Story is more important than combat in rpgs

[Shaewaroz]

Here is a list of the greatest RPG titles ever produced in the history of mankind, in alphabetical order:

Age of Decadence
Crescent Hawk's Inception
Geneforges
Nethergate
Teudogar and the Alliance with Rome
Ultima VII

Questions? I didn't think so.

Wow man, the edge level on this one is off the charts!

 

[Bigg Boss]

Here is a list of the greatest RPG titles ever produced in the history of mankind, in alphabetical order:

Age of Decadence
Crescent Hawk's Inception
Geneforges
Nethergate
Teudogar and the Alliance with Rome
Ultima VII

Questions? I didn't think so.

Wow man, the edge level on this one is off the charts!

Dude has a Rome fetish methinks.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

Usually, in games, you can skip story, but you cannot skip combat.

 

[Reinhardt]

But what is an rpg?

 

[mfkndggrfll]

Here is a list of the greatest RPG titles ever produced in the history of mankind, in alphabetical order:

Age of Decadence
Crescent Hawk's Inception
Geneforges
Nethergate
Teudogar and the Alliance with Rome
Ultima VII

Questions? I didn't think so.

All of these games have extremely strong settings, and either strong reactivity to player decisions, or else the game engine allows a lot of exploration and some freedom to be a creative arsehole and do hilarious stuff.

In terms of combat, though, it varies. The Spiderweb titles and AoD had amazingly good combat. Crescent Hawk's Inception was good but kind of cumbersome and the encounters were mostly randomly generated fluff. Teudogar's was very intuitive and good at what it did, if a bit simple. Ultima VII was just a hilarious shit show, probably I should label it as terrible combat but it's too ridiculous to hate.

So, strong setting and reactive storyfags win, eat shit combat queens. I will admit that a game with weak combat AND a restrictive game engine will never be top tier, though.

Lists Geneforge. Leaves out Arcanum and Fallout and Planescape.

Arcanum is decline, Planescape is pure and absolute decline, Fallout 1&2 are good but not good enough.

PST is one of the worst RPGs ever, tbh

You obviously haven't played enough of F1 & F2 or you wouldn't put them on the same level. F1 is easily the #1 greatest RPG of all time while F2 is bottom tier, far worse than PST.

 

[mfkndggrfll]

It's Mister Mxyzptlk! That retard that came by NMA and proclaimed how great Beth games were.

Look at how fucking retarded this kid is. 2018 join date and already tags and retard ratings out the ass. More retard ratings than posts.

Actually I've been mostly talking about how F2 was utter trash, to the point where even F3 and F4 are better.

Bethesda does have some great games too, like Arena, Daggerfall, Redguard and Oblivion.

 

[Bigg Boss]

It's Mister Mxyzptlk! That retard that came by NMA and proclaimed how great Beth games were.

Look at how fucking retarded this kid is. 2018 join date and already tags and retard ratings out the ass. More retard ratings than posts.

Actually I've been mostly talking about how F2 was utter trash, to the point where even F3 and F4 are better.

Yes, which makes you a dumbass. F2 was not utter trash. It was mediocre, but not that bad. Not as bad as F4 in the least bit. You are some 18 year old retard that played F3 when you were 8, and never played the originals for more than a hour.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

The essential elements of a video game can be plainly observed by the mechanics and mechanisms through which the player interacts with the game. The more detailed the mechanism, the more significant and important it is to the quality of the product. Very few examples of RPGs exist where combat is secondary to narrative or plot interaction. The only one of note that springs to mind immediately is Alpha Protocol, which is still highly debatable.

 

[Molina]

This topic is a good reminder that this forum doesn't like RPGs and should play Europa Universalis. Or MMO. Or X-com.

 

[undecaf]

One could argue that if you're willing to stomach shitty gameplay just to get to the next bit of the story you're invested on, then it must be more important than mere icing on the cake.

Sure, if that’s what one is willing to go through.

I’ve always looked at games as games first and anything else second, storyteller included. I mean, it is a game, afterall. A good narrative arc can certainly uplift the overall experience when it ties in with the gameplay and mechanics the right way, but I can’t see myself suffering through something that’s choresome and uninteresting just to see what what kind of passage the developer has written for the next event. The stories in games aren’t that good or captivating.

 

[fantadomat]

In RPGs the story is more important than the combat, Everyone arguing against it is delusional. Also don't mix combat and game mechanics,the former is just part of the later one.

All of the top codex RPGs are liked because of the story and the world building while having meh combat. There is a decent amount of games that do both well,like BG,IWD,ToEE etc etc.

 

[Jack Of Owls]

Well, to give an example I thought Bard's Tale I & II were pretty shitty games precisely because they had no story but decent combat & dungeon design. I like a nice middle ground - good combat AND good story, but not something completely story-centric like too many AAA tiltes and jRPGs or, at the other end, just tech demos for micromanagement in combat with no story.

 

[laclongquan]

Let us repeat a reminder

RPG is Role Playing Game, not Role Playing Story.

 

[mondblut]

bg2, Bloodlines and most jrpgs have competent combat

I can't stand rpgs with shit combat like the Fallouts

Spot a loony.

 

[mondblut]

Here is a list of the greatest RPG titles ever produced in the history of mankind, in alphabetical order:

Age of Decadence
Crescent Hawk's Inception
Geneforges
Nethergate
Teudogar and the Alliance with Rome
Ultima VII

Questions? I didn't think so.

Wow man, the edge level on this one is off the charts!

Dude has a Rome fetish methinks.

Ultimafags are the original decline.

 

[True Ukrainian]

RPGs do not necessarily need combat, but they do need some form of challenge and gameplay. An RPG that is all story might as well just call itself a cut rate visual novel with no hentai.

 

[fantadomat]

It is amusing how all the prestigious combat fags are bunch of edgy teens liking a single game and live in some authistic delusions that they like RPGs. A really sad bunch. I am curious as of which games do you see as the pinnacle of RPG making?

 

[Kliwer]

Personally – I will risk a thesis that story HAS TO be simple in cRPG to make a good cRPG.


Good story is, most of times, a complicated story. A complicated story – with many dependences, specific characters, sub-plots and cause&effect relationships – is hard to interact. The story should be so simple that any type of character could fit into it: from dwarf barbarian with 0 int. to female elfish bard with 999 charisma and no fighting skills. In p&p RPG it looks in a different way – because GM could shape the story and match it to his specific group (at least a good GM – not those guys who write the adventure without knowledge about their players characters or use the official modules).


In the story-heavy cRPGs I usually feel that my character do not fit to the plot. Take PoE. I’m dwarf barbarian from Living Lands. I have come to Deerwood in searching for fame and fortune. I’m simple mercenary who hates magic, souls, mysticism and all that jazz. So what is the point of following the story of the game? There are many games like this. To handle this problem the player usually receives some secondary identity: “the Chosen One”, “the Bhaal Spawn”, “the Dragonborne” etc. And, finally, you do not play the game as a dwarf barbarian but as a “Chosen One”, “Dragonborne” etc. I do not like this approach.


So – the best story, for me, is a frame story, with very simple plots. Compare two quests from two games: the “bridge quest” in the first town of Arcanum and the “conspiratorial” quest in Marharth of Skyrim.

· Arcanum. So roughly simple. You have a bridge to cross. The bridge is occupied by bandits. End of the story. But so many opportunities. The player can ally with the local officials or with the bandit leader. If allied with sheriff – we can kill bandits or persuade them. Or we can ignore whole this conflict, just steal the key, sneak through the bridge and say “goodbye” to everyone. All approaches has some minor dialogue variants (“I will make it for money” or “I will make it for an idea”) and some minor future consequences. It is a good cRPG.

· And in Marharth? We have a quite complicated political-criminal plot (let me be generous for Skyrim…). And what we can do with it? Nothing. We are just running from one quest marker to the other and watching the brilliant story. It is not a good cRPG. All Withers 3 quests are exactly the same thing – dialogues are better but gameplay is also week.


So the best thing you can do as a cRPG designer is, in my opinion, to write a simple plot like: “Armies of DARKNESS are approaching the FREE LAND of NEVERLAND – oh mighty PLAYER – do what you want with it”. Join the DARK LORD or the GOOD KING (or ignore everyone and watch the world burn), use any of your skills, recruit companions you like etc.


The good example of this approach is the first half of Gothic 1 and 2. What is the story, what is your goal? Very simple – you have to become someone IMPORTANT, that’s it. The rest depends on you: join the militia or rebels, study magic or art of war, make friends and foes all around the island. And it works.

 

[fantadomat]

So – the best story, for me, is a frame story, with very simple plots. Compare two quests from two games: the “bridge quest” in the first town of Arcanum and the “conspiratorial” quest in Marharth of Skyrim.

So arcanum have simple story,you know the game that have multiple different quests that shape the political situation in the play world. Yet skyrim have complex story....to kill the evul dragon and stop the end times.

 

[Kliwer]

So arcanum have simple story,you know the game that have multiple different quests that shape the political situation in the play world. Yet skyrim have complex story....to kill the evul dragon and stop the end times.

In this example I have just described “a story of a quest” to make my point clear. In my humble opinion it is parallel to “a story of a game”. The main story of Skyrim is very simple – but still badly executed.


Another example – I think that the story of Witcher 1 is more interesting then the story of Dragon Age 1. But the implementation into the gameplay is better in DA1 (still anything great but ok) – you can visit locations in different order, make some decisions on different stages of main-quest, roleplay a few types of character, meet some very personal events connected to your past etc. It is possible only because the story is basic (the forces of chaos invade the realm!) and most of characters are high fantasy chliches.

It is impossible to write a complex story around players character because you do not know who the character is.

In short, for me, the basic story (even with many cliches) which is flexible is better then good but static story. I, personally, prefer to role-play naïve canonic characters (like a Lawful Good Paladin, Chaotic Evil Necromancer or Greedy Thief) then just WATCH realistic, well-written characters like Geralt. My point is – it is easier to write flexible story based on typical high fantasy themes then based on realistic, adult plots. This is a matter of convention.

EDIT:
Oh, and one more example from Arcanum. There is one complicated “conspirational” quest in Tarrant– something about twins skulls etc. The story is interesting but the gameplay is just bad – you have no options in it, it’s all about walking from one character to another (however without quest markers, which is good). On the other side we have a very simple stories (for example – workers' strike in a factory) which give us a plenty of options.

 

[octavius]

It is amusing how all the prestigious combat fags are bunch of edgy teens liking a single game

Yes, that description like totally really fits me.

 

[JarlFrank]

Well, to give an example I thought Bard's Tale I & II were pretty shitty games precisely because they had no story but decent combat & dungeon design. I like a nice middle ground - good combat AND good story, but not something completely story-centric like too many AAA tiltes and jRPGs or, at the other end, just tech demos for micromanagement in combat with no story.

Bard's Tale were among the worst of the blobbers tho

 

[Mortmal]

Well, to give an example I thought Bard's Tale I & II were pretty shitty games precisely because they had no story but decent combat & dungeon design. I like a nice middle ground - good combat AND good story, but not something completely story-centric like too many AAA tiltes and jRPGs or, at the other end, just tech demos for micromanagement in combat with no story.

Bard's Tale were among the worst of the blobbers tho

They were amongst the most ancient. we are speaking of stuff published 30 years ago , the work of hobbyist and enthusiasts on 8 bits machines. Now there's little interest to play those old games if you like blobbers, last wizardry and jrpgs clones are considerably superior now.

 

[fantadomat]

Well, to give an example I thought Bard's Tale I & II were pretty shitty games precisely because they had no story but decent combat & dungeon design. I like a nice middle ground - good combat AND good story, but not something completely story-centric like too many AAA tiltes and jRPGs or, at the other end, just tech demos for micromanagement in combat with no story.

Bard's Tale were among the worst of the blobbers tho

They were amongst the most ancient. we are speaking of stuff published 30 years ago , the work of hobbyist and enthusiasts on 8 bits machines. Now there's little interest to play those old games if you like blobbers, last wizardry and jrpgs clones are considerably superior now.

MM was from 86 and had story spanning games.

 

[Mortmal]

Well, to give an example I thought Bard's Tale I & II were pretty shitty games precisely because they had no story but decent combat & dungeon design. I like a nice middle ground - good combat AND good story, but not something completely story-centric like too many AAA tiltes and jRPGs or, at the other end, just tech demos for micromanagement in combat with no story.

Bard's Tale were among the worst of the blobbers tho

They were amongst the most ancient. we are speaking of stuff published 30 years ago , the work of hobbyist and enthusiasts on 8 bits machines. Now there's little interest to play those old games if you like blobbers, last wizardry and jrpgs clones are considerably superior now.

MM was from 86 and had story spanning games.

Yes but it wasn't that much better, MM was quite primitive too. Best were probably gold boxes for story telling 1988 still.