Is the CRPG genre going to change whatsoever?

[Nick Cave]

The RPG genre as a whole is a bit too multifaceted and different to talk about as a whole, but generally there's been a trend in AAA RPGs to strive towards mroe action-oriented gameplay, where timing and dodgin matters more than planning or outright numbers on your gear. Some might like it, some might not, but the genre as a whole is atleast evolving and changing, something that I don't know if it can be said about CRPGs.

I'll admit I don't have much love for the genre, the writing tends to be incredibly trope-y, I don't like micromanaging gear, I don't find clearing dungeons for sidequests to be all that exiting, even moral choices (the main draw of the genre, unless you're the kind of maniac who only wants phat loot) I've rarely seen actually benefitting a game's narrative, often doing to opposite. But the one thing that worries me is that the genre doesn't seem to be evolving.

People can of course correct me (wouldn't really call myself an expert at all), but the recent submergence of "the gang is getting back together to make a CRPG" to me just seems like an attempt to rekindle the glory days of the early 2000's, rather than actually having a fresh new spin on the whole thing. the new Torment, PoE, Tyranny, Wasteland 2 etc. just seem like re-thread of the same tropes and gameplay styles the previous ones have been, and I don't know if any of them have even fixed the issue of CRPGs massively falling apart at the end.

Again, not an expert at all, this is just an impression. Am I right whatsoever or is the CRPG genre a staggering beacon of innovation leading us all to a new Bethlehem?

 

[Saelune]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

 

[Dreiko_v1legacy]

Divinity: Original Sin is a great and relatively recent example of the genre. It innovates a lot of components and you can even do co-op throughout the entire game but it also keeps true to the genre. Highly recommended!

 

[The Madman]

Huh? In one sentence you say that there's been a strive towards more action-oriented rpgs, then in another lament the lack of change in the genre. Those action rpg are an innovation on the crpg formula. Hell, you can even watch the progression as it happened in Bioware's case with each of their games becoming gradually less and less inspired by traditional D&D till came Mass Effect which eschewed D&D entirely in favour of being a straight up talky action shoot-em-up. It happened again in miniature form with Dragon Age as well.

Just because there are still more traditional crpg being made doesn't mean that there aren't evolution's as well. Even ignoring the obvious actiony AAA examples, you've got indie stuff like Banner Saga or Underrail doing neat things with the genre as well.

This is like the gaming equivalent of that whole 'If evolution is real why are there still monkey's' thing.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

Temple of Elemental Evil did 3.5 better I would say. Might not have been the best role playing game, but if you want a faithful and fun adaptation of D&D combat there's no better out there.

 

[Saelune]

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

Temple of Elemental Evil did 3.5 better I would say. Might not have been the best role playing game, but if you want a faithful and fun adaptation of D&D combat there's no better out there.

Perhaps. I only got as far as making my party. But NWN also let you do the other half of why DnD is great, cause people could make and DM their own worlds. Playing in RP servers was a joy I cant imagine ever experiencing again. One server I was on even once a week had the creator be a DM and lead us through an adventure just as if we were all at a table together.

I want a DnD game where you can play as close to actually playing DnD in person but you know, through a video game.

 

[The Madman]

Perhaps. I only got as far as making my party. But NWN also let you do the other half of why DnD is great, cause people could make and DM their own worlds. Playing in RP servers was a joy I cant imagine ever experiencing again. One server I was on even once a week had the creator be a DM and lead us through an adventure just as if we were all at a table together.

I want a DnD game where you can play as close to actually playing DnD in person but you know, through a video game.

Oh yeah, if you want multiplayer or moddability then there's really no competition, NWN wins easily. I was talking more on a pure gameplay and ruleset implementation level.

 

[CaitSeith]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

So there has been nothing better in the CRPG genre since Neverwinter Nights? It's an honest question, I think that's the last game I played from the genre.

 

[Saelune]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

So there has been nothing better in the CRPG genre since Neverwinter Nights? It's an honest question, I think that's the last game I played from the genre.

I wouldnt know. It seems the current "revival" though seems focused on games before NWN. None have allowed the freedom of NWN though, I am sure, as most seem to focus on the single player/story aspect.

I mean NWN2 was fine. I just think I didnt play it when it was new, but there were RP servers there too that I enjoyed, I just wasnt focused enough.

 

[Raddra]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

Oh man, NWN was the highlight of my gaming life. It was so great playing on user made persistent world servers in the golden days. Met so many friends there and had such a good time. I sort of feel like I experienced something that never came before and may never come again.

 

[Saelune]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

Oh man, NWN was the highlight of my gaming life. It was so great playing on user made persistent world servers in the golden days. Met so many friends there and had such a good time. I sort of feel like I experienced something that never came before and may never come again.

On the RP server I mainly played on, I ended up becoming a rather powerful player villain, inherited basically a guild of evil, and my minion players and I were building up something great. Most players in real life knew I was a villain, but because it was an RP server, and he kept his villainy somewhat secret (and occasionally played hero) he was allowed to walk freely.

I like RPing, but nothing lets me do it how I want to, other than NWN. I see people RPing in forums, or in MMOs and its like...ugh, why would I want to do that? Its not as good as NWN was! *sigh*

 

[Nick Cave]

Huh? In one sentence you say that there's been a strive towards more action-oriented rpgs, then in another lament the lack of change in the genre. Those action rpg are an innovation on the crpg formula. Hell, you can even watch the progression as it happened in Bioware's case with each of their games becoming gradually less and less inspired by traditional D&D till came Mass Effect which eschewed D&D entirely in favour of being a straight up talky action shoot-em-up. It happened again in miniature form with Dragon Age as well.

Just because there are still more traditional crpg being made doesn't mean that there aren't evolution's as well. Even ignoring the obvious actiony AAA examples, you've got indie stuff like Banner Saga or Underrail doing neat things with the genre as well.

At this point games like Witcher 3 or Dark Souls and Pillars of Eternity are different enough games they might as well be a different genre, with a vague "RPG" label slapped on both.

Anyway, my point was that the general RPG has continued to evolve and take on new forms, whereas the CRPG seems to be a subgenre that hasn't budged a damn inch in over 15 years, and the "revival" the last few years doesn't seem to have added much to shake up the formula which I did find odd because stagnation is usually noticed fairly quickly.

 

[The Madman]

At this point games like Witcher 3 or Dark Souls and Pillars of Eternity are different enough games they might as well be a different genre, with a vague "RPG" label slapped on both.

Anyway, my point was that the general RPG has continued to evolve and take on new forms, whereas the CRPG seems to be a subgenre that hasn't budged a damn inch in over 15 years, and the "revival" the last few years doesn't seem to have added much to shake up the formula which I did find odd because stagnation is usually noticed fairly quickly.

And I argue that games like Witcher 3 are crpg. In the case of the Witcher you can again even see the slow evolution of ideas happening as it progressed from Witcher 1, which had an isometric perspective and used the old Aurora rpg engine, to the more action oriented but flawed Witcher 2 and finally the more refined Witcher 3. The change is easily visible.

Hell, to use an example from another genre shooters haven't really changed much since castle Wolfenstein, just point and shoot... y'know, except the ones that have but because they've changed we don't count them anymore. Or jrpg, in which clearly the genre has completely stagnated because stuff like I Am Setsuna is still being released. It's a faulty logic.

Also even within the 'hardcore crpg demographic' there are still changes aplenty. Things tend to generally be a lot more refined with more of a focus on character interaction than the old stuff like Ultima and Wizardry, which is where the roots of the crpg genre come from D&D aside. We've got games like Divinity: Original Sin with its novel combo-based abilities and multiplayer or the Shadowrun games with their XCom-lite combat and novel setting, while outside the immediate circle you've got neat stuff like Age of Decadence, Underrail, Banner Saga, Neo Scavenger, and a whole slew of others doing novel things with the genre.

Finally I think the reason this topic riles me up a bit is because I remember not so long ago, before the Kickstarter craze, when the 'traditional crpg' genre you're talking about now was all but dead. With the exception of Dragon Age: Origins there's a period where you just didn't see that sort of game anymore, and it's only through demand of people like myself that they ever came back at all. I'm just happy that stuff like Pillars even exists again, and given it's a sort of game only recently resurrected from the grave I'm willing to give it some time to see how things go.

 

[FalloutJack]

I think the most that I can bring to the table on this is that I like the current Fallout games. Of course, you could've guessed this. Also, I like the old ones too. I think that if it's handled well enough, it's alright.

 

[Pyrian]

Why, yes, games that are developed with the express goal of being more like older games, ARE more like older games.

 

[Zenja]

First off, most, if not all, writing is tropey. Even the stuff that isn't will eventually be copied and a new trope will be born and it will also become a trope. Tropes in writing are not a bad thing by itself and your statement concerning the writing being tropey as if it is inherently bad and also only related to CRPGs shows a level of malice toward the genre. I would challenge you to name an RPG that is not tropey writing.

Micromanaging gear is understandable which means you are probably more drawn to the newer RPGs that are more action based. Clearing dungeons for a side quest is not fun according to you but that makes me wonder if it is for the main quest if that makes it more fun. I have yet to see a moral choice option effect the game in the NEWER RPGs. CRPGs of yesteryear had the likes of Fallout 2 and Arcanum and honestly offer the best venue for moral choice consequence innovation due to budget. (No voice acting, 3D animating, etc.)

Since 3D RPGs have came out with Morrowind, they have gotten more simplistic in design and moral choice systems have become more of a joke than they ever were before with the 2D engines because they dont want to animate and voice the multiple dialogue paths. Even Mass Effect and the like have mostly the same responses no matter what you pick as a result. You could argue that newer RPGs have actually taken a step backwards going down the action game path and away from RPG innovation. As well, 3D RPGs came out at a time of innovation in the CRPG scene with branching paths.

However, so far I have yet to see anything new from the CRPG scene. So there is a valid point there. But I do think the CRPG format has more to offer in the way of innovation because it can be easier to budget in more content in the format.

 

[DoPo]

The RPG genre is evolving as evidenced by your own words. And in fact this

At this point games like Witcher 3 or Dark Souls and Pillars of Eternity are different enough games they might as well be a different genre, with a vague "RPG" label slapped on both.

is another evidence of the evolution. Sure, the games are wildly different. In reality, one would be hard pressed to compare those games individually and then come up with the conclusion that they are very similar, however that is due to the genre evolving. RPGs tended to be quite same-y because they were based on the same things, still, though, there are quite a lot of things in the RPG genre - some people like playing it for the loot, some like it for the tactical fights, others for the story, others have different reasons. In most cases it's some sort of combination of the previous factors, say, some people really like medieval-ish setting with magic where they can play as the noble knights. Others may like noble very clear heroes but in space. The genre has grown to accommodate both and more by providing more and more games.

Over time the different aspects have been emphasised and deemphasised and now you have Witcher 3, Dark Souls and Pillars of Eternity, heck, let's just throw in Deus Ex and Cthulhu Saves the World for good measure - they all stem from the same roots and broadly use the same trappings but are very different from each other. If that's not a clear sign of change and evolution, then I don't know what is.

There has literally been less change in, say, FPS games OVERALL than the change that RPGs have had in this millenium. It's a genre that keeps mutating. And again, yes, that does make the label quite murky but that's only because of the transformations the games have had.

 

[Trunkage]

Snip

Man, I don't think there were that many moral choices at all in Morrowind. Skyrim had more. Both Baulder's Gate had little choice as well. This was exemplified for me when I realised the ending of Witcher 3 was determined by two separate choices and nothing else mattered. There aren't many decision that have any weight to it in these games.

Now if you think there are some good moral choice to individual side quests, some people would point out the Witcher 3. But when I went through, you didn't actually decide much. You chose between a town or kids, the leader of Skellige, who survived Kaer Morhen, the ending, who you love and that's about it. (The Kaer Morhen one is a big one, with multiple flags and is probably the best). Morrowind also didn't have many impactful decision and you mostly just did boring fetch quests.

You could also say that you don't like Skyrim moral choices. I'd agree but I'd put Morrowind in the same boat. Morrowind is only better because you can kill main quest givers and get around it.

Morrowind skill is in the thing that was more simplified, but then if it means that I don't miss nine times out of ten, I'm probably going to pick Skyrim. Morrowind made combat unenjoyable and the first dungeon was by far the hardest (same with Daggerfall though). Also, Morrowind was the huge simplification - from Daggerfall. I remember the complaints about Morrowind from Daggerfall players

Side note, Morrowind was when the storyline/ ending issue started really cropping up for me. You got 4 choices of endings in Daggerfall then Morrowind comes along and say, nope, your choices didn't make a difference because all of them a true. Deus Ex: Invisible War did the same only a little while later. It complete tries to negate all your choice. Dark Souls is the same as well.

 

[Bruenin]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

You should try temple of elemental evil by atari. It's a really by the book adaption of 3.0 dnd, like all the classes work the same, you can even craft items with feats. It only includes core rulebook material. It also needs to have an unofficial patch to work properly.

NWN changed too much for me personally. Too many skills and new combat mechanics and it ruined my bards.

EDIT: missed the conversation you already had about this, sorry. Mobile escapist is really clunky and I struggle with it sometimes

 

[Saelune]

Snip

Man, I don't think there were that many moral choices at all in Morrowind. Skyrim had more. Both Baulder's Gate had little choice as well. This was exemplified for me when I realised the ending of Witcher 3 was determined by two separate choices and nothing else mattered. There aren't many decision that have any weight to it in these games.

Now if you think there are some good moral choice to individual side quests, some people would point out the Witcher 3. But when I went through, you didn't actually decide much. You chose between a town or kids, the leader of Skellige, who survived Kaer Morhen, the ending, who you love and that's about it. (The Kaer Morhen one is a big one, with multiple flags and is probably the best). Morrowind also didn't have many impactful decision and you mostly just did boring fetch quests.

You could also say that you don't like Skyrim moral choices. I'd agree but I'd put Morrowind in the same boat. Morrowind is only better because you can kill main quest givers and get around it.

Morrowind skill is in the thing that was more simplified, but then if it means that I don't miss nine times out of ten, I'm probably going to pick Skyrim. Morrowind made combat unenjoyable and the first dungeon was by far the hardest (same with Daggerfall though). Also, Morrowind was the huge simplification - from Daggerfall. I remember the complaints about Morrowind from Daggerfall players

Side note, Morrowind was when the storyline/ ending issue started really cropping up for me. You got 4 choices of endings in Daggerfall then Morrowind comes along and say, nope, your choices didn't make a difference because all of them a true. Deus Ex: Invisible War did the same only a little while later. It complete tries to negate all your choice. Dark Souls is the same as well.

Morrowind did not shove moral choices in your face like most games do now. It was more for your own sake, especially since you can murder literally anyone. There is a Mages Guild quest in Balmora where you are to get a High Elf's research notes. The quest giver makes it clear that the notes are all that matter, suggesting you just take them from him by any means. Or you can escort the guy to where he wants to go. Infact many of that specific Mage quest giver has quests with moral choices you can make. No good/evil meter gets effected or anything, but there are certainly more and less moral ways of dealing with it.

As for the endings, well, that is a difficult issue in plots that otherwise offer so much freedom. Any game with multiple endings that has a sequel faces that dilemma. Unless every such game wants to go Two Worlds 2 on it. (see spoiler tag)

Spoiler

At the end of Two Worlds 1, the bad guy basically says join me or die, and you actually can join him, evil ending, the end. Or kill him, good ending, the end. In the sequel, neither ending happens, because he beats you and imprisons you and thus 2 starts with you escaping the dungeon.

 

[Saelune]

Personally, I want more games like Neverwinter Nights than Baldur's Gate.

Or for Wizards of the Coast to just make a straight up DnD in computer game form. (NWN was the closest to that for 3.5)

You should try temple of elemental evil by atari. It's a really by the book adaption of 3.0 dnd, like all the classes work the same, you can even craft items with feats. It only includes core rulebook material. It also needs to have an unofficial patch to work properly.

NWN changed too much for me personally. Too many skills and new combat mechanics and it ruined my bards.

EDIT: missed the conversation you already had about this, sorry. Mobile escapist is really clunky and I struggle with it sometimes

Its fine. I probably should give it a real go, since as I said, I made my party, and basically stopped.