Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

First Person RPG Combat

denizsi

Arcane
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
9,927
Location
bosphorus
I know many people here don't like the idea of first person combat in an RPG. My question is, is that an absolute and unchangable point of view for you, do you believe that there isn't any way at all to realize it the RPG way, leaving no trace of twitchiness or player-skill-dependancy, and have you thought of any implementation yourself?
 

Norfleet

Moderator
Joined
Jun 3, 2005
Messages
12,250
I'm not married to the concept that RPGs necessarily require the use of character stats that determine everything. Or any character stats, really. To that end, I see nothing wrong with the concept of even a purely twitch combat system in an RPG: After all, an RPG must, first and foremost, be a GAME. It's not really much of a game if your skill at it doesn't get involved SOMEWHERE.
 

denizsi

Arcane
Joined
Nov 24, 2005
Messages
9,927
Location
bosphorus
Or any character stats, really

I know the perfect RPG just like that; Counter Strike. It even has dialogue.

Anyway, ideas on implementation.. I got something in my mind and have been working on a primitive model just for experimenting and demonstrating the mechanics (nothing fancy), and really curious about what different methods people may come up with.
 

Zomg

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
6,984
Note that Bloodlines has first person combat, even full blown FPS combat, and has a pretty good reputation here, not just as a game like SS/SS2 but as an RPG.

My opinion is that all gameplay is necessarily about "player skill." There's no way to disentangle skill and gameplay - a game that tries to minimize the importance of player skill will converge towards a less and less interactive movie. There is player skill in maneuvering through dialog, there's lots of player skill in tactical combat, etc. Any RPG that doesn't rely significantly on player skill is going to fucking suck. Morrowind, for example, had awful core gameplay because no skill of any kind was involved. I say that just to get the player skills mantra out of the way.

I think the mode of view and combat gameplay, and I say combat since no one has much figured out a way to make good gameplay in an RPG without it, is mostly a matter of style and tradeoffs. The core roleplaying is independent and based around interactive narrative and character design/growth/expression.
 

Data4

Arcane
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
5,529
Location
Over there.
The only thing that comes to mind for me right now is Dark Messiah of Might & Magic. If Oblivion's combat was like that, I might still be playing it.

Sorry, it doesn't really answer your question, but...

-D4
 

Sae

Novice
Joined
Jul 20, 2006
Messages
29
When purely twitch based combat is introduced, you no longer really have an RPG. The only control over your character that you should have is choice. :wink:

As far as an FPPRPGs, I think people here are more concerned about turn based vs. real time(or RT with lies) than perspectives.
 

franc kaos

Liturgist
Joined
Aug 4, 2005
Messages
298
Location
On the outside ~ looking in...
I liked Gothic2's combat style. If you as the player were good, you could hold your own in an uneven sword fight, but unless your character was strong/deft enough, the chances of a successful outcome was minimal.

It also helped that time never stopped when you opened your inventory.

It was just a shame that all that sword play didn't go into making your sword skill rise.

I did use the 'cheat' that let you quaff potions by clicking on a key, but that wasn't on by default and only worked on shop bought potions, not home made ones.
 

GhanBuriGhan

Erudite
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
1,170
the twitchiness of the combat is not a big concern to me. In fact I like first person combat in RPG's more than any other style, which is one reason why I tend to prefer the ultima underworld and TES games to other classics, although I do like well made turn based combat too. But really, neither the viewpoint nor the combat model have any bearing on RPG elements that are far more important for a good RPG experience: character development, storytelling, choice and consequence, world simulation, dialogue. It's great if you like turn based combat so much, and I am really sorry that there are not more contemporary games using that system, but by itself I just don't think its important for the overalll value of a game as an RPG.

To be honest, I think the idea that "twitchy" games really depend on player reflexes is mostly ludicrous: None of the games present a serious challenge in that respect, and character stats have a far more important impact than anything you can do with fancy mousework. And except for Oblivion with its excessive scaling system, I have not encountered a single game where you were not able to remedy any real or perceived lack in twitch combat skill by simpl leveling up a bit more. If there are games where that is not the case, I don't think I have played them.
 

Surlent

Liturgist
Joined
Jul 21, 2004
Messages
825
It's ludicrous you can point your gun with mouse on enemy's head, take headshot from point blank range and all you see is few numbers popping on the enemy's head telling how much damage you did instead of blood splattering all over and one headless corpse falling down. Might as well give the player autoaim. The first person aspect didn't add anything to the previous encounter. It didn't make it anymore different than watching your character to shoot the enemy from isometric view just by click of a button, because that's basically what you did while in the 1st person view too. For guns, the fun in FPS view is the aiming.
I think Deus Ex had nice compromise with stats, shake long range aim, decrease accuracy and increase recoil with lower skill.

Other reason to use FPS view would be it's immersive aspect. Don't know really, in some games FPS view makes it more immersive and others don't. Might have something to do with map design, use of enviroment and overall atmosphere. Small things like npcs turning towards you while you walk past them, standing in sewers watching as water drops from the ceiling or opponent catching you behind feel more immersive in FPS view.
 

crufty

Arcane
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
6,383
Location
Glassworks
Shadows of the Colossus was pretty dope, and it was twitch. Not an RPG, but pretty darn close to one.
 

bryce777

Erudite
Joined
Feb 4, 2005
Messages
4,225
Location
In my country the system operates YOU
denizsi said:
I know many people here don't like the idea of first person combat in an RPG. My question is, is that an absolute and unchangable point of view for you, do you believe that there isn't any way at all to realize it the RPG way, leaving no trace of twitchiness or player-skill-dependancy, and have you thought of any implementation yourself?

I think by definition it is pretty sketchy as an rpg if it is first person single player.

I like mount and blade, but it is hardly an rpg.
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
Jesus. The letters rpg stand for roleplaying game. When you play a role your timing, button, clicking and physical hand-dexterity, and playing skill is not important. The physical attributes and skill of the character whose role you are plaing are. twitch games can never be rpgs, because you can never play a role without being yourself. You can not play a role and be yourself. If you aren't playing a role you aren't playing a fucking rpg. You are playing a game, like any other. The letters r and p are there for a reason.


Stop being retards.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
I prefer nice TB tactical combat, but am willing to slog through other types if the rest of the game is good (and I have the player skill to work the chosen combat model). However, developers generally don't chose an action combat model because because they think it's a better combat mechanic for RPGs (especially not in the last 10 years). Lot's of other stuff in the game also changes in the path to more sales, which usually means you get a watered down rpg with your twitch combat.

GhanBuriGhan said:
But really, neither the viewpoint nor the combat model have any bearing on RPG elements that are far more important for a good RPG experience: character development

Bullshit. I kept getting swarmed when I used the bow in Fable, so wham I was forced to play a melee or magic character. Twitchy McTwitch may shun a convoluted magic system in a game to make a kiting archer. Players whose skills synergize with your combat model will have more freedom to take their character where they want, compared to one that has to put all their effort into making a viable combat character/party.

,storytelling,

Taking your RPG into the FPS Action-RPG model places a cap on your storytelling. If you've got $10 million you can put as much storytelling in as you want, but for anyone else, it's cut, cut, cut.

choice and consequence

The amount of synergy between player and game can affect choices and especially consequences. This is the case regardless of your combat model.

dialogue.

see storytelling
 

GhanBuriGhan

Erudite
Joined
Aug 8, 2005
Messages
1,170
obediah said:
GhanBuriGhan said:
But really, neither the viewpoint nor the combat model have any bearing on RPG elements that are far more important for a good RPG experience: character development

Bullshit. I kept getting swarmed when I used the bow in Fable, so wham I was forced to play a melee or magic character. Twitchy McTwitch may shun a convoluted magic system in a game to make a kiting archer. Players whose skills synergize with your combat model will have more freedom to take their character where they want, compared to one that has to put all their effort into making a viable combat character/party.
That's not an argument against first person, that's an argument against any poorly designed and balanced combat system. Anyway, I don't think it's bad for an RPG to have different classes /builds have different difficulty. We went through this in the recent "balancing" discussion. Wether the difficulty derives from different tactical difficulty or if the players skill plays a role is only marginally important.

,storytelling,

Taking your RPG into the FPS Action-RPG model places a cap on your storytelling. If you've got $10 million you can put as much storytelling in as you want, but for anyone else, it's cut, cut, cut.
Bullshit yourself. 3D / First person technology is so readily available today that even indy teams can easily afford it. In fact that technology may be easier to come by /license / find artists for than a 2D isometric game. If you can't afford a group of designers you shouldn't be making a game anyway. Finally, most current commercial game budgets probably far exceed $10 million anyway.

choice and consequence

The amount of synergy between player and game can affect choices and especially consequences. This is the case regardless of your combat model.
The amount of aproaches you can take certainly impacts gameplay, yes. I don't see a principle disadvantage for first person though. E.g. I think few other games have given me as many options to aproach a combat oriented objective as Deus Ex.
 

Zomg

Arbiter
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
6,984
Imagine an RPG where your character is a mayor, and the core gameplay is Sim City-like with first person or close isometric view when you go down to the personal/dialog scale. You create a character with traits that matter - a charismatic backslapper and a brainy economist would have different gameplay experiences. There is an interactive narrative that ties the gameplay together with a plot, and the dialog gives you the ability to evoke a personality for your PC mayor and provides consequences for it. In my opinion that would be an RPG, where the G has been taken from city building games rather than the traditional squad tactics games or FPSes.

So, this example illustrates that the RP and the G, while they will create synthetic effects and limitations, are fundamentally orthogonal.
 

obediah

Erudite
Joined
Jan 31, 2005
Messages
5,051
GhanBuriGhan said:
obediah said:
Bullshit. I kept getting swarmed when I used the bow in Fable, so wham I was forced to play a melee or magic character. Twitchy McTwitch may shun a convoluted magic system in a game to make a kiting archer. Players whose skills synergize with your combat model will have more freedom to take their character where they want, compared to one that has to put all their effort into making a viable combat character/party.

That's not an argument against first person,
No, it's an argument that combat mechanics affect character development.

Wether the difficulty derives from different tactical difficulty or if the players skill plays a role is only marginally important.

Unless your making your game for people to play of course. A RPG that focuses on tactics, planning, teamwork will draw a different crowd than one that focuses on intense real time combat. Having difficulty playing a thief because I can't time the 'sneak' button combo, or because I can't understand the complex feedback system the games uses is entirely different than having difficulty with it because the game design inolves a lot of challenges that are difficult for the skills a thief possesses.

Bullshit yourself. 3D / First person technology is so readily available today that even indy teams can easily afford it. In fact that technology may be easier to come by /license / find artists for than a 2D isometric game. If you can't afford a group of designers you shouldn't be making a game anyway. Finally, most current commercial game budgets probably far exceed $10 million anyway.

My aplogies for supplieing irrelevent numbers for you to nitpick. If you're making an FP-action game with someone elses money, your going to hit a wall on story/dialogue in quantity and complexity.

The amount of aproaches you can take certainly impacts gameplay, yes. I don't see a principle disadvantage for first person though. E.g. I think few other games have given me as many options to aproach a combat oriented objective as Deus Ex.

Your post suggested that the combat and rpg aspects of a gamer were largely independent, which I disagree with. Some of my responses addressed specific limitations of action/FP games, and others just go to proving the coupling of the two components of a game.
 

Gambler

Augur
Joined
Apr 3, 2006
Messages
767
I know many people here don't like the idea of first person combat
That's right. Because some people here think that role-playing is all about killing stuff in accordance with your stats.

When purely twitch based combat is introduced, you no longer really have an RPG.
<-- See? I bet that guy thinks that ToEE is 20 times more of an RPG than Planescape or Bloodlines.

Personally, I don't care. I think combat shold be tactical, but direct control does not take tactics away (Deus Ex has more combat tactics that both Fallouts altogether).
 

Vault Dweller

Commissar, Red Star Studio
Developer
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
28,024
denizsi said:
I know many people here don't like the idea of first person combat in an RPG. My question is, is that an absolute and unchangable point of view for you, do you believe that there isn't any way at all to realize it the RPG way, leaving no trace of twitchiness or player-skill-dependancy, and have you thought of any implementation yourself?
Wizardry's combat worked well for me. No complaints.
 

Mefi

Prophet
Patron
Joined
Apr 7, 2005
Messages
1,364
Location
waiting for a train at Perdido Street Station
I've no complaints about first-person RPGs judged solely because they are first-person either. For party based RPGs, I prefer a top down view as it inherently allows greater tactical flexibility, but that doesn't mean I think that a first-person group-based RPG is inherently crap. And for a single character RPG, I think first-person can have definite advantages.
 

corvax

Augur
Joined
Jul 13, 2004
Messages
731
Zomg said:
Note that Bloodlines has first person combat, even full blown FPS combat, and has a pretty good reputation here, not just as a game like SS/SS2 but as an RPG.
Bloodlines automatically switched to third person view - not counting ranged weapons.
 

Roqua

Prospernaut
Dumbfuck Repressed Homosexual In My Safe Space
Joined
Apr 28, 2004
Messages
4,130
Location
YES!
That's right. Because some people here think that role-playing is all about killing stuff in accordance with your stats.

Whose stats? Yours or the character's whose role you are supposed to be playing?

When purely twitch based combat is introduced, you no longer really have an RPG.
<-- See? I bet that guy thinks that ToEE is 20 times more of an RPG than Planescape or Bloodlines.

See what? Planescape is linear, choices in the game are basically insignificant, whereas in ToEE they are not. Bllodlines can't be an rpg since its twitch based. But all three games are great (besdies the horrible, gay ass IE combat in Torment). Why can't a game be great and not an rpg? Wasn't your Commandos game not an rpg, but still great in your opinion?

Personally, I don't care. I think combat shold be tactical, but direct control does not take tactics away (Deus Ex has more combat tactics that both Fallouts altogether).

What the fuck are you trying to say you fucking monkey? Are you saying you are not in direct control of your characters in ToEE? Who is? Are you saying that in ToEE when I directly direct a character to go here, do this, or attack, there is something indirect about it? It doesn't happen directly from an action or cause?

If you said indirect control of the characters in PS:T I could see it, as they have scripts that make them perform atcions in lieu of direct control from the player.
 

Elwro

Arcane
Joined
Dec 29, 2002
Messages
11,746
Location
Krakow, Poland
Divinity: Original Sin Wasteland 2
As for some useless contribution: remember Demise? It was an FPS dungeon crawl, which could be fun for a while. (I think I spent a hundred hours or so with it.) And it wasn't twitchy at all.
 

St. Toxic

Arcane
Joined
Jun 9, 2006
Messages
9,098
Location
Yemen / India
There's alot of inherent features in an fps engine that would need to be circumvented for pure crpg combat to work as it's mean't to; so I think combat could be handled pretty well actually, with the proper implentation. However some other things would likely be broken by a fp viewpoint, like for example PE scripted "notice stuff that others don't" scenarios -- like, does it just pop out through the rubble if your pe is high enough, and what if you, the player, are completely oblivious as to there being an object that needs your attention? Would the camera be turned there automaticly, as in your character taking charge? I don't know, fp is a long leap from traditional rpg's and too close to larp to ever get my complete approval, not to mention the so far horrid variations of fp "rpg's" sort of putting me off on the idea.
 

Shagnak

Shagadelic
Joined
Sep 6, 2003
Messages
4,637
Location
Arse of the world, New Zealand
I'm not certain why people have jumped to the conclusion that a first person perspective denotes a game that is twitch-based.

denizsi said:
I know many people here don't like the idea of first person combat in an RPG.
No, they're just against player-reflex-based combat. Not necessarily the same thing.

My question is, is that an absolute and unchangable point of view for you, do you believe that there isn't any way at all to realize it the RPG way, leaving no trace of twitchiness or player-skill-dependancy, and have you thought of any implementation yourself?
Perspective/view has little to do with whether something requires twitch skills or not.
There are plenty of games that have turn-based or phase-based combat that are first-person (e.g. any Wizardry derivative).
I'm not certain why you would think that combat mode is beholden to a particular perspective.


EDIT:
Missed VD's response, which applies to me as well (obviously).
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom