quote:
The R and G of RPG is Role-Playing...

[[insert witty remark here]]

The only RPGs I''ve played were PlanetScape: Torment, Baldur''s Gate 2, and Diablo II (which is supposedly an RPG). They were all good, but the thing I didn''t like about the D&D games was that it took too long to level, though when you did, you usually got great new abilities (especially Sorcerers). In Diablo II, you leveled very quickly but only marginally improved with each level (woohoo, my level 8 Static Field is now level 9, etc.).

An idea I had is to use a point system for each specific skill in lieu of level-ups. If you start with 8 Str, it will cost you maybe 500 exp to bring it to 9. Or you can save up and then spend 850 exp to bring your level 1 Fireball up to level 2. You spend experience points, you see, and this way, as you gain more experience, new opportunities are constantly opening themselves up. 1050 more exp and you can get that new spell, 1200 more and you can increase your Vitality more, etc. As opposed to doing nothing until that one level up.

~CGameProgrammer( );

I agree with the guy who said Thief: The Dark Project was a great game. I mean, just TRY playing that game with a hack-n-slash mentality. You''d get killed, and fast. The whole idea of the game was to AVOID battles.

Thank you for using Slambot.

A lot of what I hate about console RPGs can be summed up in this thread from a few months back. Basically I don''t like the "lead the player by the nose through a linear story while throwing a trillion random encounters at them" style of RPG. (And even when Final Fantasy 6 does start to get non-linear, it annoys the hell out of me my ''locking me in'' to certain quest areas that I can''t leave where I inevitably end up slaughtered, when I''d just wanted to see what the area was. Anyway, I digress...) But I don''t really play many ''current'' RPGs, so I couldn''t give any more advice than that... except that to say I don''t believe originality is as important as quality.

[ MSVC Fixes | STL | SDL | Game AI | Sockets | C++ Faq Lite | Boost ]

Kylotan: That has to be the most useful sig I''ve seen here!

As for what I hate about rpg''s it has to be random encounters with primitive combat systems. In Star Ocean 2 I''ve had many encounters with about 2 sec inbetween. I''d like to see Final Fantasy Tactics type battles. One for a typical battle area. Maybe 2-3 or one really big one for a tough area.


Jack

InocuousFox (I don''t know gender so I''ll use neuter references. No offense.) said that they wanted story elements removed from their games so they could enjoy them more. Well, my friend, you aren''t looking for an RPG, you want an action game. Without a story, how do you know what your role is? If you don''t know your role, how can you play it? I''m not saying that you should have to play the role the designer meant, I''m saying that if you don''t know what''s going on around you, how can you pick something appropriate?

The problem I have with many current RPG''s is actually in line with what you had to say, though not to the extreme you took it. An RPG should be ''built'' in a world, not the world built to hold the RPG. The world should be self-consistent.

The story should be well-written, cohesive, and relevent to the players, but it shouldn''t be the only thing going on. I''m not going to save the kingdom if the king is just sitting on his duff. I will undertake a specific task that eventually leads to bigger doings, but it should be my choice. If I decide not to do what he wants, there should be other quests and riddles to solve. A specific example would be the way "Darklands" by Microprose implemented its world. There was a really good story to it, but you didn''t have to follow it.



ShadeStorm, the Day_Glo Fish

One thing is that it''s always set in a medieval setting. Spells and Magic. All the same. Cant people have some imagination and creativity?

Plus the fact that the hero''s are already a great/famous person. For example: Diablo 2, you pick a Necro or the Paladin, you start as in the Rogue''s Encampment. If you talk to all the villagers there, somebody will talk of you greatly.
My point is, game devs should put more effort into their story and stuff.

quote: Original post by ShadeStorm
InocuousFox (I don''t know gender so I''ll use neuter references. No offense.)

I''m a guy. Clever but generally harmless... a.k.a. InnocuousFox.

quote: ...said that they wanted story elements removed from their games so they could enjoy them more. Well, my friend, you aren''t looking for an RPG, you want an action game. Without a story, how do you know what your role is? If you don''t know your role, how can you play it? I''m not saying that you should have to play the role the designer meant, I''m saying that if you don''t know what''s going on around you, how can you pick something appropriate?

Perhaps you confuse role with environment and opportunity. In MMORPGs such as UO, EQ, or DAoC, for example, the world provides enough stimulus to prod many people into some decision about what they want to accomplish. However, there is no defined "role"... that is "you must now do this... then do that... and make sure you act like this..."

quote: The problem I have with many current RPG''s is actually in line with what you had to say, though not to the extreme you took it. An RPG should be ''built'' in a world, not the world built to hold the RPG. The world should be self-consistent.

Concur.

quote: The story should be well-written, cohesive, and relevent to the players, but it shouldn''t be the only thing going on. I''m not going to save the kingdom if the king is just sitting on his duff. I will undertake a specific task that eventually leads to bigger doings, but it should be my choice. If I decide not to do what he wants, there should be other quests and riddles to solve.

I think also it depends on the type of RPG we are talking about. If it is a stand-alone RPG, there would have to be a beginning, middle and end which necessitates a path of some sort. With persistant worlds, if there were an end, why would you stay? There needs to be (as in real life) a continual cycle of individual tasks and challenges... but not necessarily placed in front of you like a fantasy in-box. It should be more like an adventure buffet.

Dave Mark
Intrinsic Algorithm Development

I don''t know about you, but with every rpg I have played, (most of them were on the console), I was never in need to run around and collect money or experience to advance further in the game. Thus I never did run around and do these things. I have played a great deal of them too, as rpg is my favorite genre. There is strategy envolved, maybe if some of you wouldn''t buy the strategy guide when you buy the game, or level of at long stretches at once you wouldn''t find such problems. The only thing I find wrong with rpg''s is that they aren''t in all areas, no blending yet... I wanted perfect dark to have stats that you could raise by killing so many people. Maybe you couldn''t carry that rocket launcher until you had enough strength to do so. Perhaps you could have increase your speed, or reload time, or life... that would have been nice so my friends could keep up with me. Besides a fps-rpg, I wanted a good strat-rpg. One where I could run around with my personal player gaining stuff and completing other stuff, while overall I am trying to do something much bigger.

"Practice means good, Perfect Practice means Perfect"

Random battles and constant leveling. Some games try to solve leveling with easier battles, however, they go overboard on lowering the difficulty. Also, there isa lack of actual Role-Playing in today''s Rpgs. MUDs are my fave because people actually role-play.

Fork - In Diablo2 I think they talk about paladins and necromancers being great in general, not specifically your character.

- DarkIce