340 réponses à ce sujet

[Maria Caliban]

Sometimes it was fun. Sometimes it wasn't.

I prefer stealth and puzzle solving mechanics like Dues Ex: Human Revolution for my fun as opposed to the combat, combat, and more combat all the DnD inspired games give us. Do you slaughter enemies through real time button mashing or through turn-based killing? Either way, it's the same s***.

Modifié par Maria Caliban, 10 septembre 2012 - 08:19 .

[Renmiri1]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It still seemed pretty irrelevant when discussing video game combat mechanics.

Especially given that WoW is actually an exceptionally math heavy combat system.

Lol, if anyone doubts it tell them to google Elitist Jerks and WoW!

To make a long story short, we here on the thread have been passionately discussing wheter a slow combat system like DAO or a fast paced combat system like DA2 are best. 

I think we have at least arrived to some conclusions: It seems we find DA2 combat please people who like having combat unpredictable, that requires skilled reflexes and situational awareness - don't sit on poison, keep your healer alive, etc... Is not WoW but it is fun enough and I don't have to share loot or wake up the huntard that is pulling half the instance to my party 

DA2  combat on the other hand seems to annoy people who like to pause, plan a set of tactics, and then go afk or watch the party execute it, without needing to touch the controller. That was possible on DAO but with the fast pace and waves of mobs of DA2 the people who have slow reflexes or who dislike having to have fast reflexes and having to pay attention to what is going on in the battle get frustrated,

I asked if people who hate DA2 combat would like to just skip combat altogether and the answer is mixed. A few do want the option to just skip it, but most want a more "brainy" less skill dependant combat. With math! And quantum mechanics. And science!!! 

Me, I really want a combat system at least as fast and active as DA2. The combat system on DAO was so slow it almost made the game umplayable to me, and it did make my best friend uninstall DAO right at Ostagar. I'm more fixed on story so I slogged through it but was painful. DA2 was fun though. And Awakenings was fun too, at least because I could just use "Massacre" and kill all, basically skipping most random encounters 

[Zubie]

I am sure DA3 will have enough "awesome" and explosions to help keep your attention Renmiri1

[philippe willaume]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Mr Fixit wrote...

Renmiri1 wrote...

Math or logic are not really combat to me. And to a very big number of people, of all ages. 8 million or so at least 

You *do* know, I hope, that in order to enter a military academy in many countries around the world, you have to pass a comprehensive mathematics entry exam?

Combat is NOT what WOW would like you to believe.

It's not what DAO would have us believe either.

Curious about how comprehensive the entry exam really is.

Hello Alex

It could be argued that it is even the case with all fencing simulator in RL when compared to live steel.
The system I have studied fro the last 12 years could be called fencing with all weapons for the slow witted. Ringeck fencing manual (1430-1450) is really more a method of maximising  your entry/passing the
point and improving or getting a dominant position by using 5 strikes that are good enough to cover all situations and optimal in none.
The system is quite researched and is based on very good biomechanics, angle and distance but when you fight 
all you care about is where his/her hands are in respect to his centre line when you are breaking the distance or if he/she is weak or strong when there steel contact.
Yet it is still a matter of cognition to get  keep on top of the game.

If we bring that analogy to gaming, in DA:0 you could created and manage a situation where you went from dominant position to dominant position and how that happened would vary.

In DA:2 that was not really the case, it was more a knuckle dragging-like experience. i.e. lets move in activating
super mincing power mix and potion up when needed. It is quite clear that some people had that experience in DA:0 though not in the same proportion as for DA:2.

Regardless bringing the debate on combat action vs combat RPG (ie button mashing vs need to pause) is missing the point. In fact I would argue that combat in DA:0 and DA:2 are not that different intrinsically and the
difference lay more in what it enabled the player to do within the game system.

In DA:0 you add way to know the force and the location of the enemy and decide how to approach it. you can't do that in DA:2

In DA:0 you could use  the map (and the debatable path finding  of the enemy) to your advantage, in DA:2 the best you can do is using natural choke point  and you can used change map section to circumvent air drops but it is hampered by how far you can leave your crew behind and how quick they change area.

Of course people that like combat action vs combat RPG will find the other lacking, but in the two example the difference has nothing to do with combat mechanics it is really how the rest of the game works with combat.

If we forget the player skills vs character skill for demonstration purpose,  you could even have FPS, enclave, skyrim, london hellgate combat system with the way DA:0 interface with the rest of the game.

all you need is ME like order system or a flight sim radio orders (pausing is only a different way to do the same thing).

IE you  can select the position where you want your  fire support  team to be because you have enough Intel to
want them there and  you know they will stay where you want them to stay and do what you want to do when you want to do it.


phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 10 septembre 2012 - 09:18 .

[Plaintiff]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Sometimes it was fun. Sometimes it wasn't.

I prefer stealth and puzzle solving mechanics like Dues Ex: Human Revolution for my fun as opposed to the combat, combat, and more combat all the DnD inspired games give us. Do you slaughter enemies through real time button mashing or through turn-based killing? Either way, it's the same s***.

This is pretty much my stance.

Combat is just what I do to get exp/gold/progress through the story. The precise mechanics are a non-issue. I prefer DA2 combat to DA:O because it's faster and therefore takes less time. Being more visually impressive is also a point in its favour.

I'd like DA3 to have some more puzzles or something. There are very few instances in DA:O or DA2 where I have to use my brain at all.

[Sable Rhapsody]

Plaintiff wrote...
I'd like DA3 to have some more puzzles or something. There are very few instances in DA:O or DA2 where I have to use my brain at all.

As long as it's not the Tower of Hanoi again:D

[philippe willaume]

Renmiri1 wrote...

Allan Schumacher wrote...

It still seemed pretty irrelevant when discussing video game combat mechanics.

Especially given that WoW is actually an exceptionally math heavy combat system.

Lol, if anyone doubts it tell them to google Elitist Jerks and WoW!

To make a long story short, we here on the thread have been passionately discussing wheter a slow combat system like DAO or a fast paced combat system like DA2 are best. 

I think we have at least arrived to some conclusions: It seems we find DA2 combat please people who like having combat unpredictable, that requires skilled reflexes and situational awareness - don't sit on poison, keep your healer alive, etc... Is not WoW but it is fun enough and I don't have to share loot or wake up the huntard that is pulling half the instance to my party 

DA2  combat on the other hand seems to annoy people who like to pause, plan a set of tactics, and then go afk or watch the party execute it, without needing to touch the controller. That was possible on DAO but with the fast pace and waves of mobs of DA2 the people who have slow reflexes or who dislike having to have fast reflexes and having to pay attention to what is going on in the battle get frustrated,

I asked if people who hate DA2 combat would like to just skip combat altogether and the answer is mixed. A few do want the option to just skip it, but most want a more "brainy" less skill dependant combat. With math! And quantum mechanics. And science!!! 

Me, I really want a combat system at least as fast and active as DA2. The combat system on DAO was so slow it almost made the game umplayable to me, and it did make my best friend uninstall DAO right at Ostagar. I'm more fixed on story so I slogged through it but was painful. DA2 was fun though. And Awakenings was fun too, at least because I could just use "Massacre" and kill all, basically skipping most random encounters 

I really did not have the same experience in DA:2
what reflexes, what impredictability are we talking about regarding DA:2.
kiting in cooldown?
OH look the animation before the massive attack let move the the middle of the dragon/behing the pillar?.
Wait for the 3 waves? (which is just as well because i need some fuel for whatever talent give me more mana/stamina/health)

For me the main problem is that you mince through encounters in exactly the same way all the time for 3 acts.
it just take longer with bosses and their gazillions hit points. 
and it is fun to have encounters that are like that once and while, but all the time it is boring and becomes a tedious rinse and repeat exercise

phil

[Plaintiff]

Sable Rhapsody wrote...

Plaintiff wrote...
I'd like DA3 to have some more puzzles or something. There are very few instances in DA:O or DA2 where I have to use my brain at all.

As long as it's not the Tower of Hanoi again:D

Well hopefully the obstacles will be varied, I wouldn't want to be doing the same puzzle over and over, no matter what it was.

[philippe willaume]

Plaintiff wrote...

Maria Caliban wrote...

Sometimes it was fun. Sometimes it wasn't.

I prefer stealth and puzzle solving mechanics like Dues Ex: Human Revolution for my fun as opposed to the combat, combat, and more combat all the DnD inspired games give us. Do you slaughter enemies through real time button mashing or through turn-based killing? Either way, it's the same s***.

This is pretty much my stance.

Combat is just what I do to get exp/gold/progress through the story. The precise mechanics are a non-issue. I prefer DA2 combat to DA:O because it's faster and therefore takes less time. Being more visually impressive is also a point in its favour.

I'd like DA3 to have some more puzzles or something. There are very few instances in DA:O or DA2 where I have to use my brain at all.

I have to say that I like combat, but i would like ways to resolve situations based on skills as well as having more puzzles.
phil

[Wulfram]

DA2 combat had a very solid combat system at base, but it was wasted by boring encounter design.

The waves were massively overused and made almost every battle feel the same. And all the Human/Elvish/Dwarvish enemies were basically the same, just with varying mix of classes. DA:O had this issue a bit too, but at least at least the use of different talents depending on which weapons were being used distinguished things, and at least appropriate specialisations were used so that Templars could use Templar abilities.

[mousestalker]

It was enjoyable. The problem is that it suffered by comparison with DAO. Many of the elements I found enjoyable in DAO were absent or lessened in DA2 (Story depth, customization of the PC, item descriptions and a coherent plot from beginning to end (DA2 was a bit disjointed)).

If DA2 is considered without reference to DAO, it isn't a bad game.

[SpunkyMonkey]

No it wasn't fun...at all. It was a bland Track & Field button masher with no soul, substance or fun what to speak of, and the RPG element of the game was so dumbed down it was embarrassing. The speed of the combat totally killed the feel of the game, and the new style of animations and Anime-esq overtone made the game laughably bad to watch too.

A Dragon Age game should be John Boorman meets Steven Spielberg with a sprinkle of John Carpenter and David Lynch.

DA 2 was John Woo meets Micheal Bay sprinkled with a dollop of plop.

Bleeeuuurg!!!!

[Xewaka]

I had to force myself to finish DA2 to justify the 51€ it costed me. It still feels like wasted money. The combat was just one of many, many factors.
Since the topic has somewhat veered into "was the combat fun' (since one of DA2 flaws was that the game consisted exclusively of fighting and talking, with not a single pacebreaker to mix gameplay up and make it less repetitive), my thoughts on that: it was not so much the speed (although the stupidness of the combat animation helped with the dread) but the assimetry of it: Enemies wielding the same weapons as the party would wield them at a fifth of the speed. Enemies would have ten times as much health as the party, while dealing a fraction of the party's damage output (which also happens to completely break friendly fire). In DA:O, party members were the equivalent in power of a lieutenant enemy; and it worked. DA:2 assymetry on the basic level of combat breaks the system in several ways, which require several patches and fixes that a better designed base combat wouldn't.

Modifié par Xewaka, 10 septembre 2012 - 12:17 .

[Merlex]

Renmiri1 wrote...

To make a long story short, we here on the thread have been passionately discussing wheter a slow combat system like DAO or a fast paced combat system like DA2 are best.

I think we have at least arrived to some conclusions: It seems we find DA2 combat please people who like having combat unpredictable,

Three waves of enemies dropping from the sky, is hardly what i'd call unpredictable.

that requires skilled reflexes and situational awareness - don't sit on poison, keep your healer alive, etc... Is not WoW but it is fun enough and I don't have to share loot or wake up the huntard that is pulling half the instance to my party

I'd rather rely on my character's reflexes than mine. I have no problem with situational awareness or keeping my healer alive. Those should be part of any combat system. I just believe there are better ways of doing it than ninjas dropping from the sky, all around my party like i'm in a Jackie Chan cartoon.

DA2 combat on the other hand seems to annoy people who like to pause, plan a set of tactics, and then go afk or watch the party execute it, without needing to touch the controller. That was possible on DAO but with the fast pace and waves of mobs of DA2 the people who have slow reflexes or who dislike having to have fast reflexes and having to pay attention to what is going on in the battle get frustrated,

I'm always active and pay attention during combat. Yes i like to pause, look around and pick targets. Yes i would like to position my party members. My hands are always on the keyboard during combat.

One of the problems i had with DA2 combat was the tactic roles settings. Even if i set Anders to ranged, he would run into the middle of combat, or go off on his own to fight a squad. Varric would try and go toe to toe in melee. Thankfully Nexus has a mod that takes care of that.

Earlier you talked about the role of Warriors, as drawing in enemies. Sounds great when it works. I can't count how many times i had Aveline with full Bravery and Shield Defense on, and enemies just ran past ignoring her. Sometimes enemies got past her in doorways, and not just teleporting assassins.

Because of the lack of basic damage, she or Tank Hawk don't draw enough aggro. Taunt you say? Yea, with a twenty second cooldown. It's good for one maybe two uses. Does it make sense to you that a dagger does more damage per hit than a great sword?

I asked if people who hate DA2 combat would like to just skip combat altogether and the answer is mixed. A few do want the option to just skip it, but most want a more "brainy" less skill dependant combat. With math! And quantum mechanics. And science!!!

Strategy, not quantum mechanics. There's nothing to DA2 combat. You build your characters and companions basically the same way every time. DPS and crit damage. I like to play a controller mage sometimes, or a tank that can hold enemies while my ranged members pick them off.

And seriously, why do enemies have such large health bars, but do little damage and have very few abilities. Enemy mages were a joke, well exept the Qunari.

Me, I really want a combat system at least as fast and active as DA2. The combat system on DAO was so slow it almost made the game umplayable to me, and it did make my best friend uninstall DAO right at Ostagar. I'm more fixed on story so I slogged through it but was painful. DA2 was fun though. And Awakenings was fun too, at least because I could just use "Massacre" and kill all, basically skipping most random encounters

I felt that DAO combat didn't respond fast enough to my commands. But DA2 combat speed was way over the top. I thought i was in an arcade playing Gauntlet. It was fun at first, but quickly became the same old buttom mashing fest every time.

[hexaligned]

I prefer strategy games, and I prefer my RPG's to be more on the strategy/tactical side. That being said I'm addicted as **** to Dragons Dogma right now, which is about as consely/buttonmashy as you can get, so I'm not necessarily opposed to that play style. I think it's more just how restrictive and simplistic DA2's mechanics are. DAO was the same way, but at least that had a toolset and healthy modding community, all of the issues I had with DAO combat I just modded out... which made the game infinitely more enjoyable.

[SpunkyMonkey]

relhart wrote...

I prefer strategy games, and I prefer my RPG's to be more on the strategy/tactical side. That being said I'm addicted as **** to Dragons Dogma right now, which is about as consely/buttonmashy as you can get, so I'm not necessarily opposed to that play style. I think it's more just how restrictive and simplistic DA2's mechanics are. DAO was the same way, but at least that had a toolset and healthy modding community, all of the issues I had with DAO combat I just modded out... which made the game infinitely more enjoyable.

Action RPG's just need some rhythm to them to be enjoyable (bash, block, dodge etc.) - DA:2 had absolutely none of that what so ever and Bioware seemed to totally miss the point.

[Sigurdur]

Yes it was great fun. Combat in DA:O was often mind numbingly slow and boring. DA 2 combat was not perfect but a vast improvement.

But most importantly the character interaction was near perfect. And that´s what you play bioware games for.

[The Elder King]

Sigurdur wrote...

Yes it was great fun. Combat in DA:O was often mind numbingly slow and boring. DA 2 combat was not perfect but a vast improvement.

But most importantly the character interaction was near perfect. And that´s what you play bioware games for.

What character interaction? The one between Hawke and his companions or the one between companions? Because for the former I preferred more the interaction in Origins.

[Guilebrush]

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Action RPG's just need some rhythm to them to be enjoyable (bash, block, dodge etc.) - DA:2 had absolutely none of that what so ever and Bioware seemed to totally miss the point.

My feelings exactly. Action RPGs when done right can be quite thrilling. DA2's combat while stong in some facets felt like it suffered from an identity crisis where it was trying to cater to both people looking for strategic experiences and action heavy combat while ultimately failing to deliver on either front. Toss in the abysmal encounter design (Hawke: "another wave!") and well you end up with what DA2 was. Occassionaly fun combat but overall very unsatisying.

The problem is I'm not sure if it's even possible to achieve rythmic action combat (similar to games like the Arkham Batman games, Assassin's Creed, Sleeping Dogs, Amalur, Dark Souls, etc) without sacrificing squad and pause elements. In fact I think a lot of shortcomings that creep their way into combat, exploration and encounter design in any of the Bioware single player games are mostly due to having to compromise in order for us to continue to get to use the likes of Morrigan, Varrick, Alistair, Dog and co. I'd love to be proven wrong, but all the successful rythmic action combat engines revolve around a single user controlled character since it has full freedom over the battlefield and environment.

[SpunkyMonkey]

Guilebrush wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Action RPG's just need some rhythm to them to be enjoyable (bash, block, dodge etc.) - DA:2 had absolutely none of that what so ever and Bioware seemed to totally miss the point.

My feelings exactly. Action RPGs when done right can be quite thrilling. DA2's combat while stong in some facets felt like it suffered from an identity crisis where it was trying to cater to both people looking for strategic experiences and action heavy combat while ultimately failing to deliver on either front. Toss in the abysmal encounter design (Hawke: "another wave!") and well you end up with what DA2 was. Occassionaly fun combat but overall very unsatisying.

The problem is I'm not sure if it's even possible to achieve rythmic action combat (similar to games like the Arkham Batman games, Assassin's Creed, Sleeping Dogs, Amalur, Dark Souls, etc) without sacrificing squad and pause elements. In fact I think a lot of shortcomings that creep their way into combat, exploration and encounter design in any of the Bioware single player games are mostly due to having to compromise in order for us to continue to get to use the likes of Morrigan, Varrick, Alistair, Dog and co. I'd love to be proven wrong, but all the successful rythmic action combat engines revolve around a single user controlled character since it has full freedom over the battlefield and environment.

Well said.

If they are trying to go down the action route then (baring in mind your the leader of a group and essentially issue orders) I'd much sooner see rythmic action-esq elements used for the main character with the strategic system used to issue team-mates orders. Tricky to pull off and the combat may have to be slowed down significantly to achieve that, but I'd sooner have that system than the DA:2 one.

And I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "it's a stratergy combat system" and just sticking to that either - I've played DA:O non-stop on nightmare over the weekend and am loving how absolutely tight everything feels combat-wise.

Modifié par SpunkyMonkey, 10 septembre 2012 - 02:47 .

[Sigurdur]

hhh89 wrote...

Sigurdur wrote...

Yes it was great fun. Combat in DA:O was often mind numbingly slow and boring. DA 2 combat was not perfect but a vast improvement.

But most importantly the character interaction was near perfect. And that´s what you play bioware games for.

What character interaction? The one between Hawke and his companions or the one between companions? Because for the former I preferred more the interaction in Origins.

Both,  The interaction in 2 is mostly large companion quests while Origins has the party camp and tiny companion quests.   I just think the DA:2 way is better.   I also think having a voiced protagonist gives extra weight to the whole thing.  

[philippe willaume]

Guilebrush wrote...

SpunkyMonkey wrote...

Action RPG's just need some rhythm to them to be enjoyable (bash, block, dodge etc.) - DA:2 had absolutely none of that what so ever and Bioware seemed to totally miss the point.

My feelings exactly. Action RPGs when done right can be quite thrilling. DA2's combat while stong in some facets felt like it suffered from an identity crisis where it was trying to cater to both people looking for strategic experiences and action heavy combat while ultimately failing to deliver on either front. Toss in the abysmal encounter design (Hawke: "another wave!") and well you end up with what DA2 was. Occassionaly fun combat but overall very unsatisying.

The problem is I'm not sure if it's even possible to achieve rythmic action combat (similar to games like the Arkham Batman games, Assassin's Creed, Sleeping Dogs, Amalur, Dark Souls, etc) without sacrificing squad and pause elements. In fact I think a lot of shortcomings that creep their way into combat, exploration and encounter design in any of the Bioware single player games are mostly due to having to compromise in order for us to continue to get to use the likes of Morrigan, Varrick, Alistair, Dog and co. I'd love to be proven wrong, but all the successful rythmic action combat engines revolve around a single user controlled character since it has full freedom over the battlefield and environment.

Well it is possible to fly a plane trying to shoot down the enemy/trying to avoid being shot down and still giving orders to the rest of the squad.
so instead of group engage the bomber you can have team concentrate on the caster.
That is already works well on platform with plenty of keys but all platforms are not equal in that respect.

To an extend when the action has started you can't really writte a 30 page explanation about what you want y that specific companion to execute.
Even with rythmic action, you could use throw down or a kick back or a kill  to issue orders when your oponents gets back up or is replaced by a and other oppoents. (or you could get into full defense)

but the point of game like DA is to use a team other wise it is skyrim with a better story and the sex mod all ready imported.
so you do need a planing phase before the action so that you can used your team and the terrain to your advantage.

and it does not cost that much to have a pause key for those who wants to use it.

phil

Modifié par philippe willaume, 10 septembre 2012 - 03:28 .

[The Elder King]

Sigurdur wrote...

hhh89 wrote...

Sigurdur wrote...

Yes it was great fun. Combat in DA:O was often mind numbingly slow and boring. DA 2 combat was not perfect but a vast improvement.

But most importantly the character interaction was near perfect. And that´s what you play bioware games for.

What character interaction? The one between Hawke and his companions or the one between companions? Because for the former I preferred more the interaction in Origins.

Both,  The interaction in 2 is mostly large companion quests while Origins has the party camp and tiny companion quests.   I just think the DA:2 way is better.   I also think having a voiced protagonist gives extra weight to the whole thing.  

I was mostly referring to the dialogues between the PC and his companions (which I think it's better in DAO) , not the companion quests, but I see your point. I think that there were too many companion quests in DA2 in comparison of the side quests, but I liked most of them. But the number of dialogues with the companions outside the quests were too small.

[Guilebrush]

philippe willaume wrote...

Well it is possible to fly a plane trying to shoot down the enemy/trying to avoid being shot down and still giving orders to the rest of the squad.
so instead of group engage the bomber you can have team concentrate on the caster.
That is already works well on platform with plenty of keys but all platforms are not equal in that respect.

To an extend when the action has started you can't really writte a 30 page explanation about what you want y that specific companion to execute.
Even with rythmic action, you could use throw down or a kick back or a kill  to issue orders when your oponents gets back up or is replaced by a and other oppoents. (or you could get into full defense)

but the point of game like DA is to use a team other wise it is skyrim with a better story and the sex mod all ready imported.
so you do need a planing phase before the action so that you can used your team and the terrain to your advantage.

and it does not cost that much to have a pause key for those who wants to use it.

phil

I get what you're saying and while I do agree with it, that wasn't the point I was trying to get accross in my post. The problem mostly with implementing what we mostly look at as successful rythmic combat (such as say that found in the two Batman Arkham games) in a Bioware squad based setting, is, every instance we've seen that works so far rely on complex animation and action syncronization.

Each counter, block, leap, dodge, roll, the fact you can vault up a wall, grab one mook as he tries to punch you and fluidly toss him into another would be incredibly difficult to pull off when you add in the variables of on the fly character switching, free camera roam, ability queueing and so forth. I'm not saying it's something outside feasibility for a character to both direct combat strategem while engaged in a personal skirmish or whatnot, rather programming a game engine that facilitates complete tactical squad based control in unison with a combat engine from games like the Arkham, Souls or Assassin's Creed  series are capable of might not be a realistic proposition.

Like I said I would love to be proven wrong, just that no one so far has figured out a way to deliver on this fantasy, and if it isn't something that can be realitically achieved due to other development needs I'd much rather see a squadbased combat system that embraces its strengths along with its weaknesses rather than futily attempting to achieve something that just ends up falling up short. Personally I loved the combat system from DA:O, my only complaint was some of the animations looked ridiculous (specifically combat running/shuffling). DA:A had nice animations (some a little over the top maybe) but the inconsistent physics and other facets of it ultimately made it feel a bit awkward.

Ultimately I'm indifferent to which direction Bioware pursues, be it tactical squad based or a break from their typical norm and exploring a completely lone protagonist for a change (I'd be curious to see their take on the Zelda/Darksiders/Witcher/Fable/etc system). Whichever course they choose to explore however I'd like to see a combat engine that works with it, not something that tries to be what it can't. My personal, ideal solution for a DA game's combat engine? DA:O's system
with the "closing mechanics" (lunges) from DA:2, but that's just me. Selfishly I'd rather they just stick to squad based RPGs and polish the hell out of them. Bioware is the only company that has
so far, created Squad based RPGs that compelled me, while there are enough entries out there for quality lone protagonist games with RPG elements.