• Hello Guest, Neogaf is going to be on Scheduled Maintenance for a forum upgrade on 5/28 at 2:00 am EST for a 20 minute period.

Is it unrealistic to ever expect The Elder Scrolls or Fallout to have great combat mechanics/physics?

#53
I think the caliber of open world games that have come this gen has put a dampener on ES6's timeline. It was definitely pushed back due to the success, and new references for what a 'good open world game' entails. If these games hadn't come out, we would definitely have heard more about ES6 by now. Can they deliver?. Don't know. The only real thing ES still has over these other games is the great sandbox world. I feel gameplay/story/tech has all been surpassed greatly.

So far as the combat in previous games: imo the only way to have any sort of fun with the combat in these is to play ranged. With bow, or spells, etc. Melee combat in ES games is flailing garbage, tbh. I find 'crosshair aiming' melee combat insanely clunky.
 
Last edited:
#54
Well you should try Fallout 4. Beth improved combat big time over previous games and is one of the best in the genre.

It is now light years ahead of dark soulsborne archaic old school stuff.
 

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
#55
No, the controls in MGS games was always garbage. MGSV was a breath of fresh air.
You have it in reverse. The MGS series itself was the breath of fresh air, until they decided it should be a generic shooter/open world/online crapfest that played like every other game on the market with a bucket of "OMG SO RANDOM" dumped on it...
 
#57
I liked the shooting in Fallout 4, but would've liked better melee combat in Skyrim.
The bigger problem for me in both those games is the LACK of combat. I like to be challenged and to have stuff to kill when I am wondering around - especially once I am high level and have completed the story etc. Both games felt like a bit of a ghost town to me, at that point. Ideally, I'd like to see more enemy numbers and have them re-spawn every 5 mins or so.
yeah having the enemies respawning would eliminate the "ghost town" feeling you get towards the endgame
 
#59
You have it in reverse. The MGS series itself was the breath of fresh air, until they decided it should be a generic shooter/open world/online crapfest that played like every other game on the market with a bucket of "OMG SO RANDOM" dumped on it...
He is right about the controls though. I played MGS 2 for the first time ever a while ago, fuck me were those controls dated and completely different to the standards we know know. Aim down and shoot are on the same side which is ridiculous.

MGS V is FAR from generic in how it plays, in fact its only saving grace is how fantastic the gameplay and gunplay is, and how great your interactions with the open sandbox is
 
#60
Controls being different does not mean they are bad though. Yeah I get in retrospect the controls are insanely bizzare, but you are always in complete control and able to easily do everything you need to. I wish more games actually felt distinct.
 
#61
Hmm.. to me I don't play those games for combat. Unlike Souls series where combat is the main focus I don't think that is the priority of TES or Fallout. While it sure wouldn't hurt if they had stellar mechanics, to me it doesn't distract from the overall game quality.
 
#67
I think the caliber of open world games that have come this gen has put a dampener on ES6's timeline. It was definitely pushed back due to the success, and new references for what a 'good open world game' entails. If these games hadn't come out, we would definitely have heard more about ES6 by now. Can they deliver?. Don't know. The only real thing ES still has over these other games is the great sandbox world. I feel gameplay/story/tech has all been surpassed greatly.
i think they just want to take a break from being the "Elder Scrolls & Fallout devs". they're working on two other things and at least one of them is an open world rpg, probably been in development for awhile.

interview not too long ago todd kinda sounded concessional about Fallout 4 being a bit of a letdown though. i'd imagine they are going back to the drawing board on some things
 
Last edited:

BANGS

Fresh single BANGS in your area, or in my browser.
#69
He is right about the controls though. I played MGS 2 for the first time ever a while ago, fuck me were those controls dated and completely different to the standards we know know. Aim down and shoot are on the same side which is ridiculous.

MGS V is FAR from generic in how it plays, in fact its only saving grace is how fantastic the gameplay and gunplay is, and how great your interactions with the open sandbox is
I'll have to agree to disagree with pretty much everything you said lmfao but I also have been playing each MGS game since launch...
 
#70
I mean let's be honest.

These days if it isn't a copy of Dark Souls people will complain about it.

I think combat in Witcher 3 is very good but people endlessly shit on it because it isn't Dark Souls.
Really? I mean there are plenty of games that have good combat, yet aren't Dark Souls. God of War is a recent example.

But Witcher 3? Great game despite its combat, not because of it.
 
#71
I actually enjoyed the combat in Oblivion, where the physics seems to be projectile based, as in the objects actually move through the game space, as opposed to Skyrim, which is just hit scan animations. I ended up really liking the swordplay where you have to dance in and out of your opponents reach, knowing when to block and when to risk it for a power attack. I thought Skyrim's combat was very visceral, even if it's not that deep and starts to break down when you have too many units.

Ultimately, the combat is not the main focus and, while I hoped they brought in Arkane to help out on this part, I don't expect them to ever prioritize it over the other more important elements.
 
Last edited:
#73
It was interesting for its time. You could slash in any direction in first person. All other ES did nothing interesting or new.
Eh, each ES game did something new and different. Arguably the games had to 'become simpler' to reach the global phenomenon that Skyrim made the ES series.

I miss 1st person horsing though.
 
#74
Is it unrealistic to ever expect The Elder Scrolls or Fallout to have great combat mechanics/physics?
Yes. These are "action-RPGs. This means the games have action but the action is limited or too crappy to be considered a real action game so it gets the "action RPG" label. Combat is never going to be the focus of these games because then it'd be a different genre altogether. I'm not even sure people who make RPGs have the skill, talent or know-how to even put together a decent fighting system. Chasing after RPGs to try to get top-notch action gameplay is always going to end up in disappointment.

Also, don't mention Souls games in this. No matter what the labels or the PR says, those are not RPGs.

Bethesda has always been behind the curve when it comes to cutting edge animations, combat mechanics, etc, as their focus is primarily world building, size of world, narrative, etc.
Not to mention trying ground-breaking things like testing their games or searching for bugs. Seriously, why Bethesda doesn't take more shit for the absolute lack of interest in shipping complete games is beyond me...it's been going on for years now.
 
Last edited:
#75
Also, don't mention Souls games in this. No matter what the labels or the PR says, those are not RPGs.

Not to mention trying ground-breaking things like testing their games or searching for bugs. Seriously, why Bethesda doesn't take more shit for the absolute lack of interest in shipping complete games is beyond me...it's been going on for years now.
They're absolutely RPGs. What are you talking about? You create your own character and the entire game revolves around building that character's statistics and build style. It's more rpg than most games where the character building choices are more of an illusion.

Bloodborne might fall closer to an action game as your character building choices are far more limited.

As for your comments on why Bethesda gets a pass on its sloppy combat, bugs, poor level design, character animations, I agree. I've wondered this for a while. They've somehow convinced everyone that their games are so hard to create they're justified in all the issues no matter how many other developers make more polished open-world games.
 
Last edited:
#76
in MGS 3, you aim in First person by pressing Triangle, yeah, that's not weird at all

all i'm saying is MGS series had mediocre gameplay, what made it a masterpiece is the story

but in MGS V it's the other way around, the gameplay itself is a masterpiece
does mgsv play better than ground zeroes?
 
#77
I bought Dark Souls because it came out a month before Skyrim which I couldn't wait to play. I wasn't expecting much from DS but I thought it would be a decent time filler until Skyrim. I was very wrong. DS killed Skyrim for me. I couldn't believe how toy Skyrim was next to DS. It took about 2 years for me to be able to play the game without laughing and switching it off. I've never finished the game and I don't think I ever will which is a shame because I like the world and I like the characters but the combat is so toy I can't do it.
As much as I find your use of the word "toy" as an adjective distasteful, I agree with your post. Skyrim is very hard to go back to because it's just a jack of all trades. It got a lot of stuff kind of right but if you really want to dive in and plant your teeth deeply into something, you soon realize that there is very little for the enthusiast.

Even if you like the world, I can sense the plasticity and phoned-in voice/over. The animation, everything, really. I don't want to get political, but Oblivion's VOs were done with gusto. The actors felt the shit they were saying, and you can't tell me it wasn't convincing, even if they used the same voice actor for nearly every role, lol. Skyrim is so much worse at this.

I think it is absolutely reasonable to expect them to get their shit together when it comes to combat. They managed to "fix" the ugly face problem from TESIV, which people fucking loved to bellyache about. They should have put that energy into the combat. I played through oblivion last year with just a 5 button mouse and lord was my index so done after each session, and it hasn't changed. They just need to get a fighting game team in there or something. And yea, I know game development doesn't just work like that but to say such an implementation would be impossible is poppycock. It would take serious considered effort on their part, which is what people really mean when they talk about how game development isn't that simple.
 
#78
Wow what a childish response. Dark Shit? Dude...

What exactly do you like about TeS combat? You like them exactly how they are? So you like wildly flailing your sword in the hopes of hitting your target? You like weirdly jumping up a mountain? I really like the TeS games but let's not act like they are perfect bro.

Just because someone wants to have a discussion on how to improve the TeS combat doesn't mean 'the games aren't for him'. What a strange response.
I get what he's saying
 
Last edited:
#80
Do elaborate. I'm interested to hear your argument on why Dark Souls, with its granular stat-based leveling, gear progression, consumable recovery/buff items and D&D style magic slots, is not an RPG.
I guess it’s missing the shitty narrative, side quests and tag along and useless party members.

Souls games have more meaningful stat usage and character builds than a Bethesda game... okay, well it’s just more interesting in that regards since Bethesda games play like trash in comparison.

Then again, I consider both god of war and Bloodborne metroidvanias...

Point still stands, Bethesda games are true jank and number one example on explaining what jank is to someone.
 
Last edited:
#82
Do elaborate. I'm interested to hear your argument on why Dark Souls, with its granular stat-based leveling, gear progression, consumable recovery/buff items and D&D style magic slots, is not an RPG.
I know what you're saying but I think that highlights how useless these genre descriptors are and how we need a new name for "games with stats"... Because Soulsborne is definitely a far cry from series like Ultima, Divinity, Wasteland, and Fallout which are all deeply rooted in pen & paper/tabletop games.
 
Last edited:
#83
I'm guessing they are finally putting Gamebryo to rest, which is why we won't see another scrolls game this gen likely. That alone should significantly improve the feel of their games.
 
#84
I know what you're saying but I think that highlights how useless these genre descriptors are and how we need a new name for "games with stats"... Because Soulsborne is definitely a far cry from series like Ultima, Divinity, Wasteland, and Fallout which are all deeply rooted in pen & paper/tabletop games.
Oh for sure, Wikipedia's definition of role playing video game is literally "[a game in which] the player controls the actions of a character (and/or several party members) immersed in some well-defined world." By that standard, The Last of Us and even Super Mario Odyssey could be defined as role-playing video games. As could Dark Souls, in fact!

I agree that it's time for a new definition. I'd push for "Action Spreadsheet" if it wasn't blatantly disingenuous :p
 
#85
Do elaborate. I'm interested to hear your argument on why Dark Souls, with its granular stat-based leveling, gear progression, consumable recovery/buff items and D&D style magic slots, is not an RPG.
Because none of those things are "RPG elements" anymore. Maybe back in the 1980s when only RPGs did this stuff you can say this but not now.

Let's review:

Granular stat-based leveling - Used by Madden games, NHL, FIFA, Darksiders 2, XCom, most Strategy games, etc. None of these are RPGs.

Gear progression - Used in almost any action game. Ori, God of War, Arkham games, Call of Duty, even Assassin's Creed. None of these are RPGs.

consumable recovery/buff items - Again, used in almost any action game you think of. Bayonetta, Devil May Cry, Metal Gear Solid, etc. None of these are RPGs.

D&D style magic slots - Again, used in a lot of games. Zelda, nuGod of War, Darksiders, Call of Duty, etc. None of these are RPGs.

So given that none of the things you listed are unique to RPGs, I fail to see why having those elements magically makes a game an RPG.

What folks should focus on are elements that are ONLY used by RPGs. Things like turn-based combat, controlling actions via a menu and such like that. Dark Souls controls nothing like that and plays and controls like an action game, up there with any other hack and slash in terms of mechanics. If I wanted to play an RPG, I'd never fire up a Souls game since it's not the same. The fact that folks imply that Dark Souls and Crono Trigger are the same genre when the two games are nothing alike renders the term RPG completely useless.

We need to get off of this thing where a game having "elements" of a genre means it must be that genre.

I know what you're saying but I think that highlights how useless these genre descriptors are and how we need a new name for "games with stats"
Agreed. With how it's used now, like 95% are "RPGs" including Madden games and Call of Duty. I think we need to get "action/adventure" used a bit more. That was always the "catch-all" description for action games that dabbled in RPG elements like Zelda. I'm not sure why that term isn't used anymore but I'd imagine part of it is that "RPG" is used as a marketing tool...especially back in the 90s when RPGs were the biggest genre so everyone wanted to find ways to get RPG fans to buy their games, often by mislabeling them.
 
Last edited:

JCK75

Neo Member
#86
I like my ES games first person, if they need to learn from anyone about combat it would be Dark Messiah of Might and Magic/ Dishonored.
 
#88
There's a lot more hope for Fallout imo, since it's obviously much more ranged combat based. Fallout 4 had sneaky excellent shooting mechanics and gamefeel imo, though the base game and it's enemy health scaling neutered the feeling. With a combat overhaul mod that greatly increases the damage the player and enemies do it becomes a really competent FPS tbh.

I think Bethesda got some of the Rage guys to help them with it, and the effect is definitely noticeable.
 
#89
Because none of those things are "RPG elements" anymore. Maybe back in the 1980s when only RPGs did this stuff you can say this but not now.
So as I understand it, your argument is that because other genres have started co-opting elements from the colloquial definition of 'RPG', those elements should no longer be defined as 'RPG' despite having originated from it?

Let's review:

*snip*

What folks should focus on are elements that are ONLY used by RPGs. Things like turn-based combat, controlling actions via a menu and such like that. Dark Souls controls nothing like that and plays and controls like an action game, up there with any other hack and slash in terms of mechanics. If I wanted to play an RPG, I'd never fire up a Souls game since it's not the same. The fact that folks imply that Dark Souls and Crono Trigger are the same genre when the two games are nothing alike renders the term RPG completely useless.

We need to get off of this thing where a game having "elements" of a genre means it must be that genre.
There's a difference between 'game with RPG elements' (a.k.a. your list of not-RPGs), a subgenre of RPG (Action RPG, Strategy RPG, etc.), and something that is a 'pure' RPG (turn-based, menu heavy, stats and resources).

I agree that the games you list are not RPGs- having one element innate to the genre doth not an RPG make if everything else is significantly different.
Conversely, a game that holds rigidly to the original notion of an RPG and is defined by those elements is definitely an RPG. A 'pure' RPG, if you will.

However, I think making the black-and-white distinction between a pure RPG and 'everything else' is kind of pedantic. There is a defined middle ground that, despite being a weird and suboptimal jumble of stuff at this point, is still useful as a descriptor.
Subgenres of RPG, such as Action RPG (i.e. Dark Souls) and Strategy RPG (ex. Final Fantasy Tactics) implement enough of the defining characteristics of the genre to still be recognizable as an RPG, while being different enough to warrant a named distinction (i.e. 'Action' = direct character control, 'Strategy' = grid based w/large party).
Since a subgenre is a subset of a genre, it is contained within that parent genre. Hence why 'Dark Souls is an RPG' makes sense, but 'Devil May Cry is an RPG' doesn't.

We could certainly do with some different terminology to better describe the elements that are currently bundled under the umbrella of 'RPG' and cherry-picked by other genres, but that's no reason to ignore the definitions that already exist.
 
Last edited: