• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

WRPGs with good combat?

Brashnir

Member
I'm a big RPG guy in general. I've probably played around half of all JRPGs that saw an English retail release since the SNES era (inclusive).

Anyway, the speed of battles depends on which particular DQ we are talking about -- DQ8 was slow as molasses.
Resource management is a fair point, it does have a bit more of that than most modern JRPGs (since it's mostly an abandoned concept outside of dungeon crawlers).

Balance, well, balance is something incredibly important to some players of JRPGs and WRPGs alike, but it's not a priority I share. To me, interesting tactical and strategic (character progression / mechanical customization) possibilities are far more important. What good is balance if I end up performing the same rote actions in the vast majority of a game's battle encounters?

And I hate Akira Toriyama's style so that probably doesn't help my enjoyment of DQ :p

To the bolded, balance can definitely have an impact on the presence of rote, repetitive encounters. If the PvE balance is skewed too far in favor of the player, there is no need to explore additional options within the systems that give that tactical depth. At that point you end up with rote steamroll encounters regardless of the potential tactical depth within the system.
 

Sanctuary

Member
To the bolded, balance can definitely have an impact on the presence of rote, repetitive encounters. If the PvE balance is skewed too far in favor of the player, there is no need to explore additional options within the systems that give that tactical depth. At that point you end up with rote steamroll encounters regardless of the potential tactical depth within the system.

Biggest problem I have with too many games that start out relatively strong. Aside from Horizon (which was pretty fun while new enemies were being introduced at least), Original Sin is a prime example of balancing problems. You start out with a rather limited selection of spells and abilities, but yet you still have plenty of tactical options due to the environment itself and its interactability. Not even quite at the halfway mark though the game gets quite a bit easier, yet it can still be challenging, and it doesn't yet become dull. You kind of have to force yourself to stay away from the higher teired spells though or it pretty much ruins every encounter after that. I mean, I guess you could be someone that didn't even use a single caster or bow user and just played with all melee your first time through, but I find it hard to believe more than a few people tried that with even an inkling of how the gameplay mechanics were being advertised. Of course, there were difficulty options, but that's still a balancing thing.

Hell, as much as Dragon Age: Origins got touted as being so deep and tactical, it too had so many ways to cheese the game to the point in which there wasn't really anything better to try. The same tactic worked for almost every encounter, and you could even abuse certain spells and AI to finish fights before enemies even engaged you!
 

Brashnir

Member
Biggest problem I have with too many games that start out relatively strong. Aside from Horizon (which was pretty fun while new enemies were being introduced at least), Original Sin is a prime example of balancing problems. You start out with a rather limited selection of spells and abilities, but yet you still have plenty of tactical options due to the environment itself and its interactability. Not even quite at the halfway mark though the game gets quite a bit easier, yet it can still be challenging, and it doesn't yet become dull. You kind of have to force yourself to stay away from the higher teired spells though or it pretty much ruins every encounter after that. I mean, I guess you could be someone that didn't even use a single caster or bow user and just played with all melee your first time through, but I find it hard to believe more than a few people tried that with even an inkling of how the gameplay mechanics were being advertised. Of course, there were difficulty options, but that's still a balancing thing.

Hell, as much as Dragon Age: Origins got touted as being so deep and tactical, it too had so many ways to cheese the game to the point in which there wasn't really anything better to try. The same tactic worked for almost every encounter, and you could even abuse certain spells and AI to finish fights before enemies even engaged you!

It's very difficult to balance a game where the player gains power over the course of it, and the longer the game is, the more difficult this becomes. Players who are willing to grind out every drop of XP/loot/crafting vs those who are willing to glide past some content and may not even delve into the crafting are going to be at very different points late in a game, so the options are to either make it way too easy for player A or way too hard for player B.

It's one of the reasons I tend to prefer games that are relatively short.
 
When people think about WPRG combat, they only think about action RPGs.

When people thin about JRPG combat, they only think about turn-based.

This kind of discussion has never gone well with such narrow-minded generalizations.
 
Hyper Light Drifter (the best I can think of)
Destiny (best thing about the game)

From what I have played of Crosscode that seems to be coming along nicely.

The Surge looks decent combat wise but haven't played it.
 

Spoit

Member
When people think about WPRG combat, they only think about action RPGs.

When people thin about JRPG combat, they only think about turn-based.

This kind of discussion has never gone well with such narrow-minded generalizations.

Are we reading the same thread? Until this latest conversation about DQ, it's been the exact opposite. People have been suggesting things like DivOS for the wRPGs, and basing their jRPG comparisons on freaking DMC
 
Top Bottom