Article: Kids Can't Handle Old-School RPGs Anymore

[Menegrothx]

I take it that you havent played C64 games on the actual hardware lately, JT? Or any other old computer games for that matter

[garrett123]

Im 16, and Ive played

1.illusions of gaia-beat
2. legend of zelda a link to the past-beat
3.twisted tales of spike mcfang-beat
4. twighlight princess-beat
5. zelda I-made it through 5% of the game
6.zelda II-made it through 50% of the game
7.axe battler
ps I only like action rpgs

[Menegrothx]

Im 16, and Ive played

1.illusions of gaia-beat
2. legend of zelda a link to the past-beat
3.twisted tales of spike mcfang-beat
4. twighlight princess-beat
5. zelda I-made it through 5% of the game
6.zelda II-made it through 50% of the game
7.axe battler
ps I only like action rpgs

Twilight princess? Old-school RPG?

[Erik_Twice]

If auto-aim is gaming paradigm that aims for player's instant gratification, is Syphon Filter (also pre-2000 game) a dumbed down game?

Auto-aim is like autotune, it's an overused tool. Does it has it uses? Sure, but I have yet to see a shooting game that benefits from having the game shoot for you!

I haven't played Syphon Filter so I can't comment on it. Not sure if I would call it notable tough it certainly isn't unknown.

At the extreme end, it's not supported, and can get people banned (at least, so the internet tells me). My point there is simply that it's certainly cheap, but so are plenty of other tactics in plenty of other games.

The game don't have the concept of "cheap". The rules of the games are geared towards spawncamping, making it a bad game because spawncamping is boring and uninteresting. Perhaps the game is fixable by adding rules but the game, as written, is geared towards it. That the community, which is not the game, frowns into something doesn't mean the game does!

Many consider throws to be cheap, it's almost a meme in the fighting community, but it's obviously a part of the game for good or bad.

It's a very similar mechanic to execution in a fighting game. It's not just a matter of memorizing combos, but being able to recognize when they could/should be utilized.

Recognizing when to use an attack in a fighting game is not execution, it's yomi.

Execution is being able to do quartercircles and memorizing your attacks, by definition. Execution is being able to execute your attacks, which is not interesting in a fighting game. It's semantics, really.

[isiolia]

Many consider throws to be cheap, it's almost a meme in the fighting community, but it's obviously a part of the game for good or bad.

Sure, and in either case if you're a poor enough player/team to allow yourself to be backed into a corner and unable to get past cheap tactics, then that's not entirely the game's fault. Should the developer take it into account for later revisions? Sure. If they took out everything any player ever considered cheap, they wouldn't be left with much.

Recognizing when to use an attack in a fighting game is not execution, it's yomi.

Execution is being able to do quartercircles and memorizing your attacks, by definition. Execution is being able to execute your attacks, which is not interesting in a fighting game. It's semantics, really.

I understand that execution isn't the same as recognizing when to utilize things. My point is that if you, say, see an opening to execute a massive combo loop and haven't mastered the timing to actually do it, then it doesn't do you all that much good. The vast majority of fighting game players don't have perfect execution, hell, even the best of the best probably miss things occasionally or get thrown off by screen lag or online latency. It's still part of the game.

Just like in an FPS, you can have perfect aim, be able to headshot anything that appears on screen in front of you...but it doesn't do you much good if you don't realize that the other team is sneaking in through the sewers and not the courtyard. Aim is no different in FPS games as executing specials and combos is in fighters. It's a necessary and expected skill needed to apply your actual strategies.

[J T]

I'm really enjoying this conversation about auto-aiming, spawns, and fighting game execution. You guys are making great points.

As for the fighting game thing, I think that the execution of special moves is an important aspect of the gameplay. It adds room for error to make the game more than just rock, paper, scissors. Certain moves are more risky than others. For example, in Street Fighter II if I use an attack that requires a 2 second charge backwards, I provide a cue to my oponent that I'm planning an attack. If you see Guile crouching, for example, you know not to jump at him or else you will receive a razor kick unless he just tossed a sonic boom and has released his charge. Also, certain moves like Zangief's spinning pile driver, are risky to use. It has to be done in close quarters and it requires a full circle spin (or at least a forward, down, up). Spinning the joystick like that means you give up blocking momentarily and you risk accidentally jumping. That added vulnerability and risk is worth the payoff though if you can nail the piledriver, as it is the most damaging move in the game. I think the difficulty of perfect execution is part of the gameplay.

[Vita Mayo]

Syphon Filter's auto-aim is not a be all end all solution in winning the game, manual aiming is the best way to shoot down enemies. What auto-aiming did for Syphon Filter is it is used to scan the location of your enemy forces within Logan's perimeter of sight (this game is also stealth based), and if the going gets tough you can auto-aim+shoot while running out of a rain of bullets.

But I do see your point, some games are just ridiculous because they make the game so easy. In SF, when you auto-aim using a sniper, it would be not wise because your accuracy goes down a lot. Burst weapons are nice in auto-aiming but if an enemy unit is wearing a kevlar, there's no point in auto-aiming because you just cant kill him as the auto-aim favors the torso instead of the head.

[Zing]

I have only read the OP in this thread. I have to say, that as a teenager when Ultima IV was originally released, even I couldn't figure this game out. It felt more like work than fun. The game basically dumps you into the world and leaves you to figure out what to do. Sure, the game was groundbreaking, but there is absolutely no direction given. I was deep into RPGs at the time, so it has little to do with RPGs in general. This game was simply as opaque as possible while still being a game.

[Menegrothx]

Syphon Filter'

Seriously? Its a single player game for the PS1. GTA games have autoaim and no one cares. I dont see a single reason why any one would care about auto aim in a game like that when aiming skill is irrelevant and you are stuck with a game pad. What people do care is the fact that games that are suposed to replace PC FPS games in the competitive scene use something like that. Aiming accuracy isnt such a major point in story based single player games, but it is one of the most important factors in defining a persons skill level in competitive FPS games.

[Vita Mayo]

Syphon Filter'

Seriously? Its a single player game for the PS1. GTA games have autoaim and no one cares. I dont see a single reason why any one would care about auto aim in a game like that when aiming skill is irrelevant and you are stuck with a game pad. What people do care is the fact that games that are suposed to replace PC FPS games in the competitive scene use something like that. Aiming accuracy isnt such a major point in story based single player games, but it is one of the most important factors in defining a persons skill level in competitive FPS games.

You took me out of context, we are discussing gaming paradigms itself, comparing the past and the present designs regardless of them being single player or multiplayer. Read everything first.