Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
November 27, 2014, 08:32:56 PM

Login with username, password and session length
Search:     Advanced search
We have a new board! Pop on over to the Game Journals section and tell us what you've been playing!
338668 Posts in 13863 Topics by 2217 Members
Latest Member: milz
* Home Help Search Login Register
+  RPGFan Message Boards
|-+  Media
| |-+  Single-Player RPGs
| | |-+  Pacing in RPG's
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2] Print
Author Topic: Pacing in RPG's  (Read 5279 times)
Dincrest
Spectrum
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 12008


Stumpy McGunder- thumps

Member
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2010, 10:36:27 PM »

Most love adventure scenarios average around the 10 hour mark, and with the option to fast forward over previously viewed/read stuff, completing additional scenarios is fairly quick.  Hence I agree, if a game has branching pathways like Choose Your Own Adventure, I'd be more inclined to replay it if it's 10-15 hours and not 55-60 hours. 
Logged

Next bike-a-thon: Diabetes Tour-de-Cure 2015
Saviour
Posts: 147


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2010, 11:18:24 PM »

I like my RPGs to stay linear until the very end. I can't be bothered to do 2-3 sidequests after every key event as in FFXII or Mana Khemia, it just leads me off course and I never end up saving that world. I prefer sidequests to open up near endgame where I can finish the story, then if I feel compelled enough, I can go back and see what other goodies are around.
Logged

Finished RPG Count: 90
Dincrest
Spectrum
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 12008


Stumpy McGunder- thumps

Member
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2010, 11:26:18 PM »

How about Phantasy Star 4?  I liked how there was the robust main quest and all the sidequest were Hunter's Guild missions that opened up gradually throughout the game.  I did them all because they enhanced the worldbuilding.  So there's a game that had both a linear main quest and mission-based stuff as well.  The "talk" feature was awesome as it would remind me of my main objective.  The pacing was excellent in the game; plenty of momentum, never dragged, and ended beautifully.
Logged

Next bike-a-thon: Diabetes Tour-de-Cure 2015
Harlequin
Posts: 69


Hi, I'm swedish

Member
*

harlequin@stockholm.com
View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2010, 11:38:48 PM »

  I love curling up in front of the TV with my handhelds to grind out some missions in Etrian Odyssey or Class of Heroes while I watch Mythbuster reruns on TV.  But when it comes to console games, I like my games to be as linear as possible, so as to keep me motivated to plant my ass in that chair and keep playing.

That pretty much sums it up for me as well. But really, doesn't it also come down to how much time you have at your disposal and what kind of gamer you are? I mean, I can easily play a game for 14 hours straight and still keep going, providing I don't get bored - as in, having to do a shitload of boring sidequests/losing track of the plot etc. If you don't have that kind of time on your hands and can only play for about an hour or two at a time the mission based approach probably suits you better.

Me, I don't really mind either way. Valkyria Chronicles was mentioned earlier (it was VC2 though, but I assume it's fairly similiar to 1) and I loved that game, even though it's mission based. I guess what matters most to me is a focused story, not whether the game is broken up into different segments or not.
Logged

Be awesome instead.
Gen Eric Gui
Posts: 2302


Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #19 on: February 06, 2010, 11:51:52 AM »

I like my RPGs to stay linear until the very end. I can't be bothered to do 2-3 sidequests after every key event as in FFXII or Mana Khemia, it just leads me off course and I never end up saving that world. I prefer sidequests to open up near endgame where I can finish the story, then if I feel compelled enough, I can go back and see what other goodies are around.

Oh man, this too.  This is the reason I stopped playing Tales of the Abyss and Tales of Vesperia, too many fucking sidequests that open and close too early for you to be aware of them, and then you get screwed over endgame because you missed some mundane sidequest much earlier.
Logged
MeshGearFox
Posts: 8701


HERE ON RUM ISLAND WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN RUM!

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #20 on: February 06, 2010, 12:17:37 PM »

TotA's problem is more that you could miss sidequests for really stupid reasons.  Like, I missed the Antlion Man sidequest becaust I turned RIGHT in that desert city instead of left and accidentally triggered the next Plot Point.

I generally don't like sidequests being relegated to the end of the game because A) I like sidequests a lot. B) I rarely, rarely ever get past the halfway point in an RPG, so C) If they're all towards the end I'm never going to see them.
Logged

o/` I do not feel joy o/`
o/` I do not dream o/`
o/` I only stare at the door and smoke o/`

Aeolus
This is the Monado's Powerbomb!
Posts: 6561


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

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #21 on: February 06, 2010, 12:45:21 PM »

I've always hated branching story paths, because it makes me feel like I'm missing out on content.  Branching stories only work for me if the game is incredibly short, I am talking like 5 hours tops here.

I could tolerate branching storylines if you give me a New Game + to blow through the retreaded ground with.
Logged

In my vision, I see that one of us is going to KO the other.
Embryon
RPGFan Editor
Posts: 2893


Achieve enlightenment.

Member
*


View Profile WWW
« Reply #22 on: February 06, 2010, 02:47:05 PM »

I like my RPGs mostly linear, but I also love sidequests. I prefer when they open up towards the end of the game, but I'm also fine with them being available anytime, as long as there exists a fairly clear indication of when a quest is going to become permanently unavailable. ("It looks like we won't be able to return to Ruin City for quite a while... are you sure you're ready to leave, HeroGuy?") I absolutely detest it when I discover I've missed an important item or quest that I can no longer complete because of where I am in the game.

I'm probably also weird, because I find open-world games like Fallout/Oblivion/Mass Effect to be more stressful than enjoyable, with the exception of MMOs. I guess I just miss the typical structure of SNES/PSX-era RPGs.
Logged



"Man up and take your handjob." - dyeager
WildArms
With my dying will...!
Posts: 472


Come on, become a legend

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #23 on: February 06, 2010, 03:37:26 PM »

i dont really mind, if it haves a good story, a good flowing of battle and nice characters, will be enough for me to enjoy everything, for example, disgaea games are really based in just missions, just one place to walk, and the grinding can become horrible, but the story, humor and characters, makes it worthy.

But talking in general i prefer games that keeps you moving through towns, and you can still go back or different stuff happens in towns you visited as the story goes on.
 It feels more variated, like traditional rpgs, specially wild arms :D, what i liked the most in WA5 was the fact i walk around to move myself, though i still dont know if i prefer the traditional traveling where you become big and the towns little, and you just press X and u go inside places... i would need to see more like WA5, or enchanted arms was the same too.
Logged

I will beat you with my evil strategy of my evil 1.8 million IQ



add me to psn! the more the merrier!
MeshGearFox
Posts: 8701


HERE ON RUM ISLAND WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN RUM!

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #24 on: February 06, 2010, 04:40:36 PM »

Possible idea to consider, which I don't necessarily agree with: If you're aware of the pacing in a game, the pacing is done wrong.

Anyway, here's another way I see it personally. There tends to be a fairly consistent number of hours it takes me to get bored with a game. I'll call it a "mean time to boredom," although it's not so much boredom as it is losing interest. Anyway.

Typically I'll get bored with a game after about ten hours. Various things can change this amount. Slow or fast pacing, for me, doesn't really affect it as long as I am actually doing something in the game to make progress. Cyclical semi-non-action like grinding or watching a lot of cutscenes or having to repeat a particular difficult spot (especially when save points are limited) will kill my interest fast, but slow/fast pacing generally doesn't matter.

Linearity does. If a game's very linear I have a MTTB of about 5 hours. If it's LESS linear it'll pop up to about 15 hours. This, for instance, is why I never got past day six or seven on TWEWY. While the game's opening up a little in the sense that I can explore the towns, the "puzzles" remain linear and mostly just involve listening to NPCs telling me what to do.

Also MTTB generally is a yearly number so if, say, I hit the thirty hour point in some game you can probably assume that I really liked it and it took me two years to actually get that far.

Additionally, no, there HASN'T ever been a game with a plot I found interesting enough for it to compel me to finish a game just to see how it ends.
« Last Edit: February 06, 2010, 11:56:49 PM by MeshGearFox » Logged

o/` I do not feel joy o/`
o/` I do not dream o/`
o/` I only stare at the door and smoke o/`

Der Jermeister
Posts: 497


The Angry Videogame Fur

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #25 on: February 10, 2010, 04:10:31 PM »

Suikoden's the only RPG series I actually play for the story since all games but Tierkreis take place in the same world, and each new entry expands upon the game's universe.

As for linearity/non-linearity, I find that linear RPGs tend to have better-developed plots, whereas non-linear RPGs tend to be lacking in that area. I don't mind non-linearity but not the "OMG where do I go next" kind like in SaGa Frontier, and don't mind getting absorbed for hours in sidequests, although I really think sidequests should add decently to the storyline.
Logged

Prime Mover
Posts: 2804


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

Member
*

Shattre
View Profile WWW Email

Ignore
« Reply #26 on: February 10, 2010, 04:57:06 PM »

For the most part, I don't particularly care for missions unless they're handled correctly. I can't stand "Hiring boards" like in FF12 or DA:O, because they're so impersonal, and you have no frame of reference as to what you're doing. If you're going to do missions, do it like Mass Effect where you actually have an event (usually a conversation) leading to a mission, not just some wall of text somewhere that gives you impersonal missions.

Truth be told though, I really miss games that didn't have missions. We didn't have missions in Final Fantasy 9, and we did great without them. Main linear story with numerous sidequests is probably the most reliable way to go in my book, but it seems that many developers take issue with that approach. ME is pretty similar in that regard, actually, so I'm pretty happy with how that works.

I think either can work, but I don't think developers should feel like they HAVETO tack on a mission system just for the fuck of it. I think DO:A would have been MUCH BETTER in my book, had they done away with the horrible mission boards. I dreaded clicking on them because it meant wasting 10 minutes reading walls of text doing things that I really felt no attachment to.

I would also like to make a comment about linearity. There's a difference between whether a game feels linear or whether it actually is linear. Many games that have linear progression disguise it by having you not know where it is that the story will lead you next, and jumping you around a lot to mix things up. Final Fantasy X and Skies of Arcadia are both incredibly linear in progression. But in FFX, you know exactly where it is you are going to be going next, where-as Skies keeps things really interesting by throwing you around the map, going over material multiple times (in new fresh ways), giving you plot twists that throw you off of where you thought you would be going. I love that. I hate knowing exactly where Iím going next.

Truly non-linear games actually come off more like FFX though, because even though youíre given choices as to where to go, you always know where it is you are going to end up, because itís you thatís controlling that progression. We say we donít like plots that are so obvious that we know exactly whatís going to happen before it happens, but I think the same holds true for progression. It should keep us guessing and keep our interests up.
« Last Edit: February 10, 2010, 05:04:49 PM by Prime Mover » 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)
MeshGearFox
Posts: 8701


HERE ON RUM ISLAND WE DO NOT BELIEVE IN RUM!

Member
*


View Profile

Ignore
« Reply #27 on: February 10, 2010, 06:08:34 PM »

Quote
As for linearity/non-linearity, I find that linear RPGs tend to have better-developed plots, whereas non-linear RPGs tend to be lacking in that area.

I don't think RPGs in general tend to have well-developed plots, really.

Quote
"Hiring boards"

Other problem with hiring boards. You get all your sidequests in the same place so the need to actually explore and find quest-giving NPCs is irrelevant. This kind of reduces sidequests down to the point of being a job/task and not something fun.

I'm not opposed to having hiring boards in addition to questgiver NPCs but I don't want hiring boards to have anywhere near a majority of the quests.

Quote
Main linear story with numerous sidequests is probably the most reliable way to go in my book, but it seems that many developers take issue with that approach.

That used to be fairly traditional in CRPGs. See, with CRPGs you'd BASICALLY be able to explore the whole world at any given time if you so felt like it, but generally there was a mostly linear main story and a bunch of sidequests outside of it. With CRPGs you had a lot more sidequests than in jrpgs obviously, but still.

Might and Magic and the only TES games that come to mind as being the only early examples of games that were pretty much nothing but sidequests.

Even today, in something like Gothic 2, all of the sidequests feel relevant. Like, early on, you need to become a citizen of the town and there are a bunch of ways to do this and a bunch of sidequests associated with these methods, but all of the sidequests tie back, somehow, into your overall goal. In other words you have a fairly linear set of goals but you can accomplish them however you like.

Quote
Skies keeps things really interesting by throwing you around the map, going over material multiple times (in new fresh ways), giving you plot twists that throw you off of where you thought you would be going.

Skies, at least in the GC version, DOES have a goodish amount of sidequests though. So even though the story is linear there's tons of other stuff to do besides it, like hunting for those sky fish things.

Logged

o/` I do not feel joy o/`
o/` I do not dream o/`
o/` I only stare at the door and smoke o/`

Pages: 1 [2] 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!