Pet Peeves in JRPG games.

[Sonic Angel Knight]

Welcome to "Another thread" by "That guy" and if you are here, you must be thinking about "Those words" he gonna share with the masses. Well Then there is nothing wrong with it. Oh well. But anyway to continue, this is a thread about some of the Pet Peeves in RPG games. For those who don't know, a RPG game or more known as Japanese Roleplaying Game, is basically games that Japanese started making that feature the kind of stuff you would find in such table top games like Dungeons And Dragons (Never played it but is all i hear) Instead the player is given a set of characters in a fantasy world with towns to talk to people, gain information, solve problems and buy items, equipment. Then venture into dungeons to defeat monsters, earn exp, level up and learn spells as well as save the world from horrible darkness. Prime examples are Final Fantasy and Dragon quest series, so if you played these before, then you get what one is. (Again, explaining for those who doesn't.)

Each game is different in some ways and some of these differences are probably my biggest gripe of them, regardless of your opinion of my skill in playing them, I have played plenty and finished a handful while others ignored. This is just a small list of things that some games have that I may not agree with. Now these may exist in other games that aren't even a RPG but may feature such things, castlevania symphony of the night while is mostly a 2D action platformer like the games before it, have plenty of rpg elements such as exp gain, and equipable items and status. So keep in mind this is just general things of rpg concepts that I don't like in no particular order.

EXP gain alteration

One common thing in RPG games is gaining exp, you get it by defeating enemies and each game has some different way of handling it. In final fantasy games and breath of fire, each enemy rewards specific amount of exp upon defeat, but these game specifically handles it differently. The amount each character gain is divided between all the participating characters. This is something I hated the most, cause it just misleading.

For example in final fantasy 4 you have a party of 5 characters, if you beat a enemy rewarding 10,000 exp, each character gains 2,000 instead. Of course you know how much, there is a bestiary which is basically a monster encyclopedia guide to the game. If you do have 5 members, it would be easier to just say you gain 2,000 but it doesn't change to suit the situation and many may not even know this fact. Again in a game like breath of fire 1 & 4 which in one you max party of 8 and 4 is 6, you get 1/8 or 1/6 of the total exp for each member. Again, to me is just confusing but it also means each character levels up slowly the more people you have.

My brother has a habit of killing his party until one is alive, in this case only the remaining character gains the exp, the total amount. So is based on the amount of people still standing at the end of the battle. Some people don't find it a problem but i do. Suppose i like using specific characters, then later find out i need to use another character I didn't find useful, this especially plot specific in some games, you may have weak characters you are forced to use or even could be stuck with cause enemies are too strong to even defeat to grow stronger. It could just be a problem, one I have done a few times. Not every RPG has such problems like this but i know a few.

The second thing about this is just too odd. After achieving higher levels, the amount you gain decreases. In symphony of the night, after gaining level 60, you notice the same enemy that gave you a lot more to level up quickly suddenly drop drastically, making it longer to max out levels and i know some people like to have max status as much as possible. WHY this is i dunno. Of course in that game, high levels isn't really needed to play the game since is not like RPG with turn based "forced attack" no way to dodge system but still is just odd to me. My only theory for the two exp gain alteration decisions is to kinda balance the game in terms of difficulty, but I wish is well explained to the player not hidden only to realize it sometime late.

Item storage

Another thing I dislike in some games, I know some games in the beginning of the Revolutionary RPG genre was very limited to what can be done, but is not the case anymore, and even then some games still didn't have this problem. Back to final fantasy 4 again, a game made for SNES, in this game you can hold a total of 40 different items with you, you have the option to store WAY MORE, by means of a FAT CHOCOBO. (Don't ask I didn't make the game) Having a whistle you can enter a chocobo forest and summon a fat chocobo who can store items for you, of course you can always sell it for money which you may do more often. Is just something I didn't like. Chrono trigger, also for SNES, has you holding one of every item in the game, and 99 of them at that. That i find okay.

Is kinda upsetting when you in dungeons and find treasure you can't keep cause you have full inventory. If the game wasn't already hard enough for some of you, this adds to it, games that do this are phantasy star on genesis and even tales games, they limit you to 15 per item with possibility to increase it to 30 or more in some cases by means of grade shop.... which is accessible only after finishing the game once and playing again from the beginning along with other perks. Still I prefer to just have 99 limit and slot for every item in the game. Especially for the completionist and collectable hobbyist out there.




Perhaps the idea of this is just a sign of difficulty, to challenge the player, Is okay. I understand challenge, is not a problem to be honest. Tough Challenges come in different forms and ideas. Some people consider that a game is too easy, whenever you come to a difficult boss battle, you just go fight weaker monsters to gain a few levels and then make it easier. Others will try to challenge it on lower level or restrictive items and beat the boss. Some people like speedrunners do things like Play Legend of Zelda without the sword the whole game, or maybe collect no upgrades in mega man X or play super mario bros without pressing b to run the whole game. The thing is they set their own challenges, nothing wrong with that.

Not saying the game devs shouldn't challenge players but some people just find their own way to enjoy playing the game, and some accept the terms and conditions of the game presents to the player and try to overcome them. In the end Difficulty is always subjective no matter what goes on, each person is different and have uncommon aptitude. Doesn't make them bad or good, just as long as they enjoy what they do.

If you have any problems in RPG games you encountered that you decided you could do without, share in the comments below.

 

[Deleted User]

snip

 

[Smash Br0]

One word: Missables. AKA limited-time only items / events that you suddenly lose access to after a "point of no return" that may not be obvious.

For example, you miss a chest in a ruin that collapses when you leave. Now you can never get 100% completion unless you restart. I hate that.

 

[Wiidii100]

It really feels bad to see a character die, betray you, or leave the party for some other reason—and take your equipment. But then again, some games toss them back into your inventory or do it early enough not to be too much of a deal.

 

[Rockhoundhigh]

Sorry for the almost blog length rant but this has been eating at me lately. My JPRG (or really just "nerd" media in general) pet peeve is self-insert main characters. In an attempt to convince gamers sitting in their living rooms that they are the real life equivalent of some adolescent Mr. Perfect just waiting for destiny to swell their egos to their rightful sizes, storytelling often gets completely thrown out the window or at the very least severely hampered. When you're variation on the RPG is explicitly known for prioritizing an engrossing story over freedom in gameplay, it's infuriating how common it is to see this trope these days. I really hate it when it seems that the story was held back on account of accommodating whatever bland avatar the player might feel like imprinting on, stock responses and all. It's not like the player's given choices are ever consequential in any sort of long term anyways. In 99% of these types of games, choices amount to A or B. If A get C, if B also get C, so why bother.

Often with JRPGs however comes the argument of story vs. gameplay but it's not like freedom and story have to be two mutually exclusive things. Just compare Xenoblade to its spiritual sequel X. Even Shulk - while another example of the wish fulfilling adolescent dork with some great destiny thrust upon him - had a personality, that even while trope-ridden made him someone you could root for and acknowledge as his own unique being. The fact that your avatar was a legitimate character intrinsically invested in what happens in his own world made a ton of difference for the better in the effectiveness of how the story was conveyed. On the other hand in X, you get to be "Rook", the nondescript amnesiac deus ex machina whose greatest contribution to any conversation is a nod. While I understand they were prioritizing gameplay in the sequel let it be known that while I haven't played the original XC in years I could list way more of its story beats than I ever could from X's much sparser plot. Both games were very open, but one had me much more invested than the other.

Mind you, this pet peeve isn't the end all be all of JRPGs for me. Persona 5 was fantastic, but in order to convey a more effective story even it had to sacrifice some of its MC's bland, self-insert qualities. Let it be known that if there's zero backstory to latch onto and you as a developer want me to play a linear RPG, then you're pushing your luck and ultimately, it's a shame to see so many games that could've had amazing stories settle for decent just for the sake of some unconvincing self-insertion.

 

[Flame]

when the rival is too weak and when my rival _doesn't_ want to smell me later

 

[Taleweaver]

Fora long time, fallout 1 and 2 were the only rpg's i could stomach. Most of it comes down to a jrpg revolving around fantasy. Not so much middle Earth lore or even final fantasy lore (though this suffers from it in quite some instances) but actual fantasy. The kind that a ten year old girl with pen and paper would describe: way over the top self gratification, stereotypical and one sided characters, a story that's basically a sequence of setpieces (better known as'trailer material) and plotholes and disjunctioned parts everywhere to shoehorn in a love story at the end of the world. The games assume suspension of disbelief pretty much from the start, and i swear the makers sometimes just WANT to make things stupidly unbelievable.

So me off you've heard this before: you're this handsome yet totally insecure teenage boy surrounded by friends. You fight monsters that villagers take for granted and seem to live directly next to without even noticing. The villagers also don't have a clue the world is about to end and your United colors of benneton-group is for some reason the only ones to stop it, but they give you side quests that somehow give you more experience than randomly fighting enemies. The powers you use in combat also have no relation to the world outside of combat (why is it that you can slay a huge ass dragon and then be stopped by a locked door a bit later?).

Pfff... i know there are exceptions to all of these peeves. But most of the time i can't even bring myself to give rpgs - let alone jrpgs - a chance.

 

[FAST6191]

I am having echoes of the phantasy star discussions... we seem to approach games rather differently.

" is basically games that Japanese started making that feature the kind of stuff you would find in such table top games like Dungeons And Dragons "
Not really. American stuff might be. The European, Russian and Japanese efforts here are usually somewhat removed from D&D, or at least from the American take. Japan in particular often favouring a very linear story with few choices and featuring largely predefined characters which is basically the antithesis of D&D
They share some mechanical similarities but so do Portal 2 and Battlefield.

Anyway
"still standing at the end of the battle"
If you did it all and got KOed at the last moment I could see an argument but one has to be there to experience it.
On even splits then maybe it is like loot being split between characters.
That said I do like action based experience systems rather than "was there" ones.

Also " Suppose i like using specific characters, then later find out i need to use another character I didn't find useful"
and
"of the total exp for each member. "
The latter is the, somewhat weak, solution to the former.

"After achieving higher levels, the amount you gain decreases"
Is that not like real life?
When I was given tools as a kid the mere act of removing screws taught me a lot about how things go together. Several decades later I now know that and a thousand other things which assist in it and thus removing a screw teaches me nothing but how that screw functions and maybe how this device functions.
In martial arts you tend to seek stronger and strong opponents as beating people you have beaten before tends not to teach you much unless they have subsequently improved.
In hunting when first learning to gauge distance, approach, wind, how much to lead, how to aim it is fairly involved. Do it for a while and you don't learn as much as you already know it and it becomes instinct.

"Is kinda upsetting when you in dungeons and find treasure you can't keep cause you have full inventory"

He sighed and opened the black box and took out his rings and slipped them on. Another box held a set of knives and Klatchian steel, their blades darkened with lamp black. Various cunning and intricate devices were taken from velvet bags and dropped into pockets. A couple of long-bladed throwing tlingas were slipped into their sheaths inside his boots. A thin silk line and folding grapnel were wound around his waist, over the chain-mail shirt. A blowpipe was attached to its leather thong and dropped down the back of his cloak; Teppic picked a slim tin container with an assortment of darts, their tips corked and their stems braille-coded for ease of selection in the dark.

He winced, checked the blade of his rapier and slung the baldric over his right shoulder, to balance the bag of lead slingshot ammunition. As an afterthought he opened his sock drawer and took a pistol crossbow, a flask of oil, a roll of lockpicks and, after some consideration, a punch dagger, a bag of assorted caltrops and a set of brass knuckles.

Teppic picked up his hat and checked it's lining for the coil of cheesewire. He placed it on his head at a jaunty angle, took a last satisfied look at himself in the mirror, turned on his heel and, very slowly, fell over.

Basically consider what you carry.

There is some merit to having a genero engine that does it all and only has the restrictions the player makes for themselves, however the design part of game design tends to mean you need some restrictions; it is one of the ways you start to create challenge in a non real time game.