Does anyone else find older RPGs hard to play? Thoughts on TB combat and REs?

I've recently been replaying some of the older FF games, and, outside of reliving the stories, most of which I love, the games are honestly just not very fun for me now. The turn-based battle systems, and random encounters (with stupidly high encounter rates in some of the titles) really just feel borderline-archaic at this point, the random encounters more so than the turn-based battle systems. I had to basically force myself to play through FF4 on the DS, and FF10 on the PS2 (and FF10's random encounter rate isn't even that bad). I couldn't even bring myself to finish FF7, which is probably my second or third favorite FF title.

I think turn-based battles and even grinding still have a place in modern RPGs, but I really don't see the point of random encounters still existing. They break immersion, turn exploration into a chore in some games, and add an annoying element of repetition, as well as a limit to the player's choice of how they want to handle dungeons, exploration, etc. I look at games like Lost Odyssey and Tales of Legendia, which I loved the game worlds of but hated to explore because of the random encounters, and think of what they could have been with visible enemies, different transitions intocombat or whatever else.

I think I've fallen too in love with the brisk, seamless combat and exploration from games like FF12, Rogue Galaxy, etc... to really enjoy some of the older, more traditional RPGs, outside of their stories and characters.

Thoughts? Do you still enjoy older RPGs, particularly those with turn-based combat and random encounters, as much as you did when you first played them? Do you think turn-based combat, random encounters, grinding, etc... have a place in modern/current-genRPGs?

I'm actually one of those that loves turn-based battle and random enconter RPG's. Games like Dragon Quest VIII (which people complain the RE rate is too high, though I disagree) and such. I think I got more used to random battles after playing Digital Devil Saga, the RE rate in the game is RIDICULOUS, but it didn't make me dislike random battles, it kinda just made me more tolerant towards them.

Grinding is also something I don't mind at all, as long as I don't have to do it TOO much.

btw, if you like seamless combat, you could try out the 4 original .hack games, it's even more seamless than Rogue Galaxy (in RG in the start and ending of battle you get this 1 second intro/outro where the characters take out/put away their weapons), in the .hack games, you see the monster portal, when you get close the monsters appear and a message "Battle Mode On" appears, though without stopping anything you're doing, and during combat you can still open any tresure chests and pick up any objects you find, and then leaving combat is the same, just a message saying "Battle Mode Off" without stopping your movement whatsoever. Here's a video, go to 7:20.

It may seem like not much, but that REALLY helps the game, and more action RPG's should be like that, I remember always mashing X button so the EXP screens and such would just go away in RG and .hack//G.U. games (although I think you could still move forward during the EXP screen in RG), it's just a few seconds but after a few battles it can frustrate, the way the 4 original .hack games do their battles is much more fun. And more action RPG's should be like that, most say RG has seamless battles but in a way their are still random battles, just covered up.

If I was to choose between turn-based/random encounters and actionRPG/seamless combat, I wouldn't be able to choose, since I love both kinds almost equally, it ends up depending on the rest of the game that makes me decide if I like the game or not.

I am still into them. I don't mind random encounters much and definitely don't mind turn-based combat at all. It is hard to get the balance right though. Level grinding by random encounters is just heinous and it's equally heinous when the the random encounters get so easy you just mash the attack button for a minute. It is kind of a cop-out answer to the question but I guess I would say I don't find old RPGs hard to play as long as they are good games, which is pretty much how I feel about any genre from any time period.

They are very mixed for me honestly. I've played a few that I was really able to get into the story, but not so much the gameplay (including random encounters and turn based), and also the opposite. Overall though, I find that many classic RPGs are still fun, but not as fun as I remember them being. Even with this said, classic RPGs are still better then the majority of newer RPGs I've played with several very noteworthy exceptions (Xenoblade, Oblivion, Skyrim, Demon Souls).

I'm actually one of those that loves turn-based battle and random enconter RPG's. Games like Dragon Quest VIII (which people complain the RE rate is too high, though I disagree) and such. I think I got more used to random battles after playing Digital Devil Saga, the RE rate in the game is RIDICULOUS, but it didn't make me dislike random battles, it kinda just made me more tolerant towards them.

Grinding is also something I don't mind at all, as long as I don't have to do it TOO much.

btw, if you like seamless combat, you could try out the 4 original .hack games, it's even more seamless than Rogue Galaxy (in RG in the start and ending of battle you get this 1 second intro/outro where the characters take out/put away their weapons), in the .hack games, you see the monster portal, when you get close the monsters appear and a message "Battle Mode On" appears, though without stopping anything you're doing, and during combat you can still open any tresure chests and pick up any objects you find, and then leaving combat is the same, just a message saying "Battle Mode Off" without stopping your movement whatsoever. Here's a video, go to 7:20.

It may seem like not much, but that REALLY helps the game, and more action RPG's should be like that, I remember always mashing X button so the EXP screens and such would just go away in RG and .hack//G.U. games (although I think you could still move forward during the EXP screen in RG), it's just a few seconds but after a few battles it can frustrate, the way the 4 original .hack games do their battles is much more fun. And more action RPG's should be like that, most say RG has seamless battles but in a way their are still random battles, just covered up.

If I was to choose between turn-based/random encounters and actionRPG/seamless combat, I wouldn't be able to choose, since I love both kinds almost equally, it ends up depending on the rest of the game that makes me decide if I like the game or not.

Dudersaper

Thanks for the suggestion, I've been meaning to pick those games up for a while. And you're very right about RG, it really did just have concealed random encounters. I just prefer the way they were handled in that game, as opposed to other titles. Having your screen crack into pieces, and being whisked off to some generic battle stage just breaks immersion and disrupts the flow of a game imo. I liked that RG handled it very subtly, and that the transitions into and out of combat were quicker and more natural than most games with random encounters.

I loved DQ8 as well, but it honestly had one of the worse grinding scenarios of most RPGs I've played. The bosses were, for the most part, challenging, which meant that being underleveled just wasn't an option (kind of a gift and a curse, because that kept the game somewhat difficult but also gave you little choice when it came to grinding). Also, new gear almost ALWAYS cost double what you had by the time you got to it. I remember grinding outside the bandit-town, which I can't remember the name of lol, for hours on end trying to get everyone's gear updated, even after skipping out on the gear of the last town. I felt like that somewhat defeatedDQ8's attempts to help you avoid battles (Evac and the other teleport spell, chimera wings, and the battle avoiding bottles). Still, it was a great game imo. I felt like the turn-based combat fit well within that game and, while the repetitive "spam x" strategy got tedious, I really didn't mind them much at all. There was something very satisfying about that combat system and dealing high amounts of damage, that you don't see in a lot of turn-based battle systems imo. I felt the same about LO.

I still like them. I usually enjoy the story enough and there is usually a neat hook in battle that I don't mind RE's. They can still get annoying but I don't mind too much. As for TB battles, I tihnk they're just fine. It's a surefire way to make a battle system.

I disagree with many of you. Grinding and leveling are not what I find annoying about older rpgs (although I still like some of them) at all. I for one believe the number one problems with them were lack of descriptions of what items do, and giving you know clear, or at least being able to figure out where you are going. How the heck was I supposed to know that "You must bring the Gold pot to the pyramid" meant I had to not go to the pyramid, but stand looking at a picture of it in a random house, hope I stood there for 2 minutes, not give any hint I did it right, hope the wall in the museum was open, find a triangle next to another picture of a pyramid, and put the gold pot on the triangle? See, that's the kind of stuff you don't think of unless you have 700 years of patience. Also what the heck does "suprrtcept" do?Shockwave-DASH

very true, I remember when I was supposed to findthe airship in FF1 took me forever

Oh yeah I also love how they handled the random battles in RG, I wasn't saying that as a downside :P Because you're right, the way they made the RE really helps the immersion. And yeah, even with all the grinding/random encounters in DQVIII, there's just a certain charm in it :P It was my first RPG and my first Turn Based RPG, but it got me hooked from day 1. And yeah, I remember grinding alot when getting to that bandit town to update the gear too :P though I always felt like the battle system made up for it, I didn't mind doing battled at all :P I've finished the game 13 times, only once finishing the post-game dungeon, which that took LOTS of grinding, and at tat point I do admit getting sick of it, so after that I never bothered going through the Trials again :P What game would "LO" be? I can't figure it out :P I'm having a brain lock.Dudersaper

LO = Lost Odyssey.

I disagree with many of you. Grinding and leveling are not what I find annoying about older rpgs (although I still like some of them) at all. I for one believe the number one problems with them were lack of descriptions of what items do, and giving you know clear, or at least being able to figure out where you are going. How the heck was I supposed to know that "You must bring the Gold pot to the pyramid" meant I had to not go to the pyramid, but stand looking at a picture of it in a random house, hope I stood there for 2 minutes, not give any hint I did it right, hope the wall in the museum was open, find a triangle next to another picture of a pyramid, and put the gold pot on the triangle? See, that's the kind of stuff you don't think of unless you have 700 years of patience. Also what the heck does "suprrtcept" do?Shockwave-DASH

That's a good point. A lot of older games in general had this problem. I hate how a lot of current RPGs hold your hand almost entirely, leaving little for you to figure out on your own, but I suppose I prefer that over walking around lost for hours on end. I think games from the last gen really found the appropriate medium. Most every RPG on the GC and PS2 gave you a good amount of direction, while not walking you through the game, imo.

Random encounters is one of the seven deadly sins of game design.

(I don't know what the other 6 are, I just came up with that on the spot. lol)

But I LOVE Tales of Legendia and Dragon Quest VIII. But I HATE the random encounters in those games. But everything else about those games are flawless, so they are forgiven.

Developers who make RPGs need to come up with better way to have encounters.

Wild Arms 3 is a good example of how random encounters are done right. You have a certain amount of times you can avoid random encounters by pressing circle right before the encounter begins. You regain the ability to avoid encounters by finding collectible items or by actually fighting. That's an innovative way to do random encounters and making them less frustrating.

If anything I find it easier to play the older RPGs then newer, though I haven't played many RPGs in this generation at all. I'm not even sure which are worth playing.

I think you're right, but it is amazing how tastes change with the environment. I used to LOVE (so much I put it in caps) random battles and grinding out an RPG, but now I think I'm just so desensitized because of the casual nature of most new games.

Yes and that is why the old RPGs are way better than the modern ones...

Yes and that is why the old RPGs are way better than the modern ones...

tjricardo089

Uhhhh...?

Because they are more difficult to enjoy? Not quite sure what you're saying...

rgg's are usually the 'easiest' older games to play IMO I will say that I prefer not to have random encounters (later Lunar versions versus previous ones) -I feel like I have 'leveled' properly if I beat every enemy I come across -also, get to avoid encounters later on (if revisiting an area)rawsavon

Yep. Pretty much sums it up. Oddly, it's easier for me to play FFVI than FFVII

I like turn based fighting still. Dragon Quest 8 will always be one of my favorite games.

But I do like seeing my enemies on the field (like tales of the abyss and star ocean) better than random battles.

I don't find them difficult to play, but I grew up playing them. There are many RPG's that have aged very poorly, however

RPGs nowadays are turning into action games. I stopped being a fan of RPGs a while ago when the started to abandon the classic feel of the games.

I much prefer older RPGs to new ones (with the exclusion of the Fallout and Elder Scrolls series).

RPGs nowadays are turning into action games. I stopped being a fan of RPGs a while ago when the started to abandon the classic feel of the games.

I much prefer older RPGs to new ones (with the exclusion of the Fallout and Elder Scrolls series).

WiiCubeM1

You should try some of the JRPGs on the 360 (Lost Odyssey, Eternal Sonata, etc...), and some of the recent Tales games, if you're trying to avoid that whole Mass Effect direction of RPGs and want some recent, more traditional RPGs.While I liked the ME games, I became disappointed with the series after the first title, because it really was more of an action game/shooter than a RPG. Same thing happened with Dragon Age. Seems to be a common trend in WRPGs these days, or at least in Bioware titles.

I disagree with many of you. Grinding and leveling are not what I find annoying about older rpgs (although I still like some of them) at all. I for one believe the number one problems with them were lack of descriptions of what items do, and giving you know clear, or at least being able to figure out where you are going. How the heck was I supposed to know that "You must bring the Gold pot to the pyramid" meant I had to not go to the pyramid, but stand looking at a picture of it in a random house, hope I stood there for 2 minutes, not give any hint I did it right, hope the wall in the museum was open, find a triangle next to another picture of a pyramid, and put the gold pot on the triangle? See, that's the kind of stuff you don't think of unless you have 700 years of patience. Also what the heck does "suprrtcept" do?Shockwave-DASH

Ia gree with alot of the above. haha

Turn based combat though I still like, as long as its in the middle. Not simple victories but not so difficult that one mistake screws you over.

I only feel that way about certain RPGs, mainly the ones that have a high random encounter rate. The thing with some older RPGs is that they're more modern than some modern RPGs. Earthbound is a good example.