Quote:
Original post by Telastyn
And I'd place 'multiplayer' as one of the 5.
Inclusion, bad implementation or lack of?
21 users logged in
Proud partner of GDC 2025
Before posting, review our community guidelines.
Support GameDev.net with a monthly GDNet+ subscription!
Top 5 worst design elements of RPGs
1,951
April 21, 2008 08:50 AM
Inclusion, bad implementation or lack of?
100
April 21, 2008 08:56 AM
Quote:
Original post by Telastyn
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.
Morrowind just asked you to listen to people, occasionally think a bit, and read your journal or a book from time to time. Is that so hard...? I loved that part of MOrrowind. So much more immersive than being handed everything on a plate.
Quote:
And I'd place 'multiplayer' as one of the 5.
MP RPGs and SP RPGs are very different, and require very different designs (although really MP RPGs are very, very rarely RPGs).
368
April 21, 2008 09:02 AM
Hi all,
#1
I agree up to a certain point. Some games used too much that trick (and were painful at it) like the first Dungeon Siege where the land formation (and even the map level itself) were only pointing in one direction: forward.
However, when encased in a solid and compelling scenario, this becomes unnoticeable (see Final Fantasy 7 for example).
#2
IMHO, this is more a problem of scenario design or scenario balance. If you can't tell the player what is the personnality of his character and his motivations, the player will question why he should do the quest. Regarding balance, a player must be able to decide wether doing the quest is worth it (interesting reward which may help in the main quest).
Either it is scenario driven (Final Fantasy 7 and its strong characterisation of the game characters) or it is left to the appreciation of the player (side quests of Might and Magic with their own rewards).
#3
I would be more cautious on that one. In a wedding, when you draw your wedding list, you must put own items of every price: this empowers people with low budget to still be able to make a wedding gift.
Likewise in a RPG game, there are quests that some players will do just wrong (the dice always roll low for damage). These 'chore' side quests are there to let players gain that extra experience needed to succeed in the level.
This is more a balancing device. However, you should not abuse of that device.
Besides, it can be used for interesting plot twists: a quest which starts as a chore can end up as being connected to the main quest.
#4
You do not know beforehand what kind of weapon the players will be proficient with. At every level, different kind of weapons are interesting: what is of low interest at level 20, is highly valuable at level 10.
Besides, some players may have their own objectives. Practice of paper and pencil RPG let you discover many different kind of players (some are even dwarf minded: they are ready to loot every little bronze coin available for a profit).
Again, the player must understand beforehand if the objects to loot are worthy of interest or not (Might of Magic 6 was not nice on that one).
#5
I guess the last reward (being the king or the queen) is like #2. It must be in character with the hero the player is impersonating. Maybe not a number 5.
#6 My own beef with RPG: no memory or know ledge of the environment
Over the years, it is always the same. Why is it that people who are in danger never man the defenses ? When they are freed from danger, they do not recognize you either (at best, the mayor may ask you a side trip in their sewers to hunt down rats ... ), or ruined buildings are never rebuilt.
If you accidentally put fire to buildings, or voluntarilly rob the locals, nobody ever accuse you. Nobody would even recognize you if you come back after a month quest(that's nice, they may have something more to be robbed of ...).
What is even greater, is that you can become king/queen of such blissfull people.
MMORPGs solve that partly because there are other players online who have their own memory. But one player RPGs still lack this kind of feature.
Red.
#1
I agree up to a certain point. Some games used too much that trick (and were painful at it) like the first Dungeon Siege where the land formation (and even the map level itself) were only pointing in one direction: forward.
However, when encased in a solid and compelling scenario, this becomes unnoticeable (see Final Fantasy 7 for example).
#2
IMHO, this is more a problem of scenario design or scenario balance. If you can't tell the player what is the personnality of his character and his motivations, the player will question why he should do the quest. Regarding balance, a player must be able to decide wether doing the quest is worth it (interesting reward which may help in the main quest).
Either it is scenario driven (Final Fantasy 7 and its strong characterisation of the game characters) or it is left to the appreciation of the player (side quests of Might and Magic with their own rewards).
#3
I would be more cautious on that one. In a wedding, when you draw your wedding list, you must put own items of every price: this empowers people with low budget to still be able to make a wedding gift.
Likewise in a RPG game, there are quests that some players will do just wrong (the dice always roll low for damage). These 'chore' side quests are there to let players gain that extra experience needed to succeed in the level.
This is more a balancing device. However, you should not abuse of that device.
Besides, it can be used for interesting plot twists: a quest which starts as a chore can end up as being connected to the main quest.
#4
You do not know beforehand what kind of weapon the players will be proficient with. At every level, different kind of weapons are interesting: what is of low interest at level 20, is highly valuable at level 10.
Besides, some players may have their own objectives. Practice of paper and pencil RPG let you discover many different kind of players (some are even dwarf minded: they are ready to loot every little bronze coin available for a profit).
Again, the player must understand beforehand if the objects to loot are worthy of interest or not (Might of Magic 6 was not nice on that one).
#5
I guess the last reward (being the king or the queen) is like #2. It must be in character with the hero the player is impersonating. Maybe not a number 5.
#6 My own beef with RPG: no memory or know ledge of the environment
Over the years, it is always the same. Why is it that people who are in danger never man the defenses ? When they are freed from danger, they do not recognize you either (at best, the mayor may ask you a side trip in their sewers to hunt down rats ... ), or ruined buildings are never rebuilt.
If you accidentally put fire to buildings, or voluntarilly rob the locals, nobody ever accuse you. Nobody would even recognize you if you come back after a month quest(that's nice, they may have something more to be robbed of ...).
What is even greater, is that you can become king/queen of such blissfull people.
MMORPGs solve that partly because there are other players online who have their own memory. But one player RPGs still lack this kind of feature.
Red.
Ghostly yours,Red.
108
April 21, 2008 09:16 AM
As far as game mechanics, I will say:
1. Random Battles
2. Boring battles that dont try and push the envelope creativity wise
3. Usual lack of puzzle elements.
4. Never any multiplayer
5. Chore leveling/quests.
As far as story and creativity go:
1. Theres always the same stale understory of "hero with troubled past meets girl with mysterious past and they form a rebellion to overthrow the empire and full fill some ancient prohecy that was told long ago and they save the world blah blah. This is boring and despite what people think, there are many alternatives. Not one story I wrote RPG wise has anything cliche like this in it. When you write a game story, the first think you should do to make a creative story is to limit yourself and not allow yourself to have certain cliche aspects. Yes it may take longer to write as you will hit writers block but eventually you will end up with something a lot better and unique in the end.
2. Game music lately in RPGs is subpar. Music IS IMPORTANT. Music can invoke emotion with no visuals what so ever, thats powerful. If you want your player to be emotionally involved with your game story concentrate on not only making a great storyline, but some great music as well.
3. Art. There are fewer and fewer "Beautiful Scenes" in RPGs anymore. I remember seeing the Zenan Bridge in Chrono Trigger for the first time and being speechless. I still think its a great scene. Too many games don't put enough time into the quality of their art and its a shame.
These are just nitpicks of mine but I write a lot of RPG stories that I would one day love to make into games, I design art for them, and I create music for them (I'm working on the development team and programming portion slowly but surely but I need more experience in that area first). Its a great time coming up with something you KNOW is unique and you KNOW noone has done before and actually have art and music and story to show for it.
1. Random Battles
2. Boring battles that dont try and push the envelope creativity wise
3. Usual lack of puzzle elements.
4. Never any multiplayer
5. Chore leveling/quests.
As far as story and creativity go:
1. Theres always the same stale understory of "hero with troubled past meets girl with mysterious past and they form a rebellion to overthrow the empire and full fill some ancient prohecy that was told long ago and they save the world blah blah. This is boring and despite what people think, there are many alternatives. Not one story I wrote RPG wise has anything cliche like this in it. When you write a game story, the first think you should do to make a creative story is to limit yourself and not allow yourself to have certain cliche aspects. Yes it may take longer to write as you will hit writers block but eventually you will end up with something a lot better and unique in the end.
2. Game music lately in RPGs is subpar. Music IS IMPORTANT. Music can invoke emotion with no visuals what so ever, thats powerful. If you want your player to be emotionally involved with your game story concentrate on not only making a great storyline, but some great music as well.
3. Art. There are fewer and fewer "Beautiful Scenes" in RPGs anymore. I remember seeing the Zenan Bridge in Chrono Trigger for the first time and being speechless. I still think its a great scene. Too many games don't put enough time into the quality of their art and its a shame.
These are just nitpicks of mine but I write a lot of RPG stories that I would one day love to make into games, I design art for them, and I create music for them (I'm working on the development team and programming portion slowly but surely but I need more experience in that area first). Its a great time coming up with something you KNOW is unique and you KNOW noone has done before and actually have art and music and story to show for it.
3,778
April 21, 2008 10:12 AM
Quote:
Original post by DvDmanDT Quote:
Original post by Telastyn
And I'd place 'multiplayer' as one of the 5.
Inclusion, bad implementation or lack of?
Inclusion.
I never tried it, but Neverwinter Nights with known friends might be okay. As soon as you hit random Joes, the game experience drops precipitously. Even with friends in most games, you don't gain anything but problems with synchronization, communication travails...
Multiplayer RPGs are best left to Pen and Paper (imo).
1,951
April 21, 2008 11:12 AM
I'll have to disagree there actually. While I've only played with fairly close friends, it has been great experiences.
NWN was fairly fun at first (until the game itself got boring, too many stupid sidequests), my friend was a Ranger who took all aggro, while I was a scorcerer who did area damage.
Works even better in party based games such as baldurs gate and icewind dale (the gameplay that is, there are some multiplayer bugs however).
The only problem with such games is that many lack xp sharing, which can sometimes cause one player to lag behind in levels, and never be able to catch up because he doesn't do as much damage as the others and so on. That's not a problem if you play with the right people though.
With that said, I only like multiplayer as in 2-5 players or so, and they should all be friends.
NWN was fairly fun at first (until the game itself got boring, too many stupid sidequests), my friend was a Ranger who took all aggro, while I was a scorcerer who did area damage.
Works even better in party based games such as baldurs gate and icewind dale (the gameplay that is, there are some multiplayer bugs however).
The only problem with such games is that many lack xp sharing, which can sometimes cause one player to lag behind in levels, and never be able to catch up because he doesn't do as much damage as the others and so on. That's not a problem if you play with the right people though.
With that said, I only like multiplayer as in 2-5 players or so, and they should all be friends.
April 21, 2008 01:56 PM
Quote:
Original post by Telastyn
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.
The type I'm proposing would need to be optional. I wouldn't suggest making the main quest that way. The main quest needs to point in the correct direction, but there's no reason anything else needs to. You could, for example, make nearly every optional side quest in the game human-player-oriented, where virtually no one asks you to perform deeds, you just do them on your own. The end results can basically stay the same as any normal rigid quest. The biggest difference is that it was your idea to make a difference, and your plan that pulled it off. And if you fail, you don't fail anyone other than yourself, since it was your motivation that warranted the attempt.
Quote:
Original post by Red Ghost
Likewise in a RPG game, there are quests that some players will do just wrong (the dice always roll low for damage). These 'chore' side quests are there to let players gain that extra experience needed to succeed in the level.
Number one rule of game design: If an activity isn't fun, then it should not be rewarding in any way. Find another solution to let players catch up.
Quote:
You do not know beforehand what kind of weapon the players will be proficient with. At every level, different kind of weapons are interesting: what is of low interest at level 20, is highly valuable at level 10.
My suggestion is to only allow looting of rare and valuable items. If you see it more than once per gaming hour, it's not rare. Again, the #1 rule applies; general looting is profitable and tedious. There are fun and non invasive ways to implement looting, maybe even general looting, but you have to be careful.
Quote:
Original post by Telastyn Quote:
Original post by DvDmanDT Quote:
Original post by Telastyn
And I'd place 'multiplayer' as one of the 5.
Inclusion, bad implementation or lack of?
Inclusion.
I agree. Especially if the multiplayer is massive. MMORPGs are essentially built around the elements I hate most about RPGs, and exclude most of what I enjoy about RPGs. Growing a character stronger is my most enjoyable RPG element, and that is only interesting to me if it's for a grand enough purpose.
842
April 21, 2008 02:15 PM
Alright, my own thoughts on the state of certain design elementa of RPGs.
Yes, I wouldn't mind a high ranking weakling. This goes hand in hand with being the person who saves the world. RPGs always seem to happen in a macrocosm. You're always the person who saves the world from the evil bad guy. You're always "the man" in the game. Why can't an RPG exist in which you're just a nobody? Or an objective where you're just solving a problem in the smaller scheme of things. This would open up sequels to an overall episodic big scale RPG.
This leads to vendors. If I happen to be the one saving the universe, please stop being a selfish *****. "Please save us! BTW, this medicine is 1000 gold. Thank you, come again." If I'm the one saving all of humanity from an evil being, I expect some respect and some help. I realize that you have a job/life too, but if you don't help me out, most likely all the money in the world will be meaningless once the evil one destroys the world.
And that leads to money. Money is useless in games. The rats at the beginning of the game give barely anything. And the final dungeon creatures give millions. Except I need the money at the beginning of the game, and have an overabundance by the end. Why should the subboss before the final being give 9,999,999,999,999,999 gold if I can't really use it? And the question I have is why do rats at the beginning even have gold at all? I enjoyed the fact that the later Ultimas started employing the idea that creatures would only carry items that made logical sense.
Well, this comes down to your role in the game for me. If I'm saving the world, of course I don't want to handle your petty problems. I'm trying to save the world here. I think your basement spring cleaning can be put on hold here.
And this leads to the linearity of the game. This is especially true with JRPGs. The games never have a time line, rather they are event based. And extremely linear, so I can't go to town B until I clean your stupid basement. Event based portions of the game should be on grand key elements of the game, not every little detail.
This also is a pet peeve of mine. The term JRPG. Really imho, there is no such thing as a JRPG vs Western RPG. Japanese (/ Console RPGs) are really just a combination of Wizardry and Ultima, which are Western RPGs. The main difference is that Wizadry and Ultima came out in the early 1980's, and have evolved since then, whereas console RPGs have kept the same stale gameplay up until this day.
And where they evolve (all RPGs, including Western and Eastern RPGs), it's just not enough, or in the wrong places. Graphics evolve, music evolves, yet the gameplay keeps getting simplified in all the wrong areas. They simplify having to use 26 different keys on a keyboard to 4 buttons on a gamepad, but they don't simplify the game.
I dislike ramdom battles. I want to be able to go through a game at my pace, be it 2 hours or 200 hours. Most RPGs are really 5 hour games with 95+ hours of battle filler. That to me is just not a good game. I want to roleplay. I dislike having bosses, because then it just enforces the game to be a fighter. I want the choice of being able to play a thief who avoids all battles completely, or a mage who solves problems intellectually, rather than just a fighter who kills indiscriminantly. I want the game to be about solving an overall problem, not just killing Boss X, who in reality, probably doesn't have any influence on 98% of the overall game.
And stats. I've already stated that JRPGs haven't evolved since PC RPG's of the 1980's. Yet RPG's haven't evolved passed the PnP RPGs of the 1970s. I realize that stats fill a sadistic need that exists in human nature, but it's time we moved away from them. I'm roleplaying an elf who's just been critically injured and bleeding to death, and needs attention ASAP, not watching over a character who has 2/854 HP. I am strong enough to weild a broadsword effectly, not a character who has 21 str with 84 skill in swords. Stats lead to a problem that existed in Wizardry, that when you saw your stats, you constantly rerolled for 8 hours straight to get just the right character. It's about time we stop working games to have just the right character who cannot die, and start playing games.
This is just not an RPG problem, but a problem with games and their audience in general. Games don't exist anymore, because we're risk adverse. We can't stand losing, so we can't lose. At that point, we're just reading a novel or watching a movie while performing hours of tedious busywork between chapters.
*EDIT*
Just a quick comment on the last subject. What I'm looking for is a game that can immerse you. Once you start being a video game accountant, or worrying about dieing, you're not immersed in playing a game. You're not really playing a game, you're working a game. A good game should be something you become immersed in, something you lose track of time in, something that you don't mind dieing or playing over and over. Yet I feel that we've been moving away from that every year since the early days of the arcade.
Quote:
Would you rather them being a high ranking weakling? Going down? >.>
Yes, I wouldn't mind a high ranking weakling. This goes hand in hand with being the person who saves the world. RPGs always seem to happen in a macrocosm. You're always the person who saves the world from the evil bad guy. You're always "the man" in the game. Why can't an RPG exist in which you're just a nobody? Or an objective where you're just solving a problem in the smaller scheme of things. This would open up sequels to an overall episodic big scale RPG.
This leads to vendors. If I happen to be the one saving the universe, please stop being a selfish *****. "Please save us! BTW, this medicine is 1000 gold. Thank you, come again." If I'm the one saving all of humanity from an evil being, I expect some respect and some help. I realize that you have a job/life too, but if you don't help me out, most likely all the money in the world will be meaningless once the evil one destroys the world.
And that leads to money. Money is useless in games. The rats at the beginning of the game give barely anything. And the final dungeon creatures give millions. Except I need the money at the beginning of the game, and have an overabundance by the end. Why should the subboss before the final being give 9,999,999,999,999,999 gold if I can't really use it? And the question I have is why do rats at the beginning even have gold at all? I enjoyed the fact that the later Ultimas started employing the idea that creatures would only carry items that made logical sense.
Quote:
Original post by Kest
3. Chore quests
One or two to introduce the game is okay, but keep them out of the primary gameplay. Weeding gardens, delivering messages or packages, escorting a person, passing dialog between NPCs, etc. Some of these types of objectives may be okay under certain circumstances, such as delivering an important package through a warzone where constant battle is expected. But don't just make the player run across the map for no good reason.
Well, this comes down to your role in the game for me. If I'm saving the world, of course I don't want to handle your petty problems. I'm trying to save the world here. I think your basement spring cleaning can be put on hold here.
And this leads to the linearity of the game. This is especially true with JRPGs. The games never have a time line, rather they are event based. And extremely linear, so I can't go to town B until I clean your stupid basement. Event based portions of the game should be on grand key elements of the game, not every little detail.
This also is a pet peeve of mine. The term JRPG. Really imho, there is no such thing as a JRPG vs Western RPG. Japanese (/ Console RPGs) are really just a combination of Wizardry and Ultima, which are Western RPGs. The main difference is that Wizadry and Ultima came out in the early 1980's, and have evolved since then, whereas console RPGs have kept the same stale gameplay up until this day.
And where they evolve (all RPGs, including Western and Eastern RPGs), it's just not enough, or in the wrong places. Graphics evolve, music evolves, yet the gameplay keeps getting simplified in all the wrong areas. They simplify having to use 26 different keys on a keyboard to 4 buttons on a gamepad, but they don't simplify the game.
I dislike ramdom battles. I want to be able to go through a game at my pace, be it 2 hours or 200 hours. Most RPGs are really 5 hour games with 95+ hours of battle filler. That to me is just not a good game. I want to roleplay. I dislike having bosses, because then it just enforces the game to be a fighter. I want the choice of being able to play a thief who avoids all battles completely, or a mage who solves problems intellectually, rather than just a fighter who kills indiscriminantly. I want the game to be about solving an overall problem, not just killing Boss X, who in reality, probably doesn't have any influence on 98% of the overall game.
And stats. I've already stated that JRPGs haven't evolved since PC RPG's of the 1980's. Yet RPG's haven't evolved passed the PnP RPGs of the 1970s. I realize that stats fill a sadistic need that exists in human nature, but it's time we moved away from them. I'm roleplaying an elf who's just been critically injured and bleeding to death, and needs attention ASAP, not watching over a character who has 2/854 HP. I am strong enough to weild a broadsword effectly, not a character who has 21 str with 84 skill in swords. Stats lead to a problem that existed in Wizardry, that when you saw your stats, you constantly rerolled for 8 hours straight to get just the right character. It's about time we stop working games to have just the right character who cannot die, and start playing games.
This is just not an RPG problem, but a problem with games and their audience in general. Games don't exist anymore, because we're risk adverse. We can't stand losing, so we can't lose. At that point, we're just reading a novel or watching a movie while performing hours of tedious busywork between chapters.
*EDIT*
Just a quick comment on the last subject. What I'm looking for is a game that can immerse you. Once you start being a video game accountant, or worrying about dieing, you're not immersed in playing a game. You're not really playing a game, you're working a game. A good game should be something you become immersed in, something you lose track of time in, something that you don't mind dieing or playing over and over. Yet I feel that we've been moving away from that every year since the early days of the arcade.
745
April 21, 2008 02:24 PM
Quote:
Original post by Captain Griffen
MangaFox, your list seems to basically be a list of personal dislikes or simply bad implementation, rather than an objective assesment of high level game design.
Same with the OP's list.
Quote:
1. Everything is a quest
I, personally, like this. They'll pry my PIPBoy 2000 from my cold dead wrist!
Quote:
2. Assuming the player is suicidally helpful
Either bad story (e.g. if in a Final Fantasy) or lack of appropriate inputs (e.g. if in a Fallout), which is just bad implementation.
Quote:
3. Chore quests
Either bad story (e.g. if in a Final Fantasy) or lack of appropriate inputs (e.g. if in a Fallout), which is just bad implementation.
Quote:
4. Generic looting
What's the problem with generic looting? It seems the complaint is that generic looting is worth your time so let's make it not worth your time... what?
Anyway, maybe I've been out of the loop for too long, but haven't most games gotten this more-or-less right? I mean, if you leave out the bit about decreasing the value of an item the more of it you sell, what the OP described is what I'm used to in games. The last game I remember getting it even a little wrong was Fallout 1 where you couldn't move more than 999 bottle caps at a time and lacked a "loot all" button. The bit about the decreasing value of an item seems more of an annoyance to the player than anything else.
Quote:
5. Climbing to the top
Either bad story (e.g. if in a Final Fantasy) or lack of appropriate inputs (e.g. if in a Fallout), which is just bad implementation.
12,313
April 21, 2008 03:02 PM
I partially (dis)agree with OP's #1.
I want a quest log so that I know what I'm *supposed* to be doing, but I also want unaided content (discovering secret areas, for instance). Having a game that is ONLY guided quests with no self-discovered content is boring, and having a game that is ONLY unaided discovery is frustrating.
I want a quest log so that I know what I'm *supposed* to be doing, but I also want unaided content (discovering secret areas, for instance). Having a game that is ONLY guided quests with no self-discovered content is boring, and having a game that is ONLY unaided discovery is frustrating.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
Recommended Tutorials
Advertisement