My issue with "Retro-Styled" JRPGs

[Seacliff]

Feel free to disagree, since I know there are fans of the games I will mention below.

We have seen JRPGs in the past few year trying to utilize nostalgia in their marketing. I Am Setsuna, for example, directly compares itself to Chrono Trigger on its download page. To an extent, this is justified, since the game uses Chrono Trigger's battle system. However, as far as direct comparisons go, that seems to be the end. I didn't think of much of why this might be an issue at the time. But when the successor from the same studio, Lost Sphear, was released last month with a stricter critical and general reputation despite making decent improvements, a lot of thoughts clicked together for me... and I understand how Tokyo RPG Factory approaches game development.

To 'play like the classics' could mean a lot of things. In Lost Sphear's case, that meant taking ideas from various other RPGs and brewing them together regardless if it flowed well with the story, characters, or presentation.

Unfortunately, games are more than a list of mechanics. They need to be more than the sum of their parts. Tokyo RPG Factory seems to care more about what's being played rather than how it is being played. And contradictory to the very loose vision that is 'a game like the classics', this isn't very classical game design.

Right off the bat the player is introduced to numerous mechanics. These include Spritnite, Momentum, Sublimation skills/effects, Reflect/Counter, Artefacts, Vulcosuits, Food, and Upgrade. That's a lot of nouns, and many of these nouns can be outright ignored by the player as a gameplay element if they chose. This feels needlessly cluttered and could have been trimmed down a lot for a more fluid experience that benefits both the gameplay and the writing.

For example, Final Fantasy 6 was able to tie a lot of its gameplay, story, and characters together with a single noun. "Espers". This is done by considering how the noun worked in one department and using it to construct another part of the game.

Gameplay: Espers are able to allow characters to learn any magic they want by equipping the right esper for a number of battles.
Character: Tera is half-esper.
Gameplay: So she is able to learn some magic as she levels up naturally.
Story: The relationship between Espers and humans, and how Tera is a product of both and is a representative of both.
Character: Celes, who can also learn magic by leveling up, is a Magiknight who was infused with an esper.
Story: Kefka, the first Magiknight, but lost his sanity becoming one.

I feel like this cohesive efficiency is ignored for the sake of the illusion of depth through complexity. However, Depth is achieved by using the most out of what you currently have.

While I like Etrian Odyssey Untold 2, it has similar problems of layering mechanics on top of mechanics from previous entries in the series with little cohesion. Added classes function like existing ones (Sovereign and Troubadour). A completely new item type that can't be accessed through the menu is added for the sake of a cooking mechanic and said items are gained alongside items collected through normal means. And following the footsteps of Untold 1, a new dungeon is added that is completely segregated from the main dungeon. Outside of the bug fixes and rebalancing, I can't say these new mechanics make the game superior to the original.

So for anyone developing a game and were looking to get something out of this. Here's my advice: Don't add new mechanics to your game just because a game you liked had the same mechanic. Ask yourself "How does X element enhance the gameplay and story?". Challange yourself to do this with even genre staples like critical hit rates, linear weapon progression, or even the function of stats. Players do want games "like the classics" but they also want experiences they can't get elsewhere. If your game has to rely on another game for its identity, then there's nothing stopping the player from playing the predecessor instead.

I made this same mistake in my current game, Flip Dimensions. Early on, I wanted duel skills from Chrono Trigger for no other reason than because I thought the concept was cool. Years later, and it has added little to nothing to the gameplay, and I had to break the rules of the world to give the player more when they get a new party member.

Thanks for reading.

 

[The Mighty Palm]

I agree with almost all the points youve made I dont understand what this has to do with retro-style games.

It seems Mechanics bloat is the issue, not nostalgia-based games.

The only point I disagree with is the mention of the Cooking System in Etrian Odyssey 2 Untold as a poor mechanic. I thoroughly enjoyed it. It blended in rather well. Gave me more incentive to fight monsters and explore more thoroughly in order to collect these ingredients I needed to get my food bonuses. A much better replacement than the Doctor from the original who was much better suited to having his duties given to the Inn to save you a trip.

 

[Tai_MT]

I don't really play "games like the classics". My problem with it is one you mentioned. Why would I play a watered-down version of a game I enjoyed 10-20 years ago? I love Chrono Trigger. It's my favorite RPG of all time. Despite it's flaws, I would argue it's the best RPG of all time and cannot be duplicated despite best efforts. But, do I want it duplicated? Do I want to play a different version of it made by another company? No. Because, most companies that make these "games like the classics" don't really understand the classics. They don't know what made them good. They don't realize that even these amazing games had some flaws that could be improved or removed.

Heck, even the companies that originally owned these properties and "re-release them" don't understand what makes them great. Let's go with your Final Fantasy 6 example. A while back, it was "re-released" on the GBA. I loved this idea, I could own one of my favorite RPG's and take it anywhere with me. Then, I ran into problems. They'd decided to patch out some of the coolest stuff in the game. Stuff that only "veterans" of the game would know. Early in the game, if you took the time to learn "Death", at 1% learn rate (took forever to obtain!) you could go to a special island and fight an invisible enemy called "Intangir". If you cast Death on it, it died instantly and rewarded you with 10 Points (the most you could ever obtain before the "midgame", where the world is destroyed). Only a veteran would know what "Vanish" was, as nobody in the game ever tells you that it makes Magic Spells hit 100% of the time. Only a veteran would know that Intangir existed on this island and could be farmed to learn all the early game Magic quickly. They patched this monster in the "re-release" to be "immune" to death, even if it were invisible with Vanish. The fight then turned into a freakin' Boss Monster that won against you nearly 100% of the time. Why? To patch out an exploit in the game... THAT THEY HAD DESIGNED IN THE ORIGINAL TO BEGIN WITH. For me, that was the "straw that broke the camel's back". Which was, in all honesty, the last in a long stream of changes. They "retranslated the dialogue" as well. I'm not okay with that either. I liked the story of the American release. I don't care if some of the terminology was imprecise, many of my favorite lines of dialogue were stripped out and "re-translated" to be far less memorable and more bland. They even had a scene cut out where two evil soldiers punched Celes while she was tied up. Why? I have no idea. The initial cutscene was they walked up, you heard a "punch" sound effect, and then her sprite in the chair changed from "standing" to "laying on ground, injured" which served as showing she'd taken damage, and then reverted to "standing". Hardly graphic at all. But, it was removed.

Usually, for me, the tip off is when reviewers or the game itself begin comparing itself to another game. The only exception I have to this rule is "Metroid-vania", because that's actually become a "genre" of game all on its own. A genre that used to be called "Action/Adventure", but was so far outside of that scope, it needed its own descriptor for games that did something similar. I generally avoid any game that invites open comparison to another game. "Oh, it's like Zelda". Nope, no thanks, don't want to play it. I don't want to play a game that's "like Zelda". If I did, I'd much rather just play Zelda.

That being said... I've also been spouting all over the forums for the last few years, "don't just add stuff to your game because you think it's cool. Why does it exist? What purpose does it serve?". Don't just add a crafting system because you like crafting. Don't just add Dialogue Wheels because you liked them in Mass Effect or Dragon Age. Game design isn't "rule of cool". It's more of a "carefully measured and orchestrated balancing act". It all needs to exist for a reason. Why does this character exist? What purpose do they serve? Why does this Skill exist? Why does this Mechanic exist? Why does this Scene exist? Or this Dialogue?

It makes me a little irritated that these "Retro Styled JRPGs" as you put them fall into the same pitfalls of amateur game dev design. It's a means of trying to "make a quick sale".

Heck, currently on Steam, we have the "re-release-make" of Secret of Mana. Here's another of my favorite RPG's from my childhood. Am I interested to see what they did with the art design and these cutscenes they added? Sure. Do I think these changes will improve the game? Oh no, quite the opposite. Would I pay the $50 to find out if it's an improvement or not? No. Not on your life. The SNES copy of the game back in the day ran me $30. Direct from a store. Buying it again on my Wii ran me $10. I don't think a "graphical improvement" to an existing game is worth more than buying the game twice. But, that's what we've got now. Game companies who just don't understand what made these "classics" good to begin with. What made them fun and interesting. Lots of Indie Game Devs have this same problem.

To make a "Retro Styled JRPG", you need to know what made them good and why they are beloved. I can sit down a 12 year old kid right now, tell them to play "Earthbound" and guess what? They'll have fun! Even with the minimal controls and the "SNES graphics". I can do the same with games like Chrono Trigger and Final Fantasy 6. In fact, I've done that a few times with younger family members. "Hey, play this game. It'll only take you like 20 hours to finish it at most, let me know what you think". Some of these games actually have nostalgia goggles for a reason. It's because they were and are genuinely good games. It's because they hold up even 20 years later in some cases.

But, here we are. Lots of people modeling their games after older games and using it as a selling point. They do it without understanding why those games were designed that way to begin with. They do it without understanding what made those games good.

 

[Aoi Ninami]

For what it's worth, I felt that dual techs in Flip Dimensions achieved much the same as in Chrono Trigger: giving the player an interesting choice as to whether to use a more powerful attack that has the drawback that two characters go on cooldown, and sometimes having to choose between (A and B ) or (B and C). Not always being able to do the attacks you most want to do makes the game harder in a good, interesting way.

 

[bgillisp]

Personally, my issue is many developers play those games, and then shoe-horn those mechanics into their game without understanding why it worked well in the first game (or even IF it worked well. Sometimes those old mechanics and systems just need to die as they were honestly terrible). As a result, they end up with a poor to terrible game in the end. I've seen this in some RPGMaker games on Steam even, where the developers will say they made a game "Like game x" and end up inplementing all of the bad stuff from that game and none of the good as they failed to understand why that mechanic worked in the original game.

 

[Seacliff]

I agree with almost all the points youve made I dont understand what this has to do with retro-style games.

Well, to summarize.

Personally, my issue is many developers play those games, and then shoe-horn those mechanics into their game without understanding why it worked well in the first game

Is directly related to this.

It's not just a mechanical bloat issue or a nostalgia-based one, it's how both were uninitially combined. Developers are trying to appeal towards the nostalgia of a specific game, and they take elements from that game without fully considering how they actually work (Because a game isn't driven from a single mechanic alone).
Consider if another game took FF6's Esper system. If the system is there just for the sake of appealing FF6's fans and doesn't have a huge impact on the gameplay, characters, and story like Espers did in FF6, then it's a redundant mechanic for this new game.

The only point I disagree with is the mention of the Cooking System in Etrian Odyssey 2 Untold as a poor mechanic.

I guessed a glossed over this one, so I'll explain it a bit.
I like the concept of cooking, but I think how EOU2 handled it could have been better. The part I disagree with is as said, creating a completely separate item type that is both accessed different and functions differently from the main items ON TOP of all instances of these items being obtained alongside normal ones and are acquired the exact same way. This is increasingly jarring since the normal items are used for crafting anyways.

It felt like an attempt to mimic Tales of cooking system. Personally, I think it would make more sense to rebalance item drops so all instances so the same items that could be sold in the shop to craft weapons are the same ones you could cook. Not only does this make more sense from a worldbuilding standpoint, but adds a bit of choice and opportunity cost into the mater. Already have the equipment you want with your current items, you could sell them for gold now or prepare a meal to make the next raid easier.

For what it's worth, I felt that dual techs in Flip Dimensions achieved much the same as in Chrono Trigger.

So the problem I had with my own system was that I learned the hard way that duel skills, espically offensive based ones like CT, aren't designed for standard combat. I think they work better in Chrono Trigger with its ATB system, or even Chrono Cross with it's AGI free combat.
The balancing issue with Duel skills in a traditional turn-based environment is that if a skill is more powerful than the sum of its parts (Taking away someone else's turn) then it's a clear choice to chose that over nearly all other offensive skills. Conversely, if it's less than the sum of its parts, it's worthless. This is different from CT where the other actor might not be available through ATB or in CC where skills can only be used once per battle, and the other actor might not be available through the lack of stamina.

I don't think it's a hopeless fix, which is why I'm probably not going to remove it. But it needs seriously rebalancing, I find myself forgetting it exists when playtesting boss fights.

 

[Canini]

For example, Final Fantasy 6 was able to tie a lot of its gameplay, story, and characters together with a single noun. "Espers". This is down by considering how the noun worked in one department and using it to construct another part of the game.

Gameplay: Espers are able to allow characters to learn any magic they want by equipping the right esper for a number of battles.
Character: Tera is half-esper.
Gameplay: So she is able to learn some magic as she levels up naturally.
Story: The relationship between Espers and humans, and how Tera is a product of both and is a representative of both.
Character: Celes, who can also learn magic by leveling up, is a Magiknight who was infused with an esper.
Story: Kefka, the first Magiknight, but lost his sanity becoming one.

For what it is worth this comment really was something of an eye-opener for me. I haven´t really thought of the storyline in FF6 that way before and it does apply to a lot of other successful games.

 

[HexMozart88]

This isn't even solely retro games, to be honest. People just want to take everything from games that were received well and shove it all into their own game which effectively ends up as mismatched nonsense. I have no problems whatsoever with taking inspiration from games you enjoy, but at least make sure it actually matches with what you're going for. Don't just regurgitate other games, because if you're just going to do that and you've got nothing else to bring to the table, everyone's simply going to play the better game.
To relate to the world of RPG Maker specifically, people have a similar problem with scripts. They just throw a bunch in there 'cause they look cool or because they want to make it look like some existing game, and end up with a lagging piece of garbage or a completely unfinished game because they became feature freaks.

 

[Frogboy]

I know what you mean. I can't stand to play any of the newer versions of Final Fantasy 1 because they put target smoothing in and destroyed the whole strategy element of the battle system.

 

[T1Frequency]

I always love the retro stuff. Ive been getting into development myself and am currently trying to find like minded folk who want to develop some retro stuff... to be specific a turn based RPG. Im a professional audio engineer so I could alone make all the sound effects and music for the game. (Ive been getting into animations, C# and development in UNITY and RPG Make MV but I'm far from professional at this end of the spectrum.) I would like to make a bunch of dark ambient music and sparse creepy piano leads. I want the game to have a dark undertone to its over world and back story almost like what "Shadow Run" did on the Sega Genesis years ago, (Sega does what NintenDON'T. If you didn't know the SNES version of shadow run was inferior to the Sega.) As far as game mechanics I want to develop something new and not really seen before thus keeping the game unique from the games of the generation its trying to fit into. If anyone is interested in starting a new project contact me here. Also if you have a project and need an audio engineer I would be happy to help.

 

[Kes]

@T1Frequency Your reply is definitely off-topic.

If you want to join with others, or have others join with you to make a game, then you should be either posting in Project Recruitment, or reading threads already there asking for help with audio. Be sure to read the pinned topic of Rules and Guidelines before posting there.

 

[SOC]

There are really good modern "classic JRPGs" out there that stay true to the originals in every way, FF Dimensions being one of them.

 

[T1Frequency]

@T1Frequency Your reply is definitely off-topic.

If you want to join with others, or have others join with you to make a game, then you should be either posting in Project Recruitment, or reading threads already there asking for help with audio. Be sure to read the pinned topic of Rules and Guidelines before posting there.

Sorry I'm new and got lost and thank you for directing me in the right direction.

 

[Touchfuzzy]

This isn't even solely retro games, to be honest. People just want to take everything from games that were received well and shove it all into their own game which effectively ends up as mismatched nonsense.

I've banged on this for years now. I'm sure if I looked I could find articles I've written on it. Every piece you put in a game should be there for a reason. Games are like clocks. Every spring/gear/etc needs to be carefully selected to work in the entire system surrounding it.

To many people don't look at a mechanic well enough to understand that it doesn't just have to work on its own, it has to work in the ecosystem you are placing it.

 

[bgillisp]

@HexMozart88 : That's been an issue as long as I can remember. When Dungeon Master came out, everyone wanted to make an RPG in that style. Then Ultima Underworld came out, and suddenly everyone wanted to make a 3D RPG in that style. Then the 3d craze really took off and everyone shoved 3d into everything that didn't need it and we got disasters like Gabriel Knight 3 and Kings Quest 8.

And don't get me started on how every game wanted to be like Diablo after that came out. Or all the Warcraft clones that came out after Warcraft 2's success.

 

[Seacliff]

I've banged on this for years now. I'm sure if I looked I could find articles I've written on it. Every piece you put in a game should be there for a reason. Games are like clocks. Every spring/gear/etc needs to be carefully selected to work in the entire system surrounding it.

To many people don't look at a mechanic well enough to understand that it doesn't just have to work on its own, it has to work in the ecosystem you are placing it.

That's exactly what I mean when I say games are more than "a list of mechanics". Just taking an element from a game isn't enough, because it was a part of a formula.

On a more positive note. A game series I think does this well is The Legend of Heroes, specifically 6 (Trails in the Sky), 7 (Trails of Zero), and 8 (Trails of Cold Steel). The Orbment system is comparable to FF7's Materia system, but they were careful to make sure Orbments were relevant to combat, and just as importantly, the game's world. (Comparing the Orbal Revolution to the real world's Industrial Revolution).

Replying to @bgillisp and @HexMozart88 while I understand this isn't a new problem, and not one exclusive to JRPGs. The reason why I made the complaint to this genre specifically could be summed into three reasons. Each one I think is the result of the previous point.

1. Nostalgia. Again, while this isn't exclusive to JRPGs or Retro-styled entries, it's heavily utilized in the genre because a lot of bigger publishers don't seem to bother with Turn Based combat unless it can be directly compared to a famous older title. Stagnating the potential evolution of turn-based combat.

2. The JRPG fandom probably have the largest group of enablers compared to other genres, this isn't an attack towards anyone, just an observation. Whenever a modern entry has elements that could be defined as 'dated', 'unfair', or 'broken' fans will come out and say it's okay because the game is trying to emulate older titles. Consider that for any other genre, would it be okay for Mario Odyssey to have the same physics and camera that were present in Super Mario 64? I would say no, because the 3D platforming genre has made a lot of advancements in the past 20 years. That's not to say there can't be an audience for unfair RPGs or that they can't exist, but it shouldn't be used as an excuse for poor game design.

3. Whenever the JRPG genre does try to innovate, it can go in three directions. First is honest innovation that helps justify turn-based combat in the modern era. Second is to add action elements. This isn't an inherent problem, I like games like Tales, but when companies like Square Enix and Sega prioritize these titles over turn-based ones, it felt like they no longer believe that turn-based combat could have mainstream appeal anymore. The third is exactly why I created this topic, having a large list of mechanics for the sake of the illusion of depth, this isn't as common as the second choice (at least the second choice is for the sake of a new genre), but I think is much more damaging the genre's growth and reputation.

I think I convoluted my message a bit. But those are my thoughts.

 

[kaukusaki]

I make retro style games as my core business XD so it's a lot of study and getting mechanics just right. Also I grew up on it so that's what I'm used to lol
The kids have no idea why these classic games work so well . They just know folks like it and it made money.
If they studied more theory they would understand better how it works ... But that's just my two cents

 

[Zebestian]

I think it's all been pretty much said up to this point. Just piling up a bunch of mechanics from the "good ol' classics" doesn't make your game good. A good game is much more than just mechanics and fun elements. Everything has to tie in with lore, story, atmosphere, gameplay, characters, art and music. People should always ask themselves "does this make sense here?" not only if they want to adopt elements from distinguished games, but all the time.

 

[CaptainRadish]

I think it's all been pretty much said up to this point. Just piling up a bunch of mechanics from the "good ol' classics" doesn't make your game good. A good game is much more than just mechanics and fun elements. Everything has to tie in with lore, story, atmosphere, gameplay, characters, art and music. People should always ask themselves "does this make sense here?" not only if they want to adopt elements from distinguished games, but all the time.

Makes sense to me. Finding that magic point where it all comes together is the hard part. That's where the art of design would come in.