[Ironshanks]

Heh, we should add it to the "most cited games" list. Well there isn't one, but if there WAS.

I did like fallout's plot structure, because it managed to be COHERENT while being non-linear. And that's tricky to do.
_________________
That's not a broken link, it's a PICTURE of a broken link. It's really very conceptual.

[LeoDraco]

[Sirocco]

If a game can encompass the world depth of, say, Ultima VII, and still manage to have a coherent and easily followed plotline (meaning that you don't often find yourself lost wondering what to do next) ... that would be perfect in my book. Imagine combining the world of Ultima VII with the plotline of Xenogears.

That'd probably vaporize a normal human brain after the first 2-5 seconds of gameplay, give or take a few seconds for the sheer scale of things to set in.


.

[ThousandKnives]

[Jihgfed Pumpkinhead]

With regard to ThousandKnives' post: Well, I didn't that RomancingSaga3 was a good game of that type; just that it was a good example. The problems you mention are all fair, but a lot of them seem to be problems in general with that type of game, at least from what I've seen.

And alright, I accept that you would have gotten Zozo without my help. Heh.

---- EDIT ----
Well, ThousandKnives snuck in and posted while I was writing this (the sneak), so that last bit was directed at his post before the last one, if you know what I mean.
---- END EDIT ----

I think I'm beginning to understand what Mandrake means, I didn't before. I assumed he was talking about the difference between exploration-based and linear-based games. But now I see the distinction he was making was more between games in which most of the content is revealed through plot, and games in which most of the content is back-story.

Some games only contain as much historical information as is required to move the plot along, like most console RPGs. Others have lots of additional junk, often towns contain a library or some such place where you can go in and read about the town's/world's history, local customs, that sort of thing. Is that what you mean?

If so, the main advantage I see to world-based content is that it's optional. You can go into the library and look under a topic which interests, or not go in at all, and you still get an enjoyable experience; whereas if you miss out on plot elements, you pretty much have to say "What's going on?"

On the other hand, if one wants history, there's more than enough of it in the real world, and that history has the advantage of real-world applicability, should one ever turn up on Jeopardy or other trivia-gameshow.

Well, that said, I prefer the world-based games all the same. There can be such a sense of discovery about them, and looking for a library so you can find out why the War of a Thousand Tears began beats looking for the Sword of Superior Slayage any day of the week, in my book.

Has anyone played Chronicle of Aidyn (I think I've got the name right)? It was an N64 game, which meant it didn't find as much of an RPGing audience as would have been nice, but it accomplished what I'm talking about rather well, I seem to remember.

[ThousandKnives]

[Ironshanks]

[ThousandKnives]

[Mandrake]

ahhh crapola, more misunderstanding. I think this comes from the games people have played. FF7 is mentioned alot, and personally, i think the backdrop, and the backstory (the history of te world) is very , well, non-existant. Throwing in a few backdrop details, (and using ploys like finding information in a book, were the information is usually a line long and contains such grand revealing truths as "There once was a god of light who fought the god of dark. Big bad things happened, and our world was changed forever, blah blah blah") I find to be very skimpy and not very detailed.

Ultima (esp ultima 4 and U7, dear god....amazing) has a very detailed world, witha very detailed history. You walk around in U7, and people go to bed at nght. They like to walk by the pond at least once a day. The have a life outside of the players life. It's like watching clouds drift by, like birds wafting though the air, or talking to a cat. It's in the very details that make up the world. You can through this stuff in without forcing a non-linear plot.

You can have a world with a mythology (a real mythology, not the psudeo-christianity that most console-style RPG's contain, but a huge pantheon and etc....). It's hard to explain to those who haven't played Ultima, or who haven't played more world absed games.

Yes I included FF originally (the first few), and Dragon Warrior, and these games do have a backdrop and a semi-detailed world. But I guess it can be beyond that. The problem that I see is that a detailed world for you to explore is usually set aside in a story based game.

Although, i do agree with Sirocco....a combo like that would be fantastic. And a very insane undertaking.
_________________
"Well, last time I flicked on a lighter, I'm pretty sure I didn't create a black hole."-
Xmark

http://pauljessup.com

[Raiko]

One of my favorite console RPGs was Suikoden for PSX.

I don't remember the story much because it's been so long and I don't have a copy, but in this game, at one point, you defeat a monster and take over a castle.

From then on, you can travel the world and get people to join your cause, thus building up your castle. Eventually you can have your own inn, shop, etc. depending on the people you get to join you.

That had me playing for a while. There was like 108 people you could get, some only after a certain condition was met.

[Mandrake]

I remember that gane. I remember buying it...playing ti for about a day, and then selling it, to my later realisation on how big of a mistake that was. since it took a while to play it, I jsut got bored with kill-kill-kill the baddies to level up, not realising (as I did later when I borrwed it from a freind) that the game itself was really cool.
_________________
"Well, last time I flicked on a lighter, I'm pretty sure I didn't create a black hole."-
Xmark

http://pauljessup.com

[korndog]

I don't know if this is on the same subject, but I prefer the character part of plot above all else. Adding storyline isn't necessary for fleshing out characters. You could go with what you have already, but detail the character's reaction to events.

Like when battles occur. I don't think I've played a game where the standing characters help up the fallen ones. In FF games, if you run, it shows you leave your comrades. Also, If you win and someone is down, those still standing do their celebration dance anyway. It would make the world and storyline more immersive if they'd help them up while the "Gained 300 XP" dialog boxes flash by.

Or, during battles, maybe if player A is friends with player B, and B falls down, player A could walk over and assume a protective stance. That would take less than a dozen lines of code.

Things like this remind me of the detailed actions that can occur during pen-and-paper RPG sessions. It's rarely the world or story that interests me during those games, but it's my friends' reactions to various events that keeps me entertained.

[Ironshanks]

Definately. Character is absolutely critical to any good story. But again, in an RPG, characters are directly linked to the plot and the setting. It's not like they grew up in space, surely they'd be raised in a certain culture, and experience the world in their own way. I think the characters are hugely shaped by the world, and characters who are invented without regard to the world they live in have a tendancy to seem fake and out of place.

PS: I should really start adding examples to my points, I think it'd be a lot more communicative.
_________________
That's not a broken link, it's a PICTURE of a broken link. It's really very conceptual.

[Guest]

the two games I love best of all time are Tales of Phantasia, and Planescape: Torment. A PC game and a console game... and yet... in some areas they share a lot of details.

Torment had the detailed world going for it... Where ever you went there were people going about their lifes.. it didn't simulated it as well as Ultima 7 did.. but they made a good effort. Guards patroled.. builders worked on the broken parts of the city.. people went shopping ;) And somehow.. amazingly the plot never seemed anything less than top level! :)

In Tales.. you actually got to take part in history (going back in time, then going forward in to the world's future). Things like the elves still being alive from the first time period.. and sometimes running in to the desendants of humans you met in the first half of the game, was a really clever touch.. There was.. less world depth to it than Planescape.. but I felt the plot was better managed.. The story seemed to flow smoothly, and stuff that happened was just logical, and there were a few optional things allong the way.. ;)

[Locrian]

Im an explorer by heart. I don't need a reason to explore, its just fun. Whenever I end up somewhere outside of the concrete jungles I spend most of my life, I walk around and explore. A couple years back I had a blast in Alaska. Recently I had a lot of fun running around in the forests of Maine. I love games that let me walk around and explore. To go on self serving adventures. Finding a ruin makes me interested in it. Being directed to a ruin through dialog/plot/story is less interesting. Its an added bonus when every now and then you happen upon some awesome uber loot in your explorations/adventures. I used to collect a lot of stuff as a kid. Coins, stamps, cards, comics. I'm a total pack rat and treasure hunter in games that allow me to be. The RPGs I've most recently enjoyed have been Asherons Call and Morrowind. I horded all sorts of shit in both, and often just went around walking about not directly in search of treasure, but just seeing what there is to be seen. Finding pretty landscapes and locales.

A more strict plot would have ruined those games. I don't give a damn about people and thier problems. Screw em. I don't want to be a hero. If I was Spiderman in the recent Spiderman movie, Id let Kirsten fall to her death (cause shes ugly), as well as the kids (I dont know them why should I care), and instead go off and use my powers to explore places otherwise not possible.

Another interest of mine is ancient history, and any ficticious world that has its own in depth ancient history is kickasscool in my book.

So yeah, I voted for world, obviously.

Heh I guess I don't like the more strict definition of ROLE Playing Game, in that you are dumped into the role of some moron that is nothing like you at all. I want to play my own role, in a ficticious world. World comes before characters and story for me. There has to be some story of course, and some direction, but many games are way too oversaturated with it. Its even worse when you don't find it interesting or can't relate to it at all. Though there are always exceptions I guess. Deus Ex didn't have much exploring, was based on our slightly modified real world, and relied heavily on plot and I loved that game.

I have no idea what all I just typed and don't know if I'm still on topic or ever was... oh well. I agree with Ironshank's input anyway... yeah...