Castle Paradox

[msw188]

Some friends and I were discussing what we like about RPGs, and in particular they were asking why I don't get into newer ones like Fable, and why I still claim to like the Dragon Warrior games best. I began to realize what I think is one reason, and I'm interested to see how people here feel about the issue.

I do not like main characters to very customizable. That is to say, I do not want to be able to choose what kinds of abilities my heros learn, with the exception of maybe a few one-time usable things (which isn't very different from equipment, really). To me, the fun part of RPG battles involved having a set of heroes whose abilities were already chosen by the game-maker, and then it was up to me to deploy them intelligently in battle. In this setup, each hero ought to have a particular function that they are 'good at', and should NOT be able to overstep this function, except maybe in a few cases (like a special item that, when equipped, teaches a character some spell...?).

Okay, how do other people feel?

[PlayerOne]

I don't really like the "blank slate" heroes you traditionally get in Western RPGs, where you generate them at the start of the game. I prefer a more definite character. With some dark secrets in his/her past, obviously.

I also like a bit of imagination. The best Japanese-style RPGs are more willing to mix technologies and settings.

[Leonhart]

I hate choosing what my character would look like in RPGs. I want them to have unchangeable looks. That way, all of the players would be able to see just one image of the characters, and the players could feel the same feelings about them....
_________________
The man who smiles when things go wrong has thought of someone to blame it on.
- Robert Bloch

[Gizmog1]

It depends on the spirit of the game. Probably something insanely story based and chatty should have predetermined characters, but if it's more exploration, and more of the player having a choice as to how the story shall unfold, and what his place will be, I think that having the player in control is a great idea.

Grand Theft Auto, for instance, would do WONDERFUL with a create your own player, as it's mostly a freewheeling exploration type of game. Something like Super Return of the Jedi, where the story's already written, and everyone's kind of familliar with it wouldn't do so well with a character editor.

Of course, I also like having a bit of choice in what the character equips, and how they learn it. The Espers were a nice way of doing it. You could choose who learned what and how fast, but there also were techniques that only one person could use (Edgar's Tools, Sabin's Blitzes, Gau's Rages, etc.). Of course, I can also see how a certain amount of predestination can help. I mean, Madden's fun with a created player, but it dramatically changes your gameplan. You know he's bound to be able to kick the 60 yard field goals, or pick off 7 passes in the game, and you're no longer bound by having a crappy quarterback, or something else, and it's not as fun or challenging as a game where you're using, say, the default Detroit Lions, and have to try and rely on the best of what you have.

[Mr B]

I really can't agree with this. As far as I am concerned, the more customizability, the better -- as long as it does not break the balance. I mean, being able to customize a character so that it circumvents the normal challenge of the game is definitely rotten, but allowing players to make important decisions is something else entirely.

Several years ago I got ahold of a ROM for one of the Phantasy Star games (don't remember which number, but it was for the Sega Genesis [if I remember correctly...]). It had some unusual combat strategies that entertained me greatly...until I realized that the only "choice" I had as a player was whether to play the game or not. It was completely linear. Oh, I had some choice inside of battles, but it really came down to "do I want to win or do I want to lose?" That's a stupid kind of choice.

Several months ago I purchased a copy of KotOR II. I could decide what kind of character I wanted to make, from stat increases/level to which Force powers, and in what order. I loved that (never mind that the player crystal was so powerful that it eliminated most of the choice in lightsaber customization...). What I didn't love was that the game was so easy/unbalanced/released-too-early that most of my decisions didn't matter. That is also a stupid kind of choice.

However, given the choice between the two, I would choose the second. Why? I can experiment. I can set challenges for myself. My next run-through of KotOR II I am going to make a heavy-armor Jedi. Never mind that that will eliminate most of the useful force powers. I don't care. I want my Jedi to wear heavy armor and masks and use vibroblades and heavy Mandalorian weaponry. Heck, maybe I'll give him heavy armor and just use unarmed combat feats. I dunno. The point is, I can choose, and my choices will heavily affect the way that the game plays out -- in a fun way.

So, um, I guess I am saying that I do like being able to choose how my character's skills develop. It doesn't have to be completely customizable, but please give me more choice than just whether or not I will press the right buttons!

[Joe Man]

I believe the core of an RPG is linear. That core, though, may be expanded upon infinately. Dirt simple.
_________________
"Everyone has 200,000 bad drawings in them, the sooner you get them out the better."
~Charles Martin Jones

Last edited by Joe Man on Fri Dec 13, 1957 1:21 am; edited 2,892 time in total

[Gizmog1]

So, you're arguing AGAINST having any choice in what happens? That's kind of silly, I could just watch a movie for that.

[msw188]

Hmm, some interesting replies. In response to Mr. B, I understand you're probably exaggerating, but there can be plenty of chioces in an RPG besides 'choosing the right buttons' that lie quite outside of customizing a hero's abilities. I like the choices of where to go, who to talk to, and how to marshall my predetermined, specialized forces in battle. But I can certainly understand the other side.

In response to Gizmog1 (can he/she still read and post here?) I would say that I was intrigued by the Esper system of Final Fantasy III (or VI) at first, but I ended up feeling like it was the downfall of the game. It is mostly a balance problem I guess, as Mr. B was saying, and as Gizmog1 pointed out with his Madden comparison (it's always interesting to see cross-genre comparisons). I've enjoyed Dragon Warrior VI, which felt a bit more balanced by the extremely long time it took for your characters to master their customizable classes, but I still feel like I like predetermined skills better.

[LeRoy_Leo]

[rant]The less linear a game is, the more freedom a person has. Freedom can be good or bad. It depends on if you are the lazy person who wants to beat a game quickly or if you want to saver it. Less linear games usually have the option to go one way, so everyone is happy.

As far as created your own characters goes (I think SoulCalliber III might have brought this topic up), I prefer to Roleplay a character I didn't create because less work is involved, but enjoy creating my own characters for the flexability. the more choices for customization, the more flexible and non-linear this can be. If you only have 10 or less options, you might as well have 1. 10 is BS.
What it comes down to is effort and work ethic. If yer lazy, you will prefer games where you don't have to think as much.
[/rant]
_________________
Planning Project Blood Summons, an MMORPG which will incinerate all of the others with it's sheer brilliance...

---msw188 ---
"Seriously James, you keep rolling out the awesome like gingerbread men on a horror-movie assembly line. "

[msw188]

Ah, but which alternative really requires more thinking? One might argue that if you have the freedom to customize your characters' abilities, then you will very rarely have to think in the midst of a battle because you've customized your characters to the point where they can handle pretty much anything that the game creator can reasonably throw at you. Whereas without the ability to customize your characters abilities, you may be forced to really think about how best to command your heroes according to their own, limited abilities.

PS: I certainly see your side of it as well, I'm just interested in trying to elucidate as many sides of this as possible.

[Iblis]

[Taiyou Yume]

I think it totally depends on the game. For example, any MMORPG, I think, should be able to have customizable characters because, if not, all the characters would be completely the same. However, for most of the regular RPGS, I think they should give you a few choices in preset characters and then that's it. Personally, I think the point of a game is to overcome something with what you are given. And if you chose all the stats that make a game really easy, it's kind of pointless.

[Iblis]

[DomGallo]

Did you guys play Pokemon? You chose if you wanted Bulbasaur, Charmander, or Squirtle, (Grass, Fire, or water), and then had to go through 8 gyms and the Pokemon Four, each of whom focused on a certain type of Pokemon. You had to fight them in order, I think, but depending on your initial choice, you could kind of choose when you'd get in trouble. I think Bulbasaur had an advantage early, where as Charmander had it rough early, and Squirtle was neutral, but each one had a time in the game where it hit something it was weak against, requiring you to find something else, and train it. I thought that was kind of a neat way of allowing customization, whilst still forcing balance.

EDIT: I just read two posts behind this, and I'd kinda like to address that idea. Stats, at least well designed stats, should kind of balance themselves, and it goes back to Pokemon. You might choose for instance early on to boost your strength through the roof, and slaughter all the enemies you come across. But then when you face enemies who slow you down, or are heavily resistant to physical strength, and mostly draw damage from magic, you're suddenly not worth as much as if you'd invested more balancingly. Of course, that's not to say you'd be worthless, you'd just have to train a bit more, and have problems at that point to overcome it.
_________________
The turkey: God's most noble creature.

Don't eat Turkey for Christmas. I WILL FIND OUT.

[JSH357]

I think that Pokemon probably has the best customization I've seen in a game, but the some of the TMs were overdoing it. It's a linear game, but non-linear in the sense that you can pick your team, the monsters grow differently depending on what you fight and genetics (yes I know way too damn much about this game), you can assign different moves/skills but you can only have four (which is a great balance decision).

Only problem? There are some attacks and element types that are just flat-out better than the rest. Admittedly, the game would have been a beast to get done correctly, but it still prevents Pokemon from being perfect.