Skyrim is so shit that you don't count it as RPG, or you share account with someone, and "you're not the one playing it"?
Comment has been collapsed.
Elder Scrolls
Shit game
Doesn't count as RPG
Please hand over your Gamer Badge and controller.
Comment has been collapsed.
No I was asking him if he thinks so, and apparently I was right, check his reply to UndeadNecro.
Comment has been collapsed.
Elder scrolls is shit aye?
Let me just go throw out my copies of Morrowind, Daggerfall and Arena then.
Not like they are the most critically acclaimed RPGs of all time or anything.
Comment has been collapsed.
are you saying that i spent all my childhood playing Morrowind for nothin?!!!
Comment has been collapsed.
Daggerfall is like the best F2P game ever. Love it.
I never thought I would find myself complaying to me about the map being to big. It's amazing what technology can do
Comment has been collapsed.
True, it is perfect for some games. But most of us here are pc gamers, and keyboard+mouse are the signature weapons of pc gaming. This guy is talking about a controller, trying to look like a serious gamer. But yeah, I pretty much agree with you, most games these days are actually very good with controllers (Ubisoft, console ports and this new wave of mainstream gaming caused this), which is not exactly good in my opinion.
Comment has been collapsed.
I said controller because it's more commonly associated with gaming than a keyboard (though I do use a keyboard way more than a controller). I never said Skyrim was equal or better than the other TES games, I never said otherwise either, but it's a damn good game by any standarts. (Personally, I haven't played it, I only played Daggerfall, but I've seen enough of the game to know how good it is).
Comment has been collapsed.
Ok, I was in the middle of a looong comment when my browser crashed, so I'm gonna make it short this time.
Simply, the combination of you saying "controller" instead of keyboard and "Elder Scrolls" instead of Skyrim and your name, which seems to be telling us your age (even though I'm only one year older) makes it look like you're one of the modern gamers who try to make gaming mainstream, use controllers and prefer new games no matter how good the old ones are.
You know, when you said Elder Scrolls, I thought you were implying that Skyrim is the very definition of TES or that it's the best game in the series, which, as many ( maybe most) "traditional" gamers would say, is not true.
Ok, this was not exactly short. I just didn't want to make it sound insulting, because you earned some respect for playing Daggerfall. So, with all due respect, when someone says they don't like Skyrim, don't tell them they're bad gamers. Or anything about the other TES games. I didn't really enjoy Skyrim and yet The Elder Scrolls series is my all time favorite.
This comment is too kind to appear on the internet, damn.
Comment has been collapsed.
Oh sorry if that's the impression I made, I'm not really a mainstream gamer and I play many retro games like Duke Nukem 3D (hey it's better than the new, but I like both, no hate XD) and Thief 2 (so excited for the upcoming one), also I played more Sonic 8bit version than the 16bit one.
Have a good day sir. It's rare to see someone not trying to be insulting.
Comment has been collapsed.
With the vast variety of games that qualify as RPGs, I doubt that.
P.S. You recently played Skyrim.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can't imagine how stupid you can be.....
At least try to troll better if that;s the case :P
Comment has been collapsed.
You forgot Icewind Dale series, Baldurs Gate series and Witcher series. Neverwinter Nights series was also quite fun, very pen and paper like.
I look for a very clear rule based system that when I'm level one I can understand how it will work until level 100 or whatever the cap might be. So a clearly defined, innovative and engaging level up'ing system for one.
Secondly of course a very realistically gritty, believable world that makes sense expanding on our own real life concepts. It can have dragons but it bloody well have a good backstory why they are there and not just "Surprise mother duck her, magic!". Not only about certain concepts but also about the political intrigue, just saying "oh this bad evil kingdom is attacking" isn't really engaging. More game-of-throney'si grey area morality.
What I have noticed is I quite stick with very simplistic RPG elements, not full blown story driven rpgs but with genres that add rpg elements to other genres. Diablo I would consider among this, very simplistic concept but with a saved progress off getting your character better it made it engaging. Currently WoT, a simple progress tree makes it heaps of fun. Also Deus Ex, again a simple progress tree makes it heaps of fun. But these are kind of weak-rpg's and simply borrow elements to engage the audience.
Immersive world. This is maybe the most important. Not only the believable story backdrop and explanations given for the story but also things like art design, graphics, animations, music, npcs, all help build immersion.
Clear directions and ability to know you have exhausted a region, none of this ahaa you have millions of possibilities, we won't tell you what. I am a sucker for experiencing as much as I can. I like to comb a region every pixel through. It is so much easier if the rpg actually tells me points of interest be it how many collectibles are left or similar elements. It puts the mind at ease knowing you have gotten/experienced everything and can advance and enjoy a new area.
Randomness, I always loved this. Be it travelling between cities in Fallout1/2 or simple encounters in Baldurs Gate 2. They might be pre-scripted or they might be a little less loosely based counters that simply chose different types of enemies you would face but as you added elements on top of the already randomly created ones it became great. Basically a game that randomizes the enemy type, his stats, his look, his size, his weapon etc , currently Oblivion mods come to mind made it that much exiting as the possible encounters went up to billion combinations. You always had someone unique or some unique situation. Add random levels, randomness in quests. Basically the more modifiers to make something different the better. The moment a randomly generated situation felt better than a scripted one you knew it was an awesome game. Oblivion mods made this as you had idiotic encounters how patrols went chasing after wolves, some random mages came into fight, they all battled and suddenly some bear came from the forest and murdered them all. You knew no one probably hadn't encountered this situation and it felt just awesome. A little story of your own.
Can't think of any more at the moment.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's Icewind Dale. It is a sub-Arctic region, along the northernmost part of the Sword Coast, not an anecdote.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, its all on the Black Isle row (theres also Planescape Torment, and Lion Heart wich is the only one i didn't played).
Plus Troika's(wich was half Black Isle anyway) Arcanum...
But those are all old games ive played and replayed to death already; And a lot of things in them are dated, im dying for something fresh you know?
Dungeon Dashers (much like Dungeons of Dredmor) is too oldschool/retro (altought its aproach to controls and turns are streamlined and refreshing).
I have my eyes on the new Shadowrun Returns, but my budget can't afford it yet... but from what ive saw theres nothing really new to it beyond nice graphics(and seens linear, but i might be mistaken).
Comment has been collapsed.
My god.
Are you me? Get off my head!
The only thing i differ is the exausted area thing. I tend to look things too much on the designers side, and thats the sort of thing theres no way pleasing everyone. Theres a bunch of elements and consequence on that choice...
1- Replayability: Once youve got the 100% theres much less chance you will get motivated to replay it again sometime. Also, when replaying/revisiting all the thrill and excitement of exploration/discovery will be gone
2- Different characters, paths...: its what made Bethesda go all the way to 'all characters can complete everything'; That pretty much throw away good part of the fun that playing with a different char could had.
3- Pacing, backtracking: the most important one on my list. Im actually designing a rpg right now (and yes, this topic counts somewhat as research) and a lot of the momentum and pacing would be ruined if i chose that.
To make things clearer i will compare to something close i hate in games: theres urgency, i need to save someone (so the cutscene said)- not only generaly theres no real hurry coded, theres a lot of loot and shinny colectibles on the map asking me to search everything, and ruining all the immersion and emotion the scene could had.
So completionists are quite common (around 25% according to some old data on a popular mmorpg, i think it was ultima online); Something saying you didn't completed an area would make all those players halt progress until they completed all of it...
Comment has been collapsed.
I totally get my complaint on that part is impossible to fulfill. I was going for more on Witcher/ Dragon Age series type linearish games and even then certain paths are blocked depending on your choices. It's more about I having completed 100% with that specific character, that I talked to everyone that was there, clicked every container etc. So instead of having to manually explore every inch of the screen I could have an indication. It is ironic that I want this as this would ruin immersion, but I am quite anal on missing out.
I do know that most RPGs block out entire quest lines and it would take eons to explore everything for example in Fallout 3. I do not do it in those games as I simply gave up on my habit. I do play RPG's very slowly for the fact that I explore everything and I basically try to "ruin my replayability" by trying to get it all on the first run of that specific archetype of a character. I mean most of the RPG's manage maybe 2,3 majorly different story lines with 50-75% of the material still being the same. I go for the 75% and I want to make sure I experience the 75% with my carefully made character. I know I can't get 100% with a single hero and I don't want to as as you said that's not what RPG's are about. It's just the "100%" was used that I experience everything I can with the specific character I created. I quite rarely replay even RPG's with multiple paths as the fact that most of the content will be the same and the gameplay is the same ruins it for me, besides there are so many RPG's of past to play I wouldn't manage with my time restraints.
I do get that such "25% area complete" signs ruins the immersion, pacing. It's maybe one of my own OCD like habits. I totally get it is something game breaking but just as OCD be it strange as it is I like it. I am the guy who sees a girl getting butchered by demons in front and goes for the shiny gold nuggets on the side hoping the game won't trigger the event before I collect it. I totally see how I am breaking my own immersion with such actions but the OCD in me overrides my thought patters and I feel a lot more awarded getting that gold than keeping my immersion so I feel more happy as strange as it sounds. I do realize it's a very personal matter but that is what you asked. :D
Comment has been collapsed.
+1. I also hate too long dialogues with little options
Comment has been collapsed.
And surviving a gunshot to any spot of the body except the head is realistic? Games are unrealistic in general; however the level of allowances varies from game to game. For me healing a shotgun wound or a zombie bite with a basic health pack is the same level of realism as doing no damage with a giant axe. Besides, if you suck at wielding an axe (IRL), you most probably won't do much damage to many creatures whatsoever.
Comment has been collapsed.
I concur to that
BUT immersion is on the designers responsibility and everything in games are unrealistic, its how everything is tied and presented that creates that lovely momentary illusion (called 'magic circle' in game design).
When something makes the unreal too obvious and blatant in your face its bad, like the headshot (i include medkits on this one). An example of medkits that don't break too much is how L4D did with characters patching themselves.
One example i love is Gordon Freeman; On the first half-lifes the communication with npcs was so little and streamlined that we get into the story and character without bothering much for his silence. But on Hl2 with long dialogues and everyone referring to Gordon all the time? His muteness ruined my immersion
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, almost every game has a hardcore / VERY HARD difficulty, so realism sometimes isn't a problem. Of course, not everyone will be a hardcore player.
Comment has been collapsed.
Usually hardcore makes you more vulnerable but makes the enemies more stronger, so it's still pretty unrealistic.
Comment has been collapsed.
Note the '/ VERY HARD'. Example, the Veteran difficulty(which is a hardcore a.k.a. very hard difficulty) in CoD ( random example, bare with me). If I recall correctly, you get shot once or twice and you're dead. That's pretty realistic, because let's say you get shot once in the chest... You won't instantly die. This can apply to many other games.
Comment has been collapsed.
You'd be effectively dead. A penetrating would will hardly leave you ambulatory.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, but you wouldn't be instantly dead. If they just threw in blood-loss in games, it would make the game lean towards perfectionist players who never get hit once.
Comment has been collapsed.
I can imagine that game: five minutes into the game main character falls from too much height, breaks his ankle, and you have to wait two real life months for it to heal.
Comment has been collapsed.
THE MOST REALISTIC GAME CONFIRMED BY GAME NEWELL. IS GTA 4, IN WHICH YOU GET SHOT 100 TIMES AND YOU EAT A HOTDOG.
Comment has been collapsed.
Most annoying thing about RPG is predeterminacy. By that I mean you can't join the orcs and destroy the kingdom you were supposed to save, or even put balls on everything and go raise rabbits and live off the fat of the land.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, some games actually allows that... but all scripted paths (and generally on the sort of good-neutral-bad paths only).
I hate linearity in every game, including rpgs; Biowares simple scripted paths gets on my nerves.
With enought mods i play skyrim(as played oblivion) dishing main story and doing whatever fits me.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, some games actually allows that
Would you like to share their names with the class? I'm genuinely interested.
I hate linearity in every game, including rpgs; Biowares simple scripted paths gets on my nerves.
I don't hate linearity. I understand that it's infinitely difficult to make a game that has unlimited number of choices and at the same time has coherent plot. Also common sense tells me that if I'm not going to save the universe I might as well not launch the game in the first place. It's just that it would be nice to have a free will in a game.
With enought mods i play skyrim(as played oblivion) dishing main story and doing whatever fits me.
Only there is no point in doing so. While you always have something to do the world around you is stagnant.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not RPGs specifically, but I hate unrealistic damage. Headshots don't kill (Skyrim arrow in the head, for example), and shoot anyone in his toe enough times and he'll die.
Comment has been collapsed.
I would add to that, but i love everything medieval/fantasy too much to really bother... I mean, i hate lack of originality and repetition, but when were talking medieval or zombies i never get tired.
Nazis, military shooters, space marines, star wars/trek wannabes on the other hand... i can barely touch them any more.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like my RPGs simple, like Chrono Trigger or a certain game called Dungeon Lords. Don't know what that is? Look it up. Simple RPG Hack N' Slash Dungeon-type. It had a fantastic SIMPLE skill tree and class system. My point is, RPGs now-a-days are so damn complicated that it's more work than playing an FPS, which is pretty sad because FPS games require you to look past the unoriginality. Skyrim is a fairly simple RPG ( followed by Oblivion ). It's why I can't get into certain RPGs, but I'm always able to get into turn-based RPGs that are done right.
Comment has been collapsed.
Fallout is an exception. I use a walkthrough everytime to create my character, because I'm terrible at creating a balanced / good character in that game. The combat is simple, but that's really it. The storyline for FO2 seemed like it just went from Arroyo to Vault 13 to the Oil Rig, not really expanding to the other areas. Of course, don't get me wrong, I got ALL of the lore-based stuff from the military base and what-not.
Comment has been collapsed.
The best thing about Fallout games is that there is no "best character". You can do even with a character that speaks like a caveman.
Comment has been collapsed.
Well, yeah, but if you look up 'Ultimate Fallout Guide' there's a guide that suggests pretty good stats for a general character.
Comment has been collapsed.
Avoiding the several hours of me being frustrated at the shitty character I just made, only to restart the next day - RINSE AND REPEAT.
Oh, yeah, and I got stuck at times, too. The game can be buggy, so it's better to just look up the walkthrough. For me, anyways.
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't see how you came to that assumption. I've played many RPGs, and they are certainly 'my thing'. Fallout is just a special type of RPG, and it's only the character-creation screen that annoys me. On the topic of looking stuff up in a walkthrough, that's just me. Sometimes I don't want to completely screw my game up and get kicked out of Vault City, because I specifically want to get the good ending with that area.
Comment has been collapsed.
Once i played a coward (roleplaying it like that)in Fallout 2. I made a bad character on purpose so to say, only with some agility and social skills and the i couldn't finish the game 'naturally' only because of the forced boss fight (something fans have criticized on Fo2 since ever). Even them after many tries and some hints i overdosed him with medkits.
I forgot wich level i finished with, but ive run of almost all fights, did few quests, stole and talked my way out of all i could and after too much fumbled skill rolls on something i simply gave up and moved on.
Thats one of the things that make them the best rpgs to date (Fo1 and 2) for me.
+1 for caveman; Playing with 1 inteligence is a whole new level of fun(ALL DIALOGUES CHANCE)
Comment has been collapsed.
I'd like to point out that I DO play more 'advanced' RPGs, I just enjoy the simplistic RPGs more.
Comment has been collapsed.
I disagree with Chrono Trigger. Their character development was fantastic and very well done. I don't think you paid much attention to the characters.
Comment has been collapsed.
But you're wrong, i did pay attention to the character, I got more than halfway through and I just stopped because game was (mostly) dull. Not only that but I tried getting into the game several times.
The characters felt very generic and barely had any personality, and saying Chrono Trigger has great character development is a lie. As soon as you get the party members you don't see a change in personality, you don't see them be more courageous or anything. They felt lifeless.
Comment has been collapsed.
I'll admit that initially, when you first get the characters, it starts off dull ( it always does ). I haven't played the game in a while, so I can't cite exact examples, but some notable ones are :
-Lucca being upset when Robo has to leave at the end of the game.
-Frog defending Chrono's honour when Magus insults him after Chrono sacrifices himself, which brings us to another example...
-Chrono sacrificing himself to save everyone else when you fight Lavos at Palace under the sea.
-There's Marle, who is a care-free type of character throughout the whole game, as well as being caring when you revive Chrono ( Heck, she rushes forward to hug him like a cheetah after prey ).
-Robo being all loyal and what-not when you first recruit him, and when you go to robot boss ( promotheus, or something? ).
Yeah, I guess that's all I can think of off the top of my head.
EDIT: Yeah, I'm not good at creating a list-type of format for my posts.
Comment has been collapsed.
Never gotten that far. I only made it to the beginning of 12,000 B.C. and was told that was more than halfway through the game.
I'll give it another shot, but the lack of character personality of where I was at until 12,000 B.C. is pretty terrible.
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, most of the ones I pointed out are after 12,000 BC.
Comment has been collapsed.
Lack of realism/options.
Common misconception. Games are not supposed to be realistic. We play games to escape prosiness.
Comment has been collapsed.
Not what I meant.
I'm going to use Fallout as an example.
So if you haven't played Fallout your main character comes from a Vault and you're trying to find a new water chip since the vault's water chip broke and supply is running out.
Now you can go to one of the city and and tell one of the caravans to bring water to your fault, but by doing this you can also reveal your location to the bad guys. That's the sort of realism I want, the ones that come with realistic consequences, not the things that have been said in the thread like realistic damage or not having realistic creatures and stuff like that.
Also some games are meant to be realistic.
Comment has been collapsed.
The only problem is that purchasing water from a caravan doesn't solve the quest. You just buy fifty more days to find the chip.
Also some games are meant to be realistic.
Games are meant to be believable, not realistic. There is a huge difference.
Comment has been collapsed.
"The only problems is that purchasing water from a caravan doesn't solve the quest. You just buy fifty more days to find the chip."
I never said this solved the issue. Your mission is to get the water chip after all.
"Games are meant to be believable, not realistic. There is a huge difference."
Tell that to the developers whom are trying to go after realism in their games such as the Arma series for example.
Comment has been collapsed.
IMO games are meant to let you have fun. If there's someone who enjoys realistic games, why shouldn't some of them be realistic?
Comment has been collapsed.
Theres ways and ways to make levels, ive seen from big upgrades to small-progressive ones... But all in all its no different then character progression/upgrade, only with a number attached.
Do you dislike character progression? Or giving upgrades a number?
Comment has been collapsed.
I dislike it when I lose because dude X had +65 strength and I didn't.
Comment has been collapsed.
As a genre, I just can't get in to RPG's, but I'm giving them one last try at the moment (Witcher 2 and Dark Souls). My main issue with them is the levelling up and monitoring stats (this is not necessarily limited to RPG's, but they seem to be the worst culprits). I really couldn't care less what my Strength or Dexterity is and don't see any gameplay benefit with their inclusion apart from the fact that you have to manage it to be able to fight the increasingly tougher opponents.
Comment has been collapsed.
The thing I hate about RPGs is that they are still too linear.
For example, in Skyrim, when you want to complete the quests, they tell you "Go to X location, pick up/kill Y thing, and then return so I can tell you to do the same thing at Z location." Not very much figuring things out on your own. But if you went back to the original Elder Scrolls Arena, you can find a quest to escort a person from place X to place Y, and the only information they have is the name of the place. You have to ask around to know where it is if you've never been there before.
I also think they are getting too easy... Now, I don't entirely remember what the original RPGs were like because I was born in '97, but I have played some of them and enjoy them quite a bit, and it's because of the challenge. When I was running emulated versions of Arena and Daggerfall (they are free now at their website), I don't know how many times I died in the opening dungeon because I made a stupid mistake. And, it wasn't always the same thing over and over. In Skyrim, I've played through it so many times, I don't even want to finish a single quest anymore just because it's exactly the same as the last time I played it. In Arena and Daggerfall, the main story might be, but the land can change, and so can the quests.
But, what I love about RPGs, is the amount of time I can lose in them.
I've played like 177 hours of Skyrim, and even more on the Xbox before PC, and I've loved every moment of it. And the reason I can lose so much time, is because you can get immersed in the world and feel as though it is you in the game, so you ignore the world and play for a few hours.
So yeah, that's why I hate and love RPGs.
This is my one thousand and third comment, WOOHOO!!! I meant to make a giveaway for my thousandth, but I forgot... Oh well, maybe two thousand.
Comment has been collapsed.
Now, I don't entirely remember what the original RPGs were like
Original RPG were on paper and you were making them up as you go.
Comment has been collapsed.
I meant the original RPG video games... Yes, I know what the original original RPG was, never played one, but I know what they were...
Comment has been collapsed.
Cool, but what I meant by originals was like the original Elder Scrolls, not the ones way back when, but I actually do remember playing one of those type games on someones Atari a few years back... At the time, I was a casual gamer and thought the game was stupid because it didn't have graphics... Now, I would glady play a game like that from time to time.
Comment has been collapsed.
The figuring out quest comment. I remember even as far as Morrowind that it didn't have such thing. The first quest to meet that person (Gaius Cosades? Do I actually remember his name?) in Balmora. I still remember my initial thought when playing was "Oh crap, this is pretty realistic, I just got directions and I have no idea where any of these places are". Once I got to the town I once again realizes I had no idea where the places that were told to me where, so I simply searched for obvious places like taverns, guilds that would perhaps guide me to them.
I remember it started raining just before I reached the inn that was recommended to ask where that guy is. It was so freaking atmospheric and the actions needed to find some guy felt so realistic. It wasn't just "go to X 10,24 Y 21,12 on map. First you were referred to a town, then you had to seek a pub who might know where he lives now.
Comment has been collapsed.
Exactly, to me, it makes the game too easy and I lose interest too quickly (my Skyirm playtime is mostly just trying to find new armor and weapons to fit with Frostfall). If Skyrim, if you are told to find X guy who lives in the wilderness of Falkreath and no one ever sees him, and that's all they tell you, you still have a convenient little marker because you just magically know where this guy who has never been seen is living... Because screw logic...
Comment has been collapsed.
I don't think storylines being linear is an issue at all.
Look at Diablo II for example: same quests, same areas every single time. But, the skill trees were detailed and that took away from how boring the storyline was. A game has to make you feel like each time you do something again, it's different. And I think that's where Skyrim fell a bit short: you didn't feel like it was different or new the second time round.
Comment has been collapsed.
And that's what I was getting at. The same quests over and over is inevitable because it's harder to make a dynamic quest type story, so it's more linear, but it's never new. On the last playthrough I did, I wanted to finally finish the Thieves Guild and become Guildmaster, but I didn't want to go through all the quests because there was nothing different this time, it was exactly the same.
Even the skill tree in Skyrim felt boring to me. I always end up with the same character. A big, sneaky Nord who favors daggers and swords and hates magic. The last playthrough, I started to use some two handed, maybe some heavy armor, be a little less sneaky and more tankish, but I still feel like it's the same character (I do use the same name all the time, but this time the face was slightly different).
Comment has been collapsed.
This argument is specious. While there is nothing new in quests (and why should there be?) your characters end up the same because you can't think differently.
Comment has been collapsed.
Why should quests be different? So then when you go through them again, they aren't the same... I get bored doing a quest I've done in six different playthroughs, I want something different this time.
And the reason I get the same character every time is because I usually end up leveling what I need at that moment. If I'm in in a fight, I'll level like sword or shield. On a stealthy quest, sneak. And so on and so forth. It's not that I don't think (unless it's the actual creation because I just change hair, beard, hair color, add a scar and warpaint and done), it's more that I act on impulse. Which I guess that is doing without thinking, but I don't want to level up my smithing skill when I am getting killed by a dragon at the moment, I'm going to level my sword or armor.
But yeah, I guess it's partly that I don't think, but I think it's more that I only leveled what I need at the time. This last playthrough I've done I actually took time in thinking about my character (more than before) and so I level what he needs in the longrun, not now, but later..
Comment has been collapsed.
According to Albert Einstein doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results is insanity.
As for leveling your explanation proves my point. There is nothing wrong with that. You just consistently making the same choices without even thinking. If you truly want to break that vicious circle make a khajit archer and forego swords altogether.
Comment has been collapsed.
I never said I expect different results from anything, I just WISH there were.
But yeah, I make the choices on impulse, but the thing is, I do have a lineage type thing set up, so my character is always and Nord named Revan, and he is the great, great, great grandson of my Oblivion character. I just want to continue the things.
Plus, to break the cycle, I have used alternate start, so when I started, instead of starting out with the same stuff, I started as a hunter who uses bows and arrows, and then started leveling that to begin with. Plus, with Frostfall and Hunterborn, I kind of need to use a bow to hunt the animals so I can get food. It's worked a little, but I have found myself making the same mistakes, other than now I actually carry a two handed sword. And, I use that .ini tweak so and weapon I favorite appears on my character, so carrying a sword, dagger, axe, greatsword, bow and arrow makes my character look like a big tough hunter Nord, rather than a sneaky type. So I have been playing to that and it's worked a little.
And I will never be a Khajiit, I hate cats... Argonians to me are weird, and I don't like elves as much... So I be a Nord since I (in real life) have Nordic ancestors, and my family has records of coming over from the Northern areas. So I just make myself a Nord so I can be like that, and they don't have any special buffs to start with other than being able to survive colder weather (which is necessary in Frostfall).
Comment has been collapsed.
The point I was trying to make is that the game doesn't limit you, it's you limit yourself. Which basically means that you can't hate the game for that particular reason.
Comment has been collapsed.
They are too simple.
Comment has been collapsed.
Too bad that I'm too old for that ;__; It's hard enough to play a semi-complicated board game once a month with my friends ): and I bet that this Fatal thing would take far more time than 4-8h to play from start to finish...
Comment has been collapsed.
I was just joking, stay away from Fatal and pretend you never readed that. Its take far more then those hours to understand any part of it, duble that to recover from the trauma
Im too old for that too, but i insist on trying to play; Only problem is 'monthly' game sessions become 'someday-probably this year!'
Comment has been collapsed.
I would argue that they aren't. The formula of Dragon Age is quite the same as Baldurs Gate was. Of course less grand as they have to deal with 3D settings that limits the world size etc, everything basically takes a lot more time to create.
Anyway I don't think they are simple. I know it's a common argument that game makers dumb down rpgs to make them approachable to everyone but I would actually like to hear what are the common complaints. How are they more simple.
I know they did away with spell crafting for Elders Scrolls series but I can't say I never used it myself and in terms of Morrowind and if you have seen certain speed runs it quite broke the game. Well you could argue that you didn't need to use it but I would say a game feels broken if you are allowed to take such actions that wins you the game in like 15 minutes even if you don't use it.
Quest markers and pointers are another thing that was mentioned. I don't think it it makes a game more simple. It might take some charm away but in most cases it cuts down on unnecessary traveling trying to find the place you are meant to be.
What are the actual "they are too simple" complaints. Maybe I'm just so welcoming to these changes and I didn't care for the "hard" aspects of a game.
Comment has been collapsed.
I miss those old games where you had to remember to drink water, and it took five hours real time to fly somewhere.
Comment has been collapsed.
I absolutely love RPGs. Some of my personal favourites:
Diablo I and II (played D3 as well, for about 700 hours, it was alright I suppose)
Arcanum - loved the duality of the game (good vs evil, magicka vs tech, combat vs companions etc) and the steampunk feel
Torchlight 2 - really liked the back to basics feel, particularly after playing D3 a lot.
Gothic - loved the open world feel and just how insignificant you were
My pet hates when it comes to RPGs are usually related to end game content. An RPG has to be able to offer a decent endgame with decent rewards without making you feel like you have to farm for 100 hours to get something even remotely better (Diablo 3 grrrrrr). I also was not a fan of Skyrim's level system: it was too easy to become a master of everything on a single character and then you ran into the problem of scaled enemies who kept getting stronger after you were essentially capped.
Another gripe are the 'essential' builds: I hate it when a game offers you tons of skills but then you end up stuck having to go with just one build to actually do well: Incredible Adventures of Van Helsing is an offender (don't want to ruin anything, but its pretty much impossible to do the final boss with a set-up that worked fine up until that point) and Diablo 3 had a lot of skills like this (Zombie bears was used by something like 98% of Witch Doctors at some point, and until patch 1.0.4, summoning wasn't viable at all).
And of course, any game that makes you feel that you're at the mercy of a terrible RNG system, and that there's virtually no skill involved.
Comment has been collapsed.
I dig most of what you've said, but i can't get torchlight; Bought 2 on sale and i can barely touch it, so dumb straigh click-and-repeat the gameplay feels to me. I can't wrap my mind around why so many people like and recommend it
Diablo 1 and 2 worked for me, but i dislike Action rpgs in general... all of them bore me, even the classic diablos i couldn't kept my interest beyond mid-game.
I also hold some extra grudges against 'arpgs' because Diablo and all its clones sort of kickstarted most of the trends i hate in rpgs that crept everywhere (mmos being the most affected ones). Too much Skinner/Carrot design
Comment has been collapsed.
I enjoy playing medieval-themed rpgs, arpgs, rts' and tbs' the most. There are little to none stuffs I hate about them in general, but the most common is female-warrior and heavely naked characters - and nope, not only because I live with my girlfriend.
Comment has been collapsed.
I hate it too but much less nowadays then i once hated.
Also people forget that Conan (and all the barbarian trope) is the same thing male version; And if we put tought on it, most clothing is equally absurd...
At least male sex appeal is less obvious/blatant and exagerated (normallY) them female.
Comment has been collapsed.
Conan predates full plate armour. In his time people neither could make them, nor really needed them.
Comment has been collapsed.
I too hate the drastic difference between armors. Of course there would have to be some difference, due to obvious reasons, but the male looking like a extra armored spike tank and female is more like hanging armors pieces to a clothes line.
Comment has been collapsed.
Actually, there shouldn't be any difference. Female armour should look exactly the same as male one.
Comment has been collapsed.
You guys don't get it! All the female protection is psichological! Its like reminding someone you use glasses to not be punched; I know i wouldn't beat those rpg hoties, and if i had to i wouldn't hit hard...
God, i shouldn't have joked with that. Now im stuck with the idea bad guys want to hurt but not kill female heroines, and im not liking the reason
Comment has been collapsed.
+1!
I understand that choice design-side and i support the intention... But its a cheap, horrible, experience ruining way to avoid lost backtracking.
Plus there shoud be another way/solution to allow something similar without being in our faces and floating around the screen. When i leave a rpg for long and come back i would be tottally lost without them, and sometimes when i have little time they allow to go straight to business... the genre needs a new solution to allow that ASAP
Comment has been collapsed.
This is one I don't get. Morrowind just seems like this 'lolelitisthardcoremotherfucker' game. From what I've heard, you can encounter any level of enemies, the game itself is hard, you couldn't fast travel, and what you said. No markers. I don't get the interesting in trying to play detective in a game. It seems like you'd spend about 4 hours trying to find one spot, which would REALLY ruin the game for me. Personal preference, I guess.
Comment has been collapsed.
It's not hardcore. You carry a journal with you where you write down every single thing anybody ever told you. With hyperlinks. The world is not that big to get lost, and pretty much every NPC is involved in some quest.
Comment has been collapsed.
Ah, but it would depend on what the NPCs told you. I can still see people getting lost.
Comment has been collapsed.
I meant from anywhere. I knew that there was travelling in the game.
Comment has been collapsed.
I concur that most games of old did it the bad way.
The thing isn't making players lost, but putting some input and tought of the player on the matter. Is less about blind searching on hope of hints and more about making the player feel like they searched, rewarding them for such.
For instance Skyrim: i turned off all markers on the game, and didn't felt lost(in this case straighlined level design and such). Its on the design, surely the sde quest asked me to go to the middle of nowhere but thats it: i said i would bring it back IF ive found it, so playing normally i found... thats awesome.
Most games underuse their potential for variety. Most moddern games(not only rpgs) have different 'missions' that are all the same thing: go there, get/kill that, sometimes 'get back'- nothing else. Whats the point?
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah, but Skyrim is a huge map. Turning off markers really is a hardcore setting, because in big maps like Skyrim, you'd be searching hours, at least, and maybe even days. It would happen to me, and honestly I'm just used to being given a location. I don't see anything wrong with it, but there's this thing that people who played games that weren't as generous (so, pre-2000s era)seem to think that it makes them 'better' than others, which is ridiculous. This line of 'hardcore/simple' really does divide certain RPGs.
Comment has been collapsed.
I like some hardcore stuff but rarely mentions it, because more then i hate how dumbed down many games got what i hate a LOT more is pretentious gamers who claim to be 'hardcore' and better then others.
Also about dumbing down... im all for games cattering to larger player bases and more casual gamers but theres many ways to do that- what i hate is when all depth is removed, that means pure lazy design.
The thing with markers only needs GOOD SENSE. If they want the player to go across the map for somthing then a marker is needed, at least marking the are/general location. All else with enought hints/contextual proximity is good to go
Comment has been collapsed.
also funny when the game says "search after this and that" and then adds a quest marker :D
Comment has been collapsed.
If you read carefully isn't about hate; Its only a catchier name (people love flames and stuff to throw stones at).
Its also a lot more practical; Being such a multiple layered genre, asking what people like is asking for huge lists few would care to comment.
I don't hate bad presentation per si as many times low budget hides jewels; What i hate about same voices is seeing how developers dished text-only dialogues (that were much more branched and deep since writing more had little cost) to fill the word with clone uninspired speaking.
Also lines get old much more faster
"STOP CRIMINAL SCUM!"
Comment has been collapsed.
Yeah I know man, was just saying.
Yeah once again I get it and you're right.
That's true too, F.E. Morrowind had soooo much text, they could have kept it like that.
"STOP! You violated the law, pay your fine or serve your sentence." or "But then I took an arrow to the knee"
I wish there were more games with combat like Risen 1. But with big world like in TES. I love games where increasing difficulity doesn't just increase their HP until they become almost impossible to kill, but increase their AI skills and timings. In Risen you could kill almost anything if you have enough skill and were well trained in dodging 'n blocking.
And what I love the most and hate when it isn't there is ability to sit,sleep,drink,eat, probably play some instruments if there are any, do random jobs for people and many other random stuff you could possibly do. Also all of these things for me are useless if they aren't animated.
Edit: I also love many sidequests, since I still haven't completed Skyrim in like 177 hours of gameplay. But I wish sidequests weren't so simple and I wish they had freakin' backstory I mean it's just like go get that sword for me in a cave hunders of miles from here in the bottom of the troll or skeleton cave. I mean like seriously how did the sword even finish there or something...
Edit 2: Mod support, it's best and my most favorite part of the games after epic combat system like in Risen or Witcher 2.
I just love it when I'm able to easily mod the game to my liking or just download some epic mods and expand the gameplay.
Comment has been collapsed.
I concur on all that.
For instance i HATE the elders scrolls series, from lore to gameplay, pretty much everything...
but i also love them and by far are the games ive put most hours in. Because the most i hate the games the immersion is awesome and with the right mods... oh boy.
Its the strangest love n hate relationship i ever had.
Comment has been collapsed.
15,527 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by Kenruyoh
270 Comments - Last post 31 minutes ago by MXY
524 Comments - Last post 38 minutes ago by voidbreather
46,884 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Zolivv
55 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by zenarcher
15 Comments - Last post 2 hours ago by Jinbe
64 Comments - Last post 3 hours ago by Liandri
1,225 Comments - Last post 8 minutes ago by tevemadar
509 Comments - Last post 18 minutes ago by Fitz10024
9,030 Comments - Last post 24 minutes ago by Fluffster
79 Comments - Last post 27 minutes ago by sallachim
130 Comments - Last post 35 minutes ago by ZungBang
141 Comments - Last post 37 minutes ago by LuckyStrike1305
2,350 Comments - Last post 43 minutes ago by yungHIMO
Plus, what you most love(as the list could be quite big)?
I don't think it evolved much as a genre, and nowadays saying its a rpg doesn't mean much: an action rpg? jrpg, roguelike? All the while some things i hate (like too much math and builds, creeping into all other genres) are spreading all around.
How do you like your rpgs SG? What you hate or love?
Also anyone knows some good turn-based rpg ive might have missed? Have all kings bounty, fallout(all things black isle actually), dungeons of dredmor... and ive just pre-purchased Dungeon Dashers (and having a blast!), but im also dying for some in-depth turn-based pc rpg...
Comment has been collapsed.