Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Incoming

First off, I love RPGs. It is the only game genre that I even bother to follow closely. Sadly, they seem to be getting worse. Innovation is lacking. The same tried and true formulas and cliched storylines are being reused over and over. Gameplay is not improving.

I'll tackle Bioware first. Their early games were great. I'm not a fan of BG and BG2 simply because the I dislike the camera angles in the game. I like their stories and I thought they did justice to the excellent Forgotten Realms setting. I absolutely loved KotOR despite the fact that the gameplay wasn't very good. NWN was a good game despite the poor graphics, camera issues, and annoying abilities wheel. The expansions and premium modules for it were great and had intriguing storylines. It's been a while since I've played it, but two of the modules for it were so good, so immersive, that I ended up playing through each one in a single setting. Also, Jade Empire was a decent game and sadly the only Martial Arts RPG on the market.

KotOR 2, while not a Bioware game, was an improvement over KotOR and had the best storyline and cast of characters in any game I've ever played. Heck, I think it was the best Star Wars story, period. The gameplay was much improved, but more importantly, the story was innovative and went in a direction never before seen in the Star Wars universe.

My worries with Bioware began with Dragon Age: Origins. On it's own, it is a good game, but was overhyped and defintely not as groundbreaking or good as it was claimed to be. The DA:O universe while new, didn't really strike me as fresh and exciting. Now, I measure all RPG settings up against Morrowind and The Elder Scrolls series, which is probably unfair to other RPGs because Bethesda sets the bar so damn high, but I'll get to that later. Suffice to say, DA:O is not a game I would play through twice (however, I did play all the origins). It is too much like other Bioware games. Once again, you're out to save the world against a horrible evil and you're the only one who has a chance in hell to do so. Once again you're a member of an elite orginization. Once again you have essentially the same cast of characters. It is the same damn Bioware formula.

Same problem with often praised Mass Effect. I like the Mass Effect universe and I'm glad to see a non-Star Wars scifi RPG. Not to mention that it's nice to see a scifi game where humans aren't the underdog of the universe. The actual game however, is a bit lacking. If you've played a Bioware game in the past, you can pretty much predict what's going to happen in the game. I'm sure its great for the newcomers to Bioware, but can't the old hands see a new story?

Now, the issues with Bioware games are rampant in pretty much every RPG out there. You're always the hero. You're always the best of the best of the best, SIR! The combat in these games is always lacking. Now, I think that WoW actually has the best combat system of any RPG and I don't understand why some of these games don't adopt it. In the NWN/KotOR series you're always just queuing up attacks. Games such as The Elder Scrolls series, the Witcher, the Fable series, Dragon Age, etc are just hack and slash/auto attack with the occasional special ability. Where's the precision attacking? Where are the good specials for melee characters? I want my damn warrior to charge into combat and start cleaving enemies in two, not sit around standing their while I spam X ability in the queue or smash my mouse button faster than a 13 year old trying to close porn.

More distressing is, where is the innovation? Where are the games so far out of the box that they might as well be from a different planet? Where's the RPG where I'm not saving the world? A lot of people bash Bethesda for having buggy games, but at least in their games I don't have to trod down the hero's journey for the umpteenth time and can actually go explore the world and do whatever the hell I want.

Yes, you are limited in what you can do on a video game. Yes, we are far away from coming remotely close to matching the open ended gameplay of a table top RPG. But why does every RPG out there have to be the classic hero saves the world and gets the guy/girl/mono gender alien? Where's the rpg where can you just be an assassin, a thief, a simple adventurer, a rogue mage, etc?

When will the mold be broken?

If you played a game where you were nothing special, the game would be boring, especially for an RPG. That is what makes the game fun.

I really enjoyed dragon age, I got it free to try it out, and I was instantly hooked. Now, I have purchased all of the DLC and the expansion, yet I still have not finished the game! The story is extremely interesting at least for the first couple times you play it, and your choices make enormous changes in the game, how it ends, the stories of your companions etc etc. Do you realize how many endings there are to that game?! And the absolute monstrous amount of play time is mind blowing. You look at TES and you could beat them in all of two hours, or 20 hours depending on how much stuff you want to do. In dragon age, I could easily put in over 60 hours of game time on a single play through, and that is without any DLC all of which are mini expansions.

The main problem with the game is that there is so much customization with your character as you play the game, I keep wanting to make a new character, just so I can see what happens when a fighter/templar makes a different decision at a certain point than my combat mage. Or how an event would pan out if I had a rogue with better coercion than my reaver.

Another thing I like about it is that you control a party of 4, thus allowing for MUCH more customization. Also, the game has tactics that allow you a certain amount of control over your party's actions while you focus on controlling a single character.

Bioware also did an excellent job at making the encounters challenging, unlike many other RPGs. I can build a very well rounded group, with great gear and etc etc, yet I still have to focus to get through many of the battles. I agree that it is very similar in style to mass effect and NWN, but those games are all hugely popular, so many people must enjoy that style of play, I know I do.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
The reason a tabletop RPG is so interesting is because the entire game experience is basically developed on the spot by the combined efforts of the GM and players. A computer game cannot achieve this. However, if the developer adds in enough content with enough choices for the player that hold game altering consequences, then they can create a sort of limited shadow of that on-the-spot development that you get from tabletop gaming.

My problem with Bioware games is that the characters always fall into the same archetypes and styles.

Bioware is typical of the big game companies like blizzard that see a method of making a game good and just use it and polish every concept until the game is a good at possible.

Unfortunately this means its pretty much impossible to make a game great by using a minimal risk strategy.

By your explanation of the limitations of a computer RPG game, all computer games in which you play a role are Role Playing Games. Not all PnP RPGs involve levels and experience points. Perhaps you should look into other 'genres' if you want the free-roaming experience you're talking about.

Amaya wrote:
Now, the issues with Bioware games are rampant in pretty much every RPG out there. You're always the hero.

As opposed to being the villain? The mook that dies 5 minutes in?

Amaya wrote:
I'm sure its great for the newcomers to Bioware, but can't the old hands see a new story?

There is nothing new under the sun.

The hero's journey does not always have to be epic. At times, grity, street level adventure that doesn't have cosmic balance issues would fun.

Personally, RPGs died back when people stopped making Classic Turn Based RPGs, like the older Final Fantasies, Legend of Dragoon, Super Mario RPG, Fallout, and the like.

Now a day's, everyone has to have it be MOVING! FAST! THINK FAST!

Have I just become blind to any good old fashioned RPGs that have come out? Old fashioned, as in like Chess with Pixels?

thedarksaint wrote:The hero's journey does not always have to be epic. At times, grity, street level adventure that doesn't have cosmic balance issues would fun.

I have no doubt, and when that game sells 16 copies and recoups $50 of the 60 million dollar budget they will have a Pyrrhic victory on their hands. Wii Ware and Live arcade can get away with something like that but the budget of a Bioware game needs to be grander and can't really afford to be avante guard game as it needs to have a wide appeal. While it may be an interesting exercise to create a RPG where you are a hobo looking to find lunch it isn't going to move a lot of units, and boys and girls, at the end of the day, that is what the point of this whole exercise is.

Hey whats wrong with being an "average joe" in an interesting universe? Cmon your saying you wouldent enjoy a 40k rpg where you played as a guardsman or commissioner?

If there is enough to do being an average person in the universe isnt that bad

An average person surviving in a dangerous and unusual world/galaxy/universe/reality is definately something to look towards as an aspiration.

Look at this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob,_Agent_of_HYDRA

Bob, Agent of Hydra is the perfect example of an average Joe who is trapped within a fantastic world.

He ends up being pivotal in small ways, but is often the brunt of sadistic fortune and mockery.

Being a Guardsman or Commisar doesn't mean someone is average or that their adventures will be mundane. In fact most RPG protagonists start out as normal people. Luke Skywalker was just a kid working on a farm and eventually brought down an empire as well as rebuilding an ancient order.

In Dark Heresy you can play as a Guardsman and you get into all sorts of exciting adventures. You could play a Chapter Master but if all one does is paperwork (correspondence to Terra, requisition forms, training reports, ect ect) than that isn't very interesting.

The question isn't whether one plays as an average joe or not, and that isn't the issue at hand. The issue is what happens with these characters. If you want a simulation of a Cadian's life in the IG (or some other equivalant) where you go through basic, fill out paperwork, ride a transport, wait around for assignment, than go to a battlefield and die, well that is great, but you aren't going to get a large audience.

So, to sum up, the reason you don't get large companies with large budgets making small independent, personal projects is becuase when you drop a house sized block of cash developing something you need to make a house size block of cash back, and really at least two houses worth.

Bob from HYDRA is a great comic but doesn't move numbers like Spidey or Batman. This isn't about whether we should have small, quirkier projects, but whether large publishers should be making big budget versions of them, not whether they should exist at all. Bioware couldn't make a Bob from HYDRA game with he budget of a Mass Effect.

You know, shouldnt we just have one big "Are Video Games Dying?" topic? Seems every industry is past its prime

Bioware has been horribly formulaic since their formation. The rule is as follows:

Bioware is to formulaic and cliched plot complete with binary morality system as Bethesda is to beautiful and expansive world that they forgot to actually populate.

I thought that, given the amount of experience that Bethesda had with creating sprawling wastelands devoid of content, surely they'd do a good job on Fallout. Sadly, I keep finding myself turning away and going back to the old Interplay ones. At least those had character. Grit too. Fallout 3 is the proverbial "post apocolyptic wasteland as dictated by Tim Burton". That is, it's seems quirky and dark at first, until you realize just how much further it could have gone, and you have to wonder if they're even trying anymore.

Fallout 1 and 2 though. Those were more "post apocalyptic wasteland brought to you in the form of the deranged chalk writings by the crazy guy who lives under the interstate who has no teeth and offers you half cooked roadkill simmered over a garbage can fire". It felt more sandboxed than Fallout 3 did. There was sex, violence, depravity, all the things I would expect to see in a largely lawless wasteland. All I have to say is "Childkiller". Now that's grim. And there were consequences too. That's important.

Anyone ever play Planescape: Torment? Best damn CRPG I've ever played. I'd say even better than Ultima 7. "Oh noes, it's the end game. Guess what, big bad guy? I can end this game about 4 different ways. Hell, I can KILL you through this conversation if I really want to!"

And in response to the OP: There are innovative things being done. Look to your Indie game designers. I can't think of any real indie RPGs, but there are some other really awesome things they've been doing. Try to find some of the old games where innovation already occurred. Grab the Ultima collection off ebay or something. Look for Planescape: Torment. The games of tomorrow were written yesterday, and that's how it will continue as long as people keep buying the crap.

kenshin620 wrote:You know, shouldnt we just have one big "Are Video Games Dying?" topic? Seems every industry is past its prime

My only complaint with current FPS's is knifing (seriously people leaping 10 ft or stabbing you while facing the other way annoys the hell out of me)

If im ever making a fps you will have to aim the knife! also if you hit anything but the neck it will only cut them and do little damage

OP... or is that TC?... heck... the folks posting on this topic...

Have you tried the Gothic series of games? I heard they were supposed to be pretty good as far as RPGs go. I've bought part 2 and 3 as part of a steam sale a while back and have yet to play them. I'm hoping they will be a little refreshing... lately I've been trying to go through the Bioware catalog (some of the newer stuff... not BG/BG2) and its starting to get sort of stale... I think I'm hitting a wall right now with Dragon Age.

Regardless, I think a lot of stuff is just being mainstreamed' to appeal to a bigger audience. Also different generations are going to see the games a little different... example: Mass Effect can be the current gen's Kotor; DA:O can be the current gen's Baldur's Gate. At least thats how I see it... they are just recycling to appeal to newer players.

daedalus wrote:Planescape: Torment

As far as not being the hero goes, look at The Elder Scrolls series. You're free to be a villian, a mercenary, a pick pocket, pretty much anything you could possibly want to be. You only become the hero when you do the Main Quest which is less than 10% of the game. Sadly, that's pretty much the only series where you're not forced down the Hero's Journey into uber awesomeness.

Amaya wrote:As far as not being the hero goes, look at The Elder Scrolls series. You're free to be a villian, a mercenary, a pick pocket, pretty much anything you could possibly want to be. You only become the hero when you do the Main Quest which is less than 10% of the game. Sadly, that's pretty much the only series where you're not forced down the Hero's Journey into uber awesomeness.

But on a whole, oblivion was more action than role playing compared to morrrowind

Well, Morrowind's combat flat out sucked. Oblivion improved all aspects of combat dramtically.

The quality of the world setting went down a lot, but in both of them you're free to be whatever you want. You don't have to be the hero.

djphranq wrote:Have you tried the Gothic series of games? I heard they were supposed to be pretty good as far as RPGs go. I've bought part 2 and 3 as part of a steam sale a while back and have yet to play them. I'm hoping they will be a little refreshing...

I had the misfortune of buying Gothic 3 - the most buggy game I have ever, ever played. Literally unplayable, even with patches.

Bioware still make good RPGs but they are becoming formumatic, as this chart shows:



it's only a matter of time before the RPG go's the way of the RTS on the console

SilverMK2 wrote:

djphranq wrote:Have you tried the Gothic series of games? I heard they were supposed to be pretty good as far as RPGs go. I've bought part 2 and 3 as part of a steam sale a while back and have yet to play them. I'm hoping they will be a little refreshing...

I had the misfortune of buying Gothic 3 - the most buggy game I have ever, ever played. Literally unplayable, even with patches.

I never touched Gothic because I had heard similar things. I'm pretty leary of spending money on anything not made by Troika, Interplay, Bioware, Bethesda, Obsidian, Blizzard, or Black Isle.

Amaya wrote:As far as not being the hero goes, look at The Elder Scrolls series. You're free to be a villian, a mercenary, a pick pocket, pretty much anything you could possibly want to be. You only become the hero when you do the Main Quest which is less than 10% of the game. Sadly, that's pretty much the only series where you're not forced down the Hero's Journey into uber awesomeness.

That was what I actually loved about Planescape. You took whatever path you wanted. You were just a guy. A guy who can't die. The awesome thing is, no matter how good, evil, or just plain neutral you were, there were always consequences. You never even HAD to become a hero at the end. You were yourself; the entire quest is about just things YOU want to do for yourself. This does not make it less epic. My big problem with the Elder Scrolls was that it had this veneer of RPG slapped on top of an action game. Sure, you could go around, talking to people, taking quests and whatnot, but at the end of the day, you still had to fight your way out of situations. It's been years since I've played either, but I can't think of a single situation in Oblivion/Morrowind where I felt like I could talk my way out of a situation, or like I even felt that there was more than one way for me to solve a particular problem outside of "Yes I will deal with this quest" or "No, I'm walking away from it."

Yea that is a problem with Beth games, you have to have some combat experience (or heck most games)

But I suppose games like Planetscape Torment are rarities becuase RPGs are synonymous to fighting monsters/etc

Curse you classic FF! why must I steal stuff from woodland creatures?

I think that for them it's more of a technical restrain than a gameplay option that they're completely happy with. There are ways to do quests without killing anyone, but there is so much material in their games that it is nigh inpossible to make it so you can have multiple options for every scenarion.

Amaya wrote:

My worries with Bioware began with Dragon Age: Origins. On it's own, it is a good game, but was overhyped and defintely not as groundbreaking or good as it was claimed to be.
?

Dragon Age was never hyped to be "groundbreaking". It was designed as advertised for the people that liked Baldur's Gate and wanted a game in that style.

All I remember from Dragon Age is the excessive amount of fake blood.

Toastin' in a roll bread.

BrookM wrote:All I remember from Dragon Age is the excessive amount of fake blood.