RPG Thread XVII - Talk of RPGs past.

if you like ultima you're probably either...

one who likes the old school ultimas (IV-V), the one who likes 7, or the one who likes UO.

ultima 4 and 5 are great but have aged poorly. ultima 7 was great but 7part2, 8, and 9 have only shown that they've lost whatever touch they've had, and UO is still there and chances are fans are not asking for another UO.

(7part2 is a great game, but marred by the fact that the end was completely rushed and makes absolutely no sense.)
 
[quote name='Indignate']What I got from your post is that Ultima is Final Fantasy.[/QUOTE]

Sort of. It was the "Final Fantasy" of the PC. Except from about IV on each of the stories were connected. Each Ultima adopted a new battle system however and got further away from "pencil and paper mechanics."

I don't think I ever played 9, though. It was around that time that I got out of the PC game.
 
I can't! I still haven't beaten like three of those games yet!

At least it's coming over. Will probably have to buy it just to throw in my support for the sequel to get localized.
 
You should totally start playing Tales of Graces F. I'm only like five hours in and it's fun.

I'm glad Xillia is being localized. Now, if they can bring over Tales of Hearts R I'll be happy. :3
 
Which is why I'm telling you now that you should start playing it. I was playing it with some friends yesterday and didn't get that far.

I'll wait. ^_^
 
[quote name='Luxuria']The ones in Florida, where we dance and sing the soundtrack of Greace every Wednesday.

You Californian.[/QUOTE]

Explain to me this foreign concept of Greace.
 
[quote name='Luxuria']You should totally start playing Tales of Graces F. I'm only like five hours in and it's fun.

I'm glad Xillia is being localized. Now, if they can bring over Tales of Hearts R I'll be happy. :3[/QUOTE]

Xillia is the Tales of game I've been really excited about so I'm just super happy we are getting that, and I'll be picking it up day one.
 
Picked up Pokemon White again. This is the first time I've done any postgame Pokemon stuff and now that I have the National Pokedex, I'm considering migrating over my Pokemans from Platinum (and Ruby via Platinum). Someone talk me out of it before I spend another 50+ hours on this game D:
 
[quote name='blueshinra']Picked up Pokemon White again. This is the first time I've done any postgame Pokemon stuff and now that I have the National Pokedex, I'm considering migrating over my Pokemans from Platinum (and Ruby via Platinum). Someone talk me out of it before I spend another 50+ hours on this game D:[/QUOTE]

You are going to have to transfer everything again to White 2 (and maybe X and Y)
 
[quote name='62t']You are going to have to transfer everything again to White 2 (and maybe X and Y)[/QUOTE]
Black 2 actually, but yeah, I'm taking that (and X/Y, and my backlogged SoulSilver, which would also be Ruby & Platinum compatible) into consideration. There's also the fact that I never did any postgame stuff in either Ruby or Platinum, and run the risk of getting sucked back into those...
 
Quick question for you folks. Mostly talking oldschool here. What's your ideal number of party members in any given RPG? Do you like when everyone gets the same amount of experience (even when they're not used in battle) or do you prefer everyone to have to earn their own?
 
i like when exp is shared among the party, whether they were in battle or not. namely for the fact that games usually throw you a situation where you need to use an obsolete character, and it sucks if you haven't been leveling them the whole game.

but for stuff like SRPGs, i really like to cater towards certain soldiers and see them grow individually.
 
PC and five companions, like a Suikoden or Infinity Engine game, unless it's a Fire Emblem game or something similar, in which case 16-20 is nice. EXP for all unless, again, it's Fire Emblem or Shining Force or something, in which case it's EXP for attacking or defending or healing or whatever.
 
I like the distinction between standard turn-based and SRPGs here. I agree that in the Shining Force/Fire Emblem sense, you should have to work for what you're getting.

I'm with you on those points as well, Panzer. Splitting up a party/being forced to use a certain member is often a concept I like on paper, but when it's up to you to maintain said character, I can see it backfiring a lot of the time. I dug the whole strike team idea in FF7's endgame, but I remember groaning my first time through when I didn't give Cait and Yuffie the love they deserved.

Friend of mine also mentioned disliking when a game is over upon the PC falling (ie: Persona.) I personally like getting a chance to revive the guy in that situation.
 
I like when only the characters you use get EXP. Makes the game feel more "mine," like the choices I make for party composition have actual consequences.
 
shared exp saves time. i wouldn't mind individual exp if they didn't for you to use the main character all the time, especially in a small party (FF7), but I really liked it in FF6 and I thought the endgame dungeon was awesome.
 
I don't like shared experience because I like to pretend that everybody else in my party sits around doing absolutely nothing while three people do all the fighting.
 
Chrono Trigger did fine with it's xp. system. Non-active members were kept within like 2 or 3 levels. That's a good way to go. Your favorites are your strongest, but the others are still viable if at any point you need them. Well, aside from the tech points. Hmm...
 
Actually, this is why I liked FFIV so damn much and why I actually dug that first half of XIII.

Game never lets you have more than you can, it just swaps your ass on through.
 
I hate RPGs where you have to micromanage your characters' leveling to get stat boosts.

e.g. Final Fantasy VI – not specifically problematic since the characters got so ridiculously powerful on their own, but the idea is the same. Espers can be use on one character at a time, but some give permanent stat boosts. Notably the one that gave the elusive +1 speed. If you really wanted to optimize, you had to keep party member levels low so that they would level only after you acquired the desired stat boosting esper.

I much prefer predetermined statistics (Chrono Trigger) — or statistics that you personally control, such as in Fallout or Might and Magic.
 
I prefer every team/squad mate getting XP or an FFX-type system where you can easily swap characters in or out to get at least some XP every fight.
 
Like others much prefer exp shared. I hate having to create "grinding teams" of 1-2 strong characters babysitting a few unused lower level characters.

6-8 characters seems about right. Enough to have a diverse cast but also few enough that you grow attached to/care about them. The more that can participate in battle at once the better (or optimally be like FFX with everyone swappable. You're all traveling together but if three people fighting happen to die you mean to tell me nobody else will step up?).
 
[quote name='ID2006']I hate RPGs where you have to micromanage your characters' leveling to get stat boosts.

e.g. Final Fantasy VI – not specifically problematic since the characters got so ridiculously powerful on their own, but the idea is the same. Espers can be use on one character at a time, but some give permanent stat boosts. Notably the one that gave the elusive +1 speed. If you really wanted to optimize, you had to keep party member levels low so that they would level only after you acquired the desired stat boosting esper.

I much prefer predetermined statistics (Chrono Trigger) — or statistics that you personally control, such as in Fallout or Might and Magic.[/QUOTE]
fyi because of the way ATB worked in ff6, speed does not confer that big of a benefit... it was because of how ATB charged during abilities and such.

vigor was also not a great stat to level up as each point of vigor is only worth about 30 extra damage before defense calculation and there aren't very many good skills that use physical damage. even sabin uses magic power, only using physical for pummel and suplex.

instead, the best stat to level up was magic power, which had more versatility. it could ignore defense or target elemental weakness, and cure as well.

in the end it doesn't matter because there's so much broken crap in ff6 anyway.
 
I can't decide between 3, 4, or 5 characters in the party. There are great examples of all three.

For 3: Secret of Mana - melee, defensive magic, offensive magic worked great. Was great in FF7/8/etc. as well, imo, and Chronotrigger.

Four is generic, I guess. Lufia 2 specifically was great with the setup. Main couple, and two jokers (til Dekar gets replaced with Artea, who was dull).

Five (maybe six) is prefect in dungeon crawlers and SRPGs - varied enough to not be boring, and not to much so many that you're always in menus.

I guess one or two main characters, and two support characters (peanut gallery) would be my choice.

Edit: I like benched XP for unused characters. Not full distribution, but like 50%. That way, you won't have a completely worthless character. But at the same time, you won't bench characters that are too weak to do anything at first, and bust them out only in the final boss. *splashes around like a Magikarp*

Edit 2: What I do hate is uneven distribution in the main party. SRPGs a little less so, but why should the healers lag cause they heal? FFTA made leveling healers easy though. They can heal a high level character and get a level in 5 turns, guaranteed.
 
[quote name='kainzero']...in the end it doesn't matter because there's so much broken crap in ff6 anyway.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I know. It was the only game that immediately came to mind. There are others, though. Pokemon is probably the absolute worst. The things you have to do to optimize there... ugh.

Edit: By the way, anyone: Is Baldur's Gate (the first) still worth a playthrough? Is the story good at all? I gave it a few minutes a while back, and the interface felt really dated (I know, I'm spoiled.)

Might reinstall the GOG version, though, and give it another shot.
 
Story is generic as can be, and BG2 is better than it in pretty much every way. I would recommend skipping it and just playing the sequel. If you do want to play the original though (maybe you just prefer low-level campaigns; I ain't judging), you should install BG2 anyway so that you can use the Tutu or BGTrilogy mod to upgrade the UI and rules of the original so that they match the sequel. It's the first of the IE games, and Bioware's first RPG, but it's really quite weak in comparison to the games that built upon it.
 
[quote name='panzerfaust']i like when exp is shared among the party, whether they were in battle or not. namely for the fact that games usually throw you a situation where you need to use an obsolete character, and it sucks if you haven't been leveling them the whole game.[/QUOTE]

See for me even if the exp distribution system is setup to avoid problems when you're forced to use characters you haven't been I'll still be annoyed, because I'm being forced to use characters I don't like, which is why they weren't seeing combat in the first place. It at least makes the situation more palatable though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top