Poll: Would you play an RPG that hides stats from the player?

[Velocity Eleven]

I find it kind of hilarious that people say "JRPGs don't offer you choices"

 

[Epona]

How would a level up be handled then? Unless they handled it well it could feel kind of like empty levels, although at the same time its an interesting idea.

I think the point is that there would be nothing to show that you did, in fact, level up. Think of it like a combination of Skyrim and EVE Online in regards to how you get abilities, only minus the numbers.

It should work like in real life: for example, let's say you grab a guitar and try to practice with it. Obviously, if you're just starting out, you're not going to be very good at it - unless you're replaying the game or something, I don't know how replays would work. So you dedicate some time to practicing the guitar, and after a long while, you're actually good enough to perform in front of other people without even realizing or seeing the transition.

It should be like that with swords and leveling up: you don't see any of the transitions, but you know you're getting better, and it'd feel more realistic.

In real life, most people would give up on learning the guitar. That completion rate of games with this system would be low.

Obviously it would be sped up from real life. Look at GTA IV's map size - Liberty City feels massive, and yet the whole thing would fit inside real-life New York's Central Park. What I'm saying is that things are scaled differently in games (they're typically smaller and faster), because while doing something (walking, for example) for five minutes in real life doesn't feel like much, in a game it seems to take a lot longer.

So you're saying "It's true it will be as boring as learning a guitar but atleast it won't take as long".

I think I'll stick with visible stats, thanks.

...?

I'm sorry, I don't know how the hell you pulled that out of what I said.

Though you do realize that leveling in this hypothetical game would occur at the same rate as in a game with visible stats, yes?

How would you be able to see progress without the stats? Seeing "Level Up" 99 times without the stats is meaningless.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

OT: it depends, if its a case of "go to shop, buy weapon, test it, reload save, buy different weapon, test it, reload save if the other was better" then I could see that being very boring

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

OT: it depends, if its a case of "go to shop, buy weapon, test it, reload save, buy different weapon, test it, reload save if the other was better" then I could see that being very boring

I'd just wait for everything to be documented online and then use the wiki or GameFAQs.

 

[Scarim Coral]

It sound like if LoZ had become MMO (I mean Link doesn't have much stats other than the heart meter) and abit of Monster Hunter (they only have body and weapon stats). In which case as long it's too hard to the point of frustration, I would like to try it out.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

Aesthetic effects that would not sufficiently replace stat numbers as they would not be as precise. You could have both and that would be fine but on it's own, your idea would pale in comparison to number based stats. Even a health bar type of stat system would be more precise than altering your avatar. Plus, it would not sit well with those who prefer to design the perfect character at the start of a game and not have that character altered outside of their control throughout the game.

Stat numbers impose a mechanical system on something biological. As much as we love playing with math, any equation that attempts to accurately measure these things would be flawed to begin with.

And people who want to make the perfect character have to be the most boring gamers I can think of.

 

[Moontouched-Moogle]

Sure.

Although I'd rather they just get rid of the stats altogether.

Agree.

RPG's are suppose to be about talking to the characters, learning their stories, and acquiring spifftastic stuff that LOOKS cool. Stats just get in the way, making people go for ugly stuff simply because it's +1 damage. Sooner stats go away, the sooner people get to wear what they want to wear.

Well, this is why some games have separated clothing and armor, like Phantasy Star Portable 2.

Actually, I think Phantasy Star Portable and Phantasy Star Portable 2 are good counter examples to the original post. The games are so chock-full of hilarious and/or cool looking unique weapons that I often find myself turning down better stuff because I want to beat up enemies with a giant popsicle, dammit! Also, for better or for worse, PSP2 gave you a single, static PP gauge for all your skills, as opposed to each weapon having their own like in PSP1, so that's one less stat to influence your choice of weapon.

(Unfortunately, the removal of weapon-based PP gauges made most weapons from Neudaiz useless, since they had higher PP in exchange for the lowest attack. Now the only good weapons from them are the magic based ones, since Neudaiz weapons have the best magic damage. Even the weapons from Moatoob are kinda broken, since their shtick was to provide a balance. This means that the only logical choice most of the time is weapons from Parum, which have high attack. (That is, until you get to the brand-neutral, crazy-looking special weapons.) Incidentally, this does cut down on the stat-obsession even more, but it is frustrating in how it limits gameplay. Rangers(gunners) and Force(magic) classes originally started underpowered but got better later on as you got stuff with more PP, but now that there's a single PP gauge that never increases in size, Rangers and Force got the shaft. It's like they WANT you to play as a Hunter(melee) or a Vanguard(variety).)

 

[Moontouched-Moogle]

It sound like if LoZ had become MMO (I mean Link doesn't have much stats other than the heart meter) and abit of Monster Hunter (they only have body and weapon stats). In which case as long it's too hard to the point of frustration, I would like to try it out.

Wait, did you mean NOT too hard? If not, then I applaud your tolerance for punishment.

 

[Mystify]

I've played some RPGS that did not tell you the stats, just general descriptions. It is just annoying. You have absolutely no clue if a given ability or item is worthwhile. even if there are stats, but no description of what they mean, then it becomes annoying. In the computer arena, RPGs are tactical. building your character is part of that strategy. Making them fulfill a certain role, increasing their power, it is the core of the game. The Role aspect of role playing is really poor with computers. They are simply not capable of handling that level of dynamic interaction. Tabletop RPGs can emphasize that much better.

The only way I could see it working well is if the game is very well balanced. A large part of what the stats bring is allowing you to assess if a given strategy is going to be feasible. If a dagger-weilding rouge build deals twice the damage as the knight with a broadsword, but the knight has 10x the survivability, then the rouge is an idiotic build with 1/5 the power. With stats, you can realize this before becoming a rouge. Hiding the stats just makes it so you can't avoid pitfalls like that. Even if all of the basic builds are well-balanced, it also posses a problem for more exotic strategies.

Esp when costs are involved. if you have to pay for that new sword, then discover that it is really unweildly, and doesn't function with your strategy at all, you have just punished the player for making a choice that they cannot have predicted ahead of time.

I won't say it can't work. But it would have to be designed very, very carefully.

 

[Scarim Coral]

It sound like if LoZ had become MMO (I mean Link doesn't have much stats other than the heart meter) and abit of Monster Hunter (they only have body and weapon stats). In which case as long it's too hard to the point of frustration, I would like to try it out.

Wait, did you mean NOT too hard? If not, then I applaud your tolerance for punishment.

Sorry I mean not too hard, my bad with the typo (hey I get frustration as any other gamers).

 

[Velocity Eleven]

Aesthetic effects that would not sufficiently replace stat numbers as they would not be as precise. You could have both and that would be fine but on it's own, your idea would pale in comparison to number based stats. Even a health bar type of stat system would be more precise than altering your avatar. Plus, it would not sit well with those who prefer to design the perfect character at the start of a game and not have that character altered outside of their control throughout the game.

Stat numbers impose a mechanical system on something biological. As much as we love playing with math, any equation that attempts to accurately measure these things would be flawed to begin with.

And people who want to make the perfect character have to be the most boring gamers I can think of.

I would think the pursuit of making the character as best as they possibly could be very interesting... I'm confused, how does "a player tries to get the best they can" translate into boring?

 

[CalPal]

@Supah: That's exactly the point. You're not 100% sure. You just kinda go into the fight or whatever, hoping you're really ready for what's ahead. That sense of vague vulnerability, I think, would lead to more exciting gameplay.

@Crono1973: It's not a guitar-learning simulator, it's a video game. Obviously you're not going to be droning over trying to practice the same thing over and over again to achieve basically nothing, you're inside an interactive environment that, at best, is incredibly fun to engage with. It's just that, as you develop your skills, you might be able to look back at the very beginning of your gameplay and realize 'Hey, it's actually much easier for me to kill these guys now than it was back then!', and it's not JUST because you can play the game better and aren't getting used to the controls: your abilities have been getting better without you noticing it.

 

[Aisaku]

Sounds great. It may help if it implemented improving one's stats by constant use, just like in FFIII, and it had visual cues for losing health, mana and telling the state of an item: If it gives you a boost, it looks shiny, if it's worse than your current armor, it looks lackluster.

 

[Velocity Eleven]

@Supah: That's exactly the point. You're not 100% sure. You just kinda go into the fight or whatever, hoping you're really ready for what's ahead. That sense of vague vulnerability, I think, would lead to more exciting gameplay

but that already exists as it is, in that you dont know exactly what your enemies can do, or you dont know a dungeon layout until after you've been through it

 

[kikon9]

I'd do it, if only just to see if I play any different without knowing my exact strengths.

 

[jpoon]

If it were crafted into a fun package then sure I might give it a try! Might turn out to by pretty interesting not having control over stats such as this but it might be pretty constricting so I'd have to see how it shaped up in the process of development.

 

[CalPal]

It might exist in that sense, but let's say, for example, if you know you're a level 25 or 30 something in Skyrim prepped with the best armor statistically, for example, you're pretty sure that you going to make it out of there alive. I admit, I haven't gotten the chance to play Skyrim yet - need a 360, and I'm restricting my laptop to school stuff - but if it's anything like what I can remember from Oblivion, once I hit a high enough level, I felt confident in going inside any cave or realm of Oblivion and doing my adventuring business without worrying whether I'm going to make it out alive.

Yes, Oblivion is likely very different from Skyrim, but that's beside the point. What I want to say is that, if you know you're a good fighter, but you're not sure whether you have the skills yourself to go inside that cave, then the rest of the game is about whether you're willing to take the step needed to go through that door and face whatever's inside, come hell or high water. And THAT is what an adventure should be all about: facing uncertainty in the face and screaming "LET'S MOTHERFUCKING DANCE!!"

 

[Tourmeta]

Genious! Call bethesda immediately!

At least a "pro" mode or whatever where it is like that.

 

[Epona]

How would a level up be handled then? Unless they handled it well it could feel kind of like empty levels, although at the same time its an interesting idea.

I think the point is that there would be nothing to show that you did, in fact, level up. Think of it like a combination of Skyrim and EVE Online in regards to how you get abilities, only minus the numbers.

It should work like in real life: for example, let's say you grab a guitar and try to practice with it. Obviously, if you're just starting out, you're not going to be very good at it - unless you're replaying the game or something, I don't know how replays would work. So you dedicate some time to practicing the guitar, and after a long while, you're actually good enough to perform in front of other people without even realizing or seeing the transition.

It should be like that with swords and leveling up: you don't see any of the transitions, but you know you're getting better, and it'd feel more realistic.

In real life, most people would give up on learning the guitar. That completion rate of games with this system would be low.

Obviously it would be sped up from real life. Look at GTA IV's map size - Liberty City feels massive, and yet the whole thing would fit inside real-life New York's Central Park. What I'm saying is that things are scaled differently in games (they're typically smaller and faster), because while doing something (walking, for example) for five minutes in real life doesn't feel like much, in a game it seems to take a lot longer.

Well, since the numbers are what make it an RPG, I'm gonna say: Emphatic no.

Who the hell plays an RPG to not understand the stats behind item A or character B. That would make it an action game... and not an RPG.

Edit: People on this site seem very confused as to what is an RPG (video game). Sorry, but RPG may be a misnomer, but the numbers are still what make it so. "Role play", that is more akin to improv acting, is better suited to the other kind of RP - table top.

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

Hardly. Role-playing games are, by definition, a game where you play a role - a game where you are forced to make decisions that alter the outcome of the game, just as they would in real life. Numbers and leveling are a staple of most RPGs, but they don't make an RPG an RPG. Bioshock had numbers, but I'm hardly going to call that an RPG because it offered the player no choice (Little Sisters aside, but all that did was change the ending cutscene).

@ OP - yes, in fact I was just talking with a friend yesterday about such a game and how it would feel a lot more natural. You'd get good with your sword or gun simply by using it, and would eventually notice the difference instead of simply watching your numbers tick up.

People say most JRPG's don't offer you choices but they are still recognized as RPG's.

I don't consider JRPG's to be RPG's. One of the single biggest misnomers in the gaming in gaming, if you ask me. They tend to be more like interactive films, offering the player even less choice than your average first-person shooter.

Well, in the SNES and PS1 days they were the most open games and they were more open than they are now. They were just RPG's though, not JRPG's.

Oddly enough, it seem that the more they TRY to become like WRPG's, the more linear they get. It's very confusing but that's ok, I'll continue playing the classics when I need that JRPG fix.

 

[MidnightSt]

As i am most intrigued by the phase of discovery in all games - the phase when i'm not sure how the game controls, what the mechanics and principles are, etc... I would DEFINITELY play it. I've been thinking about a game like that too.