Topic: Mario & Luigi:Bowser's Inside Story

[BeautifulShy]

I gave up on the first game after fighting some boss for over an hour and then not pulling off some complicated attack correctly and getting beat.  It frustrated the hell out of me so I put the game down to play something else and never got back to it.  I really should start the game over and try again.  I did love the style and the characters.

The problem for me I guess is that I don't WANT an RPG to be skill based.  If I want to play a skill based game I'll play Metroid or Zelda which offer complete real-time control and thus do skill based gameplay a million times better.  RPGs are slow and full of menus so I want to be able to play it like chess.  I can sit back and plan my moves.  Strategy RPGs have the best system because it makes full use of the pros of RPG gameplay.  Stuff like this or Tales of Symphonia's screwed up attempt at real time combat or ATB in Final Fantasy basically make full use of the cons of RPGs.  Now I don't like endlessly grinding either but I don't like having to be quick on my feet while at the same time wading through menus.  If I have to use menus then give let me plan everything out, press a button and do what I want to do.  I play RPGs to explore a new world and meet new characters and solves puzzles and have a somewhat decent story to follow.

To me the whole skill-based RPG stuff is pretty much for people that don't like RPGs.  Well when I play an RPG I want to play an RPG.  This is why I like Super Mario RPG because it plays like one.  The other Mario RPGs play like they're ashamed of being RPGs and want to distance themselves from the genre as much as possible.

I should try the first game again though.  I need to get my Cube back from my brother.  I let him borrow it since my DS and Wii can play all my GBA and Cube games but I want the GB Player for this.

First bold. I take offence to that.I like RPG's I love TOS and the paper Mario and SSS series. I also like Traditional RPGs like Breath of Fire and Final Fantasy.There is room for both.

Second Bold:SMRG was the basis for the Paper Mario and SSS series with its combat system.

[Bill Aurion]

To me the whole skill-based RPG stuff is pretty much for people that don't like RPGs.

Well, I guess...If the textbook definition of RPG is "game that you have absolutely no control of whether you take damage or not"...

Frankly, turn-based gameplay in the old-style Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest fashion is HORRIBLY outdated and if it were up to me would just be killed out-right...I mean, it's not like the style was designed because it was FUN, it was because developers couldn't design anything more complex on the NES...All RPGs should have some form of effort the player puts in besides just mashing the attack button or the defense button randomly with no sense of actual timing (the Mario RPG series are pretty much the limit of what has been done in turn-based combat)...You aren't playing a game, you're playing a grindfest... =(

Plus it's just plain silly to expect that your character would just sit there and take damage from an attack... ='D

[Pale]

"I mean, it's not like the style was designed because it was FUN, it was because developers couldn't design anything more complex on the NES"

I COMPLETELY disagree with this statement.  The style was designed because it has roots in pen and paper RPGs and other games of user affected chance.

Action RPGs are NOT and NEVER WILL BE an evolution of turn based RPGs.  It is a different variation of the same genre.

I will always love games where stuff is determined based on what is essentially a dice role.  It's fine if they aren't for you, but calling them old-style is just plain wrong.

Finally, your last statement is looking at a precise instant of a battle, instead of the big picture, which is what the system is designed for.  For example, the system is designed to say your character has gained enough skill that he only dodges 20% of his hits.  Therefore, 80% of the time he will take a hit.

Having the player control that completely REMOVES that statistic as a growth spot.  Part of reason Mario RPG games drive me crazy is that it takes me a matter of moments to learn the rhythm of an attack enough to get a crit upwards of 90% of them.  Why the hell aren't they always crits?

Again, these are two distinctly different sub-genres and trying to say there is no place for one is just silly.  The mere fact that Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest still sell circles around the Tales series should be proof of that.

[Ian Sane]

Second Bold:SMRG was the basis for the Paper Mario and SSS series with its combat system.

Well absolutely.  I just think the other Mario RPGs take it a little too far.  Paper Mario definitely moreso.  Paper Mario is fun but it dumbs down RPG conventions to that point that I feel insulted - like Nintendo thinks I'm too dumb to understand experience levels that go into the double digits.

Frankly, turn-based gameplay in the old-style Final Fantasy/Dragon Quest fashion is HORRIBLY outdated and if it were up to me would just be killed out-right

Well Dragon Quest is certainly outdated but you do realize that there are many unique parts of RPGs that pretty much require turn based gameplay?  How do you do parties in real time unless you have multiplayer?  And keep in mind AI routines suck and sometimes you just want a single player game.  Using items and spells and such work best when you pause the action.  Any game that forces you to navigate menus in real time BLOW.  It's user-friendly for the action to pause.

Look at Zelda.  Zelda has a lot of RPG like elements but it doesn't have parties.  It effectively can't.  I love Zelda.  I love it more than any other game.  But it's a lone hero game and that's all it really can be unless I'm playing Four Swords and have people over.  The best you can do with Zelda to have a party and remain single player is to let me pause the game and swap characters.

Are turn-based strategy games bad?  Does Advance Wars suck because it doesn't control like Warcraft?  No.  So why can't turn-based RPGs exist in a world where real-time action games are more common anyway?

It doesn't help that personally don't care for any real-time RPG.  I've never seen the concept done right while I can point at something like Chrono Trigger and prove the validity of turn-based RPGs.

Though I think strategy RPGs have the ideal battle system.  The battles turn into a sort of boardgame.  Once positioning is in play it feels like there's a lot more control while still having the take-your-time pace of turn-based RPGs.

[Chozo Ghost]

I gave up on the first game after fighting some boss for over an hour and then not pulling off some complicated attack correctly and getting beat.  It frustrated the hell out of me so I put the game down to play something else and never got back to it.  I really should start the game over and try again.  I did love the style and the characters.

Was that the big green queen boss? I spent a ridiculous amount of time fighting her, but eventually I did beat her and then I didn't have any problems with any bosses after that. It was weird...

[Ian Sane]

Was that the big green queen boss?

Yes it was!  I think the only way to hit her was with some special jump attack or something and I sucked at it.

[shammack]

I will always love games where stuff is determined based on what is essentially a dice role.

Unless it's the dungeon layout!

[BeautifulShy]

Ian have one of the Bros attack her with the hammer in the body while the other attacks the arms.Once her crown is off attack her head.Also there is 4 modes to the Bros. Attack start on 1 and work your way up.

[Bill Aurion]

I will always love games where stuff is determined based on what is essentially a dice role.

Haha...ha...Play some Mario Party...

Finally, your last statement is looking at a precise instant of a battle, instead of the big picture, which is what the system is designed for.  For example, the system is designed to say your character has gained enough skill that he only dodges 20% of his hits.  Therefore, 80% of the time he will take a hit.  Having the player control that completely REMOVES that statistic as a growth spot.

So the system is "correct" for having an incredibly retarded, worthless statistic?  That makes no sense whatsoever...

Part of reason Mario RPG games drive me crazy is that it takes me a matter of moments to learn the rhythm of an attack enough to get a crit upwards of 90% of them.  Why the hell aren't they always crits?

I don't even know what you are talking about here...

The mere fact that Final Fantasy and Dragon Quest still sell circles around the Tales series should be proof of that.

And Halo sells circles around a bunch of much better first-person shooters...

Well Dragon Quest is certainly outdated but you do realize that there are many unique parts of RPGs that pretty much require turn based gameplay?

I didn't say get rid of turn-based games completely, I said to get rid of the FF/DQ-style of complete lack of control over your characters...

How do you do parties in real time unless you have multiplayer?  And keep in mind AI routines suck and sometimes you just want a single player game.

Tales...Star Ocean...AI is clearly getting better all the time, too, as shown by the recent efforts in Infinite Undiscovery, for example...And I've yet to be hampered by the AI in Tales of Vesperia...

It's user-friendly for the action to pause.

I thought you were a hardcore gamer...You aren't allowed to want anything to be user-friendly...

Look at Zelda.  Zelda has a lot of RPG like elements but it doesn't have parties.  It effectively can't.  I love Zelda.  I love it more than any other game.  But it's a lone hero game and that's all it really can be unless I'm playing Four Swords and have people over.  The best you can do with Zelda to have a party and remain single player is to let me pause the game and swap characters.

.............Ian, please read this again and tell me you didn't mean to type this...Why are you talking about a game designed as a single-hero adventure in the same way as a party RPG?  I do not understand!

Are turn-based strategy games bad?  Does Advance Wars suck because it doesn't control like Warcraft?  No.  So why can't turn-based RPGs exist in a world where real-time action games are more common anyway?

I think SRPGs are fine (well, I personally don't like them, but that's not the point), considering strategy is the focus point...You are basically moving chess pieces on a board...They aren't comparable to the grindfest "Am I strong enough yet!?!?" RPGs...

[Pale]

Uhmm the only thing I'll clarify is that the "rhythm presses" in mario rpg games is what I'm talking about to get critical hits.  It takes no time at all to master it, so what is the point?

But whatever, I'm glad you have your feisty my opinion is all that matters opinions Bill.

[Bill Aurion]

Uhmm the only thing I'll clarify is that the "rhythm presses" in mario rpg games is what I'm talking about to get critical hits.  It takes no time at all to master it, so what is the point?

One, "no time at all to master" is still better than not having anything to master...Second, in the M&L games each enemy has their own pattern to learn, and you are constantly learning new patterns...How quickly you progress in the game is completely dependent on how well you adapt to your enemies and less on relying on how many evade points or defense points or whatever that you have...

But whatever, I'm glad you have your feisty my opinion is all that matters opinions Bill.

Hey, if it'll teach developers to expand past "tradition" and add more to the genre, I'll play the bad guy any day!

(Which it won't, sadly...)

Edit:  And I also want to add that it's kind of silly to be pointing the finger over "only your opinion is important," considering we are only debating on an internet forum...It's not like whoever "wins" the argument gets to decide where the future of games go, and it's not like anything said is in a venomous manner (sarcastic, I will admit to!)

[Deguello]

It's too much to take down Ian's posts point by point, but I will point out the "Mario is ashamed of RPGs" charge against further Super Mario RPGs since... Super Mario RPGs, is a crock of ****.  For starters, Super Mario RPG basically destroyed the idea of an overworld map, and also made each map more than just a passive map you walk around.  You had to jump and each place was an isometric platforming game.  Super Mario RPG did more against the RPG "formula" than any entry after.  This is just more Rose-colored nostalgia. 

And you guys really need to lern2play and man the hell up.  Mario and Luigi is "hard?"  I mean are you guys serious?  Bosses taking "hours?"  What in the holy hell?  I never had any trouble with ANY of this, ever.  Once you get a boss's patterns down it's a cinch, even the Final Boss.  It's like some kind of bizarro world where Nintendo is now being told to simplify a Mario game because it's too hard and hardcore for the masses. 

This doesn't bode well for future arguments, particularly the "sales = popular, therefore the highest sales is the best" chestnut.  That's really gonna sting in the future.

[Khushrenada]

I like Paper Mario. Some days, I think Paper Mario 2 is better, somedays I like the original more. All I know is, I at least play Super Mario RPG once every year. It is the Mario RPG I always get the biggest desire to play and it is not rose-colored glasses. It's a good game. It's been a long time since I've touched a Paper Mario game.

[Pale]

To Bill:

I wasn't being overly serious in what I was saying, so don't take it that way.  I readily admit that the Mario RPGs have something going for them because so many people do enjoy them.  The fact that I'm not a huge fan doesn't really matter.

My only beef was with the statement that they (and other action RPGs) represent modern RPGs and turn based represent old time ones.  There is a place for both.

[GoldenPhoenix]

I wonder if it is possible that people like Mario RPG because they have a different opinion than Deg?

Also one thing I LOVE about the Mario and Luigi series is that you can be virtually invincible if you have the skills since you can dodge most moves. This provides a fascinating dynamic in turn based games. It is no longer required (for the most part) to take damage.

[KDR_11k]

Generally I think RPG skill progression is geared more for people whose own skills won't develop so they play a game that automatically gets easier as they play more. Of course ARPGs don't work for these people since that requires the player to develop.

Me, I prefer more action, prevents situations like FF10 where I couldn't beat a boss because I was underlevelled and would have to grind to beat him. The RPG mechanism in ARPGs serves to make backtracking easier IMO, in Metroid you get better beams instead that oneshot enemies that were difficult before.

[Nick DiMola]

Generally my favorite RPGs are the ones that do nifty things to reduce grinding.

For instance, with Persona 3 FES which I'm playing right now has two mechanisms to help minimize grinding. One is the robust Persona system which allows me to craft new skill sets (Personas) that are stronger based on things that happen outside of the battlegrounds. The other is the weakness structure where certain enemies are more vulnerable to certain attacks making them "Weak." If you can manage to hit all of the enemies' weak points in a battle you can defeat them all without breaking a sweat.

But of course, a ton of people love the grinding structure. Fortunately there are enough RPGs out there to satisfy everyone. As such, nothing in the RPG realm in terms of core gameplay/battling is outdated or antiquated because there is always a consumer base out there that can latch onto the concepts. Diversity is what makes the world-go-round.

[vudu]

Generally my favorite RPGs are the ones that do nifty things to reduce grinding.

Like the new Tales game where you can purchase character levels? 

[Hostile Creation]

I don't remember having any trouble with the controls or combos in either of these games, and all the fights were perhaps challenging, but not hour-long debacles.  I'm very much looking forward to this one, love the series.

"To me the whole skill-based RPG stuff is pretty much for people that don't like RPGs."

This is totally true of me.  I despise "regular" RPGs (including the original Mario RPG) but I enjoy most skill-based RPGs/ARPGs.  I also like tactic-style RPGs, though I can only play them in moderation.

[BeautifulShy]

An article about the game

[Mop it up]

This game looks really... strange, I'm not so sure it's going to be as magical as the first game (haven't played the second yet).

[BeautifulShy]

I haven't played the second yet but I enjoyed the first.As long as this game keeps all of the in jokes, battle system, and memorable cast. Than I'm all for it.

[Peachylala]

More Yoko Shimomura sound tunes should be confirmed by now.

Her music is what made the first one so great (the second one was kind of...meh).

[BeautifulShy]

New trailer
The puzzles are going to be interesting.There are lots of Bros Attacks.

[Caliban]

That info trailer was awesome. I so want this game even more. Bowser rules!