Off topic: How are games failing you?

[Ironhawk]

The thing that really lets me down about RPGs, these days is the move towards single character games. Mostly now you can play only one character instead of a party. While this is good for some games, I really miss the old days where you could construct your party to cover a lot of roles and didnt have to rely on idiotic AI npcs.

The other thing I cant stand in RPGs is Dynamic Leveling!! Good god, whoever thought that up should be killed. Oblivion was the most prominently bad example. Every battle throughout the entire game was resolved in almost exactly the same manner, regardless if you are a lvl-1 rookie fighting a rat or a level-50 insanely powerful hero fighting a demigod. So stupid! Why put all your effort into your character to not get any reward?

[analytic_kernel]

Originally Posted by Ironhawk

The thing that really lets me down about RPGs, these days is the move towards single character games. Mostly now you can play only one character instead of a party. While this is good for some games, I really miss the old days where you could construct your party to cover a lot of roles and didnt have to rely on idiotic AI npcs.

Agreed. Also, party design adds another dimension to the entertainment. Just like one might always wish for another 40 design points when designing a pretender, one often tends to want one more character slot in a party. IMO, trying to find the best complements and synergies between party members, while covering a variety of roles and being limited to the allowed number of slots, is part of the fun of those types of games.

[Agema]

Originally Posted by Ironhawk

The other thing I cant stand in RPGs is Dynamic Leveling!! Good god, whoever thought that up should be killed. Oblivion was the most prominently bad example. Every battle throughout the entire game was resolved in almost exactly the same manner, regardless if you are a lvl-1 rookie fighting a rat or a level-50 insanely powerful hero fighting a demigod. So stupid! Why put all your effort into your character to not get any reward?

Bethesda changed the random encounter spawn for Fallout 3. They split the map into "areas" and each area spawns creatures relevant to the level you first visited, so newbie areas stay with newbie random encounters.

For the most part, however, I'm not sure how "new" it can get. Aren't nearly all games, from 1980s scrolling shooters to FPS to RPG basically all about flinging larger weapons at larger opponents at later points in the game?

[Incabulos]

New gameplay can always be discovered.

Populous (of course Molyneux had several other innovative titles)
Midwinter
Stunt Island
Sim X (city,theme park, zoo etc)

more recently

Crayon physics
Darwinia
Portal

I think there are a plethora of games that don't involve killing the next big thing and most of those are the ones with innovation in them.

Most 'innovation' in the FPS genre is really new gimmicks (bullet time, terrain adjustment etc...)

[Ironhawk]

Originally Posted by Agema

Bethesda changed the random encounter spawn for Fallout 3. They split the map into "areas" and each area spawns creatures relevant to the level you first visited, so newbie areas stay with newbie random encounters.

Yeah I played fallout and the system there was *slightly* better but still lame. Where is the fun in a game when every battle, from start to finish, requires exactly 3 shots? There is no strategy, no feelings of accomplishment. Just level grinding and new equipment. Its fantastically boring!

As for how the gameplay can be different - of course it can! It doesnt take a genius to think of ideas how. I mean all you have to do is make combat specialized. So you have to use a particular tactic against an enemy rather than the 1-2-3 main attack. Or you have to use a specific weapon. Or have a particular skill to outwit/disarm your enemy. The list goes on, all it takes is a little creativity instead of just plugging another NPC mob into a leveling formula.

[Incabulos]

Originally Posted by Ironhawk

Yeah I played fallout and the system there was *slightly* better but still lame. Where is the fun in a game when every battle, from start to finish, requires exactly 3 shots? There is no strategy, no feelings of accomplishment. Just level grinding and new equipment. Its fantastically boring!

As for how the gameplay can be different - of course it can! It doesnt take a genius to think of ideas how. I mean all you have to do is make combat specialized. So you have to use a particular tactic against an enemy rather than the 1-2-3 main attack. Or you have to use a specific weapon. Or have a particular skill to outwit/disarm your enemy. The list goes on, all it takes is a little creativity instead of just plugging another NPC mob into a leveling formula.

Funnily enough fallout has both disarming and particular vulnerabilities. Your standing and skills also reflect what kinds of encounters appear so it does have some nice touches to it.

Although the vulnerabilities could have been implemented better (I think Bioshock does a much better job at the same thing).