Together RPG - Schedule & Discussion

[isiolia]

Also, I'm not sure how well it would work, but it might be a good idea to have two games running concurrently, or perhaps even staggered. Say RPG A lasts from January through February, and RPG B from February through March. So on March first RPG C is introduced and we're halfway through RPG B. Otherwise, concurrent ones might work to satisfy more people. Two months is a long time to keep a club active, assuming we'll have static time allotments.

Could do it as concurrent RPGs of different styles. JRPG, WRPG, SRPG for instance. Someone with a lot of time could do more than one. Those with less could just pick one, or sample them all and stick with what they like most.

[BoneSnapDeez]

I still say we stick with games with tons of ports - we don't want to "force" anyone into emulation, especially not the more "finicky" emulation of Saturn/PSX/PS2. Most of us here like to play on original hardware, as far as I can tell. A Saturn RPG would be fine if it's something like Lunar: The Silver Star, which is available on four other consoles - something like Shining the Holy Ark would be a bad idea.

Eye of the Beholder would be a good WRPG pick, as it's on two consoles (three if you count the GBA remake) as well as the PC. Plus, everyone wants to play it.

[Hatta]

Pool of Radiance has an NES port. Hope you guys have some graph paper.

[Ack]

I still say we stick with games with tons of ports - we don't want to "force" anyone into emulation, especially not the more "finicky" emulation of Saturn/PSX/PS2. Most of us here like to play on original hardware, as far as I can tell. A Saturn RPG would be fine if it's something like Lunar: The Silver Star, which is available on four other consoles - something like Shining the Holy Ark would be a bad idea.

Eye of the Beholder would be a good WRPG pick, as it's on two consoles (three if you count the GBA remake) as well as the PC. Plus, everyone wants to play it.

Yeah, I agree with this. Start with something like Eye of the Beholder, move on to things like the 8- and 16-bit Final Fantasies, Dragon Warriors, and Breath of Fires that all have a variety of ports, so on and so forth. The Wizardry, Might & Magic, and Ultima games will all work as well. Though I believe we will inevitably have to worry about games with few ports.

[Opa Opa]

No love for AD&D: Heroes of the Lance?

[Ack]

No love for AD&D: Heroes of the Lance?

Haha, sure! It's always a possibility.

[BoneSnapDeez]

No love for AD&D: Heroes of the Lance?

I've actually been meaning to pick up the C64 version for some time.

[Menegrothx]

My idea for games would be for us to cycle by sub genre. Traditional JRPG, followed by Action RPG, then tactical or strategy RPG, then a western or PC RPG. This will keep things relatively fresh and diversify the lineup.

That's the way it should be.

Imo these should be the limitations:
no current generation stuff
No Saturn exclusives (assuming that the trope about Saturn emulation being finicky is true)
PS2/GC/Xbox games are acceptable. 2005-2006 should be the limit on how new the games can be. The same goes for CRPGs, as every one has a computer powerful enough to run games from that era.

That being said, here are some suggestions
JRPG: Earthbound, Phantasy Star, Tales of Phantasia
ARPG: Popful Mail, Guardian Heroes, YS book 1&2 (maybe System Shock 2?)
SRPG: The Temple of Elemental Evil, Pool of Radiance, Tactics Ogre: Let Us Cling Together
WRPG: Planescape: Torment, Vampire: The Masquerade - Bloodlines, Ultima V.


I think a week or two should be enough for a 20-30 hour game. But if some people are really busy, I think 6-8 games a year would be an OK pace. As long we don't choose any games with a really large scope like Elder Scrolls or Ultima VII (although this games deserves to be played by all those who haven't played it yet) or games that are overly long and move at a snail like pace like DQ VIII.

Plus, I think some of you guys here may not be fans of hardcore tactics games like these.

I wouldn't call Disgaea or any tactical rpg game hardcore, compared to what strategy games are like.

Eye of the Beholder would be a good WRPG pick, as it's on two consoles (three if you count the GBA remake) as well as the PC. Plus, everyone wants to play it.

Why on earth? There's nothing special about that game. Games that should be picked first should be excellent, games that either did something special or atleast have excellent writing/characters/story/combat system. I don't see any reason to pick cookie cutter games if you haven't played first the games that are actually important. If you have to pick a Western first person dungeon crawler, it should either be Dungeon Master or Ultima Underworld 1/2. Or maybe some really early game from the early 1980s if you want to really study the history of RPGs, but I doubt most people are willing to do that. Either way I think we should first focus on WRPGs (and JRPGs, for that matter) that have great stories and writing (like the ones I listed) before playing any dungeon crawlers.

[AppleQueso]

I think a week or two should be enough for a 20-30 hour game. But if some people are really busy, I think 6-8 games a year would be an OK pace.

A lot of members here have jobs, family, etc. Squeezing in 10-15 hours per week of gaming is pretty hard for a lot of us, not to mention the fact that I doubt everyone wants these games to be the only thing they play for weeks at a time.

Personally, I'd vote quarterly. That gives plenty of time to finish an RPG at a steady pace without it necessarily having to take up all of your available gaming time.

[Opa Opa]

How about we make the schedule on a game-by-game basis? For example:

-Ys I - January

-Chrono Trigger - Feb/March

-Persona 3 - April/May/June

Etc.