+- Tendo City (https://www.tendocity.net)
+-- Forum: Tendo City: Metropolitan District (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=4)
+--- Forum: Tendo City (https://www.tendocity.net/forumdisplay.php?fid=42)
+--- Thread: Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review (/showthread.php?tid=1853)
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - Dark Jaguar - 5th May 2004
Actually, the quote system is hard to use, a whole lot of copying and pasting that I just don't want to do. :D
You know what I'm talking about most of the time though so I really don't need to quote do I?
Anyway, regarding NWN, it's NOT just one player. You are INTENDED to party up with other people online to play the game, so you can have a standard size party, but everyone is a human rather than just one human controlling everyone. The last expansion's campaign, sadly, doesn't allow this outside of a hack, which means you are right about that one. Thing is, you really need to make sure you can trust whoever you drag in, because something like this really requires some decent communication and friendship to work.
Here's something I actually DO have to quote (I'll never quote each and every time, I figure the other person has a good enough memory to know what they have said before and all I have to do is make sure they know what I'm responding to, and that above paragraph, it should be obvious what I'm responding to).
Quote:You miss my point, kinda. What would be most realistic is if they used what they have available. Now you say 'but if they did I'd NEVER win'! But that's my point exactly. It's really stupid to design it so you only win battles because the enemies are incompetent! D&D doesn't work that way. Okay, so enemies might not always use the best possible spells, but they do use a lot of them, and enough variety that you know that they're using up what they have... at least, I never felt like I was just winning battles because the enemy held back their best moves. Against really strong enemies who you probably should not be fighting yet they don't hold back... defeating one of those Demons took quite a few tries...
No, I wouldn't say that. I AGREED with you and we WERE talking about the same thing. Yes, I DO agree that the enemies should use better strategies. I agree that their move sets should either be altered so that all the moves are equally good, or the AI should be improved so the enemy knows exactly what move to use in a given situation. Some Japanese RPGs do do this, but not enough really. I agree with you here.
About stats, you are telling me my HP is RANDOMLY GENERATED?! Arg! *destroys a galaxy* You see? This is what I hate right here. They KNOW I'm just going to reload over and over if I know that until I get the best bonus I can, so why, OH WHY, would they even BOTHER with such an assinine system? It's just ANNOYING, not fun. It's like the stats in FF4 actually, and there's a reason they didn't do that at all after that game. Rather, they came up with a different system which actually depends on the player's skills to determine that instead of "DICE ROLL!". In FF6 and FF8, they have various items that give "stat bonuses" to the character if they are equipped when that character levels up. That way, a character can be in control of stat bonuses to a degree, all depending on how many of these special things they found. In FF6, it's esper bonuses. If you want a fast character, equip the Esper Odin around level up, and if you want more HP, equip Bahamut. It's all fixed so you never have to deal with the annoyance of the random element on level up. FF8 used the Guardian Forces which could learn special stat upgrade abilities that you could equip near level up.
Look, in the end, I care more about having fun than the game trying to be realistic. I know I know, if me and the enemy are evenly matched in stats, there really is a chance it could go either way. However, I don't like that chance being taken out of MY hands and placed in that of dice. I prefer me, totally me, to be responsible for how I do. When I am forced to sorta sit back and watch while the random throws determine the outcome of battle, I get annoyed.
Now then, you comment on how you still don't understand what I mean by defeating the system later on in the game. Lemme put it this way. In early levels, when your attack and defense is like 9 or 10 max, a variable of 20 makes all the difference in the world. Whatever you do, it could be anything from totally awesome attack to the enemy, or complete failure. However, once you reach level "awesome", your stats are near the hundreds for everything, a variable of 20 has very little effect. It's still THERE, but it's been delegated to a much smaller roll. As a result, stats really DO determine the winner and in an even match, unless your strategies are better, both you and the opponent will die at about the same time. In any d20 based game, I always look forward to my stats finally being able to make the roll of 20 take a back seat to pure strategy, stats, and moves.
Again, it's obvious you enjoy it. Don't take this as a "it's obvious you enjoy... TEH SUCK!1!" statement. I'm not saying you have bad tastes, just that mine are different. A VERY similar thing to this complaint of mine is yours against random battles. I don't really mind them at all, but you have a huge problem with them. I don't take it that you have better tastes than me, just different. I myself just don't enjoy, as I see it, having the control of the outcomes of battle taken away from me near the start. For you, it's all about playing with probabilities, playing the luck game at that point in the game for all it's worth. I've just never enjoyed that at all. With that, I think we've explained our opinions on this enough to get a good idea of each of our tastes. I believe we can put this to rest now.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - A Black Falcon - 6th May 2004
Quote:Anyway, regarding NWN, it's NOT just one player. You are INTENDED to party up with other people online to play the game, so you can have a standard size party, but everyone is a human rather than just one human controlling everyone. The last expansion's campaign, sadly, doesn't allow this outside of a hack, which means you are right about that one. Thing is, you really need to make sure you can trust whoever you drag in, because something like this really requires some decent communication and friendship to work.
You know exactly what I meant. You control one player. End of story.
Quote:No, I wouldn't say that. I AGREED with you and we WERE talking about the same thing. Yes, I DO agree that the enemies should use better strategies. I agree that their move sets should either be altered so that all the moves are equally good, or the AI should be improved so the enemy knows exactly what move to use in a given situation. Some Japanese RPGs do do this, but not enough really. I agree with you here.
I realized what is probably the root of the difference. In D&D, everything follows the SAME RULES. That is, evil mages use the same level system you do. They draw from the same groups of spells per level and have the same rules of casting. Enemy warriors draw from the same pool of proficiencies and weapons. Oh, sure, they might have special equipment, and there is certainly equipment that is either special for a certain character (a few people have 'only I can wear it' armor or weapons in BGI/II, and Torment had character-exclusive weapons or types for most of the people), but it's all the same stuff, with a few exceptions that don't really matter here (Planescape has its own rules and by those, what that game does is fine...). That enemy swordsman is using a sword you could pick up and use if you wished and armor you can do the same with, in virtually all cases. And those mages are using spells you can use back on them. Same rules for everyone. Now, the enemies can be stronger, or special (like Dragons... ack... (to give you a hint, Dragons in D&D are quite tough...)), but it's essentially the same rules.
Console games just do not do that. They have enemies with lists of abilities and, it seems inexaustible magic points. So you have to come up with a stupid reason for why they don't just crush you... and they have patterns. Lame, but necessary given the way it works in those games.
Quote:About stats, you are telling me my HP is RANDOMLY GENERATED?! Arg! *destroys a galaxy* You see? This is what I hate right here. They KNOW I'm just going to reload over and over if I know that until I get the best bonus I can, so why, OH WHY, would they even BOTHER with such an assinine system? It's just ANNOYING, not fun. It's like the stats in FF4 actually, and there's a reason they didn't do that at all after that game. Rather, they came up with a different system which actually depends on the player's skills to determine that instead of "DICE ROLL!". In FF6 and FF8, they have various items that give "stat bonuses" to the character if they are equipped when that character levels up. That way, a character can be in control of stat bonuses to a degree, all depending on how many of these special things they found. In FF6, it's esper bonuses. If you want a fast character, equip the Esper Odin around level up, and if you want more HP, equip Bahamut. It's all fixed so you never have to deal with the annoyance of the random element on level up. FF8 used the Guardian Forces which could learn special stat upgrade abilities that you could equip near level up.
Randomly generated within boudaries set by what level you are, your class, and probably your constitution (since that sets your base HP). You get most all your health before somewhere around 8th to 10th level; after that point you just get 1 or 3 HP a turn, depending on class (more for warrior-types, less for mage-types). But for a 'starting at level one' D&D game, level 10 or so is a point you might be at at the very end, so it matters in such a game...
Now, I didn't do that 'save before levelup' thing much, as it seems kinda cheap, but you CAN if you want. It's not a game-changing difference, but with a few more HP you can have something advantage...
As I said, it is a random variable but like everything else set numbers have a big influence. Your class is vital here, as warriors WILL have more HP than most all mages. Same with the Constitution stat. That is hugely influential to how much HP you can get. The die roll decides the exact number, but your warriors will have a lot more HP than your mages... that's for sure. That is unless you stupidly created a warrior with a super-low constitution and your mages is really high...
Oh, and as I explained, D&D is full of items that give you stat bonuses. Before the end of Baldur's Gate II I had one belt of strength 21, one gloves of strength 18, a gloves of dexterity 18, and a gloves of charisma 18... nice items. :) Oh, and I've also gotten items that do such things as adding some set number of HP (though not many). And resistances (fire resistance, magic resistance, etc, that are added, as I said, also by items you equip) are percents... in D&D2.5 anyway... they stack too, so if you have a bunch of fire-resistance stuff you could have 50% or more chance of resisting it...
Oh, that explains why D&D uses a 'chance of resistance' instead of 'rate of depracation of the attack'. Dice. Do you want to do math every attack, to figure out what percent that roll of 12 reduces his attack of 15? I don't think so! :)
Quote:Now then, you comment on how you still don't understand what I mean by defeating the system later on in the game. Lemme put it this way. In early levels, when your attack and defense is like 9 or 10 max, a variable of 20 makes all the difference in the world. Whatever you do, it could be anything from totally awesome attack to the enemy, or complete failure. However, once you reach level "awesome", your stats are near the hundreds for everything, a variable of 20 has very little effect. It's still THERE, but it's been delegated to a much smaller roll. As a result, stats really DO determine the winner and in an even match, unless your strategies are better, both you and the opponent will die at about the same time. In any d20 based game, I always look forward to my stats finally being able to make the roll of 20 take a back seat to pure strategy, stats, and moves.
Umm... but that's exactly as it should be! No system is being "broken". It's working perfectly. When you're low level and your resistances are low, you should be failing at least as often as you succeed a resistance of, say, 9 (assuming it's a scale of 1-20)! So you fail half the time and succeed the other half. So? That's EXACTLY AS IT SHOULD BE! Just like how when you're high level making the throws most of the time is exactly as it should be. Your stats don't become more of a factor as they get higher! They ARE the factor. That 9 means you SHOULD be missing throws a lot and a 18 means you SHOULDN'T. I don't see why that concept is so hard to grasp, and it's why it sounds more like you're complaining about the concept of being able to miss throws than anything else.
I'd say that saving throws are one of the biggest things you get as you level up. Oh, magic is probably the biggest one, followed by HP through about your 10th level, but saving throws are after that (and keep improving even after your HP increase rate has dropped off)... given that even a super-amazing level 20 warrior has 'only' maybe 120HP, and a level 15 maybe 105 or something (at a 3 per level increase), the saving throws are probably a proportionally bigger difference between the two..
Quote:Look, in the end, I care more about having fun than the game trying to be realistic. I know I know, if me and the enemy are evenly matched in stats, there really is a chance it could go either way. However, I don't like that chance being taken out of MY hands and placed in that of dice. I prefer me, totally me, to be responsible for how I do. When I am forced to sorta sit back and watch while the random throws determine the outcome of battle, I get annoyed.
It is almost never just you. Saving throws in concept are not significantly different than something based on a percent, if that percent is a chance of success or failure... if it's a hard 'this is the percent damage is lowered by' percent that's different, but I'd bet that that's by far the less common use of them...
D&D just makes more use of random factors. Or, more precisely, makes it more obvious. I mean, console RPGs have all kinds of random factors! But the games hide them, for the most part... D&D doesn't. You seem to have a problem with that.
For instance, I'd bet that in console RPGs you don't always get the same level up bonuses every time you level up... but unlike D&D they don't explain themselves. You seem to prefer that they hide those factors... I take that as a bad thing. I'd like to know why it is that I get a level-up reward of whatever I got! Console RPGs don't tend to do that, while in D&D you can look up the rules and see exactly why (and what) your level-up rewards are and their exact meanings. Better.
Quote:Again, it's obvious you enjoy it. Don't take this as a "it's obvious you enjoy... TEH SUCK!1!" statement. I'm not saying you have bad tastes, just that mine are different. A VERY similar thing to this complaint of mine is yours against random battles. I don't really mind them at all, but you have a huge problem with them. I don't take it that you have better tastes than me, just different. I myself just don't enjoy, as I see it, having the control of the outcomes of battle taken away from me near the start. For you, it's all about playing with probabilities, playing the luck game at that point in the game for all it's worth. I've just never enjoyed that at all. With that, I think we've explained our opinions on this enough to get a good idea of each of our tastes. I believe we can put this to rest now.
I've never seen D&D as a game based on luck above all and I never will. As I have detailed, I think that that assertion is completely wrong... luck is a factor, but it is by no means the prevailing one and it isn't some super-more-important one like you portray it as. As I said, they just put all the details out for you to see.
As for random battles, note how now that I've put good amounts of time into random-combat RPGs my thinking is a bit different... as I've said for a while now, where it gets really bad isn't just normal random combat but when I don't know where I should be going (because of maze, puzzle, whatever). Why? Because you're forced to fight an unending stream of battles while you wander around lost. That is not fun. And while in BG enemies DO spawn randomly on the map (in areas you aren't in at the moment), it happens slowly and infrequently and usually when you go to another map and back. You do just a bit of extra fighting while wandering around confused.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - Dark Jaguar - 6th May 2004
Actually, yes, in console RPGs, your stats ARE set in stone on level up. The exception is FFIV. Nothing is hidden from you actually, and no I'm not trying to say they should be. Everything about how the stats work is right there once you figure it out.
Anyway, I see your point, but you really seem to actually be getting upset at me here. I never meant to upset you, just make my opinion clear. I'm not trying to say your opinion is wrong here, so try not to get so defensive.
About the multiplayer thing, actually no, I didn't know that's what you meant. I really did think you were trying to say that in effect you only ever have one real party member, from the way you were talking about a lack of strategy anyway. Sorry if I offended you.
Anyway, about the ways enemies behave in Japanese RPGs, yes I noticed that too. There really is no explanation for why the enemies work on a totally different system than the characters, but it works out well and I just tend to ignore the fact that the enemies tend to have MUCH higher HP yet MUCH lower defense.
Look, as I said, we obviously have different tastes. I know that in your opinion, having a better chance of success on level ups is the perfect reward, but I don't like playing the odds. For me, when low level, and half the time I'm dying and the other half completely succeeding, it's like I'm actually floating around levels and not really set in place. I know you enjoy playing with odds and statistics. I just don't. Let's just leave it at that. PLEASE do NOT take this the wrong way.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - A Black Falcon - 7th May 2004
Quote:Anyway, I see your point, but you really seem to actually be getting upset at me here. I never meant to upset you, just make my opinion clear. I'm not trying to say your opinion is wrong here, so try not to get so defensive.
No, I'm not any more upset with you than I was with the first post... then I was somewhat, because I really love D&D...
Quote:Actually, yes, in console RPGs, your stats ARE set in stone on level up. The exception is FFIV. Nothing is hidden from you actually, and no I'm not trying to say they should be. Everything about how the stats work is right there once you figure it out.
So every time you play a console RPG all of your characters will be the same at each level (for games where you can't customize your character's progression, which is the vast majority of them)?
I wouldn't know for sure, but that seems improbable... but either way, I'd still definitely say that console RPGs hide stuff from you more.
Quote:About the multiplayer thing, actually no, I didn't know that's what you meant. I really did think you were trying to say that in effect you only ever have one real party member, from the way you were talking about a lack of strategy anyway. Sorry if I offended you.
AI hirelings also don't count. They are not characters you control to a meaningful degree. I've said both of those things so many times before I didn't think I had to again...
Quote:Anyway, about the ways enemies behave in Japanese RPGs, yes I noticed that too. There really is no explanation for why the enemies work on a totally different system than the characters, but it works out well and I just tend to ignore the fact that the enemies tend to have MUCH higher HP yet MUCH lower defense.
But it's far more accurate to have it so sometimes you succeed and other times you fail! Sure, low level characters shouldn't consistently be above their level, but they aren't. And it's far more unrealistic (as in by rules that would make sense for the universe the game creates) for a low-level character to ALWAYS do badly than it is for some of the time for them to succeed.
And as I described, there is no other way to have numerous spells be at all workable... 'Web' is just one of many, many examples that if they had to follow hard rules (instead of 'chance of success', 'web will hit if your magic resistance is below a X') would be stupid. Console RPGs seem to deal with this by not having spells like D&D has (the most common response, I'd have to say...) or other such things... I have never played a console RPG with anywhere close to as good a magic selection as D&D. Nowhere near.
Quote:Look, as I said, we obviously have different tastes. I know that in your opinion, having a better chance of success on level ups is the perfect reward, but I don't like playing the odds. For me, when low level, and half the time I'm dying and the other half completely succeeding, it's like I'm actually floating around levels and not really set in place. I know you enjoy playing with odds and statistics. I just don't. Let's just leave it at that. PLEASE do NOT take this the wrong way.
As you can tell your complaints about 'odds' just don't make any sense at all to me. Do you hate boardgames too, or something?
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - Dark Jaguar - 7th May 2004
I don't HATE them at all. You are being too sensitive. I'm listing my complaints about one issue. D&D is not a perfect world and I just take issues with a few aspects of it. I know they are core aspects, but oh well, just let it be.
Oh by the way, about Japanese RPG stats, YES, they ARE going to be exactly the same, not randomly generated, at each level. If you write down the stats when your character is level 10, start over, and get BACK to level 10, they will be EXACTLY the same. It's not improbable because the stats aren't randomly generated. They are all programmed in very specifically from the start and a set in stone increase is then programmed in. Maybe they'll program each and every level specifically, or maybe it'll be a formula, but the formula won't use any random numbers, likely just "increase HP by 10% of current hp each level" or something else like that. If the starting HP is fixed, then each proceeding level's HP, with a formula like the one I gave, will ALSO be fixed in place. There ARE exceptions of course. While in FF6, Relm's stats can be perfectly predicted once you learn them, in FF4, the stats really are somewhat random. It's rather annoying too, because sometimes a few stats will actually go DOWN a bit on level up.
Regarding the party thing, I really wasn't talking about henchmen. I thought you really did mean you can't have a party at all outside henchmen, and so I was reminding you of other human members who you have to talk to and develop battle strats with yourself, which plays EXACTLY like D&D actually doesn't it?
I wouldn't say it's FAR more accurate to have the occasional success. If you have a flea battle a train, the flea will never ever win ever. If you have a guy with a machine gun battle a guy with a sword, the guy with the gun will ALWAYS win, every single frickin' time. However, I don't really pay attention to these things.
Look, just to make it clear, I DID enjoy Neverwinter Nights and KOTOR. I really had a fun time. I just have a few issues with some aspects of the game. Now, honestly I don't see why it's a big deal to you that I have these problems. I'll never understand why you have such issues with Majora's Mask, but I just said "to each their own" and left it at that. Perhaps you should do the same here.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - A Black Falcon - 8th May 2004
Quote:I wouldn't say it's FAR more accurate to have the occasional success. If you have a flea battle a train, the flea will never ever win ever. If you have a guy with a machine gun battle a guy with a sword, the guy with the gun will ALWAYS win, every single frickin' time. However, I don't really pay attention to these things.
He'd lose if the guy with the sword started next to him, or if he had astonishingly bad aim or something... :D
It's like the 'Phalanx Destroys a Battleship' thing that you are describing, it seems. That is, the flaw where once in a while in Civilization I a Phalanx would win when a Battleship attacked it... Civ 2 dealt with that by adding firepower. But I don't see how that directly relates to this... unlike those cases, as I've said, this is D&D. While differences between levels are quite noticable, it isn't SO much that it's impossible to concieve of how a lower level person could ever win. I'd say the opposite, actually... and it should be that way -- hard, but possible if done well, to win against a superior opponent.
Quote:Look, just to make it clear, I DID enjoy Neverwinter Nights and KOTOR. I really had a fun time. I just have a few issues with some aspects of the game. Now, honestly I don't see why it's a big deal to you that I have these problems. I'll never understand why you have such issues with Majora's Mask, but I just said "to each their own" and left it at that. Perhaps you should do the same here.
NWN is, by all accounts, a poor excuse for a D&D game and seems to be highly criticized for having an awful single player campaign... so unless you've played the supposedly better expansions, I wouldn't take that (game) to mean a whole lot... :)
Quote:Regarding the party thing, I really wasn't talking about henchmen. I thought you really did mean you can't have a party at all outside henchmen, and so I was reminding you of other human members who you have to talk to and develop battle strats with yourself, which plays EXACTLY like D&D actually doesn't it?
But then why do you make a difference between henchmen and other PCs controlled by others? Oh, sure, there are differences, but... neither group is controlled by you. That's the point.
Quote:Oh by the way, about Japanese RPG stats, YES, they ARE going to be exactly the same, not randomly generated, at each level. If you write down the stats when your character is level 10, start over, and get BACK to level 10, they will be EXACTLY the same. It's not improbable because the stats aren't randomly generated. They are all programmed in very specifically from the start and a set in stone increase is then programmed in. Maybe they'll program each and every level specifically, or maybe it'll be a formula, but the formula won't use any random numbers, likely just "increase HP by 10% of current hp each level" or something else like that. If the starting HP is fixed, then each proceeding level's HP, with a formula like the one I gave, will ALSO be fixed in place. There ARE exceptions of course. While in FF6, Relm's stats can be perfectly predicted once you learn them, in FF4, the stats really are somewhat random. It's rather annoying too, because sometimes a few stats will actually go DOWN a bit on level up.
See, when I read that, I think 'that's too bad'... always being the same is NOT a good thing! I'd rather have an element of chance. That is, when it's explained. As I said, I always get the impression from Japanese RPGs that they're not telling me everything... that some stuff seems 'hidden' or hard to figure out. I don't like that. Oh, sure, I can't calculate how much damage I'm supposed to be doing on average in my head, but I love that they tell you the whole formula. Console RPGs seem designed to not tell you everything you want to know... I like more clarity. And as for dice, it's a bit annoying when you don't get as much HP as you wish you did, but I accept that too... I mean, it'd hardly be realistic to have everyone who looks similar (eg. same class) to always gain the same amount of health per level!
And as I said D&D has more things to worry about than just one party of heroes in one game, like is true in a console title.
Oh, and as you say, when console RPGs have random factors they are, as I've said many times, under-explained as a rule. You admit that at least...
I just played through the FFVIII demo for PC. Ignoring the pitifully low-res 2d backgrounds (incredibly ugly on a PC!), it sure doesn't seem to ME like the game gives you any reason why you do the particular amount of damage you do! You don't always do the same damage with the same attack against the same enemy, you know... how do you explain that?
Quote:I don't HATE them at all. You are being too sensitive. I'm listing my complaints about one issue. D&D is not a perfect world and I just take issues with a few aspects of it. I know they are core aspects, but oh well, just let it be.
My favorite board game is probably Hero Quest... fun fantasy/"rpg" board game I've had for a long time. And it, like most of the good boardgames I've played, uses dice... complaining about that is just stupid, I think.
Menubased combat I've already discussed. As for MM, hmm... the heart of the matter is probably simply that I like to take games slowly and that game doesn't allow for that.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - Dark Jaguar - 8th May 2004
Loose if the guy with the sword started next to him? Um, no? The guy with the sword would still be shot before he could swing. "hiyaaa *bang*... ouch...."
Um, Neverwinter Nights is not a terrible D&D game "by all accounts". Yeesh, a HUGE number of people really love the game. The expression "by all accounts" DOES require ALL accounts to actually be that way for you to be able to say it you know, not just a large number. PA also seemed to love it, and their opinions are ones I usually agree with. My friends and I also enjoyed it. Yes though, the single player campaign included with it IS pretty aweful. It's pretty much this big stereotyped story with the main flaw of too many US RPGs. That flaw, if you ask me, is emphasizing everything WAY too much, like the narrator is literely trying to BASH the supposed deepness emotion and history into your skull with a hammer. The other expansions are nice enough, though honestly when I say it's great, I'm talking about the custom campaigns. You may not play them much, but disregarding a feature as unimportant just because you didn't like it isn't exactly nice. Honestly, it's about the biggest part of it. That's where all the fun comes from. So, if you don't care for custom maps, I suppose that's one thing, but honestly, don't disregard the game as bad for EVERYONE based on something you alone don't like, but is obviuosly VERY popular.
The diff between other players and the "henchmen" is that you can actually strategize with the other humans and they are actually able to think. It's a much fuller experience that way, and it really feels like you are on an adventure with a party, even if you don't control them. I do however believe in the future they should add at least the ABILITY to control multiple characters, fully, at once. Wouldn't be long before fully controllable extra characters are added to custom campaigns.
Just to make it clear, I said from the start a little randomness thrown in for spice is fine. I just don't like it to be dominating. You seem to be really aggressive about this issue. Really, I'm only saying I don't like it when randomness replaces skill, as in the early parts of D&D games.
Now, I know you don't think that's the case, and that's fine. I'm not saying you are wrong. I am however saying that that's how I see it, and all things considered, I think that should be enough. Just let it be.
Regarding FF8, no the actual damage formula itself isn't actually explained, but all you need to do is see what damage you are doing, how much a few stat gains affect it, and then from there you instantly have all you need to draw upon to figure it out yourself. They don't spell it out sure, but it's hardly hidden. There IS randomness to it, but it's very minor, essentially to spice it up a bit. A standard attack at a certain level that averages 100 won't also be doing 200 and 10, it'll always be in the area of 90-110 or so I'd say. Likewise, a critical, while slightly varied, will always be roughly double what a normal attack is. To analyze the formula for a critical hit, in any of these games, all you need to do is remember what the attack value of a normal hit is and do the math.
You mention that having characters that develop exactly the same is boring, and yes, I see exactly what you mean. In a game like FF1, where the stats are exactly LOCKED into place, it IS in fact boring to play with the same party over and over. There are other things sure, but the stats are always going to be about the same. However, my point is really that, rather than resorting to a random element for THAT particular issue, they give YOU control of stat development to solve the issue in a lot of games. Having the control taken away from me, you see, bores me.
Allow me to give you an example of a way to get the stats varied without resorting to randomness. In Final Fantasy 2, there are no levels at all, not in the traditional sense really. No experience points to be found. Rather, everything you do has a direct and almost immediate effect on your stats in near-real time. If you attack, then after the battle, strength increases. If you use magic, then intelligence or wisdom increases. If you use a bow, your archery ability increases. If you TAKE damage, your defense or HP increases. If you dodge an attack, your evasion rate increases (there's another bit of randomness for you, thrown in at just enough of a level to make it fun without removing too much control from the player). Essentially, every single game you characters can be VASTLY different in their stats. However, very little randomness and in the end, it was you (and in part, the attacks of the enemies) that determined your character's abilities. There are penalties mind you. You raise your strength a lot, and your wisdom and intelligence start going down. The drops aren't as big as the raises mind you, so overall you will always be getting stronger, but you'll really need to decide how you want to develop your characters. You can thus custom form your character to be anything from a powerful black mage, a great white mage, a legendary swordsman, or even a jack of all trades as a red mage, though that type of character won't be as good at any of it's individual abilities as a specialist.
Another example is this. I think I've said it before actually. In FF6 and in FF8, the summoned monsters are well, equipable (as crystals, well, it is Final Fantasy, crystals are kinda needed). A large amount have stat bonuses. The maximum limit is, for most of the stats, the number you can get for equipping the best possible stat boost to that character at their starting level and keeping it there until level 99 (or 100 in the case of FF8). This means you can't max out EVERYTHING in one game. That means you have to choose which stats matter most and emphasize them. THAT means that every game will result in different stats.
You see, there are many solutions to this outside randomness.
I just want to make something clear. As much as I've pretty much ridden randomness into the ground, I don't completely HATE it. I just think it has it's place. If I'm in the mood to actually play a game where chance and skill are pretty much equal in determining the flow of things, then I play Mario Party. I also ENJOY Mario Party. I don't pretend if I win that it was totally do to my skill though, I'm just playing to have fun and win the most minigames possible there, and the randomness is there basically TO take the control away from you, and in that sort of game, that's half the point. When I'm in the mood for a game like that, I play it. However, when I want to play a fighting game, randomness must be much more subdued. For example, I generally always select "random level", and sometimes "random character", however, if my character, during battle, randomly started switching abilities, then I wouldn't be able to control them reliably. That's why I avoid Game & Watch. One of that fellow's moves is totally random, and as a result, isn't something I can depend on in a fix. While the other moves it has are nice, and I don't actually need to depend on the random one, in the end I had to decide it made Game & Watch potentially weaker. I go for the sure thing when it comes to my character's moveset. However, at the same time, the items that randomly appear I DEMAND to be random. Hard to really explain it, but I guess it really does just come down to taste.
I guess all I'm saying is we expect different things from our games, SOME different things anyway. You see, when I say I don't like how at the start, the control is kinda taken away from me and given to the dice, you say you don't even see the control being taken away. At the same time, when you say you like to be able to take your time in a game and MM doesn't allow that, I myself am of the opinion that it gives you plenty of time to do stuff and I always found I had plenty of freedom to explore so long as I dedicated my exploring to one area at a time.
It's really not a big deal. I "get over" it easily enough and I DO still enjoy those games. However, I just wanted to vent a bit about the whole thing. Don't really take it personally or anything.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - A Black Falcon - 8th May 2004
Quote:Um, Neverwinter Nights is not a terrible D&D game "by all accounts". Yeesh, a HUGE number of people really love the game. The expression "by all accounts" DOES require ALL accounts to actually be that way for you to be able to say it you know, not just a large number. PA also seemed to love it, and their opinions are ones I usually agree with. My friends and I also enjoyed it. Yes though, the single player campaign included with it IS pretty aweful. It's pretty much this big stereotyped story with the main flaw of too many US RPGs. That flaw, if you ask me, is emphasizing everything WAY too much, like the narrator is literely trying to BASH the supposed deepness emotion and history into your skull with a hammer. The other expansions are nice enough, though honestly when I say it's great, I'm talking about the custom campaigns. You may not play them much, but disregarding a feature as unimportant just because you didn't like it isn't exactly nice. Honestly, it's about the biggest part of it. That's where all the fun comes from. So, if you don't care for custom maps, I suppose that's one thing, but honestly, don't disregard the game as bad for EVERYONE based on something you alone don't like, but is obviuosly VERY popular.
If the story were really typical for a good American RPG, would so many people have complained (who play PC RPGs)? No, I don't think so... the key word there being 'good'... :) By 'all accounts' I meant most all the reviews I had read. And I meant the single player campaign, not the multiplayer. And as I said I wasn't including the expansions (reviews of a game generally don't, after all... :)). And that includes a healthy dose of my own dislike for the game for not having parties... :)
Anyway, the point is that it is NOT regarded as one of the best D&D RPGs. Oh, it's not a bad game, but it is lacking in several ways (poor single player campaign and the graphics (repetitive, I've heard the complaint as...) are the biggest ones...)
Quote:The diff between other players and the "henchmen" is that you can actually strategize with the other humans and they are actually able to think. It's a much fuller experience that way, and it really feels like you are on an adventure with a party, even if you don't control them. I do however believe in the future they should add at least the ABILITY to control multiple characters, fully, at once. Wouldn't be long before fully controllable extra characters are added to custom campaigns.
That new PC Bioware RPG they just announced better have parties...
Quote:Just to make it clear, I said from the start a little randomness thrown in for spice is fine. I just don't like it to be dominating. You seem to be really aggressive about this issue. Really, I'm only saying I don't like it when randomness replaces skill, as in the early parts of D&D games.
Now, I know you don't think that's the case, and that's fine. I'm not saying you are wrong. I am however saying that that's how I see it, and all things considered, I think that should be enough. Just let it be.
Oh, just say 'oh fine your statement's fine even though I think it's totally wrong'? Umm...
Quote:Regarding FF8, no the actual damage formula itself isn't actually explained, but all you need to do is see what damage you are doing, how much a few stat gains affect it, and then from there you instantly have all you need to draw upon to figure it out yourself. They don't spell it out sure, but it's hardly hidden. There IS randomness to it, but it's very minor, essentially to spice it up a bit. A standard attack at a certain level that averages 100 won't also be doing 200 and 10, it'll always be in the area of 90-110 or so I'd say. Likewise, a critical, while slightly varied, will always be roughly double what a normal attack is. To analyze the formula for a critical hit, in any of these games, all you need to do is remember what the attack value of a normal hit is and do the math.
And over the time of a combat I don't see how this is appreciably different from D&D. Battles are long. That 2 balances with a 12 to average 7, same as if it was a 6 and a 8! So it's a bigger range. So?
And as I said D&D tells you all those formulas. And shows damage numbers so if you want to see how much damage you can be doing you could likewise figure it out. Except they give you more of the pieces (though the formula is likely more complex). :)
Quote:You mention that having characters that develop exactly the same is boring, and yes, I see exactly what you mean. In a game like FF1, where the stats are exactly LOCKED into place, it IS in fact boring to play with the same party over and over. There are other things sure, but the stats are always going to be about the same. However, my point is really that, rather than resorting to a random element for THAT particular issue, they give YOU control of stat development to solve the issue in a lot of games. Having the control taken away from me, you see, bores me.
Fine. But that could easily be extended (and almost sounds like you mean it to be extended...) to 'and D&D takes that control away'. Which is totally wrong, given how much customizability you get over your characters... yes, most of it is on character creation (another HUGE difference... how PC titles almost always let you customize a character to your choosing (though in BG you only create the main character and get NPCs to join your party as the rest of the characters...) and a console game makes you use the specific one given...). But there are many variables as you progress. More than most any console title, certainly. The stats themselves? Remember, you choose proficiencies and theif abilities directly... and the rest of the stuff is based heavily on your choices in the beginning (the main stats)...
Quote:Allow me to give you an example of a way to get the stats varied without resorting to randomness. In Final Fantasy 2, there are no levels at all, not in the traditional sense really. No experience points to be found. Rather, everything you do has a direct and almost immediate effect on your stats in near-real time. If you attack, then after the battle, strength increases. If you use magic, then intelligence or wisdom increases. If you use a bow, your archery ability increases. If you TAKE damage, your defense or HP increases. If you dodge an attack, your evasion rate increases (there's another bit of randomness for you, thrown in at just enough of a level to make it fun without removing too much control from the player). Essentially, every single game you characters can be VASTLY different in their stats. However, very little randomness and in the end, it was you (and in part, the attacks of the enemies) that determined your character's abilities. There are penalties mind you. You raise your strength a lot, and your wisdom and intelligence start going down. The drops aren't as big as the raises mind you, so overall you will always be getting stronger, but you'll really need to decide how you want to develop your characters. You can thus custom form your character to be anything from a powerful black mage, a great white mage, a legendary swordsman, or even a jack of all trades as a red mage, though that type of character won't be as good at any of it's individual abilities as a specialist.
'Use ability X and ability X'es value increases'? I'm familiar with that one, it's used in Quest for Glory... you have no levels, but have a lot of stats and as you do things those values increase (provided you have any points in them; something you have 0 in will never increase). That means lots of throwing rocks at a tree if you want to get good at throwing. :D
Dungeon Siege has an element of that too... though it's very simple and makes the game so, so simple -- you'll improve in whatever spell or weapon you're using, and it'll level up that ability. In lieu of choosing abilities to be more proficient in level-up. So it just works as a way of simplifying the RPG aspects of a simple game (can you guess that that game bored me? :) ).
It's an okay system, but one that was more used in older stuff like QFG... it has issues. Like how to get good at things sometimes it makes you do something over and over... not too much fun...
Quote:Another example is this. I think I've said it before actually. In FF6 and in FF8, the summoned monsters are well, equipable (as crystals, well, it is Final Fantasy, crystals are kinda needed). A large amount have stat bonuses. The maximum limit is, for most of the stats, the number you can get for equipping the best possible stat boost to that character at their starting level and keeping it there until level 99 (or 100 in the case of FF8). This means you can't max out EVERYTHING in one game. That means you have to choose which stats matter most and emphasize them. THAT means that every game will result in different stats.
Yes, choice as you progress is definitely good in an RPG. Any good RPG has such things.
Quote:I guess all I'm saying is we expect different things from our games, SOME different things anyway. You see, when I say I don't like how at the start, the control is kinda taken away from me and given to the dice, you say you don't even see the control being taken away. At the same time, when you say you like to be able to take your time in a game and MM doesn't allow that, I myself am of the opinion that it gives you plenty of time to do stuff and I always found I had plenty of freedom to explore so long as I dedicated my exploring to one area at a time.
I don't see it as being taken away and don't see how you could see it as returning later... that doesn't make sense, as I said several times before... your logic that 'now that I succeed most of the time it's more based on my stats but when I succeeded less it was based on luck' is just strange. Oh, I do kind of get your opinion that you dislike how when you're at a mid level you'll sometimes succeed and sometimes fail (though I most definitely would never consider that as a bad thing)
My conclusion? I'm sorry that you didn't play more good boardgames like HeroQuest, Dragon Strike, or wargame/strategy titles like RISK or Axis & Allies when you were younger. Great games. (and you can probably guess how they relate to this issue...) I got used to dice deciding combats many years ago... sure, it's random, but why is that a bad thing? As I've said, it's influenced randomness, not totally random stuff. And it adds interest to the game. Again, it'd make these games a lot harder, and, in the overall perspective, less strategic, I think, if they got rid of the random element. LESS strategic by getting rid of randomness? Yes, because those random elements add many things to the games that would be pretty hard to have in otherwise, and allow much more interesting battles that can be done in a much simpler fashion.
Like, Axis & Allies. World War II grand strategy boardgame. My two Infantries invade an island. One defends it. Infantry gets two dice on defence (or is it three?) and one on attack... so the defender actually has a fair chance of winning despite the disadvantage. Now, I'm sure you could come up with some system of hitpoints and set attack numbers, but it'd make it more like Chess -- 'move piece here and win with 3 men, or lose if I have 2' every time. Needless to say that'd lead to a boring game after you play it a few times! Oh, sure, it'd still have strategy for sure (in anticipating your opponents' moves), and I think Chess is certainly one of the great games, but the random element adds more than it detracts. And I'd make a similar case for D&D.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - Dark Jaguar - 8th May 2004
Why are you still debating this? I never intended to convince you you are WRONG, but you really seem to think that's what I'm doing. Let me spell it out for you. I am NOT OB1.
Quote:Oh, just say 'oh fine your statement's fine even though I think it's totally wrong'? Umm...
Um, that's exactly my point there. I'm not trying to say you are wrong, or your thinking is wrong, or that I even think your thinking is wrong! I see exactly why you enjoy that stuff, and I don't mean in any way to imply it's stupid or wrong to think it. I know, you're used to OB1 doing stuff like that, but I am not doing that stuff to you here. I really AM saying your opinion is perfectly valid. I myself am ONLY saying why I don't like it. I'm not trying to convince you my opinion is the right one here, or anyone for that matter. I'm just giving my view on it.
Just to make it clear, the average may be 7, but that's not what I get. I'll get a battle where I get nothing but 2's, and then a battle with nothing but 14's. I almost never get a battle that actually mixes everything up perfectly near the start. Later, when the difference really doesn't matter, that doensn't happen any more. Again, I fully understand that you are the sort of person that enjoys playing with variables, the idea of trying to analyze what gives you the best chance of success. I can see how that can be fun, I really can. That's just not what entertains me.
Now, I already explained my view, and I'm not trying to convince you here. I didn't attack your view either, nor am I saying "you can think that" in a demeaning way because I DO respect your opinion. Mine just differs. Let's just leave it at that, okay? I let you think what you will about Zelda despite my being able to enjoy it, so why not let me think what I want about this d20 thing despite your being able to enjoy it?
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - A Black Falcon - 8th May 2004
Quote:Just to make it clear, the average may be 7, but that's not what I get. I'll get a battle where I get nothing but 2's, and then a battle with nothing but 14's. I almost never get a battle that actually mixes everything up perfectly near the start. Later, when the difference really doesn't matter, that doensn't happen any more. Again, I fully understand that you are the sort of person that enjoys playing with variables, the idea of trying to analyze what gives you the best chance of success. I can see how that can be fun, I really can. That's just not what entertains me.
I don't pay much attention to how much damage I am doing in a PC RPG at any specific time (obviously in a boardgame you would... :) ). There are many things much more important to be doing during battle, like deciding what to do next, choosing spells, etc... especially in a title like Baldur's Gate. Oh, sure, I could if I wished -- you are constantly pausing to give new orders, and I could spend a lot of time looking up and seeing how much damage I'm doing (the damage is shown in the main text box at the bottom of the screen, where conversations and the like also go, in the BG games; Torment puts it as numbers on the main screen itsself), but why? I know the ranges my people will be hitting in. Now, I will listen for the characters' "I am not doing any damage" speeches, which means I've got to switch weapons or use magic with them because the enemy is impervious to their current weapon, but when I know the range why should I look at the numbers a lot? Anyway, I know how they will perform... my main character will do the most damage (four attacks per turn, two good weapons... lots of damage... :) ), the other Ranger second, etc... sure it has a element of randomness but the set factors -- like, for instance, the number of attacks per turn, as well as proficiencies and the character's Strength -- are a much bigger factor in how much damage they will do overall!
... But maybe that's because BGII starts you at level 7? :D
I'll bet you think that it gives you lots of lows and then lots of highs more because you notice when it does than because it happens all the time. It'd be natural for it to be that way, after all...
Though... I have heard that the most random sets DO have clumping. Like, flipping a coin. You'll get heads five times in a row but over 100 flips it'll be close to fifty each... so some grouping IS natural. But you seem to suggest more than that, which is why I said that I bet you're seeing what you look for, and not all of what is there.
Quote:Now, I already explained my view, and I'm not trying to convince you here. I didn't attack your view either, nor am I saying "you can think that" in a demeaning way because I DO respect your opinion. Mine just differs. Let's just leave it at that, okay? I let you think what you will about Zelda despite my being able to enjoy it, so why not let me think what I want about this d20 thing despite your being able to enjoy it?
I see nothing wrong in saying my opinion. But we've discussed this far too many times before to make it worth talking about again.
Famitsu's Pikmin 2 review - Dark Jaguar - 8th May 2004
Actually, I check the damage for each and every attack. I do it real time too. I always have done that. It's important for me to know the results of every single move so I can know exactly how low the enemy's HP is. Just trusting my character to "ballpark" it without looking just isn't my style. I get it from the Japanese RPGs, where I do the same thing. On that note, every Japanese RPG I've played does in fact display damage numbers on every attack, not hide them. So no, I wouldn't say it's a case of "only counting the hits and not the misses". Thanks to snopes, I'm very wary of falling into that trap. My overall performance ACROSS battles just isn't so important to me as my performance in a SINGLE battle. I tend to live in the moment. Of course, that means I am very bad at chess (don't get me wrong, I like chess, I'm just not good at it because I'm not good at thinking ahead, just in the moment, like Solid Snake, which is probably why he becomes the main tool of so many conspiracies...), but I'm very GOOD at those snap decisions that make or break a fight, or at least I think so.
You already said your opinion though, and I said mine, and it's obviuosly just a matter of taste, so why actually go about trying to CONVINCE the other person after that? Don't defend it with "just saying my opinion", you're dwelling on something that I don't want to talk about. I mean no disrespect, but you do tend to have a habit of making a big deal out of nothing. I have a "low level" opinion here. I have a hard time explaning it, but honestly, I think it needs explaining. People can have opinions on things that aren't completely "I will fight to the end because of how totally right I am!" level opinions. The opinions I have on right and wrong and religion are the ones I totally BELIEVE in, but things like this? It's just an "eh, yeah I think that" sort of thing. Not a full mind totally dedicated to it thing. Basically, all I'm asking is that you find why a person thinks something, and if it's a minor issue, and the other person doesn't really want to argue about it, you should just let it go for what it is.