Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Roguey vs the Grognards Thread

imweasel

Guest
SRR managed no combat XP fairly decently - I don't remember many people crying and screaming. I suppose they succeeded at making a fun combat system and didn't need to participate in bribery *shrugs*
Shadowrun Returns forces the player to kill practically everything on a run, there is no need to convolute the design for something that you get no matter what. If the player does happen to avoid a combat situation by making smart choices or using specific skills, then you are rewarded accordingly with XP.

The core design of PoE and SRR are quite different.
 
Joined
May 1, 2013
Messages
4,499
Location
The border of the imaginary
Why do we need xp for filling out the bestiary if the combat is engaging on it's own?

Because a lot of people cry and scream when they don't get the periodic illusion of a reward.

Right he hates rewarding ways and means which is why I said that he is forfeiting his vision to appease the Grognards.. How is my statement wrong..

As far I'm concerned, he isn't.

haha Josh is revealed again as a sellout. Neither can he make Josh Sawyer Suck my Dick RPG nor can he make an IE successor.

After all his grognard hating, he caters to grognards...but not all the way. What a fucking pussy.
 

Abelian

Somebody's Alt
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,289
BG guys never had a proper justification to mix real time into it.
The Infinity Engine started off as a RTS engine, so technically the RPG was mixed in the real time gameplay, not the other way around. But if they really wanted to, Bio could have changed it to TB (like Styg did with UnderRail).
 

ZagorTeNej

Arcane
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
1,980
Enemies who immediately hit you as soon as they come up on your screen are extremely ftl. Doom had a few of these, but they were relatively weak and not obnoxiously overused, unlike Blood's.

They don't actually, Blood's cultists have pretty fast reactions for a FPS enemy (and are often placed around corners so that rushing through a level like Rambo can get you easily killed) but unless you outright suck at shooters the vast majority of the time you'll hit them before they hit you.

Is this another one of yours "I suck at this game therefore it's bad"? No wonder you have such a high opinion of the turtle paced console shooter with a built in cheat mod.
 

ZagorTeNej

Arcane
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
1,980
No arguement here. Yes, both JA2 and ToEE had better combat engines than BG. And, yes, TB in a theoretical level is more tactical than RTwP. But to dismiss RTwP as inherently shit, when 90% of RTwP games have better combat than 90% of TB games is BS.

Are there any RTwP games with great combat aside from IE ones though? If executed on a high level sure RTwP can be as good as TB (worse in some aspects, better in others) but RTwP is so much easier to screw up than TB on a basic level (not including encounter design and such) that I honestly think most RPGs are better off going TB.

As Abelian said above (and as it was known for a long time), the Infinity Engine was built for a strategy game which is IMO a major part of why IE games turned out so well. I think you need to have a good RTS engine to start with for RTWP to work really well.
 

Roguey

Codex Staff
Staff Member
Sawyerite
Joined
May 29, 2010
Messages
35,653
They don't actually, Blood's cultists have pretty fast reactions for a FPS enemy (and are often placed around corners so that rushing through a level like Rambo can get you easily killed) but unless you outright suck at shooters the vast majority of the time you'll hit them before they hit you.
Bullshit. There were plenty of times where *peek around a corner* resulted in an instant hit, especially when there are rooms full of them.

Trial and error "step into a room with hitscan enemies, die, reload, and use the metaknowledge of their positions to win" is extremely ftl. Doom and Quake, good classic fpses, were never like that. Not even DN3D was like that.
 

Sensuki

Arcane
Joined
Oct 26, 2012
Messages
9,799
Location
New North Korea
Codex 2014 Serpent in the Staglands Shadorwun: Hong Kong A Beautifully Desolate Campaign
noob @ fps

in Quake at least, enemies are always moving around. It's different in other games where shooting is more stationary.
 

ZagorTeNej

Arcane
Joined
Dec 10, 2012
Messages
1,980
Bullshit. There were plenty of times where *peek around a corner* resulted in an instant hit, especially when there are rooms full of them.

I replayed the game relatively recently (4-5 months ago I think) on third difficulty level and again I don't remember it being an issue (unlike say aiming at enemies above and below you, Build Engine is really quirky for those situations). As long as you don't have "always run" on and expect trouble when opening doors & enemies around the corner you'll do fine (well you also have to be decent at shooters, not a pro or anything but decent).

Trial and error "step into a room with hitscan enemies, die, reload, and use the metaknowledge of their positions to win"

That's how bad players do it, yes.
 

Chateaubryan

Cipher
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
369
Sometimes I get tired of seeing people furiously throw logs at a fire to extinguish it, then wonder in bewilderment why it is still raging.

...

[Blood is] style over substance hitscan shit
WAT
This isn't really a dramatic issue unless you play it on "Extra Crispy".
In any case, crouch and throw dynamite, FFS.
 

DefJam101

Arcane
Joined
Nov 11, 2007
Messages
8,047
Location
Cybernegro HQ
They don't actually, Blood's cultists have pretty fast reactions for a FPS enemy (and are often placed around corners so that rushing through a level like Rambo can get you easily killed) but unless you outright suck at shooters the vast majority of the time you'll hit them before they hit you.
Bullshit. There were plenty of times where *peek around a corner* resulted in an instant hit, especially when there are rooms full of them.

Trial and error "step into a room with hitscan enemies, die, reload, and use the metaknowledge of their positions to win" is extremely ftl. Doom and Quake, good classic fpses, were never like that. Not even DN3D was like that.
You're right, Blood doesn't play exactly like Doom and Quake because it's a different game with its own style and pacing. The reliance on quick, explosive hitscan vs. dynamite shootouts makes it play like a batshit crazy pulp western film, which was the entire point. DN3D has extremely similar pacing, you just didn't notice because unlike DN3D Blood happens to be somewhat difficult. If you were dying repeatedly before you could react you were playing on the wrong difficulty level.
 

Lujo

Augur
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
242
The Infinity Engine started off as a RTS engine, so technically the RPG was mixed in the real time gameplay, not the other way around. But if they really wanted to, Bio could have changed it to TB (like Styg did with UnderRail).

Exactly, real time got mixed with RPG's mostly due to unfortunate circumstance, executive logic and project mixing not because it improved the genre in any possible way. Various sucessful hybrids sold well mostly on selling story/atmosphere concepts to young semi-literate audience who hasn't even had an experience with a particular genre before (tons of people got into fantasy via BG, for example) but what they mostly sold was tacking on an ability/gear/reward system onto beat-them-ups. It wasn't an evolution of RPG's it was an evolution of "arcade" games, and the glory days of it happened with the graphics leap toweards isometry (and later 3d).

Anywho, seeing BG as an influential RPG classic is problematic because it's not really an RPG classic, it's more like something that happened instead of an RPG. Simmilarly seing Fallout as a pinnacle of achievement in TB RPG is problematic as it wasn't a pinaccle of achievement as much as the only one which even got close to trying to recreate a P&P system (the way ToEE went about it is even sillier as it's even more of a beat-them-up than an RPG. If combat is all there is to it a wargame not an RPG, and that system wasn't really well thought out to begin with).
 

HiddenX

The Elder Spy
Patron
Joined
May 20, 2006
Messages
1,655
Location
Germany
Divinity: Original Sin Shadorwun: Hong Kong
Baldurs Gate is a successor of the (turn based combat) Goldbox games. It has only RTwP combat because Diablo was popular in 1998.
And Diablo is a travesty of a CRPG.


PS:
Even the noobs at Eurogamer prefer turn based combat for PoE :lol:
 
Last edited:

Lujo

Augur
Joined
Mar 3, 2014
Messages
242
^ Yeah, Diabo was an AWESOME beat-them-up, but a terrible RPG XD It's litterally "we had this project going on but we had to scrape it and put out a wacky combat mech and procedural map generation code out and packaged it as a standalone game". It's litterally a leftover from a failed attempt at makaking* an RPG. Then peeps in charge decided that making those is cheaper than making RPG's and everything else happened. Don't get me wrong - I loved Diablo more than anything that spawned off it (including Diablo II which is just a bloated cash in as far as I'm concerned), but I loved it as an arcade game / shooter fan not and RPG fan.

*this is a typo I decided not to fix. "Makaking an RPG" sounds about right for when you set out to make and RPG and end up with Diablo or even Baldurs Gate. XD
 

RandomAccount

Guest
well... then we come back to the word 'balance'.

You can'y have an RPG without combat (...omg, please don't try and promote that shit) so the issue is then 'how much combat'.

What's the exact difference between the right amount of combat and a beat-em-up?

For me it's just whether the combat feels like it's in the right place and the right time and enemies don't regenerate. My biggest criticism of combat is games where you hose down hoards of humans in a non-war city setting - like, how can it make any sense to be killing 1,000 alpha males in a couple of nights? Wouldn't you send the city into complete and total chaos?

Even hosing down 1,000 Orcs out in the wilderness feels more like an extinction than an RPG challenge.

I don't think the IE games did too bad on this count. Everything felt 'in the right amount'. I don't take the beat-em-up argument for the IE engine at all seriously...
 

DragoFireheart

all caps, rainbow colors, SOMETHING.
Joined
Jun 16, 2007
Messages
23,731
So Wizardry isn't an RPG. :hmmm:

Sawyer should douse himself in gasoline and light himself on fire.



^ this. Secrets exit are fine occasionally but they are kinda retarded when they serve no purpose but to teleport you out of the dungeon. Can you find the secret exit from the other side....no. Can you find secret passages that make you avoid part of the dungeon....no. Might as well have just made fast travel possible inside last room of the dungeon and spare the player walking 10 feet in an empty rock corridor.

Or they could have made interesting, non-linear dungeons that are worth exploring.
 
Last edited:

drae

Augur
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
179
You can'y have an RPG without combat (...omg, please don't try and promote that shit) so the issue is then 'how much combat'.

Indeed. I've seen people saying you can have an RPG without combat but that's not the case. An RPG without a combat system is called a SIM *looks at Academagia and Long Live The Queen*
 

Athelas

Arcane
Joined
Jun 24, 2013
Messages
4,502
Baldurs Gate is a successor of the (turn based combat) Goldbox games. It has only RTwP combat because Diablo was popular in 1998.
And Diablo is a travesty of a CRPG.
You realize that Baldur's Gate began development before Diablo was released and that Diablo was originally intended to be turn-based?
 

Lhynn

Arcane
Joined
Aug 28, 2013
Messages
9,824
You can'y have an RPG without combat (...omg, please don't try and promote that shit) so the issue is then 'how much combat'.

Indeed. I've seen people saying you can have an RPG without combat but that's not the case. An RPG without a combat system is called a SIM *looks at Academagia and Long Live The Queen*
Sometimes always monster is an RPG that doesnt feature combat. Its not very good, but its unique.
 

drae

Augur
Joined
Aug 9, 2013
Messages
179
Sometimes always monster is an RPG that doesnt feature combat. Its not very good, but its unique.

Are you sure about that? In a sim you increase the skills of your character so you can solve problems in the world. If Sometimes Always Monster doesn't feature combat, just how does it differ from your average sim?
 

Ninjerk

Arcane
Joined
Jul 10, 2013
Messages
14,323
So Wizardry isn't an RPG. :hmmm:

Sawyer should douse himself in gasoline and light himself on fire.



^ this. Secrets exit are fine occasionally but they are kinda retarded when they serve no purpose but to teleport you out of the dungeon. Can you find the secret exit from the other side....no. Can you find secret passages that make you avoid part of the dungeon....no. Might as well have just made fast travel possible inside last room of the dungeon and spare the player walking 10 feet in an empty rock corridor.

Or they could have made interesting, non-linear dungeons that are worth exploring.
Then he'd be a martyr.
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom