Games you like, but nobody else does?

[Hyro-Sama]

 

[thesupremegamer]

so why is this game good then? im curious

 

[Foxi4]

you're playing the immersion card, but there is nothing immersive about randomly triggered encounters. The situation you describe translates to two things
1) visible enemies
2) the sequence takes place where you are (or beginning where you are) and not someplace entirely else you are teleported to

If the visible enemies are randomly-generated then they are still random encounters.

This argument makes no sense whatsoever. In any game you cannot guess what happens next. The single player campaigns of FPS and third person shooters are a good example. Aside from having played the game before already, you have no idea what challenges you will face around the next corner, how much ammo you will need or what weapon will be best, or whether you will face enemies at all. This trait is executed far more brilliantly by virtually any game without randomly triggered encounters.

Of course you do. If you die and restart at a checkpoint or if you've played a level before, you know the enemy's positions exactly, which is why an element of randomness is welcome.

(There are probably games where you are jumped by bandits, like Elder Scrolls. If you extend bandits to mean any enemy then Resident Evil games do the jump scare very well. You don't see it coming unlike random encounters. But "being jumped by bandits" will never be immerse in a random encounter system since the player is well aware that enemies are just cards being drawn from a pile. When returning from the battle your character is unmoved and there is no indication that the preceding battle has ever occurred at all, except maybe in the protagonist's own head.

We seem to have different definitions of what a random encounter is. You use the narrow definition of "screen starts to blink and a turn-based battle begins" wheras a random encounter is simply a randomized encounter with an enemy. This includes visible enemies, there's no reason why those wouldn't be random encounters if they're randomized.

That's not even entirely on point, though, if an RPG is not meant to be realistic at all, and is just about stats and combat mechanics. Which is what many RPGs are, whether unintentionally or not. But this does not make randomly triggered encounters suitable here, either. Randomly triggered encounters are a cancer, and shouldn't exist period.)

That's your opinion.

The second way to refute the argument is that you technically DO know what you will expect: More enemies. The only thing that keeps you guessing is the level itself. The kevel is actually new. The enemies are predictable and mundane. The enemies are punishing you for navigating the level. At best the enemies are there to pad out a small level or to disguise the lack of complexity of a simplistic level. But the point is, there's no surprise. After a handful of encounters, you already know the score. Its not "surprising" its just irritating. But more accurately, it is abuse.

You're describing bad random encounters. Good random encounters create randomized teams of various enemies, they should rarely be samey.

If surprise was really the issue, then there is no reason not to have scripted encounters, because the player could not be expected to anticipate those, whereas the next 100 randomly triggered encounters are all seen coming a mile away. (unless hyptheticalky the encounters were extremely rare, such as five minutes aoart at minimum--that would actually begin to be a surprise) After any given encounter, you *already know* you will take 20 paces and fight yet another encounter, facing a group of enemies chosen from a pool of groups of enemies which you have each already seen.

That's my point. Random encounters shouldn't happen every two steps - random encounters should feel random. Again, you're describing the flaws of a bad random encounter, but random encounters don't have to be this way.

But obviously surprise is not the issue, the issue is stubbornness, as I've said. Encounters are a shit idea but, not settling for merely tolerating them, people actually defend them, because people will evidently defend anything, especially if there is a cultural precedent.

Do you think encounters in Fallout: New Vegas are not random? Some are area-scripted or story-scripted, but the great majority of things you meet in the Wastelands are completely random. Of course you don't know that because they're designed well - in New Vegas you actually get jumped or you get to ambush enemies if you see them first. Those are good random encounters.

Huh? What are spawn points.

It's a level design term describing a co-ordinate on the map where an enemy is spawned, aka created.

Adventuring? These are RPGs. If adventuring was a priroty, then random encounters should go out.

If there are no random encounters then there is no adventuring. Questing and adventuring are inter-connected, but not the same thing.

RPG means stats. If immersion was a priority, then random encounters should go out. And they should go out, because immersion is a valuable element to a game experience, whereas random encounters provide no intuotive benefits of any kind. They just "are".

RPG does not mean stats, RPG means role playing. Stats are used to express character progress and maths are used to create game mechanics, but RPG at its core is all about playing a role, not about the maths behind doing so. In fact, the maths should be as transparent as possible so you don't have to think about them and can focus on the actual adventure.

But you're twiddling a dial between more terrible or less terrible. You could argue all day that not all games are ruined by randomly triggered encounters, but I could argue that no game has ever benefitted from them, and that nobody who defends them could be considered to have critical ability.

I could argue all day long that removing the top screen from a DSi or a 3DS is the dumbest thing in the universe that renders the system 95% inoperable, but you still went with it.

Some games need battles and some games need levels. Randomly triggered encounters is nothing more than a method of initiating an encounter. As a method, it is the worst possible one.

Again, you have a far too narrow definition of what a random encounter is. RPG's should never be divided into levels - RPG's are all about exploration and an open world that's not divided into separate levels works wonders in this regard.

 

[Hyro-Sama]

so why is this game good then? im curious

It's not. I just went threw this phase in Middle/High school where I was playing my PS2 daily. Burning through games one after another. Uzumaki Chronicles happens to be one of the games I remember. Terrible game, but I found lots of enjoyment in it.

 

[thesupremegamer]

It's not. I just went threw this phase in Middle/High school where I was playing my PS2 daily. Burning through games one after another. Uzumaki Chronicles happens to be one of the games I remember. Terrible game, but I found lots of enjoyment in it.

so baicly the games so bad its good?

 

[Hyro-Sama]

so baicly the games so bad its good?

I guess in sense, yeah.

 

[thesupremegamer]

I guess in sense, yeah.

XD yeah we all have one of those games that we like for all the wrong reasons lol XD

 

[HtheB]

Somehow I really loved it when I first saw it on the TV commercial.
Recently, I've discovered that Croc, was actually going to be Yoshi... Yes.... The Yoshi from Mario....

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Croc:_Legend_of_the_Gobbos

 

[Social_Outlaw]

There's nothing inherently wrong with random encounters. Problems emerge when said encounters are:

• Unavoidable
• Happen every 2 steps
• Are unbalanced

This is the problem I had with Final Fantasy VII and the reason why I never finished the game - I just got bored of running into enemies every 5 steps when all I really wanted was to complete the quest. It's a matter of implementation, not a problem with a gameplay mechanic.

Shin Megami Tensei Nocturne was a pain in the butt with random encounters. I couldn't even take 3 steps before getting into a battle. Eventually I gave up on the game, I liked it but that one problem made me not turn back.

 

[Foxi4]

Shin Megami Tensei Nocturne was a pain in the butt with random encounters. I couldn't even take 3 steps before getting into a battle. Eventually I gave up on the game, I liked it but that one problem made me not turn back.

Yeah, it's a big problem when developers can't adjust random encounters properly. They should be as the name implies - random, not constant. They should come as a surprise, catch you off-guard with unexpected combat and test your skills, too much encounters turns the game into an experience grinder which is never good.

 

[Walker D]

The first Echo Night for PS1 ...don't know how much people actually played it, or if they liked it ...but it's definitely a interesting game for me

Spoiler

 

[Social_Outlaw]

Yeah, it's a big problem when developers can't adjust random encounters properly. They should be as the name implies - random, not constant. They should come as a surprise, catch you off-guard with unexpected combat and test your skills, too much encounters turns the game into an experience grinder which is never good.

Yeah, Final Fantasy X-2 suffered with same problem and that was my favorite childhood game. I played it last week, and I gave up on that one too . (Sigh) I'm so glad we have games that fix this problem like Persona .

 

[Foxi4]

Yeah, Final Fantasy X-2 suffered with same problem and that was my favorite childhood game. I played it last week, and I gave up on that one too . (Sigh) I'm so glad we have games that fix this problem like Persona .

It's all a by-product of the "challenge = more sh*t attacks you" way of thinking prevalent in the JRPG genre, although these days it's much less prominent than it used to. Instead of challenging the wits, the devs just challenged the player's persistance and patience - bad design indeed.

The first Echo Night for PS1 ...don't know how much people actually played it, or if they liked it ...but it's definitely a interesting game for me.

I know it's just one screenshot, but it intrigued me. Is this a horror of some kind? I think I might try this, actually.

 

[thesupremegamer]

Shin Megami Tensei Nocturne was a pain in the butt with random encounters. I couldn't even take 3 steps before getting into a battle. Eventually I gave up on the game, I liked it but that one problem made me not turn back.

i think it was done like that to simulate the whole post apocolyptic monster driven feel

but yes it was very annoying

 

[zeello]

If the visible enemies are randomly-generated then they are still random encounters.

But they aren't randomly triggered. I usually say "random triggered encounters" and when I do say "random encounters" its merely as a shorthand for "randomly triggered encounters".

However it technically doesn't matter what I call them. I could call them tacos and it wouldn't change anything. It is evident you are already aware if what I'm referring to and are trying to argue using semantics. It's like you if had said that if you have a friend who is a girl, that automatically makes her your girlfriend. (because girl + friend = girlfriend) (obviously!)

We seem to have different definitions of what a random encounter is. You use the narrow definition of "screen starts to blink and a turn-based battle begins"

That is what I mean. But it doesn't have to be turned based. Star Ocean has real time gameplay during battles, but the battles are still randomly triggered (not visible enemies outside of battle) and unavoidable.

wheras a random encounter is simply a randomized encounter with an enemy.

"whereas a girlfriend is simply a girl who is your friend"
See? You're doing it again.

You're describing bad random encounters. Good random encounters create randomized teams of various enemies, they should rarely be samey.

Random encounters feature enemies distinct to the particular area you are navigating. (or were, before the encounter interrupted you) You will be seeing the same enemies over and over.

That's my point. Random encounters shouldn't happen every two steps - random encounters should feel random

"should" "should"
so, in a perfect world, all games with randomly triggered encounters would implement them in such a way as to minimize the annoyances inherent to them.
You might as well argue, at this point, that...
E.Coli is not bad, because it shouldn't make you sick.
Hitler is not bad, because he shouldn't have done those things.
Rapelay is not bad, because it shouldn't have rape in it.
Nuclear holocaust is not bad, because civilians dying to weapons of mass destruction shouldn't happen.
We should avoid blanket statements like "E.Coli/Hitler/Rapelay are bad" and notice that E.Coli, Hitler, and Rapelay can be done well if implemented carefully.

Also, to point out that an encounter happens in 5 seconds or 15 seconds is not sufficiently random in a meaningful way. In any game with randomly triggered encounters, the encounters are frequent enough that they might as well be evenly spaced apart. It is of absolutely no consequence. If you know something is going to happen, then that is random. And if you know that there's nothing you can do about it, then that is abuse.

Again, you're describing the flaws of a bad random encounter, but random encounters don't have to be this way.

I'm describing random encounters in the way the vast majority, if not all, games of the JP RPG genre implement them.
But ask yourself, if a mechanic is misused by 100 percent of games that use it, then what does it mean that the mechanic could hypothetically be used well. What's the use is trying to save a lost cause, if there us absolutely nothing to be gained? "woohoo! I made an unimmersive, coldly mechanical exercise in RPG mechanics where battles are dealt out unintelligibly throughout the experience for no reason whatsoever, but in a manner that is not quite as assaultive and annoying as previous games that had attempted it! GOTY here I come!"

Do you think encounters in Fallout: New Vegas are not random? Some are area-scripted or story-scripted, but the great majority of things you meet in the Wastelands are completely random. Of course you don't know that because they're designed well -

so in other words, we can tell that encounters in games with randomly triggered encounters are random, therefore they must be designed poorly.

If there are no random encounters then there is no adventuring.

Says who?
Here look, I can make random assertions too.
If there is no bacon then there is no adventuring.
If there is no experience point system then there is no character development.
If there is no sex appeal then there is no replay value.
If there is no character creator then there is no role playing.

Again, you have a far too narrow definition of what a random encounter is.

As stated above, I'm using the phrase to mean a specific thing.
see your definitions for RPG for instance. You say RPG doesn't mean stats, but it can mean stats provided it is established between us that RPG = stats. See also the word girlfriend, or the term "animal abuse," which is obviously inferred to mean non-human animal.

That's how language works. Argue semantics some more. You're blatantly ducking the issue by calling on games/genres that don't have randomly triggered encounters of the specific type I am describing, which are almost exclusively relegated to japanese games, and instesd simply stretching the phrase to mean any mechanic with a random element.

its like entering the handheld section gaming forum and begin talking about razors ("well they're handheld too! you obviously didn't know that so let me explain it to you what a razor is because I'm Foxi. While im at it let me tell you about Fallout New Vegas and other games that do not relate to the conversation in any way")

 

[VMM]

 

[Foxi4]

zeello Get back on-topic or make a new thread specifically about how you don't like random encounters, stop hijacking the thread.

 

[Jayro]

The game has a 94 on Metacritic. It's definitely not "a game only you liked".

What I meant was fans of the Chrono series liked Trigger over Cross. Sorry If I failed on making that clear.

 

[TecXero]

Vectorman and the Lunar series.

 

[wolf-snake]

Jet Force Gemini for the good old N64. A nice little 3rd person shooter from rare that i've seen get ignored because it's not Goldeneye or the Banjo games. The way i could describe that game is like Mario 64 and Quake made sweet love and 9 months later this game was born and if it ever gets ported to the Xbox One i will buy that console just to play that game, its just so great one of the best on the system and pretty much the direction i wanted 3D Megaman games follow instead of the Legend series.