MMORPG Killed The RPG Star

[Ratty Sr.]

Continue to pat yourselves on the back for such a great effort to create more subgenres of RPGs. RPG LITE? Dumbing Down RPGs? What exactly is it that makes an RPG good? Last time I checked was an awesome story and somewhat nonlinear gameplay? Am I missing some attraction to jogging around numbers to somehow personolize my avatar? You keep saying I have no clue what a good RPG is and you guard the truth like its your greatest treasure? Please share with me what makes an RPG a great Extinct beast that all must appreciate who wish to embark on surreal journeys.

http://www.nma-fallout.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15449

Seriously what is so great about Gothic? You must think by graphics I mean how hight res the poly model is? Or how shiny the chrome is? Because new technology has not offered designers a SENSE of beauty and aesthetics of the presentation. In 2001 I remember NNights, Elder Scrolls, Dungeon Seige, were a LOT better made.

Apparently you have no sense of aesthetics at all. Gothic looked great, especially considering its low production values. No other game has such amazing area design, with perfectly realistic forests, caverns that beg to be explored, hills and canyons that appear like they have been gradually forming for thousands of years and towns so meticulously constructed one might think designers built them brick by brick. There is a *lot* more to aesthetic appeal of a game than fancy shaders, and appreciation of finer, more artistic elements of its visual aspect is what differs a refined gamer from a drooling kid like you. Funny you should mention NWN, Dungeon Siege and Morrowind; the former two had spectacularly ugly graphics and level design so dull and unimaginative it made even Gauntlet levels appear like epitomes of architectural achievement, while the latter boasted the bleakest, most vacuous landscape since Daggerfall and its 15,000 towns that all seemed like exact copies of each other.

One more thing about Gothic; those games were quite open-ended (moreso than any of the games you mentioned) and featured an unprecedentedly immersive world. I have yet to see an RPG that can match Gothic in terms of immersion and realism.

Of course we all like different parts of games for personal reasons or reactions and I expect people to say I am wrong because I like "action rpgs." Look I love fallout, but lets face it Turn Based combat is way too time consuming when you can just bind some keys to your stimpaks and ammo, and suffer the vulnerability of having to use them during the combat.

Maybe if you have attention span of a six year old moron. For me, it is *real-time combat* that is time consuming, because it offers little challenge and makes me feel like I'm wasting my time. I'm also puzzled by your last sentence; are you saying using stimpaks and ammo during turn-based combat doesn't make you vulnerable? Please clarify.

KOTOR did one thinig right, the ability to pause gameplay.

No. KotOR's combat engine was basically a design flaw. Why? Because combat wasn't turn-based, which is a blatant infraction of D&D rules. It has fucked up the combat system beyond recognition, damaging or completely breaking more than one concept. Same thing happened in Baldur's Gate, Arcanum, Neverwinter Nights and just about any other CRPG that tried to implement RT combat while being built around a ruleset that features TB combat.

I guess that made it less an Action RPG for people like you. So, just because you have to hack some monsters in Fable during one of their scripted attacks, I don't think it degrades the Role Playing part of the game.

It does. It is also the reason why I will never hold Gothic or Bloodlines in same regard as Fallout. Namely, in a true roleplaying game, outcomes of all player's actions depend on PC's statistics. If you try to hack into a computer with insufficient skill, you fail. If you are a poor diplomat and try to reason with a homicidal drunkard, you fail. Et cetera. Combat is no different. The only way to ensure a character's combat performance is determined by his stats and his stats alone is to have a turn-based combat. If combat is real-time, then its outcome depends on the *player's* perception and reflexes rather than his character's. This obviously violates the roleplaying paradigm.

I know you will play it once it comes out, so you can all have a solid base of arguement about Fable VS the past couple of RPGs to come out for PC.

I probably will, I feel like playing a decent action game.

P.S. I notice Kotario addressed your stupidity as well. Whoever said picture speaks for a thousand words was right.

 

[Rev. Layle]

KOTOR is technically a phase-based combat system. Use D&D as a rule base (i.e. d20) - I have had many GMs run their games by making us declare all of our actions before a turn, then letting initiative and dice rolls determine the result... which is exactly how KOTOR plays.

Don't lump Arcanum into RT based on TB that doesn't work. Arcanum was designed with *their own ruleset* so they can do anything they damn well please... not to say it worked out the best, however (and being that you can switch anytime during combat it was highly exploitive too - still, a very fun game!).

And of course ANY Real-Time based system is an infraction, strictly speaking, of a PnP system... as you can't PnPs real-time no matter what, unless you LARP it out. On the computer, the rules are more flexible.

Ultimately, requiring reflexes of any sort to carry out actions that are supposed to be able to determined by a character statistic in a computer RPG DOES defeat the purposes of that statistic, skill level, ability score, etc...

This is why I say KOTOR does NOT break those rules (i.e. not requiring reflexes to play the game - not so much keeping strict d20 rules). You can have KOTOR *Pause* between EVERY combat round. So the orders are not carried out like traditional D&D/d20 (and even then it's house rules there.... see my previous statement on that), but it does NOT require reflexs to carry out combat in the very least.


(EDIT: Oh yeah, KOTOR does have those damn pod racing scenes which DO require reflexes, but I'm not sure If they were required to finish the game)

 

[Sebastian of the Wastes]

This is a tough question to ask when you're specifically comparing MMORPGs with Morrowind.

Morrowind, while a very open an expasive experience is a very lonely game. Why? It's because there's no focused storyline with impactful characters. Any emotion is displayed by text descriptions and the characters who "say" those lines don't even move, emote, etc...

There's a big difference with that and, say, WoW. Morrowind is too open ended for its own good, and there in lies its great weakness. I never felt lonely playing Fallout. I was too busy setting time bombs and planting them on those little theiving bastards at the den who kept stealing my shovel! BOOM BOOM little buddy! BOOM BOOM!

 

[Ratty Sr.]

KOTOR is technically a phase-based combat system. Use D&D as a rule base (i.e. d20) - I have had many GMs run their games by making us declare all of our actions before a turn, then letting initiative and dice rolls determine the result... which is exactly how KOTOR plays.

Don't lump Arcanum into RT based on TB that doesn't work. Arcanum was designed with *their own ruleset* so they can do anything they damn well please... not to say it worked out the best, however (and being that you can switch anytime during combat it was highly exploitive too - still, a very fun game!).

And of course ANY Real-Time based system is an infraction, strictly speaking, of a PnP system... as you can't PnPs real-time no matter what, unless you LARP it out. On the computer, the rules are more flexible.

Ultimately, requiring reflexes of any sort to carry out actions that are supposed to be able to determined by a character statistic in a computer RPG DOES defeat the purposes of that statistic, skill level, ability score, etc...

This is why I say KOTOR does NOT break those rules (i.e. not requiring reflexes to play the game - not so much keeping strict d20 rules). You can have KOTOR *Pause* between EVERY combat round. So the orders are not carried out like traditional D&D/d20 (and even then it's house rules there.... see my previous statement on that), but it does NOT require reflexs to carry out combat in the very least.


(EDIT: Oh yeah, KOTOR does have those damn pod racing scenes which DO require reflexes, but I'm not sure If they were required to finish the game)

KotOR combat isn't really phase-based, because there is no clear separation between phases. It is basically round-based with pause option (and that's *not* the same as phase-based). The combat system is messed up the same way BG's is. You can access the inventory while paused and fiddle with your equipment without incurring any penalty to your character's actions that round. You have no way to utilize cover or terrain during combat in an effective manner. You can't fire ranged weapons while moving. Combat is overly static and boring - all you have to do is line up some actions and wait for them to play out, then line up some more. There is no challenge and no tactical or strategic depth - just a bunch of dudes standing toe-to-toe and firing their blasters or hacking away with their lightsabers while the player observes everything passively. This is another breach of the roleplaying paradigm, unless everyone roleplays a moron who engages his enemies at point-blank range and doesn't move an inch for the entire duration of the battle.

Arcanum ruleset assumes turn-based combat. In fact, in terms of combat system it is almost identical to S.P.E.C.I.A.L. Real-time breaks the system completely. I remember fighting Sir Garrick Stout in Dernholm; in turn-based the battle was nigh impossible with my poor melee fighter / thief / spellcaster mix. I reloaded and engaged the bastard in real-time - after about twenty seconds of fervent clicking, Sir Garrick was dead and I still had a good portion of my health left. Conclusion: TB >> RT in any shape and form.

 

[Rev. Layle]

No... there is an option in KOTOR to stop after every single round. I used it for some of the more "tricky" battles. I set my orders, hit the "go button" everyone moved or did their attack (or attacks if they had more than one attack per round), then it automatically "paused" again for the next round. Now I won't claim KOTORs battles are overly interesting or even tactical in any form, but it is set up on the "round" idea, it just plays out those rounds repeatedly - UNLESS you tell it stop after every round - then it is NOT real-time any more.

Also, I don't see how any of KOTOR's combat modes breaks any role-playing paradigm. In my opinion, every fucking computer RPG breaks that so-called paradigm as all you can do it set some sort of order or action and let it carry out, once or repeatedly. No real "I want to lift my sword and yell 'DIE YOU HEATHEN SCUM' as I crash it down on my loathsome opponent!!" Nope, just click "attack", specify a target, hear a sound, get feedback if you hit and what happened. There is no dramatics to any attack. In fact, NPCs seems to offer more dramatics than the PC itself.

As for Arcanum: It should have stuck to one or another as the outcome of battles in either mode greatly varies. IMO, it should have stayed turn-based with more emphasis on balancing that mode. Of course, that would have killed the multiplayer feature, which I think they should have not pursued altogether.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

No... there is an option in KOTOR to stop after every single round. I used it for some of the more "tricky" battles. I set my orders, hit the "go button" everyone moved or did their attack (or attacks if they had more than one attack per round), then it automatically "paused" again for the next round. Now I won't claim KOTORs battles are overly interesting or even tactical in any form, but it is set up on the "round" idea, it just plays out those rounds repeatedly - UNLESS you tell it stop after every round - then it is NOT real-time any more.

Yes, it is. It's real time *with pause*.

 

[Rev. Layle]

Ok, this is gonna get all Python-esqe

No it isn't... it's Turn (Phase, specifically) Based with a continuous mode.

And no, I don't expect either of us to agree on any terms on our opinions of this.

Also, it's only truly PAUSE if you have specfically hit an option to make it pause every time you want it to pause. Once it pauses on it own, you are taking turns to make you decisions. (Again, this s my OWN opinion on that).

------------------------

No you didn't!

Yes I did!

You didn't!

I did!

You didn't!

I'm telling you, I did!

You didn't!

(breaking into the developing argument) Oh I'm sorry, is this a five minute argument, or the full half hour?

 

[Ratty Sr.]

This isn't the matter of individual perspective or semantics, but of cold, hard fact. Mechanics of a turn-based system are *fundamentally different* from mechanics of a real time round-based system. Turn-based combat is *sequential*. The sequence in which players get their turns is determined by their dexterity / agility. Each player has a predefined amount of actions they can perform during their turn and that amount depends on their dexterity as well. In real time combat system, players perform their actions *simultaneously*. Though the amount of actions per round is limited, this is *no longer* turn-based combat. The pause system (be it manual or automated) means jack shit for mechanics and serves only to acommodate slower players. Maybe it will help you comprehend if you compare chess and American football. Chess in analogous with a turn-based CRPG, while football is analogous with a real time CRPG. See the glaring differences between the two? Yeah, I thought so.

In terms of coding, turn-based system is fundamentally different from real time system. On the other hand, real time systems with and without pause differ in a few lines of code. In terms of mechanics, they are identical.

 

[Sander]

In terms of coding, turn-based system is fundamentally different from real time system. On the other hand, real time systems with and without pause differ in a few lines of code. In terms of mechanics, they are identical.

Only if the underlying ruleset is the same. But since rulesets used in round-based combat are almost always very different from real-time rulesets, since they were written with a different view of processing the action in mind, and hence have to accomodate different demands.

But Graz'zt, you're wrong. Phase-based is a term denoting things like the real-time with pause, where the underlying mechanics are based on rounds or phases of combat. Layle was not referring to turn-based combat when he used that term.

 

[Rev. Layle]

That why I say Phase Based ultimately (which does contradict a previous stament to spark a little debate, and I thought on it a little more. As I said previously: [paraphrase] "Yes it is turn based (phase based specifically)" - when even *those* two forms of implenting a combat system really cannot be compared and should be their own classes of combat) Which is really neither and can be implemented as real-time or in distinct "rounds" to issue orders.

And real time to me mean that statistics of the characters on the screen are physically affected by certain stats that would affect speed (moving farther, attacking more, using more items faster than an opponent), when in fact, KOTOR does none of that. Every "round" each character can use a single item, or make their attacks (movement has been simplified to "move toward opponent"), or try to perform a single non combat action (IIRC).

So really it is a perhaps bastardized version of both RT and TB. Which is cool and all, didn't bother me one bit, not terribly exciting ultiamtely, but it worked for what it did.

Your analogy is a great one. Problem is KOTORs combat lies in between... too hindered by a per-round structure to be like football but not enough each-player-takes-a-turn-individually, like in Chess, to make it TB.

In the end, my verdict I guess should be: It's neither true TB or true RT.

 

[Ratty Sr.]

Sander, real time with pause is not the same as phased.

*goes to RPGCodex and looks up that excellent article on combat systems in CRPGs*

Found it: http://www.rpgcodex.com/content.php?id=21

KotOR (much like BG and Torment) has a lame combat system which has elements of phased combat while retaining all the flaws of pure real time. True phase-based system is different. Wizardry 7 and 8 use it, as do many games in the Final Fantasy series. It can also be found in certain war sims (it is ideal for simulating war strategy).