Why are (many) FPS Fans bored to tears by RTS/RPG Games?

[apoppin]

04/01/04 . . . . Finished KotOR !!! . . . . . about 45 hours total [LS only] for me - a "hardcore" fps addict and the 'rawest' of RPG n00bs] . . . see latest post for details . . . .

and yes, i "get" RPGs AND will buy and play them in the future with EQUAL joy as my "precious" fps games
:shocked:

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:
---------------------------------------------

(original posts below)

really . . . i tried many times . . . .

i am a big fan of FPS and not just "shooters" . . . . i loved the complexities of DE and DE:IW as well as the Thief series . . . .

BUT give me a RTS or RPG and i may start with the best intentions - and after a few hours i find i just lose interest. . . .
. . . . not just RPG demos but complete games - NOX, Sanity, Might and Magic, Vampire: tM-Redemption - remain covered with dust.

Right now there is a "lull" in FPS - as we await FEAR and STALKER - the bargain bin is getting mighty slim pickins (for me anyway) . . . . and i'd again consider a "lite" RPG or RTS . . . .
. . . . gfx gotta be top-notch and the story not so "involved" . . . . maybe a fusion like DE/DE:IW.

suggestions?

OK, got KOToR1 today . . . . . see latest post . . . . . RPGs sure start SLOW . . . . . the tutorial is torturious.

OK, March 12 . . . i "get" it now . . . pretty good game but i don't think i wll EVER prefer a RPG to a FPS .,. . . . .

Final Update. . . March 20th . . .. i decided to finish KotOR last night . . . see March 20 update
:thumbsup:

"Addicted"
:roll:

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

April 5 Update . . . . this discussion is getting . . . interesting . . . . this thread has taught me a LOT . . . . THANK-YOU ALL for your participation . . . . :thumbsup:

. . . and now i have to ask:

"Can anyone sugggest a good RPG that is very 'story-driven', isn't terribly complex or difficult and has reasonably up-to-date gfx?"
obviously KotOR II is a "given" . . . what about Vampire: Bloodlines?

 

[LethalWolfe]

Have you tried any of the "Total War" games ("Shogun", "Rome," or "Medieval"). They are a mix of RTS and turned based (battles RT, but everything else is done in turns). My biggest gripe w/traditional RTS games is that you spend so much time creating an awesome army and base, but you lose it all at end to of the level and have to start over again. Really makes me stop caring quick. There are no levels in the Total War games (at least not Shogun, I haven't played the other two) just turn after turn after turn until your empire rules the world or falls to ashes. Much more fun to play than standard RTS games, IMO.


Lethal

 

[DaveSimmons]

Well, most of those RPGs you listed were second-rate. Did you ever try Fallout?

 

[Malak]

I don't have a problem with RTS's, but I can't stand many RPG's. The problem is because your abilities are based on how strong your character is, not how strong you are. In an FPS, it's pure skill. There is little skill involved in an RPG. Hybrids are great, like Planetside and Savage.

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: malak
I don't have a problem with RTS's, but I can't stand many RPG's. The problem is because your abilities are based on how strong your character is, not how strong you are. In an FPS, it's pure skill. There is little skill involved in an RPG. Hybrids are great, like Planetside and Savage.

Or the other way of looking at it, the FPS emphasizes reflexes, while an RPG emphasizes planning: not just in a battle, but deciding how to equip and level up a character. Both also have tactics, but the tactics are different.

A good RPG gives you chances to act out a role, which an FPS doesn't often offer (besides the "me tough!" jock role).

I wonder if there is any connection between not reading books (besides class texts) and not enjoying RPGs? For the RPG dislikers, how often do you read fiction books outside of a class?

 

[Malak]

There are lots of roles and planning involved in an FPS, if you are good.

I read fictional books all the time actually. I have the entire Earthsea collection, LotR, and more. I love fantasy. I dislike the game mechanics of the typical RPG, not the themes. Your deductions are waaay off.

 

[screw3d]

I am not a big fan of RPG but I really liked KotoR and KotoR II!

 

[Sentinel]

there are few RPGs that I enjoy, but FEAR and STALKER are going to be SWEET. I play AA a lot now but have played ROME and Sims series.

 

[Bateluer]

No skill in RPGs? Ever try coordinating the battles with your 6 party members in BG2 or IWD1/2? That took some serious tactical know how.

And they had great storylines and dialogue besides.

Most of your great RPGs have dated graphics though, and shooter fans in general like eye candy. RPG fans are much more forgiving in the graphical department.

 

[Malak]

Yes, actually, I used to own BG2. Of course, you could pause right in the middle of combat, and you had plenty of time with the fact that the sword would swing right through something and it'd say *MISS*

Now, have you tried coordinating a squad of 6 in a game that requires twitch reflexes and there is no such thing as the weapon missing? You can never compare the skill required in an FPS to the skill(lack of) in an RPG.

 

[Sunner]

Maybe it's because you seem hate damn near everything apoppin

I like damn near every genre, with the exception of sports games, and even there I like a few games(Speedball 2 comes to mind).
Just do what I do, when there's a good-game drought, I just play some golden oldies, either ones I didn't have time for back in the day, or I just play through some oldie I haven't played in a while.
FreeSpace2 has saved many boring days for me, musta played it through 30-40 times, Half Life 1 is another good one, as well as Doom 1&2.
Oh and let's not forget Fallout 1&2, damn they kick ass.

And something that never fails is old console emulators, a trip back to the time when consoles didn't suck, Chronotrigger, Final Fantasy, Wonder Boy: Dragons Trap...so many goodies

 

[BFG10K]

I don't usually play RTS/RPG games but I seem to really like Blizzard titles like Starcraft and Diablo 2.

 

[styrafoam]

Originally posted by: malak
Yes, actually, I used to own BG2. Of course, you could pause right in the middle of combat, and you had plenty of time with the fact that the sword would swing right through something and it'd say *MISS*

Now, have you tried coordinating a squad of 6 in a game that requires twitch reflexes and there is no such thing as the weapon missing? You can never compare the skill required in an FPS to the skill(lack of) in an RPG.

Did you finish BG2? The fact that you would swing and miss was related to the rules of the game and your ability to comprehend them(lack of). The skill of the game isn't so much in your ability to accuratly point and click your mouse but planning your characters and using their abilities in combination with sound tactics to be succesful in situations that the game will throw at you. The strength of the character is entirely up to the player.

If you are comparing a multiplayer fps to a single player rpg its obvious there is a big difference in the experience you get from each. Of course the intensity isn't going to be the same playing against other people compared to playing against the games a.i. There are deffinitly some very difficult fights in the Baldurs Gate and IWD games, a bad decision can force you to give up and start over after battling for 30 minutes. You can always reload a single player game if you lose a fight, but most who would play and enjoy an RPG do so out appreciation for other aspects of the game, not a lack of skill.

 

[skace]

I play RTS, RPG, FPS, Strat, Sim, and any other type of game. A good game shines regardless of genre. Never seen a problem with it.

 

[cjr22]

Have you tried Darwinia? It's kindof an RTS, but not really. In fact it's really very hard to describe - just try the demo. It's got a retro theme, but with modern graphics. I can't think of many other games to compare it to without doing it a disservice. It's from indie software house IntroVersion who made Uplink, and it's almost worth buying just to reward them for being creative and different.

 

[BespinReactorShaft]

I still have fond memories of Command & Conquer and Dune II (I'd replay them if only this freakin XP rig would let me) but overall RTS was just a passing fad for me. I was disappointed with Red Alert, gave up on Starcraft, never understood the popularity of Warcraft. But it was only during Tiberian Sun that I finally tuned out altogether. Perhaps the genre just got too complicated and patience-testing for me. Perhaps it's my inherent dislike for board games, which is what RTS basically is.

I'm mainly an FPS person now, if only because the genre is not as crazily addictive as CRPGs. A price to pay for having a day job I guess. :frown: However, I'd get back into CRPGs given the chance (note well: not MMORPGs, I avoid them like the plague). I still have a couple of Throne of Bhaal compaigns to finish off, as well as Neverwinter Nights, Icewind Dale 2, and KOTOR I, II still in storage. :Q

Oh, and as for CRPG suggestions, give the Fallout 2 and the Baldur's Gate series a try. If you dig them, then don't miss Planescape: Torment.

 

[jim1976]

Originally posted by: apoppin
really . . . i tried many times . . . .

i am a big fan of FPS and not just "shooters" . . . . i loved the complexities of DE and DE:IW as well as the Thief series . . . .

BUT give me a RTS or RPG and i may start with the best intentions - and after a few hours i find i just lose interest. . . .
. . . . not just RPG demos but complete games - NOX, Sanity, Might and Magic, Vampire: tM-Redemption - remain covered with dust.

Right now there is a "lull" in FPS - as we await FEAR and STALKER - the bargain bin is getting mighty slim pickins (for me anyway) . . . . and i'd again consider a "lite" RPG or RTS . . . .
. . . . gfx gotta be top-notch and the story not so "involved" . . . . maybe a fusion like DE/DE:IW.

suggestions?

Cauz you still have pure adrenaline inside you?

Just jokin of course...

I made a similar thread some days ago, asking for a good recommendation,because as you I have found myself so absorbed by FPS the last years that I really wanted to play again something more of "creative" nature.
I must admit that I ain't a huge fan of RTS/RPG either but back in the old dayz I really enjoyed Millenium,Deuteros,Eye of the Beholder,later Sim City,Civilazation,Starcraft and the latest that really absorbed me were the Fallout series.Well maybe C&C and Warcraft too for a bit. I played many others too,but after 1-2 weeks I found myself loosing the interest.
I see your point and what I do is always try to play strategy/PRGs that have story which interests me.(in my case sci-fi space related).
Hopes this helps FPS maniac :disgust:

 

[gtd2000]

I think one of reasons I'm not so interested in non-FPS games is because "I'm" simply not "in the game".

The great thing about FPS games (IMNSHO) is that I'm in that environment and I am experiencing it.

An analogy would be:

Would you rather "watch" the main character in a movie or "be" the main character in the movie?

The best way for less imagininative minds is to consider this - would you rather be the star in a porn movie or be the director..that's the basic difference between FPS and those isometic role playing games

Talking of FPS games I'm on the last level of Far Cry....

 

[Lonyo]

KoTOR is a great RPG (and it's sequel).

 

[apoppin]

Originally posted by: LethalWolfe
Have you tried any of the "Total War" games ("Shogun", "Rome," or "Medieval"). They are a mix of RTS and turned based (battles RT, but everything else is done in turns). My biggest gripe w/traditional RTS games is that you spend so much time creating an awesome army and base, but you lose it all at end to of the level and have to start over again. Really makes me stop caring quick. . . .
Lethal

No. i agree with the time "spent" . . . . and starting over . . . . heck, i won't play a FPS without quicksave.
___________________________________________________________

Originally posted by: DaveSimmons

Originally posted by: malak
I don't have a problem with RTS's, but I can't stand many RPG's. The problem is because your abilities are based on how strong your character is, not how strong you are. In an FPS, it's pure skill. There is little skill involved in an RPG. Hybrids are great, like Planetside and Savage.

Or the other way of looking at it, the FPS emphasizes reflexes, while an RPG emphasizes planning: not just in a battle, but deciding how to equip and level up a character. Both also have tactics, but the tactics are different.

A good RPG gives you chances to act out a role, which an FPS doesn't often offer (besides the "me tough!" jock role).

I wonder if there is any connection between not reading books (besides class texts) and not enjoying RPGs? For the RPG dislikers, how often do you read fiction books outside of a class?

i AM looking for hybreds that are more like FPS than RPG/RTS. . . . . and i love to read (Sxi-fi being my favourite) . . . there goes the 'theory'
:roll:
__________________________________________

Originally posted by: Bateluer
No skill in RPGs? Ever try coordinating the battles with your 6 party members in BG2 or IWD1/2? That took some serious tactical know how.

And they had great storylines and dialogue besides.

Most of your great RPGs have dated graphics though, and shooter fans in general like eye candy. RPG fans are much more forgiving in the graphical department.

The "skill" is UNdeniable . . . . . i am a sucker for excellent gfx . . . most of the rpgs i played looked "flat"
______________________________________________

Originally posted by: Sunner
Maybe it's because you seem hate damn near everything apoppin

I like damn near every genre, with the exception of sports games, and even there I like a few games(Speedball 2 comes to mind).
Just do what I do, when there's a good-game drought, I just play some golden oldies, either ones I didn't have time for back in the day, or I just play through some oldie I haven't played in a while.
FreeSpace2 has saved many boring days for me, musta played it through 30-40 times, Half Life 1 is another good one, as well as Doom 1&2.
Oh and let's not forget Fallout 1&2, damn they kick ass.

And something that never fails is old console emulators, a trip back to the time when consoles didn't suck, Chronotrigger, Final Fantasy, Wonder Boy: Dragons Trap...so many goodies

i just can't play my moldy oldies . . . . modern gfx has completely "spoiled me" . . . . about the oldest games i can still enjoy are Quake III engine and am finishing up SW:JKII:JO right now (which i set aside to play and finish PK/BOoH and FC).

re games: i hate bad games (period) . . . . i don't hate RPG/RTSes . . . i just cant seem to get "into" them and am easily bored and tend to set them down (forever).
_______________________________

Originally posted by: styrafoam

Originally posted by: malak
Yes, actually, I used to own BG2. Of course, you could pause right in the middle of combat, and you had plenty of time with the fact that the sword would swing right through something and it'd say *MISS*

Now, have you tried coordinating a squad of 6 in a game that requires twitch reflexes and there is no such thing as the weapon missing? You can never compare the skill required in an FPS to the skill(lack of) in an RPG.

Did you finish BG2? The fact that you would swing and miss was related to the rules of the game and your ability to comprehend them(lack of). The skill of the game isn't so much in your ability to accuratly point and click your mouse but planning your characters and using their abilities in combination with sound tactics to be succesful in situations that the game will throw at you. The strength of the character is entirely up to the player.

If you are comparing a multiplayer fps to a single player rpg its obvious there is a big difference in the experience you get from each. Of course the intensity isn't going to be the same playing against other people compared to playing against the games a.i. There are deffinitly some very difficult fights in the Baldurs Gate and IWD games, a bad decision can force you to give up and start over after battling for 30 minutes. You can always reload a single player game if you lose a fight, but most who would play and enjoy an RPG do so out appreciation for other aspects of the game, not a lack of skill.

There is plenty of "planning" in some FPSes, some alilities that can be developed (JKII:JO/DE) and some do require some coordination of friendly AI (the defenses in Unreal II; HL2) . . . . i am NOT comparing multiplayer in FPS to SP in RPG . . . .. that is SO unfair and i am on dial-up so multi is OUT for me anyway.



thanks for the replies . . . i am beginning to see "why"

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: styrafoam

Originally posted by: malak
Yes, actually, I used to own BG2. Of course, you could pause right in the middle of combat, and you had plenty of time with the fact that the sword would swing right through something and it'd say *MISS*

Now, have you tried coordinating a squad of 6 in a game that requires twitch reflexes and there is no such thing as the weapon missing? You can never compare the skill required in an FPS to the skill(lack of) in an RPG.

Did you finish BG2? The fact that you would swing and miss was related to the rules of the game and your ability to comprehend them(lack of). The skill of the game isn't so much in your ability to accuratly point and click your mouse but planning your characters and using their abilities in combination with sound tactics to be succesful in situations that the game will throw at you. The strength of the character is entirely up to the player.

If you are comparing a multiplayer fps to a single player rpg its obvious there is a big difference in the experience you get from each. Of course the intensity isn't going to be the same playing against other people compared to playing against the games a.i. There are deffinitly some very difficult fights in the Baldurs Gate and IWD games, a bad decision can force you to give up and start over after battling for 30 minutes. You can always reload a single player game if you lose a fight, but most who would play and enjoy an RPG do so out appreciation for other aspects of the game, not a lack of skill.

They are only made difficult by artificial means. The enemy simply has more strength, or more dexterity, or a spell that brings you within an inch of your life. There is no real skill involved. I have no problem building a character that is just as strong as any, I have lots of experience in that field. An FPS requires you to actually do something, to use your own skills, not the skills of your character. Even in hybrids, it's still up to you. When you win, it's because YOU did it, not your character. And that's why I like FPS's more.

 

[skace]

Originally posted by: malak
They are only made difficult by artificial means. The enemy simply has more strength, or more dexterity, or a spell that brings you within an inch of your life. There is no real skill involved. I have no problem building a character that is just as strong as any, I have lots of experience in that field. An FPS requires you to actually do something, to use your own skills, not the skills of your character. Even in hybrids, it's still up to you. When you win, it's because YOU did it, not your character. And that's why I like FPS's more.

That is a valid reason for liking FPS's more. But there is a real skill involved with RPGs, it is your ability to assess a situation, know your characters, strategize, etc.

 

[Malak]

Originally posted by: skace

Originally posted by: malak
They are only made difficult by artificial means. The enemy simply has more strength, or more dexterity, or a spell that brings you within an inch of your life. There is no real skill involved. I have no problem building a character that is just as strong as any, I have lots of experience in that field. An FPS requires you to actually do something, to use your own skills, not the skills of your character. Even in hybrids, it's still up to you. When you win, it's because YOU did it, not your character. And that's why I like FPS's more.

That is a valid reason for liking FPS's more. But there is a real skill involved with RPGs, it is your ability to assess a situation, know your characters, strategize, etc.

You do all that in seconds in an FPS. The skill required is unmatched. In the RPG, like BG2, you can often simply pause the game and figure it out. It's just not the same when you've got someone gunning at you and you need to decide what to do. Especially when one shot could stop you in your tracks, which is quite a bit more dangerous than most RPGs where a fight could last a while with each person just hitting each other over and over again.

 

[styrafoam]

Originally posted by: malak

Originally posted by: styrafoam

Originally posted by: malak
Yes, actually, I used to own BG2. Of course, you could pause right in the middle of combat, and you had plenty of time with the fact that the sword would swing right through something and it'd say *MISS*

Now, have you tried coordinating a squad of 6 in a game that requires twitch reflexes and there is no such thing as the weapon missing? You can never compare the skill required in an FPS to the skill(lack of) in an RPG.

Did you finish BG2? The fact that you would swing and miss was related to the rules of the game and your ability to comprehend them(lack of). The skill of the game isn't so much in your ability to accuratly point and click your mouse but planning your characters and using their abilities in combination with sound tactics to be succesful in situations that the game will throw at you. The strength of the character is entirely up to the player.

If you are comparing a multiplayer fps to a single player rpg its obvious there is a big difference in the experience you get from each. Of course the intensity isn't going to be the same playing against other people compared to playing against the games a.i. There are deffinitly some very difficult fights in the Baldurs Gate and IWD games, a bad decision can force you to give up and start over after battling for 30 minutes. You can always reload a single player game if you lose a fight, but most who would play and enjoy an RPG do so out appreciation for other aspects of the game, not a lack of skill.

They are only made difficult by artificial means. The enemy simply has more strength, or more dexterity, or a spell that brings you within an inch of your life. There is no real skill involved. I have no problem building a character that is just as strong as any, I have lots of experience in that field. An FPS requires you to actually do something, to use your own skills, not the skills of your character. Even in hybrids, it's still up to you. When you win, it's because YOU did it, not your character. And that's why I like FPS's more.

Again your deffinition of skill is extremely myopic. A champion starcraft player will win because they are able attack, micro manage, and defend well, but they never actual "fighting". Are they also without skill? You can't see a parallel there? You may encounter a situation in an RPG that seems too difficult, chances are you either haven't progressed far enough in the game or your tactics need some adjustment. A MMORPG follows the same pattern, except they tell no story what so ever (which is what a good deal of the attraction to sp RPGs comes from). All MMORPG players are also without skill by your definition.

When you win, it's because YOU did it, not your character.

The interaction with the game through the character is where your skills and strategy(YOU) come into play. If things were as you state them to be any person could play any rpg and beat it in the same amount of time as every other to play the game.


You are free to like and dislike games as you see fit. Your rationalization of your prefrence seems to overlook or ignore a good bit of detail though and blame the game for being unable to appreciate your skill with a mouse.

 

[EmperorRob]

You do all that in seconds in an FPS.

To some degree that is true, but you only control yourself as opposed to a game like FFT, Advance Wars, or most recently Dai Senryaku VII where you control many units, although some shooters like Rainbow6 allow you to control your partners a little. You can't really compare the two types because each has its own strengths and emphasizes different skills.

The problem is everyone is talking about different RPGs as if they are all the same and they are not.

I can't get into the old-school Final Fantasy type where you just run around talking to people looking for items/bosses and get randomly attacked. I prefer strategy games like Final Fantasy Tactics, Advance Wars, Vandal Hearts, and Fire Emblem. Although some people would call those RPGs or SPRGs.

It really depends on what you want out of a game. I don't want a story about unicorns and hairspray. I want a game that can be played repeatedly without the feeling that I'm just here to press the X button and read some dialogue, without sound I might add.