Slashdot Mirror
IGN on the State of the CRPG
Via the ffwd linklog, IGN has a feature up discussing the current state of the CRPG. From the article: "Most people tend to associate RPGs with sword-swinging maidens in chainmail bikinis and doddering old white-bearded mages in robes spattered with owl poop. While the high fantasy setting is certainly the stock background for most RPGs, an RPG is defined not by its content but by its manner of presentation. To be a true RPG, a game must contain three elements. First, it should offer up an interactive story in which the player takes a vital part. Second, RPGs must allow for character growth that's driven by a player's choices or actions. Finally, RPGs must be built upon a system of rules and statistics that are used to resolve the events that take place in the world."
Second, RPGs must allow for character growth that's driven by a player's choices or actions.
Growth is a common element of RPGs, but it's hardly a necessary one. Many interactive fiction games have no character growth whatsoever, and they certainly qualify as "rolepalying game."
Well, at least one mainstream "publication" that excludes japanese stat-based interactive movies from the computer RPG genre.
What I don't see is a reason for computer RPGs to use any stats the user can see. Stats were just a crutch for pen&paper RPGs since you couldn't do a proper simulation. Computers take away the need for user-accessible stats and calculations. And seriously, in real life noone says they have "coding skill level 31" or something, they know they are a good coder or they think they are. Some might protest but it fits much better with the role-playing spirit if you have as little information about the simulation mechanics as possible.
No mention of Nethack, though...
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Now everybody and their mom is only making MMORPGs. Don't expect to ever play an excellent RPG like Fallout or Planescape: Torment again. Check out the list of upcoming PC RPGs at http://www.rpgamer.com/games/upcoming.html There are 35 listed, and maybe 4 or 5 of them are not MMORPGs. It's much easier to drop you in a world infested with stupid 14 year olds than it is to create decent AI and interesting situations to put players in.
I don't even know where to begin. Lets start this way: stat based combat does NOT equal an RPG. Stat based combat is the shitty filler that bad RPGs used to fill in their dull and uninteresting stories.
The ultimate RPG would be a simulator of a world. The world might be nonsense, like D&D with Dragons and and magic, but within the 'rules' you accept, the world would be completely coherent. It wouldn't have stats or numbers, at least not any that the player would see. There would be a story, and that player could affect the story.
It is the idea of Diablo vs Planescape: Torment. Diablo was a game about whacking the moles for exp and l00tl. Planescape: Torment had a combat system that was at best medicore, but a truly awesome story and a coherent world. The problem is that Diablo is a hell of a lot easier to build then Torment. Diablo just requires fiddling with the numbers until the game starts to be balanced. Hell, an intilligent enough computer could balance one of these games. Torment requires a team of writers to not only write a story, but to keep them consistent and interesting.
The difference between the mindless numbers game of Diablo and a true RPG is that you could make an AI using todays technology to play that game for you. Until AIs start passing the turning test, no AI will ever be able to play Torment. The same goes for the shitty MMORPGs out today. You could write AI programs to play those mindless games for you. Those are not MMORPGs, those are number counting games. They are awesome if you are addicted to watching numbers go up. They suck if you want an RPG.
The author mentions Final Fantasy in a way that implies that Final Fantasy is a role-playing game. I wonder if that's really the case. Personally one of the most important characteristics I would attribute to RPGs is non-linearity (at least to an extent.) Final Fantasy compared to older RPGs, especially if you go way back, is like riding on a rail ride at Disneyland.
I'm not necessarily saying that's bad, but it's qualitatively different from a non-linear system of exploration and leveling, where you can do most things out of order. The Legend of Zelda: A link to the past is more RPG than Final Fantasy, you can do the levels in whatever order you want, get or reject weapons, etc. It may be easiest to do it in a certain order, but the experience is far more personal, and you can tailor the difficulty of the game based on what order you do things, which is more like, um, role playing, where you are in charge.
The article never mentions this explicitly, but based on the MMORPG stuff and moral accountability and repercussions in the games, they seem to be treating it like it's a nice thing to have, but not necessary. Personally I see the lack of it in many games to be a regression, or at least the designers wanted to make a different kind of game that at least traditionally an RPG was like.
Look no further then Ultimas 6 and 7. Even 9 had it's moments (Looking over bucanneers den for the first time for example).
The thing that got to me about these games was the immersion factor. That is you didn't have to spend time worrying about the quest, you could just run around and make bread for a little while if you wished. Generally most things you tried because you *wanted* to do (like make a sword) worked.
In my opinion nothing since has gone close to what you could do in these games. (If I'm wrong, please let me know so I can play it!). Morrowwind? Meh, it tried hard, but was still a step backward from what was achieved all those years ago!
Can someone name 1 CRPG where the final greatest most superior weapon in the game is NOT a sword. Exactly. CRPGs all have the same design concept. Different characters, missions, but the same shit.
That's why MMORPG will take over all of RPGs in the future. It gives you that variety flavor.
I think it goes much beyond that. In single-player games, they can let you feel like the super-hero (or wizard or fighter) the likes of which MMORPG's can't match.
The ultimate example of this is being a Jedi in one of the various Star Wars games. Single-player, like the excellent Knights of the Old Republic series, you gain power and more power and more power. You feel every bit the elite Jedi that they're supposed to be. In the MMORPG Star Wars: Galaxies, you're lucky if you can even get to be a baby Jedi after a year of grinding. Then more mind numbing grinding. Where's the "special feeling"?
In other words, in single player games, everybody gets the vorpal sword, the light sabre, the gatling gun and rocket launcher. And they have real power. In MMORPG's, some guy with a gatling gun mows at you for 3 points of damage x 10 times, your health bar moves by 1/8. Ummmm, wow.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
Yes, and they are:
1. Fire
2. Ice
3. Lightning
He's mostly working on the combat engine and has very little plot, but the skeleton of the game is downloadable and very playable. It's kind of like Diablo right now, not plot but lots of enemies to slaughter.
This is the first combat engine I've seen that makes effective use of mounted troops - playing a mounted character is a lot of fun.
A review here.
Don't bother to download if you can't live without Half Life 2 quality graphics.
PS - not affiliated with those guys, but this is a cool game