A Rebuttal Against the Guidelines RPGs Should Follow

by Shingo Horishiga 

"No enemy character in an RPG should have spells or abilities the player cannot get."

Having enemies with no unique abilities from the players makes enemies less distinct and more boring. For instance, the unique boss spells of FFVII made Seraph Sephiroth a truly intimidating, omnipotent, and awe-inspiring opponent. Can you imagine seeing Sephiroth's Supernova being cast on a group of chocobos? Seeing such a powerful looking spell being cast on significantly weaker enemies would crush anybody's will to play.

These enemies with these all-powerful spells are intended to be exactly what their spells intend them to be: all-powerful. If you were to cast "Fallen One", "Hallation", or any of those spells that reduce someone's hit points to 1, it would be the cheesiest ability ever. Killing a boss in two moves is pretty stupid.

"No RPG should punish players for character building (ex: Ogre Battle.)"

Actually, more RPG's should enforce punishments for character building. Killing Kefka with a level 99 Sabin who can strike 8 times with 9999 damage each hit is corny. Killing Lavos with a single round of Luminaire, Flare, and the Terra Arm is stupid. Killing Seraph Sephiroth in less than 30 seconds using a Limit Break with 20 hits dealing 9999 damage just plain sucks. Ultra-buff characters do take a lot of patience, but the challenge and strategy in managing the skills of a lesser team disappears. People who maximize their levels no longer appreciate the savory steak of a battle that was hard-won, but they'd rather settle for the greasy fast food of speed killing. Blowing away enemies like toothpicks doesn't give me the same rush that I get from knowing that I snatched victory from almost total annihilation. Being ultra buff can become like a curse after a while. That's pretty much punishment in itself.

"Nobody likes an enemy who is impossible to defeat."

Absolutely wrong, there are *some* of us who like enemies that are nearly impossible to defeat. An example of this is Culex from Super Mario RPG, even at level 30, he still put up a good fight, and you had to rely more on the management of your team rather than just pushing the A button over and over again. An example that better illustrates this, however, is Ruby Weapon from FFVII, in which even a level 99 party has trouble defeating it. These battles require at least *some* thought and planning, and just pushing buttons out of habit won't defeat them. The reason why we need some of these "impossible" enemies is to set the bar lower for those who make characters ultra buff (see above). Often these powerful you-don't-have-to-kill characters allow an extra challenge for experts while allowing less adept players to still finish the game.

"No RPG should have irreversible choices which the wrong choice could force players to either reset the game or start a new game all over."

Frankly, I would like more games that have irreversible choices. If people really want a "realistic" type of game, they should realize that people make mistakes, and there isn't always a I'm-sorry-kiss-and-make-up solution to every problem. People in real life have to gather themselves up, dust themselves off, and move on. Unfortunately, a lot of gamers probably won't be able to handle irreversible events. Even events that there was absolutely no control over, like Aeris' death, caused many gamers to brood, obsess, and formulate countless rumors and methods to bring her back. It seems like a lot (but not all, mind you) of gamers can't learn to admit they made mistakes, or accept that sometimes really depressing things happen, and that they have to move on. But if a gamer really thinks they can handle a game with a plot more "realistic", they have to learn that any real life cannot be led idyllically, without regret, and without mistakes.

"Sadly, there are no games which follow all these guidelines."

Thank God. I'm sure that many (but not all) gamers agree with me too. The people who agree with me are the ones who are mature enough to take responsibility for their actions, who don't want victory handed to them on a silver platter, and who are always looking to challenge themselves. We who want these are the very ones who want games more to be "realistic".