It's time for another open discussion of upcoming games. The list doesn't really include any blockbusters, but maybe that means it will go quickly.
As usual, please do not post spoilers. This discussion is to offer:
- Opinions about the game's RPG status
- Tips for emulating the game
- Known bugs and pitfalls
- Tips for character creation
- Trivia
- Sources of information about the game from around the web, particularly obscure ones that I might otherwise miss during my pre-game research.
Here are the next six games:
- BOSS: Beyond Moria (Unknown, 1993, Independent): A rare roguelike exclusively for the Macintosh, this is reportedly a shorter Moria with a science fiction skin.
- Tower of Druaga (Japan, 1984, Namco): I'm aware that this one probably isn't an RPG, but so many other games seem to be based on it, that I thought I should have the experience.
- Magus (Unknown, 1993, Independent): MobyGames has this as Magus: 2nd edition, but I don't regard edition numbers as part of the title. It appears to be an independent, open-world, iconographic RPG with some roguelike DNA.
- Ring of Elanor (USA, 1987, Softdisk). I don't have a lot of high hopes for this diskmag game, but when I did a cursory review, it did seem to meet my RPG criteria.
- The Ormus Saga II: Guild of Death (Germany, 1993, CP Verlag): A sequel to a 1991 game that I played 10 years ago and couldn't figure out how to win.
- Breach (USA, 1987, Omnitrend): This is a squad-based tactical game, but it supposedly allows for experience and leveling of the squad leader.
We'll have another one of these entries when Breach makes it to the "current" list.
I recommend you to use shaderglass in your Windows to add a shader crt to a emulator avoiding the config of each emulator shaders, the screens will look better, emulating the true feeling of old screens
ReplyDeleteThat did not look so good.... why not just get an old monitor or TV and hook that up it will always look better.
DeleteTower of Druaga may be historically interesting, but it's an exercise in frustration. If you can bear obtuse solutions to puzzles and unfairness, it might be an interesting choice (think Nihom Falcom's "Xanadu" level of obtuseness).
ReplyDeleteOtherwise I would choose to treat myself better and look for a different game :)
On the Tower of Druaga:
ReplyDeleteIt's really, really hard. Also, each level has a secret item, and no clue is given as to what you have to do to get it. Some of the items are necessary (or almost necessary) to defeat the game. Some of items are bad, and you don't want them. Some of the items are needed on some much later floor in order to get a different item.
This was originally an arcade game in Japan. Beating it was essentially a communal effort: when someone figured out the secret for one of the floors, it basically spread by word of mouth.
I suggest that you go in not really expecting to finish the game, and really, don't be averse to using a walkthrough.
Examples of the sorts of things that have to be done to get a secret item:
1. Xvyy n pregnva ahzore bs rarzvrf.
2. Xvyy nyy bs bar glcr bs rarzl, jvgubhg xvyyvat nal bgure glcr.
3. Nibvq fgnaqvat ol bar bs gur bhgrezbfg jnyyf sbe n pregnva yratgu bs gvzr.
4. Jnyx va n cnegvphyne qverpgvba sebz n cnegvphyne cbvag.
5. Oybpx n pregnva ahzore bs nggnpxf.
6. Jnyx bire gur rkvg qbbe jvgubhg univat gur xrl.
7. Whfg jnvg n juvyr.
8. Qba'g xvyy nalguvat.
9. Fgnaq va n cnegvphyne fcbg naq fjvat lbhe fjbeq.
Naq fb ba. Erzrzore gung gurer ner nofbyhgryl ab pyhrf nf gb jung gb qb ba nal cnegvphyne yriry gb trg gur frperg vgrz, be jurgure lbh jnag gb trg gur frperg vgrz (lbh hfhnyyl qb).
That sounds extraordinarily frustrating, especially as some of them are required later on.
DeleteI love it. I have zero interest in ever playing it myself but would love to read about it or watch a YouTube video about it.
DeleteSome one made a lets play of the Japanese game book with levels from dragon quest builder, so I guess it was an influential title that just stayed in Japan. I would have loved to play this.
Deletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AQWFJLlwLA&list=PLG_I0nofG-iRg3x4OmitGYf2b5jn6X24u
and they made a roller coaster.
Deletehttps://towerofdruaga.fandom.com/wiki/The_Tower_of_Druaga_(attraction)
Sadly, these style of Falcom games didn't become 'Fair' (as in you didn't need to figure out obscure stuff by trying random things in in a large group of players) until Dragon Slayer 4 - Drasle Family. Or Legacy of the Wizard on Nes. It's an excellent game, but sadly doesn't meet with the CRPG definition here - more of an early Metroidvania.
DeleteI live in Japan and while not fluent, and decent Japanese. I delved through some Japanese language sources for Druaga. (I thought I recognised it. I do not. But I'll share some findings).
DeleteI second the difficulty. There are some final-hour resets to walking dead scenarios. Info from interviews with the author imply it was a reaction to "score attack" games at the time. I also question it's RPG status. It sounds akin to Wizard's Tower et al.
It appears also, in 1995 Druaga was promoted to board game status and in 2008 an anime series.
DeleteThe game expanded to a series of four, collectively with names from the Babylonian myth that forms it's framing story.
Tower of Druaga was directly influenced by DnD and was a major inspiration for several early Japanese games Chet has already played, like Dragon Slayer and Hydlide, but yeah, it's important to realize that its (MASSIVE) popularity at the time was heavily tied to the entire concept of being a social game where tons of players from all over the country would be working together to solve its mysteries and provide each other with notes on their findings - the game was never meant to be played by one person alone, so it never attempts to provide a fair challenge for such a person either. Endless trial and error was the name of the game here, otherwise the game would've been beaten in a couple days and never become anywhere near as popular as it did.
DeleteThe difficulty is a feature, not a bug, but it's a feature meant for a different approach that can't really be replicated anymore. Definitely a game that's better off getting a BRIEF.
Seems like there was a Windows version of Tower of Duraga's Arcade Version that actually displayed hints. I think that this one of those games that had a specific place in time/history to inspire some future ideas (especially the secrets and the whole idea of climbing a tower), but doesn't really work out of its original context (players trying to figure stuff out together over many months).
ReplyDeleteIt deserves at least a BRIEF, even though I'm not sure it inspired any RPGs outside of Japan, and as others already said, it's utterly obtuse.
There's a full walkthrough of the Windows version on YouTube, which has all the hints (in English) so SPOILER WARNING: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5GrG9DUfl5Y
Ha, I was just about to link to this same video. I always found the requirement for Floor 31 to be especially mean...
DeleteThe game's not exactly easy, even with hints, and given that Zelda wasn't really your thing, I imagine that Druaga *really* won't be up your alley. For what it's worth, I'm a big fan of the original Legend of Zelda, and I found Druaga to be pretty rough.
Somewhat looking forward to Ormus Saga 2.
ReplyDeleteCommodore 64 disk magazine games are really their own special breed, kinda like DOS Shareware games. I don't think many of them are all that great, and most of them are utterly derivative, but there's just something cozy about them because they were meant for a few hours of entertainment. And Ormus truly looks like "We have Ultima at home".
Ring of Elanor looks like the polar opposite for a shareware, simple and infantile typical schlock.... or maybe I am just angry I couldn't play it online to try it out. at least the screenshots online show two different players.
DeleteNever heard of them.
ReplyDeleteThe arcade version of Tower of Druaga is absolutely not an RPG. That being said, the PC Engine version could be argued to be one, it adds adjustable stats that you can put more points into as you go up the tower. It's also got hints and an English translation available
ReplyDeleteBreach is an “RPG” as much as UFO Enemy Unknown is an RPG. I really liked it though I think it’s probably more up Warscribe‘s alley
ReplyDeleteAgreed. I don't consider either RPGs, but it's still worth at least booting up.
DeleteHa! You beat me to it.
DeleteI know nothing about the other games, but Breach is the spiritual father of the tactical squad based games that would lead to UFO: Enemy Unknown.
If the latter is on your list (and I see it is), then Breach is an 'RPG'. It isn't really however.
I wonder if a requirement to make it an RPG is that you have to finish with the same characters as you started with?
Of course, then all the Gold Box Games would then be disallowed as you can complete those games with totally different characters from what you started with via the Training menu and 'Add/Remove characters' options.
Materials for Breach say that it has a persistent squad leader who gains experience during the missions, which can be spent on upgrades. Is this true, and if so, is it also true of UFO?
DeleteTo be fair while I also wouldn't consider X-Com remotely an rpg I do have to concede it seems to meet the blog's requirements on paper. If Breach is as much an rpg as X-Com I guess it sounds like it technically qualifies.
DeleteI have to try X-COM at some point just so I can understand what people are talking about when they reference it. I've seen it used as a source for other video games, films, book . . . I swear a sommelier once told me that a particular Cabernet had hints of it.
DeleteBut I've explained why Breach is on the list. Does X-Com have a persistent hero who gains experience and levels?
Each member of xcom gains combat experience, slightly better stats each time they use them through actions in combat. One of those things where it technically fits your criteria while not fitting them in spirit.
DeleteAll the members of your team in X-COM are persistant and gain experience, level and stats (depending on what you use, eg if they carry a lot they'll gain strength, if they shoot a lot they'll gain accuracy; if they do both they'll gain both - there are something like 8-10 stats).
DeleteOn the other hand, members of your teams in X-Com are going to die a lot. The aliens are (very) smart, accurate and have the same "toys" as you do (rifles, grenades, ...), which they all use. For the first half of the game, one or two hits on your soldiers and it's good night forever. Later, you'll get equipment (armour, etc) that will change things a lot. Worry not, you can recruit as many soldiers as you need, provided you pay the cost.
The key difference, in addition to how replaceable your guys are in a tactical game, is equipment management. I don't think you keep equipment from one mission to another in Breach (I may remember wrong), and while you totally do in X-Com, every thing you'll have will have been either bought/built on your side or grabbed from the dead, fishy hands of an alien, and none of it is "unique" (eg you won't find a +4 Sonic Gun of Tank Destruction in a chest).
Have any of Omnitrend's games been covered here before? The one interesting thing about their games is that they put a lot of effort into allowing you to take saves/characters from one game to another. If you do play it, it might be a wise idea to make a quick once-over the rest of their titles to see if there's anything it slots in.
Delete> But I've explained why Breach is on the list. Does X-Com have a persistent hero who gains experience and levels?
DeleteIt doesn't.
Honestly even in late game X-Com any soldier can just drop dead at a moment's notice. IIRC the best armour is 100 and heavy plasma is rolling something like 0-220 for damage, with people typically having around 40 health. It's not really a game for getting too attached to any specific units (I played it while at university and despite knowing lots of people at the time I still ran out of friends, then friends of friends to name my soldiers after in the course of my sole playthrough of that game.)
DeleteI'll also say that while stats do go up with use and you can focus some soldier's actions in missions to try and level specific things up, the difference between an experienced veteran and a fresh recruit feels marginal-to-none (though this may have been exacerbated by rapid fire heavy plasma being my go-to for everything, so firing accuracy gains didn't do much).
"Does X-Com have a persistent hero who gains experience and levels?"
DeleteAll of your squad members are persistent as long as they stay alive, but there is no resurrection. It's possible to go through the entire game with the same group, but it's probably not going to happen unless you reload whenever someone gets killed.
I'm sure lots of people play it that way. But it can also be played in a sort of "hard-core" mode where you take the character death and just replace with a new soldier.
So from the RPG = character development game perspective of this blog it is an RPG. The reason most people don't think about it that way is because it's really just a tactical combat game with character development (with some research menus and base building in between).
It doesn't have any of the narrative/exploration/puzzle solving mechanics from the adventuring half of what makes an RPG.
@MorpheusKitami: Chet has covered Paladin, which he did two quests on and then GIMLETed as "not really an RPG," and BRIEFed Paladin II for the same reasons. In the comments to Paladin II there was some discussion of how it could import characters from Paladin or Breach II, which seemed weird, though at the time you pointed out that Centauri Alliance let you import characters from Bard's Tale 3.
DeleteThe other thing I apparently looked up at the time was their Interlocking Game System where they had a space combat game (Rules of Engagement) that would sometimes shift to Breach 2 for tactical combat, if you had Breach 2.
I love X-COM, and it probably does fit the current definition Chet uses, but yeah, it’s not an RPG. No big deal if he plays it nonetheless, but it probably will be necessary to update the definition at some point to weed out strategy games with RPG elements or he’s going to have to wade through a *lot* of Panzer General sequels and spin-offs.
DeletePlease don't waste your time on Breach. I played the game a lot back in the day, but it is in no fashion an RPG. Your squad leader can get sent off to school eventually and gain extra abilities, but this is a one-off event, not a gradual improvement. You covered Paladin and its sequel already and it's just a re-skin of Breach. The level builder is the most enjoyable part of the game. Narwhal is correct about equipment not being carried over.
DeleteBy the way Chet, your personal sommelier was probably talking about XCOM rather than X-COM. XCOM (aka nuXCOM) is the influential 2012, which while still tactical is much more within RPG territory (skill tree & relatively low lethality). nuXCOM influenced a lot of other games that walked straight back into RPG territory (eg Mutant Year Zero).
Delete> I know nothing about the other games, but
Delete> Breach is the spiritual father of the tactical
> squad based games that would lead to UFO:
> Enemy Unknown.
That is very interesting: I always thought that X-COM was directly inspired by Laser Squad (1988), but Breach (1987) is earlier. Was Laser Squad inspired by Breach? Wikipedia says that the authors of Laser Squad expanded their earlier ideas from Rebelstar Raiders (1984) and Rebelstar (1986), perhaps making these games even earlier "spiritual fathers".
Breach is very closely inspired by Rebelstar, yes.
DeleteThere is a line of progression for Julian Gollop's game which follows Rebelstar Raiders - Rebelstar - Laser Squad - XCOM line; I see it as an attempt to progressively implement the complexity of the board wargame Sniper! (with some elements of Snapshot). I have an article on that:
https://zeitgame.net/archives/12818
Interesting you call it XCOM or X-COM?
DeleteI always thought 1994's 'XCOM?' was UFO: Enemy Unknown and 2012s update was XCOM: Enemy Unknown.
Anyway. Breach isn't really an RPG, neither is UFO: Enemy Unknown.
As noted, as we move into the later 1990s you're going to have to strengthen your definition of RPG, or else, as well as Panzer General, you're going to need to add every football management sim onto your list.
The game had a variety of names
Deletehttps://www.mobygames.com/game/521/x-com-ufo-defense/
I suspect as we move forward in time, it's going to become difficult - maybe impossible - to have a firm set of technical rules that differentiate RPGs from other formats. It seems very intuitive to me that "tactics" games aren't RPGs, but I would be hard pressed to codify that into a set of technical constraints, especially if the constraints were focused on gameplay. And that's before you even consider games which deliberately cross genre lines. When you get into the modern era, you start seeing postmodernist indie games based around ideas like "What if I gave a dating sim RPG mechanics" or "What if I did a traditional RPG except the combat mechanics are a typing tutor" and that's STILL not addressing the fairly sizeable inventory of "Not really an RPG at all but RPGmaker is the most mature development platform the author could get the hang of". I think we'll increasingly see surprising games making or failing to make the cut.
DeleteA year or so ago, I started to develop a notion of likening the genre of a game to geography. Ultima and Wizardry are clearly right smack in the middle of the Kingdom of RPG, but X-COM is off in the hinterlands, and which side of the border between the Kingdom of RPG and The Strategy Republic it's on depends on interpretations of various treaties and who''s doing the surveying. Meanwhile, you eventually run into something like Disco Elysium, which metaphorically (and almost literally) over in Crimea, where Adventureland is desperately trying to make itself relevant again.
This metaphor is getting away from me.
Weren't the roots of CRPGs partly in tactical combat games? The earliest classic ones seem to encourage players to roll another character when a party member dies - which isn't that far from the X-COM model.
DeleteOf course they aren't classic CRPGs, which has come to mean the line from Wizardry, Might and Magic etc. up through Baldur's Gate and its sequels. Every genre has the same debate, in this world of mixed genre games.
I really don't think Chet needs to change his definitions for games that might be considered RPGs if a database actually considered them a RPG at some point. Checking 1994 on the master list, I really don't see any strategy games besides X-COM (the subject of this debate which we've had #485019 times before) and Jagged Alliance. (which I don't see any justifiable reason to exclude) The farther future has little more issues, because there's not even the X-COM sequels on there and most of the strategy games on have enough RPG in them that Chet should play them. A few questionable games, but that's getting less into "unseen epidemic that some commentors are lying awake in night in terror over" and more "poorly tagged in some database and now Chet has to be the asshole to point it out." (such is life trying to cover an entire genre)
DeleteAlso, wasn't Master of Magic on there at some point? I don't see it anymore and I could have sworn we had this debate about that.
Character development is a mechanic that can be used in any genre. It just happened to be invented by RPGs. But as time went by it was adopted by all genres. At some point you have to ask yourself: what is the core activity this game is asking me to do?
DeleteI think the key thing that distinguishes most people's sense of strategy/tactics games from RPGs, is that RPGs alternate tactical combat with an adventuring half of narrative/exploration/problem-solving. Strategy/tactics games are mostly only about combat and combat preparation.
The other huge division is between RPGs and Action RPGs. The former are about deciding what you want your character to do, and the latter are more about actually trying to perform as that character. Both are legitimate genres, but I do think there's a profound enough difference there that they really should be thought of as two separate things.
It's certainly not the biggest deal in the world, but it is an issue that will get more impactful over time. Looking over the 1994 list, I see Jagged Alliance and X-Com as falling into the strategy-game-with-unit-development category, or 2 out of 71 (System Shock 1 is also on there, which also isn't an RPG, but the existing criteria would weed it out so that's not the same issue). In 1995, there's Breach 3 (deferring to other commenters here as I don't know anything about it), Conqueror AD 1086, HOMM 1, the Jagged Alliance expansion pack, and Warhammer: Shadow of the Horned Rat, or 5 out of 76. Admittedly I only see 2 on the 96 list (HOMM 2 and Birthright -- which as a DnD game is probably worth playing regardless) but there are only 53 titles currently listed there, so I'd assume it'd expand as Chet does more research, and the games likely to be added are probably going to be tend to be more obscure or borderline-y in their RPG elements than the ones that are already there.
DeleteSo not the biggest deal in the world, certainly, but perhaps worth thinking through a policy at some point (and to the very limited extent my opinion matters, if the policy is "those are close enough to RPGs that they're worth playing", that's fine by me, I like many of these games even if I wouldn't consider many of them to be RPGs!)
Yeah, I did reject the Paladin titles, and I didn't really grasp that Breach was by the same developer and featured the same gameplay. The problem for me with the Paladins is that although the primary hero does gain some statistics, the gains are so minuscule in comparison to everything else happening in the game that they don't make any kind of palpable impact. The actual wording of my definition is: "Throughout the game, the character must become stronger, more resilient, and more capable of overcoming the game's challenges." A 2% gain in one of five statistics for one of 12 characters in the party is technically development but arguably not in a way that makes the character any stronger etc.
DeleteWait? Tetra thinks system shock isn’t an rpg? It’s pretty much an evolution of Ultima Underworld, just with more emphasis on shooting. It’s just as much of an rpg as Pathways Into Darkness, if not a little more so.
DeleteI would also argue that Jagged Alliance is close enough to be considered, especially compared to some of the games already covered in this blog. XCOM is 50/50 as the stats are important and do improve, and playing well, you shouldn’t have your experienced units die unless your on the harder difficulties. There’s equipment improvements via the research and salvage systems. Maybe a brief. But Jagged does feel like it should be covered.
Nah, by Chet's definition Shock 1 clearly isn't an RPG -- character progression is purely equipment-based. If you read the first Pathways post, Chet notes that what tips it over into RPG territory is that you've got a skill associated with each gun that increases your effectiveness the more you use it. There's nothing like that mechanic in Shock 1, though of course Shock 2 adds a robust class and skill system, and many but not all immersive sims since then have followed suit, which has blurred the genre boundaries further.
DeleteAnd yeah, I'd agree that JA and X-COM fit the current definition -- character progression is very impactful (I'm not sure what game the commenter who thought stat gain in X-COM was negligible was playing!) and proceeds according to standard RPG mechanics. It's just that I think the games are structured, they're best understood as strategy games with RPG elements (this is certainly how they were marketed and understood at the time!)
I'm going to argue that Shock 2 (and by association, Deus Ex) are absolutely RPGs by Chet's definition though. Also mine, I've been arguing this elsewhere for years. Deus Ex guns are basically useless with a low skill even.
DeleteYup, that branch of the immersive sim lineage pretty clearly lands in RPG territory under Chet’s definition (and mine). Not so much the Thief side of things though.
DeleteWhy not in the future instead of a discussion about a games merits as a RPG, Chet just flips a coin for the decision.... but that would probably just lead to endless discussion about which of heads or tails is slightly more favorable.
DeleteThe real solution is that Chet plays X-COM and Jagged Alliance 1 as first game of 1994 to bury that topic.
DeleteOf course, 1 day after the GIMLET of X-COM, we'll have the first discussions on wheter King of the Dragon Pass is a RPG or not.
That should also prevent a repeat of 1992's "Let me start with the game that'll likely score high but be surpassed as the year goes on. Except that it wasn't." :)
DeleteI think the subjective RPG experience of 1994 XCOM will appeal to Chet's sensibilities in building personal narratives for characters while playing.
DeleteI retain to this day the distinct visual of my heroic one-man-army veteran of dozens of battles named Xavier Gram going around the corner of a barn in full armor and getting one-shotted by a muton from offscreen. Crumpling to the ground. Certainly the only memory from 1995 I can pull in an instant!
BOSS - Beyond Moria, was originally written for VAX/VMS. It was ported to classic macOS, and later to Linux. You can read more about the history on the RogueBasin page:
ReplyDeletehttps://roguebasin.com/index.php/BOSS
I am the author of the most recent re-write: BOSS 3 for macOS, Windows, and Linux. See
https://80.style/#/plunderbunny/boss/introduction
Thank you! That's important intel.
DeleteSounds like I'd better call it a 1990 game, then.
DeleteI remember trying Magus out many years ago and it seemed more like a tactics game to me than RPG.
ReplyDeleteAlso, IIRC, moving characters in that game is a huge pain because you must move each member of your party individually. Every turn. Whether in or out of combat.
DeleteI played a LOT of Magus as a kid. You're quite correct; all tactics, not really any story to be had.
DeleteAlso, there's not really any roguelike elements. The map is fixed, though quite large, with lots of nooks and crannies to explore. The only randomness to each game is that the locations of items is determined on world generation.
Also, there's a fair number of items that have unique quirks or mechanics, but there's absolutely no text explaining any of them. A few years ago I did a dive of the source code the author had put on Github, in order to finally satiate my childhood curiosity.
Honestly, I think the right way to go was having a single character, rather than a party. Monster numbers scaled with party size, at a rate that makes even a second addition to the team to be of dubious value.
Unless my memory betrays me, Breach is very close to a sci-fi version of Knights Of Legend from 1989, but much more scenario based. Probably worth a look at least, but I suspect it will be a BRIEF.
ReplyDeleteNot Knights of Legend, but Paladin. And it's not so much a sci-fi version of Paladin so much as Paladin is a fantasy version of Breach.
DeleteOn the question of Breach/XCom etc., it's an interesting question whether to count such games as RPGs. They do share some characteristics: more-or-less persistent character (I mean, yes, you can lose your teammates in some of these games forever, but the same goes for Wizardry), they gain experience and find/buy new equipment (depending on a game), and sometimes there are even some choices to be made. Yet, I hesitate to call them RPGs without qualifications.
ReplyDeleteOne thing (most) of those games lack is exploration. They're mostly mission-based, and while you do explore a level for that mission, it's not nearly the same as exploring a dungeon in an RPG, there are usually no additional quests, almost never friendly NPCs and only sometimes you can find items. Each of those missions is more like a combat in Gold Box game. Then comes Jagged Alliance series, especially 2 & 3, and we have a "not-quite-RPG" with side-quests and exploration...
Another thing that separates such games is heavy focus on combat, with almost no dialogues or puzzles (JA aside, again). In that, they are easy to separate from later-day RPGs (you can't really mistake XCom for Fallout - or Betryal at Krondor), but hard to separate from early RPGs which also featured very little aside from dungeon crawling. And from rogue-likes.
Personally, I count such games as a sub-genre, Tactical RPGs. Japanese branch is more-or-less officially called sRPGs (strategical RPGs, I think?). They usually provide a very different experience from "normal" RPGs, but the line gets blurry a lot: is Banner Saga a tactical RPG (mission-based, no exploration to speak of), a "normal" RPG (there is a lot of dialogue between missions, with decisions which affect fate of characters and other gameplay), or a god-damned visual novel with combats?!
Actually, I'm playing a game that's very hard to pigeonhole right now: Burden of Command. It's a VERY indie (technically abysmal, but otherwise labor of love) game where you guide an unit in WW2 campaign. You can't mistake it for an RPG during missions: you get the classic wargaming hex grid, with abstract representation of squads you control. Yet, between missions it plays a lot like Banner Saga: you are presented with a situation, and have to solve it via dialogue, and it affects your stats, your lieutenants' stats and your (generic) soldiers stats. You level up your main character and his lieutenants, and they gain new abilities (a little only, though). Yet, you can lose any one of them in combat, and they will be replaced with a new face (with new set of personal problems, basically his own quest). I guess it only works while there are people in the replacement pool, and if you lose too many named character, the last ones either become undying or get replaced with generic faces with no story, but fortunately I haven't gotten there yet. With all that, is it an RPG? My gut tells me "no". It's a wargame, with some RPG elements. But those elements are important enough (the game, after all, declares its goal to show the player how important leadership is) to make it more than wargame+. So, I guess, "tactical RPG" it is, despite the fact that you control (in abstract) a lot more people than in XCom-like.
Interesting you bring up Fallout.
DeleteFallout 1 and 2 are definitely RPGs, but later ones..... less sure. I think they're self described as 'Action RPGs' but I've certainly seen people who aren't the biggest fans of where Bethesda took Fallout describe Fallout 4 as a First Person Shooter with little RPG elements....
And I've certainly time for such an argument!
(I'll have to look into Burden of Command - looks interesting from what you've described).
I wonder to what extent the Japanese classification is linked to the historical fact of that branch being largely populated with spin-offs of established JRPG franchises. Of course, TTRPGs are themselves a spinoff of wargaming, so there's a complex historical dance there.
DeleteI think you've hit on something identifying "exploration" as a key element of the distinction. I'm not sure that's exactly the right name for it, but certainly, I think that "Tactical RPGs are mission-based while CRPGs are not" is important here.
Except now I'm thinking about what a mission-based RPG would look like, and I think it's plausible? Live-a-Live comes immediately to mind. A very traditional JRPG in many respects, but its plot consists of shortish missions, each set in a comparatively smalle geography, with the player controlling different teams in each.
Yeah, I think to the extent additional criteria are helpful for sorting RPGs vs things-with-RPG-elements, they’ll be about game structure rather than discrete mechanics.
Delete> Fallout 1 and 2 are definitely RPGs, but later ones.....
Delete.....do not exist :) I wasn't a member of No Mutants Allowed site at the time, but I fully shared its feelings toward those Bethesda projects.
> Except now I'm thinking about what a mission-based RPG would look like, and I think it's plausible?
Well, I think Knights of Chalice 1 is very close to that idea, although to be fair, it's also a borderline case. KoTC 2 is certainly an RPG, though.
Avadon series is also kind of mission-based, and certainly an RPG. It sports some peaceful exploration and important story content in those missions, but so does Jagged Alliance 3.
I find almost nothing more tiresome than the absurd arguments that Bethesda's games (whether Fallout or Elder Scrolls) are not RPGs. I defy anyone to find any definition of RPG--mine or anyone's--that does not cover Fallout 4.
DeleteI don't know if "exploration" gets me where I need to go when it comes to definitions. It's a nebulous thing to define. I'm not sure why creeping through a city with a squad doesn't count.
DeleteI think Fallout 4 (and the other 3D Fallouts) are somewhat unique in that the player pretty much decides whether it's an RPG or FPS experience.
DeleteIf you exclusively use VATS for combat, choose skills/perks that enhance VATS performance, spend time creating a realistic character, etc... you're playing an RPG. OTOH if you go in guns blazing, resolving all combat via FPS shooting and focus on perks that help with this action (faster reloading animation, better hip fire accuracy), I'd say you're playing an FPS with RPG elements.
I play F4 the latter way and would say the experience is much closer to Doom than Might and Magic.
(I also admit I find the storyline in this game to be terrible and spent most of my time just looking for cool guns and things to shoot...)
A computer mouse completely breaks Fallout 3, as it gives accuracy not attainable by joystick.
DeleteThe first Jagged Alliance was not feeling like a RPG to me, but Jagged Alliance 2 I would count to the best RPGs. The main focus is on the tactical battles and the strategic planning, but there are many role playing aspects. The character creation of your main character with the multiple choice personality test is genious (though hated by some...). I will now not go into the detail why this is a great roleplaying game, I will simply state that it feels like roleplaying, something that none of all them ARPGs for eg. could ever deliver for me. (And the combat system and the consequences of injuries do remind me of GURPS, which is always a plus point in my pocket.)
DeleteSpeaking of GURPS, as Fallout was orginally planned as official licensed GURPS game you can see the influences still in the final game. When you come from Fallout 1 and 2 and then play 3 I can fully understand someone who is saying that this is not a RPG anymore. Not a RPG how "we" loved them at least... but commercial very succesful.
On the subject of which tactics/strategy games should be considered CRPGs, personally I make a distinction between games (the single player version of them, at least) that have hand made maps, with exploration, a story line, and "encounters".
DeleteSo Heroes of Might&Magic and even more so Age of Wonders I consider CRPGs with a strategy layer, while games like X-Com and Master of Magic are not, and I guess Jagged Alliance as well, since they have randomly generated maps.
It's been a while but I don't remember JA1 having randomly generated maps. Maybe in some parts that I don't remember, but certainly less than e.g. Nethack or Diablo.
DeleteIn the end I'm not sure if it matters that much. Wizardry and Baldurs Gate both fall clearly into the CRPG category for most people, but they are also clearly very different games, even beyond the optics.
Regarding Ross' question about what a mission based RPG would look like, i would point to the Harebrained Schemes Shadowrun games, Dragonfall specifically. In terms of what you do in the game, it's the usual fare that you'd see in a post Fallout 1/Baldur's Gate 1 CRPG involving combat, map exploration, selecting dialogue options and so on, though instead of having an overworld map or a freely explorable open world, you receive missions from NPCs and other sources in the Kreuzbasar, which acts as a hub area.
DeleteA Google search for "Magus game 1993" has this post as the second entry.
ReplyDeleteIf it has RPG credentials, definitely worth covering from an obscurity angle.
The author of Magus, has an archived old homepage.
Deletehttps://web.archive.org/web/20060307194825/http://www.orcsoftware.com/~ronny/
and one of the links are to an aikido club in a suburb to Stockholm, so if he isn't Swedish there is a good chance he lived there at the time.
@Delfayne: Because of that obscurity angle, it has been covered by The Obscuritory ;-).
Delete@CRPGAddict: With the name of the game and the developer, you should be able to locate most relevant sites, so I won't spoil your pre-game research fun ;-). The Magus Preservation github has a couple links, too, though partly the same a search engine would find. And yes, the '2nd edition' is just this, not part of the game's title / name.
Omnitrend was doing really interesting stuff in the 80's, with a series of games that shared a common setting (and often continuing a single story) but wildly different approaches and gameplay. Universe opened the "Local Group" story with what was a very space simulation approach. Universe II continued that story and added more components including mini text-parser adventures, more advanced ship-to-ship combat, better ship and crew cusomizaion and tactical ship-boarding combat (that was the starting point for Breach). Universe III continued the same story but dropped almost all of the simulation and RPG-ish elements, becoming more of a puzzle-based adventure game. The Rules of Engagement series expanded the Universe II ship-to-ship combat and set its campaigns in the war between the FW and UDP from the Universe Series. The Breach series did likewise with the tactical combat from Universe II and it was possible to interlock Rules of Engagement with Breach II to transition from ship-to-ship to close quarters combat.
ReplyDeleteTo me, Universe II is the game in their entire catalog that comes closest to being an RPG. The persistent character (you, the ship's captain) doesn't develop, but you recruit a crew that does (though development is strictly based on time and/or training)., Your ship is highly upgradeable and your marines can be equipped with different weapons and armor. There is a complex economy and various ways to earn money and survive. There is an overarching quest and there are some actual role-playing options in how you choose to carry out your cover mission and deal with some of the quests (or you can choose to ignore them). It doesn't fit closely with Chet's definition of a CRPG, but I think it is the best realization of the spirit of the table-top RPG Traveller.
Breach is much more of a tactical strategy game with some campaign elements.
I understand you already downloaded the manual for The Ormus Saga II after a commenter linked to a page containing it in the context of your first entry on the predecessor. Not sure how easy it is to run the content of these GIFs through a translator - should you require / want assistance with the German, let us know.
ReplyDeleteThe same page also has a link called 'Lösung' (= Solution). However, the zip file found there does not contain a walkthrough or a collection of hints, but a map of Beryland in the style of the cloth maps for the Ultima or Might and Magic games, maybe with slightly more detail.
I don't know if this came with (one of) the game(s), but I'd assume it - to me, it looks too elaborate for a fan work for such a game (assuming this diskmag saga had/has such dedicated fans). On another page where it can be found, it is labelled as an 'extra'. It might help with the mapping issues encountered in top-down, tile-based games, including the first part of the saga as per your second entry on it (I understand the world you started mapping there is the same in all three games).
PS: With the address / town given in the manual, you should be able to find potential contact information for developer Mike Doran, if you so wish. Here as well, happy to help with any German in case it makes you stumble.
Delete