Jump to content

 

what happened to old RPG games....


Recommended Posts

... where it was 90% action and 10% dialogue, choices, and back story....

These new ones where there is 20 hrs of yapping really drain the desire to even play. I just started this and I'm already sick of spawning the X button to skip all the talk.....

 

True the game has alot of dialouge but imo thats wat makes an RPG what it is. While there are a few action RPG's out there even they are filled with dialouge at points if you want all action and no story Call of duty is for you (Added that so AlterEgo3561 wouldnt be a liar :woop:)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

true the game has alot of dialouge but imo thats wat makes an rpg what it is. While there are a few action rpg's out there even they are filled with dialouge at points if you want all action and no story call of duty is for you (added that so alterego3561 wouldnt be a liar :woop:)

 

yaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaayyyyy!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, a dungeon crawler can probably be argued as a sub-genre for the RPG, because it contains RPG elements. It is no way in hell an actual plain RPG. Hell, there's a reason that term has come up in the first place.

 

The main focus of an RPG is story, always has been, always will be. Games that are 10% story and 90% action do not follow the formula of an RPG. There has never been an RPG that the main focus is the combat, and not the story itself. Are there RPGs that have not a lot of combat and mostly story? Yes. Are there RPGs that have not as many story sequences, and more combat sequences? Yes, but they are about even.

 

If you take the story out of RPGs what are you left with? Pretty much no purpose at all. The story is the driving factor of the RPG, and always has been. If people wanted just combat focused games, they wouldn't be going to look at RPGs, they would looking at action games such as Ninja Gaiden or God of War.

 

Your argument is basically 'They're RPGs, end of story.' The only reason they're even closely considered as RPGs is because they take certain elements from them. That doesn't mean that they follow the genres purpose. Lots of games borrow other elements from other genres, that doesn't mean they fit within those genres, and shall be considered as such.

 

I don't mind it when people want equal of both sides, but that's not what the OP wants.

 

 

Wow, poor argument just got ridiculous.

 

By your example that would make any game with strong story an RPG, that's just not it at all. The purpose of the genre is for you to take over a role, sometimes that requires heavy story, others that requires being able to build your own character and choose how he grows, that doesn't make one or the other MORE of an RPG, just a different focus, but they are both still RPG's despite your attempts to suggest otherwise. You say a story gives purpose, and I agree, but story alone does not an RPG make. You claim that if people just wanted action they would play a different game, but that is pure fallacy. For one thing, how do you explain Dark Souls? It's virtually vacant of story, but it has a strong following because of the challenge of the gameplay and it is still an RPG. Look at WoW an RPG through and through, but people don't really care too much about story, it is the thrill of developing your character that drives people on. Why do people play Skyrim over and over? They've played the story already. It's because the gameplay allows them a different experience from last time. Gameplay and developing a character is every single bit as much the heart of an RPG as story is. It doesn't matter whether you like it or not, it doesn't matter if it is (by your own admission) a 'sub genre' or not, as sub genre only serves to differentiate between the direction, bottom line is that it is still an RPG and every part as much an RPG as a story driven one.

 

Want further proof? Look at where the idea of Roleplay began, the theatre, drama, acting. At it's very core, acting is improvisation creating a character without without story. A play or a film takes the skills developed through improvisation and molds and directs it for a purpose, and a great actor can do more with his body than he can with a story. A picture really does paint a thousand words. Story is important to provide a foundation for a play or a film, but characters are equally as important, and arguably much more so. Take a running series of films or TV, we may love the stories, but it is how the characters grow and develop that make us love or hate them. Fans of a show live vicariously through their favourite characters, empathizing with their ordeals, it is roleplaying in the 3rd person, and it is the character development that drives it. In terms of roleplaying games, experience, levelling developing skills represent the growth of the character.

 

It doesn't matter how you want to look at roleplaying though because when you bring it all back around, story is only 1 part of the equation, the other is creating and being a character, and in terms of games, action and gameplay is every much a part of that as story is, and if a game can be an RPG with heavier story and lighter action, it can also be the reverse. You can't have it both ways, either a game is an RPG only when they have fair balance of story of action, or both directions are equally as valid. You are welcome to prefer one over the other, nobody in their right mind will tell you you are wrong for doing so, but you ARE wrong for saying that action heavy RPG's are not RPG's. Both directions are RPG's. End of story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok first off the 90/10 split was not to be taken literally. I know no game has 90 minutes for action to every 10 of dialogue. There now throwing that out as the only arguement can be squashed.

As for the "dungeon crawlers", I've been gaming ( not in tokyo, competitions, standing out inteh rain for pre-releases of the new game informant magazine, but I have never heard the term DUNGEON CRAWLER used in mainstream terms. So I doubt if throwing them into such a little used/known category justifies the means. Would you consider the early SEGA console Phantasy Star (1,2,3) Dungeon crawlers. To me there are more ROLE in those games as you evolved and learned. These days the evolution takes place over about a 3 day (story time) span in which all you get it to learn how to deflect arrows and throw daggers.

I'd consider many games where you start out as an unexperienced player and evolve through XP, Cr, or any other credential point system which allows improvement of your character as some sort of RPG. As the genre says... ROLE PLAYING GAME (which if looked at throuh a microscope would be vaguely ANY game that you, yourself are not the main character.,....)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

... where it was 90% action and 10% dialogue, choices, and back story....

These new ones where there is 20 hrs of yapping really drain the desire to even play. I just started this and I'm already sick of spawning the X button to skip all the talk.....

 

 

This is why we have the internet, so you can look into things like this before you buy them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@grummy

 

1. Dark Souls has a story, if you would bother to pay attention to it. Is it the main focus? Most likely not, but that doesn't mean the story is nonexistant. WoW is a MMORPG, a sub-genre of it. It's not the same as a regular type of RPG, hence why it's a sub-genre, just like dungeon crawler is another sub-genre. It does matter if it's a sub-genre or not, because that's what seperates them. WoW and Witcher 2 are two totally different games. Are they both classifed as RPGs? Technically yes, but the sub-genre is what seperates them, and what makes them different, and it helps people to determine on what they would like. The OP would rather want almost all action than anything related to story (his admission), so a dungeon crawler or even a plain old action game would be better for him, my whole point to begin with.

 

2. All your second point really did was prove my point. Want to know how characters develop in games? It is through cutscenes and dialogue. What you said was right, but it only further cements that the main focus of an RPG is the actual story. That's the reason why Witcher 2 has those cutscenes to begin with, to develop the characters, and further the story. That's what an RPG does. If the OP doesn't want that, then he's looking at the wrong genre of game, or at least would probably be more interested in a dungeon crawler game like Dungeon Siege, or Torchlight. Once again, my whole point.

 

3. Story may only be one part, but it is the core of the entire game. Take out the story of almost every RPG out there, and what happens? The interest is gone, because the whole reason people play these games is because of the story and the characters. Is Final Fantasy VI (for example) generally accepted as one of the best RPGs in history because of the combat? No, it's because of the characters and the story. If you take that out, the games heart gets taken away. That's why they have sub-genres for RPGish games, because they're different.

 

 

 

@ajennice

 

If it was not meant to be taken literally, then why even bother to mention it in the first place? You gave a clear definition of what you were looking for, and the RPG genre doesn't provide that. Regular action games, and dungeon crawlers do provide that. All because you've never heard the term 'dungeon crawler' that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's not like I pulled it from out of nowhere. If you would've bothered to stop skipping cutscenes during Witcher 2, you would see that the game evolves, and your 'role' is much more explained. However, you were clearly too impatient to do that, which means the game will never get better for you, because you will have no reason to keep playing it. If that's what you consider an RPG, then the Witcher has that, you have XP and then you can upgrade skills to how you see fit. You can basically turn Geralt into whatever type of character you want, based on how you pick the skills.

Edited by CelticWarriorDB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@grummy

 

1. Dark Souls has a story, if you would bother to pay attention to it. Is it the main focus? Most likely not, but that doesn't mean the story is nonexistant. WoW is a MMORPG, a sub-genre of it. It's not the same as a regular type of RPG, hence why it's a sub-genre, just like dungeon crawler is another sub-genre. It does matter if it's a sub-genre or not, because that's what seperates them. WoW and Witcher 2 are two totally different games. Are they both classifed as RPGs? Technically yes, but the sub-genre is what seperates them, and what makes them different, and it helps people to determine on what they would like. The OP would rather want almost all action than anything related to story (his admission), so a dungeon crawler or even a plain old action game would be better for him, my whole point to begin with.

 

2. All your second point really did was prove my point. Want to know how characters develop in games? It is through cutscenes and dialogue. What you said was right, but it only further cements that the main focus of an RPG is the actual story. That's the reason why Witcher 2 has those cutscenes to begin with, to develop the characters, and further the story. That's what an RPG does. If the OP doesn't want that, then he's looking at the wrong genre of game, or at least would probably be more interested in a dungeon crawler game like Dungeon Siege, or Torchlight. Once again, my whole point.

 

3. Story may only be one part, but it is the core of the entire game. Take out the story of almost every RPG out there, and what happens? The interest is gone, because the whole reason people play these games is because of the story and the characters. Is Final Fantasy VI (for example) generally accepted as one of the best RPGs in history because of the combat? No, it's because of the characters and the story. If you take that out, the games heart gets taken away. That's why they have sub-genres for RPGish games, because they're different.

 

 

 

@ajennice

 

If it was not meant to be taken literally, then why even bother to mention it in the first place? You gave a clear definition of what you were looking for, and the RPG genre doesn't provide that. Regular action games, and dungeon crawlers do provide that. All because you've never heard the term 'dungeon crawler' that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It's not like I pulled it from out of nowhere. If you would've bothered to stop skipping cutscenes during Witcher 2, you would see that the game evolves, and your 'role' is much more explained. However, you were clearly too impatient to do that, which means the game will never get better for you, because you will have no reason to keep playing it. If that's what you consider an RPG, then the Witcher has that, you have XP and then you can upgrade skills to how you see fit. You can basically turn Geralt into whatever type of character you want, based on how you pick the skills.

 

1. Dark Souls, yes it has a story, but it is not a driving force, and it is not what makes it the game it is. It is your claim that people play RPG's for the story, Dark Souls is a pure example of one that people play for the gameplay.

 

2. No, my point does nothing of the sort, and you are utterly wrong to suggest it. I make it very clear that character development is a mitigating factor, and you say story does that? You are correct, but your argument is that it is the ONLY way is entirely, indefensibly wrong. Character development is as much about the action and the building and growing the character through gameplay as it is story, and in many cases it is much more important. I will once again bring to light the example of WoW, story though it may have, it is the gameplay and the excitment of developing your character and his skills that bring people back. And no, your whole point was never that action games would be more to his liking, and nor was it to defend story as important, you point, as clear as day was that no RPG EVER had 90/10 type split in favour of action. A point that is clearly a demonstrably wrong, and instead of admitting that you overlooked something and made a mistake, you have continued to try and defend that point by saying that 'dungeon crawlers' are not RPG's, as terrible and ridiculous a defence as I have ever seen.

 

3. No, story is not THE core part of an RPG, it is an important factor, and for some games it is much more important, but it shares equal relevance with the action which for other games is much more important. Again I can raise the example of WoW here, Dark souls too. Are you now going to tell me that they are not true RPG's? As for RPG 'sub genres', story driven is every much as bit a sub genre as action. Why? Because 'sub genre' is not s designation to show something is less, it is just a way to further differentiate between styles. They all come under the banner of RPG, they are all equally as valid, and once again, there are games, true RPG's that have been all about the action and gameplay.

 

You have a clear love for the story driven RPG, I can respect that, and if you want to say that this is BETTER than the action route, then I certainly won't argue with you on that score, it would, after all, be your opinion which you are entitled to. But to argue that it is the ONLY true RPG style and to continue to argue that games that focus on action are not RPG's despite being wholly and unequivocally wrong is incredibly arrogant and makes you look foolish. You have no valid argument that can be made as to why action focused RPG's are not true RPG's, all you are doign is arguing to try and save face because you got it wrong, try to wring and twist it around to make it sound like you were right, but it can't be done. You said that no RPG has ever been that way, and you were wrong, it's as clear cut as that, no amount of wording can change that one single fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@spike, in the main menu, go to options, and make sure subtitles are turned on.

 

 

1. There are many factors that makes Dark Souls as popular as it is, and it isn't just the combat in the game. It's the difficulty, the graphics, and the online integration. It isn't just one factor of the game that people love it. Even if you were right here, that's just one game, against many.

 

2. How exactly do characters develop, and story develop, when you fight? The only thing that develops is skills through xp, but their actual character remains the same. RPGs became as popular as they did because of gripping stories. So much so, that some people probably wouldn't mind if there was no gameplay and just story. I personally don't agree with that, but some people do, and it shows how much more important story is, when compared to the actual gameplay. Once again, would people care about any Final Fantasy if there was no story? Nope. That goes for most RPGs out there. I'm guessing you never read my first post. While I did say that, I also said that action games would be more to his liking. I was trying to help, as I try to do most of the time. Of course I got a smartass answer back from the OP, which was to be expected. Please don't try to insinuate that I never tried to bring up suggestions which I, and others have done. The OP didn't come here for help, he came here to complain. Why would I overlook a mistake when I didn't make one? I said dungeon crawlers are a sub genre of the RPG. The RPG has sub genres underneath it, and there's a reason for it, because they're different from the typical RPG. It's not I made these up, there's a reason they were created in the first place.

 

3. It's funny, you keep going back to the same two games to prove your point. WoW is a MMORPG, it is not a regular RPG. To me, they aren't true regular RPGs, as they are to a lot of others, hence why those terms were created. WoW is loved because of the online integration it has, not just the combat in the game. I don't consider it a regular RPG, once again, so when I said that no RPG has been like that, I meant it, because I consider a game like WoW a MMORPG. I consider a game like Diablo, Dungeon Siege a Dungeon Crawler. Those games are in those categories.

 

You keep saying that both story and gameplay are equal, and for myself I agree, but you completely misunderstand how important the story in a RPG actually is. If you take out the gameplay, you can still have a gripping story that can hold your attention, and you can still have characters to love. If you take out the story however, it affects the gameplay. It gets rid of the purpose of actually playing it, which means it goes away from what an RPG is supposed to do, put you in a role and give you a purpose. That's why the RPG is a genre that a lot of people love. Look at any top RPG games of all time list and what are the main reasons why they're up there? It is the story, hence why it is the most important part of an RPG. Is it the most important part of a dungeon crawler and a MMORPG? No, because they are......different.

 

However, it doesn't change the fact that the OP would much prefer those type of games, hence why they were suggested in the first place.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe I am going to post a real response in this fail excuse for a topic but...

 

I have to side with Celtic, sorry Grummy but from your posts it almost sounds like you haven’t even read what Celtic is saying. You have put words in his mouth in order to try to further your own goals. Also you need to work on your typing skills; your posts are long for no reason just get to your point.

 

But that aside the real reason I have to call you out is for this:

 

 

But to argue that it is the ONLY true RPG style and to continue to argue that games that focus on action are not RPG's despite being wholly and unequivocally wrong is incredibly arrogant and makes you look foolish. You have no valid argument that can be made as to why action focused RPG's are not true RPG's, all you are doign is arguing to try and save face because you got it wrong, try to wring and twist it around to make it sound like you were right, but it can't be done..

 

You lost all credibility you might have had when you decided to post this childish statement. The truth is, the whole thing could be turned around and easily applied to you. Pulling out a nyah nyah nyah statement at the end of your already convoluted (in a bad way) essay was unnecessary and petty.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Personally, I think games should have both. I'm in love with the gameplay of Witcher 2 right now, the side quests and main storyline have offered some great combat, especially against Letho. There's plenty of quality combat to be had in this game that goes along with lots of solid dialogue, cutscenes, interactions like gambling (arm wrestling, poker dice, and boxing), cool characters, and really just a solid story so far.

 

I honestly wouldn't want this game any other way and if you think this game is 90% story, then you really haven't been playing for very long. The best part about this game is being able to change routes in where the storyline goes. Bioware could learn a thing or two from CD Projekt if anything.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe I am going to post a real response in this fail excuse for a topic but...

 

I have to side with Celtic, sorry Grummy but from your posts it almost sounds like you haven’t even read what Celtic is saying. You have put words in his mouth in order to try to further your own goals. Also you need to work on your typing skills; your posts are long for no reason just get to your point.

 

But that aside the real reason I have to call you out is for this:

 

 

 

 

You lost all credibility you might have had when you decided to post this childish statement. The truth is, the whole thing could be turned around and easily applied to you. Pulling out a nyah nyah nyah statement at the end of your already convoluted (in a bad way) essay was unnecessary and petty.

 

Just to be clear, you're calling me out for calling somebody else out when they're trying to argue that an RPG isn't an RPG. In my posts I've acknowledged his appreciation for a certain style rpg and openly agreed that they said style is valid. I've also pointed out examples that refute his claims. And let me reiterate at this juncture, I have not at any point said that story driven RPG's are not RPG's, I'm simply demonstrating that action driven ones are just as valid, which they are.

You claim that I've not read what Celtic has said, but I quite clearly have and have spent the time showing why he is mistaken. Rather than actually give me valid reasons why action driven is not a 'true' rpg, all he has done is given me a couple of examples of great story driven ones, which I have no need or desire to argue because this is not the matter at hand. Do I need to again reiterate that I have never said that story RPG's are not true RPG's? As for my examples, all he has given me in response is a lame duck argument saying that different RPG's are not RPG's just because they are not story based. That is incredibly arrogant. You want to talk about childish arguments, then that is as childish as it gets, it is a 'my way is right, everyone who disagrees is wrong' argument.

Now then, yes, you can say that I am doing the same thing and you would have a valid point, however the important difference here is that I embrace all forms of roleplaying as valid, I understand and appreciate why people prefer action driven roleplaying to story driven, Celtic does not, he does not even consider them roleplaying games. Take his example for WoW, he's trying to argue that its not a 'true' RPG because its different. I hate to bring this up here, but that sort of thinking is the basis for much discrimination, are black or asian people not human just because they're different from Caucasians? Despite that line of though, WoW is still an RPG and everyone knows it. Are you going to tell me its not? It's even in the title, MMORPG, it is a sub genre, just like the ARPG and just like the story driven RPG. What Celtic is doing by dismissing them is dismissing by proxy the opinions of anyone else who happens to prefer action to story, that his way is the only true way. That is narrow minded and wrong. The ARPG, the MMORPG and the SRPG are all equally valid.

 

Now then, to clear up any misconceptions here, I'll summarize this whole discussion.

 

Celtic said that no RPG's have ever been a 90/10 split. His argument is that the only true RPG's are story driven ones.

I've posted examples of RPG's over a few generations that have been action heavy and are still RPG's.

The discussion broke down to Celtic dismissing any example as being different and therefor not an RPG.

I have argued that action (and by proxy MMO) are just as valid and true as story.

Celtics argument that they are not amounts to being 'because they have no story and people only play rpg's for their story' (paraphrased).

I argue that he is wrong, people play RPG's for a variety of reasons, then give a couple of examples of RPG's that are action based rather than story.

At this juncture, I'd like to say that I believe Celtic is misreading my point, I believe he assumes that when I say action I mean combat, which is not the case, by action I encompass all activity involved in controlling the character-the gameplay if you will, this includes ambient gameplay like crafting or farming for materials, creating and levelling the character, as well as the combat.

I try and demonstrate how playing and developing your character is something that people love and also play RPG's for. He dismisses it.

 

I could go on here but you get the picture. What it boils down to is that Celtic believes that story must be present for a game to be an RPG, and that any other thought is wrong. If he didn't believe as such, then he wouldn't argue so strongly that the games I have given as examples are not true RPG's

I on the other hand believe that all sub genres are equally important and would not at any point dismiss any of them simple because I prefer a different one.

 

I am not sure how anyone can believe such a thing at all let alone side with him on this.

 

And for the record Celtic, I don't misunderstand the importance of a story, indeed I have said over and over that I believe it is important, my point is that a story is not the only factor involved when judging something an RPG, the action is equally important and RPG's can have a split either way and still be true RPG's. Story is one facet, it is important, but it is not the only way.

 

You mention that I keep going back to the same examples, that is simply because you have not given a reason why they are not valid. So far you have had one constant argument 'I don't think they are', but that doesn't cut it. However, if you want another example I'll give you a whole franchise, The Elder Scrolls. People play the Elder Scrolls games for a variety of reasons, some for the story, others for the gameplay. However, what the Elder Scrolls does is allow you to completely become a character. The open world nature of the experience means you can create an avatar for yourself exactly as you want, and exist in the game without ever following a story. There are plenty of examples of people saying they've played Slyrim for 100 hours without touching the story or the guilds, they're just exploring and playing the game. Are you now going to tell me that Skyrim isn't an RPG? That they're not playing Skyrim right? Or that Skyrim is only an RPG when following storyline quests? Rhetorical questions really as nobody in their right minds would say yes to those. A game like The Elder Scrolls is an RPG because you can immerse yourself in the character you create and play him however you want. There are stories of people playing the game as just a hunter, for example, they arm themselves with just a bow, clothes and a dagger, then spend the entire game surviving on their bow skills and the money they can make from selling animal pelts. THAT is the definition of roleplaying, becoming a role, and people can do that without the need for a story. you ask how a character develops without story, THAT is how. It is not development through story, it is development through action, through levelling and making your character stronger. If it was all about the story, why is it that some people are on their 3rd or 4th character in Skyrim now, its certainly not the story, it doesn't change all that much. It's because the gameplay allows them to try the game in a whole new fashion, adding a whole new experience to the mix. Can you really sit there and tell me that it is only an RPG because it has a story?

 

Edit: I just want to point out, I'm not actually trying to call Celtic a racist, I'm just pointing out how ludicrous his base argument is by applying a separate but applicable context. Sorry in advance if I offended you on that score.

Edited by Grummy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the point of these long posts are saying, that the OP likes Dungeon Crawlers, right? Which is a gameplay driven RPG. It seems like such a simple answer.

 

Soon we'll have to deal with 2x 10k word posts i guess.

 

Apparently it is to see who can write the bigger essay (sorry Grummy I am not going to read the giant thing you posted). Regardless Vindicator51 I would say you are correct.

Edited by AlterEgo3561
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem with this game wasn't the long cutscenes and fact that there was a story. I love games like Uncharted, God of War, and Mass Effect that are all heavy on that type of stuff. My problem was with the fact that not one bit of the story, the world, the characters, not any of it, was particularly interesting. I anticipated this game being of a much higher caliber, but alas, was left with only disappointment and complete fucking boredom.

 

Sadly as far as RPG's go, what we are left with here is more of a Risen or Two Worlds, than anything remotely resembling the caliber of games like Dark Souls or Skyrim, which although two vastly different RPG's, both are titans of the genre that will have plenty of replay value for years to come. And anyone who says Darks Souls doesn't have a story, is a f*cking moron. You might have to think for yourself for a moment, but there is a story, and a much better one than this long-winded, steaming pile of shit.

 

Note: For whomever called the references to other games in the beginning of the thread, I gave you two of them, but unfortunately just didn't see a way for Call of Duty to apply here. :)

Edited by ghostx30
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, the point of these long posts are saying, that the OP likes Dungeon Crawlers, right? Which is a gameplay driven RPG. It seems like such a simple answer.

 

Soon we'll have to deal with 2x 10k word posts i guess.

 

Nope, its essentially a debate over what constitutes a 'true RPG'. Celtic believes that a game can only be truly called an RPG if it has a strong storyline, such as in this game and that people only play RPG's for the story. I am arguing that a strong story is only a part of the whole, and that action, character development and ambient gameplay are of equal value, and that just as many people play RPG's to create and level characters, with the story being of little moment, and that the prominence of action over story does not stop a game from being an RPG.

The whole thing about the OP and dungeon crawlers was never actually part of the discussion we were having.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Grummy, wow. You spent all that time writing that post, without reading anything that I have stated. I will state it once again, I don't consider WoW a regular RPG. I consider it a MMORPG. I consider games like Diablo, Torchlight, etc...: Dungeon Crawlers. Why do I consider them as such, because they're different from the standard RPG.

 

I never stated that I dismiss those types of games, hell I've openly admitted what they are. All because I consider them different, that doesn't mean that I don't dismiss them. They are in their categories for a reason. However, you only put things under one umbrella: RPG. That to me, is a problem. The problem is that because they're so different from the standard RPG, one might not like one over the other. While one might like Final Fantasy, they won't like WoW. One might like Skyrim, the other might not like Witcher 2. They're in those categories for that very reason, hence why I treat them as such. As for Skyrim, while it may seem gameplay heavy (and I do agree), it has a ton of dialogue in it that connects to a bunch of stories in that game. It all depends on how one plays the game.

 

You might not agree, and that's fine, but the problem is that you're treating me like I'm some idiot, all because I don't group them all together. I've never once said that you were dumb for thinking the way you do, all I'm doing is explaining my thoughts on those games. To me, a regular RPG has never had those percentages, and I've already explained why. I've also already explained why the story is much more important in your standard RPG, and I don't see how I can explain it any clearer. Your response to it is basically 'he dismisses gameplay entirely.' I never did dude, it's just not the reason why most people play the standard RPG, and I've already given examples.

 

About your point about action, if that's the case, then I guess picking a dialogue option must be action oriented as well, because that's about the same amount of effort it takes as much as going through crafting menus and leveling up the character with skills.

 

I've read your post, and I really don't see anything that would constitute racism so.......:confused:

Edited by CelticWarriorDB
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can't believe I am going to post a real response in this fail excuse for a topic but...

 

I have to side with Celtic, sorry Grummy but from your posts it almost sounds like you haven’t even read what Celtic is saying. You have put words in his mouth in order to try to further your own goals. Also you need to work on your typing skills; your posts are long for no reason just get to your point.

 

But that aside the real reason I have to call you out is for this:

 

 

 

 

You lost all credibility you might have had when you decided to post this childish statement. The truth is, the whole thing could be turned around and easily applied to you. Pulling out a nyah nyah nyah statement at the end of your already convoluted (in a bad way) essay was unnecessary and petty.

 

for a filed topic.. it sure has gotten alot of attention (4 or so by you) from those who support the current RPG standards, and those who do not. Either way, there is no right or wrong since there is no true definition with CONCRETE game examples. You can see each side's passion for whichevert hey like.. and that's great. It means the gaming industry as a whole can actually plaease some people every once in a while.

Whetert a dungeon crawler really has no dungeons to crawl in or a story based game has a bad story.. if you're enjoyign it to a degree of what you've spent, then you're definately playing into your liking.

 

For the record, I didn't intend this to go into a war over rpg standards... and I do appreciate every opinion on here... I've learned a few things....

Edited by ajennice
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is why we have the internet, so you can look into things like this before you buy them.

 

 

Good ....uh..post??? Ok I googled "does whicher have 10% action and 90% dialogue"... no real answer...

Also can you really use the net to determine how a game plays based on opinions of others.. I think this thread has simply said "no you can't" we've seen GREAT arguements from every side defending their belief in what a RPG should be...

Can somone please use the internet as said and "look into" how HALO 4 will be? If the net says it sucks ( before it's released ot even finished), I guess it could save us all some money. Surely can't get diddly shit on or before release day either.. so your post pretty much results in just a good attempt to bolster your post count..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

for a filed topic.. it sure has gotten alot of attention (4 or so by you) from those who support the current RPG standards, and those who do not. Either way, there is no right or wrong since there is no true definition with CONCRETE game examples. You can see each side's passion for whichevert hey like.. and that's great. It means the gaming industry as a whole can actually plaease some people every once in a while.

Whetert a dungeon crawler really has no dungeons to crawl in or a story based game has a bad story.. if you're enjoyign it to a degree of what you've spent, then you're definately playing into your liking.

 

For the record, I didn't intend this to go into a war over rpg standards... and I do appreciate every opinion on here... I've learned a few things....

 

 

Please don't act stupid, you knew exactly what kind of argument this topic would spawn just like the other one with the tool claiming the game sucks because it's too hard. In my eyes you’re no better than him; key is the words in your topic:

 

These new ones where there is 20 hrs of yapping really drain the desire to even play. I just started this and I'm already sick of spawning the X button to skip all the talk...

 

Anyone who spends anytime on a forum would know the way this was worded set up a passive aggressive attack that would upset people who like story driven RPG's (or even just this one), thus causing the current argument. Also as for your comment about the internet, any bit of research about the Witcher could have told you it was an intense story driven game which would mean of course lots of dialogue. I don't know if you bought the game or rented however if you spent money on a game of all things without looking into it a little bit (especially if you are unfamiliar with a series) then I retract what I said earlier when I asked you to stop acting...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uh no... I just posted an opinion. I've played a few games and noticed they are dialogue driven more than I remember. Granted I probably do not and have never played as much RPG games as the others on here. Hence the original post. I was unaware that RPG games were catagorized into geners such as "dungeon crawlers" and such. True in some of the early sub RPG games action out did the story and dialogue. If my ignorance onthe entire RPG as a whole caused an issue, then I will take fault for any flame war.

As for being no better than others in your eyes, I really have no feelings on how you feel about me. It will not cause me to play more or less of any certain type of game.

As for wording, I can not sit here and proof read over and over and take into considerations of how my opinions will cause others (the majority or just 1 person) to react. They are entitled to defend their views. And as stated before this has even opened my eyes a bit onthe entire RPG gaming universe. So at least I can say i've learned at least one thing that I previously did not now/understand.

As for researching games.. sure you can do it. I am sure tho everyone on here will wait untill the game has been out for several days/weeks/months to read and study the reviews. Most threads about reviews are double edged anyhow, saying that it sucks when it's good or how IGN gave it a mark that players don't agree on. You will never get 100% of the players to say the same possitive/negative things. One players opinions on gameplay, controls, story, difficulty...etc may not be shared with others. I know that saints' row (just an example) is a popular game.. I think it was boring and i didn't care for it. Though the reviews and the popularity pointed at it as a good game, my opinion differed. I don't see how studying a game will deter/encourage as much as what the entire "internet" line perceived. Only gettign the game and see if it fits your liking will do so accurately.

Anyone who has ever bought a midnight release or realease day/early copy, could be categorized as not "looking into the game" since it's not officially even been properly reviewed by the players.

I do like the game, I just feel as if the dialogue takes away from the game. And as others have pointed out, their opinions are different.. and I respect that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good ....uh..post??? Ok I googled "does whicher have 10% action and 90% dialogue"... no real answer...

Also can you really use the net to determine how a game plays based on opinions of others.. I think this thread has simply said "no you can't" we've seen GREAT arguements from every side defending their belief in what a RPG should be...

Can somone please use the internet as said and "look into" how HALO 4 will be? If the net says it sucks ( before it's released ot even finished), I guess it could save us all some money. Surely can't get diddly shit on or before release day either.. so your post pretty much results in just a good attempt to bolster your post count..

 

 

Did i say look into opinions? No i did not. Did I say look into exact numbers? No did not. I never paid nay attention to this game and when ign's revie came out I decided to look into it, I learned this is a very story driven game. It even tells you on the back of the box. Watching preview videos or reading previews should give you an assumption. I learned this game was going to be dialogue heavy from one video. Started with a conversation, a little fighting, then another conversation, a little traveling, another conversation, a fight, followed by a lengthy conversation, followed by another lengthy conversation, followed by more fighting.

 

Not for nothing though, they can be a lot less talking if you don't ask too many questions, and just get straight to the point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

uh no... I just posted an opinion. I've played a few games and noticed they are dialogue driven more than I remember. Granted I probably do not and have never played as much RPG games as the others on here. Hence the original post. I was unaware that RPG games were catagorized into geners such as "dungeon crawlers" and such. True in some of the early sub RPG games action out did the story and dialogue. If my ignorance onthe entire RPG as a whole caused an issue, then I will take fault for any flame war.

As for being no better than others in your eyes, I really have no feelings on how you feel about me. It will not cause me to play more or less of any certain type of game.

As for wording, I can not sit here and proof read over and over and take into considerations of how my opinions will cause others (the majority or just 1 person) to react. They are entitled to defend their views. And as stated before this has even opened my eyes a bit onthe entire RPG gaming universe. So at least I can say i've learned at least one thing that I previously did not now/understand.

As for researching games.. sure you can do it. I am sure tho everyone on here will wait untill the game has been out for several days/weeks/months to read and study the reviews. Most threads about reviews are double edged anyhow, saying that it sucks when it's good or how IGN gave it a mark that players don't agree on. You will never get 100% of the players to say the same possitive/negative things. One players opinions on gameplay, controls, story, difficulty...etc may not be shared with others. I know that saints' row (just an example) is a popular game.. I think it was boring and i didn't care for it. Though the reviews and the popularity pointed at it as a good game, my opinion differed. I don't see how studying a game will deter/encourage as much as what the entire "internet" line perceived. Only gettign the game and see if it fits your liking will do so accurately.

Anyone who has ever bought a midnight release or realease day/early copy, could be categorized as not "looking into the game" since it's not officially even been properly reviewed by the players.

I do like the game, I just feel as if the dialogue takes away from the game. And as others have pointed out, their opinions are different.. and I respect that.

 

First: Please format your paragraphs better

Second: You have over a thousand posts on this site alone which means you should be somewhat experienced at how forums work, you are well beyond the ability to claim ignorance. The way you worded it was just enough to aggravate fans of the game without making it an outright troll post.

Third: Bajan said it best no matter what you looked at you could have learned the game was heavy on the story. Your foolish inability to actually look into the game is your own fault. Also people who go to midnight releases are generally familiar with the series (like I have already said) or they have done enough research into a game prior to making that purchase.

Fourth: For that first point you listed about you "not knowing" hmmm yeah okay bud.

I am not going to continue posting in this topic, you may respond continuing to feign ignorance but in the end we both know the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
  • Create New...