|
After beating war of genesis3 I came to thinking... Is it really that hard to incorporate some sort of realism into these genre? I understand how tricky this can be for a developer, especially if its in a fantasy setting, but some things just go too far.
I want to talk particularly about characters' mortality. First thing everyone is thinking is probably Aerith from FF7. Seriously? You die countless times in battle, but you can come back to life after sleeping at an inn... or a tent. Your friends have spells to revive, or can heal you with magic. You got stabbed, shot, and clawed by all sorts of shit until now, but you die from this one particular stab? Its not the first or last time this kind of thing happens. Ok, you can think of battle deaths as being knocked out or whatever but i mean whats happening when you are fighting, getting hit, and losing hp. Are those all just surface wounds? eventually you lose enough blood and pass out? I think it would be cool to have a battle system thats more consistent.... if not with real life then at least with its own world.
In war of genesis 3, the main character is a ridiculous beast. You can literally beat the whole game just using this single character. He can take on armies of enemies all at once and wipe them out with a single special move (kind of like a limit break). This guy dies to a few bullet wounds for story reasons. We've seen this so many times in almost every japanese game. Is it unavoidable? I dont think so.
Games like fire emblem have permanent death in battle. And other games with permanent death have at least a believable reason for why they couldnt revive that character this one time. Western RPGs tend to follow some modification of D&D rules which are pretty realistic and consistent. How hard would it be to make a traditional JRPG or strategy rpg that has a ruleset similar to D&D?
One of my biggest annoyances in some games is the disparity in stats of characters and monsters. Your characters do immense damage, but cap out at 999 HP or whatever. Monsters do damage relative to your max hp, but they have a shit ton of HP. This is just stupid and to me its just a way to simplify the battle system. Why cant they make a consistent system where stats are equally treated for everybody in that world?
I'm trying to envision a strategy game in a medieval fantasy setting that is as realistic as Jagged allience 2. I think it would be awesome :0
 
|
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
Thanks for the good laughs dude :p
Maybe you should try some Commando or Fallout tactics.
|
On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
Dragons and fictional creatures are realistic in the context of the game world though.
|
Yea and the huge amount of life of the hero too i guess.
lol
|
is awesome32280 Posts
Fictional pact or go home.
|
Blazinghand
United States25562 Posts
On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
AD&D may have been unrealistic, but it was internally consistent-- monsters had HD, levels, attack bonuses etc just like players, and followed the same "physics" even though it was weird.
|
On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
there is a bit more realism in it than you think
the main thing that most people don't get, is that HP isn't "how many more wacks can i get hit with this sword", it's more like battle karma, where in the context of the game world, nothing is actually more than superficially hurting you until you hit 0 and finally get impaled by that spear
You die countless times in battle
she doesn't die in battle - this plot hole is the result of bad translation
in japan the "life" spell is called "raise" and has since been translated properly in more recent FFs
the only game where characters actually die is FF1, in every other FF game they're just knocked unconscious
|
On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
Thanks for the good laughs dude :p
Maybe you should try some Commando or Fallout tactics.
Fallout tactics is just as realistic as ADD.
|
On November 09 2011 06:04 Blazinghand wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
AD&D may have been unrealistic, but it was internally consistent-- monsters had HD, levels, attack bonuses etc just like players, and followed the same "physics" even though it was weird.
Games based on it were never able to maintain the consistency, though. Resurrection is fucking EXPENSIVE for low-level characters in D&D, if a level 3 character dies you're best off just forgetting about them, but there's always a temple or save spot nearby that will resurrect them for free or for almost nothing.
|
On November 09 2011 06:06 Klockan3 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
Thanks for the good laughs dude :p
Maybe you should try some Commando or Fallout tactics. Fallout tactics is just as realistic as ADD.
Coz super mutants don't exist right ? Where did i say that it is a "realistic" game ? What the fuck realistic even means ?
Is CoD more realistic than Quake because you use "real" weapons ? Man can't wait to read the debate about auto-heal being realistic or not lol.
Dude realism in video games doesn't mean shit except maybe if you play Flight simulator with a proper joystick. I mentioned those games because you get "killed" fast and because they are harder to play than your average brainless Statgrind-Rpg.
|
Almost every game is like this and I've rarely seen a battle system in any game (rpg or not) that has a realistic way of doing damage to the player and enemies. Even modern shooter games, you can take like 10 shots to the chest and still be ok, and every enemy takes at least 3-4 shots when in reality it would be 1-2 to put someone down most of the time.
It really sucks, I do wish there were more realistic battle systems in games as well. :<
|
United States5162 Posts
On November 09 2011 06:21 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 06:06 Klockan3 wrote:On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
Thanks for the good laughs dude :p
Maybe you should try some Commando or Fallout tactics. Fallout tactics is just as realistic as ADD. Coz super mutants don't exist right ? Where did i say that it is a "realistic" game ? What the fuck realistic even means ? Is CoD more realistic than Quake because you use "real" weapons ? Man can't wait to read the debate about auto-heal being realistic or not lol. Dude realism in video games doesn't mean shit except maybe if you play Flight simulator with a proper joystick. I mentioned those games because you get "killed" fast and because they are harder to play than your average brainless Statgrind-Rpg.
You sound angry.
It's called suspension of disbelief. As long as things in the story are consistent it can be considered 'realistic' and people don't care if there's some monstrous dragon killing a wizard as long as it makes sense in relation to everything else.
|
I wanted to blog about RPG and Food/Sleep.
Have you noticed that in every game that has food and sleep - it's not really viable. Either it's a waste of time, or resources/money, or just the benefit from such activities isn't worth it. I wish I could find an RPG in which it's actually a good strategy to eat and sleep regularly. (not as strict as Harvest Moon with sleeping, but somewhat more viable than the current popular RPG variants and MMORPGs)
|
i guess i used the term realistic a bit loosely. I mean of course most games cannot be realistic in the literal sense. But it can still strive to i think.
What if there is a battle system that kills you in a couple of hits, but many different defenses must be breached for you to take that damage. Evasion rolls, armor levels, concentration level (for modifying evasion rates and to hit chance or something), parry, block. I know these are all general stats thats been used forever, but if they make these stats the core factor in survivability rather than some HP that you heal and what not, maybe combat could be more fun .... I guess balancing would be extremely hard considering you could die so easily lol. And also, the number of enemies in general needs to be adjusted for a given level/area....
Im just thinking about stupid shit that could never happen, but at least my gripe with consistency is probably shared by most any gamer.
About the D&D... i think its pretty realistic in terms of damage potential to HP and defense ratio in the early game. It all falls apart when you become godlike in the endgame, but thats a problem in scaling.
|
On November 09 2011 06:33 figq wrote:
I wanted to blog about RPG and Food/Sleep.
Have you noticed that in every game that has food and sleep - it's not really viable. Either it's a waste of time, or resources/money, or just the benefit from such activities isn't worth it. I wish I could find an RPG in which it's actually a good strategy to eat and sleep regularly. (not as strict as Harvest Moon with sleeping, but somewhat more viable than the current popular RPG variants and MMORPGs)
what about metal gear? I think you starved to death if you didnt eat some rat every X hours or soemthing lol
|
If you want realism in jRPG go play Earthbound. Fighting aliens with baseball bats and bottle rockets while healing yourself with a pizza is the way to go.
|
On November 09 2011 05:52 gameguard wrote:
We've seen this so many times in almost every japanese game. Is it unavoidable? I dont think so.
it's what they like in their storytelling.
cultural differences.
|
On November 09 2011 06:47 gameguard wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 06:33 figq wrote:
I wanted to blog about RPG and Food/Sleep.
Have you noticed that in every game that has food and sleep - it's not really viable. Either it's a waste of time, or resources/money, or just the benefit from such activities isn't worth it. I wish I could find an RPG in which it's actually a good strategy to eat and sleep regularly. (not as strict as Harvest Moon with sleeping, but somewhat more viable than the current popular RPG variants and MMORPGs) what about metal gear? I think you starved to death if you didnt eat some rat every X hours or soemthing lol Yeah, something of this sort, but in a more traditional RPG situations.
For example, in a Fantasy RPG, it's just nice to go to an inn, and get some food served on a table, and then go to a room and sleep in a bed. All this can fit within the RPG without taking more than a minute of actual game, just a hint that these kinds of activities really do happen. Currently, you have them implemented, but they aren't really viable except in some rare occasions.
|
On November 09 2011 06:30 Myles wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 06:21 Boblion wrote:On November 09 2011 06:06 Klockan3 wrote:On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
Thanks for the good laughs dude :p
Maybe you should try some Commando or Fallout tactics. Fallout tactics is just as realistic as ADD. Coz super mutants don't exist right ? Where did i say that it is a "realistic" game ? What the fuck realistic even means ? Is CoD more realistic than Quake because you use "real" weapons ? Man can't wait to read the debate about auto-heal being realistic or not lol. Dude realism in video games doesn't mean shit except maybe if you play Flight simulator with a proper joystick. I mentioned those games because you get "killed" fast and because they are harder to play than your average brainless Statgrind-Rpg. You sound angry. It's called suspension of disbelief. As long as things in the story are consistent it can be considered 'realistic' and people don't care if there's some monstrous dragon killing a wizard as long as it makes sense in relation to everything else.
You are introducing many new words now. "Suspension of disbelief", "consistent", "makes sense". It doesn't help us to save the riddle though !
Your point is that if people think the game "makes sense" and is "consistent" then it is "realistic".
But "makes sense" and "consistent" are already synonyms for "realistic" which means that your explanation is funny.
It is like saying that as long as people think that the game is realistic than the game can be considered as realistic. Very true indeed !
Why you just don't admit it is just a matter of personal taste, you know like an opinion instead of using new words ? People are just overthinking instead of enjoying the games. However i can't blame them because it is very hard to enjoy stat-fest rpg when you grow up and hence you try to understand why you get bored. So usually they come up with the idea that it is not "realistic" which is definitly not the proper answer lol. Meanwhile i'm still enjoying completly "unrealistic" action games like Quake or HoN.
Oh and since you like "words" my favourite game is called Deus Ex ( machina ?). Now that's a funny pun :p
|
United States5162 Posts
On November 09 2011 07:08 Boblion wrote:Show nested quote +On November 09 2011 06:30 Myles wrote:On November 09 2011 06:21 Boblion wrote:On November 09 2011 06:06 Klockan3 wrote:On November 09 2011 05:57 Boblion wrote:
- Realism in stat fests games with dragons and various fictional creatures.
- ADD being pretty realistic and consistent.
Thanks for the good laughs dude :p
Maybe you should try some Commando or Fallout tactics. Fallout tactics is just as realistic as ADD. Coz super mutants don't exist right ? Where did i say that it is a "realistic" game ? What the fuck realistic even means ? Is CoD more realistic than Quake because you use "real" weapons ? Man can't wait to read the debate about auto-heal being realistic or not lol. Dude realism in video games doesn't mean shit except maybe if you play Flight simulator with a proper joystick. I mentioned those games because you get "killed" fast and because they are harder to play than your average brainless Statgrind-Rpg. You sound angry. It's called suspension of disbelief. As long as things in the story are consistent it can be considered 'realistic' and people don't care if there's some monstrous dragon killing a wizard as long as it makes sense in relation to everything else. You are introducing many new words now. "Suspension of disbelief", "consistent", "makes sense". It doesn't help us to save the riddle though ! Your point is that if people think the game "makes sense" and is "consistent" then it is "realistic". But "makes sense" and "consistent" are already synonyms for "realistic" which means that your explanation is funny. It is like saying that as long as people think that the game is realistic than the game can be considered as realistic. Very true indeed ! Why you just don't admit it is just a matter of personal taste, you know like an opinion instead of using new words ? People are just overthinking instead of enjoying the games. However i can't blame them because it is very hard to enjoy stat-fest rpg when you grow up and hence you try to understand why you get bored. So usually they come up with the idea that it is not "realistic" which is definitly not the proper answer lol. Meanwhile i'm still enjoying completly "unrealistic" action games like Quake or HoN. Oh and since you like "words" my favourite game is called Deus Ex ( machina ?). Now that's a funny pun :p
I'll just leave it at suspension of disbelief. You seem to want to argue about the semantics of using 'realistic' to describe something not being consistent and breaking said belief.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
