Diablo IV, for me. I love the Diablo series and just a bit ago, I sank 2 hours down to get my necromancer character up and set in Diablo II Resurrection. I have Diablo III and its expansion too, but they’re online only and I almost can’t be bothered to go through that. I’ve beaten it a long time ago.
And I really do want to get Diablo IV, but they’ve made that online-only as well. Like, I know I’m always online and everything but I do like to have that fallback where if I am without internet or I can’t afford internet for a time, I can play or watch things to bide the time over. I can’t do that with online-only games because it’s like being gated away from something you bought.
So everytime I look at Diablo IV, I just get a little depressed at times. Blizzard should do what D2R did, have an online character and have an offline character.
I’ve tried a bunch of the big ones. Fallout 1&3, Skyrim, Final Fantasy 3 and 7, Pokemon, Borderlands, a couple of different MMORPGs, and a bunch of random others. My description was a bit oversimplified, but my point was more about the general lack of care towards the primary loops that you spend 99% of the game engaging with. For example, Fallout 3 has terrible gunplay which is further limitted by the need to focus on one weapon type, and uninteresting AI which doesn’t leave room for deeper tactics. Pokemon, along with a lot of other JRPGs, often boil down to finding one or two decent buffs/debuffs to use, then spamming whatever does highest damage. MMOs obviously tend to require a lot of grinding repetitive, often easy enemies.
That said, I have found some of the RPG-adjacent games better. Roguelikes are one of my favorite genres, since they tend to center around a strong gameplay loop, while still featuring the non-linearity and character builds. Same with tactics games. Honestly Dark Souls seems like it may be a good option, but I bounced off of it due to technical issues the first time and just haven’t gotten around to trying it again.
I’d argue that a game like Fallout, 1 or 3, is not 99% combat, and that’s probably where the disconnect is. They intend for you to do some detective work and even solve problems without combat plenty of times too, even when you have a combat-heavy build. Pokemon is a strange one here too, because that series is built around a rock paper scissors system such that you should be regularly be switching up which attacks you’re using. I’d love to see if your complaints hold up to Larian’s games on tactician difficulty.
By time spent, I wouldn’t be suprised if nearing that (99%) is either going to be walking to the next location (quest or not) and fighting enemies to clear the path. Yes, you’ll spend a bit of time talking to NPCs to retrieve the quest, and on some of the better designed quests, there might be some alternative routes, but traversal and combat are still usually the focus and/or the default. When you do have a reason to use other mechanics, or make meaningful story decisions, its good - but those chances are rare.
I did oversimplify, but I still find it, and other JRPGs I’ve tried way too shallow. In Pokemon’s case, while there is the typing, theres is still usually an one obvious best move at any given point. I do find Pokemon better than many others, in that there is much more ability and reason to customize your party on an ongoing basis, although they largely negate this benifit by making the games so easy.
Honestly, I would be interested too. The format with a larger party does interest me, and like I said, I do like a lot of tactics games like XCom and Fire Emblem, which are bordering on RPGs mechanically. I just don’t have the money to spend on new games for the time being, so I probably won’t be trying it until its price goes way down.
Larian’s party size is only 4, so it’s not much larger. Your breakdown of your spent time in Fallout sounds a lot like you’re trying to speedrun it compared to how I play it (I’d be surprised if you stood much of a chance in late game Fallout without giving combat more thought), so the differences in how we play it is probably somewhere there, and I think Larian’s games will probably force you to engage in more of those aspects in order to get through them. Divinity: Original Sin II regularly goes on sale for quite cheap these days, but I’d be lying if I told you it was anywhere near as good as Baldur’s Gate 3 despite having a lot of the same DNA. For one, the D:OS games just about encourage the genocide of every monster on the map in a way that BG3 doesn’t, but at least I’d strongly doubt your ability to play through the combat thoughtlessly.