Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
December 20, 2014, 07:24:31 AM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
Congratulations to Andrew Barker! RPGfan Editor of the Year and now Chief News Editor!
341044 Posts in 13939 Topics by 2222 Members
Latest Member: XanTehMan
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  Media
| |-+  Single-Player RPGs
| | |-+  What do you want out of PS4/XBone RPGs?
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] Print
Author Topic: What do you want out of PS4/XBone RPGs?  (Read 8328 times)
ZshadeZ
Posts: 215


Member
*


View Profile Email

Ignore
« Reply #90 on: August 03, 2013, 04:21:38 PM »

PS4 where Chaz dies instead of Alys.  "His swing never did get much better... anyway, time to kick some asses."

Meh. Alys was more of the game's Jagen anyways. Besides, I really didn't want to get stuck with those growth rates (she was for all intents and purposes like Nei from PS2 except for the level lead instead of doubling up on the leveling rate).

Of course, it would've been nice if PS2 developed its characters beyond having them show up on your doorstep saying "Hi. I want to join your party." and little else.


A lot of our old favorites are like that, though. Not all as bad as just showing up at your door and saying you can rename them if you'd like (lol, lots of personality there) but that's something I loved as game tech got better, more words, plot, character development, etc.
Logged
Cyril
Posts: 1673


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #91 on: August 04, 2013, 02:34:29 AM »

After replaying FFV with its three worlds recently I realized what a lot of modern RPGs are missing: drastically changed worlds due to story events. I don't mean this in like the SMT way, but more the FFVI way. It has become more and more infrequent lately - even something like Breath of Fire III where the passage of time has changed the world would suffice.
Logged
Aeolus
This is the Monado's Powerbomb!
Posts: 6654


Little did he know, the fall damage would KO him.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #92 on: August 04, 2013, 08:51:54 PM »

After replaying FFV with its three worlds recently I realized what a lot of modern RPGs are missing: drastically changed worlds due to story events. I don't mean this in like the SMT way, but more the FFVI way. It has become more and more infrequent lately - even something like Breath of Fire III where the passage of time has changed the world would suffice.

The problem though is how to balance that with the dreaded points of no return? Probably the reason why it worked in FFVI was due to the WoB being heavily focused with the primary conflict of The Returners vs. The Empire and there really wasn't a whole lot that occurred outside of what you were doing at the time. The game only really opened up once you got the Falcon in the WoR.

Generally speaking I tend to like the way that time skips handles these since its more focused on the cast's progression over reshaping the face of the Earth or Not-Earth. Incidentally, Xenoblade also had something akin to a world changing event that was mostly subdued (compared to the usual) where old areas opened up new places and your team now has the levels to take on the high level areas and no large skips of time were necessary. Though I still think LttP did it best by having both the major change with the Dark World as well as more subtle changes to enemy encounters in the Lightworld (like the village being overrun with soldiers, Poes swarming the graveyard, rabbits vanishing from the swamp, and soldier pallets were swapped with the next highest rank). Even OoT didn't handle it as well since Young Link is mostly only used for getting the Lens of Truth, the Silver Gauntlets, and various collectables; enemy encounters in general did not change nor did Y.Link's abilities beyond increased health, Great Fairy spells and upgrades, extra songs and bottles, and the aforementioned Lens of Truth.

But yes, for the most part JRPGs these days tend to model themselves more after FFX than earlier RPGs where you're so stuck on a track that any and all major world reshaping events either happen off screen, before you arrived to the affected area, or is only implied through visual ques in what might as well be the Scorched Earth level.

Also how is the FFVI's world reshaping any different from SMTs usual flipping of the table?
Logged

In my vision, I see that one of us is going to KO the other.
Cyril
Posts: 1673


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #93 on: August 05, 2013, 01:40:22 AM »

Because the difference between something like FFVI and, say, Nocturne or DDS is that you've actually spent the getting to know the world you're playing in. You've spent maybe 20 hours playing VI's world (10 or so in FFV's first world), and then suddenly everything in thrown on its head.  It's not something that occurs within the first 2-3 hours.  You don't go explore, say, Ginza in those games until the events have already happened.

Obviously this isn't the case in all SMT games. I'm looking at one in particular that actually does use this whole "world changed due to events" trope that I enjoyed very much.
Logged
Aeolus
This is the Monado's Powerbomb!
Posts: 6654


Little did he know, the fall damage would KO him.

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #94 on: August 05, 2013, 07:35:47 AM »

Because the difference between something like FFVI and, say, Nocturne or DDS is that you've actually spent the getting to know the world you're playing in. You've spent maybe 20 hours playing VI's world (10 or so in FFV's first world), and then suddenly everything in thrown on its head.  It's not something that occurs within the first 2-3 hours.  You don't go explore, say, Ginza in those games until the events have already happened.

Obviously this isn't the case in all SMT games. I'm looking at one in particular that actually does use this whole "world changed due to events" trope that I enjoyed very much.

All I know is that the original did it twice and Armageddon tends to be a running theme in SMT games.
Logged

In my vision, I see that one of us is going to KO the other.
Akanbe-
Posts: 2754


Cheap? I paid a lot for this hat!

Member
*

----- 4237981
View Profile WWW

Ignore
« Reply #95 on: August 05, 2013, 05:33:10 PM »

After replaying FFV with its three worlds recently I realized what a lot of modern RPGs are missing: drastically changed worlds due to story events. I don't mean this in like the SMT way, but more the FFVI way. It has become more and more infrequent lately - even something like Breath of Fire III where the passage of time has changed the world would suffice.

I imagine that it's probably cost prohibitive.  It would be like making two whole maps instead of just one.  They used to do it more often in older generations so maybe it was cheaper/easier back then.  Other than that I don't know why they wouldn't if it fits into the story.

I still like the thought though.
Logged


"Karma is...secret top tier"~Starmongoose
PSN ID: Akanbe9
Prime Mover
Posts: 2804


All's fair in love, war, and the recording studio

Member
*

Shattre
View Profile WWW Email

Ignore
« Reply #96 on: August 08, 2013, 03:55:37 PM »

After replaying FFV with its three worlds recently I realized what a lot of modern RPGs are missing: drastically changed worlds due to story events. I don't mean this in like the SMT way, but more the FFVI way. It has become more and more infrequent lately - even something like Breath of Fire III where the passage of time has changed the world would suffice.

I've thought about this, and also it leaves open another problem: by the end of the game, you're seeing EVERYTHING from the beginning of the game to the end, and there's little reason to replay the game, because you can just go back to the first section of the game (and do). Thing with games like FFV and FFVI is that there are large sections of the game that you can never return to, and by the end you're left feeling "wow, I began a long way off in a different place/era, I almost forget what that felt like, I want to go back and see it again" and you can enjoy replaying the game fairly soon afterwards. Now, it feels like players are insisting that the games simply grow, never giving up things that were there at the beginning, so that by the end, you're playing the beginning, middle and end of the game all at the same time.

I think the "point of no return" is only bad in theory. People dread it, but is it really bad? In many ways, it's a good thing, keeps us from constantly being OCD about things, because after a certain point you simply can't go back and do those initial sidequests... more reason to replay the game and do it then. And as I said, it changes things up. Sometimes taking something away keeps the game fresh and interesting: a character dies and the group dynamic changes, the world gets burnt to a crisp and you witness a new environment. You end up sucked into a timewarp to a different era and you've got a whole new setting.

When I think back on it, I think my fondest memories in games are for short lived sections that you can't return to ad-nauseam.
Logged


eelhouse.net
- order the new album

Currently Playing: Metroid Prime 2, Trails in the Sky, Bioshock: Infinite
Currently Listening to: Devin Townsend, Dream Theater
Watching: Star Trek: TOS, Slayers, Doctor Who (as usual)
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  



Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!