RPGs and levelling up

[vertigo]

OK, after typing this, it seems I've gone off on a big tangent, but I take into issue things that I feel are wrong with console RPGs in general, still, after over 20 years of trying. RPGs need to do something different. Levelling up is BORING AS HELL and while I love the stories (even though they're often the same bloody story over and over), I can't be arsed to play RPGs any more because they're essentially just levelling up and doing the same thing over and over. You get the odd different sort of RPG like Earthbound or Mario Story, but a lot of the time it's the standard "kid finds a sword/stick/tree, buggers something up, the world's in danger, you have to level up for 40 hours to finish the game" type affair, and TBQH, I'm ****ing bored of it.
As I said, RPGs need to do something different, to present themselves differently, to at least show the enemies on the screen and have random encounters as a rare thing perhaps odds of roughly each 1/10 fights being random, as random battles were originally only put in, as I believe it, because hardware didn't have enough power to handle that many sprites and locations wandering around a map, now that systems are powerful enough, random battles should really be a random thing, instead of an every 10 seconds thing. Off all the turn-based RPGs I've played, I'd say that Chrono Trigger and Earthbound got it about right, some randoms but mainly enemies that you could see approaching. Why didn't Square learn from the excellent CT the best way to go instead of reverting back to the tried and tired FF random battles sytem?
I think RPG developers need to do something to fix it, and balance levelling up better, possibly even do away with levels and have your character learn things instead, like spells, or earn/buy weapons that power your character up, or maybe some sort of fighting skills test every now and then (again, like in CT where you fight Spekkio at the End of Time), something, anything, really.
I dearly love RPGs, but I really haven't got the time or inclination to play one now, the problem is that I'm sure I would love the stories if 90% of the rest of the game wasn't so ****ing mundane.
Although the popularity of FF and DQ in Japan would appear to prove otherwise...
Anyone?

[Ady]

Panzer Dragoon Saga's skill-based level system was exemplary. You didn't level up through enduring tedium, you did so by fighting well.

[Treble]

I agree with Vertigo and Ady: I see no need for the archaic method of levelling-up, and think the western, console-owning public have got in right by avoiding them, in the main.

I know it's only opinion, but in mine, old-skool RPGs of this sort should be the exception, and games with a more modern, progressive system (like PDS and the forthcoming Fable) should become the norm.

Traditional RPGs should still have their place, as they entertain a lot of people, but it would be nice if 'RPG' had wider, more interesting connotations than it currently has. When we hear 'platform game', it can apply to anything from Dynamite Headdy to Mario64. It'd be cool if the transition from 2D to 3D had widened the possiblities of RPGs more than it has.

[Ady]

Traditional RPGs should still have their place, as they entertain a lot of people, but it would be nice if 'RPG' had wider, more interesting connotations than it currently has. When we hear 'platform game', it can apply to anything from Dynamite Headdy to Mario64. It'd be cool if the transition from 2D to 3D had widened the possiblities of RPGs more than it has.

To be honest, as much as I love RPGs, the genre itself has been stale for a long time. Marry the discussed levelling system to very familiar play mechanics and some banal story about a spiky hiared teenage amnesiac (and friends) with a big sword saving the world, and you've pretty much summed up most console RPGs.

I really do think its about time RPG makers started to experiement with the genre. And is there any reason why EVERY RPG has to be sword 'n sorcery crossed with neo futurism?

[Treble]

I think this is a wider issue in gaming, in that developers struggle to deal with complex emotions when creating an entire world in which you interact. Basic 'save the world' scenarios are easy to manage, as there is a central focus that polarises the emotions of the characters involved. Even in something like GTA3, you are part of a sub-strata of society with its own codes and structures, defining and limiting the emotional interaction therein.

Writing characters which display real, proper and varied emotional range is the remit of a proper author, and very few games have the benefit of a proper writer on board. When the canvas is an entire world, the strain on the development team's writing skill is all too apparent.

[Madbury]

I agree with most of the points raised. But I'd like to highlight an even worse offender

Golden Sun and its Djinn system. I can't be arsed to play this game anymore as all I do is keep setting my Djinn so that I can use the really powerful summons' in battle. The battles are always over really quickly and then I just hang about a bit and reset my Djinn, what the hell is the point in that. I doesn't require and strategy or skill, just a lot of patience.


BUT there is hope. The 2 most enjoyable rpg experiences for me have been Panzer Dragoon Saga and to a lesser extent Phantasy Star Online PDS for all the reasons already given above and in other threads (check retro forum). And PSO, because the game is levelling up and showing off which is great. What sonic team have done is remove the endless chatting and story development and gone for a simple who can attain the highest level and find the coolest items match. And as such it works very well indeed.

[Ady]

Writing characters which display real, proper and varied emotional range is the remit of a proper author, and very few games have the benefit of a proper writer on board. When the canvas is an entire world, the strain on the development team's writing skill is all too apparent.

Very true. Maybe devcos need to collaborate with authors to conceptualise their game plots? Why not have an in-house writer? It can only serve to make game stories more sophisticated, as well as bringing gaming to an even wider audience perhaps.

[Concept]

I think this is a wider issue in gaming, in that developers struggle to deal with complex emotions when creating an entire world in which you interact. Basic 'save the world' scenarios are easy to manage, as there is a central focus that polarises the emotions of the characters involved. Even in something like GTA3, you are part of a sub-strata of society with its own codes and structures, defining and limiting the emotional interaction therein.

Writing characters which display real, proper and varied emotional range is the remit of a proper author, and very few games have the benefit of a proper writer on board. When the canvas is an entire world, the strain on the development team's writing skill is all too apparent.

Yes. But having a qualified writer doesn't always confirm a great set of characters. I remember In Cold Blood being championed for having a full time writer on board, yet it didn't exactly turn out great.

Speaking of which, this is a problem which is beginning to disturb me more and more in the videogaming industry; outside input being proclaimed as the be all and end all of finished production. Take the PS2 version of Splinter Cell for instance, in the credits, the opening cinematic intro takes the front row space on the credit sheet.

Should outside input be worthy of greater recognition than possibly the game itself merits? Personally, I don't believe the answer to improving characters and stories within gaming lies at separating development of such elements individually away from the actual production of a game. In an ideal world, a director or a writer would have active and full co-operation with the game's designers - A joint project, or a meeting of minds so to speak. Time constraints, and the cultural apathy towards videogames will prevent that, unfortunately, from probably happening any time soon.

I remember when the Wachoski brothers met up with Hideo Kojima and discussed making a game together. Although I understand they are huge anime/videogame fans, such a plan never panned out.

It would be great to see how minds from various mediums would be able to truly work together. Imagine a Miyamoto/Miyazaki or a Mikami/Woo co- produced game?

Co-operation and integration is perhaps the way forward in achieveing greater emotional depth within videogames.

Ironically though, the most emotional game I've ever had the pleasure of playing, actually had very little spoken story or plot development in at all. Most of the characterisation was built through a single and carefully considered gameplay dynamic, and how that dynamic interacted with the environment. In this case, the emotion created in the title was of a direct result of pure and genius game design.

And that game?

ICO.

[Tig]

... it would be nice if 'RPG' had wider, more interesting connotations than it currently has. When we hear 'platform game', it can apply to anything from Dynamite Headdy to Mario64.

This is why I get annoyed when people try to push games like Zelda out of the 'RPG' catergory. To me, the 'Zelda' system of character development through item collection is much more interesting and varied than tedious levelling up.
Some people are determined to make sure that the RPG genre consists only of games which feature turn-based random battles and statistics.
But isn't that like omitting SM64 from the 'platformer' genre because it allows you to run in circles?

[tssk]

as random battles were originally only put in, as I believe it, because hardware didn't have enough power to handle that many sprites and locations wandering around a map, now that systems are powerful enough, random battles should really be a random thing, instead of an every 10 seconds thing.

Except of course that Lufia 2 on the Snes managed it. Hell, most of the Ultima games on the C64/Apple 2 managed to do it in 64K!

[Magnakai]

as random battles were originally only put in, as I believe it, because hardware didn't have enough power to handle that many sprites and locations wandering around a map, now that systems are powerful enough, random battles should really be a random thing, instead of an every 10 seconds thing.

Except of course that Lufia 2 on the Snes managed it. Hell, most of the Ultima games on the C64/Apple 2 managed to do it in 64K!

You shouldn't even have a swirlyeffectscueeeeeebattlescreenandFIGHT! thing anymore. It should be seamless.
It's the same reason why the same movies are made over and over again. People know what they like and like what they know. At least, that's the "despairing at the world" answer.
It seems pretty obvious to me that the RPG genre is possibly the most stale out of any available today, excluding possibly the pinball sim market.
The few things that are archaic and infuriating holdbacks from the days of yore are probably the most identifiable things about RPGs. If a game comes along which fixes these "problems", it's derided as not being an RPG.
I'm sick of genres anyway. Let's destroy gaming! Yay!

[vertigo]

as random battles were originally only put in, as I believe it, because hardware didn't have enough power to handle that many sprites and locations wandering around a map, now that systems are powerful enough, random battles should really be a random thing, instead of an every 10 seconds thing.

Except of course that Lufia 2 on the Snes managed it. Hell, most of the Ultima games on the C64/Apple 2 managed to do it in 64K!

[/quote]I was referring more to the days of NES where they could hardly handle any sprites as memory locations were so small, but yes, see, proper coding like Ultima as you mention means no need for this magical appearing enemies rubbish, which for some reason still prevails on systems as powerful as this generation.

You shouldn't even have a swirlyeffectscueeeeeebattlescreenandFIGHT! thing anymore. It should be seamless.

This is why I endlessly heap praise on Chrono Trigger. You see the enemy, you get close enough, it goes PING! and away you go. Surely it's not so hard for disc-based systems to keep the battle engine in memory all the time, is it? Seeing as that's the most used bit of the game, why make it have to load each and every time? The PSX version of FF6 was made even worse by the interminably slow loading in and out of battles.