But the #1 reason that CRPGs aren't dying...

[EnderAndrew]

Throughout most of the history of RPGs we've gotten hackfests. People act like like titles like Fallout used to be the norm, when they weren't. They never were.

 

How many titles have we really seen like Planescape: Torment?

[alanschu]

I can see your point. Many games that I see as being "typical" CRPGs are the Gold Box games like Eye of the Beholder and whatnot.

[Lancer]

I don't think we are in a dark age now. I do agree with Ender in that throughout the entire history of western RPGs, hack and slash games were always the norm whereas "true" RPGs like Fallout, Torment, Arcanum, Ultima VII, BG series and the like had always been in the minority.

 

That said it doesn't imply that the western RPG market couldn't plunge into some sort of dark age. What bothers me is that in the past we didn't used to see computer RPG developers designing RPGs for both PC and the consoles... Nowadays, we are beginning to see this more and more. This is a new occurrence as far as I know... And it does concern me that it is uncertain what this change in business strategy means in the long run...

 

At worse, it means that the console industry is slowly (gradually) swallowing up the PC RPG market. At best, it means that PC RPG developers' pockets are getting fuller while they are satisfying both the PC and console fanbases.

 

 

 

How many titles have we really seen like Planescape: Torment?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

To be truthful.. There really hasn't been another RPG quite like Torment

[EnderAndrew]

If we going to plunge into a Dark Age, I think it would have happened after Diablo. It had huge success, and while there have been some clones, RPG houses stuck to their guns to put out proper RPGs.

 

People slam Morrowind all day long, and surely it was flawed, but consider this.

 

Bethesda implemented community suggestions and actively supports their fan base. They released mod tools, plenty of patches, and don't just abandon games after release. They spend plenty of money and time trying to make the best possible game they can make. They released ambitious projects and strive for nothing less than greatness.

 

There are developers out there that aren't just striving for hack-and-slash games. They are trying to make good RPGs. Troika sure tried despite the flaws in their games. Bioware tries despite the flaws in their games.

 

I'm seeing a lot of smaller development houses in Russia and Europe with RPG projects, and more and more indie projects. This is not a dark age.

[Lancer]

Yeah.. But what is your take on the current situation regarding many RPG developers that are starting to make console RPGs as well?

 

I guess the future of computer RPGs lies with the smaller development houses eh?

[EnderAndrew]

They have to get paid, right?

 

I think you can have a great RPG on a console as well. Or maybe the console RPG makes the company enough money to finance the ambitious PC RPG.

[Lancer]

I think you can have a great RPG on a console as well.  Or maybe the console RPG makes the company enough money to finance the ambitious PC RPG.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Hard drive space is an issue for consoles though. And secondly, the console market is a completely different beast altogether. I wouldn't expect a game like Fallout or Planescape Torment to ever come out on a console.

 

 

They have to get paid, right?

 

As long as there is a fanbase.

[alanschu]

My take is to not worry about it.

 

Bioware still has a PC only game in development, and it sounds more ambitious than any of their previous projects.

 

 

Furthermore, I see increased exposure for console RPG players to play RPGs that aren't just like the JRPGs and whatnot. It lends more to the validity of western RPG styles. I'm optimistic that Fallout 3 will do the same, should it be released on a console.

 

 

I guess the future of computer RPGs lies with the smaller development houses eh?

 

As clearly indicated by companies such as Obsidian working on NWN2, Bioware's Dragon Age, and Bethesda's Oblivion.

[Lancer]

Furthermore, I see increased exposure for console RPG players to play RPGs that aren't just like the JRPGs and whatnot.  It lends more to the validity of western RPG styles.  I'm optimistic that Fallout 3 will do the same, should it be released on a console.

 

This would be a dream come true.. Usually it is the other way around though.. In my experience it seems that PC RPG players are more likely to play console RPGs than console RPG gamers are to play PC RPGs.

 

If games like KOTOR could manage to convert a few of those anime freaks then it would certainly serve its purpose.

[alanschu]

I think the only reason why a console RPGer would be less likely to play a PC RPG is because he doesn't own a gaming PC.

 

It's still a move to a style of game, regardless of what platform it's on.

 

 

After all, Final Fantasy games no longer feature anime characters with horribly exaggerated features like FF7. They still have a similar art design, but games like FF8 and FFX seem to indicate a trend towards more realistic looking characters.

 

KOTOR 1 and 2 were both insanely popular sellers, and have been the gateway RPG for gamers such as GoA. Many people I worked with loved the open ended, do whatever you want style of Morrowind on the XBOX as well.

[Tigranes]

Agreed. Furthermore, FFVII was a leap in and of itself. The fact that it was the first Final Fantasy to pretty much explode the US market testifies to that fact.

[EnderAndrew]

Hard drive space is an issue for consoles though. And secondly, the console market is a completely different beast altogether. I wouldn't expect a game like Fallout or Planescape Torment to ever come out on a console.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ultima 7 came out on the SNES. You could release Fallout on a console if you really wanted, but people choose not to.

 

You can fit quite a bit on a DVD, and the PS3 is getting Blu-Ray. Between the HDD, and the disc, you can fit quite a bit of content. And console RPGs aren't afraid to spill over to multiple discs.

 

How is storage space a limiting factor again?

 

And last time I checked, people were playing Morrowind for 200 hours, on a single DVD on the XBox.

[Cantousent]

I think having the storage capacity to install an entire game is a benefit. Maybe it's not everything, but it does make a difference. What makes a huge difference for me are the controllers. The controllers just suck compared to a keyboard and mouse. On the other hand, I love being able to sit back on my favorite chair and play a game on the xbox.

[EnderAndrew]

Being able to install to a HDD is nice, but that doesn't mean you can't design a game with depth on a console. Lancer seemed to imply the HDD size was directly proportional to the depth or quality of a game.

 

Dungeon Siege 2 looks to be several gigs, and thusly must be proportionally better than Planescape: Torment!

[metadigital]

I disagree with your analysis and your conclusion.

What a surprise. I also disagree with--- wait.. You don't have an analysis and conclusion.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ah, trolling, I see.

 

My conclusions are quite clear: the game industry is not categorised as you (arbitrarily) indicate; it is a much more homogenous organism; in short: you are jumping to false ones.

My analysis is independent of equipment concerns. It is based more on my assessment of overall trends in the gaming market. Whether they are right or wrong. And I wasn't advocating the end of PC RPGs, in that post you quoted (or in any) , I was just merely stating there that designing story-driven PC RPGS is a good idea.. And one that was inspired by JRPGS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

If that is all you are saying, then I agree it is a good idea. (But I would argue that you are guilty of apopheniac tendencies.)

Secondly, your conclusion is specious.

Ok.. I am still waiting for your better one.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, you are either purposefully ignoring it, or too dim to see it. If the former, then I have already explained above (vide ut supra), if the latter, then I can't help you.

And how many ingenious RPGs of the calibur of Torment and Fallout do you know of that have been sprung by independent users?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Therefore it will never happen? Is that your conclusion?

 

Well, you may draw that conclusion, but I don't. That sort of logic would have us conclude that there will never be another OS, for the PC, other than Windows ... oh, what's that? Linux! :D

For the final piece of evidence, notice that all consoles are propreitary (and fixed hardware specifications) systems, and all of the games from redundant consoles is now available, through emulation, for the PC.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

And this is evidence for what exactly?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Are you saying that there are no emulators for consoles?

Even if such things as strong narratives and party interaction were inspired by JRPGS, it doesn't take away from the fact that this has made western RPGs more enjoyable, and should be fully integrated.  The way you phrase it seems like the inclusion of such things is foreshadowing for a doom and gloom slippery slope of all games becoming linear JRPGs, when I see the addition of those elements as making PC RPGs stronger and more viable.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Exactly. Even if we accept your intial proposition, Lancer (that occidental cRPGs have been inspired by oriental console JRPGs), why does that foreshadow the doom of the PC platform for RPGs?

KOTOR and Morrowind that were RPGs that didn't just win RPG of the Year, they won tons of Game of the Year awards, and many action titles are starting to implement RPG elements because it is popular.

 

There are boat-loads of RPGs on consoles that people on this forum are usually too proud to play.

 

RPGs aren't in a dark age.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Translation: the computer RPG is far from a dead genre; not only is it thriving, it is interbreeding with every other genre. You may rest easy, there is no cause for alarm. Rumours of its demise have been greatly exaggerated.

 

(Apologies to the estate of Mark Twain.)

[metadigital]

It seems to me one might just as easily argue that party banter and complex NPC dialogue came to CRPGs by way of the Adventure genre and its offshoots and hybrid incarnations, as by way of JRPGs.  Actually, the prior strikes me as the more credible claim, since Adventure genre design concepts informed so much else in the development of story-focused and character-driven western RPGs.

 

Realistically though, I think it's silly to draw a direct causal link to any one source.  We can give credit to those who did it first (If I had to guess, I'd say the first arbitrarily in-party character dialogue interaction was probably that of various Infocom text adventures), and that's all well and good, but attributing all subsequent precedent in party banter and NPC interaction to whatever first precedents are to be unearthed is just silly.  Having characters talk to each other in a character and story driven RPG is just common sense.  Maybe CRPGs which employed in-depth character interaction early on applied principles they'd seen in JRPGs or Adventures, but on the other hand, maybe they were just applying principles completely generic to every single PnP roleplaying game since the beginning of time.  It doesn't take much creativity to stumble upon this particular notion.  Merely to apply it.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

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?

...

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.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It takes a long time for anything "different" to be utilized in a successful business model (i.e. building a RPG that sells to a market segment giving a set ROI); risk is an extravagence not regularly indulged in any business, much less creative ones like games. In other words, the publishers asked the developers to produce "the same thing that worked last time".

...

Things like Troika calling it quits and Bioware making the move over to consoles because that is "where the money is" concerns me.

...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Where did you get this inference from?

...

But this begs the question.. Why are unfortunate events  like this so commonplace in the PC RPG industry? Why does the PC RPG market seem so unstable as compared to the console side of things?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Risk. Poor management. Obviously there are a lot of creative types running development houses: good for creative games, bad for the bottom line.

...

But why is this constant re-shufflng of companies so common in the PC RPG industry? ...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Happens in all markets to all types of businesses, even well established ones. Look at Marconi, founded by the discoverer of radio, in business for a century, then insolvent in a couple of months, due to poor management.

...

I don't see Square going out of business anytime soon. There may be mergers but bankruptcies don't seem to run rampant like in the PC RPG industry.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Lancer, I would like to introduce EA to you ...

EA are nothing if not good managers; their products can be anything from dreadful to exceptional, but they complete projects to their deadlines.

[metadigital]

While I haven't actually played Morrowind, I find that most RPGs these days are mostly glorified hackfests and little else. People call games like Dungeon Siege or the Diablo games RPGs, and in my book they just aren't, because there's no role-playing in them. KotOR games aren't even what I'd call real CRPGs, since the stories are exceedingly linear... But they at least have deep and interesting plots, and that helps a lot. For real CRPGs, I play Fallout or similar...

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Polite suggestion: play Morrowind. It is mentioned frequently for a reason. It is totally open ended gaming: you can do anything at any time with anyone. You can even kill characters that are crucial to the main plot. (The game tells you so afterwards, giving you the option to quit and restart.)

[Jediphile]

I don't think we are in a dark age now. I do agree with Ender in that throughout the entire history of western RPGs, hack and slash games were always the norm whereas "true" RPGs like Fallout, Torment, Arcanum, Ultima VII, BG series and the like had always been in the minority.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I think I began that by saying we're in "a bit of a dark age", since I don't feel the cRPGs that are being put out today are as good as some of those we've seen in the past (Fallout, Torment, Ultima...). I may have given others the impression that this *is* a dark age, though, or that I think it definitely so. My point was more than I think quality and depth (and plot) is suffering at the expense of graphics and visual combat in RPGs, and therefore many of the alleged cRPGs today are, to my eyes, really just "semi-cRPGs" - glorified hack-fests with few roleplaying choices. KotOR has a genuine choices (DS or LS) toward the end, but there are only two, and that's about the only genuine one. At all other times, it's a question of whether you want to back the lock open or pick the lock with Security - disrupt/detonate or collect the mines, etc... Your choices are few and have next to no lasting effect on the game.

 

At worse, it means that the console industry is slowly (gradually) swallowing up the PC RPG market. At best, it means that PC RPG developers' pockets are getting fuller while they are satisfying both the PC and console fanbases.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Yes, it may seem so at first glance, but there are several factors that we should take into consideration before we simply accuse the devs of wanting to make more money, though they will go where the money is - they're companies, after all, and those exist to make money, and preferably more than before...

 

I mean, examine a classic cRPG like Fallout 2. How long was the production schedule for that, how many people worked on it, and how muc did it cost to make? I don't know, but it wasn't anywhere near to what it costs to make a game like K2, even though that was rushed and unfinished.

 

Metadigitial has accused me in the past of thinking that voiceacting is far more expensive than it really is. Fine, let's say he's right. Even if he is, it will still cost more to produce K2 on the voiceacting front alone, since there is lots of voiceacting in it. Indeed, all text is spoken in K2 except for item descriptions or datapads and the optional conversation paths for the main character. In Fallout 2, voiceacting of any kind was rare, and you only saw it on occasion (those infamous talking heads). So clearly is was less costly to produce on this basis alone.

 

In fact, Fallout 2 uses text only to tell the majority of its plot and background to the player with only the occasional "talking head" and short movie. In K2 you expect *everyone* to talk (and they do) and you expect to see movies almost constantly (and you do). This means more programming, more graphics to produce, and more voiceacting.

 

Or look at graphics. Fallout 2 was simple 2D maps and graphics. That won't be tolerated today - everything *must* be in a 3D representation today, or it will have no chance to sell.

 

Today writing a computer game is a major undertaking - we're usually talking about 25+ people working full time throughout the production schedule, and as others have said, giving a schedule of a "mere" year will raise eyebrows and meet skepticism, since the team doing the work knows that it is an exceedingly tight timetable.

 

In short, the cost for making computer games today has soared to the skies because the standard for what must be in those games is so much higher now - telling the story to the player through text is no longer an option. It's ancient and the market simply won't tolerate it.

[Lancer]

I think you misunderstood my second point. I am aware of the fact that production costs are much higher than they have been in the past and I am not accusing developers of "greed." It is natural that developers would want to make more money now than before to compensate for the increasing standards.

 

My argument is that the last few years represent a new trend where western RPG developers are also starting to design console RPGS. My question is the following: What does this mean?

A) Does this mark the start of a gradual conquest of console RPGS over western ones? Or

B) Is this just a natural response by developers to compensate for the aforementioned rising standards in graphics and development costs today?

 

Ok... let's pretend for a moment that point "B" is what is really happening...even if this is so, wouldn't the other RPG companies soon follow suit? Also, if developers happen to find console RPG making to be far more profitable why would they even continue making western RPGs in the future? This is especially dangerous knowing that the established console market does not tend to play western-style RPGs anyways which would make it quite a formidable task to make western RPG gaming a viable option on the console. It seems to me the developers would have to conform more and more to the JRPG standard as time goes on creating new games that will never again be like the Torments, Fallouts, Ultimas..etc.

 

Yes, there are smaller companies out there also making western RPGs. But if the market shrinks so much in the future that it just isn't profitable for would-be PC RPG developers then they would have to resort to other ways to making a living.... Like consoles.

 

Now, I have yet to hear a single argument from anybody explaining why this latest trend with Bioware and Obsidian and others also making console RPGS does not signify the beginning of a disturbing trend:

 

The gradual expansion of the console market and the slow atrophy of the western RPG market.

[Musopticon?]

But how we classify the recent happenings in the crpg genre is entirely subjective. I don't classify it as athropy, but evolvement.

[Lancer]

Ultima 7 came out on the SNES. 

 

SNES Ultima VII is actually the proto-typical example of how memory storage place was/is a concern for consoles. :D In the SNES version, much of the gameworld was taken out, dialogue was shortened tremendously and to make a long story short was pretty much one of the worst RPG ports in the history of mankind. SNES Ultima VII was a *very* simplified version of the PC classic and it did it no justice.

 

Since you bring up the SNES... Genesis also had memory storage issues with the Phantasy Star series. Unable to make a full 3D version of Phantasy Star II, they had to resort to a top-down perspective due to memory issues.

 

If playing simplified re-makes don't bother you then be my guest.. But I prefer to play the real thing.

 

You could release Fallout on a console if you really wanted, but people choose not to.

 

Yes.. And what is the reason that they choose not to? Aside from hardware considerations, console gamers look for completely different things in an RPG. Fallout is loved by PC RPG enthusiasts but most console gamers in general wouldn't be appealed by such a title. It is no wonder why most console RPGS play the JRPG variety whereas most PC RPGers play the "western" RPG variety. This is a pretty conspicuous divider between the two fanbases that would first have to be taken down before the console can become a serious platform for playing western-style RPGs.

 

BTW, releasing a Fallout game today would have to conform to the correspondingly higher graphical standards. I hope you are not implying to release the old Fallout on a modern console today.. It would simply not be received well by console gamers.

 

 

You can fit quite a bit on a DVD, and the PS3 is getting Blu-Ray.  Between the HDD, and the disc, you can fit quite a bit of content.  And console RPGs aren't afraid to spill over to multiple discs.

 

How is storage space a limiting factor again?

 

Even if memory space was not an issue that wasn't the only problem. You conveniently ignored the other far bigger problem I had mentioned which was getting the console fanbase to like traditional PC RPGs. No point in having all that technology if you can't get the fanbase to like the games you wish to make for them.

 

And last time I checked, people were playing Morrowind for 200 hours, on a single DVD on the XBox.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

I have never played the console version of Morrowind. How faithful is it to the PC version? It is not like an SNES Ultima VII I hope?

[Musopticon?]

Discounting the lack of mods, nothing is changed in xbox Morrowind. I know; I've played both.

[Guest Fishboot]

Discounting the lack of mods, nothing is changed in xbox Morrowind. I know; I've played both.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Well, there's patch support - and Beth sure wasn't stingy with the Morrowind PC patches.

[Lancer]

@ metadigital.

 

*sigh* Why even bother?

 

Seeing as that you *completely* missed my point and totally made up whatever random inferences from my posts as you felt like, I don't think I am the one with the apopheniac tendencies.

[Lancer]

Being able to install to a HDD is nice, but that doesn't mean you can't design a game with depth on a console.  Lancer seemed to imply the HDD size was directly proportional to the depth or quality of a game.

 

Dungeon Siege 2 looks to be several gigs, and thusly must be proportionally better than Planescape: Torment!

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

 

Where did you come to such a conclusion? Are you apopheniac as well? :D