2nd May 2007, 9:41 PM
Okay I'll drop Planescape, except for this. The focus on story shows we are looking at different aspects here.
Planescape, from what I've played of it, does have an interesting story. When I finally get back to it I intend on playing the rest of the way through. I do in fact value a good story in a game. I'd be lying if I said otherwise. But, a game can more than make up for what it lacks in an open free-interaction and choices in story with the rest of it's gameplay. I think perhaps you just haven't given these alternative styles a chance to rub off on you.
I played Neverwinter Nights, at least. I'll tell you what I will of that. Does it have an "intricate and well developed system" underneath all the gameplay?
Yes, it does. Unfortunatly, it's underealized if you ask me. Now, I appreciate things like being able to unlock a door or set a trap, but that's not really combat, that's something else. I'm talking actual combat systems. I can also appreciate a million stats that each affect different skills, like accuracy with a bow or the strenth of a magic missile (for proper attacking of the darkness). That's not really strategy though. Those are statistics. Magic: The Gathering (which I have to say I DO actually have a deck of) gives an example of real strategy, and that's got basically two statistics and somewhat simplistic rules. What matters there is clever effects where you can be all like at 1 life point and after activating a series (of tubes) special effects, you can be all "and with THAT in effect, THIS, nullifying everything you did and turning THAT against you". I've never done that in Neverwinter Nights. In that game, it really was all about boosting my statistics in various fields using various equipment to get an edge in battle. Traps set before the battle, which may not even take place due to them, don't really count. Getting the drop with stealth for an initial attack is "cute" but I was doing that in Earthbound, I was doing that in Final Fantasy with certain equipment. That's not strategy.
Okay, let me put it this way. Maybe Neverwinter Nights should also be excluded from the list. I'll admit, I haven't played either of the Fallout games (watched a friend play a little of the beginning, though that doesn't really count).
Describe to me a scenario with deeply involved strategy in one of those games. Basically I'm saying I may have been playing these games "all wrong", a possibility you should consider when it comes to console RPGs. It sounds like you never once actually thought through a battle and just hit the "attack" command over and over again.
I would have been bored from the very first Japanese RPG I played if there wasn't involved strategy I had to come up with to win. I really don't think you are playing them the right way. I think you are just sorta power leveling. You describe a "grind" but in something like Final Fantasy (for the most part) or Chrono Trigger, I never really had to grind. Further, if you never went on side quests, I'm not surpriused you never found the armor with special effects. For example, and I know you love this form of strategy, there's the stuff that cuts all elemental attacks by 50%, or absorbs one specific element, or a sword that gets a critical strike 70% of the time, or one that drains MP to do 4x damage instead of 2x during a critical strike, or something that makes you undead, meaning instant death spells heal them completely, but you can't use party-wide cure effects any more.
And I've checked all the complicated algorythms as they have been decoded for at least a few Japanese RPGs, there is a system to be found.
Looking at Chess again, that game has a lot of strategy and has almost no rules to it. A massive rule book doesn't necessarily make for a better, or more "in depth" game, except in the sense that it has a lot of rules. By the same token you can end up with a surprising level of depth with some basic rules so long as there is a lot of ways to vary those rules and stuff that totally violates those rules. Why not have abilities that defy the rules? It makes things more interesting if you have a pawn that can, for no good reason, change into a queen.
I think you really just need to give them a chance. I mean I gave the American ones a chance. I've had a lot of fun developing my characters. I've actually taken the time to just sit around CREATING characters without even playing the game. I'm not saying those games are bad, they are very well done and to be honest I do like the range of freedom they offer. I'm just saying all those guides over at GameFAQs with strategy after strategy for all manner of in-game battles should tell you something, and that's that strategy exists in the good console RPGs.
Planescape, from what I've played of it, does have an interesting story. When I finally get back to it I intend on playing the rest of the way through. I do in fact value a good story in a game. I'd be lying if I said otherwise. But, a game can more than make up for what it lacks in an open free-interaction and choices in story with the rest of it's gameplay. I think perhaps you just haven't given these alternative styles a chance to rub off on you.
I played Neverwinter Nights, at least. I'll tell you what I will of that. Does it have an "intricate and well developed system" underneath all the gameplay?
Yes, it does. Unfortunatly, it's underealized if you ask me. Now, I appreciate things like being able to unlock a door or set a trap, but that's not really combat, that's something else. I'm talking actual combat systems. I can also appreciate a million stats that each affect different skills, like accuracy with a bow or the strenth of a magic missile (for proper attacking of the darkness). That's not really strategy though. Those are statistics. Magic: The Gathering (which I have to say I DO actually have a deck of) gives an example of real strategy, and that's got basically two statistics and somewhat simplistic rules. What matters there is clever effects where you can be all like at 1 life point and after activating a series (of tubes) special effects, you can be all "and with THAT in effect, THIS, nullifying everything you did and turning THAT against you". I've never done that in Neverwinter Nights. In that game, it really was all about boosting my statistics in various fields using various equipment to get an edge in battle. Traps set before the battle, which may not even take place due to them, don't really count. Getting the drop with stealth for an initial attack is "cute" but I was doing that in Earthbound, I was doing that in Final Fantasy with certain equipment. That's not strategy.
Okay, let me put it this way. Maybe Neverwinter Nights should also be excluded from the list. I'll admit, I haven't played either of the Fallout games (watched a friend play a little of the beginning, though that doesn't really count).
Describe to me a scenario with deeply involved strategy in one of those games. Basically I'm saying I may have been playing these games "all wrong", a possibility you should consider when it comes to console RPGs. It sounds like you never once actually thought through a battle and just hit the "attack" command over and over again.
I would have been bored from the very first Japanese RPG I played if there wasn't involved strategy I had to come up with to win. I really don't think you are playing them the right way. I think you are just sorta power leveling. You describe a "grind" but in something like Final Fantasy (for the most part) or Chrono Trigger, I never really had to grind. Further, if you never went on side quests, I'm not surpriused you never found the armor with special effects. For example, and I know you love this form of strategy, there's the stuff that cuts all elemental attacks by 50%, or absorbs one specific element, or a sword that gets a critical strike 70% of the time, or one that drains MP to do 4x damage instead of 2x during a critical strike, or something that makes you undead, meaning instant death spells heal them completely, but you can't use party-wide cure effects any more.
And I've checked all the complicated algorythms as they have been decoded for at least a few Japanese RPGs, there is a system to be found.
Looking at Chess again, that game has a lot of strategy and has almost no rules to it. A massive rule book doesn't necessarily make for a better, or more "in depth" game, except in the sense that it has a lot of rules. By the same token you can end up with a surprising level of depth with some basic rules so long as there is a lot of ways to vary those rules and stuff that totally violates those rules. Why not have abilities that defy the rules? It makes things more interesting if you have a pawn that can, for no good reason, change into a queen.
I think you really just need to give them a chance. I mean I gave the American ones a chance. I've had a lot of fun developing my characters. I've actually taken the time to just sit around CREATING characters without even playing the game. I'm not saying those games are bad, they are very well done and to be honest I do like the range of freedom they offer. I'm just saying all those guides over at GameFAQs with strategy after strategy for all manner of in-game battles should tell you something, and that's that strategy exists in the good console RPGs.
"On two occasions, I have been asked [by members of Parliament], 'Pray, Mr. Babbage, if you put into the machine wrong figures, will the right answers come out?' I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question." ~ Charles Babbage (1791-1871)