Why do so many people talk about Deus Ex like its the greatest game ever made? I played it and thought it was just slightly above averge FPS. Is it because it actualy had a story and allowed multiple paths to objectives? Maybe people should be asking themselves why all FPS don't have those features? Okay enough of that little rant. Oh and Hacking in Deus Ex is cheating.
I always thought that part of the problem stems from the fact that 99% rpgs on the market have only form of combat resultion normaly side A kills side B. What there needs to be is more eleborate combat systems that can be resolved in multiple ways.
One game that married the action and dice rolling was Star Ocean 2. Basicly in combat you only control 1 of your 4 team members the rest are computer controlled however you could switch between them at any time. Also there was an actual battle field that player manuvered around during battle. To attack you pressed X I think. also you could release special moves with the R and L buttons and access the item menu by pressing circle. It wasn't bad it all happened in real time and there was advantage to getting behind the opponet. Also if you got hit your current action got interupted forcing you to keep spell casters away from the enemy if you wanted them to be able to cast magic. Special powers also gained in proficany after each use and became more powerful and more visually impressive.
-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I'm a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document
[edited by - TechnoGoth on November 28, 2003 5:56:02 PM]
Why are RPG combat systems so boring?
One barrier is the fact that you have a weapon stat at all. Throughout an rpg, weapon proficiency is of course raised, but not necessarily inline with the player.
For example, in Dragon Warrior, and alot of older RPGs, you can stay within safe distance to the first town in the game fighting blue and red slimes. And, if you fight long enough - 4-5 weeks I would imagine @ 2-3 exp/fight - you could gain enough exp and str to be comfortable through the entire map.
One thing I like about Vagrant Story is you get fighting exp for yourself, but also for every type of enemy that exists. So starting the game out fighting 50,000 cave wolves wouldn''t be a good strategy. You''d be good at fighting wolves (which I believe have a beast type) but actually worse against a dragon (which is of type dragon). (p.s. not to mention you can make your own weapons for jesus'' sake!)
I think this just makes sense. Instead of just giving the lvl.32 player the benefit of the doubt, it forces them to prove their skills, at least with different kinds of enemies.
For example, in Dragon Warrior, and alot of older RPGs, you can stay within safe distance to the first town in the game fighting blue and red slimes. And, if you fight long enough - 4-5 weeks I would imagine @ 2-3 exp/fight - you could gain enough exp and str to be comfortable through the entire map.
One thing I like about Vagrant Story is you get fighting exp for yourself, but also for every type of enemy that exists. So starting the game out fighting 50,000 cave wolves wouldn''t be a good strategy. You''d be good at fighting wolves (which I believe have a beast type) but actually worse against a dragon (which is of type dragon). (p.s. not to mention you can make your own weapons for jesus'' sake!)
I think this just makes sense. Instead of just giving the lvl.32 player the benefit of the doubt, it forces them to prove their skills, at least with different kinds of enemies.
Can you say Diablo2?
I personally think Diablo2 is a perfect merge between Stats and Action. I always played Sorceres, because it requires you to aim and it opens the door to some sort of strategy.
Add to that the most advanced and balanced looting system ever created and you obtain an enjoyable and addictive game. Now they just need to work on the storyline :-\
I personally think Diablo2 is a perfect merge between Stats and Action. I always played Sorceres, because it requires you to aim and it opens the door to some sort of strategy.
Add to that the most advanced and balanced looting system ever created and you obtain an enjoyable and addictive game. Now they just need to work on the storyline :-\
quote:Original post by CoincoinI would disagree entirely. Diablo 2 is nothing but a click-fest. All you do is point and click and use a potion every once in a while. Its like an FPS, except that instead of other players, you get to play against bots that just walk around real slow while trying to always stay visible and have a reaction time of something like a minute.
Can you say Diablo2?
I personally think Diablo2 is a perfect merge between Stats and Action. I always played Sorceres, because it requires you to aim and it opens the door to some sort of strategy.
Add to that the most advanced and balanced looting system ever created and you obtain an enjoyable and addictive game. Now they just need to work on the storyline :-\
Its also very AI dependant.
I''ll use MMORPGs as an example, because you brought up Everquest. Ultima Online will be my reference.
Basically, AI in an MMORPG is pretty stale and boring. They come at you, you hit attack and you kill ''em. Some of the bigger creatures require you to run away, rest and heal and then attack ''em again. Or even some games, like Shadowbane for example, have a pretty decent grouping system where one person can run back, and start launching their ranged attack while they''re buddy takes focus for a bit.
However, when you''re facing a player in Ultima Online, it really differs from fighting the AI. Its a completly new "combat system" all together. You move, you run, you time your attacks with your spells to a offence / defence combination that require both your character stats and your pure physical reflexes.
I consider UO (old school) one of the best examples of a combat system to date (when fighting players), because you really quire both a decent well-created character and sharp reflexes without it being a total click-fest.
I''ll use MMORPGs as an example, because you brought up Everquest. Ultima Online will be my reference.
Basically, AI in an MMORPG is pretty stale and boring. They come at you, you hit attack and you kill ''em. Some of the bigger creatures require you to run away, rest and heal and then attack ''em again. Or even some games, like Shadowbane for example, have a pretty decent grouping system where one person can run back, and start launching their ranged attack while they''re buddy takes focus for a bit.
However, when you''re facing a player in Ultima Online, it really differs from fighting the AI. Its a completly new "combat system" all together. You move, you run, you time your attacks with your spells to a offence / defence combination that require both your character stats and your pure physical reflexes.
I consider UO (old school) one of the best examples of a combat system to date (when fighting players), because you really quire both a decent well-created character and sharp reflexes without it being a total click-fest.
quote:Original post by TechnoGoth
Why do so many people talk about Deus Ex like its the greatest game ever made? I played it and thought it was just slightly above averge FPS. Is it because it actualy had a story and allowed multiple paths to objectives? Maybe people should be asking themselves why all FPS don''t have those features? Okay enough of that little rant. Oh and Hacking in Deus Ex is cheating.
I always thought that part of the problem stems from the fact that 99% rpgs on the market have only form of combat resultion normaly side A kills side B. What there needs to be is more eleborate combat systems that can be resolved in multiple ways.
One game that married the action and dice rolling was Star Ocean 2. Basicly in combat you only control 1 of your 4 team members the rest are computer controlled however you could switch between them at any time. Also there was an actual battle field that player manuvered around during battle. To attack you pressed X I think. also you could release special moves with the R and L buttons and access the item menu by pressing circle. It wasn''t bad it all happened in real time and there was advantage to getting behind the opponet. Also if you got hit your current action got interupted forcing you to keep spell casters away from the enemy if you wanted them to be able to cast magic. Special powers also gained in proficany after each use and became more powerful and more visually impressive.
-----------------------------------------------------
Writer, Programer, Cook, I''m a Jack of all Trades
Current Design project
Chaos Factor Design Document
[edited by - TechnoGoth on November 28, 2003 5:56:02 PM]
when i read the title of this thread, that was one of the games i immediately thought of. part of the reason is that, IMO, the battle engines are being duplicated regardless of the game. for example, Star Ocean 2 would have been a more interesting if it was multiplayer. the switching of characters began to become annoying. another game that suffers from this is Grandia 2.
also it would be nice if games, like FFVII, where the party splits up, that each party could be controlled by 2 players. that would make the game more interesting and fun.
when game developers, independent and commercial, started to fully explore these ideas and implement them fully, then i think the gameplay (as well as the battling) will improve.
definitly VALKYRIE PROFILE
did someone play it??
explain this a little more, i''m concerning in my own design
wether my gameplay is both from grandia and valkyrie profile (ok i borow concept, but i just want to do THE sys i allways want, chack the my in game joke like the click festival in the beginning of the story
)
the latest tales of on gamecube let you play 4 player the same time in fight (ff9 did that too with 2 player)
however nobody mention the secret of mana series BAD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
did someone play it??
quote:Original post by Alpha_ProgDes
the switching of characters began to become annoying. another game that suffers from this is Grandia 2.
explain this a little more, i''m concerning in my own design
wether my gameplay is both from grandia and valkyrie profile (ok i borow concept, but i just want to do THE sys i allways want, chack the my in game joke like the click festival in the beginning of the story
)quote:
also it would be nice if games, like FFVII, where the party splits up, that each party could be controlled by 2 players. that would make the game more interesting and fun.
the latest tales of on gamecube let you play 4 player the same time in fight (ff9 did that too with 2 player)
however nobody mention the secret of mana series
BAD>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
be good
be evil
but do it WELL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Play Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic
It has the classic DnD battle system, rolling and everything but it is played out in a realtime way. Or you can pause the battle and give specific people commands, or play in real time and give them commands on the go. It is awesome!
<- Digital Explosions ->
"Discipline is my sword, faith is my shield
do not dive into uncertainty, and you may live to reap the rewards" - (Unreal Championship)
It has the classic DnD battle system, rolling and everything but it is played out in a realtime way. Or you can pause the battle and give specific people commands, or play in real time and give them commands on the go. It is awesome!
<- Digital Explosions ->
"Discipline is my sword, faith is my shield
do not dive into uncertainty, and you may live to reap the rewards" - (Unreal Championship)
A turn-based battle system can still require the player to have skill. There might be some ways to require skill during the actual battles, but the player might also need to be prepared for battles—and not just by having a high level.
If you get afflicted with poison, you might have a limited number of turns to cure yourself, or you'd die. Not lose a small number of HP—die . You'd need to have some way to cure yourself of poison. A poison-cure spell wouldn't always be the best solution—especially if it takes several turns to cast. Alternatively, the player might need to buy poison-cure items. The player's best bet is to be prepared.
Suppose it takes four turns to cast the Immolation Beam spell. If an enemy pyromancer starts casting it, you'd have four turns to either kill the pyromancer or use some magical means to protect against fire. If not, you wouldn't just take fire damage—you'd die. There might be a spell which protects against fire, but that could take time to cast, which wouldn't save you from the pyromancer's partner who just stabbed you with a poisoned dagger. There might be items which protect against fire—again, the player must be prepared.
Make enemies dangerous, and battles become harder, requiring more skill. Simple.
[edited by - Beer Hunter on November 29, 2003 3:13:10 AM]
If you get afflicted with poison, you might have a limited number of turns to cure yourself, or you'd die. Not lose a small number of HP—die . You'd need to have some way to cure yourself of poison. A poison-cure spell wouldn't always be the best solution—especially if it takes several turns to cast. Alternatively, the player might need to buy poison-cure items. The player's best bet is to be prepared.
Suppose it takes four turns to cast the Immolation Beam spell. If an enemy pyromancer starts casting it, you'd have four turns to either kill the pyromancer or use some magical means to protect against fire. If not, you wouldn't just take fire damage—you'd die. There might be a spell which protects against fire, but that could take time to cast, which wouldn't save you from the pyromancer's partner who just stabbed you with a poisoned dagger. There might be items which protect against fire—again, the player must be prepared.
Make enemies dangerous, and battles become harder, requiring more skill. Simple.
[edited by - Beer Hunter on November 29, 2003 3:13:10 AM]
Gothic I and Gothic II blend the two pretty well. As you raise your sword skill you swing faster and can perform more combos. Yet the player still has to do the fighting.
------------------------------
If 4 out of 5 people suffer from Diahrea does that mean the fifth person enjoys it?
p.s. excuse me english. im from L.A.
------------------------------
If 4 out of 5 people suffer from Diahrea does that mean the fifth person enjoys it?
p.s. excuse me english. im from L.A.
This topic is closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Popular Topics
Advertisement
