/vr/ - Retro Games

[Anonymous No.6229858]

I don't think I'll ever understand why anyone thought random encounters were even a remotely sensible idea.

[Anonymous No.6229896]

>>6229858
Random encounters are fine when the fights are meaningful. Fallout 1/2 get them right.

[Anonymous No.6229913]

there is no alternative, and the real problem is a shitty combat system. Even action games have random encounters.

[Anonymous No.6229948]

>>6229858
Dragon Quest is so soulful

[Anonymous No.6229964]

Random encounters only exist due to hardware limitations, to fill time without bogging down the screen with too many enemies at once.

Once it was possible to have encounters on the screen like in Chrono Trigger and EarthBound, random battles should have been phased out of RPGs forever. If you disagree you are objectively wrong.

[Anonymous No.6230006]

>>6229964
Ultima allowed you to fill the screen with monsters back in 1982.

[Anonymous No.6230020]

Random encounters in vidya RPGs are a direct carryover from random encounters in tabletop RPGs. Just like most mechanics too. All early vidya RPGs basically just tried porting tabletop systems to computers.

[Anonymous No.6230064]

>>6230006
Yeah, and you had sprite flicker out the yin-yang (also, the monsters would start fights on top of treasure chests so you don't get all the money you're entitled to for your efforts)

[Anonymous No.6230069]

>>6230064
What sprites are you even talking about?
They used tile graphics.

[Anonymous No.6230073]

>>6229858

why is this board so autistic about JRPGs?

[Anonymous No.6230330]

>>6229858
Random encounters are fun if they
1. Are behind a decent battle system. Most famous, old-school JRPGs don't hold up in that regard, giving the concept a bad name as a whole. You either need to have action combat or a SRPG grid, as DQ-style combat is downright obsolete in both directions.
2. Go by as fast as your inputs can be. It's waiting for loading, text and animations that is not fun. This got to peak cancer levels during the early disk loading days and unfortunately stuck around because that was the peak popularity of JRPGs and so is held as a standard of quality.
Without these points random encounters are an objectively positive feature.

[Anonymous No.6230338]

>>6229858
I don't see a problem with them insofar as, in JRPG's, the battle screen is separate from the field screen. Even if you had enemies walking around, they'd essentially be icons that you click to take you to the battle screen anyway-- they still wouldn't have visceral reality in the game world.

[Anonymous No.6230385]

>>6230330
>You either need to have action combat or a SRPG grid
No. Both those things still slow you down.
Wizardry did everything right.

[Anonymous No.6230403]

>>6229858
random encounters suck but they exist to fill games with padding without taking time and effort to design individual encounters

[Anonymous No.6230405]

>>6230330
Why would an SRPG grid make it less tedious? If the combat's too easy there's no point. Some Fire Emblem games fall into that trap. Rhapsody also has a SRPG grid and it doesn't really help it I think, the DS version rightly turned it into regular turn-based combat.

[Anonymous No.6230427]

>>6229858
They're the ultimate zoomer/pleb filter, those who don't know what a slow burn or a modicum of patience is.

[Anonymous No.6230435]

>>6230427
High encounter rates were designed to stretch playtime to sell units as a value proposition, to pretend otherwise is dense. Even the developers admit that nowadays. It's not a decision they made for pacing or to serve an artistic purpose, it's literally just filler.

[Anonymous No.6230440]

>>6230435

Almost every design decision made in regards to a video game is ultimately profit-oriented, anon. Unless the creator never intended to sell the game for money, everything about a game is designed to be appealing enough to purchase.

Ultimately the intent of the producers or developers is meaningless. If some people prefer high encounter rates that's a design decision. On the other end of the spectrum you have people who only play zero-challenge movie-games. I guess that makes them smarter according to you.

[Anonymous No.6230454]

>>6230405
Because they increase the complexity of inputs, which, in isolation, is good. All things kept the same, the average scenario is better, and the worst possible scenario still has you worrying about more than mashing a button, or the same combination of buttons if your DQ/FF menus have no memory. It can be a net negative if you need to look at an animation at every step of the way, but I'm looking at the battle system on its own here.
If you want an example of this done right there's Disgaea 5, a SRPG that goes beyond letting you cut animations and gives you a built-in fast-forward button (up to 8x IIRC) outright. No matter how repetitive encounters get, you are still juggling trying to speed up whenever possible while having to think what to do ahead of time and not bungling the constant improvised inputs. Even when the fail-state of being defeated is nigh unreachable you're still playing a game.

[Anonymous No.6230469]

>>6230454
>Because they increase the complexity of inputs, which, in isolation, is good

Why? More complex inputs don't create more engaging gameplay

[Anonymous No.6230509]

>>6230469
More complex inputs don't necessarily create more engaging gameplay. However, when your gameplay is being held back by the amount of inputs to the extent that so-called players are often found barely looking at the screen, mashing buttons while doing something else to avoid being bored, it is a barrier that must be transposed. Turn-based RPGs need to have at least some input complexity to play around in speed and create a low-punishment sub-game in low-profile battles so as to avoid making them mind-numbingly dull. And low-profile randomized battles are inevitably required to build up tension in RPGs, otherwise what you have is just a strategy or action game.

[Anonymous No.6230569]

>>6230509

That can easily go the other way. If you're over-leveled anyway, a regular encounter is going to become more tedious if it requires more inputs to be done with. Seems like your problem is more with balance and options than inputs.

[Anonymous No.6230584]

>>6230440
>almost every design decision made in regards to a video game is ultimately profit oriented
Yeah, maybe in 1986, but we've had three decades of artistically driven video games. I'm not talking about fucking arcades here. Claiming video games are purely designed for sales is asinine. The majority of games involve a great deal of artistic expression unrelated to profits.
>ultimately the intent of the producers or developers is meaningless
Death of the author is retarded postmodern tripe. It's a way for people to defend their opinions by saying "isn't it all, like, relative, man?". It's a cowardly evasion. Your snide little remark at the end proves you're more interested in hiding from a real discussion than anything else.

[Anonymous No.6230649]

>>6230584
>The majority of games involve a great deal of artistic expression unrelated to profits
Citation required.
>Death of the author is retarded postmodern tripe
Anon intends to shit post but fosters a creative discussion. The discussion is meaningless because he actually meant to shit post.

[Anonymous No.6230653]

>>6230584

Yeah right, you're an idiot. You can criticize random encounters on their own merits, but dismissing them simply because they were "made with profit in mind" is a slippery slope. Every commercial product is made with profit in mind to some degree or another.

"Word of the author" is the retarded postmodern tripe you're looking for. Imagine changing your mind about a work of art because the artist came out and said something you don't like. Learn to appreciate things on their own merits like an adult instead of repeating talking points from 90s gaming mags.

[Anonymous No.6230690]

>>6230440
>challenge
>jrpg
Are you fucking serious?

[Anonymous No.6230717]

>>6230690

>can't come up with a response
>go back to an earlier post and try to derail the thread

ok

[Anonymous No.6230750]

>>6230717
>everyone who disagrees with me is a same person
Sucks to be you.

[Anonymous No.6230820]

>challenge
>jarpig oink oink
Oh I am laffin. Play Rayforce

[Anonymous No.6230824]

>>6230073
>why is this board so autistic
FTFY

[Anonymous No.6230910]

>>6230820
more like GAYforce lmao, kys shmuckfag

[Anonymous No.6230970]

>>6230020
this. classic D&D style campaigns always had random encounter tables when traveling overland. modern OSR / hexcrawlers still do.

the randomness makes it less of a fixed narrative. not even the person writing the game knows for sure what kind of drama might or might not emerge organically.

most of the complaints in thread seem less about random encounters and more about balance. obviously grinding for xp/loot is boring and random encounters suck when your party is too powerful for them, but that's not a complaint about the randomness.

they provide an alternate strategy for players. you can try to figure out some ideal configuration to beat a boss, or you can use patience instead of intelligence by overleveling in the random encounters until the boss is easier. games without random encounters require a lot more thoughtfulness, which is fine, but that doesn't prove that grinding is a bad option to have.

do you little bitches also whine that enemies randomly choose their next attack in a battle instead of following a script of actions you can memorize?

[Anonymous No.6231081]

>>6229964
Chrono Trigger is worse because all the encounters are either scripted, or like semi-optional where if you spend a bit of time futzing around the sides of the walkway, you can bypass them—or sometimes it just gives you the illusion of being able to do so easily, but the enemy will just turn around and engage you if you move along the wrong vector.

I don't necessarily have to see the enemies on the field to understand what's going on with these games. The implication is that the monsters are lurking around every corner or in nooks and crannies, and they occasionally ambush you. It's not a concept that's unique to JRPGs; fucking D&D has its own ways of demonstrating that your character isn't an omnipotent being with 20/10 vision and superhuman hearing. I don't understand why this triggers some people so hard. It is a little dumb if you're like, moving through an enemy installation and random encounters with guards are seemingly endless — like, how many can there be? — but still, it's abstract, just use your head a little bit.

With that said, there are games that do enemies-on-the-screen well and still have elements of surprise or other dynamic features. Super Mario RPG is one of them. I still know where all these enemies are, but it's a faster pace and the platforming keeps it engaging. Like if you want to avoid enemies, you still have to pay attention even with prior knowledge.

[Anonymous No.6232039]

>>6229858
There's a lot of thing you'll never understand sport

[Anonymous No.6232753]

>>6230020
I thought they exist because the developers didn't know how to make sure that players are high level enough for the next mini boss.

[Anonymous No.6232796]

>>6229896
>Fallout 1/2 get them right.

[Anonymous No.6232821]

>>6229858
>I don't think I'll ever understand why anyone thought random encounters were even a remotely sensible idea.
Yet you come to 4chan.

[Anonymous No.6232851]

>>6229964
EarthBound truly got it right, and considering how enormously popular its gotten in recent years with all the homages, no one has thought to emulate it. Ironically, CT *doesn't* do it well, because most of the triggers for enemy encounters are invisible ranges that first time players will never avoid.

[Anonymous No.6233105]

>>6232851
>EarthBound truly got it right
no it didn't, what's the point of seeing enemies if you can outrun none of them since you move so slow
SMRPG did it right

[Anonymous No.6233116]

They're fine, JRPGs just aren't for you,

[Anonymous No.6233167]

>>6233105
They often aren't faster than you, you're making shit up. Also, it's perfectly possible to maneuver them into catching themselves onto the geography.

[Anonymous No.6233210]

Zelda II's encounter system is underrated. they spawn and move around you at regular intervals whenever you step off the path. you can see what they are from the icon, and you get a chance to avoid them or fight them on a certain terrain (which changes the encounter). not only that, but the interval and spawn range can be adjusted to make areas easier or harder. it captures the feel of random monsters in the overworld while still providing some agency to the player.

[Anonymous No.6233212]

Zelda II's encounter system is underrated. they spawn and move around you at regular intervals whenever you step off the path. you can see what they are from the icon, and you get a chance to avoid them or fight them on a certain terrain (which changes the encounter). not only that, but the interval and spawn range can be adjusted to make areas easier or harder. it captures the feel of random monsters in the overworld while still providing some agency to the player.

[Anonymous No.6234818]

>>6229858
Random encounters are legitimately my preferred method of encounter delivery. If I can manipulate my combat rate in any reliable way, I'm going to do it. Random encounters turn movement into a game of resource and risk management when the other systems play well enough together. Etrian Odyssey had the best take on them but I really enjoy them in Dragon Quest as well. It's games like Final Fantasy that really give them a bad rap.

[Anonymous No.6234878]

>>6234818
It's not really the random encounters people hate, it's the absurd encounter rate, long fights, and no decent options to get out of them

[Anonymous No.6234895]

If you are going to have random encounters there should be an item like repel from Pokemon.

[Anonymous No.6234927]

>random encounters are genuinely turning into pleb filter
Really makes you think

[Anonymous No.6235707]

>>6233212
This. I wish more games at the time went this route.

[Anonymous No.6235718]

Like with many things Dragon Quest it's basically gambling. "Do I have the resource to get through his dungeon?" Where you don't have much control over the encounter and just hope you can make it without dying. I do say Dragon Quest is the best in that regard since even since the first game they gave you holy water or spell to stop encounter from enemies that where too low to really be a threat anymore.

Feel once SNES came around that feeling kind of slowed since they did much more rebalancing and RPG became much easier and encounter rate much lower (at least how I see it). Especially since by that point dungeons went from being almost a labyrinth of sorts to just a linear dungeon with slight branches/hidden path for gear. And PSX JRPG became more puzzle dungeons almost Zelda like. Which made random encounter more of a pain trying to solve a puzzle with a battle every 5 seconds.

[Anonymous No.6235721]

You'd have the ask the people behind the original tabletop RPGs that, because that's where the mechanic originates from.

[Anonymous No.6235874]

>>6229964
If I disagree, I am objectively right

[Anonymous No.6235957]

>>6233212
That's what Ultima used to do.

[Anonymous No.6238410]

>>6229858
Most JRPGs have spells/items which can turn random encounters off retard and even if not, the escape function exists for a reason.

Even fucking Breath of fire people like to bitch so much about had no-encounter items available right from the very beginning of the game.

Your own damn fault if you don't know how to play the game. Random encounters exist so retard who are too dumb for the bosses can STILL win just by grinding for 2 hours straight or longer.

[Anonymous No.6238413]

>>6235957
For some reason that comic is depressing as fuck. Jesus Christ. We only have this 1 life and we let our inactivity literally turn us into passive, inactive zombies.

[Anonymous No.6238498]

>>6235718
The dungeons in Dragon Quest are trash though. I enjoy Dragon Quest 1 way more than Final Fantasy 1, except for the dungeons, which Final Fantasy did better.

[Anonymous No.6238506]

>>6232796
kek

[Anonymous No.6238514]

>>6230064
>>6230069
He's a retard talking out of his fucking ass

[Anonymous No.6238559]

>>6238498
To be fair that's about a 2 year difference. If you are going to compare it's better to compare FF1 to DQ3 since they are about 2 months apart. But I was just trying to point out that random encounters at least back than ran on the idea that dungeons where meant to be a resource drain. Like in Wizardry where you are just meant to try going as far as you can until you need to jump out to rest and buy more potions. DQ is just kind in that it gives you exit spell and easy warping. Final Fantasy honestly felt like it was meant to be the harder game series. At least looking at the NES games.

[Anonymous No.6238578]

>>6238559
>Wizardry
>buy more potions
How can I tell you never actually played Wizardry?

[Anonymous No.6238582]

>>6238578
Was just saying that dungeons were more about using up resource than anything else. I said potions because that's what you did in Dragon Quest.

[Anonymous No.6238584]

>>6238582
It's called medicinal herb (やくそう) in DQ.

[Anonymous No.6238618]

>Crying because of a classic jrpg "feature"

zoom your way over to fartnite then, faggot

[Anonymous No.6238638]

Reading nu-/vr/ try and talk about RPGs is just as painful as reading neo-nu-/v/ talk about fighting games

Your "opinions" are bad and you should be embarrassed.

[Anonymous No.6239681]

>>6238413
>We only have this 1 life and we let our inactivity literally turn us into passive, inactive zombies.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IKdkHcR50E

[Anonymous No.6240798]

>>6238618
>Atelier doesn't do it
>SaGa doesn't do it
>Neptunia doesn't do it
>Lunar on the PSX doesn't do it
>Chrono Trigger doesn't do it
>Paper Mario, Mario RPG, and Mario & Luigi don't do it
>3DS remakes of DQ doesn't do it
>Grandia doesn't do it
>Valkyrie Profile doesn't do it
>SMT4, Apocalypse, and P3/4/5 don't do it
>Child of Light doesn't do it
>7th Saga doesn't do it
>Xenosaga doesn't do it
I just named a slew of RPGs, some of which are god-tier, which "don't do it". Random encounters are a crutch for bad designers.

[Anonymous No.6240834]

>>6232796
>for some reason, I think I should save my game in a brand new slot
Was there ever a more based random encounter?

[Anonymous No.6240847]

>>6232821
Underrated

[Anonymous No.6240887]

>>6240798
Wouldn't call it a bad game design just it was just Japanese love of Wizardry. The random chance of an enemy appear was shocking and made for a good juxtaposition for many. But by the time PSX era came about I agree it started to become less enjoyable. Mostly because dungeons started to become more puzzle like so having to deal with solving the dungeon while enemies appear started to become just tedious.

That being said Dragon Quest 7 dungeons were never really made for enemies to appear so like with Chrono Trigger there's enemies on the map but no good way to go around them so they might as well just be fix battles.

[Anonymous No.6240898]

>>6240887
They didn't get Wizardry.
Walking encounters are relatively rare in Wizardry. Most encounters happen after going through a door.

[Anonymous No.6240970]

>>6232851
One of the best things EB did with fights, IMO, was that random encounters that would just bore you in other games (because you were way over-leveled) became instant wins in EB. As long as you didn't get caught flat footed somehow. And even there, underwhelming enemies frequently try to run away from you.

[Anonymous No.6241067]

Lufia II is the only RPG that did visible encounters right with the enemies only moving when you do like a rogue game
Everything else added a half-assed action mini game of "run around and avoid the monsters" to otherwise turn-based games and it sucks

[Anonymous No.6241812]

>>6229858
>It's another "I hate playing games" thread

[Anonymous No.6241815]

>>6229858
If you see the enemies you're more likely to try and avoid them, thus screwing yourself in the longterm. Random battles you can run away from, but once you've transitioned to the battle screen, you're more likely to just stay and fight than run.

[Anonymous No.6241839]

>>6229948
Agreed, but I got lost partway through. I had just found a town of elves or something. The story is all over the place but really felt like an adventure.

[Anonymous No.6244725]

>>6235957
why did you gave me those feelings?

[Anonymous No.6245883]

>>6233105
You're a fucking brainlet for not being able to out maneuver them with Earthbound's jagged scenery, especially when some enemies maneuver in erratic patterns, like UFOs or Octobots. Oh wait, you never really played the game. Nevermind nigger.

[Anonymous No.6246023]

Let me ask you something, OP, you dumb, fucking retard. Do you think the sad faggot that got his sorry ass handed to him when a fucking Bengal tiger decided to turn his skull into his personal chew toy wanted that shit to happen to him? What about when a little chink kid at the zoo got his dick ripped off by an escaped, mildly bothered gorilla and he ate it like it was a fucking banana right in front of the kids mother? Yea, that was anything but a random attack, right OP? Because random attacks NEVER happen in real life! Get real, OP and leave your basement sometimes. You may just get hit on the back of your head by a nigger for your wallet, or something minuscule like that.

You see, that's why Mother is LITERALLY the best RPG, having the best combat system, beating Earthbound by a hair. Why? Do you really think if a gorilla, a truck, an alien, or some other type of creature finds you, that they're just going to let you run away without at least getting in your face first? Especially when they're under demonic alien influence. That shit would never fly IRL. The game has an element of realism that really immerses you. I could go on but... Oh well, time to shit in the other thread.

[Anonymous No.6246031]

>>6229858
There is nothing inherently wrong with random encounters. If you don't like fighting enemies, you shouldn't be playing JRPGs.

>>6229964
>Once it was possible to have encounters on the screen like in Chrono Trigger and EarthBound, random battles should have been phased out of RPGs forever.
I found it significantly more annoying that they put enemies as icons on the map and then made them completely unavoidable. With random encounters, you don't know when you're going to fight and you can't avoid it: with these games, you're made to think you can get by, but you can't, which is much worse.

[Anonymous No.6246037]

>>6233167
>>6245883
Trapping enemies onto terrain isn't always a viable option, and it's made more difficult by the enemies being faster than you. You're frequently going to be walking through a tight corridor with nowhere to run or hide. Yes, it's very easy to avoid random enemies in big wide open spaces, or in towns, but in actual dungeons, you don't have much of a choice. It's been a bit since you've played the game, clearly, so go play it again before you make such impassioned posts.

[Anonymous No.6246045]

>>6246037
No, I played Earthbound a year ago and Earthbound Zero two months ago at the most. You just fucking SUCK at video games. You should quit them and you should quit life, too.

[Anonymous No.6246047]

>>6238638
/v/ has been shit at fighting games since day 1 my friend

[Anonymous No.6246049]

>>6246045
You're remembering things wrong, which is okay. I'm a big fan of the game, and one of the main complaints I always see people who dislike it have with it is that the enemies are only technically avoidable in 90% of cases. They even knew that when they were making it, which is why they made the skip sandwich and skip sandwich dx.

[Anonymous No.6246051]

>>6246049
What? If the enemies are technically avoidable in 90% of cases then why would you ever need the skip sandwich?

[Anonymous No.6246154]

>>6246049
Why aren't you replying to me, nigger? I hope you took my advise and killed yourself.

>Trapping enemies onto terrain isn't always a viable option

No shit, you faggot, and if you were faster then the enemies then it wouldn't be too fun of a game, now would it? Well, maybe for you, since you want to play shit on easy mode. Look, if you want to avoid 90% of the enemies on screen, you may as well take the game out and throw it in the garbage, especially with a game as easy as Earthbound. I mean, I could understand EB0, but Earthbound? Literally in my last play-through, I got my entire party to level 100. I can even take a picture on my CRT as proof if you want.

[Anonymous No.6247275]

>>6246031
>you're made to think you can get by, but you can't
It feels like the game is mocking me

[Anonymous No.6247284]

>>6229858
I prefer the way Paper Mario handles it. You have enemies on the overworld you can encounter, and even get a first attack on. And then the turn based combat actually has real time minigames.
That way you can go at a pretty leisurely pace and not feel like you're constantly under pressure, while still feeling engaged and not bored.

[Anonymous No.6247287]

>>6246051
Hmmm, I wrote that poorly. What I meant was that "in like 90% of cases where I've seen people complain about the game, they tended to bring up that it's almost impossible to avoid enemies." Sorry, it was late at night.

>>6246154
I'm not responding much to you because you've made it clear that you don't want to discuss anything, you just want to sling insults and call people dumb. The game is good, but it isn't perfect, and while I think that the format for encountering enemies was a step in the right direction, my point is that often it's so difficult to avoid encounters that they might as well be random. I also said in my very first post that people who don't want to fight enemies shouldn't be playing JRPGs in the first place.

[Anonymous No.6247321]

>>6247287
>it's almost impossible to avoid enemies
That's a good thing. It's one of the reasons EB0 was so enjoyable for me.

>you don't want to discuss anything, you just want to sling insults and call people dumb
Correct

>The game is good, but it isn't perfect
Completely false statement.

>often it's so difficult to avoid encounters that they might as well be random
You can't avoid enemies in life, so why should you avoid them in-game. Encounter them, get stronger, and wipe them out no problem next time.

You go on in your very next sentence saying, "I also said in my very first post that people who don't want to fight enemies shouldn't be playing JRPGs in the first place." which is a complete contradiction of what you JUST said. Now, if you want my honest opinion of what I think of this conversation, I really don't know what else to say except the N-word. So, here it goes.

Nigger.

[Anonymous No.6247361]

>>6247321
So you got upset at me for not responding to you, then proceed to say that you don't want to discuss things?
All I did was point out that in most cases, enemies aren't avoidable. I didn't say this was good or bad, just that it's the reality of this game. Take your meds.

[Anonymous No.6247370]

>>6247361
>Take your meds
Trust me, I'm off 'em.

[Anonymous No.6247527]

>>6247361
>Take your meds.
You're a communist.

[Anonymous No.6247586]

>>6247527
I think from here on, instead of genuinely trying to talk to you people, I'm just going to start telling you to kill yourselves, starting with you. Kill yourself, anon.

[Anonymous No.6247623]

>>6247527
Looks like /pol/ is leaking their mentally ill shitposters, again.

[Anonymous No.6247708]

>>6247586
Dumb commie.

[Anonymous No.6247721]

>>6233212
This. Zelda 2 gets way too much unwarranted hate for not being a "real Zelda game" when it's a great fucking game that got a lot of things right.

[Anonymous No.6247950]

>>6247284
Yeah, there are definitely exceptions.

It's the random encounters that are stock, invisible and constant that are the problem.