RPG's-Where did the Grinding go?

I don't mind level grinding as long as the battle system is fun while doing it.

It can go both ways. Tedious grinding as well as prolonged FMV's/cut-scenes can equally be a horrible drudgery to go through if it's done, well, horribly.

I think "grinding" is the wrong word to use, but I get what you're saying. That's why I enjoy tri-Ace games so much. At least they give you a game to play.King9999

Tri-Ace's battle system can be fun and cool...for awhile. But after the gazzillionth time, it becomes a chore and a bore.

I think "grinding" is the wrong word to use, but I get what you're saying. That's why I enjoy tri-Ace games so much. At least they give you a game to play.King9999

Tri-Ace's battle system can be fun and cool...for awhile. But after the gazzillionth time, it becomes a chore and a bore.

[QUOTE="King9999"]I think "grinding" is the wrong word to use, but I get what you're saying. That's why I enjoy tri-Ace games so much. At least they give you a game to play.ASK_Story

Tri-Ace's battle system can be fun and cool...for awhile. But after the gazzillionth time, it becomes a chore and a bore.

Uh after the gazzilionth time every rpg's battle system becomes a chore and a bore.

[QUOTE="ASK_Story"]

[QUOTE="King9999"]I think "grinding" is the wrong word to use, but I get what you're saying. That's why I enjoy tri-Ace games so much. At least they give you a game to play.soulrprzaxin

Tri-Ace's battle system can be fun and cool...for awhile. But after the gazzillionth time, it becomes a chore and a bore.

Uh after the gazzilionth time every rpg's battle system becomes a chore and a bore.

[QUOTE="soulrprzaxin"]

Uh after the gazzilionth time every rpg's battle system becomes a chore and a bore.

freshgman

Oh, do please name an exception. I probably haven't played it, but whatever.

Topic:RPG's-Where did the Grinding go?

Answer:Blizzard took everything and put it in WOW :P

I don't mind level grinding as long as the battle system is fun while doing it.

It can go both ways. Tedious grinding as well as prolonged FMV's/cut-scenes can equally be a horrible drudgery to go through if it's done, well, horribly.

ASK_Story

I suppose this is a bit true in my case as well. FFXII and BoF: DQ for example I get a lot of enjoyment out of killing enemies over and over again. Some games though it annoys me. Like in FF3, honestly I really love old fashioned turn-based RPGs such as it but after a while it becomes kind of a bore.

The whole concept of grinding is the reason why I stopped playing JRPGS. I don't really mind having to gain an extra level or two to defeat a boss, but the problem is that the further along you are in a given game, the longer it takes for you to attain those measily two levels. Having to spend several hours fighting the same enemies over and over again just to level up enough to beat a boss has absolutely nothing to do with gameplay if you ask me. I prefer to defeat a boss through skill, not through level grinding. And if I fail to defeat said boss, I want it to be because I lacked the skill, and not because of some lame thing like having a 'too low of a level.'

Topic:RPG's-Where did the Grinding go?

Answer:Blizzard took everything and put it in WOW :P

Lidve

Nah, EQ and all the other ones did that. WoW just took what was left.

The whole concept of grinding is the reason why I stopped playing JRPGS. I don't really mind having to gain an extra level or two to defeat a boss, but the problem is that the further along you are in a given game, the longer it takes for you to attain those measily two levels. Having to spend several hours fighting the same enemies over and over again just to level up enough to beat a boss has absolutely nothing to do with gameplay if you ask me. I prefer to defeat a boss through skill, not through level grinding. And if I fail to defeat said boss, I want it to be because I lacked the skill, and not because of some lame thing like having a 'too low of a level.'

Kazona

They went online.

Sadly, the quality RPG's of yesteryear are dying a slow and painful death and being replaced with overly simple, pay-to-play grindfests.
foxhound_fox

I think the appeal of those games is playing as a team, but after a while everyone just gets obssessed with having the best gear to the exclusion of everything else, and then it just isn't fun anymore.

The whole concept of grinding is the reason why I stopped playing JRPGS. I don't really mind having to gain an extra level or two to defeat a boss, but the problem is that the further along you are in a given game, the longer it takes for you to attain those measily two levels. Having to spend several hours fighting the same enemies over and over again just to level up enough to beat a boss has absolutely nothing to do with gameplay if you ask me. I prefer to defeat a boss through skill, not through level grinding. And if I fail to defeat said boss, I want it to be because I lacked the skill, and not because of some lame thing like having a 'too low of a level.'

Kazona

I guess the only leveling up I would go for would be skills/abilities and weapon upgrade, I'm almost opposed to the idea of having hundreds of weapons versus having a weapon of each class that Ican evolve (going from one cool style to another), maybe even just fight a boss, get an upgrade, get a new ability, instead of regular enemies giving exp and dropping phat loot, I hate the idea of phat loot, just a waste of time anyway.

People want to be spoon-fed a story rather than be given a game to play anymore. It's depressing.DarkCatalyst

This has pretty ends the thread.

But this isn't just RPG's it's pretty much every genre out there whether it's story or just relying on special effects to hold you in.

I must have missed something. At what point did everyone start calling them JRPGs instead of just RPGs?SpaceMoose

I don't get it either, it's just an over generalzation of both genres in my opinion. Mostly because the amount of exceptions to the rule of what makes each just doesn't make sense. I mean sure if all RPG's from Japan played like Final Fantasy and all RPG's from the West played like The Elder Scrolls it would be easier but that isn't true. There are many Japanese RPG's that fuse both Western and Japanese elements into their gameplay like Contact and others like the recent Final Fantasy XII. I've also played many RPG's from the West that go against the freedom aspect and are very linear. And what makes it worse you get people confused how to caterogized something if a Western game plays really "Japanese" or vice-versa.

I personally think it's just a ridiculous way to apply genres since both countrys go against the rules many times.

It should just be.

Final Fantasy I - X-2 = Action-Adventure RPG

The Elder Scrolls = Open-Ended RPG

Grandia = Dungeon Crawler RPG

Etc.

That makes much more sense then just caterogizing from country to country.

Eh, this thread is hilarious.

Grinding is terrible. If you miss it, go play hours of Diablo 2, Gauntlet Legends or Phantasy Star Online. Walk around, wack some dudes, pick up items and level up. Maybe this game features a sci-fi theme, perhaps this one has a medieval theme. It's all the same, repetitive crap.

Don't confuse grinding with strategy. Grinding is running around and using frost nova on everything in Diablo 2. No skill involved. Just items, levels and time. Strategy is about the player skill. Look at a game like chess. Repetitive actions here? Not quite. Every move has to be planned out and each turn can have thousands of moves to think about. Quite different from grinding really.

One is about doing the same mindless actions against dumb AI hordes. The other is about carefully making planned decisions. One is chopping wood all day, while the other is a few hours of brain surgery.

If grinding were to go away, then at least we would have story. Too bad many games today follow this crap pattern of, "The world is doomed, however, you have to find the 5 magic stones to save it. However, the evil bad dude is going to try to stop you because he wants to destroy the world for no reason, har har."

The whole concept of grinding is the reason why I stopped playing JRPGS. I don't really mind having to gain an extra level or two to defeat a boss, but the problem is that the further along you are in a given game, the longer it takes for you to attain those measily two levels. Having to spend several hours fighting the same enemies over and over again just to level up enough to beat a boss has absolutely nothing to do with gameplay if you ask me. I prefer to defeat a boss through skill, not through level grinding. And if I fail to defeat said boss, I want it to be because I lacked the skill, and not because of some lame thing like having a 'too low of a level.'

Kazona

I agree, id rather kill enemies with my brain (not litterally, altho......)rather than just levelling up.

Then you don't play RPGs. Which is what I do.

I see games in two categories. Plot-driven and game-driven.

Plot-driven games are those that immerse you with their plot. Gaming is just a way to deliver it.

Game-driven means that it's focused on the game as the subject. Plots are either laughable or do not exist: DDR, fighting games, racing games, sports games, etc.

RPGs are game-driven, but are constrained by the plot. You have some detailed battle system, but then you have to throw in some kind of loopy plot to make sense of it.

If it were me, I would say no and go in one direction:

1. Make the game about the plot. Drop the battle system and instead, make the game immersive and easy to play. Easy to play? Yes, because making a player play a level 4 times will destroy what they learned about the plot so far. It's as if you are reading a book and you have to read chapter 3 multiple times.

2. Make the game about the gameplay. Make the game focused on battling. Singleplayer mode? Make it like a sports games with CPU opponents to play against that consistently get better. Have items to trade, parts to replace, etc. Throw in an online mode to battle other players.

Throwing both in the same kettle makes a sprawling mess. The definitions of one game severely limit the capabilities of the other. The story makes battles fixed, "You have to beat boss A to proceed." The story makes things linear, because you have to fight opponents in order, etc. You can free up these limitations if you focus strictly on gameplay.

Then you don't play RPGs. Which is what I do.

I see games in two categories. Plot-driven and game-driven.

Plot-driven games are those that immerse you with their plot. Gaming is just a way to deliver it.

Game-driven means that it's focused on the game as the subject. Plots are either laughable or do not exist: DDR, fighting games, racing games, sports games, etc.

RPGs are game-driven, but are constrained by the plot. You have some detailed battle system, but then you have to throw in some kind of loopy plot to make sense of it.

If it were me, I would say no and go in one direction:

1. Make the game about the plot. Drop the battle system and instead, make the game immersive and easy to play. Easy to play? Yes, because making a player play a level 4 times will destroy what they learned about the plot so far. It's as if you are reading a book and you have to read chapter 3 multiple times.

2. Make the game about the gameplay. Make the game focused on battling. Singleplayer mode? Make it like a sports games with CPU opponents to play against that consistently get better. Have items to trade, parts to replace, etc. Throw in an online mode to battle other players.

Throwing both in the same kettle makes a sprawling mess. The definitions of one game severely limit the capabilities of the other. The story makes battles fixed, "You have to beat boss A to proceed." The story makes things linear, because you have to fight opponents in order, etc. You can free up these limitations if you focus strictly on gameplay.

Revelade

Are u talking to the gamers? or are u talking to the game designers? :P lol i just got a bit confused with ur post

[QUOTE="AtomicTangerine"]Yep, beat me to it. Grinding doesn't make the game more difficult. It just makes the game take more time. Grinding doesn't equate to having good gameplay, and in fact is often used as a crutch to make poor design not seem as bad since you can just power your way through the game. _Tobli_

More time? Seriously? The last JRPG i finished was FFXII(second playtrough) , and i clocked more than 190 hours even though saved lots of time by knowing what wasn't worth doing or getting.

Actually the grinding was the best about FFXII gameplay-wise.You could power up in a cretain spot and got rewarded pretty good.The pretty uninteresting fighting-system shure wasn´t.Had the same problem as KOTOR...you don´t have really anything to do.But was more...rewarding thinks to the skill-board.The only thing thing that kept me playing...it´s not like the game was bad,but i´m still a bit *insert bad word* about the most unspectacular Storyline´,exept FF8.Plus the Sidequsts had been pretty useless (well only really good thing on FFX anyway).So somehow the whole leveling was really the most satisfinig about the whole game.

Well, as a gamer, I would not play RPGs because it contradicts itself. But if I were a developer, I would either take the plot or game route.

In a plot route, my goal would be to make games as immersive as I can. First person view would be the choice, if I could do it. You have to get rid of as many gauges, dials, etc as possible. You want the screen to be minimal and clean. Look at ICO, Half-Life, etc. Now, RPGs do poorly in this aspect. I mean a lot of them have this artsy style with big headed people. Next, the camera view is always in the sky (well except some like scrolls). Then the battle system suddenly warps you into some random area and you take turns hitting each other, choosing attacks, looking at stat numbers... IMMERSIVE? Absolutely not. You might as well make a story out of a game like tetris.

In the gaming route, this is where RPGs make sense. Stats, numbers, etc., is perfect. You do this with games like Forza, where you buy/sell parts. You do this in games like Madden, where you can track players, etc. But unlike those games, RPGs are tied to a story, which constrains it. Now you can't play anybody you want like you could in a sports game.

I believe this is why I don't like RPGs. It's not immersive, nor does it try to be. Yet as a game, it's constrained by some probably cliche plot. Gameplay and plot. You can't have both. Either you go with plot like Bioshock. Or you can take multiplayer like Warhawk.

Maybe I would have gotten to see the stories in FF7, Skies of Arcadia and so on, if I wasn't held back by so many battles. I feel much more immersed and interested in games like Bioshock, Shadow of the Colossus and Half-Life, than those.

Well, as a gamer, I would not play RPGs because it contradicts itself. But if I were a developer, I would either take the plot or game route.

In a plot route, my goal would be to make games as immersive as I can. First person view would be the choice, if I could do it. You have to get rid of as many gauges, dials, etc as possible. You want the screen to be minimal and clean. Look at ICO, Half-Life, etc. Now, RPGs do poorly in this aspect. I mean a lot of them have this artsy style with big headed people. Next, the camera view is always in the sky (well except some like scrolls). Then the battle system suddenly warps you into some random area and you take turns hitting each other, choosing attacks, looking at stat numbers... IMMERSIVE? Absolutely not. You might as well make a story out of a game like tetris.

In the gaming route, this is where RPGs make sense. Stats, numbers, etc., is perfect. You do this with games like Forza, where you buy/sell parts. You do this in games like Madden, where you can track players, etc. But unlike those games, RPGs are tied to a story, which constrains it. Now you can't play anybody you want like you could in a sports game.

I believe this is why I don't like RPGs. It's not immersive, nor does it try to be. Yet as a game, it's constrained by some probably cliche plot. Gameplay and plot. You can't have both. Either you go with plot like Bioshock. Or you can take multiplayer like Warhawk.

Maybe I would have gotten to see the stories in FF7, Skies of Arcadia and so on, if I wasn't held back by so many battles. I feel much more immersed and interested in games like Bioshock, Shadow of the Colossus and Half-Life, than those.

Revelade

Sorry buddy,but this is one of the stupidest post I´ve read in a loooong time.Calling a RPG not be possible to be immense is just stupid.You never played a really good RPG,nor you will do it.Why?Because you won´t see it.A Storyline and extremely hard enemys can make a battle intense,plus not all fighting systems are about looking at some numbers.If you had ever played one you whould know it.It´s ok that you don´t like RPGs,but don´t post such a crap if you got no clue what you´re talking about.

A game doesn´t have to be a Action game to be exiting.If shooting always the same random enemys all the time is more intense...well you choose for yourself.I whould say it´s in most cases totally boring,because you do the same stuff over and over again without and improvement in most cases.Yeah,and don´t forget,without any kind of acceptable Storyline.It´s of course not always that way and I really like FPS,but I whouldn´t call them more intense then a RPG which I gotten into because I spent 40-60h with and I´m finally at the final Boss who got beaten up by my overpowered character.

[QUOTE="Revelade"]

Well, as a gamer, I would not play RPGs because it contradicts itself. But if I were a developer, I would either take the plot or game route.

In a plot route, my goal would be to make games as immersive as I can. First person view would be the choice, if I could do it. You have to get rid of as many gauges, dials, etc as possible. You want the screen to be minimal and clean. Look at ICO, Half-Life, etc. Now, RPGs do poorly in this aspect. I mean a lot of them have this artsy style with big headed people. Next, the camera view is always in the sky (well except some like scrolls). Then the battle system suddenly warps you into some random area and you take turns hitting each other, choosing attacks, looking at stat numbers... IMMERSIVE? Absolutely not. You might as well make a story out of a game like tetris.

In the gaming route, this is where RPGs make sense. Stats, numbers, etc., is perfect. You do this with games like Forza, where you buy/sell parts. You do this in games like Madden, where you can track players, etc. But unlike those games, RPGs are tied to a story, which constrains it. Now you can't play anybody you want like you could in a sports game.

I believe this is why I don't like RPGs. It's not immersive, nor does it try to be. Yet as a game, it's constrained by some probably cliche plot. Gameplay and plot. You can't have both. Either you go with plot like Bioshock. Or you can take multiplayer like Warhawk.

Maybe I would have gotten to see the stories in FF7, Skies of Arcadia and so on, if I wasn't held back by so many battles. I feel much more immersed and interested in games like Bioshock, Shadow of the Colossus and Half-Life, than those.

Ash2X

Sorry buddy,but this is one of the stupidest post I´ve read in a loooong time.Calling a RPG not be possible to be immense is just stupid.You never played a really good RPG,nor you will do it.Why?Because you won´t see it.A Storyline and extremely hard enemys can make a battle intense,plus not all fighting systems are about looking at some numbers.If you had ever played one you whould know it.It´s ok that you don´t like RPGs,but don´t post such a crap if you got no clue what you´re talking about.

A game doesn´t have to be a Action game to be exiting.If shooting always the same random enemys all the time is more intense...well you choose for yourself.I whould say it´s in most cases totally boring,because you do the same stuff over and over again without and improvement in most cases.Yeah,and don´t forget,without any kind of acceptable Storyline.It´s of course not always that way and I really like FPS,but I whouldn´t call them more intense then a RPG which I gotten into because I spent 40-60h with and I´m finally at the final Boss who got beaten up by my overpowered character.

I agree with ash and i seems to me likerevelade hasn't even played an RPG... You;ve got tons of things to do in s single game.

[QUOTE="Planeforger"]

Well, there's a clear difference between western RPGs and Japanese RPGs, so people tend to call them WRPGs (or just RPGs) and JRPGs.

SpaceMoose

So western RPG's don't have and did not ever have grinding? Hm, I'm not so sure about that...

There's much more than that. Just play at least 3 Bioware games and then play 3 Final Fantasies to see the difference.

In MMOs, grinding can be fun. Knowing that there's a small chance the enemies drop something really valuable makes for an addictive mechanic. In single player RPGs, if you normally take the time to explore fully every location, you shouldn't need it.

Used to be a time when you needed to level up in order to be able to face some enemies (Eye of the Beholder comes to mind). While that can improve the challenge, it doesn't work very well. On the other hand, Oblivion took the worng route in my opinion, taking away the fun of levelling up.

There's much more than that. Just play at least 3 Bioware games and then play 3 Final Fantasies to see the difference.

ninjabeaver1

I would call that more a case of comparing PC RPG's to console ones.

[QUOTE="ninjabeaver1"]

There's much more than that. Just play at least 3 Bioware games and then play 3 Final Fantasies to see the difference.

SpaceMoose

I would call that more a case of comparing PC RPG's to console ones.

How so? Knights of the Old Republic was available on the Xbox and Mass Effect is coming to the Xbox 360. But they're not "console" RPG like Final Fantasy.

How so? Knights of the Old Republic was available on the Xbox and Mass Effect is coming to the Xbox 360. But they're not "console" RPG like Final Fantasy.

LordAndrew

Because those types of games are almost never developed EXCLUSIVELY for consoles. They are oftentimes ported to them though, especially the XBox, since programming games for XBox (and I assume by extension probably the 360 as well) supposedly isn't that far off from programming games for Windows.

The level grinding has thankfully gone the way of the Dodo and it should stay that way. Write in worthy and interesting objectives that provide challenge and fit in seamlessly with the plot and setting or don't bother developing the game at all.

Level grinding is a means to cover up for a lack of gameplay IMO. What, you guys want RPGs more like the very first Dragon Warrior, where the entire game was pretty much one big level grind?

Kids are soft today, and there is Dragon Quest 8. I always level up like 5 or 6 levels when I get to a new town, so I can go and pwn everything.-shmelo-

Actually I just really needed a few level-ups before the first dungeon...the rest was pretty easy.

I thought FFXII's grinding was fun.

And for Dragon Quest VIII, it was a love/hate thing for me. Loved it for the amazing old school/new school presentation, hated it for the same reason...since, it's old school, so it can be tedious and harsh.

I've played RPGs since Phantasy Star, and I've just gotten sick of grinding.

Games from eras past used it as a way to hide the technical limitations of the hardware, but riddle me this:

Would you rather fight the same monsters a thousand (or ten thousand) times in an area you've visited no less than a dozen times already? Or would you rather see developers make games with near infinite numbers of enemies and way more area to cover so that grinding...... didn't really feel like grinding?

Take Eternal Sonata for example. There are thirteen unique enemies in the game. With the horsepower these new machines have, that number should be 1,300. There should be ten times the area to cover so that not only is the sense of exploration preserved (which is why I started loving RPGs), but that the sense of newness doesn't go away so fast. Oblivion nailed the vastness of world to cover, but there still weren't anywhere near as many enemies as there should've been. But also, that game didn't require grinding. In fact, it discouraged it.

Grinding sucks (to me anyway) in its current form, but I think the challenge for developers is to somehow make grinding fun. And that's going to be a lot easier said than done.

Shame-usBlackley

I think Final Fantasy 12 did this with the combos for killing the same monsters.. I dont know if you people didnt have to grind in it, but i definetely have had to, especially with the hunts. But ya, the combo thing they did just added that extra little something to grinding to make it a bit more enjoyable.. More work can be done, for sure.. But i think Square had the idea atleast in the right ballpark with that one.

[QUOTE="ninjabeaver1"]

There's much more than that. Just play at least 3 Bioware games and then play 3 Final Fantasies to see the difference.

SpaceMoose

I would call that more a case of comparing PC RPG's to console ones.

No, that would be a case of comparing Bioware RPGs to Square ones.