[Mandrake]

Well I was thinking abot this, and which games "styles" do you guys perfer? More modern fan-dangled plot based RPG's (FF1/4j +, Phantasy Star 2+, Grandia +, etc) where the world is second hand to the characters and the plot, or games that lack in plot in most areas (ie: plot is secondary), but have a large, deatiled, living world that you explore (Dragon Warrior....well almost all of them are like this, Final Fantasy 1-3j, Phantasy Star 1, Ultima 1-7, Ultima: Underworld, Magic Candle, Suikaden +, etc)?

I noticed that computer RPG's arre more leaning towards the latter, and console RPG's since the snes are leaning towards the first. But, the NES rpg's are more akin ot old computer RPG's....
_________________
"Well, last time I flicked on a lighter, I'm pretty sure I didn't create a black hole."-
Xmark

http://pauljessup.com

[ThousandKnives]

I voted for plot, but not the kind of plot you described. I think there is more gradation between the two then you give credit for.

The assumption you are making is that plot = fixed route. This is actually true in some games, and is becoming more and more common. Many games actually fall somewhere inbetween, with times when the player is forced to follow a given path and other times when the player has a few choices. This excludes random-generation games which are certainly their own category.

I guess the main difference for me is between plot-motivated games and "getting stuff"-motivated games. I'm not very enthralled by games where the only reason to do things is to gain levels and get rare items. Which is essentially where the PC RPG market already is. Dragon Quest games typically offer small plots to be a part of as you wander around the world, as well as occassional places where the goal is simply to get something cool. But, within a context of having meaningful objectives, these item-based sub-quests offer greater motivation.

Thing is, within plot-motivated games there has been a trend toward the plot existing outside of the rules of the game. In games where the plot exists within the rules, the plot is carried out through the actions of the player and generally events happen within the context of the types of things the player can be expected to do. These games are typically tagged as being "plotless" or "simple," because the plot and action become seemless.

But there is a trend within RPGs, that has certainly been sparked by games such as FF7 and Xenogears, where the plot is decidedly seperate from the gameplay. In other words, thumbing through endless message boxes, characters attacking one another and either doing no damage or delivering otherwise undeliverable fatal blows, characters "finding powers they didnt know they had." I don't like to see that kind of thing in RPGs. Write a book, or make a movie, but don't tack either of those things onto a GAME.

[LeoDraco]

I like a nice, strong plot to keep the game together. To give purpose to my wasting 40+ hours sitting in front of the television/monitor mindlessly pressing buttons. If that plot can make me self-contemplate, then even better.

That saying, it's always fun to explore a large, immersive, interactive world, if it is done properly. If a game purports to have a large world, it better be damned detailed and feel large. (While I have not played it yet, I understand Morrowind is something like this.)

However, I would lean more towards the plot side; while there shouldn't be a trade off between the two extremes (ideally), there are. While that's the case, give me plot, or don't give me anything at all.

Also: a plot needn't necessarily be so tightly wound that the user isn't allowed to explore or spend an insane amount of time playing. I've currently racked up about 160+ hours playing FFX (of all things), just messing with my character statistics. The same would be true of Star Ocean: The Second Story. There's usually a Point Before the Point of No Return in console RPGs that allows for this. (A sort of calm before the storm, to use a cliche.)
_________________
"...LeoDraco is a pompus git..." -- Mandrake

[Mandrake]

[ThousandKnives]

[Rainer Deyke]

I think world vs story is not much of a dichotomy. There are plenty rpgs which neither (Diablo, roguelikes in general) and a good number of rpgs that focus on both (I would place Ultima 6 and Magic Candle 3 in this category, and certainly Planescape: Torment (the latter being my favorite game of all times since I played it earlier this year)). However, there are different ways of handling both plot and world, some of which I like and some of which I don't like.

I like a good, strong plot. I don't like it when the plot exists "outside the game" or when it's shoved down the player's throat. I feel that the best kind of plot is one where the player can shape the outcome through his decisions. Planescape: Torment succeeds in this admirably, even though it contains a large degree of linearity.

I like interesting worlds. However, it is not size that draws me to a world, nor is it interactivity. It's the soul of the world, its people and its history. It's the feeling of being in a real place that was there before me and will be there after me. Ironically it is largely through storytelling that a world becomes alive for me.

I voted for world. I do think that plot is important, but when reading great fantasy books, I am always drawn more to the world than to the plot. It is the world that made Lord of the Rings great. And compared to books, computer games as a medium are heavily biased in favor of world over story. There's only so much setting you can put in a book without boring the reader, whereas plot is mandatory. In computer games, it's the other way around: plot can get in the way of gameplay, but the player is in constant contact with the setting.

Having said that, I still enjoy games that focus on plot over story. I even enjoy games with linear stories told through cutscenes where the player cannot affect the outcome. I even write them. See Feyna's Quest.

[Jihgfed Pumpkinhead]

I do think to a degree that one must either say "I will concentrate on plot" or "I will concentrate on story." Of course one can say "I will do both", but then not only do you have to do the work of both, you have to do the work of integrating them properly.

I've not played much of the old-school NES games (in my opinion, the greatest improvement in RPGs over time has been interface, and having been spoiled by the simplicity of modern interfaces, I just can't get into the older games; but that's another thread): to me, the definitive example of what Mandrake's talking about as a "world-based" game is [url="http://www.the-underdogs.org/game.php?gameid=3939"]Romancing SaGa 3[/url] (which, sorry, you'll have to break out the emulator to play unless you know Japanese).

From what I've seen, which isn't much (I just started recently), you wander around the world, going on quests as you like, picking up and leaving friends and allies as you like, exploring towns and wandering around the world. Definitely a "world-based" game; and it's a hell of a lot of fun. I would love to see more games like this.

The Zelda games, while perhaps not technically RPGs (or at least just barely), are another excellent example of "world-based" games. The joy is in exploration; and that joy is, to a great degree, lessened, I think, when it is made inevitable.

But there are difficulties with these games, of course: because of their vastness, it's not always clear what one is "supposed" to do next. The only way to defeat this is to put constraints on what one is allowed to do, or to make explicit what all one's options are, which rather defeats the point.

I hated the "interactive-movie" feel of FF7; I loved it when one could just wander around the world in an airship. At the same time, the sense, while so wandering, that there is something, after all, to which this is all leading, a purpose to it, provides me with enough "cohesion" to make me happy.

One of the main problems I see with large and free done in the FF-style is that going to the wrong place is often fatal. The extreme emphasis on experience-based levelling makes it almost impossible to survive somewhere you're "not supposed to be"; and the structure of random encounters mean that you rarely know what you're getting yourself into before you get into it. This, I think, is one of the major problems with console open-world games, and needs to be addressed.

With that major exception, though, I'm very much pro-open-world.

By the way...

[PoV]

Personally I've grown bored of both concepts, 'plot' and 'big world'. It's a formula now, and it's predictable. I havn't been able to sit down and play a plot RPG to its end since Grandia 2, or a big world one since Diablo 2. Morrowwind, Dungeon Seige, FF10, Zelda: Wind Waker and Dark Cloud 2 all had me, but lost me. Other than Morrowwind, none of these games provided a new gameplay experience (where Morrowwind was too open). Respectfully, they all added unique things to their sub genre of game, but overall was the same. UT2003 was the same way, It's really not all that different from Quake. Battlefield 1942 and Soldat are 2 games I find myself still playing, cause they take what I enjoyed about Counterstrike and similar games in two totally different directions (Vehicular WW2 Arcade Action, and a 2D 3D Shooter respectfully). In my mind its the experience that should be the focus, not plot, world size, ...

Now I understand the desire by many to produce games in the spirit of others, but if the experience is the same, or worse, then why bother? Yeah yeah, I know, Nostalgia, programming experience,... But really?...

[grenideer]

I almost picked a balance of both, but figured that was a cop-out. I love world details, and when you add a good town or a forest with a history, game elements fall into place nicely. And the best rpgs do things like this. But I'm a sucker for plot, and I had to pick that.

Mandrake, I find it interesting that you separate early NES and SMS into the world-based crowd. I would think Phantasy Star 1 was just as plot based as the others. How is it much different from Phantasy Star 3, for example? I was just curious about your thoughts on this since I'm a huge PS fan.
_________________
Diver Down

[ThousandKnives]

[Mandrake]

[Rainer Deyke]

[Raiko]

Diablo 1 was the only one I could play hours at a time without getting tired of it.

Diablo 2 was extremely tedious for me for some reason

[Ironshanks]

Personally, I tend to lose interest in plot-based RPGs. I think it's because I can't view videogames as a literary medium. I love a good story, but if I wanted to experience one I'd rather read a book or watch a movie, PLAYING a character I don't empathize with cripples any gameplay experience for me.

I'd say that Morrowind was very detailed, although there were cookie-cutter elements (NPCs mostly, which was the largest flaw in the game in my opinion). Morrowind DEFINATELY has a history, that's why I loved the game. Unlike other RPGs you actually become exposed to the "lore" which it's clear the developers had built up through the series. Reading the books was great, you get the feeling of being in a world that actually exists.

I think exploration and character creation are the most enjoyable parts of RPGs for me. I actually dislike having to play a certain part in a story whether I want to or not. I also favour games where you can do things that you don't HAVE to do to complete the game. And I'm not just talking about getting ridiculously good secret items or some such, but actually finding something that wasn't laid in your path by the developers.

So my vote is for world. Not that I don't enjoy a good plot, but to be honest, I haven't played a console RPG with a plot that I enjoyed and my PC RPG experience is limited, but the same applies. I think however, that a good plot should come FROM the world. People don't exist in a vacuum, the situations and conflicts that they are involved in have to evolve from their setting in my opinion.
_________________
That's not a broken link, it's a PICTURE of a broken link. It's really very conceptual.

[XMark]

Heh, usually when a discussion like this happens, I pipe in with my two cents about Fallout's non-linear plot-structure and how I found it enjoyable because it had a great plot but didn't restrict how to progress through it. But this time I won't..... doh!
_________________
Mark Hall
Abstract Productions
I PLAYS THE MUSIC THAT MAKES THE PEOPLES FALL DOWN!