Composite Greatest RPG Ever: Topic 1

[Veryslightlymad]

Ok, kids! We're gonna try something different this time. The general idea is I'm gonna come up with a list of metrics to weigh RPGs by, and then we're all going to come up with a top 10 list for each individual metric. Then, because I'm not the resident Mathematics or Statistics guy and thus can't come up with the BEST way of compiling the composite scores, I'll just toss out every way of rating the games I can come up with! Sound fun?

BUT FIRST:
We need an actual list of scores to compile. Here's a tentative list of what I have in mind, and a reasoning for it if I feel like it needs one. This topic is for debating the list of categories, including adding new ones, changing or combining existing ones, or removing metrics entirely.

The list so far:
Plot
Characters
Setting
Music
Visuals
Gameplay
Overall (Sometimes, I feel, the sum is greater than it's parts)
Originality

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand that's what I got so far. Weigh in on these metrics, please. Ideally, I would like 10 individual categories, just so everything is all nice and round.

[DjinnAndTonic]

Your current metrics look pretty good. And you already have 8. If you really feel you need 10, you could break down some of the metrics into smaller categories.

Like... Gameplay could become "Battle System" and "Exploration/Puzzles". Or something along those lines. Visuals could be broken down into "Art/Design" and "Presentation". Characters could be divided up into "Character development" and "Group interaction"... or another approach "Protagonists" and "Antagonists".

The thread title is misleading... I was hoping you were going to fanwank over ideas for an awesome crossover RPG... Why must you always disappoint me? 

[dude789]

I think the list covers the basics, but I think a couple of changes could help. I'd split music into music and sound effects/voice acting, and I'd also add pacing (how well the game mixes plot and gameplay so that one doesn't dominate the other and they are given out in managable amounts) to the list. It's the most overlooked part of a game despite the fact that it's probably one of the most important. Bad pacing can absolutely ruin a game, whereas great pacing can make a below average game into a decent one. For example, Chrono Trigger has excellent pacing and I think that's one of the reason it is considered one of the best RPGs. On the other hand most of the recent Tales games have hideous pacing despite being above average in all other aspects. 

[Cmdr_King]

I'd definitely break down Gameplay a bit.  I'd say that Djinn's  "Battle System" and "Exploration/Puzzles" work, but I'd also suggest "Twinking/Character Customization/Whatever similar term sounds best" as its own catagory.

I'd also recommend scrapping "Originality", both due to biases on the matter and because, ultimately, I think very few games would really score anything worth noting for most people. 

Anyway, I think that a catagory along the lines of "Pacing" might be in order?  It's definitely something that most people include when evaluating the game's overall score, but it's distinct enough in my mind to be more than just an x-factor for that rating.  Although you could argue that it's a big part of "Plot" I suppose?  but for me pacing is as much about the placement, duration, and battles within dungeons, and how the plot is distributed between and (ideally) within them, as much as pacing from a writing standpoint, so I'd definitely consider it a unique catagory

[metroid composite]

Gameplay can be broken down more than just in battle vs out of battle.  


For instance, Valkyire Profile: Covenant of the Plume very successfully combines SRPG with Valkyrie Profile style combat.  But then we can further combine that with stuff that other SRPGs do...

There's Fire Emblem which manages to make plain old physical attacking very interesting.  You have to think about 4 different variables, and also it changes how well you'll deal with enemies who attack you during their turn.  There's no particular reason why you couldn't make the combat math of VPDS use weapon triangle and all that other fun stuff from FE.

Then there's FFT, which adds an excellent job system, a high quantity of interesting but simple skills, and CTB.  Again, all of which probably could be incorporated on top of this conglomerate (although granted: CTB may not be a good fit with VPDS gameplay as "who do I move first this turn?" can actually be pretty interesting).

But let's suppose for the sake of argument that we take CTB.  Then there's FFX, which offers the sphere grid as an interesting way to set up a job system, and the CTB idea of moves that take a long time to wind down, and moves that take little time to wind down.  Again, all of which could be incorporated in a mostly orthogonal way.

Assuming again that we're taking CTB, we can fix some of the ways it doesn't work well with VPDS by taking stuff from Shadow Hearts Covenant.  Namely, the combo attack command which basically makes you wait until you both have turns at the same time.  This could then be combined with the standard SRPG stuff like "if you get your turns at the same time, take them in any order you want."

Oh, and just for the fun of it, you can add WA4's ability to stand on the same hex (at the weakness that you both get attacked at the same time, though for VPDS combat this would also be an interesting bonus as it would make your counterattacks better).


Obviously I'm reaching with some of this, but you get the idea.

[Talaysen]

Yeah... I think breaking down these categories even more just makes things too specific.  They're perfectly fine as is.  About the only one I can agree with is Gameplay -> Battle + Non-Battle Gameplay.

[Dark Holy Elf]

Polish needs to be a category. aka the reason Suikoden 5 isn't whoamfg best game ever (well that and gameplay I guess <_<).

[Veryslightlymad]

I'm also thinking of adding "Replayability" because some games you just can't pick up more than once.

[DjinnAndTonic]

VPDS+FE+FFT+FFX+SH2+WA4=OMFG

Obviously I'm reaching with some of this, but you get the idea.

Now -that's- the kind of fan-wanking I'm talking about!

I'd totally play that game.



Clarifying the categories!

Plot (covers basic series of events, original concepts, dialogue/writing talent, how well events fit together, lack of plot holes, and Pacing)

Characters (covers individual personality development/likability, group dynamics, believable character history/motivation, development of PCs/antagonists/NPCs, how well characters' gameplay aspects mesh with story aspects)

Setting (covers time period, original world concepts/world-building, environmental style/presentation, scope of exploration)

Music (pretty obvious, but... covers quality of music and placement/use of music in presentation)

Visuals (covers Art style, Character design, Enemy design, Menu presentation, Battle animations, Graphics, In-game visual presentation/cinematography)

Gameplay (too huge, but currently seems to cover Battle System mechanics, Character skill progression, Equipment/Skill/Item functions, Enemy strength progression, Difficulty/Challenge, scope of exploration, challenge->reward system, Party synergy, Cast size, Puzzle design, Mini-games, Synthesis systems, Life simulation aspects, Optional content, Degree of Freedom, In-game Documentation, and Accessability/Intuitive-ness)

Originality (currently seems to cover a little bit of ALL categories,  but focuses on game-specific unique content)

Overall (primarily focused on Interaction between Story and Gameplay aspects, Accessability, Replayability, and Challenge/Fun Factor)

There's a bit of overlap in most of the categories, but I think I covered most of the possible interpretations of each of the metrics. You could break up Gameplay a bit and get your 10 categories easily.

[dude789]

I agree with Cmdr on both points. Pacing should definately be added and not just something under plot as it affects gameplay as well (a lot of fetch quests and repetitive dungeons would lower this.) Originality is too hard to judge as it varies from person to person and not all games are trying to be original.

[Talaysen]

Music should be expanded to "Sound" or at least have another category for that.  I prefer just expanding it since Sound alone doesn't need its own category except for maybe VA'd games, but not all games are VA'd.

I dislike Replayability as a category because the value of replayability depends a lot on simply whether or not you like the game.  I played WA4 four times, even though the game does nothing to encourage replaying.  On the other hand, Mazes of Fate encourages replaying but it is a shitty game so why would I replay it?  Not to mention replay value in some games makes them worse (arguably BoF5 since it withholds plot to force you to replay).

I agree with removing Originality.  For one thing, how original a game seems to someone depends a lot on how many and what games they've played before, which makes it a horrible metric.

Polish... eh, I guess something like that is needed.  I kind of dislike the term "Polish" but whatever.

Pacing I still dislike.  You can just dock or give points in the respective categories the pacing is bad or good in (plot or gameplay).  Doesn't really need its own category.

[DjinnAndTonic]

If the ultimate goal is to create a composite RPG, then ranking things like Originality and Pacing are kind of useless anyway...

You can't really make your Frankenstein RPG by saying something like 'The Plot of FFT, the Characters of SH2, the Music of Chrono Cross, the Gameplay of VPDS, and the PACING of Skies of Arcadia!' Insert originality and polish instead for the same effect...

Replayability is sort of a Gameplay subcategory anyway if you think about it, but at least it would -register- in the ultimate goal of this ranking topic...

I'm definitely leaning more towards separating Gameplay up into 2-3 categories.

And I agree that Music can be expanded to Sound, for what it's worth.

[Sierra]

And I agree that Music can be expanded to Sound, for what it's worth.

Agreed on this, basically see Tallychu's reasoning.

[NotMiki]

Polish needs to be a category. aka the reason Suikoden 5 isn't whoamfg best game ever (well that and gameplay I guess <_<).

The categories VSM originally has pretty much cover everything, so viciously dissect them until we find out what makes them tick!

Regarding Polish and Overall categories, I think it would be useful to take these apart and probably relegate them to sub-categories in other areas.

Polish in gameplay, Polish in menus (FFT's menu options are very useful, but actual menu composition?  not fantastic, especially the obscure location of the who-moves-when list) and systems (think the difference between FFX growth and Rogue Galaxy growth).

For Overall, what games are more than the sum of their parts, and why? the invisible web that makes them that way can be discerned into individual threads of synergy between discrete categories, I think.

Take Suikoden 2.  It has major deficiencies, but is generally very well thought of.  I think it's fair to say the game is better than it might objectively rank if you gave it a 1-10 in each major category.  Here are some preliminary thoughts as to why:

#1 Immersive plot.  What I mean by immersive is, it has emotional hooks that extend into other areas.  The game's music, in a vacuum, is not incredible as a whole, I think, but it works very, very well ingame.  Plot and music synergistically improve one another.

Plot, to my eye, deserves subcategories, particularly to separate plotline writing from diologue, and also to reward good directing (something that comes out both in visuals and sound as well, of course)

#2 Speedy Combat.  Combat in the game is simple (other than a few neat conceptual ideas with some runes) and, befitting simple combat, it's freaking fast.  You can conclude an S2 random encounter by the time you might in another game be inputting your first action.  It's easy to undervalue combat that is dull on paper, but the pacing makes it inoffensive at worst, at least until you slow down to think about it.  WA1 is, to me, the diametric opposite.  Combat should be interesting, and it certainly is on paper, but random encounters are sloooooow and dull in practice.

Should combat facility possibly be counted separately from combat system quality?

------------------------------------------------

One other thing that's worth considering is things that make games baaaaaaaad.  Unforced errors, I'd call them.  Things for which there is no excuse.  Don't think they should be their own category, but looking at them may sharpen our ideas of what constitutes good.

Here are some off the top of my head:

Suikoden 2 - Making you use Freed Y. - TWICE (ok, not a huge deal, but still...)
Suikoden 4 - Sailing, natch.
Star Ocean 3 - IC.  maybe not by itself, but compared to SO2 it's such a step down that it's kinda incomprehensible why it turned out so badly.
Dark Cloud - Swords that break like they're flourescent lights.

[Anthony Edward Stark]

I'd put down a category for sequels: Progression/digression. Falls in to a sort of "direction" or "design" category?

E.g., Suikoden 4 is on its own a rather inoffensive, if bland, game. But when you take in to account that its predecessor was Suikoden 3, it's a slap in the face that always smacked of underestimating your audience's intelligence. Conversely, WA4 had the balls to throw out pretty much the entire battle system from WA3 in exchange for something that was untested, but not boring as fuck, which earns it major points in my book because they made a major series change and it came out excellent.

I don't think I'm the only one who does not judge games in a vacuum.

[Bobbin Cranbud]

Personally, I prefer to rank games using the following ten categories.  There are five "large-scale" categories (story, gameplay, video, audio and vibe), which are then broken down into two parts for clarity.  Scoring the large-scale stuff is optional.

Story - Plot (How interesting are the events of the story?  Do they hang together in a consistent manner?  Do they explore a compelling theme?  Is the presentation of these events effective?)
Story - Characters (How compelling are the characters personal stories?  Do their motivations make sense?  Is their interaction entertaining?  Do I care about them?)

Gameplay - Controls (Does the game have a good user interface?  Are the controls comfortable?  Intuitive, or if not at least well-documented?  How are the camera angles?)
Gameplay - Scenario (Do the challenges engage me without frustrating me?  Are there interesting decisions to make?  Does the game reward good tactics, and are there multiple tactics to explore?  What about replayability?)

Audio - Sound (Are the sound effects immersive?  Dramatic?  If there's voice acting, is it good?  Can I listen to it in multiple languages, or turn it off?  How is the sound quality overall?)
Audio - Music (Does the music draw me into the events of the game and the feelings of the characters?  Does it set up compelling battles?  Is the composition itself worthwhile?  How well is the music handled by the sound chip?)

Video - Art (Are the character designs well drawn?  Original and/or interesting?  Do they suit the characters?  How about the setting - is it drawn in a compelling manner?  Is the cinematography good?)
Video - Graphics (How many polys are pushed?  What kind of effects are used?  Do the graphics help the gameplay, or get in its way?)

Vibe - Context (How does the game compare to others of its kind?  Were there others of its kind before it, or was it wholly original?  If it's a sequel, is it an upgrade or downgrade?  If it's older, is it still worth playing today?)
Vibe - Overall (Is the whole greater than the sum of its parts?  Are the parts so good there's no room to be greater?  Does the overall package not hang together despite some quality pieces?  Is there some otherwise unclassifiable quality that improves or degrades the game?)

[SnowFire]

I think that your first list is pretty much fine and this shouldn't be overthought too much.  The one suggestion I agree with is Djinn's first one - split Gameplay between "Gameplay - Battle System" and "Gameplay - Everything else," perhaps.  (Lufia II's puzzles are fun and better than the battle system, XSII's GS system can jump in a hole and die, etc.).

[Niu]

There needs a combine character category for visual and music, or even scenery .
Call it what, aesthetic? Atmosphere? Presentation?

Anyway, RPG's factors don't function separately. Is the scene where Zidane crawled over Pandemonium going to be as powerful is they use music other than You are Not Alone? Or the final battle against Lord Blazer if they switch they music?

Better yet, I spent like 15 minutes on Elt's Valley in FF12 doing nothing but running in circle just to stare and listen to how well that place is put together. God, if every single town and dungeon in FF12 can be as harmonious and compelling as how Elt's Valley is put together, I'd give FF12 a 10/10 even if everything else sucked.