Why Random Encounters In RPGs Aren't That Bad

Thanks to GameSpot for their guest editorial discussing why randomized enemy encounters in videogame RPGs aren't as bad as they're made out to be. The author argues: "The most common charge is that random battles are 'unrealistic.' To this I counter that the RPG experience is inherently unrealistic." He goes on to comment: "A more valid argument is that random battles 'pad' gameplay. I'm not going to argue with this, but I am going to say that RPGs need that padding... With battles cut out, there isn't really anything to fill the gameplay void." He ends by floating compromise solutions for when "it's simply annoying to be assaulted by all manner of enemies when you simply want to make it to the next town", suggesting: "Adjustable [encounter] rates or ways to abbreviate battles, especially with radically weaker adversaries, would be one way to speed things up."

Comments

Chrono Trigger

[CNERD]

No one on here seems to have accually played Chrono Trigger...

Chrono Trigger for SNES does not have random battles. That is why the article author hates it. He is a random battle fan boy.

Chrono Trigger lets you see the eneimes on the map, so that you can avoid them, or target them. Chrono Cross for PSX is the same way.

Both games are some of the best RPGs out there IMO. Think final fantasy, with a more in depth story line, multiple endings, and a 'better' battle system.