Lancer

Yep.. particularly in Serpent Isle, however, this was not attempted again until Torment (from my understanding).. And it is a mystery to me as why.

I agree (to some extent) but if this is so "common sense" knowledge why did it take so damned long to be applied to western RPGS? And there is a big difference between downright copying an already established precedent and being *inspired* by it. Sure there were other outside pressures to incorporate the said party interaction principles mainly in the form of people's PnP campaigns, but to deny the obvious importance of JRPGS as well in the movement is just being in denial. Think of it like this: You don't *have* to have obvious JRPG touches like cinematic movie cutscenes, pre-generated characters and (in the case of KOTOR) mini-games to have detailed party interaction. If JRPGS hadn't inspired the push for western RPG party interaction at all you would have detailed party interaction,yes, but you would expect it to be without any of the above JRPG elements. It seems too convenient and coincidental for me to believe that you could stumble upon those specific ideas without it being inspired by the eastern world.

This is true.. I might be mistaken but in general I have noticed on this forum that cRPG (with the lowercase c) refers to computer RPGS. CRPGS (with the uppercase) refers to JRPGS. But I do agree with your usage of "western" and "console" RPGS to avoid confusion more.

Well... It just seems too coincidental to me that the obvious JRPG inspiration in the "cinematic movie cutscences" and pre-generated characters, and in the case of KOTOR, "mini-games" for me to believe that the whole movement wasn't JRPG-inspired. No to mention that this is something cRPG players have been complaining about for years in regards to the "lack of party interaction" as compared to their JRPG counterparts. It is even stated in Torment's credits that the game was inspired by the FF series. And then after that we had games like BGII and Arcanum and later on KOTOR trying to emphasize party interaction more.

Yes and that is the main difference regarding party interaction between a modern cRPG like PS:T or Arcanum (ok, maybe not so modern anymore) and a modern JRPG like the FFs or Xenosaga. cRPGS modify it to fit in with its more non-linear gameplay but the party interaction concept was still inspired by JRPGS.

By the nature of the beast, the party interaction style of a cRPG has to be different from the party interaction style of a console RPG. A typical cRPG is all about choices and in theory more non-linear play than a JRPG... As KOTOR was designed to appeal to both console and computer RPGers it needlessly had to have elements of both. However, the obvious similarities are there... Whereas PC games before (with the notable exception of Ultima VII part II: Serpent Isle) for all practical purposes almost completely ignored any substantial party interaction, this has been a mainstay in JRPGS since well the 8 bit days. And I never said that "party interaction" was a bad thing. Quite the contrary, I think this is something that PC RPGS should have been doing all along.. Especially since many PnP campaigns have always featured such party interaction well before cRPGS finally caught on. It is about time, IMHO, since cRPGS supposedly have always been designed with an eye towards recreating the tabletop game on to the computer. EDIT: Who knows? Maybe there would be more JRPG players that would also play cRPGS had the party interaction concept been established in cRPGs from the get-go.

I did actually mis-speak about BG1. It has been many, many years since I played that game. I agree though this is something borrowed from JRPGs.

Yes it did. But does Baldur's Gate I follow the other 3 points?

Let's put it this way.. If the cRPG market "dies" it would make no business sense for a developer to continue pursuing a dead market. Certainly that doesn't stop someone from trying although they wouldn't stay in business long. Unless you want to make them.

In KOTOR, which tried to appeal to both gamers I thought the JRPG elements were quite clear... 1)A pre-generated character with a determined history (BlS' Torment did as well) 2)Many emotionally-driven cinematic movie sequences and cut scenes typical of JRPGS. 3)It even had the typical "min-game" (Pazaak) that is a trademark of console RPGs. 4) Like PS:T (which also had some JRPG influences) there was a heavy emphasis on the PC's interaction with his fellow party members. And in JRPGs, this fleshing of the PC's supporting cast is ubiquitous. You didn't really start seeing this trend in modern cRPGS until Torment. This was kind of started with Ultima VII but was not capitualed on until 1999. This trend toward improved character interaction, however, is something I deem good that we borrowed from JRPGs. Baldur's Gate only had #1 and Icewind Dale had none of the above. Although BGII had a little bit of point 4 continuing what Torment had started. Get this...KOTOR had even more JRPG elements than Torment did... And in Torment's credits the designers even admitted that the game had been influenced by the Final Fantasy series.

If there are no more cRPG developers then there wouldn't be any more cRPG games.

You are an honorable exception. But I am willing to gander that most console RPG players don't play CRPGs. This is why it would be a problem if cRPG developers decided one day to pack their bags and do what Bioware did. KOTOR and JE were both console games. So that is not surprising. And that actually serves to prove my point about Bioware slowly adapting to the JRPG mold. Just contrast KOTOR and JE with Bioware's earlier PC titles like Icewind Dale and Baldur's Gate. You see the difference? I haven't finished VtMB yet but from I have seen so far it is very much a computer RPG. Unlike KOTOR, it had no character with a pre-generated history (from what I can tell), the character creation system is open-ended like Arcanum or Fallout. It has more or less open-ended gameplay with your stats and skills affecting outcomes... It is rated mature because there is much violence, language, and adult themes that you just won't find in a console RPG.. The only thing truly different about VtMB from older computer RPG games is its FPP. But, yes, there is a push to abandon the isometric view in favor of the FP and Third Person views. That push, however, is one I have nothing against.

They wouldn't be made at all if for some reason the remaining cRPG developers either went out of business or went over to consoles. Developers would have to adapt their game-making strategy to reflect their new fanbase of console RPGers that don't play games like Torment and the Fallouts. And I am not blaming consoles.. I just realize that the console market is composed of gamers with a very different perspective on what constitutes a good RPG.

And BGDA? KOTOR and JE both had strong JRPG elements, although, I admit that KOTOR was very good. KOTOR especially was designed to appeal to both types of gamers so it is no surprise it would have fans on both sides. How about games with a more computer RPG feel than KOTOR? How about traditional open-ended cRPGs like the Fallouts, Arcanum, and Ultima VII? How about a cerebral game like Planescape: Torment? Do you think that developers would make those type of RPGs on a console?

So you don't care if in the foreseeable future the only RPGs around are linear JRPGS?

I didn't ever say that we should blame the average gamer. It shouldn't matter what the "average joe" prefers to play, as long as cRPG developers continue making games to satisfy their niche market... us. Things like Troika calling it quits and Bioware making the move over to consoles because that is "where the money is" concerns me. EDIT: Conversely, I don't see Square-Enix going out of business or going to computer-style RPGs anytime soon.

Some people seem to think that games that are serious and make you ponder and ask philosophical questions aren't as "fun" as those that are more lighthearted in tone. Simple, lighthearted games aren't the only ones capable of providing escapist fun. That said I didn't find Torment boring at all. Even though Chrono Trigger is by far the more cheerful of the two, Torment was by far more enjoyable for me to play. I've played a lot of action packed, comedic games that weren't fun at all.

You are welcome. A couple of years ago I went through a phase where I was reading and trying out different RPG Makers.. Explorations was my favorite. I never bought it , however, since it is a little on the expensive side. But if you can afford the full version, I think it would be a good investment. Here is a list of other ones though: Alexander's RPG Maker list

This is unfortunately very true. Pssst... Who is saying that PC RPGs ever dominated the RPG market? I do prefer CRPGs over console RPGS but I think most of us on this forum don't have any delusions of grandeur in this matter. CRPGS have always been a niche market and probably always will be. I doubt even the most staunch CRPG fan would argue the contrary. It is just sad IMHO that the "average gamer" prefers cute and cheery anime RPGs and pokemon to the more serious, adult (in general) counterparts on the PC. It is unfortunate and backwards IMHO, but then again, I know what I like and don't care too much if the guy next door prefers FFVII or Chrono Trigger over Planescape:Torment. That said.. Anything Final Fantasy bites the big one. My only concern is the PC RPG market dwindling to the point where developers no longer find making games in the genre lucrative. As long as there is a steady fanbase, I don't care how the console RPG industry is doing in comparison.

If illegal RPG Makers bother you good alternatives exist on the PS1 and PS2. You can obtain RPG MakerI or II respectively at a pretty cheap price. And both are pretty damn good at creating JRPGs. IIRC, RPG Maker I allowed you to make all your graphics, though, II didn't. The second one just came with a whole lot more pre-made avatars and graphics But like all these RPG Makers mentioned here, they wouldn't be good for computer-style RPGS. For something like that, "Explorations"would probably be a better choice.

Hmm.. What status page are you referring to? I have a menu that pops up with various submenus.. After I hit the "Servers" submenu I press the "add" button and type "irc.psionics.net" into a space and then I hit connect. There is a quicker way to do this? EDIT: Oh. you are referring to when you are already connected to the first server but wish to connect to another so then you would write /server servername to leave the first one and go to the second one.

Thanks Archmonarch and Loof.. I just figured out how to use irc.psionics.net and Boxcars for mIRC

Thanks! Where is this irc.psionics.net? Is this a server? I don't have that on my list so I am assuming i need to add it? Is the port still 6667? What do you put down for "Group" and so on.. or does it not matter?

Yeah!!! I just figured it out. I had to go on a different server and adjust the colors so that the results would be visible FINALLY! Lesson learned: The functionality of bots is very dependent upon which server you choose. Which servers out there are specifically for IRC RPGing?

The good news is that I was finally able to solve one of the problems. Apparently the server I was using to connect does not support bots. After changing to a different server, the dicebot actually does something.. yeah! This is what I get though: <Lancer> roll 1d6 <dicebot2> Lancer rolled: And after "Lancer rolled:" it is just blank.. What is going on here?