|
NikkolasKing posted:I have a complex moral/philosophical question for all of you. I don't think people generally hate turn-based combat -- people hate turn-based combat that wastes your time. Fire Emblem and Shin Megami Tensei are both working on extremely dated, turn-based mechanics while providing a compelling experience. What sets a good turn-based RPG apart from a bad one is that the good RPG actually demands that you think about what you're doing, uses a variety of ideas to prevent random battles from feeling like a worthless waste of time (removing them entirely, asking that you play them properly, handing out a more meaningful reward than 5% of a level's worth of experience, or any combination thereof), and generally provides a good degree of player customization. Turn-based games can be fun if done right, but you have to design some meaningful player agency into them.
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:11
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
RPGs, to a large extent, are still built with the weird idea of barfing dull, unchallenging trash encounters everywhere. The reason people dislike turn-based combat is because it makes trying to get through them that much slower. Get rid of dull trash encounters and you solve the biggest hurdle to having an enjoyable turn-based game.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:18
|
|
|
Vermain posted:RPGs, to a large extent, are still built with the weird idea of barfing dull, unchallenging trash encounters everywhere. The reason people dislike turn-based combat is because it makes trying to get through them that much slower. Get rid of dull trash encounters and you solve the biggest hurdle to having an enjoyable turn-based game. Or let players customize the encounter system itself. Along with the excellent execution of the job system and neat B/D system, that was one of Bravely Default's best features. e: quote:It made everyone samey and then you just picked whoever had the best stats and limit break. That is an issue with half of the Final Fantasy games (3,5,6,7,8,10 sort of, 10-2, 12 non-zodiac) and has been done in plenty of other games and series. I recognize that "leveling the job/materia" vs "leveling the character" has small meaningful effects on how one plays a game but it never really deterred from the fun for me. Also, FF7's limit breaks were different enough between characters and commonly used enough that they were pretty meaningful differences between them. bloodychill fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:24
|
|
|
bravely default's turning off random encounters isn't as innovative as usually claimed in my opinion, because it's still a worse solution than just not having random encounters, which is basically the standard nowadays anyway
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:27
|
|
|
Has anyone played the PSN version of Digital Devil Saga? It's on sale (again), but I saw somebody on NeoGaf saying it runs slow and has sound issues. I'd like to finally get around to it, but not if it runs like rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:31
|
|
|
gently caress the FF7 remake, where are the ones for 5 and 6?  Though I guess after seeing what they did with 3 and 4, maybe it's for the best.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:34
|
|
|
Cake Attack posted:bravely default's turning off random encounters isn't as innovative as usually claimed in my opinion, because it's still a worse solution than just not having random encounters, which is basically the standard nowadays anyway Not everyone hates random encounters though. I don't mind them up until the endgame when I'm just going around doing end-gamey stuff which is exactly when that "turn off random encounters" feature becomes very useful. Note that it also let you increase encounter rate and encounter speed letting you grind at a million miles and hour if you wanted as well.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:35
|
|
|
CAPTAIN CAPSLOCK posted:gently caress the FF7 remake, where are the ones for 5 and 6? Yeah, after making the remake of 4, the might make a good remake of 5 and 6
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:36
|
|
|
bloodychill posted:Not everyone hates random encounters though. I don't mind them up until the endgame when I'm just going around doing end-gamey stuff which is exactly when that "turn off random encounters" feature becomes very useful. Note that it also let you increase encounter rate and encounter speed letting you grind at a million miles and hour if you wanted as well. I quite like random encounters.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:38
|
|
|
Turn-based combat may not be an archaic holdover from when that was all older RPG's could do but lovely random encounters definitely are.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:39
|
|
|
i will defend random encounters as having a situational niche in game design. basically they make fights unavoidable, so they are good in Etrian Odyssey, for example
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:40
|
|
|
I think the only niche that random encounters fill in game design is "our game engine/art and modeling budget can't really handle non-random encounters but we've designed around their inherent flaws." Shin Megami Tensei 4 had its own way of making fights both avoidable and unavoidable in an interesting way -- by making failed attempts to avoid a fight extremely risky, prompting the player to either take the safe, cautious approach or the fast, risky style.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 05:48
|
|
|
Codiekitty posted:Wouldn't you also have to revive Neifirst? Because you can kill Neifirst with Nei if you're really overleveled, but Nei dies anyway because she's bound to Neifirst. The retranslated version has the cloning hag say "Welp, all of the human parts of her are completely destroyed" after killing Neifirst, with the implication she can't do poo poo if that happens. The official translation blew it, as usual.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:24
|
|
|
I like the way the Zeboyd RPGs handle random encounters. That was pretty neat.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:44
|
|
|
Heavy neutrino posted:I think the only niche that random encounters fill in game design is "our game engine/art and modeling budget can't really handle non-random encounters but we've designed around their inherent flaws." Shin Megami Tensei 4 had its own way of making fights both avoidable and unavoidable in an interesting way -- by making failed attempts to avoid a fight extremely risky, prompting the player to either take the safe, cautious approach or the fast, risky style. that's just frustrating. battle shouldn't be a punishment for loving up it should be something fun to do. like chronocross has all these puzzle rooms where you need to figure out how to prevent getting mobbed by trash enemies to progress. gently caress that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:45
|
|
|
Random encounters are fine. Probability-based mechanics with extremely limited opportunities for player input are a valid element of game design, and they are also way cheaper to implement than most other ways of having low-intensity, resource-draining practice battles. In a highly content-intensive genre like RPGs, going with random battles as a cost-saving measure incurs savings that can be dedicated towards improving more distinctive qualities like the variety of the encounters themselves or the size and density of the game world.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
counter argument: they suck
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:49
|
|
|
Cake Attack posted:counter argument: they suck they suck so that other parts of the game can afford to rule
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:50
|
|
|
in seriousness i don't buy on faith the argument that implementing a field based encounter system (touch the enemy model, fight them) is meaningfully more expensive than regular random encounters i'll agree that there is a niche for random encounters in that forcing players to fight can make for good design, which i think is what you said
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:53
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:that's just frustrating. battle shouldn't be a punishment for loving up it should be something fun to do. like chronocross has all these puzzle rooms where you need to figure out how to prevent getting mobbed by trash enemies to progress. gently caress that. You're reminding me of Chrono Trigger, where, despite there being no random encounters, it's nearly impossible to avoid most fights, despite the system the game has to let you avoid them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:55
|
|
|
Real hurthling! posted:that's just frustrating. battle shouldn't be a punishment for loving up it should be something fun to do. like chronocross has all these puzzle rooms where you need to figure out how to prevent getting mobbed by trash enemies to progress. gently caress that. Why shouldn't an encounter be a "punishment" for failing to avoid an encounter? And besides, who's to say you can't have a system where battles are fun, rewarding, and avoidable given some player finesse, all at the same time? I have some issues with the way SMT4 did things (rng decides that reinforcements appear -> rng decides the enemy acts first -> game over), but I don't think a lot of people would say that encounters weren't enjoyable, especially given that they're over in a cinch after you learn weaknesses and play them properly.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 06:57
|
|
|
There are much better ways of handling trash encounters than RNG and even low budget games like Radiant Historia can manage an on-field encounter system, but at the same time random encounters don't bug me all that much. The only time it's really bad is when they put involved puzzle dungeons in a game with random encounters, so you're left fiddling with things while you keep getting sent to battle screen halfway between each switch or whatever.
Motto fucked around with this message at 07:06 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 07:01
|
|
|
I once played a game that had nothing but fixed encounters. It made everything boringly predictable/streamlined.Erebus posted:Has anyone played the PSN version of Digital Devil Saga? It's on sale (again), but I saw somebody on NeoGaf saying it runs slow and has sound issues. I'd like to finally get around to it, but not if it runs like rear end. Sadly both it and Nocturne had those weird bugs. They're not too severe but it detracts a bit from the games. Like, the demon fusion animation in PS3 Nocturne barely functions, but you usually skip that anyway.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 08:45
|
|
|
Is there any reason to replay Lightning Returns on Hard mode? Is there extra content or anything?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 08:49
|
|
|
Rascyc posted:Is there any reason to replay Lightning Returns on Hard mode? Is there extra content or anything?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 08:55
|
|
|
I think the only problem with random encounters is that you can't clear areas that you've already explored as safe. This becomes a problem when you need to backtrack and hit a switch or something. On the other hand, games with fixed encounters often respawn enemies on screen change, which can be even more frustrating. I think the best option is to have some way to earn your right to avoid enemies in a reliable way. For example, a system where trivial battles end automatically or where you can turn off encounters in dungeons you've already cleared (the last Wild Arms game had a switch you hit within the dungeon that turned on a magic barrier or whatever). Letting you avoid all enemies always strikes me as sort of admitting that your combat system in unfun, and having unavoidable battles with onscreen enemies (say, standing in front of door) is often just frustrating.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 09:04
|
|
|
Heavy neutrino posted:Why shouldn't an encounter be a "punishment" for failing to avoid an encounter? if battling trash mobs were ever a source of fun for the player you'd have a point, and reading skills.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 10:07
|
|
|
Random encounters make sense in dungeon crawlers where not being able to stay in dangerous areas indefinitely is a key design feature and one of the questions you're supposed to be asking yourself as a player is "how much longer should I risk pushing ahead before turning back", but in most other RPGs since the mid-90s you're expected to clear out dungeons in one trip anyway so you may as well let players choose when they feel like fighting.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 11:00
|
|
|
Even worse is when, in some RPGs no resources are actually expended in battle (because you heal to full HP/there is no mana/etc.). So the only thing repeated battles cost you is time. You usually get some XP out of the deal but at the point when you'd rather avoid fighting that XP is probably not looking very attractive.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 12:01
|
|
|
the problem isn't turn-based battles it's boring rear end design. hit the guy and heal sometimes isn't really interesting. there has never been a single final fantasy game where you have to actually make interesting mid-battle decisions at any point, ever. eo games are good games with turn-based combat, because they're actually somewhat challenging and combat serves a purpose outside of existing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 12:18
|
|
|
final fantasy five e: provided you are using restricted classes. the whole thing breaks if you just pick the "good" classes
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 13:04
|
|
|
The Fiesta has kinda motivated me to finally beat FFV. I've started and stopped it several times over the years but never got farther than like an hour or so in. I'm not going to be playing it with the Fiesta though because that's like a challenge run. Challenge runs aren't supposed to be your first time through a game. You'd be missing out on all the fun of trying different things. I've heard the game can waver from hard to easy, depending on if you pick the "right" or "wrong" classes. A friend told me all that was bullshit though, or at least some of the "bad" classes weren't as bad as I had heard. (like Black Mage or Berserker) I think he said Trainer or Ranger were kinda bad, especially since you'll only use Ranger to get one ability and then never use it ever again. That sounds like it can be kinda broken, if you can just learn the "useful" abilities from a lesser job and then import all of them into a better job. NikkolasKing fucked around with this message at 14:05 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 14:03
|
|
|
my first completion of the game was doing the fiesta run, but i've run the game multiple times up to the fourth act a bunch of times over the years. the point of the game, whether intended or not, is to find the most broken class / skill combinations that you can find. that is where most of the fun is in the game, and a lot of the later bosses, especially the optional bosses, are meant to test your ability to craft unkillable party comps. it's pretty easy to do this in a standard run, and for the most part it is a "solved" problem. what the four job fiesta does is changes the parts of the equation so that you can solve it for your specific party. its a fun way to play through it, and i highly recommend it. there isn't any combination of classes you can get that won't be able to beat the game, if you just do a chaos run.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 14:11
|
|
|
Clarste posted:I think the best option is to have some way to earn your right to avoid enemies in a reliable way. For example, a system where trivial battles end automatically or where you can turn off encounters in dungeons you've already cleared (the last Wild Arms game had a switch you hit within the dungeon that turned on a magic barrier or whatever). Letting you avoid all enemies always strikes me as sort of admitting that your combat system in unfun, and having unavoidable battles with onscreen enemies (say, standing in front of door) is often just frustrating. Ar Nosurge handled this in a really great way, I thought. When you get into a random battle, you have many waves of enemies that you have to fight through, with a limited number of turns to do it in. Each wave that you defeat comes out of a "total" for the dungeon, and once you've beaten them all, you're done with random battles for the rest of your time in that dungeon. (until you leave and come back) If you're good / powerful enough, you can even do it in one "battle". It allowed for the forcing of some fighting, quick resolution, and not punishing intra-dungeon backtracking. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8sXoEod6FA Endorph posted:the problem isn't turn-based battles it's boring rear end design. hit the guy and heal sometimes isn't really interesting. there has never been a single final fantasy game where you have to actually make interesting mid-battle decisions at any point, ever. This is why FF13's combat was so awesome, because it was focused on the strategy of the battles more than on the individual moves. You had to balance buffs / debuffs (which are incredibly important), healing, defense, staggering, etc. in an effective manner. For trash mobs, doing this correctly could be the difference between a 20s fight and a 2m fight, and some of the bosses are just plain impossible without intelligent shifting. Edit: though I suppose FF13 may not qualify as "turn-based". Edit2: also FF14 also completely blows your "no interesting decisions" point away, but I suspect you'll say that it doesn't count. Dr. Eldarion fucked around with this message at 14:55 on Jul 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 14:49
|
|
|
Speaking of Ar Nosurge, the plus version just released on Vita here but the original PS3 version is on sale at the moment, anyone know if Plus is worth the extra? Is it worthwhile in general?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 14:57
|
|
|
not really. give me five and ill post more in depth thoughts
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:24
|
|
|
rip Sakurazuka, posted anime in GBS a month ago
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
lol
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:26
|
|
|
Please don't post in GBS, kids.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 02:27 |
|
|
Cake Attack posted:rip Sakurazuka, posted anime in GBS a month ago Well they posted in GBS.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2015 15:36
|
|
