KOTOR an RPG?

[TFVanguard]

In turn based, things move one at a time. The concept has been around since Ancient India and probably long before that.

Well, ya know, they didn't exactly have computers running at 3.2 Gigahertz back then to handle caculations and simulate battle conditions in real time as well. There's a reason that Chess is so abstract, after all.

That is, of course, ignoring many, many games over the years that have simultaneous turns (such as Diplomacy, or Star Fleet Battles). They're still turns, of course, just not the 'one moves then the other moves' variety.

Of course, by your statements, you realize that Dungeons and Dragons, Rifts, and GURPS aren't really role-playing games, because there are rules for simulataneous actions and phase-based actions in there as well?

All a phase is, is a smaller-turn in a bigger, but just as arbitrary, full-turn. All a turn is is just an arbitrary 'time period' for the pieces to move. You're trying to rigidly define a 'turn' based on what you want an RPG to have, and otherwise have no basis in reality, as there are many, many easily cited examples to contradict you.

So, imperically speaking, do you actually know anything about game design?

If you don't like it, good for you, this isn't about your shitty personal tastes. Don't take a new system and pass it as something already existing and different.

This isn't about your tastes, either. Shitty or otherwise. It's about you being factually wrong.

 

[POOPERSCOOPER]

So how about that search button?

 

[TFVanguard]

So how about that search button?

You're about as nice and as friendly as a war-protestor on Independance Day , you know that?

Reading a bunch of flame-filled 'I told you so' threads as 'proof' of an argument, isn't going to do much for my general happy quotient. It's certainly not going to prove anything anyway - unless God himself has come down in there and said 'This is what a turn based game is'.

If you're going to argue that KOTOR isn't an RPG because it uses 'pause-phase-turns' unstead of 'dead-on-turns', I'm going to say that your argument is seriously flawed. Nothing said so far has dissuaded me from that opinion.

 

[Vault Dweller]

No, it's another one of them popular adventure games with RPG elements. Before somebody else asks, WarCraft 3 isn't an RPG either. :wink:

And.. huh? Let's see, it's got character generation, turn-based combat, tactical control, engrossing character, dialog trees, multiple endings, and very very few 'puzzle' situations. You may not like Knights of the Old Republic, but to say that it's then somehow not an RPG is pretty much a bold-faced lie.

I guess I'm a liar then. It's ok, I can live with that.

I've posted a lot on this subject already, so I won't go into details again, but here is a short overview:

Char generation
It sucked. 3 classes with a pitiful selection of skills and feats. Please.

TB combat
Huh? You can tell the difference between TB and RT, can't you? I don't give a damn whether or not I can see the turns if I squint. The point is, it's not TB, because there is no time (turn) allocated for each given character to act including tactical movement.

Tactical control
What are you, reading from a press release? What was tactical about it?

EnGROSSing character
Yep, the character were something. That's why we all hope that we won't see most of them again in K2.

Dialogue trees
They were rather primitive and linear. You just say your line, occasionally using useless Persuade and Force Persuade to get a better deal and move on.

Multiple endings
I love those, especially if you can pick one 10 min before the end of the game, Deus Ex-style. Very meaningful.

What about almost non-existent player's choices, extreme linearity, poor design (Academy, the first fight with Malak, etc), nerfed ranged, etc.

Overall, KOTOR has much more in common with an adventure game with some RPG elements, hence my comment.

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

Its an adventure game, with rpg-lite elements. thats not slamming it, its still an o.k. game.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Precisely

 

[Volourn]

No. It's a role-playing game. As much as FO, BG, or PST are. Not as good as them; but still a rpg.

Afterall, RPGCodex The Hardcore RPG Site does cover it. Then again, RPGCodex covers both DS games so tehir opinion on that matter is moot.

 

[Vault Dweller]

Pause and play is NOT the same as full TB.

Turn based means things happen in turns. Sorry, it's not the early 80's anymore, so a new system was developed

Then why pretend that this new (RT with pause) system is the ol' TB? You like it better? Fine. You think it's a step forward, evolution, revolution, whatever? Great. BUT IT'S NOT TB. Plain and simple. Write it down or something.

Personally, I like the 'pause turn' aspect more, since I can let those 'my 10th level warrior against two kobolds' combats just happen and drag the entire game down to micromanage a non-challenging combat.

And that's coming from a person who claims that he knows a lot about game design? Hilarious. How about NOT forcing a high level fighter to fight lowly rats or kobolds? Mind-blowing, eh?

The only difference is that the computer queues up commands in phases, but does not stop at the end of each turn.

You are not stupid by any chance, are you?

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

No. It's a role-playing game. As much as FO, BG, or PST are. Not as good as them; but still a rpg.

Afterall, RPGCodex The Hardcore RPG Site does cover it. Then again, RPGCodex covers both DS games so tehir opinion on that matter is moot.

You're moot....

 

[Volourn]

Yet you continue to bug me for sex...

 

[Vault Dweller]

Afterall, RPGCodex The Hardcore RPG Site does cover it.

Only on slow days It's a part of our new feature "Look what's being passed for RPGs these days"

 

[StraitLacedDeviant]

Yet you continue to bug me for sex...

What I do with my surveillance equipment is my own business, after all how many times do you get to tape record someone getting violated by a herd of rabid kangaroos.

 

[Andyman Messiah]

Just thought I'd pop in here and say what I think about Knights of the Old Republic.

First of all; it's adventure with (bad) roleplaying elements. There's no way you can actually roleplay your way through the game since everything boils down to you choosing if you're a good guy or a bad guy and then fighting, fighting and fighting until you're done with the quest and picks another one.

The "dialogue" doesn't even exist since when you get to choose something to say it hasn't any effect and the dialogue keeps rolling like normal with perhaps some minor changes like if you pissed off the guy you were talking to.

The class system was hilarious and worthless. You choose one of three classes (later on, you choose one of the same classes which now have been more jedi-esque) and tries to beat the game using their "talents"? Oh please.

The only thing that was actually good about the game was the character HK-47 who delivered many different lines which made me smile and dance around the house like a little girl. :wink:

 

[TFVanguard]

Its an adventure game, with rpg-lite elements. thats not slamming it, its still an o.k. game.

Yet is has more role-playing elements within the game than other games that you're citing are true role-playing games. From what I'm gathering, honestly, that you've decided that what you like is a role-playing game, and whatever you don't, obviously isn't.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Just thought I'd pop in here and say what I think about Knights of the Old Republic.

First of all; it's adventure with (bad) roleplaying elements. There's no way you can actually roleplay your way through the game since everything boils down to you choosing if you're a good guy or a bad guy and then fighting, fighting and fighting until you're done with the quest and picks another one.

The problem is that you can roleplay in KoTOR, but whatever you do is put to waste because whatever you roleplayed before is undone with your decision towards the end of the game. Couple that with the ability to choose dialogue choices over and over until the NPC accepts it and you're left wondering what is the point.

 

[Transcendent One]

Then why pretend that this new (RT with pause) system is the ol' TB? You like it better? Fine. You think it's a step forward, evolution, revolution, whatever? Great. BUT IT'S NOT TB. Plain and simple. Write it down or something.

TFVanguard just doesn't seem to know what the word turn means.

All a turn is is just an arbitrary 'time period' for the pieces to move

Huh? Grab that dictionary please. Turn. We aren't talking about rotational movement. Clearly we aren't implying milk or anything like that. But look. In turns - in succesion, one by one. Take turns - act or work alternatively or in succesion. KotOR's attacks may be one by one. They are. Movement isn't. And anything affecting a moving target isn't. Why do you think KotOR's grenades are so useless, cause by the time it lands your opponent will have already stepped away.

As for KotOR being RPG. KotOR is a very bad RPG, I think. Sometimes it provides ways for differing characters to handle encounters differently. Most of the time the choices you make are shallow and have little impact on anything. That said, I don't think it's a fun adventure game either, cause of problems with combat, shallow characters, etc.

 

[TFVanguard]

TFVanguard just doesn't seem to know what the word turn means.

No, you're simply trying to define a 'turn based' game to your terms and desires. Despite my citing quite a few games with clearly-deliniated turns that do not follow your model, you refuse to accept them.

To then take your limited definition and then say that an RPG is only an RPG if the game follows that definition, is just intellectually dishonest.

Most of the time the choices you make are shallow and have little impact on anything. That said, I don't think it's a fun adventure game either, cause of problems with combat, shallow characters, etc.

You're entitled to your opinion, but keep in mind that literally thousands of people disagree with you. It's a role-playing game, by definition - but just one that you didn't enjoy. That's fine, but then to claim it's not an RPG for that reason, isn't intellectually honest.

 

[Transcendent One]

To then take your limited definition and then say that an RPG is only an RPG if the game follows that definition, is just intellectually dishonest.

It's a role-playing game, by definition - but just one that you didn't enjoy

Hypocrite?

 

[TFVanguard]

Hypocrite?

Not at all. There are plenty of RPGs that I don't like, such as Planescape: Torment, that I would still call RPGs. They're just not ones that I enjoy playing.

Plus, since you're saying that it can only be an RPG if it has a very strict concept of a turn-based system - something not borne out by quite a number of RPGs over the years, both electronic and paper, is just intellecutally dishonest elitism.

 

[Transcendent One]

Plus, since you're saying that it can only be an RPG if it has a very strict concept of a turn-based system - something not borne out by quite a number of RPGs over the years, both electronic and paper, is just intellecutally dishonest elitism

WTF?

Where did I say that?

 

[protobob]

If we want to deal in functional descriptions here, that is, descriptions that describe things well enough to compare and contrast features of the described object, it's best to keep the terms turn-based and real-time with pause seperate and distinct.

Turn-based defines a certain kind of play, as does real-time with pause. There isn't any advantage to merging the two terms.

What happens under the hood is irrelevant. While real-time with pause may have 'turns' 'under the hood,' those turns are (generally) not exposed to the manipulation of the player, and furthermore, all character's actions occur at once.

The strongest distinction between the two, then, is if character action is simultaneious. If so, it should not be described as turn-based.

 

[TFVanguard]

Where did I say that?

It's one of the biggest complaints I see when someone says 'KOTOR is not an RPG'. If that's not your opinion then I apologize for stating it as such.

 

[ichpokhudezh]

Yet is has more role-playing elements within the game than other games that you're citing are true role-playing games.

1. KotOR is a round-based game.
2. Whatever else, KotOR is not a SW universe role-playing game.
3. KotOR has a preset main story line with mandatory waypoints and a single branching point 5% before the ending credits. Both branches are available to any type of character.
4. There were exactly 2 roles that fit good into the story: an evil superpowered thug with planet-sized charisma and a goody-goody psycho butcher.
5. Attributes were useful for changing your combat pattern only.
6. Only one skill actually mattered in the game (if reading a sidestory and accessing a combat upgrade matters to you).

7. I liked KotOR. It's funnier and shorter than Diablo.

Need explanations on any of these points?

 

[TFVanguard]

The strongest distinction between the two, then, is if character action is simultaneious. If so, it should not be described as turn-based.

But it is different than real-time, which is a point I think a lot of people lose. When you can, turn by turn, pause to give commands, you're getting a hybrid - and the 'turn engine under the hood' does make a large difference in the style of play.

 

[TFVanguard]

1. KotOR is a round-based game.

Fair enough. 'pause and play' might be more accurate, mind you.

2. Whatever else, KotOR is not[/ a SW universe role-playing game.

Yes. It is. Lucas said so. Pretty much everyone on the planet says so - except for a few die-hards with an axe to grind about what comprises a 'pure' RPG.

3. KotOR has a preset main story line with mandatory waypoints and a single branching point 5% before the ending credits. Both branches are available to any type of character.

Wrong. There are lots of smaller branching points in the quests and interactions with NPCs. There are four distinct endings to the game, which is three more than most RPGs offer. The big branching point is near the end, but it's not the only one.

4. There were exactly 2 roles that fit good into the story: an evil thug with planet-sized charisma and a goody-goody psycho butcher.

Your opinion and hyperbolic. I know several dozen people who've played the game, and I've seen a much wider variety of characters than this.

5. Attributes were useful for changing your combat pattern only.

Flatly wrong. Attributes figured heavily into how you handle NPC and party-member relations as well. As for physical stats.. well, tell me a game where the primary role of physical stats isn't combat.

6. Only one skill actually mattered in the game (if reading a sidestory and accessing a combat upgrade matters to you).

Again, flatly wrong. Different skills have different uses in many points in the game. Some are worth more than others, but show me a CRPG where that isn't the case.

7. I liked KotOR. It's funnier and shorter than Diablo.

Sounds like you plowed through KOTOR, and did none of the sidequests, or major NPC interactions. Yeah, the main story can be done in about 20 hours, but the game as a whole is much longer. Sounds like you missed an awful lot.