So Vampire: the Masquerade - Bloodlines will be a decade old this year. LET'S TALK ABOUT OTHER RPG'S

[thesheeep]

And no, you can't mix the two. True RPGs by their very nature can't be dependent upon player skill. And you can't have a good skill based combat system if you have retarded shit like shooting enemy straight in the head and slashing them over and over again (Morrowderp) and still missing because the developers thought it would be a fun idea to mix stat based RPG concepts (chance to hit, critical strikes) with first person combat where supposedly if something is between your crosshairs and you pull the trigger, it dies.

Aaaaand: wrong.
I agree that the system in both F:NV and Morrowind are pretty derpy when it comes to player skill vs RPG stats vs common sense.
But that doesn't mean it is not possible. You just have to put some effort into it.
Imagine in Morrowind, when an attack misses, the attack animation becomes a fumbling one or the opponent is depicted as blocking. Voila, it works.
Same for ranged combat. Just make the crosshair large the worse a character is at shooting. Or even better, do that and make it shaky (more if the character is afraid, etc.). Voila, it works, too.

The most important thing to get right is WYSIWYG and if that doesn't fit, things become pretty immersion breaking, if not worse.

Of course, a system that has you shooting in heads for a dozen times until a character dies is bullshit.
But even that is a matter of balancing (and using an HP-based system), not proof of a broken system. I would say that shooting in someones head in Fallout is both too easy (especially for moving targets) and does not do enough damage.

All that said, of course, a first person game will always have more player skill involved than any other perspective.
So if your definition of true RPG is 0 reflex player skill, then yeah it becomes impossible, but I find that definition a bit too restrictive.

 

[Excidium]

Morrowind air sword combat does not make for a strong case

 

[dryan]

There's nothing wrong with Morrowind's combat.

 

[Excidium]

There is a whole lot wrong even though it doesn't detract much from the game because of the systems around it

 

[Roguey]

I enjoy VtMB, yet I also see its rather large flaws.

I wish we could have seen a Troika game with a reasonable budget, no stupid publisher demands (like rt combat in arcanum), and a sane development schedule. Would be interesting to see what would have happened.

It would have been as bad as their other games because, as usual, they would have tried to deliver too much, they would have taken a cargo cult approach to RPG systems, and they'd neglect core gameplay in favor of narrative.

The less retarded sibling of Fallout 3 better than DX, VTMB and SS2?

As the game with the best C&C and core gameplay among all of them, yes.

Stalker does that a lot better and Fallout does Fallout a lot better.

Stalker and Fallout neither do C&C nor core gameplay better than New Vegas.

 

[Irxy]

If I had to choose 1 classic rpg for a reboot/sequel, I'd probably choose VtM:B.

 

[thesheeep]

There is a whole lot wrong even though it doesn't detract much from the game because of the systems around it

Yep, the systems behind are fine, but the representation... It was probably good for its time, but by now when you have animation fests like Darksiders or Assassins Creed to compare with, I find it hard not to find some things in there quite unintentionally funny.
So, when you would create a new game like Morrowind today, I'd expect a bit more visual feedback.

And some people (like TheGreatOne I guess) have an even bigger problem with this. It is really a very subjective matter how easily one can be thrown out of a world with stuff like that.

 

[TheGreatOne]

As the game with the best C&C and core gameplay among all of them, yes.

What core gameplay? Wandering around a desert aimlessly shooting with guns that feel like shit? Borderline retarded did that better. DX and SS2 have much better level design and better RPG systems, VTMB has better C&C in dialogue and how the world treats your character depending on your rac and mental&social skills. And it had the best, most organic quest design out of the bunch (untill it went full retard in the last third at least), even if the level design wasn't as good at incorporating multiple playstyles as that of Deus Ex. All of them have combat that feels like shit/meh. VTMB is shit, DX and SS2 are OK (SS2 is better than DX), NV is somewhere in the between.

Stalker does that a lot better and Fallout does Fallout a lot better.

Stalker and Fallout neither do C&C nor core gameplay better than New Vegas.

I never claimed that Stalker has good C&C. It's a better sandbox shooter than Fallout 3/New Vegas. As for NV having better C&C and core gameplay than F1, I'd suggest a different forum, the IGN or escapist forums probably have more like-minded people. It does have better UI but the combat is equally bad in both, so no, it's not significantly better.

 

[Vibalist]

They do if the devs aren't retarded.

Spoiler

They're all retarded. Most RPGs have shit combat, including isometric tb ap ones like Fallout.

Oh I never claimed Fallout has good combat, both F1&2 and Arcanum had really bad combat despite being TB.

And no, you can't mix the two. True RPGs by their very nature can't be dependent upon player skill. And you can't have a good skill based combat system if you have retarded shit like shooting enemy straight in the head and slashing them over and over again (Morrowderp) and still missing because the developers thought it would be a fun idea to mix stat based RPG concepts (chance to hit, critical strikes) with first person combat where supposedly if something is between your crosshairs and you pull the trigger, it dies.

Goddamnit motherfucker, this was already addressed:

Another common obstacle is the RPG devs insistence on thinking about real time combat in terms of numbers. This is a hold-over from tactical RPG combat, where numbers play a big role, but in real time combat, having numbers related to hitpoints, damage, weapons and so on change throughout the game as you level up just really messes with balance and the mechanics. What they should do instead, in my opinion, is have the player gain new abilities, for example, that they can use in combat, while their numbers stay the same. Enemies would also have various collections of those abilities depending on their target difficulty, and then the combat system could be designed around the overall set of those.

In short, a FPS/TPS action RPG doesn't need to go the Morrowind route with stats dicating your to-hit chance. Make the stats do something else, like add new abilities. This way we get to level up while we can still play the game like a traditional FPS.

Dark Messiah of Might and Magic, for instance, did this. Stats mattered because they added new abilities for the player to fuck around with, but winning a fight was still completely dependent on your own reflexes.

 

[DalekFlay]

And no, you can't mix the two. True RPGs by their very nature can't be dependent upon player skill.

Welcome to "What is an RPG?!?!" Your host this week, TheGreatOne! Give him a hand, everyone!

 

[TheGreatOne]

Ever wondered why some times there's "A", "S" or even "FPS" in front of the term "RPG"? Yeah, me neither. Great wisdom from some guys sig

Spoiler

Let me educate you a bit there. A TRUE tm RPG is a game where character skills override player skills.
Therefore, for example, Fallout is a TRUE tm RPG while Morrowind is not.

Another common obstacle is the RPG devs insistence on thinking about real time combat in terms of numbers. This is a hold-over from tactical RPG combat, where numbers play a big role, but in real time combat, having numbers related to hitpoints, damage, weapons and so on change throughout the game as you level up just really messes with balance and the mechanics. What they should do instead, in my opinion, is have the player gain new abilities, for example, that they can use in combat, while their numbers stay the same

In short, a FPS/TPS action RPG doesn't need to go the Morrowind route with stats dicating your to-hit chance. Make the stats do something else, like add new abilities. This way we get to level up while we can still play the game like a traditional FPS.

So your solution to the problem is to have stats/character attributes influence fewer aspects of gameplay? In a RPG? What's the point of having a strength and a dexterity attribute if a warrior and a mage can just as easily hit and damage an opponent with an axe, to the same effect? That's the core concept of RPGs, seeing numbers go up.

 

[tuluse]

Ever wondered why some times there's "A", "S" or even "FPS" in front of the term "RPG"? Yeah, me neither.

Because genres are not meant to be definitive buckets every single creation of earth easily fits in. They're just quick descriptors to help people find things they're interested in.

 

[Lhynn]

I kinda like my RPGs to play differently. If some of them are player reflex based so be it, they can still be good RPGs despite of the gameplay TheGreatOne
I believe a true RPG is the one that lets me play the character i want to play, in the way i want to play it, and i also believe the quality of any RPG often depends on how well i can depict my character.

tuluse God dammit, ninjaed.

 

[DalekFlay]

Ever wondered why some times there's "A", "S" or even "FPS" in front of the term "RPG"? Yeah, me neither. Great wisdom from some guys sig

I think if one were to try and define what an RPG REALLY IS then player skill versus character skill would be an important distinction. However since I feel trying to define what an RPG REALLY IS is fucking retarded, it matters little in the end.

 

[TheGreatOne]

I have a System Shock 2 avatar, I'm one of the good guys

 

[CyberP]

Meh, I really value motor skills in my RPG. I love a good blend of player skill-based and stat-based, it's like the best of both worlds for me in the rare few that get it right.

 

[TheGreatOne]

How is that best of the both worlds? You don't get a real test of your twitch reflexes and ability to come up with strategies on fly (eSports and fighting game tournaments) and you're not playing a full blooded RPG. You're playing against bots. RNG has no place in competitive games (games that are truly skill based). It's either Knights of the Chalice or Quake 3, you can't have it both ways.

 

[Lhynn]

How is that best of the both worlds? You don't get a real test of your twitch reflexes and ability to come up with strategies on fly (eSports and fighting game tournaments) and you're not playing a full blooded RPG. You're playing against bots. RNG has no place in competitive games (games that are truly skill based). It's either Knights of the Chalice or Quake 3, you can't have it both ways.

Why not?

 

[CyberP]

How is that best of the both worlds? You don't get a real test of your twitch reflexes and ability to come up with strategies on fly (eSports and fighting game tournaments) and you're not playing a full blooded RPG. You're playing against bots. RNG has no place in competitive games (games that are truly skill based). It's either Knights of the Chalice or Quake 3, you can't have it both ways.

Deus Ex. 1st half of the game as combat player= "full blooded RPG" (or not in TheGreatOne's opinion) . Second half of the game= FPS with much RPG greatness, in addition to aspects unique to DX. Once you upgrade weapons skills the combat is not stat-based any more for the most part.

 

[DalekFlay]

The trick is to make stats matter enough despite player skill that it still feels like an RPG. Deus Ex does that. A lot of others don't.

 

[TheGreatOne]

Deus Ex is undeniably one of the best 3D RPGs of all time, up there with the likes of SS2, DS, Wiz8, Nocturne, P4 and VTMB, but it's not good at making the case for what you advocate as the combat is a bit clunky (even after you've upgraded your skills and weapons), AI is brainless and enemies easy, at least once you've done with the full fledged RPG portion of the game. It rewards outside the box thinking, but it's not a skill based game. Blasting guards in the face with shotgun as they charge towards you guy after guy is no Counter Strike/Quakeworld. Hell, it's not even Doom/Quake (single player).
If you're going to make a skill based action RPG, it must have good gameplay. Dark/Demon Souls succeeds in that (although there's room for improvement), Deus Ex doesn't (*). I tried to urge people to play DX on another forum and some people who've played a shit ton of shooters gave up on it pretty soon, stating bad/outdated gameplay (and even writing and reactivity, due to guards not noticing corpses) as a reason why they quit playing. Granted I became butthurt, started hating those people and left the scene, but still the point remains.
(*) though I personally prefer Deus Ex though due to nostalgia, atmosphere/music, story and reactivity. But that's really the same argument you'd use to defend Arcanum (no, I'm not implying that DX's gameplay is THAT bad). Video games are about gameplay.

 

[Roguey]

What core gameplay? Wandering around a desert aimlessly shooting with guns that feel like shit? Borderline retarded did that better.

Hmm.

DX and SS2 have much better level design and better RPG systems, VTMB has better C&C in dialogue and how the world treats your character depending on your rac and mental&social skills.

Okay, you're an idiot and a discussion with you would be unproductive.

 

[TheGreatOne]

Okay, you're an idiot and a discussion with you would be unproductive.

Coming from some one who idolizes a designer who has never once in his life made a single great game, that's just humorous. Although I guess Sawyer really did try his hardest doing Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance and Lionheart.

 

[Roguey]

Although I guess Sawyer really did try his hardest doing Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance and Lionheart.

His contributions to those were extremely minor.

There hasn't been a single great RPG so his record is as good as anyone else's if not better since New Vegas came close.

 

[TheGreatOne]

Keep telling yourself that. He also did some work for Gauntlet: Seven Sorrows

There hasn't been a single great RPG so his record is as good as anyone else's if not better since New Vegas came close.

Games aren't judged on a theoretical level. They are judged on practical level: what previous games of the same genre did and what's technically possible to achieve with the hardware it's running on. There are various RPGs that are great, he had no part in any of them. New Vegas is ascended mediocrity (like Icewind Dale, the best games he ever did), not even a flawed gem let alone a great RPG. It might've been the best RPG of 2010, but that's hardly impressive considering that during the previous year KOTC and P4 were released and the year after we got Dark Souls (and some lesser but solid titles like D4). If NV had been stand alone title it might be more well recieved, but seeing as it tries to live up to the original game, it just falls short.