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.

RPG gameplay elements/habits you don't understand

Semiurge

Cipher
Joined
Apr 11, 2020
Messages
6,646
Location
Asp Hole
Dialogue trees containing topics that are mutually exclusive or remove the others permanently for no good reason when used. Let's say you want to use them all because you're a completionist, so you usually have to reload repeatedly to discover the order you have to use each so that all will be available. I don't remember a single game that had a dialogue tree that didn't have a design flaw like this.
 
Last edited:

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
Dialogue trees containing topics that are mutually exclusive or remove the others permanently for no good reason when used. Let's say you want to use them all because you're a completionist, so you usually have to reload repeatedly to discover the order you have to use each so that all will be available. I don't remember a single game that had a dialogue tree that didn't have a design flaw like this.
It's been a long while, and I might be wrong, but iirc PS:T didn't get rid of dialogue options, and you can always choose that one line even after you've chosen others. You still need to go back to the start of the dialogue branch though, and iirc when it comes to big choices time like with the hag obviously the other lines would be deleted.
 

DalekFlay

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
14,118
Location
New Vegas
Same goes with walking all the way to some quest location, then walking all the way back to get the reward, then walking another 10 miles to the next NPC who will send you on another hike.

Morrowind sprung to mind reading this, because of course it did. Thing is though, Morrowind quickly teaches you how to get around faster, and it's all "in world" stuff. Bug busses, teleportation spells, enchanted speed items, etc. This is the antithesis of the topic, but I like when open world RPGs have mechanics like that as opposed to just bopping around the map willy-nilly. It makes it feel more like a real place, and it makes distance feel more important and like a challenge to overcome. If you want to get from Balmora to Sadrith Mora in the early game you have to spend some time figuring out how to do it, and if you want to get to a camp in the middle of fucking nowhere you actually feel like you're heading off into the middle of nowhere.
 

Sykar

Arcane
Joined
Dec 2, 2014
Messages
11,297
Location
Turn right after Alpha Centauri
What I hate the most:

Nr.1: Quest compass is probably the most loathsome invention. I can accept them in shallow games like Hack&Slashs but unless there is a VERY good explanation loathe them in RPGs. Even in some Sci Fi setting with advanced AI helping you I would still prefer to actually have to think how to get to my objective and look around for it myself. Metroid Prime series did it well. Usually your ship AI told you where the next objective on your map is but if you had not explored the map of that area yet you would have no idea how to get to it at all. Also the straight route was usually the wrong route so you had to think and explore how to get there. Sadly that is the exception and in most games they just take away from exploration since not only does the compass show you where it is, some games go so far and draw a line how to travel to it like in Black Desert Online for example.
It also leads to degenrate style of play where everything but the quest marker gets ignored/missed. In a certain FO 3 critique video the creator showed a clip where the active player missed that gigantic massive robot on his screen for like a minute because he was so focused on the fucking quest marker. Worse you often do not even have to read what the quest is about. It literally becomes a brain dead retarded "Follow and click quest marker ad nauseum" for the entirety of the game. Because who can be bothered to read quest texts or listen to quest givers or read or think or anyhting, no instant shallow gratification is all that matters to 95% of the retards playing games these days.

Nr.2: Level scaling. Dumbest shit ever. Makes you feel like you progress not at all. There is nothing more satisfying to be able to obliterate previously difficult enemies. Oblivion was probably the most egregious in that regard where staying at level one was actually a good idea.

Nr.3: Stat bloat. Nothing is more aggrevating that shooting or hacking an enemies "weak spot" for an hour. Completely immersion breaking to me. Often goes hand in hand with level scaling.

Nr4: Generic loot. Oh how I hated it in DAO when you get an item and all it does give you 1% more damage compared to the previous one. Even top notch stuff was usually nothing more than 20% extra damage. Makes me want to throw up at the lack of creativity and laziness.

Nr.5: Loot flooding. Absolutely mind boggling when I play games like PoE or Grim Dawn and every zombie rat drops shit, cluttering the game so bad you need fucking loot filters. Hey you fucktards, instead of mindlessly throwing shit at us come up with something better instead of that garbage of which only 1 out of 10.000 is actually something I want to pick up? Worse in a lot of RPGs you also get drops that make no sense. Some giant warhammer on a mosquito you just killed? Seriously?

Nr.6: Grinding. Even more mindless than following quest markers, but at least in all but many MMOs optional and not required.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
4,220
RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In
One thing I hate he most and I've bitched about Witcher 3 doing it countless times is leveled enemies, and enemies that are beyond their powerlevel for no good reason. DnD games are perfect in utilizing their bestiary because the books are explicit about how dangerous certain monsters are. You fight goblins at first levels, then orcs, then go up until dragons. It's simple and AFAIK no game based on DnD has managed to not do it correctly. Might and Magic was also pretty great. It makes you thin as if you're achieving something, you feel your characters getting stronger.
On the other hand you have garbage like Divine Divinity 2 and Witcher 3. There you get from lvl 1 bandits to lvl 80 bandits and goblins. Apparently these people are able to single-handedly kill armies of Griffons and professional soldiers, yet instead of creating entire kingdoms with their awesome power they just rob people as usual. Local cities since unaffected by having bandit superheroes right outside its walls.
Special award goes to Morrowind: Tribunal. They've actually created and modeled new creatures for this epic-level expansion instead of using the old ones. And what epic creatures did they decide to unleash on players? Goblins. So you have super-goblins living under Mournhold. They could probably kill Vivec if a bunch of them decided to do it for fun.
 

Dr Skeleton

Arcane
Joined
Nov 9, 2014
Messages
830
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Nr.5: Loot flooding. Absolutely mind boggling when I play games like PoE or Grim Dawn and every zombie rat drops shit, cluttering the game so bad you need fucking loot filters. Hey you fucktards, instead of mindlessly throwing shit at us come up with something better instead of that garbage of which only 1 out of 10.000 is actually something I want to pick up?
You'd think by the time they're adding loot filtering options to game menus, someone would go "hmm maybe there's a problem with itemization and drop rates if we need to give players tools to filter out all this garbage. Let's work on that instead.". But no.
 

Carrion

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jun 30, 2011
Messages
3,648
Location
Lost in Necropolis
Morrowind sprung to mind reading this, because of course it did. Thing is though, Morrowind quickly teaches you how to get around faster, and it's all "in world" stuff. Bug busses, teleportation spells, enchanted speed items, etc. This is the antithesis of the topic, but I like when open world RPGs have mechanics like that as opposed to just bopping around the map willy-nilly. It makes it feel more like a real place, and it makes distance feel more important and like a challenge to overcome. If you want to get from Balmora to Sadrith Mora in the early game you have to spend some time figuring out how to do it, and if you want to get to a camp in the middle of fucking nowhere you actually feel like you're heading off into the middle of nowhere.
I like to plan my travels to minimize pointless trips. If you see a quest taking place on the other side of a map, you'll put it on hold until you've done everything else, or until you have a bunch of other quests that also take place in the same general area or somewhere along the way. That's why it's fucking infuriating when a game suddenly decides to teleport you somewhere without any warning or a good reason (like a god teleporting you, or because you got too drunk and blacked out). One thing I give Bethesda credit for is that I don't remember them doing this.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,332
Location
Bjørgvin
Some modders did. I remember a mod for Morrowind called Glory Road that had a character in Balmora run up to you and teleport you without your consent. When mod makers are that desperate I uninstall the mod.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
4,220
RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In
It gets worse when a high level enemy is just different color of Monster energy.

I don't mind recolored monsters if they're properly explained.
I was completely fine with M&M VI having green goblins for footsoldiers, blue for shamans and red for kings since those were obviously different monsters with different capabilities, not just goblins+10.
 

Darth Canoli

Arcane
Joined
Jun 8, 2018
Messages
5,724
Location
Perched on a tree
I don't mind recolored monsters if they're properly explained.
I was completely fine with M&M VI having green goblins for footsoldiers, blue for shamans and red for kings since those were obviously different monsters with different capabilities, not just goblins+10.

It's coherent in Might & Magic, they're in the same area too unlike in a lot of jrpg where you fight blue slimes at level 1, green slimes at level 10 and red slimes at level 20 ...
And then gold slimes at level 100 ...
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,326
Location
Bulgaria
There are a few things players do (and developers implement) that I don't get.

Recently saw some youtube vids on Fallout games and the guy who talked about them played New Vegas and Fallout 4 with companions following him everywhere. And I just don't get it. Having followers in first person RPGs is lame as fuck, all they do is cramp your style, especially in something as clunky as Bethesda's Fallouts where they only get in your way when you wanna shoot at the enemy.

I don't get the appeal of having companions in first or third person action RPGs, yet devs keep implementing them and players apparently like it. New Vegas, Skyrim, Fallout 4 all have companions. Elex has companions. Chances are, if you play a modern action RPG there are companions you can recruit to follow you around.

Everyone hates escort quests, but companions in those kinds of games are cool? How? It feels like having a constant escort quest character tagging along with you. You have to babysit your companions to make sure they don't suicide themselves and it just makes the game more stressful and annoying. There are zero gameplay benefits to having an uncontrollable AI companion tag along with you in an action RPG. You can't coordinate your attacks with your companion in most of these games, so it's not like you can involve them in tactical approaches. Once the enemy spots you, your companion's AI will just derp out and go on a frontal attack, and if you don't want him/her to die you have to also run forward and do your best to prevent the enemies from killing the retard.

I'll never understand the appeal of companions in action RPGs.

Are there any features/habits in RPGs that you don't understand the appeal of?
Ahh it depends on the game,dragon age did companions well,they were functional and you would have hard time playing it solo. In PB games the companions are useless and generally detract from the experience of lonely exploration. Companions are used as the name suggests...for company and maybe a cool story or two. Most people prefer to not be a lonely murderhobo. For example in Fallout 2 the companions would have been good if you could control them and not let them shoot you in the back.
Oh also people hate escort quests because they loose the freedom they had before it. It is like the corona shit,people hate to not be free to go out,not that they don't go out. It is not like all those fat american protesters will go for a run in the park if the quarantine fell today.
 

JarlFrank

I like Thief THIS much
Patron
Joined
Jan 4, 2007
Messages
33,561
Location
KA.DINGIR.RA.KI
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Ahh it depends on the game,dragon age did companions well,they were functional and you would have hard time playing it solo.

Yeah but in Dragon Age you get to control your companions in combat, they're not just AI followers. I like controllable companions. What I don't get is AI followers that derp around and ruin your tactical approach by being dumb AIs.
 

thesheeep

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Mar 16, 2007
Messages
10,011
Location
Tampere, Finland
Codex 2012 Strap Yourselves In Codex Year of the Donut Codex+ Now Streaming! Serpent in the Staglands Dead State Divinity: Original Sin Torment: Tides of Numenera Codex USB, 2014 Shadorwun: Hong Kong Divinity: Original Sin 2 BattleTech Bubbles In Memoria A Beautifully Desolate Campaign Pillars of Eternity 2: Deadfire Pathfinder: Kingmaker Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag. Pathfinder: Wrath I'm very into cock and ball torture I helped put crap in Monomyth
One thing I hate he most and I've bitched about Witcher 3 doing it countless times is leveled enemies, and enemies that are beyond their powerlevel for no good reason
I think that a limited approach to level scaling is fine. Makes sense that some goblins would be stronger than others, especially if you come back to a region after some time and maybe a different goblin tribe has taken over. It also makes sense from a production perspective that you cannot give all "tiers" of goblins extra textures/meshes/effects/etc.
But unlimited scaling or scaling without any explanation whatsoever is horrible.

Anyway, I don't think Witcher 3 had unlimited level scaling, pretty sure common bandits would always remain around the same level region.
You also wouldn't find Nekkers that could take on armies on their own just because you leveled up.
Then again, I might have played with mods removing that...
 
Self-Ejected

Lilura

RPG Codex Dragon Lady
Joined
Feb 13, 2013
Messages
5,274
i'm fine with respawning if there is an in-game explanation, like aforementioned different goblin tribe.

There doesn't even have to be an explicit explanation, since one can be inferred by the player. Even generic respawns aren't necessarily bad; it depends on their employment and inference potential ("this shit keeps coming because they're part of a horde").
 

MpuMngwana

Arbiter
Joined
Sep 23, 2016
Messages
341
I’m fine with respawning tbh, especially in the overworld. After all, you’re not gonna encounter every wolf pack that lives there as you hike through a forest - I’m willing to accept that a wolf pack that respawned is just a different pack I happened not to cross paths with. This is harder to justify in dungeons though.

As for the question in the OP, I’ve never liked exploration for the sake of exploration. I usually need some reason to go places, which can be trivial but needs to be specific, otherwise I burn out pretty quickly even if I enjoy the game otherwise.
 

Peachcurl

Cipher
Joined
Jan 3, 2020
Messages
9,485
Location
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
I don't get the appeal of having companions in first or third person action RPGs, yet devs keep implementing them and players apparently like it. New Vegas, Skyrim, Fallout 4 all have companions. Elex has companions. Chances are, if you play a modern action RPG there are companions you can recruit to follow you around.

I can agree to the observation that companions in the games you mention are unappealing. I don't think it has to be that way. It's not perfectly the same, but summons/pets in hack&slash RPGs are not that different from companions. And I love to play summoner builds in these games. This is of course disregarding integration into the story (summons/pets are pretty much never part of the story, unlike companions).
But considering combat gameplay, I think the devs of the games mentioned could learn alot from the hack & slash genre on how to enable interesting combat interactions between player characters and companions.

Outer Worlds seemed to move in that direction, but fell unfortunately short.

Are there any features/habits in RPGs that you don't understand the appeal of?

Yes. Carry limits (weight, volume, whatever).
 
Joined
Feb 8, 2020
Messages
387
Feature bloat. Every RPG loves slapping on: random encounters, crafting, zillion of companions (usually all underwritten), badly implemented stealth, barebones town management, unnecessarily complicated itemization etc.

I like it when the games, especially small ones, know what they want to be and built mechanics around that (like Disco Elysium lazer focusing on story) instead of trying to include every fucking mechanic in existence, only for most of them to end up being mediocre and unnecessary.
 
Joined
Mar 28, 2014
Messages
4,220
RPG Wokedex Strap Yourselves In
One thing I hate he most and I've bitched about Witcher 3 doing it countless times is leveled enemies, and enemies that are beyond their powerlevel for no good reason
I think that a limited approach to level scaling is fine. Makes sense that some goblins would be stronger than others, especially if you come back to a region after some time and maybe a different goblin tribe has taken over. It also makes sense from a production perspective that you cannot give all "tiers" of goblins extra textures/meshes/effects/etc.
But unlimited scaling or scaling without any explanation whatsoever is horrible.

Anyway, I don't think Witcher 3 had unlimited level scaling, pretty sure common bandits would always remain around the same level region.
You also wouldn't find Nekkers that could take on armies on their own just because you leveled up.
Then again, I might have played with mods removing that...

The problem is not that the monsters increase in strength without reason, Witcher 3 doesn't have any scalling as far as I know. The problem is that something like monster power level is non existent in there. It's reasonable that there are stronger and weaker goblins, but putting a goblin in a high-level location and slapping a high number in front of its name is just lazy.
And to make matters worse Witcher 3 describes Royal Griffon as "one of the most dangerous creatures out there" and have you kill one at the end of the tutorial location, but later on throws drowners, ghouls and bandits that have level high enough to make you run from them.
So yeah, Griffon is one of the strongest and most dangerous monsters but somehow Velen is full of petty criminals that could kill it in 5 hits. What's the point?
 

ValeVelKal

Arcane
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
1,605
Dialogue trees containing topics that are mutually exclusive or remove the others permanently for no good reason when used. Let's say you want to use them all because you're a completionist, so you usually have to reload repeatedly to discover the order you have to use each so that all will be available. I don't remember a single game that had a dialogue tree that didn't have a design flaw like this.
Generally speaking, I feel like in RPG dialog trees are not really well-done and don't feel natural, as you can very often roll back to previous topics, say 10 times the same thing, or give 5 different answers in a row to the same question.

Recently I played a branching adventure game mostly based on dialogs ("The Red Strings Club") and it has probably the dialogs that feel the most "organic" of any game I played, so now I want all my dialogs in all my games - especially RPG - to be like there.
 

fantadomat

Arcane
Edgy Vatnik Wumao
Joined
Jun 2, 2017
Messages
37,326
Location
Bulgaria
Ahh it depends on the game,dragon age did companions well,they were functional and you would have hard time playing it solo.

Yeah but in Dragon Age you get to control your companions in combat, they're not just AI followers. I like controllable companions. What I don't get is AI followers that derp around and ruin your tactical approach by being dumb AIs.
It just shows that people prefer a good story over action. People do use them so they don't miss on some side quests or comment from the npc. It just shows that storfags reign supreme in the world MUAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHA!!!!!


Joke aside,it just shows that there is a need for improvement in the companions. I personally don't use them in games like nu fallout or BP's games.
 

anvi

Prophet
Village Idiot
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
Messages
7,678
Location
Kelethin
I don't mind respawns but it is the 3rd best option.

1) Best option is to act like a world simulation. Nothing respawns, if you kill everyone in a village, the village is left abandoned. But you can do things like have roaming bands of creatures/people that might find an empty village and take it over. There are some games that work like this. And you can spawn new enemies over time, not respawns, which act like creatures/people giving birth to keep the population topped up.

2) Just no respawns. It works ok although leaving entire areas completely empty after you have been through, can be a problem if there are not plenty of new places to go. But it does feel good to see your actions making a real impact on the world. If you wipe out a whole village and see it days later deserted, you then feel regret or satisfaction and like you have made a difference for better/worse.

3) Respawns. It is fine but it is gamey and not simulation-y.
 

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