[General Discussion] Do RPG's Get Better With Age?

Over the past few weeks, I got into my older systems collections and just started going through some of the games I have. Hooking up my old Playstation (yes old, the model that had the port in the back where you could plug in extra stuff...like a gameshark) I started playing through various RPG's that I had. Various titles such as Xenogears, Suikoden I&II, Brave Fencer Musashi, Final Fantasy Tactics, the Lunar Games all brought me back to very fond memories but they even wanted me to keep playing them. In the last two weeks, I have finished Xenogears, Suikoden I and half of Lunar. So this got me thinking.

Are these good games that have gotten better with age? Or is the market of games nowadays such total crap that these games are the best that games will ever be? Thinking back, I remember when I would get a new RPG for Playstation. I could easily spend hours a day trying to get through it as fast as I can almost everyday. Once I got through a game, I would either start playing it again or go back and revisit some of my favorite moments on the various save files I would have. I honestly cannot think of that many games on PS2 or anything beyond that I have done that for. I did spend a little bit of time on Final Fantasy XII and Suikoden V but everything else was pretty much me going through slowly barely being able to pay attention.

Im guessing though that perhaps even PS2 games will improve with age. I cannot think of any titles now that I would really want to go back and replay but who knows. Even dating back before the Playstation era of RPG's, there is a mass amount of SNES and Genesis games that I loved. Phantasy Star IV and Secret of Mana give me very fond memories from when I was younger. Even games that I never played, I have taken the time to find roms and emulate them. I can easily sit there and play for hours, something that im finding I can't do with anything current.

Im feeling like theres one of two things happening here. Either its as I feel, RPG's get better with age...especially when you have shit games to compare them to....or RPG's have already had their highest moment in the time from of SNES till PS1 era. Either way, I myself was personally very surprised to find that I could be this impressed with games I have already played and beaten before.

Jam it back in, in the dark.

I think it's more that you're playing games that were the best of their generation and not playing any of the loads of crap filler that was also released. If you distilled your entire PS2 gaming experience down into 5-10 games, I'm sure you'd have much fonder memories too.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

I'm so glad there are people who understand that. People look back to the SNES and think "why isn't gaming this good anymore?" not understanding that there were maybe a handful of GREAT RPGs and a myriad of average or terrible ones.

I always felt like the PSX had a better ratio of good and bad rpgs; and the ps2 honestly has about the same or better as the SNES ever did. Also keeping in mind that rpgs in general are growing stale because the formula itself hasn't changed much for a lot of companies -- but that doesn't mean the games are bad, it just means you are burning out I think.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Recently I went back and started playing Chrono Trigger again, and while I don't think it's improved with age, it's still one of the best gaming experiences I've ever had.

I don't think RPGs get better with age, but I do think they're appreciated a little more if you enjoyed them. I've replayed Dragon Quest VIII and Rogue Galaxy at least twice each now, and being able to get that second playthrough makes me appreciate them a little more than say, Wild Arms 4 or 5 which I'll probably never replay.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

The trick with the SNES and the PSX is that their highs were simply HIGHER than anything the PS2 ever came out with. Shadow Hearts I and II are great, but they aren't FF VI and Chrono Trigger great. Suikoden V and was amazing, but it wasn't Suikoden II or Final Fantasy Tactics great. Secret of Mana, same deal. Terranigma. The list goes on and on and on. If you like graphics, the new gens are tops. If you like everything else, you can't beat some of the classics.

How ya doing, buddy?

No, they get worse. RIP cartridge batteries.

What kind of toxic man-thing is happening now?

Originally Posted by Infernal Monkey

No, they get worse. RIP cartridge batteries.

Oh just replace them you down-under-suckah you.

FELIPE NO

That's an RPG in itself, I guess. Wait wait. This means they DO get better with age, since there's an ALL NEW QUEST to go on! Fuck, entering 'Zelda' as your name on the first Zelda game has nothing on this.

I'm sure in ten years time we'll all be remembering Final Fantasy X and whinging about how good it was compared to Final Fantasy XLV on PlayStation 9, "Remember that emotional laughing scene?! New games have nothing on that!". And when that day comes I'll hopefully be dead.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

I think:

A: There's too much out there to play. Not a bad thing, especially compared to the availability of RPG's in the SNES days.

B: RPG's nowadays take too long to get started and you can't tell if a game is worth the trouble without putting a lot of time into it to get started. That's a bad thing, especially with a lot to choose from. Hitting 3-4 games in a row you just can't bring yourself to care about and wastes your time and money tends to drag the opinion of the rest of the market down.

C: Replayability is the ultimate mark of excellence for an RPG to me and very few nowadays, I'd replay even if I could bring myself to finish them. In fact, the only RPG's I've replayed (either for endings or for fun) are FF1/FFIV/FFVI/FFVII, Chrono Trigger, Star Ocean 2, Valkyrie Profile, Suikoden 1/2/5, Growlanser 2 and Ys VI. Non-coincidentally, that's pretty much a complete listing of my favorite RPG's.

D: I don't care as much about RPG's as I used to in general and I just look for a more compact experience, instead of the next epic. Chrono Trigger does more in 14 hours (add 6 for the side-quests) than most RPG's that noticably limp into the 40-50 hours range and Phantasy Star IV's bang-bang pace is frighteningly refreshing right now. Just an hour here, an hour there and I get a lot done.

How ya doing, buddy?

Maybe, only maybe, when you grow up you get the chance to appreciate even more those old games that we used to play (notice those little great things that we missed)... or quite the opposite: realize how silly/stupid/bad they were.

You know, we are judging new games with far more experience and age. That can't be fair for new games.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

I'd say it depends on the RPG. I honestly cannot see Final Fantasy I or any of the Dragon Warriors having improved with time. They are completely archaic and have been eclipsed by better RPGs.

I believe what it is, as is with anything, it's just nostalgia clouding the mind. Sure there are classics that do hold up to the test of time but I'd kind of play something more current like say KOTOR or even FFXII.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Originally Posted by Tafer

Maybe, only maybe, when you grow up you get the chance to appreciate even more those old games that we used to play (notice those little great things that we missed)... or quite the opposite: realize how silly/stupid/bad they were.

I just know I appreciate 4-5 member parties far more now than when they were the norm. I tend not to like games that only use 3 character slots and never did (Chrono Trigger aside, but I always think it would have been even more awesome with 4-5 character slots...I didn't mind when I got and played FFVII, but it got old shortly after that). I think that's been one of the more glaring signs of regression to me. Bigger graphics, more live instruments in the music and...fewer party members? Uh, okay.

I remember playing FFVII and thinking how lame it was there was only one world map. FFIV had 3 (over, under, moon) and FFVI had the normal world and world of ruin. I tend to abhor games that don't use some sort of traditional world map at all...

I remember when FFVIII came out, there was all this talk about how the junctioning system and the ditching of traditional armor, leveling, individual skills and money gathering was "innovative". There's a reason I've always had a like-hate relationship with the game...Despite stupid shit like that, it still managed to be decent. FFVI got it right, balancing tradition (armor, money, leveling, special skills/attacks) with the customization of the esper system and the relics (which should be a staple of every RPG, IMO). I've never thought otherwise.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

For me, some of it is due to the simple fact that during the SNES era, there were so few RPGS that those you got you couldn't help but play from beginning to completition-multiple times.

With the PS1, there were a slew of RPGS to come out. Final Fantasy VII to IX, Tactics, Star Ocean, Xenogears, Suikoden I and II, just to name a FEW. That list right there is almost more games than the entire combined list of RPGs released State-side. So instead of getting a yearly or biyearly RPG, you get them, um, sometimes biWEEKLY. It's not like before when you HAD to play that RPG because there was nothing else but older ones available. There was (and is) plenty of variety.

And yeah, I do find that I play some of the older games nowadays. I really still enjoy FF4 (albeit on GBA now for convience), Secret of Mana, and Zelda (okay, so it's not really an RPG...) among other RPGs. Heck, when my old FF3 was never returned, I went on a search to find a new copy (which I eventually did) because I would have rather played that then the majority of games (including the one rereleased for PS1) that were currently available.

I was speaking idiomatically.

Always back to this discussion...heh.

I don't agree that RPGs that come out these days are all necessarily worst then anything from the "old days" really, it isn't true. I've played enough by now to know this isn't the case. I manage to enjoy just about anything I play these days. Perhaps I keep a more open mind and keep nostalgia from influencing my decision, who knows.

Why do people feel this way? I have no idea, perhaps people hang on to their nostalgic games too much, or perhaps there's just too many RPGs coming out now, perhaps something else, but I've played enough good PS2 RPGs to know they can still be as amazing as SNES/PSX RPGs.

Games like Tales of the Abyss, Rogue Galaxy, Wild Arms 5, Suikoden V, Ar Tonelico, Valkyrie Profile 2, Star Ocean 3, Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy XII. These are games I like to use as a example. They are more then enough proof that there's still enough out there to match the glorious old days. Of course, that's just my opinion, that's the great thing about all this.

How ya doing, buddy?

There's very little of that "new RPG smell" anymore. Take Xellos' list for example. Tales of the Abyss (which is what, the 5th one on a console?), Wild Arms 5, Suikoden V, Valkyrie Profile 2, Star Ocean 3, Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy XII.

Only two games in the original list are actually new IPs, and Ar Tonelico already has a sequel or eight coming out in Japan.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Xellos

Always back to this discussion...heh.

I don't agree that RPGs that come out these days are all necessarily worst then anything from the "old days" really, it isn't true. I've played enough by now to know this isn't the case. I manage to enjoy just about anything I play these days. Perhaps I keep a more open mind and keep nostalgia from influencing my decision, who knows.

Why do people feel this way? I have no idea, perhaps people hang on to their nostalgic games too much, or perhaps there's just too many RPGs coming out now, perhaps something else, but I've played enough good PS2 RPGs to know they can still be as amazing as SNES/PSX RPGs.

Games like Tales of the Abyss, Rogue Galaxy, Wild Arms 5, Suikoden V, Ar Tonelico, Valkyrie Profile 2, Star Ocean 3, Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy XII. These are games I like to use as a example. They are more then enough proof that there's still enough out there to match the glorious old days. Of course, that's just my opinion, that's the great thing about all this.

Except that every single game you listed lacks the story punch of the old guard. This is exactly what I was talking about with graphics and battle systems taking over storytelling. Suikoden V can make a claim to it. I'll spot you that one, but the rest aren't even in the same ballpark as an FFT, or a Chrono Trigger or FF VI. Certainly not playing ball with Suikoden II or Terranigma. They're good games. All of them. No one is saying the new gens have NOTHING (well, PS3 doesn't, but I'm talking PS2 here. Here's hoping White Knight doesn't blow.) we're saying they can't stand next to the giants of yore. And they can't. The new games have too many options and events going on, so their developers tend to leave a really steam rolling story to the side in place of mini games and open options. This isn't bad, it just isn't good storytelling, which is what an RPG should be.

What, you don't want my bikini-clad body?

Originally Posted by SouthJag

There's very little of that "new RPG smell" anymore. Take Xellos' list for example. Tales of the Abyss (which is what, the 5th one on a console?), Wild Arms 5, Suikoden V, Valkyrie Profile 2, Star Ocean 3, Breath of Fire IV and Final Fantasy XII.

Only two games in the original list are actually new IPs, and Ar Tonelico already has a sequel or eight coming out in Japan.

Blue Dragon. Lost Odyssey, Mass Effect, Too Human, Infinite Undiscovery, Last Remnants, Hellgate: London and more. Good enough for you?

Jam it back in, in the dark.

See, that is your problem right there. You compare the games I listed and compared them to their previous counterparts, why? what's the point in that? What do the previous games have to do with this one? You are living the past, get over it. Just because you don't want to see the great qualities in these games, doesn't mean that they aren't there.

I was extremely satisfied with all of them, storyline included. The storylines were just fine the way they were, they certainly didn't suffer because the games weren't 2D and had lots of pixels. Some of those games aren't even my favorites in the series, but that doesn't mean that I automatically disliked it. So what if Valkyrie Profile 2 wasn't as good as the original? That doesn't change the fact that it's a very nice game on it's own. I spent over a hundred hours in it, did everything there was to do, and in the end had a great time with it.

There's nowhere I can't reach.

Originally Posted by Xellos

See, that is your problem right there. You compare the games I listed and compared them to their previous counterparts, why? what's the point in that? What do the previous games have to do with this one? You are living the past, get over it. Just because you don't want to see the great qualities in these games, doesn't mean that they aren't there.

I was extremely satisfied with all of them, storyline included. The storylines were just fine the way they were, they certainly didn't suffer because the games weren't 2D and had lots of pixels. Some of those games aren't even my favorites in the series, but that doesn't mean that I automatically disliked it. So what if Valkyrie Profile 2 wasn't as good as the original? That doesn't change the fact that it's a very nice game on it's own. I spent over a hundred hours in it, did everything there was to do, and in the end had a great time with it.

Yes, so I guess you're stupid or can't read. So I'll put it in bold for you this time, hotshot. THEY'RE GOOD GAMES. ALL OF THEM. See how sweet I was, even putting it in caps to help your reading comprehension? And as for your comment that my problem is that I'm comparing them to their predecessors? Yeah. For a few reasons. One, you use your experience to gage just how good a game is. I mean, if I didn't have any prior experience with video games, I might think Suikoden IV was good. But since I have, in point of fact, played other video games, I know that it, in point of fact, not a very good game. And second, the question at hand is basically: "Are old games good because they're good, or because we remember them as good." My answer is: Old games are good because old games were FUCKING GOOD.

And you're right. The new games stories don't suffer because they aren't using sprites. They suffer because they lack focus due to 100+ hours worth of sidequests that have little to no relevance to the actual story at hand. Which you nicely point out for me with your comments on VP2. Yeah, VP2 had way more stuff to do than the first one. Unfortunately one of them wasn't telling a cohesive, enjoyable story without rambling like an old man asked about his service in WW I. I appreciate you providing my examples for me, it saves me some time.

You'll also notice I didn't say I disliked the new games. I happen to love Suikoden V, Shadow Hearts I and II, Rogue Galaxy, Persona 3, Disgaea... they're all very good games. However, they aren't as good as the classics. They just aren't. Maybe if you cut your teeth on FF VII, I can see why the new movement in RPGs isn't horribly disappointing to you. But if you started on the NES, SNES, or a prior system, I don't know how you can sit back and say the quality of storytelling hasn't gone down in the genre. Which is a genre that depends on its storytelling to be what it is.

Now, yes, if you look at every game in a vacuum and say "hey, this has some good points to it" then yeah, I guess every single game is as great as every other game because, hey, no comparisons to be drawn. But I live in the real world, and it's all shiny with gaming history. So I know the difference between a good storyline and a bunch of sidequests meant to artificially stretch play time from 12 hours to 100+. If you can't, that's not on me.

This thing is sticky, and I don't like it. I don't appreciate it.

Quote:

Do RPG's Get Better With Age?

No. They're still as good as they were when they first showed up, however the folks who played them have changed as well as the standards to which games are held. We can just appreciate them more than we did back then, that's all.

I'd even say that RPGs have steadily been getting better as the hardware allows the development team to get more of their ideas into the game without compromising it. It just boils down to more freedom and detail in all aspects of the game. Of course, you need a creative group to take full advantage of this and deliver a damn fine title.

Quote:

I don't know how you can sit back and say the quality of storytelling hasn't gone down in the genre. Which is a genre that depends on its storytelling to be what it is.

Seems like a matter of perception, since it seems like it'd be easier to jump to the conclusion that stories are weaker on the whole nowadays if there's obvious effort in the visuals and/or music. Personally, I think that the overall quality of games on the whole has improved.

I am a dolphin, do you want me on your body?

I think older games are generally better because the actual story telling and atmosphere was different. I feel a lot of RPG games today are lacking that atmosphere. Many new games incorporate the RPG systems of old games, but rarely try to to do something else with it. I guess nostalgia has something to do with it partly, but still, in the past it felt like they were trying to create real adventures, exploring otherworldly lands, magical powers and mystical creatures, having epic fights with evil masterminds. Nowadays it often feels like they're doing "just another RPG" and adding some cliché story to it because it's just "a game". Why can't games today just get a proper story?

I was speaking idiomatically.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

However, they aren't as good as the classics. They just aren't. Maybe if you cut your teeth on FF VII, I can see why the new movement in RPGs isn't horribly disappointing to you. But if you started on the NES, SNES, or a prior system, I don't know how you can sit back and say the quality of storytelling hasn't gone down in the genre. Which is a genre that depends on its storytelling to be what it is.

This is mostly thanks to tedious big budget FMV clips that rip you out of the game world completely and voice acting done by dead cats pushing the games storyline down your throat these days. No chance to soak up the roll eyes worthy twists and turns for ourselves anymore!

Most amazing jew boots

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Yes, so I guess you're stupid or can't read. So I'll put it in bold for you this time, hotshot. THEY'RE GOOD GAMES. ALL OF THEM. See how sweet I was, even putting it in caps to help your reading comprehension? And as for your comment that my problem is that I'm comparing them to their predecessors? Yeah. For a few reasons. One, you use your experience to gage just how good a game is. I mean, if I didn't have any prior experience with video games, I might think Suikoden IV was good. But since I have, in point of fact, played other video games, I know that it, in point of fact, not a very good game. And second, the question at hand is basically: "Are old games good because they're good, or because we remember them as good." My answer is: Old games are good because old games were FUCKING GOOD.

I have played a lot of videogames too, probably more then you, and I think the old games are good, but so are the new games. Just too bad you had to use Suikoden IV as a example, I can't defend that one either.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

And you're right. The new games stories don't suffer because they aren't using sprites. They suffer because they lack focus due to 100+ hours worth of sidequests that have little to no relevance to the actual story at hand. Which you nicely point out for me with your comments on VP2. Yeah, VP2 had way more stuff to do than the first one. Unfortunately one of them wasn't telling a cohesive, enjoyable story without rambling like an old man asked about his service in WW I. I appreciate you providing my examples for me, it saves me some time.

There are games out there that focus more on sidequests then the main storyline, true, but that's not the case with the games I mentioned, and that certainly doesn't apply to most RPGs. And even if they do it, in most cases the story far from suffers from it. I can't even think of one right now.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

You'll also notice I didn't say I disliked the new games. I happen to love Suikoden V, Shadow Hearts I and II, Rogue Galaxy, Persona 3, Disgaea... they're all very good games. However, they aren't as good as the classics. They just aren't. Maybe if you cut your teeth on FF VII, I can see why the new movement in RPGs isn't horribly disappointing to you. But if you started on the NES, SNES, or a prior system, I don't know how you can sit back and say the quality of storytelling hasn't gone down in the genre. Which is a genre that depends on its storytelling to be what it is.

Hate to disappoint you, but I did start in the SNES era, and yes, I can safely say that RPGs that come out now are fine the way they are. Not counting a few crappy games, overall, I am pretty much always satisfied with the way the story unfolds.

Originally Posted by Denicalis

Now, yes, if you look at every game in a vacuum and say "hey, this has some good points to it" then yeah, I guess every single game is as great as every other game because, hey, no comparisons to be drawn. But I live in the real world, and it's all shiny with gaming history. So I know the difference between a good storyline and a bunch of sidequests meant to artificially stretch play time from 12 hours to 100+. If you can't, that's not on me.

I've played games for over 15 years too, so I have more then enough experience, but that doesn't mean I always feel the need to compare every RPG with Suikoden 2. And don't go overboard, only a handful of games have so many sidequests that they last for more then 30 hours.

FELIPE NO

Originally Posted by Knighthawk

Thinking back, I remember when I would get a new RPG for Playstation. I could easily spend hours a day trying to get through it as fast as I can almost everyday. Once I got through a game, I would either start playing it again or go back and revisit some of my favorite moments on the various save files I would have.

I used to do that all the time for SNES RPGs. Chrono Trigger, Breath of Fire I and II, Final Fantasy II; I'd just play 'em over and over trying to do a little better each time. I think the biggest reason why was I really didn't have that many games as a kid. Anything I got would be a rare event, so I guess I just cherished the ones I had more. Breath of Fire III and Final Fantasy Tactics were other big ones for me, but beyond that not too many recent games have had the same effect -- yet anyway. Who knows, maybe in five years I'll be looking back on Tales of the Abyss fondly or something, playing it all over again just for the memories. Console RPGs are still far and away my favorite genre and pretty much the only games I still buy for PS2, they're just so darn enjoyable. Some age better than others, though, that's for sure.

Most amazing jew boots

I am fairly disappointed with the direction role playing games have taken in recent years. There have been very few classics and a plethora of shlock filler cookie cutter crap.

The last 'great' in my eyes was Final Fantasy Tactics.

The SNES on the other hand was littered with assloads of amazing role playing games. (The graphics of the SNES haven't aged well and yet I am a sucker for sprites.) The reason I love the SNES games still, is mostly in regards to the excellent storytelling and the music, which was necessity as the SNES didn't boast 'cutting edge' graphics.
Still, the games endure.

Do Rpg's get better with age? Not if they are crap to begin with. The only reason I keep coming back to the SNES era, playing the games continually, is for the sole reason that they are far better than what RPG's currently have to offer in recent days. The quality of old generation games is far better, IMO.

Jam it back in, in the dark.