranking weakling? Going down? >.>

Quote:

Original post by Bearhugger The 5 points of the OP would enhance realism, but I'm not so sure as of how it would enhance fun.

None of my top 5 are about realism. #2 was related to a conceivable reality, but not real world realism. If characters are hard to imagine in any conceivable reality, that makes them seem far less alive.

#1 is not about realism. It's just about structuring. What does a complex test amount to after you've been given the answers? Filling in dots with a pencil. That's what most RPG quests amount to. The essence of the quests have already been done for you, so you simply perform the manual labor.

My favorite thing about RPGs, which they potentially, but may or may not actually, do is giving you an opportunity to explore.

That being said, one thing I miss that RPGs used to have a lot more frequently was a strong, eh, adventure game aspect to them. Item based puzzles and whatnot.

I guess in a larger sense that goes back to world interaction. Nothing's really been able to beat most of the Ultimas in that sense and what did really dissapoint me about Oblivion, more than anything else, was that of all the stuff you could pick up, none of it really did anything.

I think the notion of rigid quests isn't really useful or appropriate anymore. Space Rangers 2 does this really well. You have rigid quests you can take on. Pre-scripted. At the same time, there's a constant war raging in the background, which is entirely unscripted, and a leaderboard, and certain unique, named weapons for your ship which you can try to hunt down. In this sense, you can also quest on your own, just trying to find hidden caches and acting as a mercenary in a constantly shifting war and trying to rise up the leaderboard.

Hardwar also did this, sort of.

There's some other RPGs that did this too, I believe, but I can't think of them off hand. Where instead of getting quests, you quest on your own becase there are things to explore, caverns to prod, and the world-state means that certain actions are more profitable than others.

I'm tired of watching RPGs where you stick to the main quests (no sidequests) and everything is pretty easy, except the dammed final boss that kicks you to dead every time you try it, forcing you to backtrack and level up when you are just going to finish the game...

Quote:

Original post by MeshGearFox In this sense, you can also quest on your own, just trying to find hidden caches and acting as a mercenary in a constantly shifting war and trying to rise up the leaderboard.

I've played many games where you can operate on your own frequency, but everything is usually repeatable and of low consequence. And I've played many games where the objectives are unbendable, but the rigid setup allows heavy changes to the plot and game setting. I like both, but the first has no decent goals, and the second leaves no room for player decision making.

I propose the inclusion of some quests that have rigid goals, where the goal is not given to the player as a quest, but just as simple information.

For example, taking out the adon tower in the city removes your nemesis' ability to control seeker robots, which are used to police their slave population. You can obtain information somewhere about the purpose of the tower, and the rest is left up to you. Taking out the tower releases the slaves, and causes a major plot development. No one asks you to do this. The game doesn't even hint at it. The player makes up their own mind, and comes up with a plan on their own.

I hate sidequests which doesn't do anything except show up as an unfinished quest or give you a tiny amount of experience. Sidequests are great, if they are somewhat unique and/or accutually give you something. Perhaps some cool weapon, perhaps it unlocks a new part of the world or a shortcut which lets you travel around the world easier or something like that. Suikoden is a great sidequest game btw (collecting characters and various wierd items). I also like Dungeon Siege 2 sidequests, because they were somewhat varied, and often give you something intresting on completion.

Exploring is great, if there's a limit imho. I like to be able to explore small areas at a time, and unlocking additional areas as I progress (for example, Alundra). Unlocking can also mean I can go anywhere but the monsters are way to though until I level some more. I hate games which let me travel just about anywhere and adjust monster difficulcy after my current level (such as Sacred).

Looting is great if, and only if, there are items which are worth the trouble, such as in Diablo.

If I'm going to spend 90% of the game fighting, then please make me better at it as I progress. Diablo 2 skills are great, and DnD spells are good too.

More than one way to complete a quest isn't a bad thing.

Personally, I find games where you get stuck and are then going "wtf do I do now?" (see: Morrowind, Wizardry 6,7,8) the 2nd most frustrating gaming experience ever (after puzzles in a rpg/fps).

I'll take semi-rigid quests over that anyday.

And I'd place 'multiplayer' as one of the 5.