2x2 strafing undermines character building [edited]

[Thels]

You mean 90% "tetris"/10% stats?

Stats aren't the same thing as RPG. Stats are there to support system based RPGs. Of course Computer RPGs require stats, but there's more to a CRPG than just stats.

[Stamm]

..
There's 2 camps. Some people want to play combat like Tetris while some people want action/RPG combat where stats and tactics play a key role without eliminating the need for player movement. I support the latter because the RPG is already in the game, it's just often irrelevant. (Then there's the third camp who actually want static turn based combat but it's apparently a tiny majority - dungeon crawlers really have to be real time with movement)

Right now combat is about 90% Tetris / 10% RPG. ..

One of the reasons for this being such a long chain is your somewhat condescending attitude towards players who find this game hard enough and regard evasion by moving a godsend leveling factor.

I mean when your ass is kicked continuously and you a are busy being killed every other minute it is annoying to read things like Tetris or that the game is so easy for you.

Granted you are probably an unusually skillful computer game player.

[Isaac]

There's 2 camps. Some people want to play combat like Tetris while some people want action/RPG combat where stats and tactics play a key role without eliminating the need for player movement. I support the latter because the RPG is already in the game, it's just often irrelevant. (Then there's the third camp who actually want static turn based combat but it's apparently a tiny majority - dungeon crawlers really have to be real time with movement)

Right now combat is about 90% Tetris / 10% RPG. Hats off to Almost Human if they can make it 50/50 and please both camps.

I'm not so sure about this. First off... As much as I love LoG, and the genre... there is almost no 'RPG' in these games; these games are generally "90%" combat. In LoG absolutely all of the skill development in all disciplines is either offensive or defensive, and revolves around the combat. How can you have an RPG with zero dialog? True, the situation is one that does not really demand dialog ~it could be argued that the player is doing what the character's would do (trapped) in a mountain dungeon with only hostile animals and constructs within the maze ~nothing talks but the cube; and it never listens... but that basically kills any chance for playing a role... as in roleplaying; Leveling and Stats alone do not make an RPG... There are pure FPS shooters that would qualify as RPGs if that were all there was to it.

IMO there are two camps: and each want the game mechanics to gravitate toward their mutually exclusive ideal (and yes it's mutually exclusive, for one camp wants closer emulation of the the genre and the original games ~the classic archetypes ARE your opinion of tetris combat.... each and everyone of them that I have played). trying to make it 50/50 as you say, is stepping away from what one camp wants.

For myself... I absolutely love when RPGs are mostly character based; where if they cannot achieve, access, or accomplish something ~then it doesn't happen; where you suggest to pick a lock and their skill alone determines if the lock can be opened. But almost none of these style of games really had that in any significant measure. Dungeon-crawlers are foremost... stylized combat games. (edit: and puzzles of course. )

(Then there's the third camp who actually want static turn based combat but it's apparently a tiny majority - dungeon crawlers really have to be real time with movement)

I absolutely love turn based combat. (I'm not sure what you mean by 'static'); but I would never want it in a dungeon crawler like the ones LoG are based on... You really need an isometic (real or faked) view for that; Although (and it contradicts the norm)... I have to say that "Realms of Arkania" (1, 2 & 3) did a fantastic job of exactly that. It was first person like EOB, and had an Isometric combat engine ~Far better than the "gold box" games (that were similar).

[1varangian]

Yeah with RPG I was referring to the combat side of things where stats and skills matter.

Would be great to have to make some story related choices though.

edit: As for the ratio of twitch/stat based combat - yes the golden oldies had the same thing where you could just strafe to avoid all damage. That doesn't mean the genre shouldn't evolve over 2 decades.

[Isaac]

That doesn't mean the genre shouldn't evolve over 2 decades.

I would prefer a split; because I know that I would enjoy them both, but I doubt that I would enjoy them combined. It's bad (IMO) to evolve away from the core intention...

...(into something with far longer arms, but incapable of drinking coffee. If you don't get the joke, don't panic, it's a book; it's name is not important.)

[Thels]

There's 2 camps. Some people want to play combat like Tetris while some people want action/RPG combat where stats and tactics play a key role without eliminating the need for player movement. I support the latter because the RPG is already in the game, it's just often irrelevant. (Then there's the third camp who actually want static turn based combat but it's apparently a tiny majority - dungeon crawlers really have to be real time with movement)

Right now combat is about 90% Tetris / 10% RPG. Hats off to Almost Human if they can make it 50/50 and please both camps.

I'm not so sure about this. First off... As much as I love LoG, and the genre... there is almost no 'RPG' in these games; these games are generally "90%" combat. In LoG absolutely all of the skill development in all disciplines is either offensive or defensive, and revolves around the combat. How can you have an RPG with zero dialog? True, the situation is one that does not really demand dialog ~it could be argued that the player is doing what the character's would do (trapped) in a mountain dungeon with only hostile animals and constructs within the maze ~nothing talks but the cube; and it never listens... but that basically kills any chance for playing a role... as in roleplaying; Leveling and Stats alone do not make an RPG... There are pure FPS shooters that would qualify as RPGs if that were all there was to it.

Indeed, LoG is 100% Dungeon Crawler, even more than EoB1/EoB2 were, since there you had very minimal dialog. Here's hoping for some dialog in future dungeons.

I absolutely love turn based combat. but I would never want it in a dungeon crawler like the ones LoG are based on... You really need an isometic (real or faked) view for that;

I'm not sure I understand why you need an isometric view for that. There's games that were you run into a monster, you then start a turnbased fight with that monster. Given, most of these are hentai games, but still, it can be done well.

However, LoG is not a turnbased game. LoG is a game where dancing is part of the game, and some of the mobs are actually built around the idea of the player dancing.

[pimpskinny]

...I'm not sure I understand why you need an isometric view for that. There's games that were you run into a monster, you then start a turnbased fight with that monster. Given, most of these are hentai games, but still, it can be done well...

Like The Bard's Tale (1985). One of the best games ever made! Totally turn based. I think turn-based made strategy more of an issue, because it didn't allow 2x2 dancing. You had to decide in each turn what each party member would do during the fight, and which mob they would attack. However, your party members in Bard's Tale had a lot more options (especially the mages) for what they could be doing at any given moment than either LoG or EoB.

Seems to me that the EoB style was an attempt to upgrade on the Bard's Tale style. Because going to real-time combat instead of the old school turn-based combat (that you can do on paper with dice) was a big advancement in gaming technology. But maybe it came with a sacrifice.

[BlueSpace]

With all due respect but I don't see how this is relevant to the actual discussion. The entire thread is borderline flame-bait since it attacks a core mechanic of the game and the people arguing for the change seem to ignore all the explanations of why their suggestions will ruin this mechanic.

It's mostly the people "defending" the game (not that it really needs to be defended - these are suggestions, not demands) who post things like "go away" or "stupid idea" without any explanations to back up their opinions. A lot of people feel there are things that could be done to spice up combat and bring the RPG side of it up to speed.

There's 2 camps. Some people want to play combat like Tetris while some people want action/RPG combat where stats and tactics play a key role without eliminating the need for player movement. I support the latter because the RPG is already in the game, it's just often irrelevant. (Then there's the third camp who actually want static turn based combat but it's apparently a tiny majority - dungeon crawlers really have to be real time with movement)

Right now combat is about 90% Tetris / 10% RPG. Hats off to Almost Human if they can make it 50/50 and please both camps.

First of all dungeon crawlers don't need real time movement. Bard's tale is a dungeon crawler for example and featured turn based combat while having the same type of square movement including puzzles and so on. I don't remember though if it had switches, but it had invisible walls... oh lord did it have a lot of invisible walls. It mainly revolved around combat though and building a good party. Higher dungeons were very often blocked by things that would simply kill you. The old times were like that. If the dev didn't want you to go somewhere, they just put some monster there that one-shotted you. Dead heroes don't ask questions. One can argue if that is good game design but I always thought that it is more "realistic".

90/10?, why not 80/20? or 40/60? or any other random statistics. I get it... you want more encounters that force you to fight. As was already suggested make a "no step back" playthrough. Start and see how far you get. Optimize the hell out of the party. Could be fun I think.

The 50/50 sweet spot doesn't exist for everybody since the amount of tanking that you do is directly related to how well you can kite. Only because in theory you can dodge 23.23% of all encounters, doesn't mean that every player will reach that number. Right now the game favors kiting and I would not like it to favor tanking.

Yeah with RPG I was referring to the combat side of things where stats and skills matter.

Would be great to have to make some story related choices though.

edit: As for the ratio of twitch/stat based combat - yes the golden oldies had the same thing where you could just strafe to avoid all damage. That doesn't mean the genre shouldn't evolve over 2 decades.

Stop saying that as if it is true. There are several occasions in the game where kiting is not possible apart from the fighter challenge and if you play on hard, you actually die for a single misstep in certain fights against a "single mob". There are situations where you outright die the first time because you are ill prepared. And as I have already pointed out, using the quicksave/excessive saving might mask this quite a lot. Just safe a bit less and try to clear larger chunks at a time. The difficulty goes up steeply.

"That doesn't mean the genre shouldn't evolve over 2 decades." And that might be the core of the problem here of why you keep failing to understand. There is a long... long progression from f.e. Bard's Tale all the way to Skyrim. The games did evolve and as a result the genre changed, which is precisely the reason why people here say that you cannot touch that mechanic without changing the game. It was changed... it moved to where we are today.

(In my mind the progression was something like: Bard's Tale -> Dungeon Master -> Ultima Underworld -> Daggerfall (which is Skyrim in principle). I can argue that but the post is already too long)

TL;DR:
- There is no sweet spot due to varying player skill.
- Stats matter depending on the play style and the difficulty setting.
- Excessive saving makes the game easier.
- Changes to the core mechanic will push the game into another genre.

[Isaac]

Like The Bard's Tale (1985). One of the best games ever made! Totally turn based.

Except that it isn't turn based ~It's phase based. There are no turns in Bard's Tale, only declarations of intent. After the actions are chosen, the game determines initiative and the results play out autonomously. Turn based games allow the 'turn taker' to have seen the previous turns ~and usually base their action(s) on them.

In Bard's Tale, a target may get killed before a PC's declared attack can happen; in a turn based game (say like Fallout) this can't happen; or at least I've never seen a game where it did.

*Edit: Except in the case of poison or timed explosions; and Gold Box games allowed your action to be "Guard", and in that case your PC attacked any enemy that passed them in range ~on their turn. But if this happened to kill, then the target is no longer an option to attack, and you still get to take action during your turn.

[Mychaelh]

I see it as BlueSpace, just want to add that Bard's Tale is just a 'rip-off' from the early Wizardry-games (I-III,V) - with nice graphics of course. Kind of like Eye of the Beholder is just a Dungeon Master 'AD&D rip-off' with nice graphics...