Cheap chaos and a side of fries - May 25, 2000 - Chris
Jones
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed within this column are those of
the participants and the moderator, and do not necessarily reflect those of the GIA. There
is coarse language and potentially offensive material afoot. Oh no, I said too much. Don't
say we didn't warn you.
Well, I still think it was a good idea to ask casual RPG players if there was something
about menu-driven turn-based combat they were inherently attached to. But I forgot that
the topic in question would scare off everyone but hard core gamers. Doh.
On the other hand, we have news of a true sequel to Silent Hill. I'm a little wary that
a follow-up might kill some of the ambiguity that I loved about the original's ending, but
there are things about the game that would work well with closure. Looking forward to it,
regardless.
Onward.
| This is why Superman works alone. (The ONLY
good line in the movie.) |
| The closest thing that I can think of regarding your Idea to merge RPS
with RTS was Ogre Battle for the SNES, and even then the battle mode would switch to
turn-based, menu-driven combat upon contact with an enemy. CONFUSING turn-based,
menu-driven combat at that. It's definately a really neat idea that I'd like to see
incorporated myself, but it'd be difficult to pull off effectively without losing
something from the RPG aspect of the game. Who knows what the next generation of gaming
consolses will hold though?
And, completely off subject: Can I nominate myself as trusty sidekick? You'll need one
to hand you stuff while fighting your Arch Nemesis. And I can say things like, "Holy
Gramatical Error, Double Agent!" That'd be pretty neat.
.Pisces. |
There is something to the criticism that the RTS and RPG genres are difficult to
integrate - Blizzard apparently attempted it with Warcraft III, but couldn't make it work
and they're now readapting to something more traditional. If Blizzard, an excellent
developer working on a platform very open to experimentation (the PC) couldn't make it
work, it's possible nobody can.
And I'm flattered that more than a few people have asked to be my sidekick, but I have
a theory that nearly anything starts to go downhill when you start to add sidekicks.
Witness the Batman movie series.
| 5001 things you can do with a GBC |
| I just had a thought. I am sure you have heard about the mp3 player in
the works for the GameBoy Color. If you are anything like me you were all excited about it
and stuff and was like "WOW! its not that expensive" and "SWEET, you can
get memory upgrades" or something to that effect. But, like I said, I had a thought.
The sound really sucks on the GB. It like really, really sucks. And who wants to listen to
music when sound quality is poor? Nobody! Thats who. |
The GBC is a considerably more powerful platform than the original Game Boy. I think
the reason game music tends to bite on the GBC has less to do with the inherent hardware
limitations and more to do with the limited memory provided on a Game Boy cart. It's
technically possible that the system could be a decent MP3 player, so keep your head open
about it.
| Now thatsa gooda Gouda! |
| You can have a good story, fancy abilities, and a realtime engine WITH
menu's...but If you dont have cheese, you aint got nothin. Kandrin on ice. |
Deep. Very deep, man.
| Blast from the past |
| Hey Chris Two weeks ago, I pulled out the SNES and FF3 (FF6j). After
hauling ass through it, I came to a few conclusions.
Final Fantasy has come a long way since the SNES days. The graphics, obviously, have
been improved immensely. The stories are far more complex, more mature (not just in the
lack of censorship). The characters are more realistic (not just in appearance) and all of
them are reasonably well developed. The battle systems are far more intricate, and the
games take longer to complete. The detail is incredible as well - you won't find a row of
six soldiers all saying the same thing any more.
But despite these vast improvements, in the transition from 2D to 3D, something
irreplaceable was very definitely lost.
Play it again. You'll see.
-CS- |
Progress is good, no question. Looking back, I got more emotionally involved with the
last two Final Fantasies than any previous, with the exception of IV. That's not a
definite indicator of the overall quality of a game, but it's not a bad one either.
What annoys me is your last comment - it's fine to say something has been lost, but
chalking it up to some kind of ineffable "feel" is a cheap trick. If it's real,
it's quantifiable, if it's not quantifiable, chances are it's just nostalgia for the good
old days when you were young and carefree. This might not be universal, but I suspect
we'll be seeing the same "FF was better two games ago" arguments twenty years
from now.
| Man, I must be feverish if I'm actually
posting this |
| Chris, sounds to me like you're trying to turn the realtime vs turn-based
debate into another 3D vs 2D debate. I understand that you absolutely can't stand menus
(sounds to me like you'd be at home playing action/RPGs or Zelda-like games instead of
regular console RPGs), but there are plenty of reasons why menus should stay: #1
Simulation/RPGs - These games *by definition* cannot be done in real-time. The whole point
of a simulation/RPG is being able to think out your strategy and move your units on a
hex-based map. Some simulation/RPGs have opted for the real-time environment (Ogre Battle)
but then these games still focus on micromanagement, plus the battles are done in turns. I
for one, would not want my favorite genre to go away because of some direction in gaming
towards real-time.
#2 Some, actually most, gamers simply prefer thinking over fast reflexes, or at least I
know I do. While I do appreciate Vagrant Story's chains as a way of forcing the player to
actually *earn* those experience points, I would absolutely get sick of RPGs if every new
RPG coming out employed a similar or real-time system. With menus, a player is allowed
time to think about what he has to do. In most battles, the player won't have to think,
but what about boss battles, or those rare enemies whom you've never encoutered before and
are seemingly invincible at first? Oh and just so you know, a system with "hot
keys" (i.e. something like Mario RPG where pressing a button automatically does
something instead of having to wade through a menu with your directional pad) is still
considered menu-based.
#3 Real RPGs aren't about real-time gaming. Do people use time limits when they play
out a game of D&D or other pen & paper RPG? On computer RPGs, even the ones that
employ a supposedly "real-time" system, there is still always the ability to
pause or the system is actually pseudo turn-based. The whole reason why the action/RPG
genre exists (and action/RPGs are not RPGs, they're action/RPGs) is because they're a
totally different type of game. They're action games with an RPG premise, but despite that
RPG premise, they're still action games at heart. And like I said, while I do like games
like Star Ocean and Tales of Phantasia which do employ pseudo real-time systems, I would
get absolutely sick of RPGs if all of them were like that.
My proposal: menus should stay. I'm not saying that there isn't room for the RPG genre
to evolve and show off new fancy real-time systems, I'm saying that like 2D RPGs, there
should always be a good amount of RPGs that are menu-based. I have seen absolutely no
advantages to a real-time system over a turn-based system. If anything, the real-time
systems generally have a negative impact on gameplay because they don't promote strategy
or the possibility for strategy. And besides, you may love System Shock 2, but who the
hell wants to see all future RPGs turned into FPS games with RPG elements?
Oh, one last comment, which I guess sort of actually backs you up. I do think that it
would be cool if someone came up with a truly real-time RPG. It wouldn't be an action/RPG
because it wouldn't be an action game. You would get to control someone living in a
fantasy world (I prefer medievel kingdoms myself) and he/she would roam around and go on
adventures with NPCs and would fight in realtime (imagine Zelda but more refined for the
next-gen). But this character would also get to live out its own life, get married or plot
to kill the king, do pretty much anything the game engine would allow. I'm sure there may
be a PC game like this, but wouldn't it be great if someone came out with a console RPG
like this? If someone does make a game like that, i'll renounce my traditional RPG love
and embrace this new style.
Desmond Gaban |
I figured I'd get at least one well-written letter from the hard core element, and here
it is. For the record, I DON'T HATE MENUS! I just don't think they need to be in
every "real" RPG published.
I've said before if you want to do a tactical or simulation game, you probably will end
up with menus. That's not a problem, because such games do require brains and strategy.
But I've said it before and I'll say it again: I've never seen any menu-based traditional
RPG (FFT, etc. need not apply) that requires real thought in non-boss battles. That
includes any of the first four DQs. And given that you're probably going to have lots of
standard, mediocre fights to pad out game time, I'd just as soon they be more diverting
than using a Windows application.
I like RPGs because they're immersive, because they have great plots and yes, they have
combat systems deeper than most Zelda type-games. But there's nothing in any of those
requirements that demands menus as an implementation. What is it that you see in RPGs that
suggests that they can't be real time, or that action/RPGs aren't RPGs? The fact that the
great RPG series have traditionally been menu based doesn't mean they're always gonna be
that way.
Closing Comments:
Ok folks, I'm starting to get a little loopy with the fever and I think that's starting
to bleed through into my writing. So I'm gonna cut this a little short, and try again
tomorrow.
No topic for tomorrow, at this point I don't trust myself to pick something I've
already done before. Like menus. Aye carrumba, I'm goin' to sleep. See y'all tomorrow.
-Chris Jones, sick of being sick |
|
|
|
