What annoys you in western/action rpgs?

[The Man From G.R.I.D.S.]

For me, it's crafting. It seems like a more evolved fetch quest. Work, basically. I don't see why a mercenary, a reincarnated demigod, or some guy that can kill you by yelling at you would suddenly pick up blacksmithing as a hobby.

Sort of related to that is this push for immersion when IRL you'd pass out from heat exhaustion after walking for 4 hours in plate mail, let alone all day.

I won't pay for a work simulator; I just want to run around with a sword. Why do so many games include harvest moon tier autism bait?

 

[ES 148]

Perhaps you forget that video games are for autists.

 

[IV 445]

Zelda kind of has the market cornered on sword and sorcery adventure heroes quest type stuff.

The sense of “accomplishment” for making an iron dagger is slightly addictive I will admit

 

[RG 448]

Having to sit through cutscenes in Party Girls used to drive me nuts, but after someone here solved that problem the most annoying thing to me is when the game doesn’t have new game plus.

 

[Clop]

Making a small counter-argument to the crafting gripe (no worries, hate it as much as you want - it is somewhat annoying at times) pen&paper RPGs have methods of crafting, players tend to have some profession that relates to stuff that earns them cash between questing or gives them easier and cheaper access to some great gear. P&P is the main reference for RPGs (at least when done properly) so it's to be expected. I'm more annoyed that pure action games have crafting, because crafting isn't all that thrilling. Most of the time.

As for my gripe, it's the alignment in games that put emphasis on creating your own character. RPGs should always have a wide variety of choices, and lazier ones just give you angelic/monstrous choices and nothing in between. It's fine if it's just good or just bad that you go with when a character's story requires it, but if there has to be a choice, make it actually feel like you can pick one that most defines your own character as you want them to be. If you have alignments in games, put some effort into them. There's nine alignments in tabletop gaming (and dozens of gods that also guide your motivations), and only a few games offer more than two.

 

[Ghostapplesause]

The gray morality idea has been played out. Now I kinda just roll my eyes to that stuff. It's not cool or edgy as it was anymore.

 

[Nekromantik]

As for my gripe, it's the alignment in games that put emphasis on creating your own character. RPGs should always have a wide variety of choices, and lazier ones just give you angelic/monstrous choices and nothing in between

It's even better when no one in the game really reacts to your choices. I remember Fable being really bad with this. You're surprised that the giant man with evil tattoos and horns growing out of his head would kill someone in the arena?

 

[OhGoy]

While it's mainly just a problem with post-Morrowind Bethesda, I hate RPGs that are more like amusement park rides than actual RPGs. Good RPGs have things like well-written quests with multiple nuanced outcomes, a unique setting that doesn't take most of its concepts from already existing works, combat that involves more than spamming the attack button, etc. Meanwhile, games like Skyrim are practically the opposite. They have bland storylines that reward you with loot and nothing else, concepts that are just ripped off of its predecessors and/or works that are entirely unrelated, and spammy combat against damage-sponges.

These games get away with all this, though, because they don't market themselves as RPGs. They market themselves as games where you fuck around and do whatever like its a virtual playground. Rather than a game with in-depth mechanics and story, they're just medieval GTA games.

...oh, and level-scaling is pretty bad.

As for my gripe, it's the alignment in games that put emphasis on creating your own character. RPGs should always have a wide variety of choices, and lazier ones just give you angelic/monstrous choices and nothing in between. It's fine if it's just good or just bad that you go with when a character's story requires it, but if there has to be a choice, make it actually feel like you can pick one that most defines your own character as you want them to be. If you have alignments in games, put some effort into them. There's nine alignments in tabletop gaming (and dozens of gods that also guide your motivations), and only a few games offer more than two.

I'd say straight up black and white morality is fine as long as the game is self-aware about it. Fable and the first Knights of the Old Republic don't try to push any narrative boundaries and just aim to be fun. Sometimes it's good to take a break from games with morally grey areas and to just have fun being a stereotypical goody two-shoes or a psychopathic, genocidal bad guy... but mostly the latter.

 

[Piss Clam]

Mazes. Can we please stop putting them in.

 

[Some Manajerk]

The forced stealth missions. I shouldn't have to sneak around and avoid people who i have up to this point been killing like nothing else

 

[Batman VS Tony Danza]

Dialogue choices that don't represent what my character is actually going to say or how they will say it. I'll choose something like "Okay, then it's settled" thinking it's a neutral agreement and my character will instead jump up and yell something like "GUESS IT'S TIME WE SETTLED THIS" and pull out a sword on the villagers I was trying to accept payment from.

 

[Y2K Baby]

Perhaps you forget that video games are for autists.

Now THIS is epic.

The gray morality idea has been played out. Now I kinda just roll my eyes to that stuff. It's not cool or edgy as it was anymore.

That isn't exactly something that can be "played out". That's like calling any basic narrative characteristic played out. Videogames' autistic one pro, one con moral ambiguity ("free but chaotic!" "Strict but fair") is garbage though.

 

[Midlife Sperglord]

The dating sim angles that are ripped right out of JRPGs. I get it, too many gamers do not go out on dates.

 

[Wärring Ornac]

Mazes. Can we please stop putting them in.

 

[Sable]

Patrolling the Mojave almost makes you use curved swords. Curved. Swords.

Yeah, stock dialogue. It's not specific to this genre, but it's a little worse in it.

 

[The Man From G.R.I.D.S.]

Making a small counter-argument to the crafting gripe (no worries, hate it as much as you want - it is somewhat annoying at times) pen&paper RPGs have methods of crafting, players tend to have some profession that relates to stuff that earns them cash between questing or gives them easier and cheaper access to some great gear. P&P is the main reference for RPGs (at least when done properly) so it's to be expected. I'm more annoyed that pure action games have crafting, because crafting isn't all that thrilling. Most of the time.

Crafting and all the training just takes as long as you need to plan it out in p&p rpgs. Plus you're expected to have some background as something besides a mercenary drifter (aka murderhobo).

Maybe games like skyrim should let you build your character's background, personality, and disposition as you would their stats and appearance? And map this to various variables that determine how npcs treat you and how in game events/quests behave? Sound sane?

As for my gripe, it's the alignment in games that put emphasis on creating your own character. RPGs should always have a wide variety of choices, and lazier ones just give you angelic/monstrous choices and nothing in between. It's fine if it's just good or just bad that you go with when a character's story requires it, but if there has to be a choice, make it actually feel like you can pick one that most defines your own character as you want them to be. If you have alignments in games, put some effort into them. There's nine alignments in tabletop gaming (and dozens of gods that also guide your motivations), and only a few games offer more than two.

Allowing more choice would restrict all you could do in one playthrough, which means actual replay value.

 

[ES 148]

Crafting and all the training just takes as long as you need to plan it out in p&p rpgs. Plus you're expected to have some background as something besides a mercenary drifter (aka murderhobo).

Maybe games like skyrim should let you build your character's background, personality, and disposition as you would their stats and appearance? And map this to various variables that determine how npcs treat you and how in game events/quests behave? Sound sane?


Allowing more choice would restrict all you could do in one playthrough, which means actual replay value.

I think the inherent difficulty with computer RPGs is that you will never be able to do exactly what you want. I could want the Courier of Fallout: New Vegas to be a vault dweller all I wanted, but canonically they are not.
It's a kind of poor example, but you get what I mean, right? There have to be lines drawn.

 

[Duncan Hills Coffee]

I think the inherent difficulty with computer RPGs is that you will never be able to do exactly what you want. I could want the Courier of Fallout: New Vegas to be a vault dweller all I wanted, but canonically they are not.
It's a kind of poor example, but you get what I mean, right? There have to be lines drawn.

I played DnD after I played computer RPGs like Fallout 1 and Planescape Torment, games I was already really impressed by their level of freedom. The thing about DnD is that the only real limits are your imagination, and to a lesser extant, the DM, and even then, you can still do whatever the hell you want. You can derail the campaign entirely, and (if your DM is good enough anyway) the game will change accordingly. That's a level of choice you just don't get in video games. Meanwhile, you murder a plot-critical NPC in Morrowind, and you get a text box telling you that you just made the game unwinnable.

It's not technologically feasible to really do this, especially with the much bigger games like Morrowind and Fallout. That's why the best way to experience RPGs, in my opinion, is the original tabletop games that the video games take so much inspiration from. Video games can only do so much.

 

[Clop]

It's even better when no one in the game really reacts to your choices. I remember Fable being really bad with this. You're surprised that the giant man with evil tattoos and horns growing out of his head would kill someone in the arena?

I'd say straight up black and white morality is fine as long as the game is self-aware about it. Fable and the first Knights of the Old Republic don't try to push any narrative boundaries and just aim to be fun. Sometimes it's good to take a break from games with morally grey areas and to just have fun being a stereotypical goody two-shoes or a psychopathic, genocidal bad guy... but mostly the latter.

imo Fable's just on 'ok' game, a fantasy game with hacking and slashing. Nothing wrong with that. It's not as big on RPG stuff as I'm used to.

Crafting and all the training just takes as long as you need to plan it out in p&p rpgs. Plus you're expected to have some background as something besides a mercenary drifter (aka murderhobo).

Maybe games like skyrim should let you build your character's background, personality, and disposition as you would their stats and appearance? And map this to various variables that determine how npcs treat you and how in game events/quests behave? Sound sane?


Allowing more choice would restrict all you could do in one playthrough, which means actual replay value.

Yes, that would sound sane, but it would also require more expensive work, especially in a fully voiced game. That's why I totally prefer games where everyone doesn't need a voice actor. Even after all that video games still have some restrictions for obvious reasons, but it doesn't need to be so restricted as Skyrim is (or as patronizing with the compass - I hate the fucking Bethesda compass.)

Indeed, replay value is awesome. You can't even discover all the content as a male character in Fallout 1/2. And the NPCs do treat you differently based on your stats so there's lots of stuff to stumble upon.

 

[Rand /pol/]

To be honest I like crafting (or at least base building) in RPGs, it helps get into the story and play a role.

 

[The Man From G.R.I.D.S.]

imo Fable's just on 'ok' game, a fantasy game with hacking and slashing. Nothing wrong with that. It's not as big on RPG stuff as I'm used to.



Yes, that would sound sane, but it would also require more expensive work, especially in a fully voiced game. That's why I totally prefer games where everyone doesn't need a voice actor. Even after all that video games still have some restrictions for obvious reasons, but it doesn't need to be so restricted as Skyrim is (or as patronizing with the compass - I hate the fucking Bethesda compass.)

Indeed, replay value is awesome. You can't even discover all the content as a male character in Fallout 1/2. And the NPCs do treat you differently based on your stats so there's lots of stuff to stumble upon.

Voice acting all possibilities would get expensive and produce very large downloads in such a game. What about voice emulation (similar to deepfakes)?

By stats I mean variables that hold info about personality to which npcs respond. Think of personality tests. These would also change in response to your actions. They would be separate from your combat stats.