The Case For Grinding in RPGs

[ssjdkcrew]

Just to be clear if it is the least bit engaging I don't consider it to even be grinding.

When I say "grinding," what I mean is, "any time, in a game, when one performs the same kind of action more than once, in order to acquire some bonus or enhancement to their character." That's all. This encompasses pretty much all forms of leveling, whether they're engaging or not. I'm using the word in this way, because this is how I hear others use it. Anytime a gamer has the freedom to stop the incessant plot points for an hour or two, and just relax and gain strength with some fighting/in-game working, I've heard this denounced as "grind," and so it's this kind of "grind," that I defend. That target is staying where it is, thank you.

Give people a small reward for each time something is completed and they will be so compelled to do it all reason will be set aside just to get that next reward, and then the next, and then the next,...
It is certainly a very interesting observation of our brain, but it is none the less a principle that traps people in an infinite loop of pointless tedium... no part of that is a good thing.

What you just described is essentially how all video games work, even as far down the ladder as Tetris and pong. You're doing this over and over because of the reward you notice. You're moving blocks over and over, because when they disappear, you get more points, and don't have to worry as much about space.

In any case, RPGs are just about the only setting in which tedium (in the worst case scenario,) is guaranteed to not be pointless, since you always get a skill/level/gold/equipment/feature increase through it, and therefore it feels more like an accomplishment than the normal tedium, which we all face in our lives and jobs.

This stuff isn't really as black and white as people think

For example, in ME2, I considered doing that crummy space resource collection mini game as grinding cause it's pretty banal. (Since you do need it to get the perfect ending)

While I couldn't say the exact same thing as redoing those special high level maps in PoE because I enjoying doing them. (Risk and reward, you need to pay attention to your surrounding, etcetc) Same thing probably apply to WoW along with most MMO with an end game content. (Or anything with WoW like quest design anyway, since the quest system is streamline enough the leveling up is basically given to you right in the face)

It also depends on the speed of that "grinding".

DS for example, you can get most of your character build up and running under 20 minutes if you know what you are doing.

And no level of grinding/magic can save you in DS if you don't know what you are doing.

Yes. There are a lot of factors, which can determine whether a specific game's grinding will be good or bad.

 

[Blaster395]

I find grinding to be entertaining in itself only if the difficulty level is suitably challenging for it to force me to concentrate on what I am doing. Lots of games just make the grind boring by making it too easy. Games that do grinding well give you options to make it more difficult for a correspondingly increased reward (though they also give you the option to make it easier, because I can understand some people enjoy easier content because it's relaxing to play).

The worst thing grinding can do is mix it with travelling time, as most MMOs still do. What is the gameplay in forcing players to press the forwards button for 10 minutes in between collecting 9 bear asses? That's not to say longer travel times as a game mechanic is always bad, but it is bad when used as padding for what is already padding.

 

[Timpossible]

As long as the fighting is fun I'm okay with grinding. Like in Dark Souls...Grinding can be fun, because very fight is fun. So as long at is not some random encounter fights with eternal animations going on I'm fine.

 

[ssjdkcrew]

I'm of mixed feelings. Grinding used to mean exclusively fighting battles in RPGs or other games with levelling systems to become powerful enough to survive the next dungeon or boss. Now it's used as a catchall for any less-entertaining task not related to the story.

I can enjoy some grinding in RPGs when the benefits are readily apparent. Where you can gain new abilities or equipment with just a little bit of time investment, or if there are newly explorable areas or side quests that not only make you stronger, but develop NPCs.

You're right. This is key. When a character is made stronger through effort, the player should notice it, due to more than just a changing number in a subscreen somewhere. Like, being able to defeat an enemy in three hits instead of five, or execute a new kind of slash during a combo (a-la Kingdom Hearts.)

However, mandatory grinding is always something to avoid. All of my favourite RPGs require zero grinding if you are a good enough tactician. You can grind if you want to make the upcoming battles less stressful, but it's never required of you. In other words, it's a more time-consuming way of turning on easy mode. You call it training and satisfaction of payoff for work, but it's not really the player who is practising, but the character(s) they are controlling. Unless the player is actually practising with game mechanics they're not yet completely familiar with, but in most RPGs that's not really something you need to worry about since their controls and mechanics are usually fairly straightforward. Also, games should never feel like work. To me, my games are the payoff for a hard day's work, and they themselves should not be work-like.

Well, I certainly agree that it's the character who's doing the training, not the player, because that's what an RPG is. The character, not the player, succeeds or fails by their own merits.

I don't think games that require grinding are unredeemable, but I admit to preferring those where you have a choice in the matter, such as Kingdom Hearts and Quest For Glory.

OT: In my opinion, grinding as defined as "hours of time spent doing repetitive actions, in order to be of appropriate strength to take on the next boss the game put in front of you" is a sign of poor design.

I don't define it in this way. Based on the context in which I've heard the word used, the typical definition seems to be...
"Performing the same type of action multiple times, in order to gain some reward."

To keep the player engaged in the story of the game you made, you need to have the advancement match the pace of the game.

Here I agree. Therefore, to implement grinding effectively into a story-based game, it helps to have several points in the game where the pace slows down, allowing the player to take a breath and grind in peace.

Final Fantasy 10 did this a lot, in fact most of the FF games I played did.

Many do, yes. I can't say for certain if FF4 or FF6 did it, but since those are my favorite Final Fantasy titles to date, I suspect it probably didn't happen that way in those games. Also, I know for certain that it didn't happen that way in Chrono Trigger.

But I mean, you have some big fight with a bad boss, and he does some epicly evil shit to the world!! We have to stop him right away!! Oh wait, nah let's go run around the Thunder Plains for 15+ leveling up first, I'm sure he'll put his plans on hold until we're done.

I see it as being more similar to an enemy in something like a shonen anime. Yes, they're going to cause harm if allowed to do so, but if you tried to fight them as you are, you'd never be able to win. Therefore, your character must go through some kind of special training in order to get to the point where he can fight on their level. I agree, however, that stressing the sense of urgency in the storyline while discouraging it in the gameplay is a bad move.

But yeah, if you can't design the game where your characters are strong enough to fight the next threat without hours and hours of grind, you did something wrong.

Now, -that,- I don't agree with. This kind of situation pops up all the time, both in stories and in real life, where characters are unprepared for an evil force, and we've got to have the freedom to depict it.

In stories, movies or books, there is usually a small amount of Training Montage that the heroes go through, but it's usually a very short section of the story, not the majority of the game. And if I have to clock in more Grind Hours than Story Hours in your game, simply to finish your game, then there is something wrong there.

See, I have nothing against games having an involving story, but ultimately, in the end, the story of most games is not something which is significantly effected by the specific actions and choices of the player character. Because of this, while I think it's good for games to have stories, and good ones, I don't think it has as much to do with the game's core RPG-ness as any action (including grinding,) in which the player character participates. It's also less involving (in a literal sense) to the player. When I play an RPG, I'm not in a hurry to rush from one story point to the next, nor do I care to spend half the game reading/listening to character dialogue over which I have no control. I'd rather just relax and play the game.

Thing is, at the time I didn't really mind at all, I actually were looking forward to go heckler hunting or farm mortigs for hours on end, but why?
The answer is rather simple, it was the people.
Whenever we grinded back then, we basically just talked about stuff while killing things over and over again. The game was more like a chatroom than anything else, just something to do while we talked about what the best sandwich was or whatever.
The grinding was boring yes, but because it was boring you started to talk with strangers and actually ineract with them.
Same with WoW, as it wasn't until we raided the same place for the 10th time on auto pilot with alts that the really funny moments happened.

These days the grind is all but gone, and I notice the effect it has. You just go in, get what you wanted and thats it, now what?

Just think about it for a moment. If you are working on something, and fully concentrated at what you are doing, you can't talk to the people around you about the latest episode of Game of Thrones right? But when you have done it 10 000 times and don't have to think at all, that's when you can actually get to know the people around you.

I'm sorry, but there are much less expensive ways to chat with real people, and the one thing I would never talk about while playing an RPG, is anything outside the game world. When I play an RPG, I'm the character; not the player, and anyone who doesn't at least try to RP with me is just a distraction. I obviously think grinding does have a place in single-player games, but there are reasons why I don't play MMOs, and grinding isn't one of them.

Dark Souls is a good example in the sense that you can go through the game at base stats. Leveling is used more to accomodate play style than OP'ing your toon. i.e. in many other RPG you do not stand a chance against even level 10 monsters with a new character. Yet, you can pretty much walk around all of NG with an upgraded character, kill everything by looking at it, and never even get scratched. Dark Souls isn't like that. You will never need to "grind" a level to get past a section you are having trouble with.

But you can if you want to, right? As I said, I think that's pretty important.

Are we talking about grinding for XP or simply any form of grinding in games (doing the same stuff over and over to get a reward)?

"Performing the same type of action multiple times, in order to gain some reward."

IMO if a game makes you do tedious and repetitive grinding for at least 12 hours to make the game more fun and varied is doing something wrong. It robs you of both time and enjoyment.

Well, that can't be, because *I enjoy* grinding when it's implemented well.

 

[ssjdkcrew]

I think Yahtzee covered that as well. I recall he was bashing a game because you had to go find a way to amuse yourself...while playing a game...

Yahtzee and I don't agree on much, but we agree on this much; "if I ever need to lose money, I can just throw it off a bridge."

That's one of my biggest pet peeves as well in JRPG's, though I wouldn't necessarily call it grinding but rather poor immersion breaking story pacing. In FFVI when you get to the World and hit the mainland with Celes, Kefka has for all intents and purpose already won and is just happily sitting up in his tower as the god clown king of the world occasionally raining terror down among the people. The calamity has settled and it makes sense that you have time to explore to find your allies and gain strength before confronting Kefka. But this great setup was more by accident than design, as every other FF game since Square has gotten it totally wrong. In FFVII there's this big evil meteor hanging in the sky en route to destroy the world... should Squall really be spending months-in game breeding and racing chocobos? And the reward when you get a block chocobo is the ultimate materia that simply makes that game a joke from that point on.

It was Cloud, actually, but yes; I agree. This isn't really a grinding issue, but it -is- an issue.

On the PC or WPRG end, though for the most part they've gotten much better getting around it, I've always found the similar problem is the incessant need for wizards/sorcerers to rest and regain their spells. We've just torn through the enemy camp and now there's a big evil villain just past this final door, but Mordock's out of spells so better stop and setup camp for 8 hours to get back to full strength.

It's why in games from Balders Gate to Neverwinter Nights to Morrowind I could never play a wizard!

See, I -want- to play a wizard in all of those games from time to time, and in some of them, fortunately, it makes some sense. For example, the imminent threat level in Morrowind is hardly ever pressing, which is a common thread in TES games, from what I've seen. So that way, it doesn't come across as a plot hole that your character must (MUST, remember,) stop and rest in order to get their MP back. Indeed, a pure wizard wouldn't be -able- to continue on with the quest, if they have no MP left. They would have to find a good place to hide, and wait for their MP to come back, so that makes sense to me, in the context of the story. I get it.

What I don't get, is missions where you're told "you've got to get these guys quickly, or they'll escape, or destroy us, or something." Then you have no choice but to rest and it -feels like- a plot hole that the bad guys don't do -evil thing X- while you're resting. That would be the issue I've noticed.

Despite how it seems on the internet these days JRPG's were never really a popular genre until they got a boost from FFVII. In the 8-16 most never even got translated, including juggernaut series like FF and Dragon Quest. If you didn't like FFVI, which had already started streamlining a lot of the grinding elements from early RPG's, then these just weren't your games.

This is my point exactly. It seems like those who -did- like RPGs back in the days before FF7 are being hung out to dry, largely because a lot of people who don't like playing RPGs are now playing RPGs and complaining about not liking them. I'd love for more people to be able to like the same games I like, but not by warping a whole genre of gaming into something unrecognizable from what it was before.

The thing with the Skinner Box though is that it's not inherently bad by itself. Especially in the earlier 8 or 16 bit days when games were typically short, expensive, and you were probably a kid and had a limited selection.

I have a ton of Genesis games, and most didn't last me more than one afternoon. There was a reason for that; namely, this was before memory cards were created, so games had to store save data on the cartridge itself, and lots of developers didn't want to do that. Because of that, only a handful of games were long enough to need saves (Sonic 3K, Super Mario World, the Legend of Zelda games, Final Fantasy, Dragon Quest, Light Crusader, Landstalker, Sword of Vermillion and a few other RPGs, generally.) Indeed, this is one reason why I got into the Elder Scrolls to begin with; I knew I'd get over a month's worth of gameplay out of them, even without doing every last sidequest.

Also in some cases the challenge isn't necessarily in the specific random battle itself, but rather the sequence of them as you need to navigate from point A to point B. A game like Phantasy Star 2 which I mentioned, and Dragon Quests were all like this as well, it's more a battle of attrition and a game of strategic resource management.

Yes, I did notice that about PS2. You could spend time leveling, and indeed, if you didn't, you were in trouble, but leveling didn't have so much of an impact, that you could get by without carefully planning what you were going to carry into dungeons.

But back to the Skinner box, in my opinion the problem starts when developers start using it in a cold & cynical manner. In WoW Blizzard wants to hook you indefinitely so you keep coming back and paying your monthly subscription, so the game has no end and is carefully crafted to maximize the carrot on a stick effect to keep people grinding away. In a game like Farmville, you're dealing with something that's not really a game and an audience that aren't really gamers so the time/reward element is cynically crafted to subtly hook them and keep them playing. Same with all the newer FTP mobile games, which may take an actual game play element like Bejeweled and wrap a skinner box around it to encourage players to part with their money.

This is another reason why I don't play subscription games. Aside from the monetary cost, it leaves one open to abuses like this, which give the developers another reason to reduce the total substance of the experience (plus, the bad guys in WOW must feel like they're in Groundhog Day. Nothing ever changes about the game world.)

In my mind, grinding is basically the same as a game that's really difficult like Dark Souls: you spend a lot doing the same thing over and over again and eventually you get rewarded.

Yup. That's what I mean by "grinding," though I don't think it's the same thing as "game difficulty."

Rewards are just more satisfying when you had to do something to get them. The only difference is that people who have good reflexes (or whatever the game requires) can get those rewards faster while grinding takes more patience, or sometimes strategy, to get a thing done. So long as the thing you have to do is fun, then who cares if it's the same thing over and over. Though I would also be in the camp of people without time to spare so I probably won't be playing a game FF8 over again any time soon

Heh. Me either, although for me, FF8's problem was mainly the storyline and characters. Still, this is another reason why I loved Kingdom Hearts so much. You could overpower enemies by grinding up to a level superior to theirs, or if you were agile enough, you could defeat them at a lower level, because the game allowed you free range of motion. This is a style of RPG that I would really like to see more of; more freedom in both the training and movement of your character.

No, grinding is stupid, pointless and it either breaks you away from the game or breaks the game itself, and neither is good. The best RPGs are the ones that integrate leveling with the natural progression of the game itself, making it nigh impossible to be underleveled or overleveled at any point

No, the best RPGs are not the ones with lots of hand-holding, to keep you from going off the railroad set for you by the developers. I certainly disagree.

 

[RICHIERICAN]

I'm playing skyrim again and I discover a few caves and ruins that never found with my first few play thoughs!

 

[default]

I don't see any reason for it to exist at all from a design perspective. One could argue that requiring grinding is actually a massive failure on the part of the designers, as from naturally progressing through the game the player has not been given enough resources to complete the next challenges, requiring them to go out of their way and perform monotonous and repetitive tasks in order to be able to continue. It's stupid, frankly. It doesn't need to be a thing and it shouldn't.

Grinding doesn't even make sense to me for rare random drops. Why are rare drops from, say, dungeon bosses a thing? Why are you forcing your player to replay the same thing over and over again? Why not make the attainment of this item require a feat of skill rather than attention span?

All grinding is doing is tricking a player into thinking they are achieving something as they make the numbers go high enough so that they can use the pretty sword. It's just bleh. It's a tired and archaic design principle.

 

[small]

In general, I hate grinding. As one of those gamers who somehow became an adult, I have much less time than I did back in my yesteryears. Final Fantasy (and JRPG's in general) used to be some of my favored games. Now so many of them go unplayed by yours truly because they take 80+ hours to play with half of that being grinding.

The only time grinding is fine with me is a time when...well...anything would be fine with me; when it's fun.

For example, I just finished Saint's Row IV (you should go play it if you haven't; I'll wait here....you done? Good). I found myself running all over the place doing all the mini-missions because they were fun and hilarious. What I was doing WAS grinding (doing a bunch of little actions that don't advance the story in order to become stronger) but they were FUN to do. That's the big variable that so many "grinding" games forget; if I'm not having fun (or getting some kind of emotion besides "fuck me I'm so freaking bored"), then you have failed at your game.

That however is where the definition of "Fun" messes with grinding. What I find fun is going to be different from you what you find fun is going to be different than what my Dad finds fun is going to be different from what a ten year old girl is going to find fun...

saints row 4 does grinding right.. lets take a tank out and blow crap up or lets go play in traffic.

 

[TheSapphireKnight]

I'm of the mind that you should not have to 'grind' to play through the core of the game. As long as you don't ignore every enemy on the path towards completing the main game, you should be about ready to fight the final boss when it comes down to it.

I don't mind grinding for side-bosses that are supposed to be tough as long as it is not a consistent need to grind in order to progress.

The issue I have with grinding lately is that it seems to be the only way many developers seem to know how to keep players invested. This is not just an issue with RPGs anymore, CoD and more recently Destiny seem to be all about keeping players on a treadmill rather than taking them on a hike to visit somewhere completely new. Both methods keep things 'healthy', but the treadmill requires a lot less effort on the part of the developers and publishers.

Player growth should not always be about levels and loot.

 

[Little Gray]

I don't see any reason for it to exist at all from a design perspective. One could argue that requiring grinding is actually a massive failure on the part of the designers, as from naturally progressing through the game the player has not been given enough resources to complete the next challenges, requiring them to go out of their way and perform monotonous and repetitive tasks in order to be able to continue. It's stupid, frankly. It doesn't need to be a thing and it shouldn't.

Grinding doesn't even make sense to me for rare random drops. Why are rare drops from, say, dungeon bosses a thing? Why are you forcing your player to replay the same thing over and over again? Why not make the attainment of this item require a feat of skill rather than attention span?

All grinding is doing is tricking a player into thinking they are achieving something as they make the numbers go high enough so that they can use the pretty sword. It's just bleh. It's a tired and archaic design principle.

It makes perfect sense from a design perspective. It is used to artificially extend the length of a game so they can either brag about how long it is or to to disguise how little content is actually in the game.

 

[Gamerpalooza]

CAR theory seriously. From Glued to Games.

It helps us satisfy the needs in our lives.

Grinding is basically part of competence: The feeling of mastering. The sense that you're growing, learning, and progressing.

The growing and progressing part is what's part of grinding. Since you grind for exp (grow) and grind to get loot to tackle the harder aspects of the game (progression).

 

[Riotguards]

just gonna respond to your one comment

1. Simulated training.

Bruce Lee once said that he feared not the man who'd practiced 10,000 kicks once, but rather, the man who'd practiced one kick 10,000 times. Well, the same is true when training oneself in anything. Any skill, in order to be mastered, must be practiced over and over, and if one does so, one distinctly improves in it. Imitating this factor of skill or character improvement in a natural way (rather than, for example, buying new skills at the local shop, a-la Spider-man 2,) is going to involve repetition, to simulate the repetition that would be involved in *actually* training that skill. That's what everybody means by "grind."

Video games, remember, are a form of art, and if art is going to imitate life, we've got to let it have the freedom to not be immediately and instantly entertaining for every single second of the game, but that said...

the meaning behind Bruce Lee's quote is that by practising one type of kick you are able to understand pretty much everything related to that one kick, all the pro's and cons and just what you are capable of

you don't get anything from sitting on a chair moving a mouse and typing all day

so how exactly do you train anything other than micromanagement and move the mouse around (plus clicking)

your character gets better, not you

 

[ssjdkcrew]

What's worse about JRPGs is that they almost always have shit combat systems, and they make you constantly fight. The whole point of turn-based combat is to be strategic, that's why it's turn-based. But most JRPGs are just your team on one side vs the enemies are the other side thus positioning doesn't factor into the battle. Any good turn-based game from chess to DnD, positioning plays a key role in battle. If you remove positioning, most of the strategy is removed as well.

This is one reason why I loved the first two "Shining Force" games so much. It gives the player something to do while grinding, but not in such a way that the player feels like an intruder in the mind of the main character.

Most JRPGs allow you to grind for resources so it's not really a resource management game when you have unlimited resources at hand.

If you're suggesting implementing a more realistic system of economics into modern RPGs, you're on the nose with that one.

Random battles only even were a thing due to hardware limitations yet continued on for far too long when the hardware was more than capable.

I don't see that there's any problem with largely-random encounters. D&D allows for this, so modern RPGs can do the same. After all, if you can predict each battle before it happens, it removes a lot of the fun.

My typical playthrough of FF8 is about 90-100 hours, half of which is grinding spells and weapon upgrades. In Skyrim, one of my characters was level 71 before I started the main quest lines (smithing, enchanting and alchemy can go a very long way apparently), most of the combat was centered around odd jobs from innkeepers and clearing mines for ore. FYI, at level 71, hitting the Greybeards (when you are sent to meet them for the first time) with Fus causes them to go berserk and kill you.

My problems with FF8 were numerous, but my biggest ones were the story not making sense, the characters being utterly strange and unsympathetic, and yes, the fact that the grinding often felt unrewarding. I think, for me, this is because the whole system of "drawing magic" actually seems to be there to discourage you from grinding in the more traditional way, and if I want to be discouraged from grinding, I can play an action game, like Psychonauts.

Fair enough, you're obviously looking at it from a different point of view than I am.

Yeah. With other kinds of games, the character may just be an "avatar" or "toon" to represent the player, but in RPGs, while the player is still the decision-maker, it should be the *character* who does the accomplishing.

That was just the first example that came to mind. I remember grinding on the original Phantasy Star as being the same kind of thing.

It basically was. Shining Force, on the other hand, was very different, which is why I refer to it in such a positive light.

Grinding is why I only play MMOs for 1 week every 2-4 months. 7 years ago, I could grind all day, but every year I have less patience towards repetition.

I have more patience with repetition than I ever did. I just wouldn't play a game that required regular payments; and certainly not one that I was only going to play for 1 week every 2-4 months.

I remember when going from mashing 1 button over & over again to using a set of unlockable, upgradable moves in timely order was a huge step forward, but I'm getting bored of that too.

Depends how different the moves make the game feel. If there's some sense that your character is progressing, that's about all I need on that score.

I wish RPGs would spice it up by taking a Pokemon approach....Making it so that we have to use completely different sets of techniques for different kinds of enemies instead of bashing the same order of keys for each one. (There probably are some, but none that I'm presently aware of).

Heck, yeah!

Forced grinding is laborious, optional grinding is fine.

If someone were forcing me to grind, I might not enjoy it either. However, we agree that optional grinding is indeed fine.

That way the people that really love the game and it's mechanics and want to be masters of the game can do so.

And the people that want to pick it up, play through it and finish in a reasonable amount of time can do so.

Everybody wins!

Personally I don't mind a little grinding and sometimes what some may consider grinding I may find fun, but it all depends.

Right. It will depend on whether the grinding is done well or badly, and like any gameplay mechanic, either one is always a possibility.

 

[008Zulu_v1legacy]

My problems with FF8 were numerous, but my biggest ones were the story not making sense, the characters being utterly strange and unsympathetic, and yes, the fact that the grinding often felt unrewarding. I think, for me, this is because the whole system of "drawing magic" actually seems to be there to discourage you from grinding in the more traditional way, and if I want to be discouraged from grinding, I can play an action game, like Psychonauts.

Any story that involves a complex issue such as time travel can be difficult to follow. Ultimecia knew that you (Squall, etc) were going to kill her, so her plan to compress time is a means to becoming a God. Which would give her the power needed to defeat you. Her defeat causes time to loop, because she is still going to be born in the future and the cycle starts itself all over again.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I don't see that there's any problem with largely-random encounters. D&D allows for this, so modern RPGs can do the same. After all, if you can predict each battle before it happens, it removes a lot of the fun.

Random battles are a major hindrance to exploration. If I want to go over and check out a corner of the map, I have to go there fighting enemies (fine), check to see if there is something worth anything there (which is probably not), then I have to come back to my starting location fighting enemies along a path I just fucking cleared (not fine). Also, random battles are totally immersion breaking in the fact that the world is supposed to be teeming with creatures and yet it is barren with nothing. The Calm Lands of FFX is open and supposed be loaded with monsters yet my backyard is more interesting. Just because a game doesn't have random battles does not mean you can't have random encounters where say an enemy pops out from under a bridge and stuff like that. Several RPGs don't have random battles and aren't any less fun. A game like XCOM has enemies at random positions on the map, but the battles aren't random. And, I can predict that almost every battle in your standard JRPG will play out just like 99.9% of other battles regardless if the game has random battles.

 

[ssjdkcrew]

It depends. I feel ATLUS is god damn brilliant at this. Look at Persona 4, unless you know how to exploit it (which every Man and his mother claims is obvious) the game throws absurd amounts of encounters at you between bosses. BUT, it doesn't throw checkpoints, nor does the checkpoints heal you. This is very important, because it means you are constantly struggling to manage your leveling, your SP because your god damn useless without any, your HP and your dating sim remaining days which are precious and painful to lose but losing one can restore every other problem...but you lose precious social link days by doing so.

That's a good point. A game with lots of grinding can be made difficult by simply making the grinding difficult.

It feels like you're calling a learning curve or perhaps leveling as a whole and grinding the same thing, and they aren't.

The latter, not the former. Any time you do the same thing multiple times, in order to achieve some advantage, it falls under what I've heard people call "grinding."

What I would call grinding is certainly a bad thing. Look at Persona 1, you have a random encounter every two or three steps in dungeons in that game and by the second dungeon you have to run through it three or four times to be able to take on the boss simply because the game can't properly balance them to a reasonable level range. Or the older dragon quest games where you had to walk out of town, farm slimes and go back to town to heal for three+ hours, and only then would you not get one-shot by the first dungeon's basic mobs.

Dragon Quest's grinding was of the most basic sort, but it wasn't the worst that I've ever seen grinding done, because at least there was some sense of progression for your character. I've seen RPGs where levels made far less of a difference most of the time.

The game doesn't get any more difficult, or require increasing skill on the part of the player, it's not giving greater intellectual stimulation or thought, it simply demands your numbers to be higher.

Because it's an RPG. Sure, it's nice when the player can be directly involved in the choices of your character's moves (Chrono Trigger, Shining Force, etc...) or in the action itself (Secret of Mana, Kingdom Hearts, Beyond Oasis, etc...) but engaging with the player is simply not the purpose of an RPG in the way you're suggesting. The player becomes engaged in the world of the RPG because he/she becomes engaged with the *character.* The *character* faces challenges and overcomes them, and this is rewarding to the player as well, because it gives the player a chance to step outside of themselves for once. It's simply not the purpose of an RPG for the player to improve, but for the character to improve.

Nobody's asking to be handed everything at once and blow through it, they just don't want a time sink between the parts of the game that are fun or actually matter.

Again, you're attempting to co-opt the word "fun," as though the things I find "fun" don't matter. It won't work.

As for events that "actually matter," it's a video game. None of this matters. The objective is that we enjoy it, and if I enjoy spending time training a character to make them stronger, why is that a problem?

Another way to put it: Would you watch a movie that made you watch six hours of a white screen between every act? That's what a grind is.

No, in a grind, you're not on a white screen. You're doing the same action multiple times, in order to gain some benefit.

Interesting, but I would contend that there's more to role playing as a character than leveling up their stats.

I have no problem at all with there being *more* to role playing than this, just so long as there isn't *less.* Yet, so often, they remove the stat-leveling, or include it mainly as an afterthought, as though it makes no difference at all.

Player choice, player urgency, and the strength of the story matter more.

Agreed, but only with respect to the third one; the strength of the story. Player choice and player urgency are just ways to make the player feel more involved in the life and quest of their character, and certainly, they serve their purpose, but neither one is as important as the feel of the character experiencing improvement, and gaining rewards in exchange for their work.

In Dark Souls your character is a blank slate, allowing you to design their personalities, race, and beliefs. It's similar to Bethesda that way. The difference is that, while you can soul farm (grinding), the game expects the player to improve along with the character. Even more impressive, they manage to make all of this fit into the narrative of the game.

Sounds like my kind of game, though I'm sorry to say, I've never played it.

Does it really make sense for the cast of ff7 to stop in the middle of a shinra base so they can workout for three hours?

This is a problem with the *pacing* of the game. When a game stresses urgency too much, forgetting that it's an RPG, and training will play a central part in it, absurdities like this creep in.

And does it really show character progression when when the only thing that changes is that Cloud now does 500 damage instead of 200?

Sure it does. Cloud has been training hard, and now he can hit the enemy harder than he could before. Indeed, if the character himself doesn't gain greater power, either in this area or some other, there is no character progress at all.

I won't say that makes the game "not an RPG," but it's certainly much less like what I want to see in RPGs.

If the story and writing is good enough, then the focus should be on either the protagonists or the world they inhabit anyway.

Lots of games have good stories these days, and many of them, without character improvements, or with only minimal character improvements, are not RPGs. You don't need to play an RPG to get a good story anymore. These features are not unique to RPGs, nor should they be allowed to interfere with the core gameplay mechanics of an RPG.

I don't think relying on player skill somehow robs the protagonist of their central role

That depends.

If you mean "relying *only* on player skill," then yes, I do.

If you mean "relying on player skill *as well as* having character skill improvements," then no. I really don't.

Remember, this is a video game, not a book. The game's story may be great, but it's the gameplay elements present that ultimately determine many things, and this is one of them.

Keep in mind that I'm not against leveling up as a concept, I'm against having to stop what you're doing in order to meet arbitrary level requirements. There should be more to difficulty than what level you are.

In real life, some tasks are harder or easier, on the basis of the level of your skill in that area. RPGs are just taking that to its logical conclusion, by allowing difficulty of some tasks to be dependent on numerical values, associated with the skill of the character. These numbers are usually associated with fighting skill, but not always, and in my view, RPGs are at their best when they have *many* skills to grind, such as the Elder Scrolls or Quest For Glory series'.

If a game focuses on player skill then it typically allows for more complex boss fights that require more thought and strategy, as opposed to simply hitting the opponent harder than before. Improved enemy A.I. and more complex boss fights should be encouraged. Dark Souls does this wonderfully, and I don't think it's any less of an rpg because of it.

Agreed, and as I've said before, it's possible to do grinding well, and to do it poorly.

Putting in time and effort to work towards being able to blast through the next few stages in a God-Mode-esque way is very satisfying.

Sure is, because you worked hard, and were rewarded for it.

Having to put time and effort in just to be able to survive the next Boss encounter is frustrating and bad game design.

Truth be told, I sort of agree, but only in theory. By this I mean that I almost never notice the difference between the two, since if a game will let me grind, I grind.

If you say "yes", I have nothing else to say except "well enjoy your digital bowel movements".

I did find it more realistic, so if the goal is total realism, then yes. It adds something.

However, unless the point of the game is indeed to be realistic in that sense, I wouldn't waste the time adding it. However, I do love when games require you to eat and sleep, and sometimes, when they require you to drink. It's one of my favorite things about the first "Dark Cloud" game.

Third, just because many games omit one thing, doesn't mean they should also omit a completely different kind of thing, or they'd end up omitting everything.

Slippery Slope

Omission of one facet does not imply omission of all, otherwise there would be no game.

Exactly, and in the same way that this would be a fallacy, it's also a fallacy to say that because most games omit bathroom breaks, they should also omit character-training.

You don't see many TV repair or sheep shagging simulators. Gaming is a luxury in the free market.

Actually... That's false. In fact, games are *not* a luxury. Anyone can make a game with a pencil and a piece of paper. I designed one myself using OpenOffice Spreadsheet and two Word Documents. I haven't finished ironing out all the rules for monsters yet, but it's got 8 attributes, dozens of skills, a virtually limitless ceiling for gains, ten armor types, at least six types of weapons, not counting hand-to-hand, and a combat system with custom rules for charging, shooting, gaining advantages based on the terrain, and the distance from the enemy. I haven't quite ironed out some of the monster mechanics and content, but in every other respect, it's totally playable, and I did it all without paying anyone a cent.

So I ask; why is my game to be treated in an inferior way to actual RPGs, if they can't offer half of that?

Like the setting and mechanics.
Of course, there's a limit, as determined by what is or isn't a necessary level of detail for a given production.
Why? Because there's an added burden of cost associated with the added level of detail desired.

Right, and the precise cost will vary depending on the *kind* of detail desired. Sadly, many game companies tend to prioritize detail of *graphics* over other details, which matter more and cost less.

Why should the character care? They aren't real.
If you aren't "training" the player in use of mechanics or rules (or challenging them), then why bother?

Because that's what an RPG is. If the character isn't being played *as though the character mattered,* you're not really playing a role, and therefore, there is no "role-playing" going on.

You had better distinguish then, because until you provide something that does so, there is no such thing as "good grind".

I provided several examples in the OP. Check it out.

As "grind" specifically refers to "arbitrarily needless repetition".

"Grind" means "doing the same activity multiple times, in order to gain a benefit."

Super Mario Bros never felt the need to mandate a minimum score to progress to the next level.

Super Mario Brothers isn't an RPG, and no one's stopping you from playing a non-RPG if you just don't like RPGs or how they're played.

Except there is work, or effort involved in everything we do.

That's not true at all. Lots of activities aren't work. Sleeping, for instance, or breathing, or thinking, or talking, recreational reading, watching a movie, listening to a book on tape, going out for a bite to eat, etc, etc, etc...

Story has absolutely NOTHING to do with grind, as grind is a purely-mechanics centric element.

Then you shouldn't have brought it up.

That's true, but true "personal" progress must come from recognizing our changing capabilities as we grow older (better and worse) and experience life. If games aim to emulate that even at its most basic level, mindless repetition and arbitrary time wasting is NOT acceptable.

I certainly don't think that the repetition in grinding needs to be mindless, nor the time spent in it arbitrary. There are many good ways to grind in a way that demands intelligent thought (the Elder Scrolls and Shining Force games come to mind,) and as for it being arbitrary, you have a set goal, which you want to accomplish, and through performing the same task multiple times, you gradually accomplish that goal, recognizing your changing capacities as you train (for better or for worse.) That's far from arbitrary.

Why? How about the fact I am aware that I have a finite amount of time to live and thus have a greater appreciation and value for it?

Yet you're here on a message board arguing about something that will probably make no difference in the long run. I've never insulted your intelligence, have I?

I don't want "instant gratification", because without challenge or build up there's no purpose.

That's part of it, yes.

 

[Scootinfroodie]

OP what you're running into is the fact that much of the western core market isn't interested in repeating actions for higher numbers as a central mechanic. This idea features more prominently in the mobile and eastern markets
The difference between what is acceptable grind-wise is going to depend on the game and the person. While I accept that I need to level up characters in a JRPG, I won't accept it so readily in a CRPG, and wont tolerate it being at all central in an online shooter.

Additionally you seem to be under the impression that it's an "RPG" thing. It isn't
RPGs are named after, and built upon, the classic Pen and Paper games. These games had another living breathing human being who could tailor the experience to the strengths (or weaknesses) of the party. At no point in a typical DnD module would there be a section that said *and then the party fought goblins for an hour so they could level up and the fighter could get a totally boss new ability*. Grinding is generally "added" to lengthen a game, or to lock content away for the sake of providing bonus content to reward more dedicated players.

Your comment on work depends on what we're talking about work-wise. Your body is moving and expending energy to have you breathe, but you don't become a super-breather as you get older. RPG mechanics are abstract, and were necessarily so to get so many ideas across with limited tech. This is why things like "hit points" exist. It's actually kinda funny seeing people get the crap kicked out of them for half an hour in a JRPG when HP was meant to be, conceptually, both a matter of injury and of overall stamina.

As far as the utilization of player skill over character skill goes, I think both are totally valid if handled well. Ultimately short of neutering the depth of gameplay, player skill will always factor in. Knowing the optimal ability/gear combos and how to get them quickly in a game like Saga Frontier allows me to beat the game faster than somebody who just decided to grind right on through. Additionally, the more you make character skill abstract, the greater risk you have of not allowing the player into the experience, or even outright removing them. Personally, I can't get into games like Diablo, Borderlands, Torchlight etc. because their "RPG mechanics" essentially boil down to "increase a number on a random interval" and this interval directly affects how long it will take me to get through content. I'd rather just load up Quake and level up my personal ability to strafejump

 

[-Dragmire-]

You can grind in Shining Force!?

Ahem, I tend to like grinding to the point of overleveling myself rather consistently in games so I agree with the points given.


...Might be time for another Disgaea series playthrough.

 

[ssjdkcrew]

I find grinding to be entertaining in itself only if the difficulty level is suitably challenging for it to force me to concentrate on what I am doing. Lots of games just make the grind boring by making it too easy. Games that do grinding well give you options to make it more difficult for a correspondingly increased reward (though they also give you the option to make it easier, because I can understand some people enjoy easier content because it's relaxing to play).

I'm okay with it when a game opens up your options like that; sure.

The worst thing grinding can do is mix it with travelling time, as most MMOs still do. What is the gameplay in forcing players to press the forwards button for 10 minutes in between collecting 9 bear asses? That's not to say longer travel times as a game mechanic is always bad, but it is bad when used as padding for what is already padding.

I like how they did it in Morrowind; there were lots of shortcuts, if you were willing to pay, but the land still felt large enough. I certainly agree, though, that other gameplay mechanics, done poorly, can certainly make bad grinding even worse.

As long as the fighting is fun I'm okay with grinding. Like in Dark Souls...Grinding can be fun, because very fight is fun. So as long at is not some random encounter fights with eternal animations going on I'm fine.

Yup. That'd be my position. Grinding that's done well makes a good game better.

I'm playing skyrim again and I discover a few caves and ruins that never found with my first few play thoughs!

That's typical of Elder Scrolls games. The game worlds are big, to give players a lot to explore.

I don't see any reason for it to exist at all from a design perspective. One could argue that requiring grinding is actually a massive failure on the part of the designers, as from naturally progressing through the game the player has not been given enough resources to complete the next challenges, requiring them to go out of their way and perform monotonous and repetitive tasks in order to be able to continue. It's stupid, frankly. It doesn't need to be a thing and it shouldn't.

I get the impression that you didn't read the entire OP. I already addressed this position sufficiently, by pointing out that in order to properly simulate the factor of a character growing in skill or power through training, some form of repetition is helpful. I don't see any other means of simulating the same thing, and you don't offer one. All you've done here is address grinding from a perspective, which says that we should be able to just pick up and waltz through a game successfully, without any process of character growth being involved. There's absolutely nothing about that statement that I can sympathize with.

Grinding doesn't even make sense to me for rare random drops. Why are rare drops from, say, dungeon bosses a thing? Why are you forcing your player to replay the same thing over and over again? Why not make the attainment of this item require a feat of skill rather than attention span?

Well, first off, on the topic of your first question, random drops are *much* different from grinding. Grinding is about doing the same thing multiple times, in order to acquire a reward. Random drops are about doing the same thing multiple times *not knowing whether* you'll get a reward. Big difference.

On your second question, the player does the same thing many times, to simulate training on the part of the character, as I explained in the OP.

On your third question, the answer is that that's not the point of an RPG. The point of an RPG is for the *character,* not the *player,* to progress. The player is involved in the development and life of the character, insofar as the player has the attention and imagination needed to put themselves in that character's shoes. Of course, not understanding this about RPGs does lead to confusion, but that doesn't mean there's something wrong with RPGs.

I'm of the mind that you should not have to 'grind' to play through the core of the game. As long as you don't ignore every enemy on the path towards completing the main game, you should be about ready to fight the final boss when it comes down to it.

Those two sentences are two different kinds of statements. The first one, I can understand, and even sympathize with, but not the second. I certainly don't agree that you should always be ready to face everything a game world can throw at you, because this excises difficulty and the need for training from being depicted in games, and I don't feel it's right to restrict gaming as an art form in this way.

I don't mind grinding for side-bosses that are supposed to be tough as long as it is not a consistent need to grind in order to progress.

Well, as I've said before, I don't mind when a game gives you an *option* to have an easier time with progression, but as I grind every chance I get, I just don't take advantage of that option very often when it's available.

The issue I have with grinding lately is that it seems to be the only way many developers seem to know how to keep players invested. This is not just an issue with RPGs anymore, CoD and more recently Destiny seem to be all about keeping players on a treadmill rather than taking them on a hike to visit somewhere completely new. Both methods keep things 'healthy', but the treadmill requires a lot less effort on the part of the developers and publishers.

Yes, yes. I've said it before; there's good grinding and bad grinding. Not every game needs grinding, and Call of Duty, in particular, could do without it, because the point of that game isn't the development of the character. However, I certainly think that grinding provides a form of investment in games that other methods and game mechanics don't.

Player growth should not always be about levels and loot.

*Player* growth is for platformers, shooters, racing games, sports games, fighting games, action games, strategy games, etc, etc... RPGs are about *character* growth, and yes; leveling in some manner is going to be part of that, though it need not involve actual "levels" as such. (Quest For Glory, for example, didn't rely on conventional "levels," and in my view, its grinding was some of the best I've ever seen; especially in the remake of QFG2.)

 

[Duck Sandwich]

Grinding = boring.

If I'm playing a video game, and it's not fun, I'm wasting my time. Games that have grinding should take a page from movies. There's a reason why movies have montages instead of showing every minute of a character training for some kind of mission, competition, etc. Imagine if a Rocky movie was 10 hours long because 8 of those hours were dedicated to showing Rocky hitting the bags, lifting weights, running, etc.