Random Encounters Hate

[Xprimentyl]

It is much easier to make encounters happen every few steps than it is to create and animate creatures on the dungeon/world map for players to run into. Especially if one pairs it with turned based combat. Having visible and avoidable battles is not only an evolution of random encounters but objectively superior in terms of both immersion and player satisfaction. However random encounters still exist even now simply because they take less effort and testing to do.

This was kinda my point (if more kindly,) that random encounters started off as a way to create the illusion of huge and intriguing worlds on consoles that could only support linear games that could be beaten in a half an hour. I think FF games were ambitious in that they had grand stories to tell, arguable unlike any seen before them, but limited capability to tell them, so they became elevator pitches wherein the person selling their idea found a way to stop the elevator every few inches to buy more time. We've long since reached the point where that's necessary, but it became such a defining part of the JRPG identity, they kinda went "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" for the next 30 years.

Conversely, in the first Zelda, its story progresses through completion of 9 dungeons that can each be completed in a couple minutes, but they and the tools required to beat them are meticulously spread out across [arguably] vast expanses of emptiness and scant few enemies. But it's story is pretty flat, so it functions as an elevator pitch wherein the elevator has stopped unexpectedly, and the person selling their idea didn't come prepared to fill that much idle time, so they start effectively "answering questions with questions" to engage the audience.

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

What is life if not repetition and randomness?

Ha, but really even if fighting dozens of mundane trash mob battles is a progression-centric design choice, on the other hand, consistently complicated combat be exhausting, especially for working folk who might just want to unwind after a stressful day and watch audio-visual dopamine triggers. Sometimes the scales don’t have to be in any particular balance of skill vs time investment, and both can be feel rewarding after their respective milestones or accomplishments.

There are game types that can satisfy pretty much any mindstate, so no harm no foul IMO.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

So I would like it if they had some alternative method of level advancement. Perhaps more social encounters that let you level up via helping npc's and having fun little side stories, that don't rely entirely on combat prowess. Including skills that let you avoid combat, like social skills or intelligence skills (charm/diplomacy/lockpicking/etc), that give you a way through some challenges, that have nothing to do with hitting something with a stick until it dies, but is still challenging and requires skill investment, but equally nets you experience, on par with the combat rewards.

The Rune Factory series has been in the frontlines of this movement. RF4 had it so that doing anything would give some kind of stat increase relative to what you're doing. Running around, eating, going to sleep, farming, fishing, fighting, smithing, talking with other townspeople, finding items in the overworld, taking care of your monsters, etc. etc. etc.

 

[happyninja42]

The Rune Factory series has been in the frontlines of this movement. RF4 had it so that doing anything would give some kind of stat increase relative to what you're doing. Running around, eating, going to sleep, farming, fishing, fighting, smithing, talking with other townspeople, finding items in the overworld, taking care of your monsters, etc. etc. etc.

The key issue I think most video games run into, is that if you do this kind of system, where direct game input of actions, reflects growth in those skills (ie. Sneaking makes you sneaky, swimming makes you swimmy, etc), if the final result of the game is "And then you hit the Big Bad until they die" , it ultimately doesn't matter, as you'll still have to go do all the punchy/kicky stuff to win. So the game would have to account for alternate win conditions at every stage. Which, some games do, but most don't. I'd personally like to see it more often, but I can also appreciate that some teams might not have the resources to do that, as it would increase development time, require increased dialogue/voice recordings if it's got voice acting, to account for all those variations, etc.

Still doesn't mean I like it when a game is just nothing but mindless hitting things, if the only reason I have to do 20+ hours of mindless hitting things, is ONLY because the devs decided to make the difficulty escalation require it. I mean there is no law saying Act 1 ends at difficulty lvl 10, but Act 2 starts at difficulty 25. Forcing you to go futz about for 5 hours or whatever to make up the difference. That's only like that because the devs made it that way.

 

[immortalfrieza]

The key issue I think most video games run into, is that if you do this kind of system, where direct game input of actions, reflects growth in those skills (ie. Sneaking makes you sneaky, swimming makes you swimmy, etc), if the final result of the game is "And then you hit the Big Bad until they die" , it ultimately doesn't matter, as you'll still have to go do all the punchy/kicky stuff to win. So the game would have to account for alternate win conditions at every stage. Which, some games do, but most don't. I'd personally like to see it more often, but I can also appreciate that some teams might not have the resources to do that, as it would increase development time, require increased dialogue/voice recordings if it's got voice acting, to account for all those variations, etc.

My issue with any systems that have "If you do X you'll become better at X" is that, while more realistic it just results in players doing things like swimming in circles for hours on end, or standing there healing themselves while a weak enemy wails on them, or somesuch rather than being required to advance by playing the game itself. At the very least you have to be mindful of what skills you're using so that you can increase what is most effective. In fact, games that do this tend to require doing this to be powerful enough to face it's challenges a good amount of the time. It's no less grindy than an EXP=levels=gaining skills system and maybe is more so, but regardless it's not immersive and creates an experience where one notices they are playing a video game more. The Elder Scrolls seems to be particularly bad about this but any system that use=skill advancement ends up having this problem in the end.

I've found that if I mod Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim with an EXP advancement system the entire game ends up being much less tedious, grindy, and much more immersive because I advance by playing the game itself. I make progress in the game, my character progresses. It works well.

 

[Kyrian007]

I think you are just trading one grind for another in this example. You can arguably do less random battles in 8, but each battle is much longer as you sit there and spam draw until you get everything you need out of a fight.

In 7 there isn't really a NEED to level the materia, the levels you'll gain in materia just playing through the game (so long as you keep character levels up) is good enough to beat it. The materia grind only really comes into play if you plan to do the extras. Which points back to the draw system in 8. Drawing spells is mandatory in 8, and leveling materia in 7 is optional. So I don't think the comparison tracks.

But it's all about perception, you do less encounters in 8 and even though they are longer it doesn't feel the same as doing a lot of quick fights. 8's leveling system didn't really do itself any favors and practically required you to invest in a grindy mini-game to power up "properly".

Well yes, those couple of dozen battles are longer in FF8. As long as 10 or so minutes each even. But seeing as how materia leveling in 7 is simply a random encounter... counter (meaning you just have to count 100 or in some instances 350 individual random encounters to get that level up) and each battle lasts at least 30 seconds or so (usually longer though)... it really isn't comparable time wise. And that was (again) just my 1 factor that really made the difference at that time in my life. Had I been a millennial instead of an Xer, I probably would have had enough free time (like I did in high and middle school) to put the 50 or so hours into 7 that I did FF1, or Dragon Quest. When I played 7 I liked it, it just felt like I wasn't going anywhere. I'd play for an hour or so every couple of days; and that's just long enough to visit a shop, organize inventory, and fight in a dozen or so random encounters and maybe level up every once in a while. And then I'd have to go to class, or study, or hang with friends or party. With 8, you could see a lot of progression in that kind of time frame. Even if I only had time for 1 or 2 random encounters... that's still 1 or 2 monster types I never had to fight again. The gains were just more tangible, and that's why I enjoyed it more. I never once had to run around, trying to trigger a random encounter. In 7, it felt like that's all I ever did. Now that's not true, I was doing a lot of different things in 7, its a really good game. But to me it felt like "wow, its 100 random encounters until I can cast Firea instead of Fire... well time to start running in circles in the overworld again." And that's the kind of grind that annoys me, a kind that 8 nearly eliminated when you compare it to 7.

And to get back to the thread topic, I don't hate random encounters... I do hate having to run around with my nuts on a griddle trying to lure the RNG into granting me another random encounter because I have to do 50 or 60 more before I can level up. Its the same reason I don't like MMORPG's. It really feels like, "hey, that mob just dropped a rat foreskin, I only have to get another 20 for that NPC I talked to a couple of hours ago so he will give me a quest to get 100 rat foreskins."

 

[Kyrian007]

My issue with any systems that have "If you do X you'll become better at X" is that, while more realistic it just results in players doing things like swimming in circles for hours on end, or standing there healing themselves while a weak enemy wails on them, or somesuch rather than being required to advance by playing the game itself. At the very least you have to be mindful of what skills you're using so that you can increase what is most effective. In fact, games that do this tend to require doing this to be powerful enough to face it's challenges a good amount of the time. It's no less grindy than an EXP=levels=gaining skills system and maybe is more so, but regardless it's not immersive and creates an experience where one notices they are playing a video game more. The Elder Scrolls seems to be particularly bad about this but any system that use=skill advancement ends up having this problem in the end.

I've found that if I mod Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim with an EXP advancement system the entire game ends up being much less tedious, grindy, and much more immersive because I advance by playing the game itself. I make progress in the game, my character progresses. It works well.

Wow, I had almost the exact opposite reaction to Skyrim in particular. I did enjoy the abandonment of the absurdity of killing x number of bandits and wolves and PING... suddenly you are a better blacksmith for some reason. But where other games ran into problems like you describe with people swimming in circles or healing continuously while weak enemies continually do damage... Skyrim actively punishes players who try to "game" this system. Sure in Skyrim you can powerlevel the Shield skill by letting low level drugar pound on your shield for hours until you have 100 in shield. But if you do that (or powerlevel any skill) your own character level increases... without any of your other skills improving. And when your level goes up, so does your enemies level. So yes, you can block really well. But your 15 in the sword skill won't be enough to damage the much tougher enemies you brought on yourself by "cheating." Players routinely ruined character builds by overleveling peaceful skills and getting pounded by the higher level enemies they brought on themselves. Or conversely, not being able to outfit or augment themselves properly by overleveling martial skills. It makes advancing the way you suggest, by playing the game itself, actually the best, quickest, and least frustrating way to play the game. It also discourages the "imma get gud at all skills" mentality because trying to level every possible skill creates the same problem. Each individual skill increase, increases your character level and eventually while your own skills are getting near say "mid game" levels... you will be fighting "end game" level enemies. Skyrim actually makes picking some specialties, and not using skills you don't want to level... the best way to play. Evolving a character rather than just creating them by putting points on a character sheet. If you aren't making a thief character, but are picking every lock and sneaking everywhere... well you are playing like a thief character so you ARE becoming one whether or not you wanted to. Its one of the better leveling systems I've ever encountered.

Are there ways to "game" it... yeah. Can you just cheese the system and become OP... well yes. But those methods are generally boring and tedious, and if you just level as you play you actually cruise through the game generally fairly OP everywhere you go. More than most games, Skyrim rewards playing the game the "right" way.

 

[Phoenixmgs]

Wow, I had almost the exact opposite reaction to Skyrim in particular. I did enjoy the abandonment of the absurdity of killing x number of bandits and wolves and PING... suddenly you are a better blacksmith for some reason. But where other games ran into problems like you describe with people swimming in circles or healing continuously while weak enemies continually do damage... Skyrim actively punishes players who try to "game" this system. Sure in Skyrim you can powerlevel the Shield skill by letting low level drugar pound on your shield for hours until you have 100 in shield. But if you do that (or powerlevel any skill) your own character level increases... without any of your other skills improving. And when your level goes up, so does your enemies level. So yes, you can block really well. But your 15 in the sword skill won't be enough to damage the much tougher enemies you brought on yourself by "cheating." Players routinely ruined character builds by overleveling peaceful skills and getting pounded by the higher level enemies they brought on themselves. Or conversely, not being able to outfit or augment themselves properly by overleveling martial skills. It makes advancing the way you suggest, by playing the game itself, actually the best, quickest, and least frustrating way to play the game. It also discourages the "imma get gud at all skills" mentality because trying to level every possible skill creates the same problem. Each individual skill increase, increases your character level and eventually while your own skills are getting near say "mid game" levels... you will be fighting "end game" level enemies. Skyrim actually makes picking some specialties, and not using skills you don't want to level... the best way to play. Evolving a character rather than just creating them by putting points on a character sheet. If you aren't making a thief character, but are picking every lock and sneaking everywhere... well you are playing like a thief character so you ARE becoming one whether or not you wanted to. Its one of the better leveling systems I've ever encountered.

Are there ways to "game" it... yeah. Can you just cheese the system and become OP... well yes. But those methods are generally boring and tedious, and if you just level as you play you actually cruise through the game generally fairly OP everywhere you go. More than most games, Skyrim rewards playing the game the "right" way.

Or you power level crafting...

 

[hanselthecaretaker]

My issue with any systems that have "If you do X you'll become better at X" is that, while more realistic it just results in players doing things like swimming in circles for hours on end, or standing there healing themselves while a weak enemy wails on them, or somesuch rather than being required to advance by playing the game itself. At the very least you have to be mindful of what skills you're using so that you can increase what is most effective. In fact, games that do this tend to require doing this to be powerful enough to face it's challenges a good amount of the time. It's no less grindy than an EXP=levels=gaining skills system and maybe is more so, but regardless it's not immersive and creates an experience where one notices they are playing a video game more. The Elder Scrolls seems to be particularly bad about this but any system that use=skill advancement ends up having this problem in the end.

I've found that if I mod Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim with an EXP advancement system the entire game ends up being much less tedious, grindy, and much more immersive because I advance by playing the game itself. I make progress in the game, my character progresses. It works well.

It probably depends on the game type for how viable it is, but in both Kingdom Come: Deliverance and RDR2 your “stats” are essentially efficiency variables, and they gain value by simply doing those types of things more. For example in the latter:

Health XP: ist fights, bow shots, fishing and other physical strength-related activities. Stamina XP: Sprinting, swimming and performing other strenuous activities.
Dead Eye XP: Trick shots, hanging, crafting and other survivalist-related activities.
Horse Bonding Level XP: Feeding, grooming and riding your horse.

It’s a very gradual increase to the respective pool “depth” of each, and you wouldn’t even know it happens if the +xp notifications didn’t pop up, but it works well because you don’t have to waste any time with sliders or toggles. Special perks are acquired through completing challenges and trading legendary animal parts for stat boosting trinkets. As long as the game is it never feels like a grind because they are things you would be doing anyways, and the abilities you always had are just made better almost autonomously in the background.

Kingdom Come is largely the same, but has a trade off system for perks. An example for one of the horse perks would be:

Heavy Duty Pony	Your horse can carry more, but moves more slowly. Can't be combined with Racehorse.
Racehorse	Your horse moves more quickly, but can carry less. Can't be combined with Heavy Duty Pony.

 

[happyninja42]

My issue with any systems that have "If you do X you'll become better at X" is that, while more realistic it just results in players doing things like swimming in circles for hours on end, or standing there healing themselves while a weak enemy wails on them, or somesuch rather than being required to advance by playing the game itself.

What you've just described is called practice. And it's exactly what does happen. Gold Medal swimmers, got that good....by swimming in circles (or lines usually) for hours on end, day in, day out. And while there is no healing magic, the idea that "you get better at doing this by practicing it until you are as good as can be" is pretty in keeping with how you actually get better at something.
Now if your problem with it is "And I find this kind of thing boring to play", ok fair enough, there's a reason we don't really watch hours and hours of Michael Phelps doing training in a pool, and instead just watch the races. But it's hard to say it's not at least basically accurate to how one would get better.

But there really isn't anything forcing a player to hold control down and sneak into a corner to level up Stealth. They could easily do it by just doing stuff. The fact that players choose the minimal effort, minimal engagement option, is basically on them.

 

[Trunkage]

Currently playing Shadow of War. Also known as Random Encounter: the Simulator

 

[Jarrito3002]

Currently playing Shadow of War. Also known as Random Encounter: the Simulator

That is random encounters done right. I don't know the algorithm but it just works especially running into a orc who you recruited and then betrayed you and now I keep shaming him and lowering their level.

Shadow of War will get no credit for its random encounters and more games need add nemesis systems or some variant. I want nemesis system to be the new thing big gaming runs into the ground.

 

[Gergar12]

Red Dead 2 random encounters... bandits, or townsfolk ambush you in the middle of nowhere for no reason.

 

[sXeth]

Eh, depends. In Exile (the first one), I'd be walking up to a Nephil dungeon so I can clear part of it out, and when I run low on magic or health go to the nearest town to recuperate and sell off any loot. Having to fight serious Nephil random encounters on the way there and back is grind on top of the grind.

OTOH, when wandering around looking for something to kill to level up before the enxt big grind in Nethergate, 3 goblins and a wolf that pose no threat isn't so annoying, just a slight delay.

Its been awhile, but I could swear Exile had the monsters visible on the map, they didn't just pop out at you (barring a few triggered events which were contextual). And the map monsters made sense for their regions, you wouldn't just have Nephil patrols knee deep in Slithzerikai territory or something.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Its been awhile, but I could swear Exile had the monsters visible on the map, they didn't just pop out at you (barring a few triggered events which were contextual). And the map monsters made sense for their regions, you wouldn't just have Nephil patrols knee deep in Slithzerikai territory or something.

That's true, though sometimes a monster could follow you way out of it's region.

 

[Specter Von Baren]

My issue with any systems that have "If you do X you'll become better at X" is that, while more realistic it just results in players doing things like swimming in circles for hours on end, or standing there healing themselves while a weak enemy wails on them, or somesuch rather than being required to advance by playing the game itself. At the very least you have to be mindful of what skills you're using so that you can increase what is most effective. In fact, games that do this tend to require doing this to be powerful enough to face it's challenges a good amount of the time. It's no less grindy than an EXP=levels=gaining skills system and maybe is more so, but regardless it's not immersive and creates an experience where one notices they are playing a video game more. The Elder Scrolls seems to be particularly bad about this but any system that use=skill advancement ends up having this problem in the end.

I've found that if I mod Morrowind/Oblivion/Skyrim with an EXP advancement system the entire game ends up being much less tedious, grindy, and much more immersive because I advance by playing the game itself. I make progress in the game, my character progresses. It works well.

Just to be clear, Rune Factory does have it so things like cooking makes you better at cooking but what I was trying to say is that everything feeds into your combat stats. Like watering your farm will improve your ability to use water magic.

 

[happyninja42]

Red Dead 2 random encounters... bandits, or townsfolk ambush you in the middle of nowhere for no reason.

The same ones, multiple times too. I remember having a convict in chains come running up to me on 4 separate occasions, asking me to free him. I was like "muthafucka I JUST got you back to custody not 3 days ago and we're doing this random encounter again?!"

 

[Drathnoxis]

I feel like this is an exaggerated expression that I've seen many people point out. But in all the years of rpg playing I've done, I have never played a game in which the encounter rate was so high. There is never a moment in which you are triggering fights that often in any game I can recall. Are there areas in some games where the encounters are maybe too high, sure, but not every two steps.

I think a lot of it comes from people also being lost or exploring the dungeon or area in which they don't actively know how much distance they cover between fights so the random encounters give the illusion of appearing very frequently.

I just watched SGF play Final Fantasy Legend II and it's pretty much this. You can run into an encounter every step so you will have situations where you will run into an encounter, take a step another encounter, two steps and another encounter, then maybe you will get to walk 10 or so before the next. You can also run into an encounter when you walk through a door before you even take a step. It's not always 3 steps, but it happens enough that it makes it feel like you can barely take a step without an encounter.

 

[immortalfrieza]

The same ones, multiple times too. I remember having a convict in chains come running up to me on 4 separate occasions, asking me to free him. I was like "muthafucka I JUST got you back to custody not 3 days ago and we're doing this random encounter again?!"

I don't know why they don't just randomize encounters only to a point with games like this. What I mean is, why can't they just have it so they pick something at random from a list of potential encounters and then just block off that encounter from occurring again, until eventually all possible encounters have occurred at least once? After that they start from having everything available again and picking at random and blocking encounters off again. That way players would not only be able to see all encounters eventually, but it would be ages before the player would see the same encounter again, more than long enough that it's still fresh when it does eventually happen again, if the encounters are few enough that the player can even see the same encounter twice in the same playthrough in the first place.

 

[happyninja42]

I don't know why they don't just randomize encounters only to a point with games like this. What I mean is, why can't they just have it so they pick something at random from a list of potential encounters and then just block off that encounter from occurring again, until eventually all possible encounters have occurred at least once? After that they start from having everything available again and picking at random and blocking encounters off again. That way players would not only be able to see all encounters eventually, but it would be ages before the player would see the same encounter again, more than long enough that it's still fresh when it does eventually happen again, if the encounters are few enough that the player can even see the same encounter twice in the same playthrough in the first place.

It would be a lot more immersive than the way they do have it, where I feel like I'm having a Groundhog's Day event. Another one I remember is a wagon being pulled by some Marshalls, or bounty hunters maybe, I dunno, law enforcement guys. And they've got a guy in there saying he's innocent, "he aint never killed nobody!" and the driver "boy, you killed your way across half the country!" "that's a lie! I aint never left *wherever he said he lived*" I ran into that fucking event at least 20 times, EVERY time I travelled along this one trail, next to the river near our basecamp. And it was fucking annoying, because apparently the game REALLY wanted me to involve myself in the events, seeing as it had it on repeat every 10 goddamn minutes. But the only interaction you could have with it, was to kill the lawmen, and free that guy. And I know this, because I tried to engage with it in some kind of White Hat manner, to stop it fucking showing up, but in order to get close enough to talk to them, I'm too close for comfort, and they draw guns and tell me to fuck off. And if you don't do it fast enough, it's an instant Black Hat action, and now I'm shooting people. So apparently I have to either do bad shit (which I don't want to do game, assuming I actually do have CHOICE), or just endure this repetitive mission showing up every fucking time I travel a heavily trafficked trail, that is a main route to my base.

Yeah I just really don't like RDR2. Too many aspects of it's design annoy the shit out of me.