quote:The players can't very well design the bad guys and supporting cast, though.
Obviously not. I'm not sure what your point is here. BB didn't put forth any bad guys or supporting cast-- he posted his three main characters.
This implies to me that the players of this game are going to be forced to choose between premade characters, as is done in many CRPGs.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
When I play that sort of game, I am looking for a story that will keep me interested. To that end, there usually must be something original in the plot, because contrived devices that I've already seen will not keep me interested. The fact that there have been gates in other games will not matter so long as the plot is different from those other games. I see very little here to tell me about the actual plot, so I can't see a way to judge it's originality.
posted
Scott, have you played any Japanese CRPGs? I'd imagine that players get ALL THREE main characters, and the plot revolves around their personal stories and/or love affairs.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Do you mean that (using Blayne's RPG as an example) players would get to choose if Nerwen and Felix hooked up? Or even Felix and Zelik?
That would make it slightly more interesting...but I think it still violates a fundamental purpose of RPGs. It ceases to become an interactive session as the DM railroads the players into his own plot threads.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scott: in the best CRPGs (read: Fallout series, Planescape: Torment, Knights of the Old Republic, etc.), you DO have that level of freedom. In most Japanese (meaning "bad") CRPGs, however, they do not. The romantic entanglements and/or villainous decisions are all made in advance as part of the plot, and the player has very little control over the storyline's direction.
And, yes, this is completely at odds with a "real" RPG; there's no real "roleplaying" involved. But for some reason, something is considered a RPG on a computer if it includes characters with statistics and levels that improve, as opposed to roles that are played. Don't ask me why.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Tom, even in those RPGs you enumerate as the "best," you don't have control of the scope of the overall story. The Nameless One is still the Nameless One regardless of whether you make him a fighter or a rogue, and regardless of whether you make out with the girl with the tail or the girl with the wings. The storyline is still essentially linear in its progression. You have a little more freedom than, say, Neverwinter Nights, but it's still very much on rails. The "freedom" you're lauding so much is essentially two things: (1) more control over character statistics, and (2) greater side quest availability (and broader side quest scope).
All CRPGs offer a "main" storyline that is basically on rails. They differ only in the extent to which they force you to follow it. I think what makes one CRPG better than the next is not the amount of control you have over your character's naughty bits, but rather, how compelling that linear story is. Big winners here are Planescape: Torment and the two Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga games.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
You want a good computer based RPG, you need to go to MMORPGs, in my opinion. And even then you need to stick to "in character" servers.
There have been some linear games that have been pretty good, though. Vampire: Bloodlines was pretty decent.
Of course, I also thought you were talking about pen-and-paper rpg's... since the computer variety are really not really "rpgs" in my mind, at least not in the true sense.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
That depends entirely on your criteria for "good." I trust a game designer to create a believable NPC more than I trust a random person to roleplay one successfully. In general, when I think of MMORPGs, I think of this:
quote:Warrior stops to bitch about noobie priests and hunters stealing his aggro then comes back and hits your ice trapped mob (this is a warrior thing, they believe you trap mobs so it's easier for them to hit them). Your pet is probably dead by now so you run up and either FD/Freeze trap the mob he was on, or just offtank him till warrior and priest finish with other one. Then you all focus on remaining mob and group wipe averted. Expect the priest to /whisper you thanks after this and the warrior to warn "you two noobs that you better not roll on any weapons or armour but hes still rolling on cloth and guns because he needs money for his mount".
And this from a forum where the level of discourse is generally much higher than that. On an "in character" server you might get that with slightly more flowery language.
I think non-MMO CRPGS can be excellent games without meeting the strict definition of "roleplaying game" that you, Tom, and Scott seem to be using. In other words, I'm not too concerned if you want to tell me that Shin Megami Tensei: Digital Devil Saga 2 (an entirely linear Japanese console RPG with comparatively rote gameplay) fails as an RPG because you don't have much in the way of significant choices to make -- but it's still a very good game. From a story perspective, it's as good as Planescape: Torment.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
See, if you want to call it a "character based game" or a "story based game" or a "strategic character game" or a "leveled character game", then you can apply what standards you will.
When you take out the idea of "roleplaying" and replace it with "choosing from a finite set of options", you end up with one of two things. A) a bad roleplaying game, or B) a game (good or bad) that is not a roleplaying game at all.
MMOs are the closest thing computers have found to true roleplaying, in my opinion, but they are still so very far off. All they have done is increase the number of finite options to such a point you don't notice immediately that you don't have true freedom of action. Plus, your actions have no permanent effect or consequences.
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the difference stems from the fact that D&D was developed and popularized in North America. This informs our understanding of what an RPG is. The same is not true in Japan.
Characters in Japanese CRPGs are more like actors in a play. You certainly take on the role of the protagonist in the game, and that role is largely scripted for you.
By your standard, there's no such thing as a computer or console RPG, since none of them qualify for the "roleplaying" moniker. If you want to call them something else, you're welcome to invent and popularize your own moniker, but I do think that what are presently called Japanese CRPGs belong in the same overall category as Planescape: Torment. I'll even switch to your preferred moniker once it becomes the accepted term for the category.
It's kind of weird to hear this coming out of my own mouth, as I don't play all that many Japanese RPGs, and generally prefer the BioWare/Black Isle variety. However, I don't think that North American CRPGs are inherently better, unlike what Tom has been saying. The clichés are just different.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
quote:The "freedom" you're lauding so much is essentially two things: (1) more control over character statistics, and (2) greater side quest availability (and broader side quest scope).
Well, almost. In all the CRPGs I cited, you ALSO have the limited freedom to, while still being railroaded down the main plot due to the limitations of a pre-created scenario, make fairly "important" choices that determine how key elements of the game play out. One's experience in P:T, for example, is VERY different if you choose to be an evil, self-righteous mage versus a saintly fighter. I don't think a CRPG has managed yet to give a player complete freedom -- for obvious reasons -- but Japanese CRPGs do a particularly poor job.
In my opinion, Japanese CRPGs are essentially novels that require small turn-based strategy games to be played before each page is turned. American CRPGs often have the grace to recognize that they're not really RPGs at all, and at least throw in the occasional sop to adventure gaming.
quote:I don't think that North American CRPGs are inherently better...
Well, I do. Of course, I also think MOST products of Japanese culture suck major eggs, with the possible exception of some foodstuffs.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
okay making a completely non-linear game with the ability to role play every facet is impossible for only a SINGLE coder and graphics artist. At best I can have side quests that add story and flesh out the characters through dialague and scripting choices but I'm pretty sure that even with my best choise everything will end the same with the "good guy" beating the "bad guys"
IP: Logged |
posted
Oh, I'm not actually arguing that you need to make it non-linear. You said from the beginning that you were making a Japanese-style RPG, and I don't expect much in the way of roleplaying from those. But I STILL want to know why you think adding gates makes something inherently original; I want to know what the addition of the gates will add to the gameplay and storyline.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Raw fish from Japan really is much better than raw fish from Kansas.
Trust me.
I admit being rather bored with CRPGs. And twinky's notes on MMORPG's fit my feelings to a tee. (I'm also biased because I can't play them on a dial up... It's a good thing.)
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Pardon my ignorance on this subject, but has anyone programmed a game that "learns" yet, and, if so, what capabilities are we talking about in the program's abilities?
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
some games primarily FPS's will have AI that adapts to the tactics used by the player.
Its original in my mind in the degree that I am using a Gate system to allow player to explore different worlds and civilizations as the quest goes on and grows and complexity.
Also in theory I want each planet visited to be fully explorable but that may take awhile and I'm thinking really hard on how to make it so that a player doesnt waste hours exploring a cave with no point.
IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: American CRPGs
Incidentally, BioWare is a Canadian company. I thought I'd point that out since you mentioned to Knights of the Old Republic. Black Isle, however, was based in Los Angeles. I'm sure I don't need to tell you that the latter was responsible for PS:T.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: I don't think a CRPG has managed yet to give a player complete freedom -- for obvious reasons -- but Japanese CRPGs do a particularly poor job.
In my opinion, Japanese CRPGs are essentially novels that require small turn-based strategy games to be played before each page is turned.
I understand this. What I'm not getting is why this makes them bad games. I don't think gameplay freedom is a necessary condition for a game to be good.
Of course, I think that the best games of the last couple of years were Shadow of the Colossus and Resident Evil 4. Atmosphere and cohesiveness are worth a lot in my books, more so than story freedom.
quote:Originally posted by TomDavidson: Of course, I also think MOST products of Japanese culture suck major eggs, with the possible exception of some foodstuffs.
Insofar as this is true, it's also true of MOST products of American and Canadian culture. So I'm still not following the inherent "betterness" of all things North American that you seem to be suggesting.
If you were to say that the best North American CRPGs are better than the best Japanese CRPGs, I'd probably agree -- and I definitely prefer North American ones as a general rule. I don't, however, agree that it's true in the general case. There are plenty of relatively uninspired North American RPGs. As I said, the clichés are just different; you simply prefer our clichés because you, like me, are culturally North American. This often translates to a preference for gallant dragon-slaying heroes, power-mad wizards, and skulking stealthy rogues over slender 17-year-old boys with large swords and angst issues.
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: Pardon my ignorance on this subject, but has anyone programmed a game that "learns" yet, and, if so, what capabilities are we talking about in the program's abilities?
Yes, there have been multiple games that used some sort of adaptive "AI." The most obvious example is Black & White, where you played a god and could "train" your animal avatar to perform various tasks by rewarding some behaviours and punishing others. The techniques the developers used were pretty basic -- the AI was just a decision tree, but it was reinforced by the player's "training," meaning that certain paths through the tree were weighted preferentially. Other kinds of more "advanced" AI -- neural networks, genetic algorithms -- take hundreds or thousands of iterations (or generations in the latter case) to "learn" anything of consequence, making them somewhat impractical for a game where they would learn by processing player input.
Posts: 10886 | Registered: Feb 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
twinky, you're right. By my standard there is no such thing as a true computer or console rpg. They don't exist yet, though computer programming may some day evolve to the level where they might.
The term "roleplaying game" has two entirely separate meanings. Either you are discussing a "pen and paper roleplaying game" or a "computer/console roleplaying game". The two are very, very different, as you are well aware I'm sure.
When I read Blayne's first post, being a pen and paper gamer, I understood him to mean an rpg in that sense. Someone else who does not game with pen and paper but is instead immersed in computer/console gaming would understand him differently. Thus, some confusion by many of us.
It's more a matter of context than anything else, I think. If I'm listening to someone talk about computer/console rpgs, I know to expect one type of experience. If they're discussing pen and paper, I'll expect another. If they say "roleplaying" I'm going to naturally assume the meaning I'm most familiar with, though I understand others will take a different connotation.
It's like saying "animation" - and not differentiating between Monsters Inc (computer animation), Claymation (stop motion animation), or Snow White (hand-drawn animation). Just confusing, is all.
(Edit: In fact, strange as it may sound, if I'm talking about a computer or console game, I'll call it an "RPG" almost exclusively, while I'll refer to a pen and paper game as a "roleplaying game" more often. I think calling it an RPG divorces it a bit from what those letters actually stand for and makes it a little more palatable.)
Posts: 3960 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
Blayne Bradley
unregistered
posted
Okay I got a rough draft of the script, not very much I wrote it in story mode aka as a novel.
About 2 pages and doesnt go very far maybe 10 minutes of game play but it sorta serves as an introduction to the game, but the problem is I wrote it using a type writter at school so it may take me a while to copy down into word.
IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wall Bash]](graemlins/wallbash.gif)
