Quantcast
RPG games with insane random encounters?

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - RPG games with insane random encounters?

Final Fantasy 7 remake should be

Turn based RPG 39 67.24%
 
Action RPG 19 32.76%
 
Total:58

Every system has flaws, which can be mitigated by good design or exaggerated by bad design. There is no perfect method that everyone will enjoy.

Personally, everything being an "action RPG" now has pretty much killed what used to be my favorite genre.



Around the Network
pokoko said:
Every system has flaws, which can be mitigated by good design or exaggerated by bad design. There is no perfect method that everyone will enjoy.

Personally, everything being an "action RPG" now has pretty much killed what used to be my favorite genre.

IMO, action elements tend to cheapen the experience. As much as I enjoy the Xenoblade games, I’d prefer them if I didn’t have to constantly worry about positioning in every battle. If I select backstab, I’d prefer my character to auto-move in for a backstab so long as I don’t fall off a cliff =P

But, the action elements always feel like imperfections or pollution in the battle system. And it is not a Japan vs. rest of the world thing. The majority of European and some American games (like Civ) I play also use menu-based commands and/or turn based progression.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

pokoko said:
Every system has flaws, which can be mitigated by good design or exaggerated by bad design. There is no perfect method that everyone will enjoy.

Personally, everything being an "action RPG" now has pretty much killed what used to be my favorite genre.

Nothing wrong with action-RPGs, if done properly, they are as deep as classic RPGs.

Problem is, these days genre is so diluted that action-pseudo-RPGs are predominant AAA mass-market "RPG" offerings.



I have no problems with random encounters, particularly if I can choose whether to fight or not. Maybe well defined areas where powerful enemies respawn are more efficient to grind, though. Fallout 2 and Temple of Elemental Evil use random encounters, Planescape: Torment has dungeons with respawning monters, plus peaceful monsters and thugs that respawn in the streets and that can be taunted. I like them all. Morrowind has enemies respawning indoors and outdoors, and intellingent ones can be calmed too for a while with magic to talk with them. In Morrowind case the only problems are lots of crap in the loot and difficulties in selling the best loot, as most traders have little cash.



Stwike him, Centuwion. Stwike him vewy wuffly! (Pontius Pilate, "Life of Brian")

A fart without stink is like a sky without stars.

TGS, Third Grade Shooter: brand new genre invented by Kevin Butler exclusively for Natal WiiToo Kinect. PEW! PEW-PEW-PEW!

        

FF-7 to 9 remake should only improve graphics. I could accept make random encounters transformed in enemies in the screen you choose to attack. But no action rpg.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Around the Network
Illusion said:

Honestly, I really enjoy classic RPG's with very high random encounter rates as long as level grinding my characters enables them to beat bosses later with relative ease. What I can't stand is spending hours level grinding through a dungeon only to get to a boss where there is some kind of special trick or tactic that needs to be discovered that requires your party to die a few times before you can actually beat the boss regardless of your level. The reward for level grinding should be the ability to easily beat bosses, otherwise there is really no point.

 

I think westerners generally don't enjoy old-school RPG's with high encounter rates because we can't understand the concept of utilizing game time (as opposed to  playing skill) as our resource in games.  There is a lot of reward (and in my experience, a lot less frustration) in investing time (ie. by levelling up) as the means to defeat a game's enemies as opposed to your own skills as a gamer.  There is something very satisfying about watching your over-powered party lay waste to a difficult boss especially when it was your time spent strengthening them.

It trully is delicious to obliterate enemies from time to time, but the investment is to high. I would say the concept of to much random encounters came from the idea of the time to make the person play a lot to see value on the game as much as the difficult in several 8-16 bits games were to hide a 1h game as something very time consuming.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

DonFerrari said:
Illusion said:

Honestly, I really enjoy classic RPG's with very high random encounter rates as long as level grinding my characters enables them to beat bosses later with relative ease. What I can't stand is spending hours level grinding through a dungeon only to get to a boss where there is some kind of special trick or tactic that needs to be discovered that requires your party to die a few times before you can actually beat the boss regardless of your level. The reward for level grinding should be the ability to easily beat bosses, otherwise there is really no point.

 

I think westerners generally don't enjoy old-school RPG's with high encounter rates because we can't understand the concept of utilizing game time (as opposed to  playing skill) as our resource in games.  There is a lot of reward (and in my experience, a lot less frustration) in investing time (ie. by levelling up) as the means to defeat a game's enemies as opposed to your own skills as a gamer.  There is something very satisfying about watching your over-powered party lay waste to a difficult boss especially when it was your time spent strengthening them.

It trully is delicious to obliterate enemies from time to time, but the investment is to high. I would say the concept of to much random encounters came from the idea of the time to make the person play a lot to see value on the game as much as the difficult in several 8-16 bits games were to hide a 1h game as something very time consuming.

Haha, maybe not that extreme in most cases - Dragon Warrior was about a 5-10 hour game but probably had around an hour to two of unique content. But I fully agree with what you’re saying with the grinding in early RPGs, particularly NES/SMS/SMD. In fact, I’d say Dragon Warrior 3 and 4 were the only RPGs of the 8-bit generation that didn’t require grinding MOST of the time (they required a little if playing reasonably, but maybe 10-30% of the game was grinding as opposed to the majority of RPGs at the time which hit the 80%+ mark (Phantasy Star series anyone?!?!). The first RPG I recall that didn’t require grinding was Mystic Quest Legend and the extremely rare Final Fantasy Legend games for Gameboy - but all those games took only a few hours to finish (FF Legend 2 had way more content than any NES RPGs but you could finish it in a sitting). I can point out the exact moment of change: Secret of Mana, that game required a ton of grinding like most RPGs before it, but just about every RPG after it could be done free of the stop-and-grind. But you’ll notice that FF6 has significantly more content and story than any Square RPG before it, and that’s probably the reason for the ease of balance.



I describe myself as a little dose of toxic masculinity.

Jumpin said:
DonFerrari said:

It trully is delicious to obliterate enemies from time to time, but the investment is to high. I would say the concept of to much random encounters came from the idea of the time to make the person play a lot to see value on the game as much as the difficult in several 8-16 bits games were to hide a 1h game as something very time consuming.

Haha, maybe not that extreme in most cases - Dragon Warrior was about a 5-10 hour game but probably had around an hour to two of unique content. But I fully agree with what you’re saying with the grinding in early RPGs, particularly NES/SMS/SMD. In fact, I’d say Dragon Warrior 3 and 4 were the only RPGs of the 8-bit generation that didn’t require grinding MOST of the time (they required a little if playing reasonably, but maybe 10-30% of the game was grinding as opposed to the majority of RPGs at the time which hit the 80%+ mark (Phantasy Star series anyone?!?!). The first RPG I recall that didn’t require grinding was Mystic Quest Legend and the extremely rare Final Fantasy Legend games for Gameboy - but all those games took only a few hours to finish (FF Legend 2 had way more content than any NES RPGs but you could finish it in a sitting). I can point out the exact moment of change: Secret of Mana, that game required a ton of grinding like most RPGs before it, but just about every RPG after it could be done free of the stop-and-grind. But you’ll notice that FF6 has significantly more content and story than any Square RPG before it, and that’s probably the reason for the ease of balance.

I started FF on 9, and ever since I never needed to grind to finish regular content, the pace and quantity of random encounters is enough for you to level (still takes like 50h), and you just need to plan well your game and learn the skills so you can have an end-boss under lvl 50 with success. Of course the hidden content was another matter that is totally necessary to grind so for me that is perfect balance.



duduspace11 "Well, since we are estimating costs, Pokemon Red/Blue did cost Nintendo about $50m to make back in 1996"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=8808363

Mr Puggsly: "Hehe, I said good profit. You said big profit. Frankly, not losing money is what I meant by good. Don't get hung up on semantics"

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9008994

Mar1217 said:
Although, random encounters system has never really threw me off of any games. I do appreciate when you're given the liberty to fight with the enemy of your choosing from the overworld.

So do i. Like in Tales of Symphonia and Shin Megami Tensei 4 you are free to avoid the enemy on the map or attack them first to get the advantage in battle.

Ka-pi96 said:
Random encounters are great!

That said there was one particular map in Lost Odyssey where they were really ridiculous. It felt like you couldn't even take 2 steps without a battle triggering

They can be fun but get incredibly annoying after 50 hours.

LMU Uncle Alfred said:
It wasn't until FF7 that random encounters in the FF series became tolerable. You can run for 30 seconds to a minute straight in many areas of the game before hitting a random encounter. It's much, much less than that in FF1-6. The JP version of FF7 has a higher random encounter rate from what I read, and the changes to a more spaced out random encounter design were made for the western releases. Smartest decision ever.

As for the poll:
FF7 can be both action and turn based, or rather menu selection based with timed inputs you need to keep track of on your party and the enemy. They can implement something akin to FFXV's wait mode. Just polish it up some more, add more control, time constraints determined between actions and bam.

Perhaps, i felt it became worse in FF8 especially since the game doesn't reward lvling up, let alone grinding. The Diablos ability is a game saver though. 

SvennoJ said:
I quit FF10 because of them. I forgot something at some point and had to back track quite a bit which took forever, Every 5 steps another battle, too much. I preferred the way FF12 did it.

Litterally the same thing happened to me with Star Ocean backtracking is part of the story and its really makes you give up on it.

DaAndy said:
turn based fighting --> I prefer that to real time action based combat by far. And I pretty much hate combat system where I e.g. have a party of 4 characters and I only control 1 people and the AI is controlling the others. When its only 1 character real time action based combat is fine though.

linearity --> no problem for me

too much reading --> not cool, but especially if there is no voice acting you can not avoid it

cliche characters and stories --> I dont care at all

too much anime --> there can be too much? ;) Seriously: Fine for me.

bad voice acting --> yeah, pretty disturbing (better NO voice acting at all than bad voice acting) I hate how we in germany often get Eng Dub only or Jap Dub with Eng Sub. Jap Dub with Ger Sub would be so awesome. But I got used to Eng Sub in the meanwhile. But only having Eng Dub is a reason for me to not buy a game at all - sorry, I can not stand it.

random encounters --> no problem with that. Only when its like every 4-5 footsteps then it is pretty annoying.

Actually the complaints for anime are far worse - everthing is too cutesy, too colorful, not dark enough, little girls doing creepy stuff.... Yeah so i decided to group them all together as too much anime.

JWeinCom said:
Skies of Arcadia's random battles were a bit over the top, in the Dreamcast version. Thankfully they toned them down on the Gamecube release. That's the only game I could remember where the amount of random battles really bothered me. Some of the battle network games too maybe.

I've read about that but even so the GC version still has random encounters like every 2 or 3 seconds while sailing the Sky, i can't imagine how much of a nightmare the Dreamcast version must be.

CaptainExplosion said:

Sure, go ahead, ignore my very simple question again and again, leaving us with no clarity as to why this is in Nintendo Discussions.

Let me explain.

- To be fair, most frustrating RPGs known for its insane amount of encounters appeared mostly on Nintendo consoles. Breath of Fire. Lufia. Skies of Arcadia. Tales of Phantasia. Pokemon. Dragon Quest.

- I actually wasn't aware that i had this thread on Nintendo discussion and then forgot to change it to gaming discussion so now it's stuck on Nintendo. If some mod decides it should be moved then it's fine by me.  



Snoorlax said:
Mar1217 said:
Although, random encounters system has never really threw me off of any games. I do appreciate when you're given the liberty to fight with the enemy of your choosing from the overworld.

So do i. Like in Tales of Symphonia and Shin Megami Tensei 4 you are free to avoid the enemy on the map or attack them first to get the advantage in battle.

Ka-pi96 said:
Random encounters are great!
That said there was one particular map in Lost Odyssey where they were really ridiculous. It felt like you couldn't even take 2 steps without a battle triggering

They can be fun but get incredibly annoying after 50 hours.

LMU Uncle Alfred said:
It wasn't until FF7 that random encounters in the FF series became tolerable. You can run for 30 seconds to a minute straight in many areas of the game before hitting a random encounter. It's much, much less than that in FF1-6. The JP version of FF7 has a higher random encounter rate from what I read, and the changes to a more spaced out random encounter design were made for the western releases. Smartest decision ever.

As for the poll:
FF7 can be both action and turn based, or rather menu selection based with timed inputs you need to keep track of on your party and the enemy. They can implement something akin to FFXV's wait mode. Just polish it up some more, add more control, time constraints determined between actions and bam.

Perhaps, i felt it became worse in FF8 especially since the game doesn't reward lvling up, let alone grinding. The Diablos ability is a game saver though. 

SvennoJ said:
I quit FF10 because of them. I forgot something at some point and had to back track quite a bit which took forever, Every 5 steps another battle, too much. I preferred the way FF12 did it.

Litterally the same thing happened to me with Star Ocean backtracking is part of the story and its really makes you give up on it.

DaAndy said:
turn based fighting --> I prefer that to real time action based combat by far. And I pretty much hate combat system where I e.g. have a party of 4 characters and I only control 1 people and the AI is controlling the others. When its only 1 character real time action based combat is fine though.

linearity --> no problem for me

too much reading --> not cool, but especially if there is no voice acting you can not avoid it

cliche characters and stories --> I dont care at all

too much anime --> there can be too much? ;) Seriously: Fine for me.

bad voice acting --> yeah, pretty disturbing (better NO voice acting at all than bad voice acting) I hate how we in germany often get Eng Dub only or Jap Dub with Eng Sub. Jap Dub with Ger Sub would be so awesome. But I got used to Eng Sub in the meanwhile. But only having Eng Dub is a reason for me to not buy a game at all - sorry, I can not stand it.

random encounters --> no problem with that. Only when its like every 4-5 footsteps then it is pretty annoying.

Actually the complaints for anime are far worse - everthing is too cutesy, too colorful, not dark enough, little girls doing creepy stuff.... Yeah so i decided to group them all together as too much anime.

JWeinCom said:
Skies of Arcadia's random battles were a bit over the top, in the Dreamcast version. Thankfully they toned them down on the Gamecube release. That's the only game I could remember where the amount of random battles really bothered me. Some of the battle network games too maybe.

I've read about that but even so the GC version still has random encounters like every 2 or 3 seconds while sailing the Sky, i can't imagine how much of a nightmare the Dreamcast version must be.

CaptainExplosion said:

Sure, go ahead, ignore my very simple question again and again, leaving us with no clarity as to why this is in Nintendo Discussions.

Let me explain.

- To be fair, most frustrating RPGs known for its insane amount of encounters appeared mostly on Nintendo consoles. Breath of Fire. Lufia. Skies of Arcadia. Tales of Phantasia. Pokemon. Dragon Quest.

- I actually wasn't aware that i had this thread on Nintendo discussion and then forgot to change it to gaming discussion so now it's stuck on Nintendo. If some mod decides it should be moved then it's fine by me.  

Ni no Kuni is almost perfect. You not only can avoid enemies (unless when they're standing on a too narrow path) but you don't need to avoid weaker enemies, they just run from you. So when you need to go back to some area you've beaten, you don't need to care about the useless weaklings.



My Total Sales prediction for PS4 by the end of 2021: 110m+

When PS4 will hit 100m consoles sold: Before Christmas 2019

There were three ravens sat on a tree / They were as blacke as they might be / The one of them said to his mate, Where shall we our breakfast take?