Balancing RPGs ( Because Lulu Cares ;) )

  • 63 results
  • 1
  • 2
#51 Posted by PapaTrop (474 posts) -

@PapaTrop

It will happen one day... ;)

Maybe, but with Nintendo there won't be online multiplayer :(

#52 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

@PapaTrop

They're working on that witth Splatoon :)

#53 Edited by PapaTrop (474 posts) -

If only I was rich enough to afford a Wii U.

I can only afford to be a poor PC peasant

#54 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

@PapaTrop

I hitched my wagon to the wrong horse when I bough an Xbox. :(

its actually my 1st console.

#55 Edited by Maddie_Larkin (6324 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Maddie_Larkin

WOW ! After hearing that I'm even more confident I understand RPGs even more than you do ! :p

@Planeforger

I'm assuming I'be needing a PC to play any of these games.... I'm also assuming they won't be in Real Time.

no, the stats are from the wargames of which the people WHO made D&D thought up thier rules, based in a tolkin inspired universe. So the stats have always been there, they form the basics of an rpg, as in the very core. You don't agree with history? tough luck.

The first D&D games had characters be randomly created by dice, you could chose profession but not stats, what they were good at. All characters would Thus have shortcommings in which would dictate thier paths you could take. And which you could not.

Later on a good deal of RPGS started having a stat pool as preferred creation, more tailored, but still the basics were still the same as those tapletop wargames that the army used for training.

The actual RPG would then throw problematics which could be solved or handled by the players with what talents they had. A game World which is consistant within itself would be required for the player to know how they could handle problems, so a DM or storyteller could not just go alter the internal logic as they saw fit (at most Count dicerolls around +/-2 in either direction

Now since you find this redundent, and this IS what RPGs are and this IS what RPGS on pc and console strive for, I would say that you know absolutely Jack, and either a troll, or extremely poor at your history and know nothing about RPGs.

If a game have no real stats, they would indeed be action adventure games, darksiders, the LoZ series.

But hey you could just be less lazy and read up on computer and console RPG backgrounds, it can often be healthy to know where Things came from, before posting pointless personal preference about RPGs wehn opening post states that the best rpg you ever playied was not an rpg... Yeh. Such logic, the lack of is baffeling.

Edit: In case of wrong impression, I am baffeled, don't take it as negative, I am simply trying to figure out the point of view you have, which so far have shown no interrest in RPGs that is all, since having the viewpoint you have is fine, but the games you want don't sound like RPGs, and no reason to call the games you like RPGs if they are not, no?

#56 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

@Maddie_Larkin

I know its history, it wasn't that hard to google, besides you fail to see the bigger picture.

What is the purpose of an RPG, what is the general concept behind each and everysingle component that makes up RPGs ?

Go past all the rules and the stats and all that nonsense and really get to the heart of the idea, not how it all started but what it really is at its core.

Haven't you wondered why the "genre" is so versatile and pervasive?

#57 Edited by Maddie_Larkin (6324 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu said:

@Maddie_Larkin

I know its history, it wasn't that hard to google, besides you fail to see the bigger picture.

What is the purpose of an RPG, what is the general concept behind each and everysingle component that makes up RPGs ?

Go past all the rules and the stats and all that nonsense and really get to the heart of the idea, not how it all started but what it really is at its core.

Haven't you wondered why the "genre" is so versatile and pervasive?

You mean why you find "RPG elements" in most games? it is an easy way to gauge the character you play as.

WEll lets see after playing about 5 different kinds of PnP RPGS and about 60 on pc and console (my got Ive gotten old), The general concept is the felxibility in an rpg to fit the character you have, as it may or may not have been designed by you, with its weaknesses and strengths that character has.

The purpose is to tell a joint story, that really is all it is, and that is done through choice and consequences. But choice and consequences also bleed into how you evolve the character you have. However choice alone can not bear an RPG, as mentioned before being omnipotant (no stats) strips all meaning of choice as it is to your leasure not internal logic of the systems in place.

I am sorry but stripping the core of an rpg, and insist on calling it an epg without the systems it use is so pointless that it is beyond me why you would call it an rpg then. They are called RPG due to the sole reason they imitate the PnP game. an RPG IS the core systems, as you can have hundreds of different kinds, or takes, but the Foundation on which they are built are what makes them what they are.

What you suggest seems to be like stating "I wamt an action movie... but without any kind of violence" Integral to the experience yes, without it? Not really that genre.

I simply do not understand the "bigger Picture" you claim there is so paint it for us.

I have another question though, as seeing what RPGs tend to be, what would make it an RPG if you removed stats like you would want? what notion would be RPG? I can have choices in an fps, infact alot of FPS games give me choices, I can find games that allow violent or non violent actions. They certainly ain't RPGs either.

To keep my point short however: If you strip an RPG from the core makeup that goes through every RPG in existence, the result you would have would not be an RPG. You mentioned Bioshock at one point in a thread about this (or this thread). I challange you to find a spot wher ethat game is an RPG.

And if you try the "you take on a role of a given character" then all games are RPGs and in truth it is not really correct, as most games in which you take on any given role, rarely gives you the challange of the person the flaws and workarounds of it, they are by default fixed and not yours to evolve.

There is a difference between playing a role and playing an RPG (in which you dictate the role within the gameworlds logic). An actor also plays a role, but playing an rpg does not have to mean that you are acting.

So in short, an rpg is a game where the character evolves how you dictate in tact with the story, no choice must be made for you about the character you play as.

The systems that govern an RPG is the very core of an RPG, has been since they took tabletop wargames till now, there is a reason for this, that is that that aspect is the core of an RPG (you can strip either from eatchother, but each on thier own will not make an rpg, in the strict sense, one is the philosophy behind, the other is the mechanics.

Same mechanics drives each genre, an FPS have certain mechanics that has to be in place for it to be an FPS, first person perspective, and shooting, you can also dismantle that, but each on its own will not make a first person shooter.

You can also make hybrids (system shock 2 and Deus Ex are worthy notions (Deus Ex itself classified by its creaters to be an FPS/RPG hybrid, because it nolonger had a clear difinition to them)).

#58 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

@Maddie_Larkin

"So in short, an rpg is a game where the character evolves how you dictate in tact with the story, no choice must be made for you about the character you play as."

Almost got it.

Drop the bit about story and thats essentially the bigger picture of Role Playing Games, thats the whole point, that simplicity is why "RPG Elements" and "Pseudo-RPGs" keep popping EVERYWHERE !

If we can agree on that then I would like to move to the 2nd phase....

#59 Edited by Planeforger (15526 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: I don't see how you can simply dismiss the 'story' part of his post, without further explanation.

I mean, a necessary part of roleplaying is the ability to overcome obstacle in ways reflective of your crafted character (and, conversely, restrictions on doing things that your character couldn't do). If every character you make resolves their quests in the same way, then the roleplaying is meaningless - and you end up with either a weak RPG or no RPG at all.

The overarching story itself will essentially take the form of one big quest, so it stands to reason that an RPG must allow your choice of character to influence the overall story in some meaningful way

#60 Edited by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

@Planeforger

Is Heavy Rain an RPG ? Seems to fit with in those Parameters.

Anyway I use a much much more simplified Definition, "An RPG is a 'game' where you build and define a character"... Thats it.... What you're building this character for, how you build this character or how any part of the gameplay is executed is not really relevant, lets be honest, Table Top and PnP were not choices, there was just no other way to execute Role Playing, it was the only the way genre could exist at that time, they may have been the 1st types of RPGs but thats exactly what they are - "TYPES".

I use that deliberately vague definition specifically because it reflects the versatility of the Genre.

As usual with Video Gamer Logic they believe the most accurate version of something is the 1st iteration of it, namely PnP RPGs . That logic makes absolutely no sense outside of this medium, imagine if we started doing that with cars, you can't say other cars are not "real/pure/true cars" because they're nothing like that wooden wheel, steam engine , no steering piece of crap that 1st appeared long time ago, if anything that thing looked and worked more like a miniture train than a car...

This whole "a Real RPG is PnP" outlook, is just missing the point entirely.

As I may have told some people before, I actually Like I like the the idea, the concept appeals to me, I just hate this iteration/execution of it. The unnecessary abstraction of Skills and Progression is the worst part. Thats the part I'm desperately trying to get rid of.... Actually to replace it, I don't want it gone, I want it "Fixed".

#61 Posted by Black_Knight_00 (18260 posts) -

They suck at implementing role-playing

#62 Posted by Planeforger (15526 posts) -

@Lulu_Lulu: "Is Heavy Rain an RPG ? Seems to fit with in those Parameters."

No it doesn't. It's an adventure game, or even a choose-your-own-adventure story. As far as I'm aware, you don't create or customise a character in Heavy Rain in such a way that leads to 'your' Ethan having different skills/characteristics, allowing him to do things that other players' Ethans cannot do. If I'm wrong, then I'd like to hear otherwise.

"Anyway I use a much much more simplified Definition, "An RPG is a 'game' where you build and define a character"... Thats it.... What you're building this character for, how you build this character or how any part of the gameplay is executed is not really relevant"

I don't see why. The word "roleplaying" itself necessarily involves the concept of not just creating a role, but playing it as well. What you've described only accounts for the "role" part of a roleplaying game - you're forgetting the "playing" part (ie. how you use the character in the context of the game, and how the rules of the game react to your use of that character).

They suck at implementing role-playing

Who suck at it? Oh...Obsidian? Really?

Could you explain why you think that, with reference to specific examples from their games? (And no, South Park and Dungeon Siege 3 totally don't count - they're basically just action-RPGs!)

#63 Posted by dakan45 (18523 posts) -

Honestly its impossible to know what skills the player will have at some point in a open world rpgs but yeah the balancing is also off on linear rpgs.

Personally just ptu a difficulity option so you can re-balance the game yourself wherever you want.

#64 Edited by Black_Knight_00 (18260 posts) -

@Black_Knight_00 said:

They suck at implementing role-playing

Who suck at it? Oh...Obsidian? Really?

Could you explain why you think that, with reference to specific examples from their games? (And no, South Park and Dungeon Siege 3 totally don't count - they're basically just action-RPGs!)

I didn't mean Obsidian in particular, I meant the average RPG developer in general. "RPG" these days (barring a few exceptions) simply means following a linear, unalterable questline, while min-maxing your character through combat and fetch quests. That's not role-playing, it's dice-rolling. The whole concept of alingment is absent from RPGs these days. There is no trace of it. In its place we have that stupid binary karma system where you get good/bad points and get rewarded either way.

#65 Posted by Lulu_Lulu (10284 posts) -

@Planeforger

And Mass Effect is a 3rd person Shooter.... Its still an RPG though. Like I said, Role Playing is extremely Versatile it will crop up just about everywhere in different.

"As far as I'm aware, you don't create or customise a character in Heavy Rain in such a way that leads to 'your' Ethan having different skills/characteristics, allowing him to do things that other players' Ethans cannot do."

Actually you do, each choice you make defines the character. Ethan can be a whole different person simply by making choice. As I said before, how you build a character or how the gameplay is executed is irrelevant.

"you're forgetting the "playing" part (ie. how you use the character in the context of the game, and how the rules of the game react to your use of that character)."

I didn't forget, unlike Other video game genres RPG have no specific methods of play. Yes there definitely should be "playing" but but how is irrelevant, could be played like Mass Effect, Final Fantasy, PlaneScape, Dungeons & Dragons, etc. The how doesn't really matter, this is why I never considered RPG to be an actuall genre.