Gaming World Forums
General Category => Entertainment and Media => Topic started by: Bumblebee man on September 09, 2009, 11:35:41 am
-
I've sort of never understood the whole concept of the dungeon crawler. Even the name suggests it's a painful, slow and tiring experience!
Whenever I'm playing an RPG I'm usually dreading the next dungeon. They're kind of hellish, normally a struggle to get through, and just really really hard sometimes. My experience with RPG's isn't anything extensive (I've played a few Final Fantasies and thats about it really!) but I don't see the appeal. I caught my brother playing Pokemon Mystery Dungeon the other day and that seemed to me to be a dungeon crawler. I know, like, that it's not the best thing to measure the genre by but, it just didn't look fun. Dungeons are not fun. Remember Rock Tunnel in Pokemon? That was a tough dungeon. The Water Temple in OoT? A little but different because it's an action RPG (this is not up for discussion) but still it was hellish. Dungeons are bleak, annoying, take a long time and just aren't fun. Why do people like dungeon crawlers?
Ps. Even like, FALLOUT 3. That game is basically an open ended dungeon crawler. It's long, it's hard and it's not fun.
Why do people like these games?
-
I completely agree, dungeons are awful and I never enjoyed playing them in any game ever.
-
That's not true.
Zelda dungeons are fun!
-
I think one of the key things is you actually find them difficult? The only one on that list that I remember being anything negative was the fucking Rock Tunnel in Pokemon, but that wasn't because it was HARD it was just so long and boring. I got sick of killing so many Zubats.
Like, Fallout 3, hard? Really? I love some of the dungeons in Fallout 3, like the Moresetti Trainyard and the cave that the old man at Arefu sends you to, the one with the radscorps and Raiders.
I like dungeons. They are fun, a challenge to the reflexes (depending on the game, I like games with traps that actually test your real life reflexes), while not actually being a REAL CHALLENGE, and usually atmospheric.
You mention the word bleak in a negative sense, and also don't seem to enjoy Fallout 3. Ever think that maybe you just don't like bleak/dark things? Fallout 3 is a pretty depressing game if you are that way inclined, wheras some of us enjoy it because it allows you to experience a horrible spider filled dungeon or a post-apocalyptic nuclear wasteland without actually having to do it ourselves.
-
Ever think that maybe you just don't like bleak/dark things?
This describes almost every dungeon though.
-
Maybe that's just me having issues with design then. I wouldn't have bought Fallout 3 if I wasn't attracted to the idea of roaming a desolate wasteland, meeting a few crazy characters along the way. I like bleak things it would seem. Instead all I got was a literal wasteland with not much going on in it (though lots of people say that there's a lot to do, I just can't find it apparently) and all the areas to explore were just identical looking buildings filled with mutants. That's all it is. (and yes I find it pretty difficult at times!)
Also, I was probably exagerrating about Rock Tunnel, I just remember getting to the end, all my dudes on low health and then coming out to see loads of trainers outside. I thought it pretty sadistic of Nintendo. Yeah, I hated that place.
-
It's one of the things I remember the most about my first time playing Pokemon, it was around Christmas and I remember being at my dad's office struggling through it, and we got in the car and I was desperately trying to get a reflection from the street lights to keep playing, because I had been stuck in that cave for so long and I was finally getting out of it and didn't want to quit.
Don't get me wrong I don't mean YEAH BUT IT WAS MEMORABLE, I just mean it was so horribly frustrating as a kid that I was happy it was over.
-
I've got no problems with dungeons, but if I may refer back to Rm2k3 games... If your dungeons are 30+ sizable maps of snake tunnels (one way with no alternate route or treasures) with battles that will leave you beaten near to the point of death, I think it's time to say adios to your game as I don't think anyone would be willing to go between here and there on the world map with beasts such as these in between.
-
Dungeons in RPGs are meant to be difficult areas you have to get through to reach the next area. That is what they are, by definition (rpg definition not real person's definition!). Sometimes, the game throws a boss at you with no dungeon and he is extra hard as a result. Sometimes, the game throws a dungeon at you because it wants that to be the challenge. If the dungeon isn't fun or it goes on to long, that is the game's fault.
Game Freak sucks a dick at game design. Sorry, they do. Pokemon is a really fun game that I enjoy a lot because of the inherent concept, but outside the battle engine and menus (including the Pokemon listings themselves, which are like a jRPGs wet dream) Game Freak makes no attempt to make the Pokemon games good. They suffer from horribly repetitive mapping, terrible layouts (as evidenced by having to backtrack areas OVER AND OVER because they wanted the player to use the "only jump down" cliff face for the nth time), and poor graphics. They also suffer from something that most jRPGs suffer from, which is the fact that it takes ten hours to do anything. Want to trade a Pokemon? I hope you like 19 cutscenes instead of the POKEMON JUST FUCKING BEING TRADED. The first Pokemon was no exception to this, but nobody noticed because a) it was new and b) you didn't have random encounters outside of the tall grass. Then you get to the Rock Cave and suddenly you have encounters everywhere and it's not funny any more. It has most of the bad features of Pokemon rolled up into one little package. And, because apparently they decided it wasn't bad enough that they'd up the encounter rate and have no safe areas, they decided to include two of the game's 150 Pokemon. Thanks, Game Freak. You suck.
Sorry, I didn't mean to rant about Game Freak there, but I am just saying: never base dungeon design off of Pokemon. There are good dungeons and bad dungeons, and pretty much every dungeon in Pokemon is bad. Again, I really enjoy Pokemon, but... ugh.
Dungeon Crawlers aren't even about traversing the same dungeons as in other RPGs. Like I said, dungeons are meant to move you slowly from A to B. They throw obstacles at you, but ultimately you emerge, battered and weak, into the light. The main idea in a Dungeon Crawler is to just... keep going down. And down. To see how far down you can get. Some games have a set number of levels which you can reach (the make your way out again), but some just keep generating harder and harder levels until it becomes impossible to descend further.
They are survival sims more than they are RPGs, really. You have to eat and sleep and not be beaten to death by monsters. Some Dungeon Crawlers don't even take place in Dungeons, but they are still so similar that to not call them a Dungeon Crawler would be a shame. There is that one set in Finland which is pretty much a Dungeon Crawler with no levels to it. Dungeon Crawlers are also procedurally generated, so each one is different. Part of the game is just exploring the Dungeon. There are no random encounters (except that every encounter is random, really) and you can run away from most, if you're lucky. Of course, if you run away there is always the chance that you'll turn a corner and that same monster will be there when you really don't want it to be.
So yeah: don't judge a Dungeon Crawler by jRPG standards. They are much closer to being Western P&P-influenced games, minus a storytelling DM. People like them because they are challenging and new each time they play. There are usually a huge number of options, so they're extremely replayable. They can also be played to a player's own speed, since typically time only passes when the player performs an action, so you can play them in the background, or try to plan, or rush head first into whatever situation may come along. They're also one of the only types of RPGs you can actually get "good" at, since it's not always about beating the most monsters or collecting the most gold. Sometimes, it's just about identifying warning signs and avoiding danger, or smart rationing of items to get you down another level.
-
I don't think Pokemon is designed nearly as bad as you are making it out sorry bro
-
Also, I was probably exagerrating about Rock Tunnel, I just remember getting to the end, all my dudes on low health and then coming out to see loads of trainers outside. I thought it pretty sadistic of Nintendo. Yeah, I hated that place.
isn't there a pokécentre at each end?
-
i think there's a bit of above-ground stuff (with trainers maybe??? idk) before you get to the pokecenter at the end
-
I don't think Pokemon is designed nearly as bad as you are making it out sorry bro
Ugh yes it is why does it take me so long to use fly or swim? Why are there messages describing to me every minor detail of what my Pokemon is doing when I use one of those moves? I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY DO LET ME USE THEM!!!
Those are bad (really bad) design decisions. Why do they exist? Why are the things that I use most so time consuming? If I had to use fly twice in the game, those prompts wouldn't be annoying. Have you ever tried trading Pokemon? There are about six billion prompts and mandatory waits between each transfer. If you load the game standing in front of the wi-fi connection, you have to save again before going in. Then you have to walk around slowly trying to find another trainer, who has to not talk to you otherwise the connection fails. Then you have to agree to enter the trading mode. Twice. Then you have to agree to the trade about three times, at which point a five minute cutscene takes place where the Pokeball FLIES INTO THE AIR or some shit. It takes way longer than they needed to mask transfer time. The whole process takes like ten minutes! That is not cool! The whole game is like this. Maybe I over exaggerated about the poor map design, but it leave a lot to be desired (especially interior spaces which are riddled with dead ends).
Also I am basing the graphics thing mostly on Pearl, which is hideous.
-
This describes almost every dungeon though.
..yes, that's why I asked if maybe that's what he dislikes. Yes, dungeons are bleak and dark, but they are supposed to be. You are supposed to enjoy the tense atmosphere good dungeons supply, and then enjoy the relief you feel when you leave them.
Unless you play Fallout, where the outside of the dungeons are just as dangerous as the insides :(.
-
Unless you play Fallout, where the outside of the dungeons are just as dangerous as the insides :(.
Usually moreso because you can't just click on the building exit and be pretty much safe forever!
-
i thought dungeon crawlers were things like diablo2/dungeon runners/titan quest. Those are not hard at all, really tedious and boring, but i like finding loot and shit.
-
Also, clearing a level is satisfying - very Asteroids-esque.
-
Okay! I think I understand now. Dungeons in RPGs are not anything like Dungeons in Dungeon Crawlers (and roguelikes!)
You're not actually supposed to enjoy the dungeons in RPGs because they're the hardest parts. But yeah it's rewarding to come out of them battered and bruised but alive. But yeah, don't make a whole game out of them though.
Ps: This is a discussion about Dungeons not the game design of Pokemon.
-
Ps: This is a discussion about Dungeons not the game design of Pokemon.
I know I'm sorry =(
-
though pokemon mystery dungeon was a dungeon crawler of the purest form. you're excused.
-
I just don't like the first-person stuff like Wizardry or KING'S FIELD or whatever because it's like a dungeon and now I'm fucking disoriented too
games like SMT weird me out, because don't even the non-dungeon areas look that way? Like you're going through a city but the city is just like a dungeon
but yeah are any dungeons in games really like that anymore? I thought most at least tried to create an ILLUSION that you weren't in a dungeon. Even Pokemon attempted this I think. I think any RPG Maker game should at least have something going on in each dungeon that isn't dungeonlike, like some person wandering around you can talk to at least. I'm also a fan of dungeons that are broken down into several areas (that Pokemon dungeon does it wrong but I like stuff like in Earthbound, how Giant Step was cave then it opens up into an outdoor area which is kind of cool imo at least you get a VIEW for your hard work, and then it's back to cave for a while. Also Peaceful Rest Valley didn't feel much like a dungeon. The most dungeon area of the game to me was that stupid mine with the moles)
but yeah first-person dungeon crawlers really weird me out at least with an overhead view you have a feeling of being ALMOST THERE, and I think Dragon Warrior used this to good effect, trying to figure out which tunnel looks /right/ for some reason and maybe it turns out to be a dead end. First-person games totally miss out on shit like that. But yeah I really like the idea of at least getting some nice view once you get to the summit/whatever I think most RPG Maker stuff at least does this, back in the Dragon Warrior day the most you got from some dungeons was WHOA A FOUNTAIN IN A CAVE after you've been conditioned to think a little patch of blue and green is the most interesting thing in the world after walking through this brown tunnel for an hour. Most of the time they didn't even have bosses. Although I remember in the third one you go in some cave and end up on an entirely different CONTINENT so that was pretty rewarding. Lufia overdid this like a lot and I never got over that but the way Lufia did it was just stupid. Hey let's use this weird teleporter thing to go two tiles over to the next landmass when they could've just put in a BRIDGE. DWIII did it kind of cool because you were in this relatively small island and no other land is in sight and all of a sudden you've got about 6 or 7 places you can check out if you can manage to not die on the way there
Edit: All the old RPGs were still incredibly cheap but I can at least see their reasoning with stuff like that. I thought it was a missed opportunity in Lufia/Lufia II how it was just this formula town/dungeon/use key from dungeon to transmogrify to the next place. I thought it was kind of clever to make the dungeon actually lead someplace for once. Then again I know some RPG Maker games that are like this every single time, the dungeon is always the route to the next area and that gets kind of annoying sometimes. That also misses on that feeling of coming out of a dungeon and being sort of 'free' in the open even if it's just as infested with monsters as the dungeon itself. I mean the player would usually end up in the next town and towns can get pretty tiring too. My main gripe with RPG Maker games is a lot mess up on the exploration feel, by having the game go directly from town to town and the inbetween is technically a dungeon and they want to make it have a feeling of being more open than the town but they mess it up
-
What the hell, dungeons are the best part of any game to me. That's the meat and potatoes right there. That's where the strategy is involved, making careful choices, rationing, and planning. I suppose you play RPGs for the story and the towns. Well, to me that's the worst part of the game. I groan when I come to the next town I have to spend more time than necessary in the next town, or spend more than 2 minutes watching the anime soap opera unfold before me.
That being said, dungeon crawlers are for folks like myself. They cut the crap and give you all the action and strategy straight away. Your typical RPG is usually pretty easy as far as dungeon material, to keep more casual players interested. I like having to think, possibly die, and try again, until you've got that optimal plan where you just barely scratch by.
-
like I was saying, I think a feeling of exploration is important, and the first-person ones kind of miss out on that. Well not if exploration is finding LOOT or whatever, but I think something as stupid as a BRIDGE in a Dragon Warrior clone teases the imagination at least a little bit while in first-person games it's just the same brown hallway what's the point. But I dunno, those kind of rpgs are more random like you could get free Big Macs for life or get the plague by stepping on the next tile right
-
like I was saying, I think a feeling of exploration is important, and the first-person ones kind of miss out on that. Well not if exploration is finding LOOT or whatever, but I think something as stupid as a BRIDGE in a Dragon Warrior clone teases the imagination at least a little bit while in first-person games it's just the same brown hallway what's the point. But I dunno, those kind of rpgs are more random like you could get free Big Macs for life or get the plague by stepping on the next tile right
The first-person dungeon loses charm if it's one of those "every tunnel is 10x10 ft. and looks the same" eye of the beholder things, but I suppose whoever is into those isn't really interested in superb graphics. Exploration is still a big aspect, but it must be done in a responsible manner. You've got to mind your cardinal directions, and possibly even draw out a map if an in-game map is not provided. I have fun with that, but understand how it's frustrating to people.
-
Well I hate dungeon crawlers as well...
Persona 3 was a dungeon crawler but the thing about it is that you had a choice,you could either beat the dungeon asap and get it over with.. or do bits of it overtime or completly ignore it (and get punished for it by getting stuck with low lvl characters and thus having to restart the whole game), so yeah you had to go tru 1 hour of pointless crawling just to get to 3 hours of story.
-
I think one of the most interesting things you can do in a dungeon is throw in town-like aspects. Like, you'll be trekking deeper and deeper into this endless cave when suddenly you stumble upon a group of friendly dwarves just a mining away and singing work songs who sell you potions. My big problem with roguelikes is that they, despite being randomized, get pretty repetitive after awhile. I love it when elements from the typical RPG tropes are mixed together subtly.
Earthbound did this really well by blurring together towns and dungeons areas. Like, Threed IS a dungeon on the top and bottom, but it's also a town. Same with Fourside. The town and the dungeon are totally intertwined. Earthbound had pretty amazing dungeon design, like Ragnar said. There were lots of times when there would be a break to the cave or whatever, and Earthbound was REALLY good at rewarding the player at the end of a dungeon. The luminous cave or dinosaur world are shining examples, but pretty much 100% of the time a dungeon would lead to a completely new area, not just one identical to the one you left. This is the one thing I feel that dungeon crawlers lack, majorly. You either start and stop in the same town, or the levels becoming darker shades of brown or grey.
-
I like some dungeon crawlers, especially those hack'n'slash ones. Champions of Norath, does that count?
Also; ugh pokemon design... I hated all the prompts too. It wasn't just a prompt. It was a slow loading text blurb that didn't need to be there, followed by a chime, followed by 3 seconds of waiting. Especially hated the pokecentres for this!
The battlesystem equally irked me, but above all else (even rock cave or whatever) was the pokemon trading. Ugh it took forever and then the pokemon would errupt from a ball and chirp with a victory chime. Took forever! But yay I got a bulbasaur. :/
-
I think it would be pretty interesting to see a Link to the Past-style hack and slash adventure game with a roguelike setting where the dungeons are all randomly generated and stuff. I think that would appeal to a lot of people. You know, actually moving around in real time using player skill and interesting items and stuff (man I've found six boomerangs but no bow this run) with lots of classes (what good are all these bows to a dwarf like me!?) and simple spells (each one working in some different way, sort of like weapons in shmups) to keep the replayability up.
Let's make this someone, let's make this in GM
edit: when I say like lttp I mean just like it with the almost top down perspective and little cartoony guy with a sword and shield and stuff
-
I'd call Unlimited SaGa a dungeon crawler, and it's almost a damn fine game. The only thing that screws it up is the fucked up battle system. The majority of the game takes place in tabletop-style dungeon areas, moving space-to-space and utilizing your skills for survival in the field. I liked that the town visits cut to the point and were very brief. Through a quick menu you would go in, trade weapons, view a couple minutes of dialouge at most, and be on your way. No bullshit!
-
Thank you for this topic as I have had no idea what a dungeon crawler was for like a few years and wasn't about to ask.
How is Pokemon Dungeon whatever, I have the first NDS one and I never finished it because I found out my pokemon wouldn't evolve until I beat the story mode.
-
kaempfer is right. so is ragnar. just letting you all know before you plan on doing "all in" next time... heh :sly:
I'd call Unlimited SaGa a dungeon crawler, and it's almost a damn fine game. The only thing that screws it up is the fucked up battle system. The majority of the game takes place in tabletop-style dungeon areas, moving space-to-space and utilizing your skills for survival in the field. I liked that the town visits cut to the point and were very brief. Through a quick menu you would go in, trade weapons, view a couple minutes of dialouge at most, and be on your way. No bullshit!
nah i have heard lots of bad stuff about unlimited saga but that sounds just awful. bad design! well, i guess the same goes for Last Remnant. the towns looked pretty boring on that one.
-
hey you guys know you can turn up the text speed and turn off battle animations in the pokemon games right?
-
How is Pokemon Dungeon whatever, I have the first NDS one and I never finished it because I found out my pokemon wouldn't evolve until I beat the story mode.
i had the nds one but i sold it because it was kind of boring
-
Thank you for this topic as I have had no idea what a dungeon crawler was for like a few years and wasn't about to ask.
How is Pokemon Dungeon whatever, I have the first NDS one and I never finished it because I found out my pokemon wouldn't evolve until I beat the story mode.
Lmao I played that game for the same reason.... I was so disapointed when I reached lvl 50 and I still had a Charmander... what were they thinking getting rid of the best part about Pokemon games -_-
-
I've sort of never understood the whole concept of the dungeon crawler. Even the name suggests it's a painful, slow and tiring experience!
Whenever I'm playing an RPG I'm usually dreading the next dungeon. They're kind of hellish, normally a struggle to get through, and just really really hard sometimes. My experience with RPG's isn't anything extensive (I've played a few Final Fantasies and thats about it really!) but I don't see the appeal. I caught my brother playing Pokemon Mystery Dungeon the other day and that seemed to me to be a dungeon crawler. I know, like, that it's not the best thing to measure the genre by but, it just didn't look fun. Dungeons are not fun. Remember Rock Tunnel in Pokemon? That was a tough dungeon. The Water Temple in OoT? A little but different because it's an action RPG (this is not up for discussion) but still it was hellish. Dungeons are bleak, annoying, take a long time and just aren't fun. Why do people like dungeon crawlers?
Ps. Even like, FALLOUT 3. That game is basically an open ended dungeon crawler. It's long, it's hard and it's not fun.
Why do people like these games?
Personally, not sure how one would struggle getting through Rock Tunnel as it's pretty straight forward, maybe if you accidentally wandered in there without FLASH or something. Now the Mysterious Cave in Cerulean City after you beat the game or even Victory Road, I can probably see where you're getting at there. OoT's Water Temple though was just confusing.
*ahem*
Anyway, just because a dungeon is hard doesn't necessarily make it out like a dungeon crawler, you just dread having to deal with a section of the game's environment designed to challenge you. Though I guess it wouldn't really take away from your feelings of dungeon crawlers because games more notable for that (like roguelikes - Baroque, Shiren the Wanderer, Pokemon Mystery Dungeon) are pretty difficult and sometimes confusing. I'm not a fan of that particular genre/subgenre myself because the games are usually monotonous and having the map/item placement/boss room placement generate randomly doesn't change that. I bought and beat Baroque but there a came a point where I wanted to beat it just to get it out of the way rather than actually having fun with it. I did have some fun with Shiren though and I hear Izuna: Legend of the Unemployed Ninja is fun too so there are some bright spots.
But just playing through dungeons in games in general doesn't bother me. In something like Zelda it might take more to get through them, but in most RPGs, they tend to be straightforward, it's just being bogged down with mindless puzzles and a barrage of enemies that slows things down a bit for me. ("Tales Of" games for instance)
-
Urgh Victory Road! Victory Road was harder than Rock Tunnel but at least it had a few puzzles and was designed a little bit more interestingly. Rock Tunnel was straight forward and littered with trainers and felt more like a CRAWL you know. That's why I used it as an example. Victory Road was a better dungeon overall but Rock Tunnel was exactly how I imagine dungeon crawlers to be. Long, boring and a crawl. Not much fun at all.
-
I like dungeons... but at the same time, i find them difficult to crack.
-
Ugh yes it is why does it take me so long to use fly or swim? Why are there messages describing to me every minor detail of what my Pokemon is doing when I use one of those moves? I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY DO LET ME USE THEM!!!
Those are bad (really bad) design decisions. Why do they exist? Why are the things that I use most so time consuming? If I had to use fly twice in the game, those prompts wouldn't be annoying. Have you ever tried trading Pokemon? There are about six billion prompts and mandatory waits between each transfer. If you load the game standing in front of the wi-fi connection, you have to save again before going in. Then you have to walk around slowly trying to find another trainer, who has to not talk to you otherwise the connection fails. Then you have to agree to enter the trading mode. Twice. Then you have to agree to the trade about three times, at which point a five minute cutscene takes place where the Pokeball FLIES INTO THE AIR or some shit. It takes way longer than they needed to mask transfer time. The whole process takes like ten minutes! That is not cool! The whole game is like this. Maybe I over exaggerated about the poor map design, but it leave a lot to be desired (especially interior spaces which are riddled with dead ends).
Also I am basing the graphics thing mostly on Pearl, which is hideous.
You really don't know the answer by now? It almost sounds like you haven't been wasting the best moments of your life playing the past 5 generations of Pokemon games.
Simply put, you don't mess with success. It may be horribly designed, but that could very well be why it's successful. It's called branding.
-
hey you guys know you can turn up the text speed and turn off battle animations in the pokemon games right?
Yes but even at maximum text speed the billions of menu prompts drive me insane! The battle animations aren't a problem since they are generally really quick anyways, it's the repeated "are you sure?" (or similar) messages that pop up every time you want to do the most simple of tasks. A good example is watering berries, which becomes so annoying I never do it. Why doesn't he just start watering the damn berries? Why do I need a prompt telling me that the berries need water, then asking me if I'd like to water them, then telling me I've watered them? The graphics look different for soil that needs water, and there is an animation of the player watering them. Who can't figure this shit out?
You really don't know the answer by now? It almost sounds like you haven't been wasting the best moments of your life playing the past 5 generations of Pokemon games.
Simply put, you don't mess with success. It may be horribly designed, but that could very well be why it's successful. It's called branding.
There is no way the fifteen thousand billion prompts trumps the branding of the Pokemon namesake or the monsters themselves- it's just bad game design that they can get away with because of, not as part of, the excellent branding of the Pokemon franchise. I really enjoy the games, but always stop playing them near the end because you have to start relying more and more on prompt-filled nonsense than just running around and leveling your Zigzagoon.
edit: I haven't been wasting any time playing Pokemon. One of the reasons I've always enjoyed Pokemon is because it's a great handheld game, something you can play on the bus or in a car or while you are waiting or cutting class, which is defeated by things that hamper me just getting on with the damn game.
edit2: this topic was mostly dead so don't give me grief about resurrecting this silly Pokemon argument!
-
If they'd just get rid of HMs in Pokemon, I'd be a lot happier. I'm sick to death of carrying around two HM slaves because there are eight of these damn moves now and you usually need three or four of them for a single dungeon. Hell, if they have to keep the idea, then they should give us tools like in Lufia II or something!
But I know they won't...and they won't because that's how Pokemon is and it is blasphemous for humans to do anything manually in these games. How else does a 10-year old brat conquer an entire criminal syndicate by merely whipping the boss and his peons at Pokemon battling?
And so as to not be off-topic: dungeon crawlers are simply "no bullshit" RPGs. They cut out all or most of the story that will ultimately be called cliche by someone and give the player the raw gameplay of the genre, and due to lack of focus on other aspects of the game, the combat system and character growth will tend to be deeper, more involving, and generally better planned than your typical game. Sure, your characters become lifeless mutes, but on the other hand, you usually get to name and shape them into whatever you want...so in a way, it's even more of a role-playing game 'cause those characters can be you. :)
I'd call Unlimited SaGa a dungeon crawler, and it's almost is a damn fine game. The only thing that screws it up is the fucked up battle system. The majority of the game takes place in tabletop-style dungeon areas, moving space-to-space and utilizing your skills for survival in the field. I liked that the town visits cut to the point and were very brief. Through a quick menu you would go in, trade weapons, view a couple minutes of dialouge at most, and be on your way. No bullshit!
Fixed that for you. Unlimited SaGa = love. Yes, the battle system is weird. I agree with you on that one, but it's still a lot of fun. Damn, I'm going to have to go back and actually beat that someday... I think I cleared three of the characters' games. Only four left!
-
dungeons are mad (cept for f*cking last dungeons find myself fleeing from pretty much all battles time consuming and boring)