Am I the only one who is tired of Computer RPGs where everything is simply leading up to some big huge fight with the main bad guy? I have stayed away from console RPGs because they all seem to end this way, and had grown up on computer ones that didn’t end this way (none of the Ultimas after Ultima 2 end with a huge battle, the Might and Magic series never did).
I don’t know why, but I’ve always felt that kind of ending to be sort of boring. It always makes me feel like, “is that IT? You mean all that needed to be done to stop this evil demon guy was for him to be hit enough times with the right stick?” It always seems like a cheap way to end stuff. It also bugs me because usually I’ve been fighting all along - giving me at the end, yet another battle that is simply harder than all the others, well, jeez, is it too much to ask for something a little different there?
Especialy when it’s SO mindless. “You’ve fought a magic guy who casts spells and can’t be hit my normal weapons. And a really tough guy who puts out tons of damage. And guy who does a lot of damage from range - BUT HAVE YOU FOUGHT ALL AT ONCE!?!?! MWAAAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!” Usually that evil laugh at the end will rouse me from the slumber induced by this silly way to end a game.
Fallout is hailed as one of the greatest RPGs in recent times, as is Planescape: Torment, and both can be completed without a final, end-boss battle, and no one has ever complained about that. Possibly because they also can be completed WITH a final end-boss battle, should you elect to do so. That seems fair enough. So it CAN be done, and it can be done with no loss to quality. But as Jonathan Richman says, “If someone else can do it, how come nobody does?”
I’ve given up on a console RPG getting away from this, as suggesting such usually results in things being thrown at my head. But if we’ve got a long history of computer RPGs - and good ones- not doing this, how come all the newest games (the Baldur’s Gate games, Icewind Dale, Arcanum (from what I hear)) are all madly rushing to have the final end-boss battle?
I think that Fallout and Planescape were exceptions rather than the rule-- thinking back on all the computer RPGs I’ve played (well, the ones I can remember- there’s so many of them, my memory is blurring) the majority of them had the Big Bad Guy That You’re Supposed To Kill. Hearkening back to some of the oldest computer RPGs that come to mind - Wizardry I (1980) and Bard’s Tale I (1985) both had the big baddie mage, in the form of Werdna and Mangar.
I don’t mind fighting into the Evil Guy’s fortress, hacking and slashing my way, coming to his throne room, and fighting one more epic battle. What I DO mind is when you find out that the kindly old gentleman you met at the start really was evil incarnate, and the whole thing could have been avoided had some innkeeper fed him bad stew.
Still, I do prefer games that offer an alternative to fighting- it gives me a feeling of accomplishment, knowing that I solved a puzzle rather than got lucky with some die rolls in combat.
Often, figuring out how to beat the big bad guys IS a puzzle. Beating the last encounter in BG2, for example, takes more than running up to her and hitting her with weapons. You’ll be loading a bunch if you try that.
Hmm, with Fallout, I seem to remember a huge fight in the military base before you could get the widget you took back to your village, no? Then there was the fight with the Overseer…but it’s been years since I played, so I could be wrong.
I distinctly remember the ending to the RPG game HARVESTER.
After killing everything that moves, you have a final confrontation with the Lodge’s Sergeant at Arms. Turns out you’re just a body in a deprivation tank with your brain wired to a Sim reality. Then he gives you a choice. You can use a baseball bat to kill your girlfriend, the only other REAL person in the Sim, and the only person that’s been nice to you the entire game. By doing this, you will be initiated into the Lodge and become a serial killer for the Lodge’s vague and nefarious goals. Or you can tell the Sergeant to go screw himself, which results in you and your girlfriend being killed anyway. But killed with honor and purity. No final battle, no nothing.
I think RPG’s are so boring they approach punishment (I’m a UT/HL guy myself) but even people who like them often complain. On a couple game boards I visit, there are a few consistent complaints about RPG’s:
-one is that “the story’s no good”,
-another is that “there’s nothing to do”,
-another is that “you shouldn’t have to do anything”,
-another is that “more players would be better, because- um, -more players would just be better”,
-and the last is that “you can’t do anything you want”.
?
Having an interest in PC game design, I note that not one of these problems can really be solved in any meaningful way. Previous to computers games do not require stories at all, all games have an objective and all games involve a limited number of people. -And RPG players tend to get really angry when you point this stuff out.
A frequent wish is for a massive multiplayer online gaming: PC game magazines have treated it as gospel for some time. Proponents of it claim that it would be “just like a real war” with “different levels of involvement” available- easily making it far and away the most complex game program ever. Problem is that it won’t, for a couple key reasons: everybody is going to want to be the General, and taking risk in real life doesn’t even approach taking risk in Super-Multiplayer-Online-Combat, where suicide attacks would become common because “you can just re-start again”. It would end up with tactics quite different from reality. It might be interesting to watch for a while -kind of like the evolution of robots on the Robot Wars TV shows, but it wouldn’t be realistic, and with the bandwidth requirements it would have, it’s very unlikely to be profitable. Ultima Online is the most popular online RPG, and it’s such a raging success that Origin Studios closed and the UO2 project was abandoned, -no other companies even made any offers on it. - MC
Actually, Demise, maybe I’m a newbie but if you’re talking about Amelyssan at the end of Throne of Bhaal… the ONLY way I beat that royal bitch was to do just that… beat her. My bard, Keldorn, and Sarevok totally jumped her while Cernd and Viconia kept her Tanar’ri summoned aids (click, click, boom. You have to hate a chick that summons demons to help her) off our backs… with Edwin sprinkling mega-death here and there in the form of Abi-Dalzim’s Horrid Wilting, Dragon’s Breath (What was it? 10D10 Fireball? bites fist Mama…), et cetera. Still… I loved that game and its predecessor and certainly didn’t mind the Super-Mega-Boss Ending.
That’s my point. You couldn’t just run your party up to her and hit her, you had to take care of adds, use spells properly and use your characters special skills (disciplines was it?). It took tactics.
But at the end of the day, it’s still just a fight. It’s still just more of the same thing you’ve been doing all along, only harder. The stick might be bigger, but the solution is still “hit it with a stick”. There\s got to be a different way. I know there is, I’ve seen it.
But at the end of the day, it’s still just a puzzle. It’s still just more of the same thing you’ve been doing all along, only harder. The puzzle might be bigger, but the solution is still “click the mouse till it works”. There’s got to be a different way. I know there is, I’ve seen it.
I’m playing Arcanum right now and there are ways around the final end-boss battle. If you are a negotiator you can convince him to stop or if you are evil you can join forces with him.