RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

[Ωbright]

(This is from the perspective of the game player as well as the game creator)

Here's my 2 cents on this: If random encounters are low, they can still annoy me, but to me it's worth it if I can avoid the battles when I want to (either by spell/item effect or encounter-free map areas). Random encounters can give players more options and freedom IMO (to train/mine for gold), especially if they have the option to not be bothered if they don't want a fight right then. Event battles can be set to repeat, but for the sake of variety I prefer random battles. Event battles are very important, but I don't think I would make a game that used them exclusively.

[Red Dragon]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

As a Player:

2 steps ENCOUNTER

2 more ENCOUNTER

2 more ENCOUNTER

etc

Gets on my nerves ALOT.

Creator:

It's alot easier to made tough battles without worrying that the player might powerlevel to an extreme (which is very easy to do, even on the longest level up settings, in RPGM3)

My $0.02

[ErikaFuzzbottom]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

It depends for me. I like both random and scripted battles, but a balance must be met. If there's random battles, they shouldn't occur in a room with a puzzle. Not only could you potentially get into a whole lot of them if you're wandering around clueless, but you could wind up forgetting what you were doing by the time you win the battle. And of course people will get annoyed if you set the encounter rate a little high.

But if you use scripted battles, one has to keep in mind that, unless the rooms in the dungeon are sparsely filled (which makes the dungeons a little less interesting if they're not puzzle-filled), a player is gonna wind up encountering more battles than they would if they were random. And seeing those monsters ahead of me when I'm getting worn out and low on potions is a little more worrying than when you've got random battles. Of course, one could avoid them relatively easy if they wanted to. But you'd better provide plenty of potion-filled treasure chests if you want the player to have any chance of surviving.

In a way, it kinda sounds like random battles are the better choice. And when you're worried about memory consumption, random battles are probably the way to go. On the other hand, if seeing monsters is important to the story or for puzzles in some way, scripted battles are necessary. But even in games that use scripted battles, the traditional world map should either have random encoutners or no encounters at all. It just doesn't seem right seeing these giant monsters wandering the same distances as yourself.

[Perversion]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

I did not vote in this category, because my first game (due to getting a handle on the system) used random battles. After playtesting it, I came to realize that even on the low setting, random battles can get tedious in short order. So I vowed to myself not to make another game with random battles. My last game, A Series Aside, had no battles at all. The game I'm currently working on will have all scripted battles. So depending on the project on which I'm working, I kind of run the gamut. I hope to have my next 2 games (Series 4: A Dark Day Dawns Episodes 2 and 3) have no battles whatsoever. That was the original plan with my current game (Episode 1), but after mulling over how to make the game more interesting, I decided to "lift" the arena battle system I was going to use in Series 2 and incorporate it into this game instead. So all the battles are scripted.

As a player, I prefer either no battles, like Whispers in the Woods, or scripted battles, like....well, I haven't played one with scripted battles yet. Once I played through the 20 hours of Series 1, I really had no desire to see another game that used random battles. As good as it might be, I do not want to slog through that morass again. Then again, that could change depending on if Hito, Chuck Rich, and Pagerron's games use random battles. If they do, I'll probably tough it out and play it anyway. And I am not sure if Raiders of Lekunder uses random battles or not, but I plan on playing that sometime as well. And I do not think the game that Obright is currently working on has random battles either, which would also encourage me to play it. So, yeah, as a player, I prefer no random battles, but I CAN make exceptions.

I guess I should have just voted instead of typing all of this.

[Drazus]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

I choose option 2, somewhat of a balance, with lower encounters.

Hm... Here's an idea. What if a player could only get to a certain level, like 30 perhaps, but to get stronger they need to unlock skills instead of leveling up? Kinda like Guild Wars. Levels wouldn't matter as much.

[hitogoroshi]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

Torayu ain't gonna have no stinking random battles. I'm considering running through dungeons to obtain artifacts to pawn on the black market: but instead of monsters being the problems, it's trap evasion.
I voted #3 on random battles, because most games need them as a leveling device and I accept them. But Torayu's not gonna have em

[Crythania]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

As a player, I do not care for random encounters. Especially in RM3. In a much older game with more low concept graphics and less dancing bologna, REs are acceptable to me. You'll be walking along, there's a very brief screen effect of some sort, the battle music starts playing, and you see pictures of monsters and portraits of your characters (very low concept). In that type of gaming envrionment, it's possible to get through an encounter pretty quickly. Dispatch the bad guys and be on your merry way.

In RM3, you get the screen swirl effect, then you gotta wait for it to load, then the camera pans over the battlefield with "battle start" displayed at center screen, then the monsters do their opening animations ("Roar! We're gonna get you!"), then you gotta wait for your initiative bars to fill up, then maybe a half hour later your first guy gets to move (if one of the monsters didn't already make a move). It's a big production. A time consuming one. And it gets old fast. This style of high concept gaming environment is just too... well, high concept... for random encounters. There are too many flashy animations and dancing bologna that devour my time. I'd rather spend my time exploring, seeing the fantasy world, collecting goodies, solving puzzles, talking to characters, and advancing the story.

As a game creator, I am more than willing to go to great lengths to provide a gaming environment that offers smooth, streamlined gameplay, be it with REs or without. There are solutions to the "RE problem". I put that in quotes because it's a problem for me; it may not be a problem for others. I prefer a game that flows smoothly from one story event to the next, without too much time spent battling. To me, it's about more than just fighting battles. It's also about exploring the world and interacting with it as much as possible.

But all of this is just my personal taste.

"The Raiders Of Lekunder" has scripted battles only. All battles are non-repeating events.

[Dark Sentry]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

I chose #3. I'm getting away from purely random encounters and mixing things up with areas that have random battles, areas with scripted battles, and sometimes areas with no battles at all.

[tjoris9]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

For me it depends on the style of game I'm doing.

For Forest of Deceit, which is supposed to be a survival horror game, I use nothing but scripted battles, since A) I do have some leveling going on, and I don't want characters spoiling the game balance by power-leveling and B) There aren't going to be that many healing and recovery items.

Another couple projects I'm working on the party levels up and gains money without combat. You can still wander around and fight RE's for a little extra money, but I'm planning on having events to take the place of walking everywhere.

If I'm doing a more traditional game, I'll probably rely on random encounters, though scripted battles will still have their place.

[Wavelength]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

I get lost a lot if I can't find reference points, so I hate frequent RE's in complex dungeons. Besides that, I don't mind them much, although the inflexability of RPGM3's battle system makes me prefer Event Battles in that one, since the maker gains some peripheral control that way.

For commercial games, the "monsters that you see on the map" before going to the battle screen is my favorite compromise. Doesn't require the linearity or complexity of scripting, but gives the players a chance to avoid battles she doesn't want to fight.

[Perversion]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

a chance to avoid battles she

[Wavelength]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

I make a glaring singular/plural error in that same sentence, and what you catch is that I implied a player could be female?



EDIT: I got served!

I'll alternately use "he" or "she" in my posts... I'm not crazy about when people always use "he"... and I HATE "he or she," it sounds so clumsy, especially when you then have to make it "his or her." Sometimes I have to use "he or she" in an essay, but while I'm typing that in I'm giving my essay the bird.

By the way, I've been wondering this for a while: the picture in your sig, did you take a screenshot from your game and photoshop it to sketch style, or is that an original sketch you made? It's pretty neat!

[Perversion]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

but gives the players a chance to avoid battles she doesn't want to fight.

I did catch it, but did not think it was important enough to point out and make you look like a buffoon. I just thought it was funny, because in most instances of that sentence, the average person would have used the word "he"...I was smiling that you did not say "he or she"...you merely said "she"

Okay, that's my long-winded explanation of why I put a

[ErikaFuzzbottom]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

I'll alternately use "he" or "she" in my posts... I'm not crazy about when people always use "he"... and I HATE "he or she," it sounds so clumsy, especially when you then have to make it "his or her." Sometimes I have to use "he or she" in an essay, but while I'm typing that in I'm giving my essay the bird.

Try using:

'e

[DYRE]

Re: RANDOM ENCOUNTERS vs. SCRIPTED BATTLES

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-...ronoun#English