i would like to know your opinions about rpg fighting. do you like the classic style like FF games, wait ur turn to select ur move? or a style like parasite eve where u get 2 move around in real time(RT) but go into "classic rpg mode" when u attack? i think the former is ok, but i think it is a slow pace to fight, and i don''t like the fact that i have 2 sit there and take my hits. in parasite eve, u could move around and dodge attacks. many argue that rpg''s are supposed to make u someone u r not, so by having an RT dodge system, u throw the users skill into the game. i like it because it seems faster paced and it does use at least some of my hand-eye coordination, but i''m not a total sell on either. i was wondering what u think on this matter.
i want to make an rpg but i don''t want a classic style. baldur''s gate was cool, but i want a system like that except u have control over ur character. when i press left, the guy moves left, etc... so i guess i have 2 questions now! would this style interest anyone? and if so, would u like to have teammates? they would be automated and would take orders, but wouldn''t be controlled.
please feel free to answer either or both questions. thanks (sorry for the length)

They both have their up sides and down sides. In RT, you have good control over a character, but you can only control one fighter. In FF-stlye, you can control a whole party. I think they both have their place, but your idea definently sounds cool. If I were you, not only would I make it so the player has to dodge the enemies attacks, but you also have to aim manually. I hate that auto-aim Star Ocean 2 crap where all you do is press X to win battles.

I also think you should put team mates in your game. It''d make it more fun.

quote: Original post by Dynamite
a style like parasite eve where u get 2 move around in real time(RT) but go into "classic rpg mode" when u attack?

Could you explain this more? I have never played parasite eve, and that sounds interesting.

IMO, I don't much like fully turned based systems. I do appreciate what they offer as far as the different strategical options, but I suppose I think they take too long too. Plus, like Wavinator said combat has a special flare because of the adrenaline, and I think that has something to do w/ it. I don't consider myself a big action game fan, but I still like the tension of RT.

quote:
many argue that rpg's are supposed to make u someone u r not, so by having an RT dodge system, u throw the users skill into the game. i like it because it seems faster paced and it does use at least some of my hand-eye coordination, but i'm not a total sell on either. i was wondering what u think on this matter.

I'm quite tired of that argument personally. I still think the rules of what makes an RPG an RPG are so blurred that it's just not a valid argument. The question should be what works best in the game, not whether if fits in an RPG or not.

quote:
i want to make an rpg but i don't want a classic style. baldur's gate was cool, but i want a system like that except u have control over ur character. when i press left, the guy moves left, etc... so i guess i have 2 questions now! would this style interest anyone? and if so, would u like to have teammates? they would be automated and would take orders, but wouldn't be controlled.

Yeah, it was interesting how BG let you pause at any time during battle, but I also feel that I would rather have some input into how the characters move. It can be boring letting the characters do all the work. In BG, I eventually just felt like once I got a basic strategy I was doing the same process every time and just waiting for the battle to be over.

Also, in an RPG type of game, I perfer only controlling one character. I think it's mostly because I think you can be better immersed into the character and it feels more personal when there's only 1 character.

(also, I just wanted to let you know...I noticed you used < b r > in the post...you don't have to do that if you just leave blank lines in the post it will put them in for you )



"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on January 12, 2001 1:09:15 AM

Personally, I like the combat in Odium.

For those who don''t know, it''s almost like chess. You move each character on a grid, and each weapon has a different pattern of where it can hit.

Pistols could only fire orthogonally w/ limited range. Rifles could fire in 8 directions for a longer range. SMG fires for a short range, but spreads over a few blocks.

It turned combat into a strategy game- totally unrealistic, but very engaging.

quote:
If I were you, not only would I make it so the player has to dodge the enemies attacks, but you also have to aim manually. I hate that auto-aim Star Ocean 2 crap where all you do is press X to win battles.

I also think you should put team mates in your game. It''d make it more fun.

yeah wav, i was gonna have teammates, actually a military group. and yeah aiming would be manual. i''m leaning towards using stats to determine hits/missed, but also take into accout the manual aim. the better the player aims(i.e. center of body as opposed to the left arm) there would be a better chance of hitting. this way even if u r uncoordinated u can still play the game.

quote:
Original post by Dynamite
a style like parasite eve where u get 2 move around in real time(RT) but go into "classic rpg mode" when u attack?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Could you explain this more? I have never played parasite eve, and that sounds interesting.

IMO, I don''t much like fully turned based systems. I do appreciate what they offer as far as the different strategical options, but I suppose I think they take too long too. Plus, like Wavinator said combat has a special flare because of the adrenaline, and I think that has something to do w/ it. I don''t consider myself a big action game fan, but I still like the tension of RT.

in parasite eve u would move around a lot like resident evil2. it''s like FF7 when u r waiting for ur turn, i can''t think of what it''s called, but the bar that had 2 fill up b4 u could attack. u have 1 of those and it fills as u move. when it''s full, u can hit a button 2 attack. at this point, the game pauses and u select enemies and attacks just like FF7. after that process, it goes back 2 RT. i can throw an example of the system out this weekend and let u c it if u wish, just let me know.

oh, and i feel xactly the same as u do about that quote on rpgs!

quote:
Also, in an RPG type of game, I perfer only controlling one character. I think it''s mostly because I think you can be better immersed into the character and it feels more personal when there''s only 1 character.

i plan on having direct control over main char, but the other guys can receive commands like "fire here" or "cover fire", stuff like that. but they will have their own minds. i think the RT system make u "the" player like u were saying.

i also want the teammates to get better as well, but would anyone rather get new troops for every battle? would it be hard to maintain the other troops(like 3 or 4 teammates) since u r actually "in" the battle? what do u guys think about this?

also, thx 4 the line break info Nazrix

quote: Original post by JSwing

Personally, I like the combat in Odium.

For those who don''t know, it''s almost like chess. You move each character on a grid, and each weapon has a different pattern of where it can hit.

Pistols could only fire orthogonally w/ limited range. Rifles could fire in 8 directions for a longer range. SMG fires for a short range, but spreads over a few blocks.

It turned combat into a strategy game- totally unrealistic, but very engaging.

i liked this too in FF tactics(haven''t played Odium, actually never heard of it!). i considered that too, it takes care of the movement, but it''s even more drawn out that normal rpg fighting. i''m probably going 2 do one later w/ this system. thx 4 the input

I''ve always liked the strategy involved with turn based combat. But I''m starting to come to the way of thinking that each game has their own needs. RT combat works in some games but not in others. Turn based is the same way. I absolutly hated the combat system in Baldur''s Gate. Pausing in the middle of combat is only something that you should do when you need to answer the phone or take a break because the last five minutes have been so intense. RT combat is probably the way you want to go if you don''t want a "clasic style".

quote:
I absolutly hated the combat system in Baldur''s Gate. Pausing in the middle of combat is only something that you should do when you need to answer the phone or take a break because the last five minutes have been so intense.

i agree, i like BG, it was something new, but it didn''t quite capture the adrenaline IMO. but i have mixed feelings on pausing because sometimes it can help if u have multiple things 2 do at 1 time. but it slows down the pace and removes the "danger". i don''t know if imma use pause as BG does, maybe a REAL pause where the game is paused and u can''t perform any actions.

does anyone else wish to comment? i am interested in multiple opinions?

I have only skimmed through the above, but I would just like to mention Revenant. It was single-person RPG which made full use of RT combat.
In it, you started with three keys:

A - Thrust
S - Slash
D - Smash(Hammer)

Slash could (IIRC) attack multiple opponents, whilst smash would cause immense damage. The really cool thing about this is you could go back to the trainer (after you''ve upped a few levels) and could learn a new move, a charging thrust, the something slash and the jumping smash, along with others...

My ideas would be that Thrust would have an accuracy bonus (like you could "thrust" their eye out), whilst the other two would be kept the same.

Just my thoughts

-TF