How about another RPG Codex Top 70 RPGs poll?

[Sigourn]

These polls will always be controversial because not everyone plays cRPGs for the same reason and not everyone finds the same elements to have the same importance in RPGs. Some prioritize the writing, others the combat, others C&C, others the whole package. Even "combat" is controversial, as some people hate action RPGs altogether, while other cRPGs have almost nothing to offer BUT combat.

Fallout is basically the role model for what I think cRPGs should be like, as it tries to pay attention to pretty much all aspects you can ask for in an RPG while still working inside its limitations (like no classes or no party creation). I think it's no coincidence that the highest ranking cRPGs of these lists are usually the ones that mix everything you could possibly demand from a cRPG, as opposed to having something like classic Wizardry dominate the top 5.

 

[DakaSha V]

It's very kind. But, most of your game are just incremental visual novel shit.

 

[Serus]

These polls will always be controversial because not everyone plays cRPGs for the same reason and not everyone finds the same elements to have the same importance in RPGs. Some prioritize the writing, others the combat, others C&C, others the whole package. Even "combat" is controversial, as some people hate action RPGs altogether, while other cRPGs have almost nothing to offer BUT combat.

Fallout is basically the role model for what I think cRPGs should be like, as it tries to pay attention to pretty much all aspects you can ask for in an RPG while still working inside its limitations (like no classes or no party creation). I think it's no coincidence that the highest ranking cRPGs of these lists are usually the ones that mix everything you could possibly demand from a cRPG, as opposed to having something like classic Wizardry dominate the top 5.

The opposite is true. Fallout is good example of a very focused CRPG that is very strong in some aspects and treats other elements superficially or ignores them completely. As much as I like Fallout for its setting, good quest design with multiple solutions allowing use of different stats and skills combinations, for its exploration and a few other thing - it certainly doesn't pay attention to things like serious tactical combat and full party creation and management. It does not try, it never meant to try to seriously tackle those aspects. Those limitations you mention have been put there exactly because the devs didn't care much about certain elements of traditional CRPGs when designing Fallout. Not the other way around.

 

[Sigourn]

The opposite is true. Fallout is good example of a very focused CRPG that is very strong in some aspects and treats other elements superficially or ignores them completely. As much as I like Fallout for its setting, good quest design with multiple solutions allowing use of different stats and skills combinations, for its exploration and a few other thing - it certainly doesn't pay attention to things like serious tactical combat and full party creation and management. It does not try, it never meant to try to seriously tackle those aspects. Those limitations you mention have been put there exactly because the devs didn't care much about certain elements of traditional CRPGs when designing Fallout. Not the other way around.

You are seeing digression from tradition as a flaw, when it isn't. I'd argue you wouldn't have FALLOUT if you could create an entire party. It defeats the purpose of rolling with one character whose strengths and weaknesses limit just how much you can do in the world. I've seen it with Wasteland 2; a lot of people think it's just "modern Fallout", but reality couldn't be any different: having multiple charaters all with their own specialized set of skills allows you to overcome far many obstacles than you could if you just rolled with one character as in Fallout.

As a consequence of "one character, one build", you can't really hope to have "serious tactical combat". It makes sense to have serious tactical combat when it's a party against a party. Not when it's just one character against hordes of enemies, which is why Fallout has such small encounters (and reduced number of encounters at that) when compared to many other cRPGs.

 

[laclongquan]

I'm fine with whatever method generates the most butthurt.

Then this is the best method. You should reread the two thread, votings and discussion to watch how some people had meltdowns over the result~

 

[RNGsus]

Let's do this with academy awards categories.

 

[newtmonkey]

Run it as "Worst 70 RPGs" and once the votes have been tallied, change the title to "Best 70 RPGs" for tidal wave of butthurt

 

[sullynathan]

it's unnecessary

 

[Serus]

The opposite is true. Fallout is good example of a very focused CRPG that is very strong in some aspects and treats other elements superficially or ignores them completely. As much as I like Fallout for its setting, good quest design with multiple solutions allowing use of different stats and skills combinations, for its exploration and a few other thing - it certainly doesn't pay attention to things like serious tactical combat and full party creation and management. It does not try, it never meant to try to seriously tackle those aspects. Those limitations you mention have been put there exactly because the devs didn't care much about certain elements of traditional CRPGs when designing Fallout. Not the other way around.

You are seeing digression from tradition as a flaw, when it isn't. I'd argue you wouldn't have FALLOUT if you could create an entire party. It defeats the purpose of rolling with one character whose strengths and weaknesses limit just how much you can do in the world. I've seen it with Wasteland 2; a lot of people think it's just "modern Fallout", but reality couldn't be any different: having multiple charaters all with their own specialized set of skills allows you to overcome far many obstacles than you could if you just rolled with one character as in Fallout.

As a consequence of "one character, one build", you can't really hope to have "serious tactical combat". It makes sense to have serious tactical combat when it's a party against a party. Not when it's just one character against hordes of enemies, which is why Fallout has such small encounters (and reduced number of encounters at that) when compared to many other cRPGs.

I never said anything about digression from tradition being "a flaw". I never made any evaluative statement of that kind at all only a factual statement about it. No one is attacking Fallout here, no need to get defensive and protect anything.
Your description of Fallout is correct - which is only reinforcing MY point. You are arguing against your own original claim that Fallout, and I quote: "tries to pay attention to pretty much all aspects you can ask for in a RPG". It clearly doesn't try to pay attention to some aspects by your own admission. There are reasons for that of curse and you correctly pointed out those reasons. And they might be good reasons and good design decision for Fallout. But the fact remains and it contradicts your original claim. Fallout does not try to pay attention to all aspects that "you can ask in a RPG". On the contrary, it concentrates on some and tackles other only superficially or not at all. The question if it's a good thing or a bad thing is irrelevant in that context and neither you nor me should care. It's not part of the current argument.

One more point. The combat in Fallout is (relatively) simple not only because the player controls directly just 1-character. There are CRPGs out there with with only 1 controllable character that attempted (with varying and arguable degree of success) implementing tactical combat with more complex mechanics than Fallout. Underrail to not look very far. Fallout devs simply weren't interested in making combat very tactical. One might make an argument that less tactical combat = faster combat resulting in better flow of the game but again - whether one considers it a good or a bad thing is beside the point.

For the record, not that it matters for the discussion but here it is: I find Fallout combat fun.

 

[Ninjerk]

Didn't Tim Christ even say that the companions in FO were last minute additions that almost didn't work?

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

We did 2012-2016 RPGs last year already: http://www.rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=10535

The fun thing about doing this is to see how modern RPGs compare to older titles, see how Witcher 3 or D:OS rank alongside Fallout: New Vegas, Gothic and other older games.

The best poll ever conducted on the Codex was your 2012-2016 RPG rating poll. This not only covered a large number of games but did so with a system that provided meaningful results, i.e. asking people to actually determine whether games are good or bad rather than merely assigning a few votes to their favorite game(s) as in the Top 70 CRPGs of All Time poll. And it did so by linking Codex accounts to votes rather than allowing anyone to vote. What the Codex needs is the extension of the 2012-2016 RPG rating poll into a series of polls that collectively cover all of CRPG history, ultimately allowing for a cross-poll comparison to establish the best CRPGs of all time with some degree of validity.

 

[felipepepe]

The best poll ever conducted on the Codex was your 2012-2016 RPG rating poll. This not only covered a large number of games but did so with a system that provided meaningful results, i.e. asking people to actually determine whether games are good or bad rather than merely assigning a few votes to their favorite game(s) as in the Top 70 CRPGs of All Time poll. And it did so by linking Codex accounts to votes rather than allowing anyone to vote. What the Codex needs is the extension of the 2012-2016 RPG rating poll into a series of polls that collectively cover all of CRPG history, ultimately allowing for a cross-poll comparison to establish the best CRPGs of all time with some degree of validity.

We could do that again, but the problem is that it depends on the goodwill of ours overlords... they must create the poll with the options I send.

 

[V_K]

I'm fine with whatever method generates the most butthurt.

Then this is the best method. You should reread the two thread, votings and discussion to watch how some people had meltdowns over the result~

There's always room for improvement.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

To early! No way I will be able to play all incline before that. We need to wait a bit further. Good thing about that is we then have Disco Elysium in the poll

e: I have like 2-3 hours a week to play so will need a bit more time. Havn't even finished Age of Decadence yet.

 

[Feyd Rautha]

Felipepe probably is up to something? Why would he like to have the poll done before Disco Elysium? Something is off with this one

 

[Chainsaw Gutsfuck]

Would be cool if there were subcategories this time.

I think Dark Souls is a fine game but have a hard time comparing it to Wizardry 7. Or to compare Deus Ex to Dark Sun. Both fine games but hard to put in the same box.

I would go even further and say that some of the subgenres are closer to non-rpgs than other crpg subgenres. Planescape has certainly more in common with something like Sanitarium than say Eye of the Beholder. And Dark Souls is closer to Ninja Gaiden than either of them. In the current way of voting what really happens is that everyone votes for his favorite games in general instead of the best on this or that aspect.

I think the reason we go with this system is to avoid the arguments about what goes in which subgenre. And well liked games that don't fit anywhere like Deus Ex would probably get excluded otherwise. Still, it's better than jumbling them all together.

 

[V_K]

We will never agree about subgenre borders though. If voting should be split into categories, it should be different game aspects. Something like
- Best combat
- Best non-combat gameplay (stealth, puzzles, minigames)
- Best character system
- Best level design
- Best fluff (plot, lore, c&c)
Then we could sum up the category votes for the overall best RPG rating and enjoy the massive butthurt when PST rolls out of Top10 and is a tie with Twitcher.

 

[octavius]

There must be a way to arrange the poll so that Chaos Strikes Back comes out on top.

 

[V_K]

There must be a way to arrange the poll so that Chaos Strikes Back comes out on top.

It should be a poll for most RPG with the ratings being:
1 - story mode
2 - easy
3 - proper RPG
4 - couldn't finish without cheating
5 - am too scared to even try

 

[Chainsaw Gutsfuck]

Categories like "Best Combat" are way too broad, we will end up comparing different subgenres again like Dragon's Dogma vs Knights of the Chalice etc. Same for "best level design". What counts for good level design in a dungeon crawler and a tactical RPG isn't the same.

 

[Perkel]

I was thinking of using the same system, any feedback?

I will say same thing as last year. make 10 point scale and when everything is set and done remove 1 and 10 scores.
This way you will avoid any brigading by randoms and idiots and it would be closer to actual consensus instead of meme war.

 

[V_K]

remove 1 and 10 scores.

Vehemently disagree. I've seen such systems used for other types of competitions. The only thing they do is bring mediocrity to the top. We could have a simple populariy contest just as well.
Besides, the Bayesian average already takes care for brigading.

 

[Perkel]

remove 1 and 10 scores.

Vehemently disagree. I've seen such systems used for other types of competitions. The only thing they do is bring mediocrity to the top. We could have a simple populariy contest just as well.
Besides, the Bayesian average already takes care for brigading.

I am talking about removing those scores after people voted for 1 and 10 scores.
So when you vote 1 or 10 your vote doesn't count.

Usually people who vote 1 just do if for lols or their internal disgust for some game.
Usually people who vote 10 are just dumb fucks who fangirl for their favorite game

Either way it can be done as separate chart too when felipepepe will have data.

 

[Bohr]

Note to self: vote 9 for my favourite game, 9 is the new 10

 

[newtmonkey]

There's really no way to avoid a popularity contest with a poll, without relying on some kind of honor system. I think an interesting poll might be, what RPGs have you not played but you'd like to?