ALTERNATIVE TO BATTLES

post=131092
Now this may seem to be like 'yo dawg what the fuck' here, but don't those Princess Maker games have a shitload of numbers but no battles?

Those types of games are fun at first, but, once you play it again after completing it, it's just boring... Unless you can make one that gives you a totally new experience each time, in my opinion, I think making one would be a waste of time.

post=131357

post=131100
The basis of almost any game is some level of competition. It is you vs someone else, whether it is a friend you are playing with, or a computer, and your goal is to win.

Actually this is usually refuted in one of the first paragraphs of any tabletop RPG book. And I always go back to my beloved tabletop RPGs. The aim of most tabletop RPGs is NOT the players vs the GM. Instead the players and the GM collaborate to create something. Of course computer RPGs are mostly single player things, but this actually got me thinking about another design thing from tabletop that would be cool to bring to the computer. The concept of not trying to beat the game. Instead trying to... just... sort of... enjoy it... (And of course the game accomodating this... enjoying)

I don't think anyone was suggesting that it's an issue of player vs. GM, or even vs. game designer. It IS an issue of Player vs. Environment. In order to get anywhere in the game, you have to overcome obstacles and threats in the environment. Losing means not getting anywhere, and that's boring and frustrating if you do nothing but lose, so the goal is to win.

post=131367
I don't think anyone was suggesting that it's an issue of player vs. GM, or even vs. game designer. It IS an issue of Player vs. Environment. In order to get anywhere in the game, you have to overcome obstacles and threats in the environment. Losing means not getting anywhere, and that's boring and frustrating if you do nothing but lose, so the goal is to win.

On the other hand if we're speaking in that general terms EVERYTHING is like this. Not only games. Getting out of bed in the morning is like this. It's a challenge you have to overcome and if you don't do it you lose.

Of course the only real way to lose is to die (and everybody dies so everybody loses). And that also applies to tabletop. That was the three-page idea I sort of had. A game where losing doesn't mean you're not getting anywhere. Heavy Rain does something like this doesn't it? Where not responding sometimes can be just the response you need. (Though I don't know enough about that game. Does it have a "game over"?)

Shinan
On the other hand if we're speaking in that general terms EVERYTHING is like this. Not only games. Getting out of bed in the morning is like this. It's a challenge you have to overcome and if you don't do it you lose.

One day I lost getting out of bed




It was a good day

I tend to prefer RPGs with fewer battles, such as Xenosaga. To that end, I've eliminated random encounters in my own series, Carlsev Saga, and replaced them with touch encounters. The thing is, I sprinkle only a few of those encounters throughout a twenty-minute dungeon -- maybe ten or twelve at most. However, they respawn after leaving the room.

I think it's a good compromise between those who hate battles and those who could grind for decades.