• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Western RPGs are casual as hell.

Moff said:
uh no, not at all.
the witcher has great consequenzes though, but choices are a strong and profuound tradition in wrps in general. not all of them handle it as thogoughly as the witcher series, but its defnitely more present than in jrpgs and just one of many reasons why I strongly prefer wrpgs.

and on-topic: mass effect is hardly a wrpgs, if you want a casual wrpg look at skyrim. its for wrpgs what call of duty is for shooters, the pure casual game. but not all of them are like that, although there is certainly a trend towards casual with all big budget games (and wrps usually are), but that is true for all genres.
if you want to see how hardcore wrpgs were in their prime, be ready for some of the kickstarted ones in the next year.
Click to expand...

But then that's called CRPGs eh? :P

It'd be unfair to label them as WRPGs when those are more of PC vs Console RPGs.
 
partyphone said:
Okay so you don't like games where you have freedom. That's just, like, your opinion, dude.
Click to expand...

Freedom is fine. Making a game where you say to the player "save everywhere, anytime, save scum, whatever, have at it" tells me you have put zero thought into your saving structure and that in general you don't give a shit. And if you don't care, why should I care about your game?

Even if you have made a game where it is necessary for the player to save where he wants, there are better ways to go about it. Skyrim for instance - how about a semi-rare consumable in-game item that lets you save (think like an ink ribbon in the old resident evil games)?
 
Modern wRPGs are easy but not because of save anywhere. I prefer save states if only for the simple fact that, should something come up, I can just save and leave my game instead of having to put off life in order to find that elusive save spot.

tournanext said:
If developers add an "extreme" difficulty, or an "ironman" difficulty setting, they then have to test and balance that difficulty. That can be a lot of work, especially in lengthy, complex, deep games like RPGs.
Click to expand...

They don't have to test the balance. Skyrim and Dragon Age 2 would be obvious examples where they throw in "difficulty levels" that are obviously breaking the original design.
 
MTMBStudios said:
how about a semi-rare consumable in-game item that lets you save (think like an ink ribbon in the old resident evil games)?
Click to expand...

How about no? It's your own damn fault if you can't resist the urge to save-scum your way through the whole game, doesn't mean the feature itself is at fault. Save points are crap in comparison.
 
MTMBStudios said:
Freedom is fine. Making a game where you say to the player "save everywhere, anytime, save scum, whatever, have at it" tells me you have put zero thought into your saving structure and that in general you don't give a shit. And if you don't care, why should I care about your game?

Even if you have made a game where it is necessary for the player to save where he wants, there are better ways to go about it. Skyrim for instance - how about a semi-rare consumable in-game item that lets you save (think like an ink ribbon in the old resident evil games)?
Click to expand...

It's your prerogative to not play a game because of save anywhere, that's fine but to me it's really not that big of a deal. I've been annoyed more by games that don't allow you to save anywhere more than I have those that have allowed it. I'd rather developers concentrate their efforts on making anything else in a game better, because I'm more than happy to manage my own saves.
 
MTMBStudios said:
Freedom is fine. Making a game where you say to the player "save everywhere, anytime, save scum, whatever, have at it" tells me you have put zero thought into your saving structure and that in general you don't give a shit. And if you don't care, why should I care about your game?

Even if you have made a game where it is necessary for the player to save where he wants, there are better ways to go about it. Skyrim for instance - how about a semi-rare consumable in-game item that lets you save (think like an ink ribbon in the old resident evil games)?
Click to expand...

That's not what it tells me at all. It tells me that they've made a big, complicated game based upon rules and systems that will sometimes interact unpredictably or break. Giving the player the ability to save when out of combat means not having to lose hours of progress because an NPC clipped through a mountain.
 
MTMBStudios said:
Freedom is fine. Making a game where you say to the player "save everywhere, anytime, save scum, whatever, have at it" tells me you have put zero thought into your saving structure and that in general you don't give a shit. And if you don't care, why should I care about your game?

Even if you have made a game where it is necessary for the player to save where he wants, there are better ways to go about it. Skyrim for instance - how about a semi-rare consumable in-game item that lets you save (think like an ink ribbon in the old resident evil games)?
Click to expand...

Why must a game use its save system for anything other than a way for the player to save their current progress so they can quit and come back to it at another time? I can appreciate a game that puts some limits on saving but I don't feel its some prerequisite to making a good game.
 
partyphone said:
Okay so you don't like games where you have freedom. That's just, like, your opinion, dude.
Click to expand...

No, he just wants to have fun with Games and most fun comes from the rules and limitaions that are set by the Gameworld.
On the other hand, there are people who love Escapism which only Sandbox Games can deliver at their finest.

So yeah, different people, different tastes.
 
Boss Doggie said:
Hmm, what are you talking about?
Click to expand...

I'm assuming from this question that you've played the game, so what I'm getting is when accidentally don't kill enough people or destroy enough body parts to reclaim bezels spent on hero actions, so then you enter critical condition and you lose maximum bezels as you get hit. And if you move too far, you'll find yourself not having enough bezels to adequately progress, or even just get out alive. And then there's that fucking statue escort mission...

These portions were obviously my fault in part, but the yoyos in difficulty feel like they have less to do with enemies suddenly getting too strong or numerous and more to do with the game not properly educating you on long-term protection of your assets and lacking recovery options without having to pay more money than you ever have with you.
 
Personally I think save-anywhere is a cop-out for a decent auto-save system. Although linear, I thought God of War 3 handled saving really well. There are 'save points', but if you turn the system off and play later you will still just resume from where you left off.
 
Boss Doggie said:
Eh, people talk as though there's a huge difference in "choices" in your average WRPG. The only games that thoroughly explored it are the Witcher series.
Click to expand...

And anything made by Obsidian, Troika and Black Isle. Play better games.

TheSeks said:
Only if you change stuff in your inventory, use your inventory or die I thought?
Click to expand...

Or quit, which is the important part. You can literally save anywhere by exiting the game.
 
MTMBStudios said:
Dark Souls saving everytime anything semi-significant happens (including when you die) is different than quick saving / quick reloading. If you can't figure out why, you may want to stay out of this topic.
Click to expand...

No I don't think I'll be doing that. The OP specifically refers to auto saving in addition to quick saving. If you think that developer controlled saving is superior game design then you clearly think Dark Souls has a bad save system.

Do you?
 
jim-jam bongs said:
No I don't think I'll be doing that. The OP specifically refers to auto saving in addition to quick saving. If you think that developer controlled saving is superior game design then you clearly think Dark Souls has a bad save system.

Do you?
Click to expand...

The developer is in full control of the saving system in Dark Souls. I don't think you are thinking this through lol. Being able to stop wherever you want (essentially a suspend) is different than a god mode button (quick save / quick reload).
 
Man, all I can think about is how much my ass was kicked in every CRPG I ever tried to play in my whole life, I don't think you have even touched that world, what you are referencing is basically a new thing and not even related to traditional "Western RPG" (more often was called CRPG in the past...)

Try Divine Divinity on Steam
 
It's pretty easy to replicate JRPG saving in WRPGs. Go into your options menu and turn off autosaves. Only save your games in towns or at the beginning of a dungeon. Do not save anywhere else.

Done.

If you can't help yourself and take full advantage of the quicksave/quickload capabilities of WRPGs to scrub your way through game obstacles, then the problem is you.
 
MTMBStudios said:
The developer is in full control of the saving system in Dark Souls. I don't think you are thinking this through lol. Being able to stop wherever you want (essentially a suspend) is different than a god mode button (quick save / quick reload).
Click to expand...

Why? I don't think you're thinking this through lol. The OP lost a bunch of progress because of the lack of controlled saving, do you think that's better than being able to save wherever you want? You want to narrow the goalposts now, but I think we need to go deeper so we can find the real gamers around here, not lame casuals.

You're not a filthy casual, are you?
 
I feel like I'm one of the few people on this board that can enjoy both JRPGs and WRPGs and not feel the need to compare for some superfluous reason. The reasons given in the OP are just bad. I beat RoF and you can save in the overworld, and in save stations in the dungeons.

It seems a few gamers lack simple patience. Dark Souls and Demon's Souls arent super hard, but they require patience. RoF requires patience. These games just ask for the player to take time to learn the systems, and if you get your as kicked, try again. This has nothing to do with ME, or Skyrim or any other WRPG, it has to do with laziness.
 
jim-jam bongs said:
Why? I don't think you're thinking this through lol. The OP lost a bunch of progress because of the lack of controlled saving, do you think that's better than being able to save wherever you want? You want to narrow the goalposts now, but I think we need to go deeper so we can find the real gamers around here, not lame casuals.

You're not a filthy casual, are you?
Click to expand...

Yeah, losing a bunch of progress IS better than being able to quicksave / quickreload anywhere. The developer has set limits and created the rules which create tension / friction. Quicksave / quickreload is the laziest, thoughtless thing you could do for your game. It sours anything else you have done by giving you an ability that is actually arguably the same as god mode. It turns any game into a tensionless slog.

I am saying there are TONS of saving structures out there for people to use. Quicksave / quickreload is the lamest one you could pick. If there is no penalty / tension to any decision you make in a game, why not just watch the game on youtube?
 
MTMBStudios said:
It turns any game into a tensionless slog.
Click to expand...
Only if you choose to fully utilize it.

Dragon's Dogma is one of my favorite games this gen, and it becomes a pretty easy game at about the halfway point. I however, create my own tension and difficulty - I don't allow myself to use any healing/stamina replenishing items and rely solely on an NPC pawn to heal me. I also can't climb monsters forever... both of these things completely changes the way I play through it. I also don't quicksave/quickload, which is very much a thing you can do in the game. I have full control over my game experience. I can make it as hard or as easy as I choose.

You're incapable of self-control, we get it.
 
Parn said:
Only if you choose to fully utilize it.

Dragon's Dogma is one of my favorite games this gen, and it becomes a pretty easy game at about the halfway point. I however, create my own tension and difficulty - I don't allow myself to use any healing/stamina replenishing items and rely solely on an NPC pawn to heal me. I also can't climb monsters forever... both of these things completely changes the way I play through it. I also don't quicksave/quickload, which is very much a thing you can do in the game. I have full control over my game experience. I can make it as hard or as easy as I choose.

You're incapable of self-control, we get it.
Click to expand...

It is cool that you can make a game that is better than the game the designers made via self imposed rules. It would be great if you didn't have to though. If the designers had made a good game, you wouldn't have to make self imposed rules to make it good.
 
MTMBStudios said:
It is cool that you can make a game that is better than the game the designers made via self imposed rules. It would be great if you didn't have to though. If the designers had made a good game, you wouldn't have to make self imposed rules to make it good.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it's a shame when game developers make games that allow a wide variety of people of varying skills and capabilities to enjoy them instead of a narrow segment of the population, i.e. you.
 
MTMBStudios said:
Yeah, losing a bunch of progress IS better than being able to quicksave / quickreload anywhere. The developer has set limits and created the rules which create tension / friction. Quicksave / quickreload is the laziest, thoughtless thing you could do for your game. It sours anything else you have done by giving you an ability that is actually arguably the same as god mode. It turns any game into a tensionless slog.

I am saying there are TONS of saving structures out there for people to use. Quicksave / quickreload is the lamest one you could pick. If there is no penalty / tension to any decision you make in a game, why not just watch the game on youtube?
Click to expand...

Maybe for you. It would be nice if would stop speaking in absolutes.
 
I'm currently playing BG2: ToB (almost finished now)

autosave, qicksave death, reload, death reload, quicksave quicksave, death, reload quicksave quicksave death, reload, autosave death, reload, death, reload, quicksave

my verdict: if it ain't got a quicksave function, it ain't worth playing!
 
Parn said:
Yeah, it's a shame when game developers make games that allow a wide variety of people of varying skills and capabilities to enjoy them instead of a narrow segment of the population, i.e. you.
Click to expand...

Games that are all things to all people are a waste of time to all people. Not every game needs to be accessible to everyone.
 
Keslord said:
Seriously though, maybe WRPGs ARE casual... I mean, look at this mature, hardcore competition.

http://www.destructoid.com//ul/247201-LadyBoners.jpg[IMG][/QUOTE]
Have you actually played an EO game before?

$20 says you'd play for an hour and then cry about it being too hard.

It's far more "hardcore" than almost any RPG released recently, Eastern or Western.
Click to expand...
 
partyphone said:
Sub-divide the genre until your argument is correct! Oh boy!
Click to expand...

Ah but you speak as though the Console vs Computer RPG divide didn't exist before! If anything, it defined the split back then. It is the actual division people seem to forget.

In fact, that division makes more sense than JRPG vs WRPG which are just culture clash than anything else. In fact, it bothers me that CRPG vs CPRPG (or was it CCRPG?) suddenly vanished. I think it's this gen that do away with that, or was it last gen?

And again - computer RPGs boomed in Japan that they integrate it in their games, whereas the RPGs in computers nowadays feel more "console"-ized as seen in Skyrim.

Lowlander2 said:
I'm assuming from this question that you've played the game, so what I'm getting is when accidentally don't kill enough people or destroy enough body parts to reclaim bezels spent on hero actions, so then you enter critical condition and you lose maximum bezels as you get hit. And if you move too far, you'll find yourself not having enough bezels to adequately progress, or even just get out alive. And then there's that fucking statue escort mission...

These portions were obviously my fault in part, but the yoyos in difficulty feel like they have less to do with enemies suddenly getting too strong or numerous and more to do with the game not properly educating you on long-term protection of your assets and lacking recovery options without having to pay more money than you ever have with you.
Click to expand...

Ahh those accidents. I experienced them, usually in minor miscalculations. I honestly find stuff like that fun.

jim-jam bongs said:
And anything made by Obsidian, Troika and Black Isle. Play better games.
Click to expand...

Obsidian never really got me. Masquerade I always forgot for some odd reason. Ahh and IceWind games are good too.

But then again I tend to put them as computer RPGs more than they are "Western" RPGs.
 
Call Me Maybe said:
They're also probably truer to the 'role playing' part of a role playing game. Just saying.
Click to expand...

This.

It amazes me how the OP complains about auto saves and all that nonsense, but if he took 5 seconds and went into the options, you can TURN IT OFF and increase the difficulty. Be a man and play every game you play at the hardest setting you possibly can, and if the game has a harder one that you unlock after one play through then you need to play that one because otherwise you have never finished the game.
 
Parn said:
So I have to ask: what is your opinion on difficulty mode settings?
Click to expand...

Like every element of your game, it needs a lot of thought. Ideally the default difficulty (and preferably there should probably be only one difficulty to choose from when you start the game) should be hard enough to express what your mechanics are about. Something like Ninja Gaiden Black is the absolute ideal for a modern game, with the difficulty curve just right (never, ever mindless from beginning to master ninja). After beating the game the options become available to begin again on hard (where the difficulty curve begins where normal ended for the most part) with fully rehauled and remixed encounters and enemies. Dark Souls is okay too but a harder mode would be appreciated as Dark Souls is not very difficult at the top level (NG+ is not very interesting, or hard).

If you are an exceptional player who believes that your skills are better than what normal can provide, being able to input cheat codes to skip to the last difficulty is a good idea too. This way the average player is not exposed to this difficulty right off the bat but action game veterans will probably be aware of it.

Of course these are action games but in an ideal world every game would have this much thought put into difficulties as opposed to most games where the player is lazily presented with easy, normal, hard - and worse of all the only difference between these difficulties is slight stat changes (enemies do more damage, you have less health).
 
QP3 said:
While WRPGs may be made more "casual", I like them because they offer freedom to the player on how they want to play the game.

For example, say you find Skyrim not hard enough. Make rules for yourself that you have to follow.

1. Only saving in Towns
2. Limit number of weight you can carry
3. Permadeath
4. etc.


On the other hand, you can play the game just as it is designed and still get a lot out of it.
Click to expand...


This is just ridiculous for a variety of reasons. First, the game designers have not made the game structured around any artificial difficulties and limitations you might impose on yourself. Second, its stupid really and is prone to change if you get frustrated. The beauty of challenging games is that they frustrate you, but you can't change the goalposts and inherently you know that you're doing something wrong, the game is still addicting so you keep coming back to it and eventually overcome it. That is their charm.

Plus another thing to hate about Skyrim is the level scaling. Its a cop-out mechanic. Despite being harder, Dark and Demon's end up having fairer mechanics, because the games have enemies which you can overpower with enough "Rpg'ing". Its motivating to know the enemy who just one-shotted you, you will be able to one-shot if you build yourself up further.
 
MTMBStudios said:
Ideally the default difficulty (and preferably there should probably be only one difficulty to choose from when you start the game) should be hard enough to express what your mechanics are about. Something like Ninja Gaiden Black is the absolute ideal for a modern game, with the difficulty curve just right (never, ever mindless from beginning to master ninja). After beating the game the options become available to begin again on hard (where the difficulty curve begins where normal ended for the most part) with fully rehauled and remixed encounters and enemies. Dark Souls is okay too but a harder mode would be appreciated as Dark Souls is not very difficult at the top level (NG+ is not very interesting, or hard).
Click to expand...
Let me pose a scenario for you: let's take Ninja Gaiden Black exactly as it is, except we add an easy mode for folks who aren't as skilled. You are able to play the game exactly as you do now, and now other people who previously wouldn't have been able to play through the game because it was too hard, can now do so.

What exactly is wrong with that?
 
params7 said:
Second, its stupid really and is prone to change if you get frustrated. The beauty of challenging games is that they frustrate you, but you can't change the goalposts and inherently you know that you're doing something wrong, the game is still addicting so you keep coming back to it and eventually overcome it. That is their charm.
Click to expand...
In other words, you have no self-control and will always fall prey to the path of least resistance. Sounds to me like the problem isn't the save feature.
 
Parn said:
Let me pose a scenario for you: let's take Ninja Gaiden Black exactly as it is, except we add an easy mode for folks who aren't as skilled. You are able to play the game exactly as you do now, and now other people who previously wouldn't have been able to play through the game because it was too hard, can now do so.

What exactly is wrong with that?
Click to expand...

MTMBStudios has a history of being irrational and elitistic about the matter of games difficulty. He doesn't want unworthy people enjoying the game :b
 
Parn said:
Let me pose a scenario for you: let's take Ninja Gaiden Black exactly as it is, except we add an easy mode for folks who aren't as skilled. You are able to play the game exactly as you do now, and now other people who previously wouldn't have been able to play through the game because it was too hard, can now do so.
Click to expand...
uh, that's called Ninja Dog mode
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

  • Poll
RPGs from my backlog
20
157
PeteBull replied
What the hell
35
126
German Shocks replied
Western Rye - Trailer
Trailer Indie 
0
97
IbizaPocholo replied
Ubisoft is desperate as hell
42
1K
grvg replied
Are Arcade Fighting Sticks Worth It for Casual Gamers?
2
73
2K
coinhook replied
Top Bottom