Interesting topic, but a bit weird, to me CRPG's are games like GW1 a classic cooperative RPG, that it is on a computer seems a strange definition as the alternative after all is that it is a paper based game such as AD&D etc. which haven't really been all that popular for several decades now. RPG's is used mostly for Single player games, the Dragon Age games a good example, although Balders Gate/Icewind Dale are good examples, if not iconic ones of the early turn based RPG's based on, i think, 3rd edition AD&D. CRPG's took RPG's one step further and allowed multiple players to interact in the same game, Icewind Dale also had this aspect, although at the time it was a tad unreliable, but it was GW1 that really did CRPG's well to me, providing a central hub where players could form groups with strangers rather than relying on a limited pool of friends who had PC's and an internet connection.
Interesting. So where do you see the genre moving forward in regards to that point of view? Do you think it relies on multiplayer for the evolution of the genre?
I think there is plenty of room for RPG's and CRPG's, would i like to see more games like Witcher 3, absolutely, would i like to play a game like Witcher 3 with friends, or at least with a few other players, also yes. One of the huge problems with MMO's is costs, servers etc. with huge bandwidth requirements, queues, taking turns to hit on mobs for storyline reasons etc. etc. CRPG's can sidestep this, its cheaper to host a matchmaking hub than it is a gameworld after all, I am thinking that Anthem is that kind of a game, where you have the storyline aspect as a single player, some kind of hub where you can recruit other players before venturing out into an instance of the game world. Groups tend to fall apart after a set period of time after all, so rather than have that happen have the group sessions aim for maybe 20 to 30 minutes with predefined objectives. I think these days multiplayer is a requirement, CRPG's can give you the Social aspect normally limited to MMO's while giving more of the single player experience that MMO's can't. I think there is a lot of room for growth there.
@Phry, see, this is why I want a superhero shared world RPG. The weight and impact of the power effects can be better, the aesthetic appeal can be hotter, the combat can be more intense, and you won't ever stand around with 50 other heroes wondering what's so super about you when there's that many others here to save the day, too.
The issue is you just blindly assumed that those who like the games from those studios have never heard of nor played lesser known titles. That is a blind guess on your part. What makes you think that?
I really don't know how to explain better. I'll post my great analogy again and hope you read it.
----As I stated before, I don't know anything about French movies. But I know that a lot of people love them and there are more than two. If there were tons of articles about French movies, and they only mentioned Leon The Professional and Le Femme Nakita, two films that also were remade into US versions, and the discussion on the articles transformed to talk about Run Lola Run, and Pan's Labyrinth - would it be crazy for a someone to mention, "Hey, there are tons of French films besides those two mentioned in this article about French films, the same two that are always mentioned pretty much exclusively. If you like those two, you should check out other, lesser known French films that don't always get the spotlight." ----
So who do you think actually have bought these lesser titles? Obviously fans of the genre You are just assuming people reading that article or in this thread are outliers to the crpg genre and we/they have only played more well known titles. Once again, you are assuming and you are wrong.
The fact that we as fans of the genre have the option in the current landscape to play higher budget titles now after years of us playing low budget yet still good titles is a good thing. This article was about where industry professionals see or want to see the genre move forward.
Fantastic. How was my analogy wrong? How was it wrong to mention for the people who only look at the games mentioned in all these "crpg resurgent" articles that there are tons more games they could be interested in? Obviously, to you, the wrong place is in a fucking thread about fucking crpgs.
What the fuck are you going on about? Seriously? Are you saying that no one should ever mention anything, because even though it hadn't been mentioned you should assume everyone knows about it?
What exactly about what I said bothers you so much and hurts your butt so much? You keep saying I blindly did this or assumed that, while ignoring what I actually wrote. I made a beautiful analogy for you that explains it perfectly and you ignore it and tell me what I think. Instead of telling me what I think, try thinking and read what I actually fucking said.
Who do you think didn't buy these lesser titles that sold a lot, lot worse than PoE or D:OS? People that like crpgs but don't fucking know about games like Underrail, or even games like the two Drakensangs that would be right up their alley. Who do you think are the best people to mention this to that may actually check these games out?
If you are not willing to answer questions, and continue to just spout off about what I think, while ignoring what I said, or engage in adult dialogue, please just leave me the fuck alone.
Not sure why you are so angry. Maybe relax a little and step away from the keyboard? Obviously you are letting this get to you a little too much. It is kind of a silly reaction you are having. You derailed the thread by making suggestions instead of expounding on what the articles main point was which is the future of the genre, which is fine, but perhaps create your own thread for that? Just a thought Oh and smile! It is just a forum! No need to embarrass yourself
Sure. I derailed a thread about an article about the resurgence of crpgs by mentioning there are way more crpgs besides those made by the three specific devs that get all the attention on the topic. That is such insane gibberish, and, gain, covered perfectly in my analogy.
And I got angry because you attacked me and told me what I think, instead of reading what I said. Reply after reply. Over and over. I think its safe to assume that thinking and comprehension are just not your strong suit.
Oh and smile! Its just your brain! No need to use it
The article was not about the resurgence of crpgs more it was an article about where the genre is moving forward. Hence the name of the thread. Did you read it? Or are you just going to continue to attack and be petty? I never will understand people that feel so poorly that they need to personally attack other people online. Very strange reaction by you. I would have expected more from a father. Good luck to you and I hope you get some help and or some peace. Take care.
Why attack me then? You can try and worm and twist, but obviously I did not start the attack, tell other people how they think, or get angry at anything they posted, until I got attacked by people with poor comprehension.
The article was titled, "Clear 100 hours in your calendar, ‘cos CRPGs are here to stay."
Near the top of the article we have this blurb - "Then, around 2012, RPGs made a comeback, largely thanks to the rise of crowdfunding and an endless well of nostalgia. Since then we’ve been treated to heaps of good ones – Divinity: Original Sin, Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2, Torment: Tides of Numenera – and there are plenty more in the works. But there’s no guarantee that CRPGs are back for good."
You can twist, spin, and try to cast aspersions, but anyone older than twelve can read through the article, similar articles, and this thread to see my comments were 100% on topic and fitting - and I certainly didn't start the attacks, but reacted to being attacked for no reason other than poor comprehension by the attackers.
I'm with @Torval in that CRPG to me is just a generic term once used to differentiate all computer RPGs but I understand how it's used now to refer to isometric RPGs that feature a party of characters, are turn based or at least have some sort of pause option that you can use to issue orders.
I'm very happy to see how some of the bigger titles have broken through into the gaming mainstream in the past few years. This is a great development that should spur on more development and more innovation not just from the ones who managed to break on through but also from other less known developers who may bring even more fresh ideas into the genre.
I do have one reservation although it's just my own personal preference. Once upon a time I couldn't get enough complexity and detail in the games I liked whether in RPGs or the strategy 4X games I've also played for a long time. These days though I've sort of reached a point where too much complexity and too many options can be a turn off.
Take D:OS 2 for example. As much as I love the game overall, I found myself enjoying the early game much more than the mid or end-game and I realized the reason I was having more fun in the early game was precisely because my party's ability toolkit was somewhat limited to the extent that I found it easily manageable. Later on as more and more options, abilities and synergies open up, managing that started to feel more like a chore than fun.
It's probably just me but I want a happy medium balance between simplicity and complexity. Extreme complexity just isn't as much fun for me as it once was.
Jrpg used to refer only to rpgs made in Japan. Most blobbers are crpgs and are definitely first person. There are as many crpgs with a single character than with a party. Such as Underrail, Fall Out 1 and 2 (granted you can have a companion but without the new patches they were more of a hindrance than anything close to a real party), Age of Decadence, Eschalon 1 to 3, etc.
Now, if you look at the core of the games, or when the acronyms where used more to define genre/type of expected gameplay rather than medium or geographic place a game was made, you can see some commonalities. This is general, since there are many exceptions. But, after the early Dragon Quests and Final Fantasies jrpgs tended to have the following - no character creation, predefined cast of characters as your party members, and a 100% set narrative you have no influence on.
Obviously some early rpgs, like Ultima 5 - 7, had set characters for party members, and a generally set-in-stone narrative. Lands of Lore also, etc. But generally, if you went to Radio Shack or EB whatever rpg you picked up for your computer in the 80s and 90s you were going to make your own party. You could say the goldbox games had just as fixed narrative, as did most crpgs.
The difference being how the fixed narrative was presented. In p&p games the whole thing was about creating a character, banding together, and creating a story. Western rpg devs wanted the illusion you were creating a story. Jrpg devs didn't hide it or try to make illusions or ask you not to look behind the curtain. This game wasn't about you - it was about the characters they created. You advanced the story of those characters, not your story or your character's story. A movie sliced up with a game in between those slices.
In the early 90s is when I think the different genres started forming for real, but it didn't become apparent until after you had failure after failure of crpgs like POR, Arcanum, and MM9 (though Arcanum may have been due to it being pirated heavily six months before it was released). Western rpgs devs started making rpgs for the console and mixed the two schools. That is when the term crpg sort of became fixed, and was used by us who liked how things were a short while ago, versus what the new normal turned out to be at the time with streamlining and simple systems, very simple and easy combat, lite to almost no chargen/dev, and horrible console UIs.
But that doesn't mean there is not tons of diversity within crpgs or crpg games. One specific example that really bothers me since I seem to be the only one to see a difference is in dungeon crawlers. People group games like Legends of Grimrock and Grimoire together. To me, if a game doesn't have npcs, quests, shops, towns, or any dialogue how can it be grouped with games like Grimoire or MMX? It doesn't make sense to me. But, on the other hand, games like Realms of Arkania trilogy are grouped along with games like Tyranny and I agree with both falling under the "crpg" umbrella.
Crpgs are turned based or RTwP because they wouldn't be crpgs if they had action, or twitch combat. No one considered Al-Qadim: The Genie's Curse an rpg when it came out. Ultima Underworld, Legends of Valour, and Daggerfall were considered first-person action rpgs.
This is another generality I have noticed. People that like more narrative-heavy games, usually dislike creating a party and want recruitable party members and RTwP combat. People that want more open gameplay, a story that isn't on rails, and a lot of choice and consequence usually want either single character or full party creation and TB combat. In crpgs and generally, not specifically. But there is no doubt that the more popular brand of crpg is the RTwP with recruitable party members such as Ultima 7, BG2, PST, NWN2:MoTB, etc.
Speaking of RTwP - have any of you guys played Serpents in the Stagland? Or looked into the new game from the same people - Copper Dreams?
Arcanum is one of the best F-ing games ever made.
Go check out Balrum btw, its on Steam and you might actually fall in love. And M&MX isn't half bad either, as is Lords of Xulima. Different types of rpgs, all pretty good.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
'the only way he could nail it any better is if he used a cross.'
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
I'm with @Torval in that CRPG to me is just a generic term once used to differentiate all computer RPGs but I understand how it's used now to refer to isometric RPGs that feature a party of characters, are turn based or at least have some sort of pause option that you can use to issue orders.
I'm very happy to see how some of the bigger titles have broken through into the gaming mainstream in the past few years. This is a great development that should spur on more development and more innovation not just from the ones who managed to break on through but also from other less known developers who may bring even more fresh ideas into the genre.
I do have one reservation although it's just my own personal preference. Once upon a time I couldn't get enough complexity and detail in the games I liked whether in RPGs or the strategy 4X games I've also played for a long time. These days though I've sort of reached a point where too much complexity and too many options can be a turn off.
Take D:OS 2 for example. As much as I love the game overall, I found myself enjoying the early game much more than the mid or end-game and I realized the reason I was having more fun in the early game was precisely because my party's ability toolkit was somewhat limited to the extent that I found it easily manageable. Later on as more and more options, abilities and synergies open up, managing that started to feel more like a chore than fun.
It's probably just me but I want a happy medium balance between simplicity and complexity. Extreme complexity just isn't as much fun for me as it once was.
Jrpg used to refer only to rpgs made in Japan. Most blobbers are crpgs and are definitely first person. There are as many crpgs with a single character than with a party. Such as Underrail, Fall Out 1 and 2 (granted you can have a companion but without the new patches they were more of a hindrance than anything close to a real party), Age of Decadence, Eschalon 1 to 3, etc.
Now, if you look at the core of the games, or when the acronyms where used more to define genre/type of expected gameplay rather than medium or geographic place a game was made, you can see some commonalities. This is general, since there are many exceptions. But, after the early Dragon Quests and Final Fantasies jrpgs tended to have the following - no character creation, predefined cast of characters as your party members, and a 100% set narrative you have no influence on.
Obviously some early rpgs, like Ultima 5 - 7, had set characters for party members, and a generally set-in-stone narrative. Lands of Lore also, etc. But generally, if you went to Radio Shack or EB whatever rpg you picked up for your computer in the 80s and 90s you were going to make your own party. You could say the goldbox games had just as fixed narrative, as did most crpgs.
The difference being how the fixed narrative was presented. In p&p games the whole thing was about creating a character, banding together, and creating a story. Western rpg devs wanted the illusion you were creating a story. Jrpg devs didn't hide it or try to make illusions or ask you not to look behind the curtain. This game wasn't about you - it was about the characters they created. You advanced the story of those characters, not your story or your character's story. A movie sliced up with a game in between those slices.
In the early 90s is when I think the different genres started forming for real, but it didn't become apparent until after you had failure after failure of crpgs like POR, Arcanum, and MM9 (though Arcanum may have been due to it being pirated heavily six months before it was released). Western rpgs devs started making rpgs for the console and mixed the two schools. That is when the term crpg sort of became fixed, and was used by us who liked how things were a short while ago, versus what the new normal turned out to be at the time with streamlining and simple systems, very simple and easy combat, lite to almost no chargen/dev, and horrible console UIs.
But that doesn't mean there is not tons of diversity within crpgs or crpg games. One specific example that really bothers me since I seem to be the only one to see a difference is in dungeon crawlers. People group games like Legends of Grimrock and Grimoire together. To me, if a game doesn't have npcs, quests, shops, towns, or any dialogue how can it be grouped with games like Grimoire or MMX? It doesn't make sense to me. But, on the other hand, games like Realms of Arkania trilogy are grouped along with games like Tyranny and I agree with both falling under the "crpg" umbrella.
Crpgs are turned based or RTwP because they wouldn't be crpgs if they had action, or twitch combat. No one considered Al-Qadim: The Genie's Curse an rpg when it came out. Ultima Underworld, Legends of Valour, and Daggerfall were considered first-person action rpgs.
This is another generality I have noticed. People that like more narrative-heavy games, usually dislike creating a party and want recruitable party members and RTwP combat. People that want more open gameplay, a story that isn't on rails, and a lot of choice and consequence usually want either single character or full party creation and TB combat. In crpgs and generally, not specifically. But there is no doubt that the more popular brand of crpg is the RTwP with recruitable party members such as Ultima 7, BG2, PST, NWN2:MoTB, etc.
Speaking of RTwP - have any of you guys played Serpents in the Stagland? Or looked into the new game from the same people - Copper Dreams?
Arcanum is one of the best F-ing games ever made.
Go check out Balrum btw, its on Steam and you might actually fall in love. And M&MX isn't half bad either, as is Lords of Xulima. Different types of rpgs, all pretty good.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
I really wanted to play through Arcanum, but the date control scheme really got to me almost immediately. I guess you could say on spoiled by having easier to work controls and UIs these days.
It seemed uber-interesting in spite of the understandably dated controls/UI.
Go check out Balrum btw, its on Steam and you might actually fall in love. And M&MX isn't half bad either, as is Lords of Xulima. Different types of rpgs, all pretty good.
/Cheers, Lahnmir
I agree about Arcanum. I love it and played it more times than I can remember. But it did not do well. One of the main reasons being it was leaked about six months before being released, and all the people that pirated it didn't buy it. I also liked POR, which was also a flop, and thought MM9 wasn't all that bad. Besides Arcanum, ToEE and Bloodlines didn't sell like hotcakes and that is why Troika is closed, regardless of being my favorite game developers and making three games that have been proven over time to be rpg community favorites that all still receive updates, patches, mods from their communities.
I played and enjoyed Balrum more than I have any other crafting focused game. The world would make far more sense to me if Balrum and Stardew Valley switched popularities. But, I like rpg games and not crafting focused games. MMX is one of my favorite blobbers. I also loved LoX (for the most part, unreservedly with a steam mod that changed how mana worked (or the mana costs at least) and made low level skills far more useful and without feeling like you wasted points later in the game).
Comments
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
One of the huge problems with MMO's is costs, servers etc. with huge bandwidth requirements, queues, taking turns to hit on mobs for storyline reasons etc. etc. CRPG's can sidestep this, its cheaper to host a matchmaking hub than it is a gameworld after all, I am thinking that Anthem is that kind of a game, where you have the storyline aspect as a single player, some kind of hub where you can recruit other players before venturing out into an instance of the game world.
Groups tend to fall apart after a set period of time after all, so rather than have that happen have the group sessions aim for maybe 20 to 30 minutes with predefined objectives. I think these days multiplayer is a requirement, CRPG's can give you the Social aspect normally limited to MMO's while giving more of the single player experience that MMO's can't. I think there is a lot of room for growth there.
#pipedreams
And I got angry because you attacked me and told me what I think, instead of reading what I said. Reply after reply. Over and over. I think its safe to assume that thinking and comprehension are just not your strong suit.
Oh and smile! Its just your brain! No need to use it
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
The article was titled, "Clear 100 hours in your calendar, ‘cos CRPGs are here to stay."
Near the top of the article we have this blurb - "Then, around 2012, RPGs made a comeback, largely thanks to the rise of crowdfunding and an endless well of nostalgia. Since then we’ve been treated to heaps of good ones – Divinity: Original Sin, Pillars of Eternity, Wasteland 2, Torment: Tides of Numenera – and there are plenty more in the works. But there’s no guarantee that CRPGs are back for good."
You can twist, spin, and try to cast aspersions, but anyone older than twelve can read through the article, similar articles, and this thread to see my comments were 100% on topic and fitting - and I certainly didn't start the attacks, but reacted to being attacked for no reason other than poor comprehension by the attackers.
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
What, me worry?
Go check out Balrum btw, its on Steam and you might actually fall in love. And M&MX isn't half bad either, as is Lords of Xulima. Different types of rpgs, all pretty good.
/Cheers,
Lahnmir
Kyleran on yours sincerely
'But there are many. You can play them entirely solo, and even offline. Also, you are wrong by default.'
Ikcin in response to yours sincerely debating whether or not single-player offline MMOs exist...
'This does not apply just to ED but SC or any other game. What they will get is Rebirth/X4, likely prettier but equally underwhelming and pointless.
It is incredibly difficult to design some meaningfull leg content that would fit a space ship game - simply because it is not a leg game.
It is just huge resource waste....'
Gdemami absolutely not being an armchair developer
거북이는 목을 내밀 때 안 움직입니다
It seemed uber-interesting in spite of the understandably dated controls/UI.
I played and enjoyed Balrum more than I have any other crafting focused game. The world would make far more sense to me if Balrum and Stardew Valley switched popularities. But, I like rpg games and not crafting focused games. MMX is one of my favorite blobbers. I also loved LoX (for the most part, unreservedly with a steam mod that changed how mana worked (or the mana costs at least) and made low level skills far more useful and without feeling like you wasted points later in the game).