|
Post by vespuleth on Nov 10, 2004 13:11:53 GMT -5
Whats one thing you consider absolutely necessary for a good rpg?
|
|
|
Post by Jugem on Nov 10, 2004 15:07:32 GMT -5
I would say fun, challenging battles. I mean, really, what else could I say? Gripping storyline...*looks at Dragon Warrior*...nope. Gripping characters/character interaction...*looks at Dragon Warrior again*...nope. You get the idea. A lot of what makes rpgs these days so great was absent in older rpgs such as Dragon Warrior. The only real constant between then and now are the battles, and a real sense of making your character(s) stronger. I guess those two aspects of rpgs are the most important. I'm not trying to downplay the story/characters though, as they are still important in creating an emotionally-engaging rpg.
|
|
|
Post by Tacticalman on Nov 10, 2004 20:26:53 GMT -5
a heroine without a high voice and magical powers.... lol seriously, I think pace... if the game just blows right by you u wont get anything out of it. But it cant go too slow or ur players will get bored.. hard, huh. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 10, 2004 23:20:37 GMT -5
I'd say realism, believability, and originality. Once the player thinks, "That's stupid, why would he do that?" or "Chrono, Link, and Sephiroth, WTF?" or "Great, the princess was kidnapped and I have to save her," they're distanced from the game, and everything from that point onward seems much worse and is much less enjoyable, regardless of how well-done, good-looking, original, realistic, fun, interesting, intriguing, believable, and creative everything else is - it'll suck ass to the player.
Edit: If it's a game clearly meant not to be original, like a spoof or a Zelda/Mario/whomever RPG than it's fine.
|
|
Draygone
RPGM2 Helper
Founder and CEO of Great Dragon Gaming
Posts: 207
|
Post by Draygone on Nov 11, 2004 0:54:07 GMT -5
Story is important, though not necessary. It definately has to be fun to play. Or at least addicting. IMO, the Dragon Warrior games usually aren't that fun, but for some reason (with the exception of DW2 and 7), I find myself coming back for more. Same can be said about the first FF. Not fun compared to today's standards, but, at least with the Origins edition, the game has me hooked.
But just because fun/addictiveness is so necessary doesn't mean the other stuff can't help make things even better. Look at Golden Sun for example. The gameplay was great (though I'm a little tired of having to spend hours in an area fighting monsters to get enough money for new equipment), as were the graphics and sound. The problem was, the story never really picked up after the somewhat cool events that happened at Vale and Soul Sanctum. Now, I understand the story was supposed to continue in the next game (although from a different point of view), but even in the next game, you get hit by the ending without anything truly exciting going on. Even so, I'm sure Golden Sun wouldn't have been that great had it had the same graphic and sound quality of, say, the Breath of Fire GBA ports. The gameplay still would've rocked, but the game just wouldn't have that same oomph.
BTW, is anybody else tired of how RPGs give you rediculously easy monsters at the beginning and wind up making it necessary to heal every chance you get by the end of the game? It makes it so the Healer is forced to do nothing but, well, heal, when we could be using that character for something else. It may give the illusion that the game is getting more difficult (and I suppose it is, for an extent), but it isn't really doing anything more than making you heal a little more often. That really needs to be changed. Don't really need to change the fact that later monsters usually take more hits, though that could help a bit. Maybe later monsters would require the use of a Scan-like ability, to detect weak points of a monster, or maybe learn how certain monsters move so it would be easier to dodge (if even partially) their attacks.
|
|
|
Post by Dungeon Warden on Nov 11, 2004 9:28:38 GMT -5
I have to say that there is not one absolutely necessary thing. The best games work everything together so that the player has an enjoyable experience. If any piece fails, the whole game fails. If combat is great and the story is lousy you might not feel like finishing the game. If the other way around, you'll give up because you don't want to deal with another fustrating battle.
|
|
|
Post by vespuleth on Nov 13, 2004 1:04:27 GMT -5
i somewhat agree w/ DW, although i think a good story, or maybe even just a theme, is more important. i will sit through annoying battles for a good story, but i will not play a game just for the battles. games where i feel like im playing for the battles are aggravating for me. the only exception to this is the games where the story is told through the battles (FFT, TO: LUCT), or where the game is predominantly a strategy game (Brigandine).
so, imo, a story or at least a good theme is needed. an example of a well themed game, although not necessarily a good story, is the first Grandia. the theme was good, and the battle system were good.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 13, 2004 2:42:30 GMT -5
FFT, TO:LUCT, an Brigandine. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Doan the Nado on Nov 15, 2004 14:38:32 GMT -5
I'm just going to start by saying that what makes a good RPG varies from RPG to RPG. I still go back and play NES RPGs like Shadowgate, FF1, and DW1. Those games are far-surpassed in graphics, storyline, and battles by nearly every modern RPG, yet I still would rate them near the top of my to-play list. I think one important quality is certainly balance. I quit playing Xenosaga because it had too much story and not enough battling. Other than an awesome mini-card game, I consider the $20 I spent on that game a complete waste of money. On the other hand, MMORPGs like Everquest have an awesome battle system and community, but with no story driving the game, I eventually lost interest in it.
That doesn't mean that your game has to do everything well. FF1 had almost no story whatsoever, and what it did have was related without cutscenes, but entirely through dialogue. The thing that made that game fun was a good difficulty level and the ability to choose your own party to save the world with. Shadowgate, on the other hand, had no true battles, as all the encounters involved using some kind of tool to get to the next area. The massive amount of thinking and strategy in that game made it one that was fun to play.
Basically, try to be sure that something in your game stands out and is done very well. It would be better to be lacking in a few areas but to outshine the rest in one element than it would be to be decent across the board. Every game that anyone talks about has something that defines it, but nobody talks about Mystic Quest, in spite of being a solid game. Nothing stood out about it, and I'm sure a lot of you haven't even heard of it.
So do what you like, and do it well.
|
|
|
Post by The Final Rune on Nov 16, 2004 14:30:06 GMT -5
Quallity story telling.
No matter if the game story line sucks or the story is very cliche, the way the story is presented to the gamer must be done with style and quality.
|
|
|
Post by vespuleth on Nov 16, 2004 16:38:36 GMT -5
*agreed*
|
|