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.

1eyedking Top 10 things that RPGs don't do anymore

Prime Junta

Guest
Dungeons you have to map out yourself.

-> tangent

Back when it came out, I played Ultima III with a friend, sharing a computer. That was cool because I was better at the fights, but he had a nearly superhuman ability to memorise maps. When I was playing all by myself I had to draw all those damn dungeons on graph paper, but he just never got lost. Never ever. Could memorise the whole damn things from start to finish. Saved a lot of time.
 
Self-Ejected

Sacred82

Self-Ejected
Dumbfuck
Joined
Jun 7, 2013
Messages
2,957
Location
Free Village
CRPG's never focus on NPC interaction anymore. Not since PS:T overdid it and people had a go-to example of why it's bad.

Ultima VII was my formative experience and there's just no game that came close in making me care about NPC's. The best you get now is You-Know-Who games with SJW self-inserts that loredump on you. The best RPG towns had that quaint fairy tale atmosphere that was reflected in conversations. But fairy tales aren't sexy enough bro, gotta squeeze that awesome gland.
 

Zanzoken

Arcane
Joined
Dec 16, 2014
Messages
4,090
This is a pretty abstract example and not even really an RPG, but one of my favorite games as a kid was Ogre Battle 64. The game had a number of elements that you don't see very often anymore, but the particular one I want to highlight is the way the game used the in-game calendar as a way to create secrets.

The gist of it is that some events would only trigger on certain days, and usually only at a particular time of day. A lot of content was hidden this way -- items, classes, characters, and even the Elem Pedra, which is nearly the strongest magic in the game. You could play and complete the whole game without finding any of these things, so they weren't essential but provided huge rewards for exploration. And occasionally you would stumble across accidentally and it was just awesome.

I wish side-questing was still handled this way in modern gaming. Nowadays if you see an NPC you can pretty much bet they either offer a quest or are involved in one. You follow the steps, fight a battle or two, then receive a reward. Rinse, repeat, boring.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,769
Location
Bjørgvin
Keeping things abstract.
You can no longer use your imagination and "fill in the blanks", wether it be characters, combat or level design. CRPGs have become more like movies, and less like games in general.

Further thoughts:
I wouldn't mind so much if the modern engines allowed for decent AI and physics that lead to emergent gameplay. But when everything is scripted I feel I could just as well watch a movie.

Yeah time limit was such a great idea in Fallout 1 that they eventually patched the game and almost removed it completely.
Yeah, and Tell me about button was so great that they didn't add it in Fallout 2. Your point? Retards were whining that 500 days was too little so they've patched it and dumbed it down

I love time limits myself, and I really appreciated how the M&M and HoMM games reward you for completing the games ASAP with a higher score.

It's sad that people had problems with the time limit in Fallout. Either they must have been retarded or suffering from some serious OCD that made them explore every wilderness area instead of seeking out the towns.
 

eric__s

ass hater
Developer
Joined
Jun 13, 2011
Messages
2,301
Party members used to split up gold individually, like in Wizardry. That was awful.
 

Lord Azlan

Arcane
Patron
Shitposter
Joined
Jun 4, 2014
Messages
1,901
Money.

When did someone make some sort of holy dictate the money weights nothing? In some games you can go around carrying 50,000 or even 300,000 gold whatever. Why has that become acceptable? I remember that Daggerfall having banks and you could deposit cash and take out loans.

Elder+Scrolls+Daggerfall+(3).png


I want my money to weigh something.

I think in some other games I can't remember money came in gold, silver and bronze pieces and as you adventured you you swap them out or buy things for 5 silver pieces or something.

One of the best and unique things I remember about Daggerfall is the horse and wagon you could buy and then park outside some dungeon and clean it out.

That sort of made sense and was a good investment. Nowadays you can just raise your strength to 100, carry infinite items or fortify strength for two seconds and instantly fast travel somewhere.

Finally, and most important, THE ABILITY TO CLOSE A DUNGEON DOOR ON TOP OF A MONSTER AND KILL IT.

PURE MAGIC.

Partly explains why I really enjoyed D:OS.
 
Last edited:
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
I love time limits myself, and I really appreciated how the M&M and HoMM games reward you for completing the games ASAP with a higher score.

It's sad that people had problems with the time limit in Fallout. Either they must have been retarded or suffering from some serious OCD that made them explore every wilderness area instead of seeking out the towns.

While I agree with you about the first part, end-game scores should reflect efficiency, regarding the second part its probably the first time I've seen a post from you that I disagree with on a fundamental level, to the point where I'd direct your own insults back at yourself. It has to be some kind of retarded OCD'er that picks up an RPG and then runs blindly through the main quest like a blinkered horse at the Grand National, talk about missing the point of the genre by a country mile.
 

Arulan

Cipher
Joined
Feb 13, 2014
Messages
313
Interact or Parlay with Monsters

I'm uncertain how common this really was, but the idea being that even monsters don't only exist to attack you on sight. Pool of Radiance again comes to mind with the ability to Parlay to gain information, or interact with them in scripted scenarios.


Expanding on this subject a little, it wasn't too uncommon in RPGs to find enemies, of any kind, that while if provoked would gladly attack you, it didn't happen immediately. For instance, in Fallout the Khans weren't simply mindless enemy bandits. They could easily be provoked, but you could also reason with them. In Gothic, most of the wildlife and creatures are simply living their lives, unless of course you provoke them into becoming hostile.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,769
Location
Bjørgvin
I love time limits myself, and I really appreciated how the M&M and HoMM games reward you for completing the games ASAP with a higher score.

It's sad that people had problems with the time limit in Fallout. Either they must have been retarded or suffering from some serious OCD that made them explore every wilderness area instead of seeking out the towns.

While I agree with you about the first part, end-game scores should reflect efficiency, regarding the second part its probably the first time I've seen a post from you that I disagree with on a fundamental level, to the point where I'd direct your own insults back at yourself. It has to be some kind of retarded OCD'er that picks up an RPG and then runs blindly through the main quest like a blinkered horse at the Grand National, talk about missing the point of the genre by a country mile.

If you're gonna insult me, at least find something that fits. Finishing a game in as little game time as possible is good role playing, and is the opposite of the OCD players that uses year of game time to level up to maximum or rest 1 HP per day instead of using spells and potions, while the Big Bad who must be stopped before he conquers everything is in some kind of temporal stasis.
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
Yes, thanks for the 2 second retarded tag there Goral I did see your discussion about it earlier and am aware of your position. I'm not entirely sure where the love for this idea comes from, as its not an RPG trait, but just something Fallout did, so I'm not even sure why its part of the discussion as it doesn't have anything to do with the topic. If you want to alienate ever more people from the genre, getting fixated on bizarre one-offs that a good game just happen to chuck in there once for whatever reason is certainly a good way to go about it. Why not get fixated over Dungeon Siege's unique method of a continually scrolling linear game-world with 8 companions, "who gives a fuck that no-one else ever did that, but fuck you I'm gonna get fixated by it because Fuck you etc etc".
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
If you're gonna insult me, at least find something that fits. Finishing a game in as little game time as possible is good role playing, and is the opposite of the OCD players that uses year of game time to level up to maximum or rest 1 HP per day instead of using spells and potions, while the Big Bad who must be stopped before he conquers everything is in some kind of temporal stasis.

Quality goal post moving there, 10/10. Your initial insult was "Either they must have been retarded or suffering from some serious OCD that made them explore every wilderness area instead of seeking out the towns." - because that's what 'adventurers' like doing... riiiiiiiiight.
 

pippin

Guest
Interact or Parlay with Monsters

I'm uncertain how common this really was, but the idea being that even monsters don't only exist to attack you on sight. Pool of Radiance again comes to mind with the ability to Parlay to gain information, or interact with them in scripted scenarios.


Expanding on this subject a little, it wasn't too uncommon in RPGs to find enemies, of any kind, that while if provoked would gladly attack you, it didn't happen immediately. For instance, in Fallout with the Khans weren't simply mindless enemy bandits. They could easily be provoked, but you could also reason with them. In Gothic, most of the wildlife and creatures are simply living their lives, unless of course you provoke them into becoming hostile.

There's a bit in Morrowind where you can get to talk to one of those dagoth monsters in a specific location in one of those Sixth House fortresses. The reature attacks you normally, but there's a tiny window of time where you can engage in conversation and the creature will give you dagoth brandy, which only had negative effects.
 

Murk

Arcane
Joined
Jan 17, 2008
Messages
13,459

repost from tgdmb

Coins are Big and Heavy
"How many boards could the Mongols hoard if the Mongol hordes got bored?"

From the standpoint of the adventurer, the primary difficulty of the D&D currency system is that the lack of a coherent banking and paper currency system means that there are profound limits to what you could possibly purchase even with platinum. But the currency system hurts on the other end as well. Untrained labor gets a silverpiece a week. That's 500 copper coins a year, which means that no matter how cheap things are they can only make one purchase a day most of the time. That's pretty stifling to the economy, in that however much gets produced, noone can buy it. Demand, from the economics standpoint, is strangled to the point where large production outputs don't even matter (remember that in economics Demand doesn't mean "what people want", it means "what people are willing and able to pay for", so if the average person only has 500 discreet pieces of currency per year, that puts an absolute cap on economic demand, even though the people are of course both needy and greedy enough to want anything you happen to produce).

What's worse, those coins are heavy. For our next demonstration, reach into your change drawer and fish out nine pennies. That's a decent lump in your pocket, neh? That's about one copper piece. Gold pieces are smaller (less than half the size, actually), but weigh the same. D&D currency, therefore, is more like a Monopoly playing piece than it is like a modern or ancient coin. There's no reason to even believe these things are round, people are seriously marching around gold hats and silver dogs as the basic medium of exchange.

Now, you may ask yourself why these coins are so titanic compared to real coins. The answer is because having piles of coins is awesome. Dragons are supposed to sleep on that stuff, and that requires big piles of coins. Consider my own mattress, which is a "twin-size" (pretty reasonable for a single medium-size creature) and nearly .2 cubic meters. If it was made out of gold, it would be about 3.9 tonnes. That's about eighty-six hundred pounds, and even with the ginormous coins in D&D, that's four hundred and thirty thousand gold pieces. In previous editions, that sort of thing was simply accepted and very powerful dragons really did have the millions of gold pieces – which was actually fine. Since third edition, they've been trying to make gold actually equal character power, and the result has been that dragon hoards are… really small. None of this "We need to get a wagon team to haul it all away", no. In 3rd edition, hoard sizes have become manageable, even ridiculously tiny. When a 6th level party defeats a powerful and wealthy monster, they can expect to find… nearly a liter of gold. That is, the treasure "hoard" of that evil dragon you defeated will actually fit into an Evian bottle.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,769
Location
Bjørgvin
If you're gonna insult me, at least find something that fits. Finishing a game in as little game time as possible is good role playing, and is the opposite of the OCD players that uses year of game time to level up to maximum or rest 1 HP per day instead of using spells and potions, while the Big Bad who must be stopped before he conquers everything is in some kind of temporal stasis.

Quality goal post moving there, 10/10. Your initial insult was "Either they must have been retarded or suffering from some serious OCD that made them explore every wilderness area instead of seeking out the towns." - because that's what 'adventurers' like doing... riiiiiiiiight.

You mean in "real life" you would have "lawnmowered" every square mile of California in the search for a Water Chip, instead of just visiting places of interest? A real band of adventurers would have focused on their main quest, but would probably got sidetracked sometimes (making side quests is a good use of companions, for example). Personally I generally try to role play my adventurers instead of power playing them, these days. I used belong to the "lawnmowers", though. I know I missed some things in Fallout, but I don't fret about it. Besides, it's more fun to replay if you don't discover everything on the first playthrough.
 
Last edited:
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407

repost from tgdmb

Coins are Big and Heavy
"How many boards could the Mongols hoard if the Mongol hordes got bored?"

From the standpoint of the adventurer, the primary difficulty of the D&D currency system is that the lack of a coherent banking and paper currency system means that there are profound limits to what you could possibly purchase even with platinum. But the currency system hurts on the other end as well. Untrained labor gets a silverpiece a week. That's 500 copper coins a year, which means that no matter how cheap things are they can only make one purchase a day most of the time. That's pretty stifling to the economy, in that however much gets produced, noone can buy it. Demand, from the economics standpoint, is strangled to the point where large production outputs don't even matter (remember that in economics Demand doesn't mean "what people want", it means "what people are willing and able to pay for", so if the average person only has 500 discreet pieces of currency per year, that puts an absolute cap on economic demand, even though the people are of course both needy and greedy enough to want anything you happen to produce).

What's worse, those coins are heavy. For our next demonstration, reach into your change drawer and fish out nine pennies. That's a decent lump in your pocket, neh? That's about one copper piece. Gold pieces are smaller (less than half the size, actually), but weigh the same. D&D currency, therefore, is more like a Monopoly playing piece than it is like a modern or ancient coin. There's no reason to even believe these things are round, people are seriously marching around gold hats and silver dogs as the basic medium of exchange.

Now, you may ask yourself why these coins are so titanic compared to real coins. The answer is because having piles of coins is awesome. Dragons are supposed to sleep on that stuff, and that requires big piles of coins. Consider my own mattress, which is a "twin-size" (pretty reasonable for a single medium-size creature) and nearly .2 cubic meters. If it was made out of gold, it would be about 3.9 tonnes. That's about eighty-six hundred pounds, and even with the ginormous coins in D&D, that's four hundred and thirty thousand gold pieces. In previous editions, that sort of thing was simply accepted and very powerful dragons really did have the millions of gold pieces – which was actually fine. Since third edition, they've been trying to make gold actually equal character power, and the result has been that dragon hoards are… really small. None of this "We need to get a wagon team to haul it all away", no. In 3rd edition, hoard sizes have become manageable, even ridiculously tiny. When a 6th level party defeats a powerful and wealthy monster, they can expect to find… nearly a liter of gold. That is, the treasure "hoard" of that evil dragon you defeated will actually fit into an Evian bottle.

Magic bags of holding, problem solved. Games without magic bags of holding (ie: with crap itemisation) are the issue. So it's another itemisation issue. Or it's a crappy spells issue (casts "coin to dust" and "dust to coin" etc).
 

vonAchdorf

Arcane
Joined
Sep 20, 2014
Messages
13,465
Money.

When did someone make some sort of holy dictate the money weights nothing? In some games you can go around carrying 50,000 or even 300,000 gold whatever. Why has that become acceptable? I remember that Daggerfall having banks and you could deposit cash and take out loans.

Elder+Scrolls+Daggerfall+(3).png


I want my money to weigh something.

I think in some other games I can't remember money came in gold, silver and bronze pieces and as you adventured you you swap them out or buy things for 5 silver pieces or something.

One of the best and unique things I remember about Daggerfall is the horse and wagon you could buy and then park outside some dungeon and clean it out.

That sort of made sense and was a good investment. Nowadays you can just raise your strength to 100, carry infinite items or fortify strength for two seconds and instantly fast travel somewhere.

Finally, and most important, THE ABILITY TO CLOSE A DUNGEON DOOR ON TOP OF A MONSTER AND KILL IT.

PURE MAGIC.

Partly explains why I really enjoyed D:OS.

In (early) Everquest you could even become immobile if you carried too much cash. When they introduced a market in a later expansion, they disabled/reduced money weight there, but you had to store your cash at the bank before leaving or you'd still not be able to move. (And you could change copper / silver / gold / platinum pieces only at a bank.)
 
Last edited:

Goral

Arcane
Patron
The Real Fanboy
Joined
May 4, 2008
Messages
3,572
Location
Poland
It has to be some kind of retarded OCD'er that picks up an RPG and then runs blindly through the main quest like a blinkered horse at the Grand National, talk about missing the point of the genre by a country mile.
"Running blindly through the main quest" is retarded statement in itself since doing the main quest is the only logical thing you could do and it's the opposite of "running blindly". Going to Vault 15 is the most rational thing you can do, going to Shady Sands is too since you're heading in the right direction anyway. You can of course act like a retard and go everywhere except to locations that might have clues where to find the water chip but it at least has consequences (thanks to time limit). And like I said, no one in his right mind would go into wasteland blindly but go from one settlement to the next.

Go back to Skyrim.
 
Self-Ejected

IncendiaryDevice

Self-Ejected
Village Idiot
Joined
Nov 3, 2014
Messages
7,407
"Running blindly through the main quest" is retarded statement in itself since doing the main quest is the only logical thing you could do and it's the opposite of "running blindly". Going to Vault 15 is the most rational thing you can do, going to Shady Sands is too since you're heading in the right direction anyway. You can of course act like a retard and go everywhere except to locations that might have clues where to find the water chip but it at least has consequences (thanks to time limit). And like I said, no one in his right mind would go into wasteland blindly but go from one settlement to the next. Go back to Skyrim.

You got anything else apart from Fallout examples? Or are you going to continue to ignore my point and just wank over Fallout like its the only RPG you ever played.
 

octavius

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Aug 4, 2007
Messages
19,769
Location
Bjørgvin
Or are you going to continue to ignore my point and just wank over Fallout like its the only RPG you ever played.

What was your point? Not trying to be funny, but I don't think you made it very clear.
 

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