Jump to content

NO-GOs in RPGs


MisterIceTeaPeach
 Share

Recommended Posts

Forced level scalings.  In Xenoblade Chronicles, if you're 5 levels under, you will never hit because they punish you by making your dodge rate and your hit rate really bad on purpose.  This was an intentional design despite your current stats are similar to most enemies.  Then 1 level up later you're completely demolishing the entire enemy foe.

I was much more happier with it in X where this wasn't an issue at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

19 hours ago, kingddd said:

Forced level scalings.  In Xenoblade Chronicles, if you're 5 levels under, you will never hit because they punish you by making your dodge rate and your hit rate really bad on purpose.  This was an intentional design despite your current stats are similar to most enemies.  Then 1 level up later you're completely demolishing the entire enemy foe.

I was much more happier with it in X where this wasn't an issue at all.

Yeah, I can agree with this.

Though thinking back to Xenoblade X, it's probably the worst offender of RNG item drops ever. On my current run I have been literally running in circles for hours waiting for those stupid White Cometites to get generated. 

I still like that game though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, PeaceRibbon said:

Yeah, I can agree with this.

Though thinking back to Xenoblade X, it's probably the worst offender of RNG item drops ever. On my current run I have been literally running in circles for hours waiting for those stupid White Cometites to get generated. 

I still like that game though.

X is is way less offender of RNG item drops compared to other RPGs I've played considering you can manipulate item drops very easily by targeting appendages, getting treasure sensors which you can double the rate of item drops and white cometites pretty much become a fixed item drop once you setup your probes easily.  So I don't think X is as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, kingddd said:

X is is way less offender of RNG item drops compared to other RPGs I've played considering you can manipulate item drops very easily by targeting appendages, getting treasure sensors which you can double the rate of item drops and white cometites pretty much become a fixed item drop once you setup your probes easily.  So I don't think X is as bad as everyone makes it out to be.

The problem is that X has required missions and missions that will lock you out of content until they are completed if you start them that have these elements.  This type of thing should never be tied to these kinds of missions it's fine for the optional mission it is not fine for friendship (because they must be completed once started) and required missions. Also some people don't have any treasure sensors or targeting appendages I certainly didn't... (though it's been a while still play the game but I don't remember using anything like this)... 

Keep in mind that I still like X better than the original but this is by far it's the worst feature. 

Edited by Locke087
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Locke087 said:

The problem is that X has required missions and missions that will lock you out of content until they are completed if you start them that have these elements.  This type of thing should never be tied to these kinds of missions it's fine for the optional mission it is not fine for friendship (because they must be completed once started) and required missions. Also some people don't have any treasure sensors or targeting appendages I certainly didn't... (though it's been a while still play the game but I don't remember using anything like this)... 

Keep in mind that I still like X better than the original but this is by far it's the worst feature. 

targetting appendages is where you lock target a certain body parts onto an enemy instead of just hitting the enemy.  In X, you can target legs and arms and other body parts of a monster and destroying them gives you a higher rate of getting a specific item when you beat a monster.  So really you can already influence the drop rate of items a lot more.  I don't think it's a perfect system either but at least you can influence the RNG rate then the original game where you just hope you get it which was 5 times worse imo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, kingddd said:

targetting appendages is where you lock target a certain body parts onto an enemy instead of just hitting the enemy.  In X, you can target legs and arms and other body parts of a monster and destroying them gives you a higher rate of getting a specific item when you beat a monster.  So really you can already influence the drop rate of items a lot more.  I don't think it's a perfect system either but at least you can influence the RNG rate then the original game where you just hope you get it which was 5 times worse imo.

Yeah I think did that it still took forever though.  But if I remember right in the original I don't think any collection quests are required for progression...  but like X it's been long time since I played it so maybe it did. That's why it was so much more of a problem for me in X at least if I recall correctly.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Locke087 said:

Yeah I think did that it still took forever though.  But if I remember right in the original I don't think any collection quests are required for progression...  but like X it's been long time since I played it so maybe it did. That's why it was so much more of a problem for me in X at least if I recall correctly.

In the original there are probably stuff like find the keys and stuff very minor but even then in X for story required progression there are probably like maybe 3 or 4 quests that have required gathering just to beat the story and they don't take very long either.  I've replayed the game 9 times and beaten the story that many times already and it's not as big of a problem as most people make it out.

Edited by kingddd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dragging came first into mind. I don't like when I am wasting time on a RPG doing something that could've been perfectly avoidable and the game could've just jumped to the conclusion already, but it forces me to go through boring, time consuming chores, usually with little or no plot relevance, because the designers didn't think about it enough or they wanted to fill space with something unnecessary as an excuse.

It ranges from excessive fetch quests that make you go find A, but then you learn you need B, C, D and so on (like in Lufia, where you're supposed to find a NPC that should be in the A spot, but then you get there and another NPC gives you the "your princess is in another castle" treatment, so you cross the world, facing repetitive random encounters and all, go to the place he indicated and find out your target conveniently just left minutes ago, so you have to go through another needless expedition that has no excuse for existing ingame) to needlessly complicating the game with complex elements that could've been simpler and more straightforward or not exist at all when they don't really add much to the experience (as a non-RPG example, because I couldn't remember one that fits: like the part in AJ 4-3 where you have to point how Trucy's magic trick happened because she refuses to do so for duh I won't reveal my tricks even to help our case, even though she's your assistant and it is for the best interests of the defendant that the trick is explained, and you also have to go through an absurd mini game thrice where you have to listen to a song and point out where a certain character stopped playing the piano with both hands, using your ears alone as your guide to pointing that out. Compare that case to 6-2, where something similar happens but the game goes straight to the point and doesn't waste your time with mini games more than necessary).

 

tl;dr Occam's Razor should totally be a thing in games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 4/21/2017 at 9:39 AM, kingddd said:

Forced level scalings.  In Xenoblade Chronicles, if you're 5 levels under, you will never hit because they punish you by making your dodge rate and your hit rate really bad on purpose.  This was an intentional design despite your current stats are similar to most enemies.  Then 1 level up later you're completely demolishing the entire enemy foe.

I was much more happier with it in X where this wasn't an issue at all.

Lol yeah, I remember SMT games did that a lot where stats had virtually no effect. Here's Persona 3's formula

Dealing damage to a level 25 enemy, all other things equal:

Level 1-19: 100 damage
Level 20: 100 damage
Level 21: 110 damage
Level 22: 125 damage
Level 23: 145 damage
Leevl 24: 170 damage
Level 25: 200 damage
Level 26: 230 damage
Level 27: 255 damage
Level 28: 275 damage
Level 29: 290 damage
Level 30: 300 damage
Level 31-99: 300 damage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, kingddd said:

In the original there are probably stuff like find the keys and stuff very minor but even then in X for story required progression there are probably like maybe 3 or 4 quests that have required gathering just to beat the story and they don't take very long either.  I've replayed the game 9 times and beaten the story that many times already and it's not as big of a problem as most people make it out.

But don't you think this game could only be improved by losing the RNG on its pick ups I know it can be mitigated but it shouldn't be there in the first place. Games shouldn't try to waste peoples time, I know value proposition and that stuff is a big thing for some people  but for someone like me who has a limited time to play games this kind of stuff is aggravating.

Don't get me wrong I enjoyed X and the Original, and I'm looking forward to 2.  But I really hope that in 2 they take the feedback that they received and make sure the game doesn't waste your time (and a has better story).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rapier said:

It ranges from excessive fetch quests that make you go find A, but then you learn you need B, C, D and so on (like in Lufia, where you're supposed to find a NPC that should be in the A spot, but then you get there and another NPC gives you the "your princess is in another castle" treatment, so you cross the world, facing repetitive random encounters and all, go to the place he indicated and find out your target conveniently just left minutes ago, so you have to go through another needless expedition that has no excuse for existing ingame) to needlessly complicating the game with complex elements that could've been simpler and more straightforward or not exist at all when they don't really add much to the experience

Nice Mario reference.

The mandatory General White search in Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door is just what you described. Plus you have to the guy on the head like ten times to wake him up once you finally discover where he is. And for the completionist, there is a side quest that has you do pretty much the same thing all over again.

PM: TTYD, though in many ways superior to its predecessor, was a bit bogged down by backtracking. And if you thought the General White thing was bad, Twilight Town is even worse. Not to mention Keelhaul Key and Boggly Woods both have smaller, but still noticeable backtracking segments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My two cents -

Level-ups are a thing of the past. Wanna make a deep and strategic game? Then do it. Level-ups have never added any depth to anything. (Unless they have, in which case please tell me.) Best case scenario, you choose what stat goes up when you level-up. Although the battles in recent Paper Mario games are too unrewarding and easy, I feel like IS was onto something by removing the grind entirely.

I hate output randomness. Anything that can be accomplished by luck or grinding could be accomplished with skill, if only the devs would trust players more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Locke087 said:

But don't you think this game could only be improved by losing the RNG on its pick ups I know it can be mitigated but it shouldn't be there in the first place. Games shouldn't try to waste peoples time, I know value proposition and that stuff is a big thing for some people  but for someone like me who has a limited time to play games this kind of stuff is aggravating.

Don't get me wrong I enjoyed X and the Original, and I'm looking forward to 2.  But I really hope that in 2 they take the feedback that they received and make sure the game doesn't waste your time (and a has better story).

Oh don't get me wrong I don't like RNG drops in any RPGs but if you can actually manipulate the drop rates then I don't have as much problems with it since you still can control the rate increase and decrease.  Unlike say something like in Earthbound where if you want to get Poo's best weapon you need 1 in 128 chances which took me hours to get.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Zera said:

My two cents -

Level-ups are a thing of the past. Wanna make a deep and strategic game? Then do it. Level-ups have never added any depth to anything. (Unless they have, in which case please tell me.) Best case scenario, you choose what stat goes up when you level-up. Although the battles in recent Paper Mario games are too unrewarding and easy, I feel like IS was onto something by removing the grind entirely.

I hate output randomness. Anything that can be accomplished by luck or grinding could be accomplished with skill, if only the devs would trust players more.

Leveling can be a nice way to put a cap on a person's ability to increase their skills but placing an easily view able limit on what the person is capable of doing. IE, seeing that I cannot increase my sneak more is a nice way to actually demonstrate that I cannot increase my sneak more without having to notify the player every time they sneak that it cannot increase, or requiring them to view a menu to check if they are allowed to do it now. Realistically though, it depends if the game is turn based or not that primarily matters. 

In action games, I *would* prefer for my actions to dictate how I level more than anything else, but in turn based games, I'm not a fan of the Saga styled leveling. It requires too much scumming to actually build a decent character. Plus, it makes it hard to customize a character to be well rounded when sometimes there might be a situation where your character might need to do some patch up healing and suddenly he's a cleric and oh my gosh you can never be the ninja class so forget about it-- aka The Last Remnant.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Augestein said:

Leveling can be a nice way to put a cap on a person's ability to increase their skills but placing an easily view able limit on what the person is capable of doing. IE, seeing that I cannot increase my sneak more is a nice way to actually demonstrate that I cannot increase my sneak more without having to notify the player every time they sneak that it cannot increase, or requiring them to view a menu to check if they are allowed to do it now. Realistically though, it depends if the game is turn based or not that primarily matters.

Sorry; I have no idea what you just said. Most leveling systems do not cap stats (except at max level) and they don't increase visibility of stats either...

13 hours ago, Augestein said:

...but in turn based games, I'm not a fan of the Saga styled leveling. It requires too much scumming to actually build a decent character. Plus, it makes it hard to customize a character to be well rounded when sometimes there might be a situation where your character might need to do some patch up healing and suddenly he's a cleric and oh my gosh you can never be the ninja class so forget about it-- aka The Last Remnant.

What is the "Saga" style of leveling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Zera said:

My two cents -

Level-ups are a thing of the past. Wanna make a deep and strategic game? Then do it. Level-ups have never added any depth to anything. (Unless they have, in which case please tell me.) Best case scenario, you choose what stat goes up when you level-up. Although the battles in recent Paper Mario games are too unrewarding and easy, I feel like IS was onto something by removing the grind entirely.

I hate output randomness. Anything that can be accomplished by luck or grinding could be accomplished with skill, if only the devs would trust players more.

In what world does adding a levelling system hinders depth? Levelling systems, when done right, exist to create a natural difficulty curve, at the beginning of the game, both the player and the enemies rely on nothing but simple strategies, and as the players grown in power so does their arsenal of options of how they can take on their enemies, and so do their enemies, and you can say that RPGs could easily achieve this kind of curve with other systems, but the point of the levelling system is that it facilitates this type of curve, it's far easier to design a game that starts simple and becomes more complex as it goes along with a levelling system than without one.

Edited by OakTree
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zera said:

What is the "Saga" style of leveling?

Only weapons/magic levels up, with weapons gaining skills/techs along the way

Stats like Strength, Magic, etc. remain, for the most part, static

That's what I think he means, anyways. I've only ever played Romancing SaGa 1-3.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zera said:

Sorry; I have no idea what you just said. Most leveling systems do not cap stats (except at max level) and they don't increase visibility of stats either...

What is the "Saga" style of leveling?

Quite a few games have caps on leveling systems. Mass Effect 1 has caps on your stats for certain level (IE, you can't level Decryption passed a certain skill height until level 10) , D'n'D places level caps on skills / abilities as a form of progression without hiding what you can work towards for your character (to allow freedom of choice within the restrictions of your class). Basically, leveling can be a way to say that you can only have X amount of skills at a certain point, while a game like Elder Scrolls has no real cap for anything thus enabling a person to o nothing but use a bow and max it out, and be far better with a bow than the designers would find reasonable for certain points etc. In other words, it can really help out a designer in some regards, and it keeps the player from wanting to skip enemies by virtue that it gives them something to work towards. Take something like Ultima 8, there's no reason to really fight anyone when you can just abuse the fact that you can swing your weapon at a mannequin for an hour or so and max out on strength. From then on, you only need to fight bosses. 

Saga styled leveling is literally what you were talking about where your stats level up based on what you do in battle. Want to get better at magic? Cast magic. Want to get more hp? Get attacked a lot. Want to get better with swords? Well using that axe certain won't help. Want to gain defense? Use Shields and heavier armor. It sounds interesting for a turn based game, but it can have really nasty effects like having your mage become some sort of juggernaut tank because the RNG kept attacking the mage over your actual tank. Or having a person morph into a healer type of character because you fought a couple of strong enemies and had to spend most of the battle healing instead of punching someone. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, OakTree said:

In what world does adding a levelling system hinders depth? Levelling systems, when done right, exist to create a natural difficulty curve, at the beginning of the game, both the player and the enemies rely on nothing but simple strategies, and as the players grown in power so does their arsenal of options of how they can take on their enemies, and so do their enemies, and you can say that RPGs could easily achieve this kind of curve with other systems, but the point of the levelling system is that it facilitates this type of curve, it's far easier to design a game that starts simple and becomes more complex as it goes along with a levelling system than without one.

There are several ways that a leveling system can hinder depth: for one, it enables for grinding. "Here's this boss that's really tough. Should I be strategic? Nah. I'll just defeat a whole bunch of random enemies until I am higher leveled than him and then I can defeat him easily." If one does not have a level system, one cannot do that, and will have to rely on skill and strategy to beat a tough opponent. Also, player characters can grow in power and increase their arsenal without the need for a leveling system; just look at Megaman (specifically Battle Network and Starforce, as the original is more of a platform game), Legend of Zelda, etc. These games avoid a level system while still enabling the player to grow in power and increase their options. They also provide a natural difficulty curve without the need for a leveling system. Another way that a leveling system removes depth is that, in most games with a leveling system, at a high enough level the character's stats have increased so much that lower-leveled enemies cannot harm the character even if the character is not wearing any armour. I'm sorry, but if a knife/claw/axe/sword hits someone unarmoured, then it will deal damage. Also, a leveling system can sometimes actually make the game become easier as the game progresses, rather than harder. In Xenoblade Chronicles X, I found a lot of the later boss fights easier than the earlier ones, and earlier in the game you had to be a lot more careful and strategic when exploring than later in the game (though random Tyrants and such meant exploring later in the game was no easy feat either).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, vanguard333 said:

There are several ways that a leveling system can hinder depth: for one, it enables for grinding. "Here's this boss that's really tough. Should I be strategic? Nah. I'll just defeat a whole bunch of random enemies until I am higher leveled than him and then I can defeat him easily." If one does not have a level system, one cannot do that, and will have to rely on skill and strategy to beat a tough opponent. Also, player characters can grow in power and increase their arsenal without the need for a leveling system; just look at Megaman (specifically Battle Network and Starforce, as the original is more of a platform game), Legend of Zelda, etc. These games avoid a level system while still enabling the player to grow in power and increase their options. They also provide a natural difficulty curve without the need for a leveling system. Another way that a leveling system removes depth is that, in most games with a leveling system, at a high enough level the character's stats have increased so much that lower-leveled enemies cannot harm the character even if the character is not wearing any armour. I'm sorry, but if a knife/claw/axe/sword hits someone unarmoured, then it will deal damage. Also, a leveling system can sometimes actually make the game become easier as the game progresses, rather than harder. In Xenoblade Chronicles X, I found a lot of the later boss fights easier than the earlier ones, and earlier in the game you had to be a lot more careful and strategic when exploring than later in the game (though random Tyrants and such meant exploring later in the game was no easy feat either).

Keyword being "can", there's nothing inherently wrong with leveling systems as a concept, any problems that come in a RPG with leveling system are balance problems, not leveling system problems, and while i have never played the Megaman RPGs, they definetly don't seem to be as complex as something like the Etrian Odyssey games (Which are my favorite RPGs), and if they are as complex, they don't seem to be complex due to their way of handling growth as much as because of their battle system, which is something separate from leveling, and TLOZ isn't even a RPG, the series has more in common with point-and-click adventure games than your average RPG.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@vanguard333 You took the words right outta my mouth.

Is Zelda an RPG?
Zelda games have always been close to RPGs (they are categorized as RPGs in Japan, and BoTW apparently has the "fumbling through menus" the genre is infamous for). Imagine that killing enough enemies in Zelda caused your sword to deal more damage and your max health to increase. BOOM, instant ramen noodles action-RPG. The genre boundaries have always been shallow and pedantic, but I digress.

Examples of not-sucky progression systems
In games like Zelda and Metroid, you you can replenish your health and ammo by killing enemies, but not get permanent boosts. You usually get those for clearing unique challenges and bosses.

In the action-RPG Brave Fencer Musashi, your Body (Attack) and Mind (Defense) increase as you kill enemies and walk around, respectively. Your swords Lumina and Fusion level separately when you use them, but they have different abilities and can be used together for combos. Each of these attributes has a level cap depending on where you are in the story, so you can't over-level.

In the first two Paper Mario games, you level-up with 100 star points. However, for every level higher/lower you are, all enemies/bosses give one less/more point when you kill them. So you can play at whatever pace you want, and you'll never be too over/under leveled.

In Advance Wars: Days of Ruin, each unit can level-up by killing a single enemy. 1/2/3 kills will make it level I, II, and V. This system rewards your strategy (for joining and repairing damaged units instead of making new ones), but it doesn't enable grinding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, vanguard333 said:

There are several ways that a leveling system can hinder depth: for one, it enables for grinding. "Here's this boss that's really tough. Should I be strategic? Nah. I'll just defeat a whole bunch of random enemies until I am higher leveled than him and then I can defeat him easily." If one does not have a level system, one cannot do that, and will have to rely on skill and strategy to beat a tough opponent. Also, player characters can grow in power and increase their arsenal without the need for a leveling system; just look at Megaman (specifically Battle Network and Starforce, as the original is more of a platform game), Legend of Zelda, etc. These games avoid a level system while still enabling the player to grow in power and increase their options. They also provide a natural difficulty curve without the need for a leveling system. Another way that a leveling system removes depth is that, in most games with a leveling system, at a high enough level the character's stats have increased so much that lower-leveled enemies cannot harm the character even if the character is not wearing any armour. I'm sorry, but if a knife/claw/axe/sword hits someone unarmoured, then it will deal damage. Also, a leveling system can sometimes actually make the game become easier as the game progresses, rather than harder. In Xenoblade Chronicles X, I found a lot of the later boss fights easier than the earlier ones, and earlier in the game you had to be a lot more careful and strategic when exploring than later in the game (though random Tyrants and such meant exploring later in the game was no easy feat either).

I've seen games with leveling that still allow you to die even at max level to basic grunts. Alpha Protocol and Mars War Logs come into play for that. In Mars War Logs, you have to select a feat to get more hp-- you never get it through leveling, and Alpha Protocol still demands the player utilize their skills to win. Whether they have them or not. Also, Megaman has levels in it. The game tells you the level of your Megaman based on the gear you have equipped him in. And this is done to tell people for versus around how sturdy your Megaman is comparatively to their own. 

RPGs are weird in mechanics, because realistically, if I hit you with a sword, it should kill you. So bringing up realism is pretty silly don't you think? 

And a lot of on-rail style RPGs don't really allow for grinding very much. Take something like Vandal Hearts it's a SRPG, but you can't grind at all in that game. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ya know for an FE fansite, I can't believe this leveling discussion has yet to bring in FE.

Level cap and stat caps are generally reachable by the end of the game and stats that are simple, but meaningful in even smaller quantities.

FE could actually probably work without leveling, along the lines of Awakening/Fates where alternative sources of stat alterations are plentiful. Good old Cousin Berwick actually doesn't put that much importance on leveling, as does that antiquated SRPG rival FFT (where I've been told a lot that Skills > Equipment >>>>>> Level).

And FE's pure Strategy steampunk sibling Codename STEAM trades leveling for horizontal progression- the addition of new boiler packs and weapons via gears and medals collecting (though grinding medals is a chore like leveling).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...