IS IT JUST ME, OR ARE BATTLES WHERE IT ALL GOES WRONG FOR RM GAMES?

Pfft Rudra will always have the best naming conventions.



E: Also X-2 uses ATB with variable charge and recharge times, a number of CTB systems also do this. It owns

I would love it if the ground was called 'gronk'.

Fuck skill names in SMT.

I have never even played it, just watched the videos that Chaos and company post and the skill names are super fucking annoying.

*dead*

People seriously get annoyed by spell names?? x.x

But how is that possible?


Granted, I'm fairly easily pleased so I'm not bothered by little things, but seriously. That's never happened to me before, ever.

Well that's MY opinion. I don't mind front view, but I *PREFER* sideview. I'd play both, but with sideview you can make better animations and then you at least know your character is actually doing it.

post=133715

more interesting active time.

more boring "watching gauges fill" system*

(hint: the only game in the series on consoles I can afford (hint: not XIII) that used ATB properly was X-2, of all things.)

I will argue time and time again that you don't need to ERADICATE the turn-based structure to make your RPG strategically deep and fulfilling to play.

I'm not arguing an eradication of turn-based combat altogether. Just an eradication of they far too common form of turn-based comment that has absolutely no thought put into it, and that all of the non-ATB combat systems found in the various RMs directly emulate.

Regarding ATB, it was at least a nice innovation when it came out. I wouldn't condone brainless copying of that system for new games though.

post=133729

post=133725
Touching on the Fire 1, Fire 2, Fire 3 progression - I don't mind this at all, and in fact I like it! I like the idea that my players are growing progressively stronger.

Players get stronger with increased stats, don't they? Also, I don't mind so much players getting evolved versions of skills as long as you get rid of the old one. I have never played an RPG where I used the weaker version of a fire spell intentionally.

And I was being a bit facetious on the spam comment. Point is, mage characters are often just stuck with a bunch of high level attack magic, and the only ones they use are the most elite versions of them. And I really am not a fan of it when using the biggest attacks constantly = victory, like it so often is.

I actually agree with you pretty much. I feel that a character should have a single fire spell that is flexible, rather than multiple fire spells. The spell would get more powerful as your character grows and/or their skill with that spell (or type of magic) grows, and when you use it you have the option of doing a lot of damage to a single enemy or less damage to multiple enemies. It might even take enemy placement into account for area-of-effect considerations.

I imagine that's more the kind of thing you'd like to see.

Edit: holy crap only I just realize this thread grew by two pages. Oh well, I guess I ignored them.