I miss the old RPG style.

[Don Savik]

Mass Effect may have an engaging storyline (gather a ragtag bunch of antiheroes to save the world from overmind aliens *hurr hurr*) and memorable-ish characters, but the gameplay is Gears of War. In fact, I prefer Gears of War. All the special skills don't add any unique strategy to the game, its just different colors of damage (which you could do with gun headshots more effectively). The storyline/character emphasis and lack of deep gameplay make the series a very cinematic and flashy game......and it doesn't have much lasting appeal.

Considering a lot of gamers are in their 20s-30s I don't know why companies want to dumb down difficulty to appeal to a "wider" audience.

Edit: I see a hate for people nostalgia crying, and to me its that old games weren't generally better all the time, its just that the genre was ripe with games back then. To be honest, there aren't that many rpgs these days, and not even that many action oriented rpgs. We're seeing a lot of mmos, fighters, shooters, and puzzle-platformers and less rpgs and rts. Its more of an issue of what genres are popular at the time, and rpg fans feeling a bit left out.

 

[CAPTCHA]

Skyrim more complex than Pool of Radiance? Only in a parallel universe where the rules of logic do not apply could that be true. Just admit your fawning admiration for Skyrim is obscuring your sense of reason. You're already somehow hurt that I've accused less complex games like Skyrim for being lower quality, which I have not done.

A little hostile there dude. Just for the record, I'm not really that big a fan of Skyrim beyond it's use as a remedy for insomnia. However there's no denying Skyrim is the more complex game. Crafting, NPC interaction, the radiant quest system, all these are far more complexe concepts than anything found in a Gold Box game (and that's not going into mods which add the need for suvivalism and nutrient managment or whatever else people have drempt up).

Mechanically Skyrim is suprerior, therefore I must assume that you are suggesting Skyrim is inferior strategically. Well there is a lot to do in Skyrim in order to succed, much more than in a GB game. In regards to the combat system, they are two different from one another to truly compare. It's be like comparing chess to paintballing (mousetrap to tiggy?). The only common ground is the rules system behind it all. I can guarantee that Skyrim has a system more complex than a D20 running it. It's just a matter of transparancy. Like I said in my original post, its the flashy GUI compared to the basic command line. Both get the same job done, one just has a measure of tedium removed.

 

[Kahunaburger]

A little hostile there dude. Just for the record, I'm not really that big a fan of Skyrim beyond it's use as a remedy for insomnia. However there's no denying Skyrim is the more complex game. Crafting, NPC interaction, the radiant quest system, all these are far more complexe concepts than anything found in a Gold Box game (and that's not going into mods which add the need for suvivalism and nutrient managment or whatever else people have drempt up).

Although I think there's a distinction that needs to be drawn here between mechanical complexity and gameplay complexity. Skyrim lets you do a lot of things with a lot of variables, but the core gameplay is very simplistic - you hit things with basic attacks (or use your "I win" buttons) and chug potions.

Mechanically Skyrim is suprerior,

I also don't think Skyrim has very good mechanics. The RPG elements are the perfect example of mechanical complexity/gameplay simplicity, and the action elements are, if anything, even more simplistic in practice.

 

[Ranorak]

These older games surely had a lot more options.

But more options doesn't always mean more complex.
And it also doesn't make it better.

Now, before someone tells me that I must be a ADHD kid, as someone so delicately and totally un- generalizingly put, I play EVE-Online.
A game known for it's complexity and difficulty curve.

But in the end, I rather have a fun game with loads to do, and epic quests, then spend 15 minutes pondering if I should use a short sword, or a Kukri.

Complexity is more then just the number of skills, spells or weapon types.
People say that Morrowind is more complex then Skyrim.
I disagree. I have found plenty of fun and original ways to kill things in Skyrim, while in Morrowind the environment was static.

Besides EVE-Online, I play DnD.
I prefer the 3.5 version, but my party had never heard of a level up, or a D20 when I started playing. And I know they would have had a harder time learning 3.5. So I introduced them to 4.0. Far less "complex" but equally fun, because for them it was easier to get into.

 

[scorptatious]

I don't what it is with these nostalgia threads, but they just bug the hell out of me.

.

I know how you feel...it actually makes me angry for some reason

while I can understand the apeal of all this complex RPG type stuff....I think I'd still take a game Like Mass effect 2 or 3 any day (and come on..ME1 wasnt even that good, admit it)

actiony fun with "talky/cinematic/story" fun

I loved Fallout NV as well

I actually liked ME1. But hey, that's just me.

Which brings me to something I'd like to talk about in what makes a good RPG. I've been thinking about this thread for a little while, so I decided to give my feelings on them.

To me it's all subjective. RPG's are a very broad genre of games. There are games like say, FFIX, and then there are games like Dark Souls. Both games couldn't be more different and yet they are both considered RPG's.

I like both kinds of games myself, but there are most definitely people who prefer one over the other.

The same could probably be said about stories and characters in said RPG's. A lot of people on here state that stories and characters just aren't as good as they used to be in games. Again, subjective. To me, I found the characters and story in Mass Effect more interesting than the story and characters in say, Final Fantasy IV. Again though, that's just me.

My point is, people seem to be confusing opinion with fact when it comes to what makes a good RPG. While some people may not enjoy action RPG's and feel they don't work, others may feel the opposite.

At the same time though, I probably wouldn't mind seeing more games like FFIX.

 

[Weaver]

I have to laugh at anyone trying to defend the new action "RPGs" as being complex -or even more laughable, more complex- than the old, proper RPGs. If this is your opinion, you're just plain wrong and it's 99% certain you haven't even played a proper RPG. No doubt some 14 year old will come along now and accuse me of elitism, which is the usual response of someone who doesn't know what they are talking about to someone who does.

I'm 20 and you sound pretty elitist to me

but seriosuly....examples of a "real" RPG?

I guess, for some of us, the definition of an RPG used to mean "here, memorize these 3 rulebooks totalling 900 pages; then we'll play the game".

 

[Kahunaburger]

Complexity is more then just the number of skills, spells or weapon types.
People say that Morrowind is more complex then Skyrim.
I disagree. I have found plenty of fun and original ways to kill things in Skyrim, while in Morrowind the environment was static.

They're both pretty bad examples of RPG design, IMO. Morrowind is better because the exploration aspect is actually a lot of fun, but it's not like it succeeds as an RPG or anything. As you said, having a bunch of options does not translate into complex gameplay.

 

[CAPTCHA]

Although I think there's a distinction that needs to be drawn here between mechanical complexity and gameplay complexity.

But if the mechanics of the game allow for greater variety in gameplay it introduces a new dimensions and thus complexity through greater choice.

Skyrim lets you do a lot of things with a lot of variables, but the core gameplay is very simplistic - you hit things with basic attacks (or use your "I win" buttons) and chug potions.

To be fair that's pretty much what you do in older RPGs too.

I'm starting to feel a little silly comparing old games and new games against each other anyway. They're just too different, CRPG were designed to emultate the rule systems of tabletop games, action RPGs are something else entirely. This whole topic is about as pointless as comparing Microsoft Flight Sim to R-Type because you fly a plane in them both.

 

[Weaver]

I guess, for some of us, the definition of an RPG used to mean "here, memorize these 3 rulebooks totalling 900 pages; then we'll play the game".

Hmm, over exaggerating a little much there ?

Yes, I am.
But really, I mean how big is shadowrun 20th? 300ish pages?
You don't need to, say, memorize every possible thing your character can buy and such but there is still a large set of core rules (combat, the matrix, magic, basic role-playing) that pretty much all players should know. It's a sizeable set of rules.

This is compounded if you're a GM as there's more on top of that to know and deal with.

 

[Kahunaburger]

Although I think there's a distinction that needs to be drawn here between mechanical complexity and gameplay complexity.

But if the mechanics of the game allow for greater variety in gameplay it introduces a new dimensions and thus complexity through greater choice.

Team Fortress 2 has hats, accessories, paint, and nametags, but they don't actually increase gameplay depth/complexity - they're just cosmetic variation. Mario Party has a variety of mini-games, but the vast number of mini-games available don't mean that a particular mini-game (or Mario Party as a whole) is particularly deep/complex. Same principle.

Skyrim lets you do a lot of things with a lot of variables, but the core gameplay is very simplistic - you hit things with basic attacks (or use your "I win" buttons) and chug potions.

To be fair that's pretty much what you do in older RPGs too.

Depends on the RPG. There are RPGs from pretty much any time period that also offer non-simplistic gameplay.

 

[sunsetspawn]

Mass Effect may have an engaging storyline (gather a ragtag bunch of antiheroes to save the world from overmind aliens *hurr hurr*) and memorable-ish characters, but the gameplay is Gears of War.

Clearly you didn't play the first one as it plays nothing like Gears of War, and the story is one of the best I've ever encountered in a game. That's assuming it's played from start to finish with no spoilers, though with this current generation of google-tards there really is no reason to make a genuinely good story with an intriguing mystery anymore. Simply put, Mass Effect is one of the greatest, yet flawed, games of this generation.

And as for 2 and 3 being like GoW, well, play them on insanity and try GoW tactics with gunplay and no powers. You will be curb-stomped. But that's neither here nor there because all three Mass Effect games are really interactive movies with emphasis on the "interactive."

Oh, and anyone that throws the word "elitism" around simply cannot see. Modern RPGs are in a state of decline for a variety of reasons, but there are good ones if you look. I'd say the biggest CURRENT problem is that the professional reviewer's livelihood actually depends on advertising dollars, so the publishers that spend the most money on advertising always get glowing reviews for their games, which, in turn, causes those games to sell very well. Always be skeptical of the reviews for games published by a 400lb gorilla.

And consequently, many titles with less-known publishers are often excellent but may only get 7s. Of course, if you really WANT a game with more depth you won't have too much of a problem reading between the lines and knowing to look out for user reviews, preferably where they are modded to screen for trolls as opposed to just language violations.


Anyway, this topic is far too broad, so let me see if I can conjure a few talking points...


Deus Ex: Human Revolution was NOT great; it was solid, but nothing more, and in my opinion it gets all of its cool points from the atmosphere. There was more customization and specialization in Invisible War (that's right).


Dragon Age: Origins is the tightest current-gen fantasy RPG I've played.


Risen is one of those great, current-gen, underrated gems I was referencing before. Seriously, I paid like 15 bucks for this game last year and I was blown away by the old-school goodness AND flashy-bling graphics (well, compared to the old-school games it's emulating), and on a console no less. I can only imagine that the PC version was more smooth, BUT, due to its action-oriented combat the XBOX 360 controller was PERFECT. Seriously, if you were as disappointed in Oblivion as I was (haven't touched Skyrim due to it), then this may be just what you need. There are some minor flaws, but nothing along the lines of the game-breaking, herpity derp level scaling that crippled Oblivion (actually, Oblivion had a lot of flaws, but it was the level scaling that ruined it).

And nostalgia has nothing to do with it. I played Gothic 2 for the first time last year and it's everything everyone says it is and more. One of the best RPGs I've ever played. Coincidentally made by the same people that made Risen, go figure, though it is better than Risen.

 

[Weaver]

I guess, for some of us, the definition of an RPG used to mean "here, memorize these 3 rulebooks totalling 900 pages; then we'll play the game".

Hmm, over exaggerating a little much there ?

Yes, I am.
But really, I mean how big is shadowrun 20th? 300ish pages?
You don't need to, say, memorize every possible thing your character can buy and such but there is still a large set of core rules (combat, the matrix, magic, basic role-playing) that pretty much all players should know. It's a sizeable set of rules.

This is compounded if you're a GM as there's more on top of that to know and deal with.

So do you need to memorize all the Shadowrun p&p rules to play the Shadowrun video game on Sega, for instance ?

That's what we are talking about here, the video game versions of these tabletop games, correct ? Not the p&p games themselves.

I was referring to the original p&p games. I think we're both a bit confused

 

[Verzin]

Dear god. This thread exploded over the long weekend when I wasn't checking. I should have checked more often.

 

[Verzin]

snip

(I usually respond to quotes immediately, but I've been away from the escapist for a little while.)
Depressing and true. So much money to be made catering to the 'very' casual gamers. I have high hopes for BH enhanced and a couple kickstarter projects though. Wasteland 2, at the very least, aught to have massive potential.

 

[Verzin]

Dear god. This thread exploded over the long weekend when I wasn't checking. I should have checked more often.

Avernum Escape From the Pit


'Need to Play this Game', cannot be expressed enough.

Thank you sir. I always need more games to play. This one looks rather fantastic.

(Or at least the 12 seconds of it I was able to watch before this hotel's internet caved under the load....Travel sucks. I miss the hotel I was in yesterday)