My Growing Concern With Modern RPGs

[Aporeia]

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Maltese_Falcon91

... Technically, I guess?

That's really not the definition you should ever use when talking about video game RPGs though, it's confusing and kinda stupid.

You're telling me a game where you play the role of a character in a story isn't a Role Playing Game? Please explain this to me in a manner that isn't confusing or stupid.

The issue is that your definition is broad and covers a variety of genres. If your base definition is indeed correct, then all games are RPGs, since in every game, you play the role of a character in a story. Thus, RPG.

No, all games aren't RPGs, but a gigantic number of them are. RPGs are split into massive numbers of subgenres, but some are more traditional, and therefore are marketed under the banner "RPG," even if they contain less roleplay elements than a game that doesn't even label itself as one.

Quote:

Quote:

But you wouldn't sit there and tell me that Age of Empires is an RPG, correct?

RTS games are traditionally not RPGs because you do not play a character with a story, you play an impersonal group of people who have no stories themselves. Turn Based Strategy games commonly differ in this regard, as you usually play as a character who is either a unit or a tactician for a group of units who have lives, personalities, and stories.

That said, you CAN have a RTS RPG, and you CAN have an non-RPG Turn Based Strategy game.

And now the argument changes.

Define "Traditional RPG".

Somewhat generic roleplaying games that have elements of adventure, action, and combat. They typically, in some way, resemble DnD.

Non traditional RPGs are not bound to turn based/dice roll combat or generic fantasy settings, a recent example that shares almost no similitude with DnD would be DX:HR, and nobody seems to be debating its status as an RPG.

[Lord of the Vine]

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

You're telling me a game where you play the role of a character in a story isn't a Role Playing Game? Please explain this to me in a manner that isn't confusing or stupid.

The issue is that your definition is broad and covers a variety of genres. If your base definition is indeed correct, then all games are RPGs, since in every game, you play the role of a character in a story. Thus, RPG.

No, all games aren't RPGs, but a gigantic number of them are. RPGs are split into massive numbers of subgenres, but some are more traditional, and therefore are marketed under the banner "RPG," even if they contain less roleplay elements than a game that doesn't even label itself as one.

Quote:

Quote:

But you wouldn't sit there and tell me that Age of Empires is an RPG, correct?

RTS games are traditionally not RPGs because you do not play a character with a story, you play an impersonal group of people who have no stories themselves. Turn Based Strategy games commonly differ in this regard, as you usually play as a character who is either a unit or a tactician for a group of units who have lives, personalities, and stories.

That said, you CAN have a RTS RPG, and you CAN have an non-RPG Turn Based Strategy game.

And now the argument changes.

Define "Traditional RPG".

Somewhat generic roleplaying games that have elements of adventure, action, and combat. They typically, in some way, resemble DnD.

Non traditional RPGs are not bound to turn based/dice roll combat or generic fantasy settings, a recent example that shares almost no similitude with DnD would be DX:HR, and nobody seems to be debating its status as an RPG.

DX:HR?

[GunsmithKitten]

Aporeia

Sometimes; usually not, though. There's very little storytelling or becoming a character unless it's a specific game that adds that into the formula.

So what's the objective line on when there's storytelling or "becoming a character" sufficient to qualify? I'd dare say that Doom gives just as much (if not a touch more) than a lot of games of it's time considered to be RPG's (Wizardry for example).

[Aporeia]

Maltese_Falcon91

Aporeia

You're telling me a game where you play the role of a character in a story isn't a Role Playing Game? Please explain this to me in a manner that isn't confusing or stupid.

Hells yeah.

Look, you ever notice how all these genres kinda evolved from video games? First Person Shooters, Dating Sims, Real Time Strategy, Flight Sim, Platformer? They all didn't exist before the rise of electronic gaming.

Roleplaying games did though, in the form of Pen and Paper RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons. They were called RPGs because it make sense, you took on the role of a character in order to play the game. And since the first computer roleplaying games were heavily derivative of games like Dungeons and Dragons, the RPG label got stapled onto them, too.

The genre has grown and encompassed a lot more mechanics and gameplay elements over the years, but at it's core, it really just does refer to a game that has stat building mechanics.

And this isn't a stupid or confusing definition to you? Those are level-based RPGs, but a game that is a ROLE PLAYING GAME only requires you to ROLE PLAY. Otherwise, your definition would mean Sonic All Stars Racing is a RPG, and even I don't say that.

Quote:

Aporeia

Maltese_Falcon91

Aporeia

They kind of just used "travel" because there wasn't a non-fast travel. It was still boring and uneventful.

Sure, but this big spiel of yours:

Aporeia

Instead of being given a vibrant and memorable series of events, you're given an emotionless and surgically segmented series of story-nodes that make you feel less like you've taken a long journey (the reason I'm drawn to rpgs), and more like you've read a bullet-point summery of important events culled from a larger, potentially better written book. The sense of distance traveled is meaningless. The random hardship and intrigue of just trying to get to the place you need to go to do what needs to be done doesn't exist. It's like a story written by a 3rd grader who's primary inspiration was DBZ after it jumped the shark.

...is that this is a growing concern with modern RPGs. Fast Travel isn't exactly a problem that's endemic to the turn of the millenium, now is it?

At what point did I say fast travel was the problem? Read carefully.

Right here.

Fast travel is a tool used to facilitate this kind of piss poor game design. A well designed game does not require you to travel boredom-inducing distances, yet recent sandbox games have that so hard coded that at least 3/4 quests do, and you will use fast travel because traveling there is SO boring and uneventful that they made it optional, when at the very least they could've removed the distance if they didn't want to entertain you on the way there, but they didn't. It will appear this way in the next game, too.

Quote:

Aporeia

Instead of being given a vibrant and memorable series of events, you're given an emotionless and surgically segmented series of story-nodes that make you feel less like you've taken a long journey (the reason I'm drawn to rpgs), and more like you've read a bullet-point summery of important events culled from a larger, potentially better written book. The sense of distance traveled is meaningless. The random hardship and intrigue of just trying to get to the place you need to go to do what needs to be done doesn't exist. It's like a story written by a 3rd grader who's primary inspiration was DBZ after it jumped the shark.

Haha, I know you said Unrestricted Fast Travel wasn't a the real issue, but, still, my point is that your argument is oversimplified, and that games that feature these "symptons" like Dragon Age are not a new thing.

I didn't say they were new, I said they were getting worse, and the startingpoint I chose was KOTOR.

[Aporeia]

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

The issue is that your definition is broad and covers a variety of genres. If your base definition is indeed correct, then all games are RPGs, since in every game, you play the role of a character in a story. Thus, RPG.

No, all games aren't RPGs, but a gigantic number of them are. RPGs are split into massive numbers of subgenres, but some are more traditional, and therefore are marketed under the banner "RPG," even if they contain less roleplay elements than a game that doesn't even label itself as one.

Quote:

Quote:

But you wouldn't sit there and tell me that Age of Empires is an RPG, correct?

RTS games are traditionally not RPGs because you do not play a character with a story, you play an impersonal group of people who have no stories themselves. Turn Based Strategy games commonly differ in this regard, as you usually play as a character who is either a unit or a tactician for a group of units who have lives, personalities, and stories.

That said, you CAN have a RTS RPG, and you CAN have an non-RPG Turn Based Strategy game.

And now the argument changes.

Define "Traditional RPG".

Somewhat generic roleplaying games that have elements of adventure, action, and combat. They typically, in some way, resemble DnD.

Non traditional RPGs are not bound to turn based/dice roll combat or generic fantasy settings, a recent example that shares almost no similitude with DnD would be DX:HR, and nobody seems to be debating its status as an RPG.

DX:HR?

Deus Ex 3

[Aporeia]

GunsmithKitten

Aporeia

Sometimes; usually not, though. There's very little storytelling or becoming a character unless it's a specific game that adds that into the formula.

So what's the objective line on when there's storytelling or "becoming a character" sufficient to qualify? I'd dare say that Doom gives just as much (if not a touch more) than a lot of games of it's time considered to be RPG's (Wizardry for example).

It doesn't really give much. The game is atmospheric in its storytelling, but it's not really character driven. Most FPS games have RPG elements these days, with a few exceptions like Team Fortress. Even CoD games are (really horrifically bad) RPGs, although the majority of focus in the game is put into multiplayer which has an absence of RP... whether or not I choose to call its leveling system an RPG element depends on what mood I'm in, but for the purpose of this thread, I don't.

I think if you use any other criteria, it makes the title needlessly confusing because basing it on stat-building is stupid if you're calling it an RPG and excluding games with MOUNDS of RP.

[Maltese_Falcon91]

Aporeia

And this isn't a stupid or confusing definition to you? Those are level-based RPGs, but a game that is a ROLE PLAYING GAME only requires you to ROLE PLAY. Otherwise, your definition would mean Sonic All Stars Racing is a RPG, and even I don't say that.

My eyes work just fine, Aporeia. No need to use all caps for my sake.

Now, I've already gone out of my way to point out that yes. A game that features a role that the player assumes can technically be considered a roleplaying exercise. When a game is considered an RPG, though it refers to a subset of games that feature the mechanics I previously pointed out. Yes, it's a misnomer, yes it's confusing. Not nearly as confusing as claiming that every video game that has even the slightest hint of roleplaying is an RPG.

I've never played Sonic All Stars Racing. I'm also not going to bother researching it, but my psychic powers are telling me it's probably a racing game that might have a few level up RPG elements, which, of course makes it a racing game.

Aporeia

I said they were getting worse, and the startingpoint I chose was KOTOR.

Worse? I'm afraid I don't see that. Yes, Dragon Age is different than KOTOR, but, look at the world map of Icewind Dale, now look at Dragon Age's world map. They work exactly the same way. Dragon Age is not the zenith of poorly designed fast travel systems. It's a throwback to the older Infinity Engine games, specifically Bioware's previous title, Baldur's Gate.

Dion Necurat

DX:HR?

He means Deus Ex: Human Revolution. I'd also like to mention that people have contested its status as an RPG.

[HMS Thunder Child]

Aporeia

HMS Thunder Child

Find myself agreeing with both people with conflicting positions. AGH DISCUSSION TOO EXTENDED, MAKING ME THINK

Then you have the air of a thinker. Anything worth detailing?

Not that hasn't already been said. I'll have to mull over everything. I'm currently leaning towards your case, at least with regards to modern RPGs being too samey and removing needed structure to make room for freedom. I can understand the appeal of emergent gameplay to those who are interested in it, and I engage in it myself, but telling people to use their imagination about most details is not exactly good game design.

My favorite Skyrim character was intended to be a healer. Damned if the game would let me play that way, though. The game is very clearly a go here, kill this, come back style game. Doesn't work for me. I played Morrowind as a merchant once. Can't really do that in Skyrim. To me, a lack of options does not constitute freedom. Money is only useful for buying stuff and skill training. Stuff you can generally mine, harvest, or craft. So you end up spending all of your money on training your skills. To level up. To access better loot, blah blah.

It reminds me of an MMO, but even MMOs nowadays have other ways to d**k around besides getting new big monsters to fight with new big weapons. I can't help but think back to Neverwinter Nights: Shadows of Undrentide and Hordes of the Underdark. Sure, obligatory fighting, but you could be a pure healer and rock it. You could be a druid and just talk to animals and s**t. ******** knows I did. That's freedom to me. A wide open sandbox with just sand, not so much.

On the flipside, I do know the appeal of fast travel systems, and they kind of work for sandboxes since pacing in those games is inherently ********. Or it's Dead Rising and the game is a sandbox and forces you to pace yourself, which sucked, too. There is definitely something nice about being able to jump straight to completion, but it also is very instant gratificationy and you miss out on a whole lot. Unlike hub based games, where there is nothing to miss, fast travel skips over a whole lot of potentially neat stuff.

So I dunno. I see pros and cons, but I definitely preferred Morrowind's system. It was far, far more immersive and it felt like I was in the game world instead of automating my travel like a Facebook game. So I think having both is an okay thing, I guess. Skyrim has them, somewhat, but it definitely feels like less. Morrowind let you take a Silt Strider to and from Ald-Ruhn or Khuul, but you better get to walking if you go to Morthal or Falkreath. Good design would make fast travel an option, but not the most appealing one. Like you said in the OP, filling the gaps would be great. Skyrim is lots of walking, with killing in between locations. Why not events? And not just the "revelers offer you a mead!" or "three Thalmor try to kill you because you killed hundreds of their friends and put their bodies in compromising positions."

The dragons kind of remind me of Rift's dynamic PvE, except Rift's wasn't tedious and boring. And the NPCs that died ******** came back. Scaled level enemies are obnoxious.

[Lord of the Vine]

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

No, all games aren't RPGs, but a gigantic number of them are. RPGs are split into massive numbers of subgenres, but some are more traditional, and therefore are marketed under the banner "RPG," even if they contain less roleplay elements than a game that doesn't even label itself as one.

Quote:

RTS games are traditionally not RPGs because you do not play a character with a story, you play an impersonal group of people who have no stories themselves. Turn Based Strategy games commonly differ in this regard, as you usually play as a character who is either a unit or a tactician for a group of units who have lives, personalities, and stories.

That said, you CAN have a RTS RPG, and you CAN have an non-RPG Turn Based Strategy game.

And now the argument changes.

Define "Traditional RPG".

Somewhat generic roleplaying games that have elements of adventure, action, and combat. They typically, in some way, resemble DnD.

Non traditional RPGs are not bound to turn based/dice roll combat or generic fantasy settings, a recent example that shares almost no similitude with DnD would be DX:HR, and nobody seems to be debating its status as an RPG.

DX:HR?

Deus Ex 3

On the loose definition, its an RPG.

When the qualifiers are in place, aka "Traditional RPG" requirements...I believe it falls short.

[Lord of the Vine]

Aporeia

Maltese_Falcon91

Aporeia

You're telling me a game where you play the role of a character in a story isn't a Role Playing Game? Please explain this to me in a manner that isn't confusing or stupid.

Hells yeah.

Look, you ever notice how all these genres kinda evolved from video games? First Person Shooters, Dating Sims, Real Time Strategy, Flight Sim, Platformer? They all didn't exist before the rise of electronic gaming.

Roleplaying games did though, in the form of Pen and Paper RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons. They were called RPGs because it make sense, you took on the role of a character in order to play the game. And since the first computer roleplaying games were heavily derivative of games like Dungeons and Dragons, the RPG label got stapled onto them, too.

The genre has grown and encompassed a lot more mechanics and gameplay elements over the years, but at it's core, it really just does refer to a game that has stat building mechanics.

And this isn't a stupid or confusing definition to you? Those are level-based RPGs, but a game that is a ROLE PLAYING GAME only requires you to ROLE PLAY. Otherwise, your definition would mean Sonic All Stars Racing is a RPG, and even I don't say that.

...Hold up.

Your initial point...WAS, in fact, that an RPG requires you to role play.

[Aporeia]

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Maltese_Falcon91

Aporeia

You're telling me a game where you play the role of a character in a story isn't a Role Playing Game? Please explain this to me in a manner that isn't confusing or stupid.

Hells yeah.

Look, you ever notice how all these genres kinda evolved from video games? First Person Shooters, Dating Sims, Real Time Strategy, Flight Sim, Platformer? They all didn't exist before the rise of electronic gaming.

Roleplaying games did though, in the form of Pen and Paper RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons. They were called RPGs because it make sense, you took on the role of a character in order to play the game. And since the first computer roleplaying games were heavily derivative of games like Dungeons and Dragons, the RPG label got stapled onto them, too.

The genre has grown and encompassed a lot more mechanics and gameplay elements over the years, but at it's core, it really just does refer to a game that has stat building mechanics.

And this isn't a stupid or confusing definition to you? Those are level-based RPGs, but a game that is a ROLE PLAYING GAME only requires you to ROLE PLAY. Otherwise, your definition would mean Sonic All Stars Racing is a RPG, and even I don't say that.

...Hold up.

Your initial point...WAS, in fact, that an RPG requires you to role play.

And yours wasn't.

[Lord of the Vine]

Aporeia

Dion Necurat

Aporeia

Maltese_Falcon91

Aporeia

You're telling me a game where you play the role of a character in a story isn't a Role Playing Game? Please explain this to me in a manner that isn't confusing or stupid.

Hells yeah.

Look, you ever notice how all these genres kinda evolved from video games? First Person Shooters, Dating Sims, Real Time Strategy, Flight Sim, Platformer? They all didn't exist before the rise of electronic gaming.

Roleplaying games did though, in the form of Pen and Paper RPGs like Dungeons and Dragons. They were called RPGs because it make sense, you took on the role of a character in order to play the game. And since the first computer roleplaying games were heavily derivative of games like Dungeons and Dragons, the RPG label got stapled onto them, too.

The genre has grown and encompassed a lot more mechanics and gameplay elements over the years, but at it's core, it really just does refer to a game that has stat building mechanics.

And this isn't a stupid or confusing definition to you? Those are level-based RPGs, but a game that is a ROLE PLAYING GAME only requires you to ROLE PLAY. Otherwise, your definition would mean Sonic All Stars Racing is a RPG, and even I don't say that.

Actually, my point was that your definition is too simplistic...which it is.
...Hold up.

Your initial point...WAS, in fact, that an RPG requires you to role play.

And yours wasn't.

[Wombalicious]

I just want to say that i have absolutely no opinion on your topic, other than games like Dragon Age, Diablo etc bore the s**t out of me and i enjoy FF and KH, but i greatly admire the effort and thought you put into this.
Even though i mostly have no earthly idea what you're talking about, i still enjoyed reading it.

[Exoth XIII]

Aporeia

Alinear RPG - Story is linear, but world is open. Chapters exist, but do not prevent you from backtracking. Examples: Final Fantasy (10 and below), Kingdom Hearts (series), Legend of Zelda (notably OoT, and WW), Bioshock 1 and 2, Fable.

Really? Final Fantasy 10?

That was the final fantasy game that first came up with the idea of "the hallway." Rare is the occasion where you can deviate from the linear path. While you aren't prevented from going back, by, say, an invisible wall, you're instead prevented by the lack of incentive, combined with the deterrents. (Random encounters with enemies too underpowered to grind with.)
Metroid would be a good example for alinear.

Quote:

Now, as you can see, the primary examples for sandbox RPGs are Bethesda and Bioware, the only remaining companies that release big-name RPGs.

Which one does assassin's creed and grand theft auto?

Quote:

Few people complain about fast travel in Ocarina of Time.

The world of OOT is a lot smaller than modern games, and later on, when the world expands a lot, you DO have fast travel once you've explored the path to a temple.

I gotta say, the last sandbox I played was Asscreed III, and that was a big damn world. I was glad to not have to trek across the whole damn frontier every time I want to go to a different city.

Quote:

Out of all of the Final Fantasy games, I feel VII was the best example of proper pacing in world travel. The game starts with you being dropped off in a tight-spaced city for 12ish hours (once again, that number shows up), and it isn't until then that you are locked out of the city and thrown into a broad open world with a still linear pathing. 8 hours later, you get a car that breaks down soon after, but gives you a taste of conflictless world travel. The world continues to send you on sprawling journeys with tons of distractions and roadblocks until about 3/4 of the way through the game when it finally tosses you an airship, now opening up access to every place you've ever been, along with new locations never before within reach.

Late in the game, you also got an airship, which allowed you to get anywhere in the world, pretty quick. (That the world was smaller also helped.) This would be an excellent mechanic in some games, but some games, flying really doesn't make sense.

Quote:

Sandbox RPGs tried to take a step above Alinear RPGs; they have almost unilaterally

That's not what that word means.

Quote:

bog down your time with grinding repetitive fetch x MacGuffin or kill x# of mooks to obtain enough gold to buy featureless diablo-style gear that is about as satisfying as it is fun to work for.

Yeah, see, that's why I don't do the mmorpg style crap, and why I dropped final fantasy.
There's so much better stuff these days. Again, asscreed. What do I feel like doing today? Do I want to advance the story? Then I go to the mission. Do I want to kill a dude? Head to the nearest pigeon coop. Do I feel like planning out an attack on a base? Look for a fort.

That's what's great about sandboxes, you can do literally anything you like.

I've gotten into minecraft lately. There's no scripted events, not even a story. It's just buildin' s**t.
My god, I have never had so much fun with a game.

Quote:

Stop making games too ******** big and ambitious for your ability to go through with them. If you make a game that has a huge world, don't fill it with hundreds of fetch quests.

I agree, but that's not a problem with the world, it's a problem with the game itself. Fetch quests suck.

Quote:

Stick to long and involved sidequests that have multiple phases to them,

That's the same thing as a fetch quest, it's just hidden more.

Quote:

or present a challenge with exceptional levels of difficulty that don't equate themselves to gathering hundreds of rare-drop materials.

The nintendo hard approach. Kingdom Hearts did this, including optional bosses.

Quote:

Don't make the player travel from one area to another that's far off without entertaining them along the way.

I cannot tell you how strongly I disagree with this.
I have never had more fun traveling than I do in minecraft, and that game literally does nothing whatsoever to entertain you as you go.

[The Willow Of Darkness]

HMS Thunder Child

Find myself agreeing with both people with conflicting positions. AGH DISCUSSION TOO EXTENDED, MAKING ME THINK

They can both be right you know.

The success or failure of a game (or any art of that matter) is measured on whether it achieves the goal it is meant to, not to some standard which sits outside, over and above it. Even when a game is "wrong," as the OP suggests, it is so because it doesn't achieve what it is supposed to.

What a game is "meant" to do needn't be restricted to one standard. Skyrim can be a successful game, in terms of being a fun romp around a detailed world, where you get to collect all manner of craft materials and level up your character, while also being a failure in terms of interesting side-quests, dungeons, areas and combat.

Would it be great if one game could combine success in every or most departments? For sure. That is why some games (or films, or painting, etc.,etc.) have an extra "something" over other great games which do one things really, really well. But not every game has to be that. We don't even want that all the time. Sometimes we are content, even joyous, simply running around the never changing fields for the stray wolf, so we can finally say we levelled up our blade skill and got a wolf pelt at the same time.

Yet, at the same time, we don't have to always settle for that. We can point out how these, otherwise successful games, fail to achieve some things. Things which are important to do well if we want to create which successful in other ways.