Saturday, May 25, 2013
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
Seeking new Game
So, what games are people playing now-a-days? I'm currently revisiting TF2, both regular and dodgeball modes are lots of fun to me. Still playing a bit of LoL, though I'm cutting back a bit (a loss streak really upset me because I know that most of them were just due to bad allies. I'm being much more selective about who I play with now). SC2 I barely touch anymore. But that's about it for multiplayer stuff. I had considered picking up DungeonSiege 3, but a bad review from Penny-Arcade made me hold off. So I'm looking for something else that I can play with friends.
In singleplayer land, I rolled through Mass Effect 2 rather quickly once I was done with Arhkam Assylum and am still working on Valkyrie Profile 2 (console games always take me longer). ME2 was a spectacular game. It's major flaw is that it was too short. I found it much more reminiscent of the Baldur's Gate series in terms of overarching RPG progression than say...Dragon Age which was a horrible let-down.
You have a starting "break out" mission. Collect a team, and go face the big bad. Part way through you can earn loyalty (or lose it) and advance inter-character interactions. And by collect, you actually had to fight your way through mobs to prove your worth to your soon-to-be allies. While Dragon Age, you were pretty much spoon fed your party members. Never really having to prove yourself. And so long as you didn't take the blatant "I hate you" actions the party members wouldn't leave.
Mass Effect 2 really deserves its own write up, which I don't have time for at the moment. But in closing, I would like to say that it's only real flaw is that it was too short and lacked the same depth in terms of world exploration.
At any rate, I've been looking for a new game to play. Multiplayer preferably. I am open to suggestions.
In singleplayer land, I rolled through Mass Effect 2 rather quickly once I was done with Arhkam Assylum and am still working on Valkyrie Profile 2 (console games always take me longer). ME2 was a spectacular game. It's major flaw is that it was too short. I found it much more reminiscent of the Baldur's Gate series in terms of overarching RPG progression than say...Dragon Age which was a horrible let-down.
You have a starting "break out" mission. Collect a team, and go face the big bad. Part way through you can earn loyalty (or lose it) and advance inter-character interactions. And by collect, you actually had to fight your way through mobs to prove your worth to your soon-to-be allies. While Dragon Age, you were pretty much spoon fed your party members. Never really having to prove yourself. And so long as you didn't take the blatant "I hate you" actions the party members wouldn't leave.
Mass Effect 2 really deserves its own write up, which I don't have time for at the moment. But in closing, I would like to say that it's only real flaw is that it was too short and lacked the same depth in terms of world exploration.
At any rate, I've been looking for a new game to play. Multiplayer preferably. I am open to suggestions.
Current Games and Projects:
Computer: League of Legends
Computer: StarCraft 2
Computer: Team Fortress 2
Console: Valkyrie Profile 2 (PS2)
LARP: Live Effects (Wyrd, Veil, Lanaque, Messina, & others)
LARP: TwinMask
LARP: Fighter Practice (El Segundo)
Book: Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi (on hold)
Monday, April 11, 2011
Game Update
Work has been dragging down the amount of time I have for games in general.
I've been mostly focusing on LARPs which I can play on weekends. SC2 is still played but rarely. Mostly at work with co-workers. I have a co-worker who got into Masters on 3v3 and Diamond on all other ladders.
LoL is my consistent game at night. I've expanded my character repertoire to encompass all playstyles aside from Assassin and Melee Carry. Current list of characters I can play competently (Sivir, Shen, Anivia, Cho'Gath, Amumu, Nunu).
Warstorm, I've been playing less and less. It was certainly an interesting game that was remeniscent of Ogre Battle in that combat is automated. Were Ogre Battle a card-game, Warstorm would be it. For a simple Facebook game, it's pretty decent.
But anyways, the two new items on the list are Arkham Asylum and Valkyrie Profile 2. Both are amazing games. I've had the Batman game for awhile now, it was apart of a Steam bundle I bought awhile ago, and it's pretty amazing. The only complaint I have is that the Xbox Live is mandatory if you want to save your game. This DRM crap is getting excessive...especially for a single player game. Aside from that, the game play is well done. The combat system itself is pretty simple, left click repeatedly and you'll punch people. Of course you can do MORE than that to be more effective, quick batarangs, cloak sweeps to stun, and using a variety of batman tools to beat them up faster. The real fun, and the real reason I like the system is the stealth system. It's not like the Thief games where you can just hide in the shadows. No, you're batman, you just gotta not be seen. Use ledges to grapple yourself up to and hide. Perform stealth subdues...yes you can hang people by their feet like batman is want to do. Common thugs don't really require this, but when they have guns, The Goddamned Batman needs to be a bit more careful and take them out from behind and pick them off one by one.
Valkyrie Profile is a game that received much acclaim when it came out, but it wasn't popularized as much. Now, I've ragged on JRPGs in the past, but the Valkyrie Profile games go beyond. It shares the same flaw in most JRPGs in that you don't have customization of your characters. You are given a cast of NPCs to control rather then these characters being truly yours. However, within the confines and restrictions of the JRPG genre, Valkyrie Profile 2 shines brightly. The combat system and the ability to avoid combat are both very engaging. The combat system itself is highly tactical requiring a good amount of thought and managing your action points wisely as well as positioning. The tactical map allows you to see where the monsters are. Not only can you avoid most fights, you can freeze the monsters for a short duration and stand on them to reach high ledge or even teleport between them to reach locations you would otherwise not be able to reach.
Anyways, that's it for now. When I have time, I'll give more detailed rundowns of the games.
Anyways, that's it for now. When I have time, I'll give more detailed rundowns of the games.
Current Games and Projects:
Computer: League of Legends
Computer: StarCraft 2
Computer: Warstorm
Computer: Batman: Arkham Asylum
Console: Valkyrie Profile 2 (PS2)
LARP: Live Effects (Wyrd, Veil, Lanaque, Messina, & others)
LARP: TwinMask
LARP: Fighter Practice (El Segundo)
Book: Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi (on hold)
Sunday, February 6, 2011
LoL - Game Guide
So my League of Legends game guide has been receiving some very good reviews from community members.
[Game Guide] Logistics, Strategy, Tactics
Let me know what you guys think and I'll see about improving it.
[Game Guide] Logistics, Strategy, Tactics
Let me know what you guys think and I'll see about improving it.
Friday, January 28, 2011
League of Legends
First off: sorry for not having updated for awhile. Having a job is far more time consuming than school in my case. However, I do try to squeeze in a game of SC2 or League of Legends every night.
So League of Legends is a Defense of the Ancients spin off. I never played DotA, but I am greatly enjoying LoL. These games are classified as MOBA games, a sub-genre within RTS. The key difference that I've observed playing SC2 and LoL is that LoL is all micro. In an RTS like SC2, macro is necessary so that you have units to fight with, and sometimes a large enough army will just make micro irrelevant. However, in LoL, you control one hero unit, so everything is about microing that one hero unit. Incidentally, my SC2 macro needs work, but my micro is awesome. So if we play on a team, share control and I'll micro while you tech and macro.
My main is Sivir and I feel she is perhaps the best champion in terms of how much she teaches you about the game. Like most RPGs, there are archtypes of characters. You have your Tank, DPS, Mage, and Healer/Support. Sivir's primary role is that of a DPS. She fills the role exceptionally well in larger team fights as her abilities allow her to hit multiple targets simultaneous. To further fuel her team oriented playstyle, her ultimate ability is a group buff for all allies in the area, increasing attack speed and movement speed.
So, what about Sivir makes her so great for learning the game? There are many aspects important for the game. All of these aspects directly or indirectly affect the win condition: destroying your opponent's nexus.
Pushing (direct)
Leveling/Farming (indirect)
Team Fights (indirect)
Ganking (indirect)
Map Awareness (indirect)
Pushing is the act of destroying enemy minions and towers so you can "push" closer to the enemy nexus. Towers must be destroyed before the nexus can even be targeted, and towers in a lane must be destroyed in sequence. Thus Pushing is the only direct method to victory.
Sivir is the queen of pushing. While many come close, there is no champion that can both destroy minion waves and destroy towers as quickly and efficiently as Sivir.
Leveling/Farming is what I consider to be the second most important thing. Often times even if you have a bad matchup in a fight, you can still win if you out level your opponent.
Sivir, being an excellent pusher, likewise accrues XP and gold faster than most champions. Thus while she may be weaker than other individual champions in a stand up fight, her superior equipment and higher level will oftent allow her to win fights.
Team Fights are when you and your allies gather up and fight the opposing team. Sivir's role is often to sit back and allow her ricochet ability to bounce her attacks between enemies and thus damage all opponents quickly and efficiently. As noted before, she can also use her ultimate to boost herself and her team.
Ganking is when someone tries to ambush someone else. Frequently the ambush involves stealth characters of hiding in bushes waiting for opportune moments. In these situations, high burst damage is valued. Sivir's Boomerang Blade is one of the largest sources of burst damage in mid game. Incidentally, Sivir is also fairly weak if she gets attacked, so she also focuses on not getting ganked frequently.
Map Awareness is knowledge of the surrounding environment. This is probably more important than all of the above, because without map awareness one cannot push, level/farm, team fight, gank, nor avoid ganks safely.
Needless to say, in order to play Sivir properly, one must be aware of all of these aspects of the game. I've gotten pretty into this game and recently I've started working on my first guide that details how to level and thus come back from a poor early game.
http://www.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=477680
So League of Legends is a Defense of the Ancients spin off. I never played DotA, but I am greatly enjoying LoL. These games are classified as MOBA games, a sub-genre within RTS. The key difference that I've observed playing SC2 and LoL is that LoL is all micro. In an RTS like SC2, macro is necessary so that you have units to fight with, and sometimes a large enough army will just make micro irrelevant. However, in LoL, you control one hero unit, so everything is about microing that one hero unit. Incidentally, my SC2 macro needs work, but my micro is awesome. So if we play on a team, share control and I'll micro while you tech and macro.
My main is Sivir and I feel she is perhaps the best champion in terms of how much she teaches you about the game. Like most RPGs, there are archtypes of characters. You have your Tank, DPS, Mage, and Healer/Support. Sivir's primary role is that of a DPS. She fills the role exceptionally well in larger team fights as her abilities allow her to hit multiple targets simultaneous. To further fuel her team oriented playstyle, her ultimate ability is a group buff for all allies in the area, increasing attack speed and movement speed.
So, what about Sivir makes her so great for learning the game? There are many aspects important for the game. All of these aspects directly or indirectly affect the win condition: destroying your opponent's nexus.
Pushing (direct)
Leveling/Farming (indirect)
Team Fights (indirect)
Ganking (indirect)
Map Awareness (indirect)
Pushing is the act of destroying enemy minions and towers so you can "push" closer to the enemy nexus. Towers must be destroyed before the nexus can even be targeted, and towers in a lane must be destroyed in sequence. Thus Pushing is the only direct method to victory.
Sivir is the queen of pushing. While many come close, there is no champion that can both destroy minion waves and destroy towers as quickly and efficiently as Sivir.
Leveling/Farming is what I consider to be the second most important thing. Often times even if you have a bad matchup in a fight, you can still win if you out level your opponent.
Sivir, being an excellent pusher, likewise accrues XP and gold faster than most champions. Thus while she may be weaker than other individual champions in a stand up fight, her superior equipment and higher level will oftent allow her to win fights.
Team Fights are when you and your allies gather up and fight the opposing team. Sivir's role is often to sit back and allow her ricochet ability to bounce her attacks between enemies and thus damage all opponents quickly and efficiently. As noted before, she can also use her ultimate to boost herself and her team.
Ganking is when someone tries to ambush someone else. Frequently the ambush involves stealth characters of hiding in bushes waiting for opportune moments. In these situations, high burst damage is valued. Sivir's Boomerang Blade is one of the largest sources of burst damage in mid game. Incidentally, Sivir is also fairly weak if she gets attacked, so she also focuses on not getting ganked frequently.
Map Awareness is knowledge of the surrounding environment. This is probably more important than all of the above, because without map awareness one cannot push, level/farm, team fight, gank, nor avoid ganks safely.
Needless to say, in order to play Sivir properly, one must be aware of all of these aspects of the game. I've gotten pretty into this game and recently I've started working on my first guide that details how to level and thus come back from a poor early game.
http://www.leagueoflegends.com/board/showthread.php?t=477680
Current Games and Projects:
Computer: League of Legends
Computer: Team Fortress 2
Computer: StarCraft 2
Computer: Warstorm
LARP: Live Effects (Wyrd, Veil, Lanaque, Messina, & others)
LARP: TwinMask
LARP: Fighter Practice (El Segundo)
Book: Art of War by Sun Tzu
Book: Book of Five Rings by Miyamoto Musashi
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
L5r 4th Edition: Book of Earth
Girlfriend bought the book and it's arrived. She wants to run a game, but wants me to review the mechanics to help run the game smoothly. While I was disgusted with the atrocity that was L5r 3rd edition, I've been promised numerous times that 4th will be great. I am skeptical, but there have been numerous items that the design team has done to give me hope. Between trading forum posts with Shawn Carman himself, to reading the design diaries, they are learning how to build an RPG. However, without a good understanding of their design process, I was unwilling to give full confidence. Now that I have the book and have reviewed it, here's the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly.
The Good:
Rule of 10 - it has been changed such that every die is important now. Having odd numbers no longer means a 'dead level'. This also makes skill gradients better.
Cooperative Roll - much simpler, and there is a benefit for all. The two different types of cooperative rolls make sense and encourage the use of this feature.
Combat Time - I'm glad that they clarified the amorphous nature of time in combat. It is a clear step towards a more cinematic and less tactical style of game play.
Duration Termination - the final reaction stage of the Combat round is an excellent idea to clarify when durational abilities terminate. It will reduce a ton of confusion that was previously present.
Action Terminology - 1 Complex = 2 Simple? Yeah, that's easy to remember and easy to classify.
Terrain Types - Good descriptions and clear definitions of what does what. If only the Skill TN chart were as informative.
Combat Maneuvers - Great job in descriptions in general. Things are easier to deal with.
Extra Attack Maneuver - Excellent clarification. It's been what every L5r rules lawyer has been looking for since 3.0 was released. While I am disappointed it took a full edition for a formal change to be made, I'm glad it's here.
Conditional Effects Glossary - awesome. I love it.
CP is gone, just XP now - About damned time.
Stance Dance Revolution! - I like the new stances in general. Especially the new Center stance. I can see the Crane hopping between Center and Attack/Full Attack to maximize offense.
Iaijutsu - It's been simplified, but I actually liked the old focus wars. I thought it was good for building tension. It also burned a ton of void points. The removal of Agility as a dueling skill is a good thing though. Fire is already an over used ring. I also love the widened window for kharmic strikes. Overall, good changes.
The Bad:
TNtbH - still the same old method of calculation. This will lend towards the "unhittable" and the "punching bag" scenario. There needs to be a better way to deal with this.
Earth * X - The Lethality and Wounds section gives multiple "settings" for difficulty. This would have fallen into "The Ugly" category if not for the note that Earth*2 is the default. Really, it's just wasted real estate on the page. Why even have a lethality setting? I can't see anyone using it. Also, it changes the game dynamics drastically. Increased health pools make initiative based classes weaker by way of prolonging the combat.
Glory/Honor points - To a new reader, it's more difficult to find how this functions. It was much easier reading decimal places in the old book. Although moving to a 10 point system is good.
The Ugly:
Feint - While I appreciate the new terminology, I fail to see the point of having a second "Increased Damage" option. With the express exception of creating a different scale for Bayushi Bushi, Feint and Increased Damage fill the same role: increased TN difficult for increased damage. Something needs to be done to differentiate Feint.
TN Table - it's the same crap we got before. Sure I see that TN 20 is the difficulty for jumping a 10 ft ditch, but how does that relate to rock climbing? Or swimming? There really is not enough description on the TNs. An customized TN chart should be made for each skill. This chart is near useless.
Armor TN - they need a better phrase. TN to be Hit was much better. Seriously, I just read a phrase that said "This attack roll ignores the benefits of armor to the Armor TN." Ugh. I know what it means, but it hurts to read.
Grappling with Weapons - Good clarification on what can be done in grapple...however, this section is fuzzy. It seems to imply that both characters in a chain weapon grapple would have to use the requisite grappling skill.
The Neutral:
Surprised penalty - being reduced is an interesting choice. It makes initiative based schools better on the defense, while making it more difficult for stealth based schools.
This concludes the Book of Earth review.
Book of Fire is next.
The Good:
Rule of 10 - it has been changed such that every die is important now. Having odd numbers no longer means a 'dead level'. This also makes skill gradients better.
Cooperative Roll - much simpler, and there is a benefit for all. The two different types of cooperative rolls make sense and encourage the use of this feature.
Combat Time - I'm glad that they clarified the amorphous nature of time in combat. It is a clear step towards a more cinematic and less tactical style of game play.
Duration Termination - the final reaction stage of the Combat round is an excellent idea to clarify when durational abilities terminate. It will reduce a ton of confusion that was previously present.
Action Terminology - 1 Complex = 2 Simple? Yeah, that's easy to remember and easy to classify.
Terrain Types - Good descriptions and clear definitions of what does what. If only the Skill TN chart were as informative.
Combat Maneuvers - Great job in descriptions in general. Things are easier to deal with.
Extra Attack Maneuver - Excellent clarification. It's been what every L5r rules lawyer has been looking for since 3.0 was released. While I am disappointed it took a full edition for a formal change to be made, I'm glad it's here.
Conditional Effects Glossary - awesome. I love it.
CP is gone, just XP now - About damned time.
Stance Dance Revolution! - I like the new stances in general. Especially the new Center stance. I can see the Crane hopping between Center and Attack/Full Attack to maximize offense.
Iaijutsu - It's been simplified, but I actually liked the old focus wars. I thought it was good for building tension. It also burned a ton of void points. The removal of Agility as a dueling skill is a good thing though. Fire is already an over used ring. I also love the widened window for kharmic strikes. Overall, good changes.
The Bad:
TNtbH - still the same old method of calculation. This will lend towards the "unhittable" and the "punching bag" scenario. There needs to be a better way to deal with this.
Earth * X - The Lethality and Wounds section gives multiple "settings" for difficulty. This would have fallen into "The Ugly" category if not for the note that Earth*2 is the default. Really, it's just wasted real estate on the page. Why even have a lethality setting? I can't see anyone using it. Also, it changes the game dynamics drastically. Increased health pools make initiative based classes weaker by way of prolonging the combat.
Glory/Honor points - To a new reader, it's more difficult to find how this functions. It was much easier reading decimal places in the old book. Although moving to a 10 point system is good.
The Ugly:
Feint - While I appreciate the new terminology, I fail to see the point of having a second "Increased Damage" option. With the express exception of creating a different scale for Bayushi Bushi, Feint and Increased Damage fill the same role: increased TN difficult for increased damage. Something needs to be done to differentiate Feint.
TN Table - it's the same crap we got before. Sure I see that TN 20 is the difficulty for jumping a 10 ft ditch, but how does that relate to rock climbing? Or swimming? There really is not enough description on the TNs. An customized TN chart should be made for each skill. This chart is near useless.
Armor TN - they need a better phrase. TN to be Hit was much better. Seriously, I just read a phrase that said "This attack roll ignores the benefits of armor to the Armor TN." Ugh. I know what it means, but it hurts to read.
Grappling with Weapons - Good clarification on what can be done in grapple...however, this section is fuzzy. It seems to imply that both characters in a chain weapon grapple would have to use the requisite grappling skill.
The Neutral:
Surprised penalty - being reduced is an interesting choice. It makes initiative based schools better on the defense, while making it more difficult for stealth based schools.
This concludes the Book of Earth review.
Book of Fire is next.
Monday, June 28, 2010
Define RPG
What is an RPG?
Simply put, I no longer consider the traditional JRPG (Japanese RPG) formula (a-la Dragon Warrior or Final Fantasy) an RPG game. I am rather hesitant to make such a clear assertion though as I feel it would offend many of the fandom. The JRPG has always been "a long walk down a straight hallway" regardless of any illusions any of us might have. Does that prevent the game from being an RPG? Lets cross reference with the definition we picked up.
Is the JRPG a 'game'? Yes. There is player effort involved, and all of those qualities that Juuls talks about.
Is the player assuming the role of one or more characters? Yes, you have your main character or a party of characters.
Is it in a fictional setting? It's a video game right? Then, yes, it's fictional.
Formal System of rule/guidelines? Yes, more complex than I would like to think about, but certainly yes.
Actions taken by players succeed or fail according to said system? Yes it does.
So by strict stringent definitions, the JRPG is indeed an RPG. But that gets me thinking: What game is NOT an RPG?
To answer this concisely, we can strip a few of these qualifiers out.
Fictional Setting, Formal System of Rules, Player Effort.
These three qualities are necessary for all video games worth mentioning.
So the only real question lies in weather or not the player is assuming the role of character or characters.
In this sense, is not Counter-Strike an RPG? How about Team Fortress 2? The player is assuming the role of a soldier with weapons and they go about controlling their avatar to play the game. This goes for any FPS. Yes, there are RPG-FPS hybrids such as Duex Ex, the entire Theif series, Half-Life single player modes, but what prevents the multiplayer from being considered an RPG as well? Certainly not the definition of Role Playing Games. I could go into the exact same argument with RTS games where the player is assuming the role of a military commander and managing tens if not hundreds of individual unit avatars.
To stretch this line of thought further, I was playing Poker Blitz on Facebook. Normally such a game is not an RPG by virtue of the fact that it is the player who is playing the game directly. The player is not assuming any sort of "role". However, one of the first things that happens in the game is that the player creates an avatar to represent himself in the virtual environment. So now, the player controls an avatar. Does this minor cosmetic change make an RPG? Pretty silly huh?
Now lets drop out of the video game world and hop into pen/paper and boardgames. The traditional RPG revolves around pencil/paper, rulebooks, and dice. How about a boardgames? Players usually control characters around the board, so does that mean all boardgames are thus RPGs as well? I can see an argument made for Clue, but as we descend down to games like Scrabble it becomes more of a stretch.
If we look at all of these examples, the moment there is a "character" or "avatar" involved in the game, we're dealing with elements of an RPG. In this sense, the term RPG is far too broad. How do we determine whether a game is an RPG? Clearly, no one views most of the generic FPS games to be RPGs, nor do they think that of RTSs or boardgames.
Back to the top then, the JRPG. Why do we consider such games to be RPGs. Because they contain iconic references to RPG terminology such as Hit Points and Experience Points? Seems rather silly again. Hit point is another work for Health or Stamina or "something that will cause you to lose the game if you don't have some". Experience points are merely a measure of progression. The typical Zelda game never had EXP, instead money, and gaining better items was the form of progression.
I suppose the better question is: what do I expect out of an RPG? Why do I play them? I play them because they give me freedom to create the character I wish, and make the decisions I want.
JRPGs do not give me these liberties. Most CRPGs (computer RPGs) don't either. That is the nature of dealing with videogames though. They lack the imagination of the human mind. However, it is the human mind that pre-programs these games. Variety is possible and enough variety grants the illusion of freedom. So if JRPGs do not have these qualities, what CRPGs do?
Most of the classics actually. The Baldur's Gate trilogy certainly does. As with any videogames, I do not have total freedom, but there are distinct choices I have in character creation which alters playstyle and decision making when it comes to party member selection. In character interaction as well, I have a dialog menu rife with choices. Not always the exact response I would give, but often there is one close enough to satisfy me. Lastly, the storyline is flexible. There's actually a randomized manner in which side quests appear, and it is also dependent on party members present, which generates a unique sequence of events every play through. The manner in which one replies to specific NPCs will change the flow of the story as well.
In stark contrast, the JRPG formula locks the player into a pre-conceived character with personality and statistics already laid out. Sure, there might be some options when it comes to advancing statistics or choice of equipment, however, the progression of the game leaves little to ones imagination. Perhaps this is why I enjoyed FF 5 and FF:Tactics more than the rest of the games. The class system allowed the player to customize the characters to their hearts content. Moreover, the storyline for the game is locked. There is one ending, possibly with minor variations (hello FF6, did you wait for Shadow? Recruit Umaro and Gogo?), but the story doesn't change. Perhaps this is why Chrono Trigger and Ogre Battle stood out in my mind as superior specimens in the atrocity that is your standard JRPG. Actions have consequences. These are two examples that rose above the standard JRPG.
In conclusion, we can see that not all JRPGs are bad. It's not even that they have bells and whistles that mask the bad. In fact, some have the 'good' qualities of RPG gameplay that we look for. However, the basic JRPG model is a shame to the term Role Playing Game. The basic model is devoid of any player effort beyond power-leveling and thus would probably be more enjoyable as a movie.
RPGs should strive to grant freedom and choice. This is perhaps why Bioware RPGs sell so well. All of the Neverwinter Nights games, Knights of the Old Republic, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, ect. They all contain freedom of character choice. The player is not stuck with an annoying main character that they cannot get rid of. Nor are players stuck with characters that do not fit their playstyle. Varied storyline that combines a bit of randomness and player control over how the story develops. It's times like this when I compare the new Bioware games to their contemporary RPGs and wonder if I'm just being nostalgic in thinking how awesome Baldur's Gate was. Maybe Bioware should release a Baldur's Gate remake with an updated game/graphics engine. Then we could see how well it compares to today's RPGs.
Our good friends at Wikipedia say:
a broad family of games in which players assume the roles of characters, or take control of one or more avatars, in a fictionalsetting. Actions taken within the game succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.
Well, lets first get into what spurs this question about a term that most of us have already defined in some way shape or form. This comic from VGCats.com is what raises the question.
Simply put, I no longer consider the traditional JRPG (Japanese RPG) formula (a-la Dragon Warrior or Final Fantasy) an RPG game. I am rather hesitant to make such a clear assertion though as I feel it would offend many of the fandom. The JRPG has always been "a long walk down a straight hallway" regardless of any illusions any of us might have. Does that prevent the game from being an RPG? Lets cross reference with the definition we picked up.
Is the JRPG a 'game'? Yes. There is player effort involved, and all of those qualities that Juuls talks about.
Is the player assuming the role of one or more characters? Yes, you have your main character or a party of characters.
Is it in a fictional setting? It's a video game right? Then, yes, it's fictional.
Formal System of rule/guidelines? Yes, more complex than I would like to think about, but certainly yes.
Actions taken by players succeed or fail according to said system? Yes it does.
So by strict stringent definitions, the JRPG is indeed an RPG. But that gets me thinking: What game is NOT an RPG?
To answer this concisely, we can strip a few of these qualifiers out.
Fictional Setting, Formal System of Rules, Player Effort.
These three qualities are necessary for all video games worth mentioning.
So the only real question lies in weather or not the player is assuming the role of character or characters.
In this sense, is not Counter-Strike an RPG? How about Team Fortress 2? The player is assuming the role of a soldier with weapons and they go about controlling their avatar to play the game. This goes for any FPS. Yes, there are RPG-FPS hybrids such as Duex Ex, the entire Theif series, Half-Life single player modes, but what prevents the multiplayer from being considered an RPG as well? Certainly not the definition of Role Playing Games. I could go into the exact same argument with RTS games where the player is assuming the role of a military commander and managing tens if not hundreds of individual unit avatars.
To stretch this line of thought further, I was playing Poker Blitz on Facebook. Normally such a game is not an RPG by virtue of the fact that it is the player who is playing the game directly. The player is not assuming any sort of "role". However, one of the first things that happens in the game is that the player creates an avatar to represent himself in the virtual environment. So now, the player controls an avatar. Does this minor cosmetic change make an RPG? Pretty silly huh?
Now lets drop out of the video game world and hop into pen/paper and boardgames. The traditional RPG revolves around pencil/paper, rulebooks, and dice. How about a boardgames? Players usually control characters around the board, so does that mean all boardgames are thus RPGs as well? I can see an argument made for Clue, but as we descend down to games like Scrabble it becomes more of a stretch.
If we look at all of these examples, the moment there is a "character" or "avatar" involved in the game, we're dealing with elements of an RPG. In this sense, the term RPG is far too broad. How do we determine whether a game is an RPG? Clearly, no one views most of the generic FPS games to be RPGs, nor do they think that of RTSs or boardgames.
Back to the top then, the JRPG. Why do we consider such games to be RPGs. Because they contain iconic references to RPG terminology such as Hit Points and Experience Points? Seems rather silly again. Hit point is another work for Health or Stamina or "something that will cause you to lose the game if you don't have some". Experience points are merely a measure of progression. The typical Zelda game never had EXP, instead money, and gaining better items was the form of progression.
I suppose the better question is: what do I expect out of an RPG? Why do I play them? I play them because they give me freedom to create the character I wish, and make the decisions I want.
JRPGs do not give me these liberties. Most CRPGs (computer RPGs) don't either. That is the nature of dealing with videogames though. They lack the imagination of the human mind. However, it is the human mind that pre-programs these games. Variety is possible and enough variety grants the illusion of freedom. So if JRPGs do not have these qualities, what CRPGs do?
Most of the classics actually. The Baldur's Gate trilogy certainly does. As with any videogames, I do not have total freedom, but there are distinct choices I have in character creation which alters playstyle and decision making when it comes to party member selection. In character interaction as well, I have a dialog menu rife with choices. Not always the exact response I would give, but often there is one close enough to satisfy me. Lastly, the storyline is flexible. There's actually a randomized manner in which side quests appear, and it is also dependent on party members present, which generates a unique sequence of events every play through. The manner in which one replies to specific NPCs will change the flow of the story as well.
In stark contrast, the JRPG formula locks the player into a pre-conceived character with personality and statistics already laid out. Sure, there might be some options when it comes to advancing statistics or choice of equipment, however, the progression of the game leaves little to ones imagination. Perhaps this is why I enjoyed FF 5 and FF:Tactics more than the rest of the games. The class system allowed the player to customize the characters to their hearts content. Moreover, the storyline for the game is locked. There is one ending, possibly with minor variations (hello FF6, did you wait for Shadow? Recruit Umaro and Gogo?), but the story doesn't change. Perhaps this is why Chrono Trigger and Ogre Battle stood out in my mind as superior specimens in the atrocity that is your standard JRPG. Actions have consequences. These are two examples that rose above the standard JRPG.
In conclusion, we can see that not all JRPGs are bad. It's not even that they have bells and whistles that mask the bad. In fact, some have the 'good' qualities of RPG gameplay that we look for. However, the basic JRPG model is a shame to the term Role Playing Game. The basic model is devoid of any player effort beyond power-leveling and thus would probably be more enjoyable as a movie.
RPGs should strive to grant freedom and choice. This is perhaps why Bioware RPGs sell so well. All of the Neverwinter Nights games, Knights of the Old Republic, Mass Effect, Dragon Age, ect. They all contain freedom of character choice. The player is not stuck with an annoying main character that they cannot get rid of. Nor are players stuck with characters that do not fit their playstyle. Varied storyline that combines a bit of randomness and player control over how the story develops. It's times like this when I compare the new Bioware games to their contemporary RPGs and wonder if I'm just being nostalgic in thinking how awesome Baldur's Gate was. Maybe Bioware should release a Baldur's Gate remake with an updated game/graphics engine. Then we could see how well it compares to today's RPGs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)