by Evropi » 03 Mar 2013, 17:12
I am a propontent of Hacklike mechanics regarding the power curve˙of RPG games. That is, the items and skills you have and use at the start of the game should be similar to the ones at the end. I think one of Fable's great failings, despite being an awesome series of games, was that the character was almost invincible at the end, and additionally, that going back to locations on the map that you were at as a child was boring as all the baddies were so weak there (or, well, nonexistent as you had already killed them all). And yes, Jastiv, this definitely affects single-player RPGs as well. Diablo II is a good example of this.
As for classes, I never really believed in them. I don't like being restricted to classes and it always causes a little dilemma for me. If it's an MMORPG, I usually drop it, unless it works very well regarding the PvP aspect, such as World of Warcraft.
I think the RuneScape approach of 'localising' PvP, i.e. removing most aspects of the 'outside world' such as the gear you own is the best. It lets you pick your class specifically for that minigame you are playing (e.g. Castle Wars is freeform, but you can generally go either mining, attacking or defending and Barbarian Assault has specific classes) but not for the rest of the game.
So my conclusion on classes is that if your game has highly restrictive classes, especially if it's single-player and makes you replay the game, it has already failed. You should get the opportunity to play with every playstyle and be able to switch with relative ease, or at least in a fun way (e.g. in RuneScape you have to complete quests to unlock major parts of certain skills).
You just wasted 3 seconds of your life reading this.