How important is visual progression to you?

[rusty_shackleford]

Indie RPGs typically spend a good deal of time making sure all the equipment makes characters look different. To me, this isn't a big deal and I'd be fine with a character having a static, unchanging appearance. If armor type matters, perhaps having a couple different appearances based upon armor type for NPCs, I suppose.

I don't know if JRPGs still do it, but it's worth pointing out that the big name JRPGs always had a static look for protagonists and nobody seemed to mind.

---

p.s. transmog is gay

[Cedric]

I don't care. I think visual character customization is a waste of time. I do like gear being visible but I don't care enough about it. Maybe just have a no/light/medium/heavy armor model or paperdoll and a shield, that's enough for me. But I'm fine without this. For me, the progression should be felt in the combat, not in how you look.

[Norfleet]

Visual Progression typically works like this:

Low level charcter:

High level character:

[Stack of Turtles]

Indie RPGs typically spend a good deal of time making sure all the equipment makes characters look different. To me, this isn't a big deal and I'd be fine with a character having a static, unchanging appearance. If armor type matters, perhaps having a couple different appearances based upon armor type for NPCs, I suppose.

I don't know if JRPGs still do it, but it's worth pointing out that the big name JRPGs always had a static look for protagonists and nobody seemed to mind.

---

p.s. transmog is gay

I like it if they actually look good but nobody ever manages that so whatever, static unchanging appearance is fine.

[Tangerine]

I like when it's done. It doesn't even have to be for every piece of equipment, they can do tiered appearances like in the first Diablo - it's a nice visual representation of progression. But it's never make or break for enjoying a game.

[TKVNC]

It's nice when gear looks good. But it rarely does.

I don't like over-designed slop.

[Xenich]

Visual Progression typically works like this:

Low level charcter:

High level character:

I always preferred something like this:

Low level charcter:

guy-in-a-burlap-suit-and-a-wooden-staff.webp

High level character:

[Lord of Riva]

Actually, a lot.

It's not about graphical fidelity but I think while power progression through numbers can be felt and is necessary, which is why I abhor level scaling, the same is true for visual progression. A game lacking any visual Feedback on progression simply looks boring. It's not a deal breaker of course but there is a reason why paper dolls were a thing.

Player customization is simply important, there is a reason why the **** Mainstream games can sell this nonsense for 20 $ a pop.

[J1M]

I like some visual progression, but color palette swaps are enough for me. Or what they did in Final Fantasy 1 with the sprite changing once.

At the end of the day I'd rather have a smaller number of nice/thematic looking equipment sets than thousands of items with slightly different textures. The latter feels like a huge waste of money that would be better spent on other areas of the game. Even if the artists needed something to do, they could have been creating additional monsters or environments, which I would appreciate more.

[DemoGraph]

Low level character


High level character

[Tweed]

Low:

low.png

High:

high.png

[TKVNC]

I like some visual progression, but color palette swaps are enough for me. Or what they did in Final Fantasy 1 with the sprite changing once.

At the end of the day I'd rather have a smaller number of nice/thematic looking equipment sets than thousands of items with slightly different textures. The latter feels like a huge waste of money that would be better spent on other areas of the game. Even if the artists needed something to do, they could have been creating additional monsters or environments, which I would appreciate more.

Truthfully, one of the best ways this can be done is with gear that has effectively the same texture all the time, but only the meshes change.

A really nice example I've played recently is the Chaos Warrior armour from Warsword Conquest - you just get more pieces of the armour as it gets higher quality - starting with just a breastplate, ended up as full armour.

[LemonDemonGirl]

Visual Progression typically works like this:

Low level charcter:

High level character:

Literally WoW pre Wrath

[Breathe]

p.s. transmog is gay

So very gay it is. I don’t care about appearance and could play with completely static characters, but on the other hand I do appreciate, for example, in og WoW the pieces meant something and showed progression/achievements.

[J1M]

Visual progression would be more important to me in a game where equipment dictated your capabilities. For example, you can only use 'block' if you equip a shield, can only teleport if you have a wizard hat, and so on.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

I find the visuals of the party members you will spend most of the game looking at to be essential. If they aren't appealing then the appeal of the game goes down drastically. This can be addressed if the game gives you lots of different armors you can equip or classes you can change to or dozens of different characters to pick from.

FF12 is an example of a game where the look of 5 out of the 6 main characters' outfits were visually unappealing to look at. Princess Ashe does not look dignified. Vaan and Basch look okay but not as cool as they could have been. Penelo is offensive but a little derpy. Fran is whatever. That just left Baltheir as the only somewhat appealing character design to watch for dozens and dozens of hours.

[J1M]

Why does Penelo look "offensive"?

[TheCumGuzzler]

p.s. transmog is gay

I'm putting min-maxed armor on my female companions and using transmog to make it titty armor, and you can't stop me

[rusty_shackleford]

p.s. transmog is gay

I'm putting min-maxed armor on my female companions and using transmog to make it titty armor, and you can't stop me

Playing dressup with female characters is giga-***** stuff

[Trickster]

Visual progression should either be minimal or strictly controlled by player, because personally, I grow deeply attached to my character’s appearance. Actually, no, when i think about it: progression should refine him toward his ultimate, ‘peak’ form as I envision it. A generic leather-armored "npc like" hero should develop distinctive unique traits organically.

Take Kaneki Ken from Tokyo Ghoul, when people recall him, they picture the white-haired, red-eyed figure in a leather mask, not his early-manga self. RPG character progression should replicate this effect: aesthetically deliberate, avoiding garish clownery, while offering enough variety to feel personalized yet player-curated.

[Lich]

Low:

High:

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Why does Penelo look "offensive"?

I meant inoffensive. I should have doublechecked more carefully.

[Norfleet]

It's not about graphical fidelity but I think while power progression through numbers can be felt and is necessary, which is why I abhor level scaling, the same is true for visual progression. A game lacking any visual Feedback on progression simply looks boring. It's not a deal breaker of course but there is a reason why paper dolls were a thing.

Level-scaling has always existed, though. Pretty much EVERY game has it. There's basically NO game in which you gain levels, but are still expected to fight the exact same **** as before, only now you can dunk on them even harder. Sometimes you fight MORE of the same ****. Sometimes you fight different colored versions of the same ****. But it's always level-scaled in this way. Sure, some games don't rub it in your face and you're allowed to go back and dunk on the red demons, but if you want to progress the storyline or otherwise accomplish anything, you're expected to move on to fight the orange demons now, and the orange demons tend to take about as many hits to kill as the red demons used to.

[J1M]

It's not about graphical fidelity but I think while power progression through numbers can be felt and is necessary, which is why I abhor level scaling, the same is true for visual progression. A game lacking any visual Feedback on progression simply looks boring. It's not a deal breaker of course but there is a reason why paper dolls were a thing.

Level-scaling has always existed, though. Pretty much EVERY game has it. There's basically NO game in which you gain levels, but are still expected to fight the exact same **** as before, only now you can dunk on them even harder. Sometimes you fight MORE of the same ****. Sometimes you fight different colored versions of the same ****. But it's always level-scaled in this way. Sure, some games don't rub it in your face and you're allowed to go back and dunk on the red demons, but if you want to progress the storyline or otherwise accomplish anything, you're expected to move on to fight the orange demons now, and the orange demons tend to take about as many hits to kill as the red demons used to.

No. Level-scaling is a term with a clear definition. Don't try to change it. That makes terms meaningless.

Use progression or balance or challenge depending on whatever is appropriate to the point you are trying to make.

I would also disagree with a premise of yours, as the majority of RPGs become significantly easier as you get stronger as long as you are at least slightly above the curve of what the designers intended the minimum ability to progress should be.

[Norfleet]

No. Level-scaling is a term with a clear definition. Don't try to change it. That makes terms meaningless.

Use progression or balance or challenge depending on whatever is appropriate to the point you are trying to make.

Sure, okay, if you want to draw the line that way. Although I would argue that encountering orange demons instead of red demons that just HAPPEN to have more hitpoints that you then more power to kill, resulting in no actual change in your experience on the ground, is the same. Either way, the outcome is the same: Hitpoint bloat requiring increasing power-level to overcome.

I would also disagree with a premise of yours, as the majority of RPGs become significantly easier as you get stronger as long as you are at least slightly above the curve of what the designers intended the minimum ability to progress should be.

That is also partly true, since levelling up grants you more options and the ability to minmax your options will tend to grow your power level above that which was intended. Level-scaling, whatever form it comes in, is complained about only when you notice it when this DOESN'T happen. Call it what you want, but when HP inflation outpaces your output from levelling up, such that levelling up or advancing makes your experience worse, you're going to feel exactly as bad.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

It's not about graphical fidelity but I think while power progression through numbers can be felt and is necessary, which is why I abhor level scaling, the same is true for visual progression. A game lacking any visual Feedback on progression simply looks boring. It's not a deal breaker of course but there is a reason why paper dolls were a thing.

Level-scaling has always existed, though. Pretty much EVERY game has it. There's basically NO game in which you gain levels, but are still expected to fight the exact same **** as before, only now you can dunk on them even harder. Sometimes you fight MORE of the same ****. Sometimes you fight different colored versions of the same ****. But it's always level-scaled in this way. Sure, some games don't rub it in your face and you're allowed to go back and dunk on the red demons, but if you want to progress the storyline or otherwise accomplish anything, you're expected to move on to fight the orange demons now, and the orange demons tend to take about as many hits to kill as the red demons used to.

What you are describing is just bad implementation of mobs, where at level 90 you are still fighting same level bears just as when you started the game at level 10. The issue isn't that you are still fighting same level mobs, it's that the mobs you are fighting are the same types of common enemies you were struggling with early on. At level 90 you should not be fighting bears. You should be fighting huge dragons, mecha, kaiju, ancient sorcerers, etc.

[Norfleet]

What you are describing is just bad implementation of mobs, where at level 90 you are still fighting same level bears just as when you started the game at level 10. The issue isn't that you are still fighting same level mobs, it's that the mobs you are fighting are the same types of common enemies you were struggling with early on. At level 90 you should not be fighting bears.

Eh, that doesn't matter to me. I'm from the old text game days, where everything is just a word on a screen. All that matters is how the resulting gameplay feels and plays.

You should be fighting huge dragons, mecha, kaiju, ancient sorcerers, etc.

Which you then womp on until their hojillions of HPs are depleted, yes. Because somehow, a sorceror, even an ancient one, somehow has more HP than a bear.

[Val the Moofia Boss]

Which you then womp on until their hojillions of HPs are depleted, yes. Because somehow, a sorceror, even an ancient one, somehow has more HP than a bear.

If he looks like just some pathetic weak old man who you could shove into the ground let alone stab, then yes. Hopefully an enemy that far into the game looks more powerful than that.

[Eyestabber]

Visual progression is very important and fallout wouldn't be a cult classic without the iconic design of its power armor. Static appearances are bad and give the impression nothing changes with your character. In other words, the "community" who voted for this in wasteland 2 is ********.

[Stack of Turtles]

Which you then womp on until their hojillions of HPs are depleted, yes. Because somehow, a sorceror, even an ancient one, somehow has more HP than a bear.

If he looks like just some pathetic weak old man who you could shove into the ground let alone stab, then yes. Hopefully an enemy that far into the game looks more powerful than that.

Who cares what he looks like? If he plays the same as a bear, but fatter, he might as well be a palette swap of a bear.