Retarded mechanics/features that never works out

[JustLooking]

Recently I've been thinking about all the bad designs and features that I've encountered in my short journey with RPGs and games in general that somehow are repeated over and over again and they are always hot mess and pretty much never work out. I would like to dedicate this thread to gather as much as possible retarded ideas that some game devs still think are a good idea. Let's begin:

1. Level scalling:
I don't know which game started with this idea but from the get go it was one hell of a stupid feature. They tried to explain it by stating that it would provide user with constant challenge and the world would level up with you, what it really lead to is that the same bandit that you could beat as complete newbie is still same threat as when you're knight in plate armor, everything becomes bloated, including your mother and all the fun of leveling is gone. It almost as communism where everyone is "equal", that in reality means everyone gets shit. I think I encountered it first in Oblivion but I bet it was there way before that.

2. Difficulty modes:
I remember the times when there was single difficulty mode, tailored for best possible user experience that would be both challenging and do not insult your intelligence while still not being too tedious. At some point there came this trend where game dev decided to put shit ton of difficulty modes, one for morons called easy and anything below, one for so called "normal" players and few other for complete masochists where nothing really changed other than giving enemies some bloated numbers in their stats and making the whole experience an nightmare fuel. I find this idea to be complete waste of time, that could be used in other areas of the game. All it does it makes it harder for you to choose the one mode that the devs had in mind when creating the game and avoiding all others all together so you won't end up either as demi god or complete pushover that have to hit enemy 15454646466 times before he dies and he can do as much as fart and you're dead and your save game gets purged.

3. Balance <insert Josh Sawyer here>
Similar to Level scaling it makes everything bland to the point of throwing up. All spells sucks, everything gets countered, your character can never become good at anything, everything in the name of the equality and fair changes. You will never fell as if you achieved anything because you will be bring back down to the ground by our smelly balancing mechanism. Absolutely disgusting.

4. Replaying same areas
Nioh and other asian games I'm looking at you. You know these games, they reuse every asset possible and make you go trough the same level, do the same shit but you start from other area of the map. I think the only game where it was slightly enjoyable were Severance Blade of Darkness, other than that it always feel dull and it's just petty attempt at making you grind more hours in their shitty game. I already played this level why would I like to replay it?

5. Grind Required
I'm not sure how narrow your asian eyes have to be to don't see what a waste of time is the idea of grind. You literally do the same shit a if you're working second full time job in some god forsaken game and it's somehow enjoyable? That's one of the reasons why I never could get into JRPGs and I can't understand what I had in mind when I was little younger, played MMOs and lost hours of my life on grinding some useless shit while cool kids made fun of me buying everything they needed in Item Shop. Who ever came up with the idea of grinding in games must be a chink. It wouldn't be so bad if grind was optional but hell no, if there's grind in the game you can be sure you will have to hustle to get to the end.

6. Random encounters
Especially when they are as boring and useless as in Solasta or Wasteland 2. They don't bring anything to the table, it's just a time waster oh hey some random, good for nothing bandits attacked you while you were camping 212131233th times and they didn't learn anything from last 23232323232 attemps where they failed, quess it's pointless combat again Woooohoooo. I think the only game where it kind of worked were first two Fallouts but even though those random encounter could be just areas to visit and then they could removed all together. Even if they did removed completely nothing of the value would be lost.

Ok that would be it for now, your turn!

 

[octavius]

1. Oldest one I know of with level scaling is Might&Magic 1. But I suspect even Wizardry 1 may have it. In both cases combined with area scaling.

2. Nothing wrong with difficulty settings as long as it is done right. That is, without using HP bloat, which is what most CRPGs do. In Thief games it leads to different play styles, and in HoMM on impossible it makes things much more interesting when you start with no resources (and it also affect your score).

3. Balance is important for multi-player, I guess, but for SP it only leads to blandness and boredom. Master of Orion is my favourite 4X game partly because the races species are unbalanced.

5. Yeah, this is an Asian or Japanese thing. I've never played a CRPG where grinding is mandatory, except it makes sense if you are playing Iron Man. But of the two JRPGs I've completed one (Wizardry Chronicle) required grinding if you wanted to advance.

6. Random encounters have their place. But it's more fun facing an army of orcs than facing the same tired group of six orcs twenty times, for example.

7. Respawning. Great if you are into grinding. But otherwise it's just tedious, unless there's some in-game rationale. I can forgive old games that reset dungeons due to technical limitations, though.

 

[NaturallyCarnivorousSheep]

Crafting.

 

[Hagashager]

On the topic of balance in RPGs I think some of it is due to the nature of class dynamic in PnP not translating to video-games and the snowballing *back* to later PnP.

In AD&D 2e the wizard class is stupidly overpowered mechanically. Tge trope aint no joke. In my 2e group the party mage is routinely the heavy hitter of the gang and respinsible for 75% of all kills. This is even after I've buffed all my other players to have half-way comparable competence in combat.


That all said, out of combat and utility, mages don't get much. Our party fighter was the group's face, within the scope of 2e, he was automatically given political power, prestige, an army and a castle at level 10. Out of combat our party fighter was the mover and shaker who made things happen.


The party, Druid, likewise, got her own grove, underling Druids, and political clout regarding nature by tbe rules of 2e. The party thief got his own guild and henchmen. The mage? *an apprentice*. Everything else he ought to have magic'd into existence by level 10 himself.


In PnP this is pretty balanced. How do you translate ephemeral concepts like "political power" and "the world doesn't like you if you're a mage" into something like Baldur's Gate?


From there, PnP has gotten worse as it emulates video-games by shirking Roleplay balance for mechanical balance.

 

[agris]

Retarded mechanics/features that never works out​

Not true, Fallout 1/2 and Arcanum both had low intelligence dialogues that worked.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

1-3 are essentially the same thing. They also tie in with 4 & 5, which are just expressions of laziness or absence of talent. Random encounters (6) can have value, but are frequently crutched as filler (see 4 & 5).

I think the core problem with many CRPGs is that their mechanics are sterile ground from which anything good struggles to sprout. The core concepts are bad starting with the primary resolution mechanic and then to character/class design. All of this decline is coincident with the rise of early 2000s MMOs. That's when the fundamental shifts occurred and your list of grievances became common.

 

[Dadd]

Stats at level up. Especially when each stat point makes a tiny difference.

 

[Erisㅤ]

Procedurally generated dungeons/quests. Usually done in the name of variety and freshness, produces the opposite effect.

 

[SlightlyRadioactive]

Morality systems, I don't think I have ever seen one example where this brings anything of value to gameplay or roleplay.

 

[Butter]

Morality systems, I don't think I have ever seen one example where this brings anything of value to gameplay or roleplay.

 

[SlightlyRadioactive]

Morality systems, I don't think I have ever seen one example where this brings anything of value to gameplay or roleplay.

I haven't played Ultima, could you elaborate a bit on how it's morality system makes playing it more interesting?

 

[Hagashager]

Morality systems, I don't think I have ever seen one example where this brings anything of value to gameplay or roleplay.

I haven't played Ultima, could you elaborate a bit on how it's morality system makes playing it more interesting?

U4 involves the protagonist founding his own religion based on seven virtues.


The main quest involves you physically traveling the land and exemplifying those seven virtues for the world to follow. Most of the virtues are pacifistic in nature forcing the player to genuinely sacrifice loot, mechanical power and defer to other character's actions. It culminates in a mega dungeon that tests player resolve

 

[SlightlyRadioactive]

And what if the palyer doesn't want to follow these virtues? How do things play out?

 

[Gargaune]

Diegetic save limitations. Vita-chambers, Saviour schnapps, whatever, ridiculous and irritating. Fuck off and let me play the game on my own time, I've got shit to do.

 

[Blutwurstritter]

Item durability that can be undone by a simple repair skill or a minimal fee at a shop. I can't recall a single game where this combination improved gameplay. I'm usually under the impression that its just there because its a simple thing to implement and other games did it before, even if it adds nothing of value to gameplay otherwise.

 

[Hagashager]

And what if the palyer doesn't want to follow these virtues? How do things play out?

Never played it personally.

As far as I can tell you have no choice. The reason U4 is referenced as a good "morality play" is because progress often doesn't involve violence, which in 1985 was apparently hot shit to players.

The virtues themselves are cute. I remember reading cRPG Addict saying he used U4 as a perdonal basis for his ethics during his 20s...which is utterly absurd, but whatever. Kid wanted to stick to old-man Christianity I guess

 

[SlightlyRadioactive]

And what if the palyer doesn't want to follow these virtues? How do things play out?

Never played it personally.

As far as I can tell you have no choice. The reason U4 is referenced as a good "morality play" is because progress often doesn't involve violence, which in 1985 was apparently hot shit to players.

The virtues themselves are cute. I remember reading cRPG Addict saying he used U4 as a perdonal basis for his ethics during his 20s...which is utterly absurd, but whatever. Kid wanted to stick to old-man Christianity I guess

Sounds kinda shit, honestly. I don't see how this makes a good morality system.

 

[agris]

1. Level scalling:
I think I encountered it first in Oblivion but I bet it was there way before that.

Daggerfall is the earliest I'm aware of, but is probably pre-dated by something a whitehair can chime in about. It is indeed shit, but some games do a passable job hiding it. It takes cognitive burden off the devs to design encounters and populate areas with appropriate combat challenges.

Fallout: New Vegas has level scaling.

2. Difficulty modes:

If it's good enough for Doom, it's good enough for you. Don't be a bitch.

Fallout: New Vegas has difficulty levels.

3. Balance <insert Josh Sawyer here>

You just gained 2% respect in the eyes of the fora, congratulations.

Fallout: New Vegas' guns are balanced by JES.

4. Replaying same areas

In small doses and used in a narrative-appropriate way, it's fine. Otherwise, stop playing shitty games that do this.

Fallout: New Vegas has you revisiting the same areas over and over and over again.

5. Grind Required

Again, stop playing shit games. Yes, it's annoying. Only exception is when you're still in school and have time to grind with a group in an MMO. Take the time to get to know the players you're playing with and it's like (you will later find out) sharing a few pints at the pub with strangers. It's enjoyable. But you gotta group with people that don't suck, be young, and have time. Single player games that emphasize this shit are beyond retarded.

Fallout: New Vegas emphasizes grinding.

6. Random encounters

Can be done well, or can be useless filler. Stop playing bad games.

Fallout: New Vegas has random encounters.


This reply is brought to you by

you'll never guess

 

[Krivol]

And what if the palyer doesn't want to follow these virtues? How do things play out?

Never played it personally.

As far as I can tell you have no choice. The reason U4 is referenced as a good "morality play" is because progress often doesn't involve violence, which in 1985 was apparently hot shit to players.

The virtues themselves are cute. I remember reading cRPG Addict saying he used U4 as a perdonal basis for his ethics during his 20s...which is utterly absurd, but whatever. Kid wanted to stick to old-man Christianity I guess

Sounds kinda shit, honestly. I don't see how this makes a good morality system.

Ehh actually you can play the bad guy in U4, you will not be able to achieve the minor goal, which is being an avatar of virtues, which is the goal of this game, so you can't finish it, but still can have some fun with stealing and murdering everything.


Oh and about difficulty settings: I hate when games (especially long ones) give me no possibility of changing difficulty during the game - so many times I have chosen normal and felt like being treated as an idiot, and had no possibility of changing this :/ .

 

[Butter]

Fallout: New Vegas emphasizes grinding through the gain-skill-through-use system.

 

[agris]

yeah that was my bad, i edited it out

 

[Denim Destroyer]

Stronghold management
Gaining ownership of a large property should see players pivot their decisions away from what is best for the party to what will ensure the success of their stronghold. Players should be delegating low level threats to new up and coming parties, ideally controlled by the player, while they focus more on the kingdom level threats. Pathfinder Kingmaker hinted at this with militias being sent off to deal with minor brigands but that occurs off screen. Baldur's Gate 2 is even worse in this aspect as the strongholds don't have an impact on the wider world.

 

[Shaki]

Diegetic save limitations. Vita-chambers, Saviour schnapps, whatever, ridiculous and irritating. Fuck off and let me play the game on my own time, I've got shit to do.

Nah, saviour schnapps shit was done well. You could play at your own time, save&exit didn't require a consumable, it was possible to quit at any time with no problems. You just couldn't savescum every smallest thing, which is good. Every game should have limited saving, so gamers can be detoxed from their savescum addiction and stop being retarded. Then we could finally get good, actual RPGs, not handicapped by being build around the assumption, that players will spend more time clicking save/load than actually playing the game.

 

[None]

Base building. It always feels tacked on and competes with the rest of the game.

 

[DJOGamer PT]

Any gameplay mechanic/system can work and even enhance the game experience, if executed appropriately

1. Level scalling

Can definitely work if the devs do it with considerate moderation and tie it to the campgain progress
Oblivion is an interesting example because it could've definitely worked if Betheseda tied it well to the fact the Oblivion Gates were spreading throughout the province

2. Difficulty modes

Just look (ba-dum-tss) at any competently action game
Different difficulty selections alter level design (most commonly the position of threats), improve enemy behaviour, make mission objectives more demanding and other smart changes - only lazy devs rely on bloat
Also they clearly transmit their intentions as to who and that what they are meant for

3. Balance

Actual game balance means no mechanic is useless or trivializes the game
Not that every gameplay option is equal

Replaying same areas

Nothing wrong if they're are well designed in the first place and specially if said area suffered a significant alteration
Also it can be fun to return to early areas in late game just to see how much progress you've made

5. Grind Required

Makes perfect sense in games that prioritize preparation and heavy resource management
Obviously the devs shouldn't abuse it

6. Random encounters

They have their place in specific contexts
Also by their nature, they can add unpredictability

Diegetic save limitations

Do you think REmake would be half as tense if you could save anywhere, at anytime?

Item durability

The problem is usually that devs never really penalize players for fear of annoying them
As examples of good implementation: in Bayonetta 1 you can pick up the weapons of fallen enemies and while powerful they usually allow for only 2/3 combos before breaking, so the player must make them count; in Blade of Darkness most shields break rather quickly, the reason is to punish players for playing passively.

Base building

In Subnautica it's extremely useful if you don't want to have a brain meltdown with resource management once you can build the major tech, it also helps alot in exploring the more advanced biomes