next »

[s0]

i dont really consider grind to be that fundamental tho. grind is a weird videogamey mutation of the EXP concept (not that that's bad). vampire bloodlines and (iirc) the new shadowrun videogames only give you EXP for solving quests and those are definitely "real rpgs" to me (that system is closer to how it would work in a tabletop rpg with a decent DM btw). heart pieces in zelda are the same thing.

fighting monster won't make the boss easier

kind of does if you factor in that monsters drop resources like hearts, magic, bombs arrows etc. but ok, most of the newer zelda games place jars that more or less refill you right in front of the boss door, so that aspect falls away a bit.

[gimymblert]

Dropping resource is not the same, you don't get longer life, you don't get bonus resistance, they are not permanent change. I would class that more as resource management through risk and reward (you still have to kill the monster) and that's the basis of all actions game almost. It's more rubber band mechanics than "grind".

However I didn't refer to grind, you don't "have" to grind when simple encounter do make you better. I did fill heart piece as rpg mechanics above.

Xp acquisition policy is a hot topic in rpg design though. Fighting makes you better at fighting is the most direct mechanics (get good at what you are doing) instead of get good at what you aren't doing (quest xp use for combat). Mass effect use separate stat for dialog with the paragon/renegade gauge.

[s0]

However I didn't refer to grind, you don't "have" to grind when simple encounter do make you better. I did fill heart piece as rpg mechanics above.

i meant grind as in the ability to grind.

btw i think the combat focus in videogame rpgs comes from D&D which started off as a spinoff to a miniatures wargame and as such is mechanically very combat-centric. all of the early crpgs took D&D as their model.

[starsrift]

Xp acquisition policy is a hot topic in rpg design though. Fighting makes you better at fighting is the most direct mechanics (get good at what you are doing) instead of get good at what you aren't doing (quest xp use for combat). Mass effect use separate stat for dialog with the paragon/renegade gauge.

Am I the only one that gets pissed off at stuff like this?
There's a time to bring the realism, and a time to say it's a damn game.

[JWK5]

Dragon Quest will never get old.



NEVER!!!

[eliasfrost]

Xp acquisition policy is a hot topic in rpg design though. Fighting makes you better at fighting is the most direct mechanics (get good at what you are doing) instead of get good at what you aren't doing (quest xp use for combat). Mass effect use separate stat for dialog with the paragon/renegade gauge.

It's actually one of the things I liked about Underrail. In that game the default XP gain system is that you find "oddities" in containers and sometimes on dead bodies for various types of enemies. Mostly in containers though. Instead of killing things all the time to get experience you can use stealth, persuade characters to gain access to buildings and such to explore and find oddities and gain experience that way. I thought it was nifty, It encourages you to try new stuff and explore the game world.

It doesn't really fix the problem of not getting good at the things you do by doing them but I thought it was a quite elegant way of at least getting away from the tired concept of getting experience through only bloodshed.

[valrus]

It's actually one of the things I liked about Underrail. In that game the default XP gain system is that you find "oddities" in containers and sometimes on dead bodies for various types of enemies. Mostly in containers though. Instead of killing things all the time to get experience you can use stealth, persuade characters to gain access to buildings and such to explore and find oddities and gain experience that way. I thought it was nifty, It encourages you to try new stuff and explore the game world.

It doesn't really fix the problem of not getting good at the things you do by doing them but I thought it was a quite elegant way of at least getting away from the tired concept of getting experience through only bloodshed.

Speaking of which, it's worth noting that XP-from-treasure is part of the design of the *original* D&D that is kinda forgotten now.  (I didn't know this until recently.)  Roughly 80% of your XP in OD&D came from getting treasure, not from defeating monsters, and so pursuing alternate methods (stealth, trickery, diplomacy, whatever) was almost as well-rewarded as combat.

It doesn't make much sense, of course, that gaining gold would make you stronger/smarter/etc., but iirc Gygax specifically wanted to avoid the kind of gameplay where you treat monsters as walking XP pools rather than something potentially deadly and to be avoided when possible.  (This isn't to say that OD&D wasn't a very combat-focused game, just that it was purposely designed to at least start bringing things into miniatures gaming that weren't straight-up combat, and the XP system reflects that goal.)

[gimymblert]

So you are saying quarter of heart are a pure implementation (reward exploration and task completion)?

[s0]

(This isn't to say that OD&D wasn't a very combat-focused game, just that it was purposely designed to at least start bringing things into miniatures gaming that weren't straight-up combat, and the XP system reflects that goal.)

D&D as a system is still pretty combat focused even today.

but yes in a pen and paper rpg, you generally wouldnt grind monsters for exp and get most of them from completing tasks.

[Jordgubben]

My favorite RPGs - Final Fantasy 9

I was enjoying that videogame, but every single random encounter had a 30 second wait before you could input anything, made it unplayable for me

Ah, the PAL version of FF9. Much load time. So nostalgia. Wow Europe.   

If you like FF9 you should really look into Bravely Default. It's the spiritual successor when it comes to atmosphere, but has a more sophisticated battle system (and short load times).

[s0]

i replayed a bit of FF9 recently and it's almost depressing how the starting town alone feels more detailed and lovingly crafted than all of ff13 taken together. RIP.

btw ff9 has the best monster designs in the entire series and is a freaking amazing game that doesn't get enough love.

[oahda]

what breaks a jrpg: bad voice acting in the american dub

[starsrift]

Yeah, FF9 really was great. I also especially liked that combos unlocked just by having Vivi + Steiner in your party.

The more I think about it, the more that story design in Western RPG's irritates me. Western RPG's give you a bunch of quests and then unlock an adventure area from a hub, where you're meant to kind of explore and stumble over the quest completions. In comparison, JRPG's or really really old Western RPG's actually follow a traditional story structure with rising action, climax, and denouement, making each dungeon or area into a distinct chapter. While that usually makes JRPG's more linear, it makes them feel more well-crafted than WRPG's, imo. WRPG's tend to feel messy and blech whereas JRPG's actually feel like a series of stories. Even the sidequests in JRPG's are usually not quasi-random or 'feel' random, they have their own set-pieces and distinct settings.

Liking those aspects are probably really subjective, some people probably enjoy the 'free' nature of hub-and-wild WRPG's just as much as I like a properly crafted story. But it feels a lot more transparently like picking up plot coupons/macguffins, in WRPG's.

[s0]

Liking those aspects are probably really subjective, some people probably enjoy the 'free' nature of hub-and-wild WRPG's just as much as I like a properly crafted story. But it feels a lot more transparently like picking up plot coupons/macguffins, in WRPG's.

to me wrpgs are more like a TV series with short episodes and a relatively simple overarching plot to string it all together. also remember that wrpgs are about the setting usually and the quests and characters and so on are meant to provide a window into the setting.

the problem with jrpgs for is that the "epic" plots in them are mostly really trite, so even if theyre well structured (which imo they arent, most of them suffer from poor pacing, as discussed previously) they don't interest me enough to sit through a 50+ hour game. most WRPGs arent exactly original either, but experiencing a bunch of short stories in a generic elves n orcs fantasy setting is ok as light entertainment, esp because i get to decide how many i want to experience and in which order.