i get that it's fair and solves the problem with rng based targeting but it defeats the purpose of these types of games which derive from table top rpgs.
the player will take damage when it's the enemies turn and is supposed to figure out a way to react to that damage efficiently.

allowing the player to completely mitigate damage on the enemies turn doesn't make sense since the player isn't forced to follow the rules of combat.
they did this to appeal to a wider audience and it works but the solution isn't fair. this is just a qte game disguised turn based combat.

>>3781938 (OP)
Yeah, I'm a big turn based fan and a boomer in his 50s who has been RPGing since 86, but jesus god, I just can't get into this shit. Everyone is raving about it, but there's just too much shit going on in combat to make it actually feel/play turn based.
I bought Bravely Default's remaster and have been playing that and having a much better time.

>>3781938 (OP)
>i get that it's fair and solves the problem with rng based targeting but it defeats the purpose of these types of games which derive from table top rpgs.
RNG to hit is genuiinelly bad design that is baggage from PnP which in turn "needed" dice as a necessary evil.

The dodge system in Expedition 33 is also bad design, but not because of this. But the sole purpose of it is to make the combat look flashy.

>>3781938 (OP)
normalfags get bored if they're not constantly pressing buttons, that's literally why the ps3 generation was so dogshit and every game from them is just constant qte spam, rpg or no

>>3781968
what i was referring to was how enemy targeting works in these 4 niggas in a line games. it's hard to predict outside of taunt status effects.
recall times where a boss decides to hit your squishy instead of your tank or when it decides to target one party member 4 times in a row. this randomness removes the strategy out of the game since there's no way to play around it.
the bandaid solution would be to use an aggro meter or just have one party member. this problem is really hard to solve while keeping things interesting imo but going the qte route is not the right call.

>>3781938 (OP)
>allowing the player to completely mitigate damage on the enemies turn
Is good game design
>derive from table top rpgs.
Oh shut it

>>3781971
The rng targeting is a systemic one that can be fixed in hundreds of different ways, which any competent designer can solve if they want to and is aware of it.

But this game does not have competent designers or has some exceptionally retarded management.

why are you guys surprised a game built around spectacle isn't mechanically interesting? sounds really naive.

>>3781938 (OP)
1 - in this specific case, E33 was designed intentionally to appeal to people who are into Soulslikes games - which is a larger and more mainstream crowd than any kind RPG east or west that isn't Pokemon, and it worked for them obviously. So that influenced the decision to include reactive elements here, and that's why it had a larger market than most other rpgs
2 - this poster >>3781970 is a bit shitposty in their point, but they're getting close to the right track in recognizing that there is a difference between modern and older games and gamers. But they picked the wrong thing. The bigger issue is actually the change in the way that games are played now - and that's because of internet access and the prevalence of guide use. We are long past the point where people enter boss fights or even dungeons blind - it has become pervasive that people look up strategy guides even before they hit roadblocks. Unfortunately, what that means is that for a lot of these kinds of games, difficulty and thus engagement with the game has dropped massively - players don't need to think if they're just following a strategy someone else wrote. Quick time events or other gimmicks like them are ways of getting around that - Developers are looking for difficulty found in other genres and implementing them in RPGs because to most players RPGs don't have any. It adds a tiny bit of skill into the process. The only RPGs that have really escaped this are the ones that are designed to be very difficult and more reactionary in terms of situation analysis - and those are intrinsically a smaller subset of the genre that only appeals to a niche audience.
>>3781971
Yeah I can't really agree with you either, there's been so many different variations solutions to that at this point, that it's sorta silly to still be hung up on it. We are largely way past the point of games that just have a 1/4 chance to target each individual member.
>>3781979
Both is both achievable and desirable my dude.

>>3781990
>Both is both achievable and desirable my dude.
nope. spectacle is intrinsically shallow because it's based on surface perceptions. focusing on spectacle means aiming for broad appeal and that means aiming for midwits. it's just not compatible with rpgs, which lack broad appeal in their mechanics due to normalfag aversion to math and subsequently "rng".

>>3781994
>nope
It's almost entirely down to presentation, so no.

>>3782008
give an example of an rpg which focuses on both spectacle and mechanical depth and is loved for both.

>>3781977
tell me one way to solve it please.

>>3782011
Final Fantasy series

>>3782027
lmao, i rest my case.

>>3782030
Thanks for coming by and saying nothing, anon.

>>3781938 (OP)
>the player isn't forced to follow the rules of combat
Different game, different rules. Only a mentally stunted infant would be unable to digest such a simple fact. You can't play a game like this that explicitly departs from the generic formula and then REEE about how it's not enough like the tabletop. If you want to play babby's first D&D game, stick to BG3.

>>3781938 (OP)
yeah real time engagement shit that's just designed to be a pat on the head for paying attention to the work they put into the game should give you like some kind of currency you can use to unlock bonus crap, not have a material impact on the battle

>>3782043
*like have a mechanic where a follower character can take timing based photographs of enemies while you're fighting that unlocks new skills or something

>>3782042
Yes, I'm constantly amazed by that rigid, black & white thinking on display here. Don't know if it's the same anon or what.

>>3781957
Don't worry, picrel is bad game for Internet induced adhd.

>>3782064
On the contrary, people with ADHD might have trouble with reacting.

>>3782041
i stated a clear argument, that spectacle precludes mechanical complexity in rpgs due to innate design differences, which was supported by the example provided and not argued against in any way.

>>3782011
No matter what is mentioned you will say it doesn't have enough mechanical depth or just shitpost. I don't engage with shitposters.

>>3782014
>tell me one way to solve it please.

>aggro system based on damage/skills/attacking with weakness or a separate element they are not weak against but hate
>boss will always telegraph who (1 or more) they will focus attacks on next at the end of their turn
>boss prioritizes attacks based on rank/proximity to boss (or for some bosses, the opposite)
>either an equippable skill or a character skill either forces the boss to attack them or can take a hit for allies
>defensive active/passive skills that lowers chance of being attacked or prevents from being focused for a set time/attacks, so long as they don't do offensive actions
>etc

>>3782088
You asked
>>3782011
>give an example of an rpg which focuses on both spectacle and mechanical depth and is loved for both.
FF series is loved for both. You might disagree, especially because your "argument" relies on it, but who cares.

Once again you argue like a dumb rat.

>>3782132
i accept your concession. i've already racked my brain and i can't think of a single example. spectacle and rpg mechanics are counteractive because rpgs don't "look" cool like an action game or a cutscene does.
>>3782156
>FF series is loved for both
it's entirely loved for its stories and presentation, mechanics are often jank as hell in them and the games are extremely easy.

>>3782179
I love the mechanics and spectacles. That means you're wrong.

>>3782192
i think the mechanics are simplistic, so i'm right. :)
my favorite ff is 1, the least focused on spectacle.
which mechanics specifically do you find deep?

>>3782200
>ff is 1, the least focused on spectacle
NES was a bit limited.. Could barely hold enough text for a story

>>3782203
and it didn't hurt the game at all. more space has seemed to equate to more cutscenes and effects, not more game.

>>3782259
More game?

>>3781938 (OP)
>allowing the player to completely mitigate damage on the enemies turn doesn't make sense since the player isn't forced to follow the rules of combat.
How so? That's literally a rule of the combat in this game. It might not be what you think the rules of combat should be, but it's literally following this games rules.

Qte in tbs combat negates the one major thing tbs has going over real time, animation control and the ability to skip said animations.
All it does is add more time in fodder encounters and nullify the rpg element since it is now half reaction based.
People who like it never liked tbs and just want random spectacle shit.

>>3782295
>People who like it never liked tbs
Even if this were true, so fucking what

>>3782179
>i accept your concession
You're literally the one that didn't back up the initial bold claim and now demand others prove something wrong you never proved yourself. So one rule for you and another for everyone else, good job hypocrite.

Also, the thing you're demanding is also irrelevant, since it has nothing to do with the actual point you're trying to make, which is
>spectacle is intrinsically shallow because it's based on surface perceptions
which is factually wrong.
Spectacle is presentation. Persona 5's UI is all spectacle yet has no impact on how you interact with it (apart from in-game controls). You could make Go or Chess have very flashy presentation with cool animations and sfx, yet it would not impact the complexity of the games at all.
YOU however claim that it does, when it clearly does not.

Now we both know you're a close-minded manchild that will keep screaming about the concession meme, when you're the one literally conceding your own argument. Go ahead and prove me right again by making another shitpost.

>>3781938 (OP)
My issue with dodge slop is that it's thoughtless and way too good to the point where you make the game even more shallow.
Like imagine if you had a game with several elemental, status, combo and so on systems but they could all be made irrelevant if you could just time a dodge. you would now no longer need to interact with several core systems that give more depth to the combat.

it's too even like in games like Sekiro which is focused on parrying where they have different types of parries you need to do to keep you on your toes.

>>3782323
>Like imagine if you had a game with several elemental, status, combo and so on systems but they could all be made irrelevant if you could just time a dodge
Imagine this, but all made irrelevant with level ups and equipment..

Wouldn't that be awful haha

>>3782317
i think you're legitimately confused about what a shitpost is.
i'm fine with being proven wrong.

i'm sure you could have style with substance in theory, but in practice it doesn't seem to happen and the idea bears out. flashy animations and shit just get in the way of rpg combat, which is really just math and strategy and kinda dry. spectacle is superficial and a focus on the superficial means an attempt to attract people who don't really want depth to whom depth would be a turn-off. it's like the transformers movies.

>>3781938 (OP)
I don't get it when it's done by Westerners, it's soulless and shit. But when the Japanese do the same shit, is that mechanical depth? Exploiting glitches is not mechanical depth.

>>3782323
it takes the element of building for damage mitigation out of the game. there's literally no point in building for defense.

>>3782137
thanks, i'm noting this for my own game

>>3782330
You're fundamentally wrong since you conflate spectactle with no substance, when they are completely independent.

You could take a deep systemic game like Dwarf Fortress and add extremely flashy visuals and feedback, with well animated scenes with voiceacting playing out for the events that can happen. That would add a lot a of spectactle to the game without changing it.
No matter how deep and complex of a game, spectactle can be added.
Spectactle only becomes a problem if that's all something has (which has nothing to do with spectacle itself, since the problem is everything else) or that they prioritize spectactle over something playing well, which could be done for anything. It's in fact very common for the game to "look good" art wise even if it makes the game play or visually read worse.
Take a look at OP and how their terrible UI design makes visually reading and seeing the UI harder or how visually noisy the environment and enemies are. Now directly compare that to Persona 5 (their inspiration) and how much easier it is to read, how much less noisy everything is and thematically how consistent it is.

Persona 5 has a ton of spectactle, as does something like SMTV Vengeance (or many other games).
They could've not had unique animations and effects for the demons unique skills and just used a generic fire vfx or something, but the added animations and effects for each results in more spectactle, which directly adds to the satsifaction and enjoyment of using them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2oDZgOREi4Q

Expedition 33 is a really bad example for good design, because it basically has absolutely nothing that is visually or gameplay wise well designed.

>>3782392
>You could take a deep systemic game like Dwarf Fortress and add extremely flashy visuals and feedback, with well animated scenes with voiceacting playing out for the events that can happen. That would add a lot a of spectactle to the game without changing it.
you could also give the players a self-lubing automatic blowjob machine with every copy.
but, how would it not change it? it would make it virtually unplayable, apart from performance issues, because the amount of time required to do things in the game would be extended to provide a spectacle, which adds nothing to the game itself. no one would have fun and so various elements would have to be simplified.

spectacle inhibits interaction because it creates, at the very least, a time barrier between player input and action resolution.

>Persona 5 has a ton of spectactle
it's also a boring game. style with little substance.

>>3782397
Name mechanically complex games, anon.

>>3782399
realms of arkania: star trail

>>3782397
You didn't disprove a single thing I said and just deflected. I have given you several very direct examples that prove that spectactle can be added on top of anything and have zero impact of depth or complexity.

>because the amount of time required to do things in the game would be extended to provide a spectacle
Factually wrong. It all comes down to execution and even really old games have anim skip functions when necessary. It can be as long or as short as you want. Don't waste my time with drivel like this.

>adds nothing to the game itself
Also wrong, which has already been explained and provided examples.

>various elements would have to be simplified
Once again wrong, as has been proven several times. Again, stop wasting my fucking time. I'm replying seriously, so stop with these immature fallacies. I have zero patience for close-minded people.

>a time barrier between player input
No it fucking doesn't. No more than a basic 5 frame attack animation would and using your retarded logic even that is a bad thing so there should be no animations, no vfx, no nothing and just be a list of commands with zero visual feedback, character models or anything.
Stop wasting my fucking time. A single more retarded statement from you and I will disregard you as a braindead idiot incapable of basic discussion.

>>3782406
your provided example was a hypothetical and a game concerned with presenting a juvenile high school anime narrative with repetitive cutscenes and snappy rock paper scissors combat.
>Also wrong, which has already been explained and provided examples.
you already said it doesn't change the game to add spectacle, then it necessarily doesn't add anything to the game part of the game.
>I have zero patience for close-minded people
you say this a lot, yet you don't stop replying. stop being so dramatic, this is just a discussion for kicks. there's nothing at stake here and your time obviously isn't precious in any way.
>stop wasting my time
i love how you spent time repeating this over and over

>>3781938 (OP)
>>3781957
I got through BG 1&2 on core rules and DAO on Nightmare, but I had to turn on story mode for Clair Obscur because of those fucking dodges/parries.

>>3782413
Good, so you admit to being a subhuman retard that also ignores 99% of what people argue against you because you can't disprove it and repeats things which has already been dispoven. While also not backing up anything he claims.

Do the world a favor and kill yourself so you won't waste anyone else's time ever again with your mentally handicapped attentionwhoring.

>>3782671
and then you woke up.

>>3782200
I like Lune's elemental stains even though they're pretty static at endgame.

>>3782295
My very first JRPG was Super Mario RPG, so I love timed blocks/attacks.

>>3782361
Not everyone is ONGBAL, hell there's people in this thread complaining that they're taking too much damage because they can't dodge/parry everything.

>>3784564
Then that highlights how poorly the combat system is even further.

Honestly though, this style of RPG is always kind of shallow anyway. That's the entire problem with the genre. You just end up finding a strong formula and doing it every fight, occasionally stopping to deal with specific mechanics to get yourself back to the formula.

Notice how the thread got entirely derailed by one schizo?
Most of the thread isn't about the topic in the OP at all.
Funny that.

>

>>3784617
How much of a zoomer are you that you go to this instead of SMRPG?

>>3784627
>noo how dare you pick the 22 year old game instead of the 29 year old game!!! zoomer!!! aiiieeee!!!!

>>3784632
>22 year
>29 year
that's the 80s lol

The only timed attack system I kind of enjoyed was Shadow Hearts, because you have ways to mitigate the difficulty within the game and it felt tied into the RPG system. Didn't enjoy Legend of Dragoon's version and I was too old to get into the Mario RPGs when they released.

Anime paper mario

>>3784638
Anon, Paper Mario is anime.

>>3784636
timed attack systems are cool at first but then they just become a slog especially if there are random encounters just like the ones you mentioned

>>3784642
You're anime.

>>3785036
>become a slog especially if there are random encounters
Name of combat system that doesn't become a slog with repetition

>>3785358
anything without minigames/gimmicks embedded into the design

>>3785570
Name it