RPG's dying?

[cdexswzaq]

It's not dying at all. Simply, WRPGs are getting better and JRPGs are getting shittier.

I would rather say that they have been jumping up and down on the same spot for 20 years and that it might feel that they're going the wrong way since they aren't going any way.

[Drew]

Hopefully we'll get more JRPGs in the vein on The World Ends With You. Fun as hell, and a refreshing take on the battle system. Granted, most platforms don't have the freedom of an interface like a touch screen, I still think they can do better than what's currently out on this generation of consoles.

[fohfoh]

Too much cookie cutter business in the gaming industry. Think about it.

For ever decent game, there are games that copy it. There are usually 1 or 2 that might even come close to calibre, but essentially, it's 1 great, 1-2 chasers, a large rag tag of retards. Dynasty Warriors was sort of fun when it first came out. Then all the sequels chased themselves... then came the Samurai Version, then came the shittier games like 99 Nights, Heavenly Sword... etc.

Gran Turismo. Kept chasing itself. Sort of got better (debatable), then came Forza. What other sims are still screwing around?

Arcade racing... Too many to count. So many shitty ones.

RPGs... within RPGS are several sub genres. Many of you have listed some of the best versions... but seriously. How many failures have you seen? For every decent RPG there has to be at least 7-8 failures (easily). For the record... Demon Souls is a recent game that's a totally interesting piece of work. I recommend it. (But I'll be damned if you do not believe that the game is frustrating)

[sdedalus83]

For the record... Demon Souls is a recent game that's a totally interesting piece of work. I recommend it. (But I'll be damned if you do not believe that the game is frustrating)

And even Demon's Souls is just following in the footsteps of earlier Japanese roguelikes, like Baroque.

[wolkec]

For the record... Demon Souls is a recent game that's a totally interesting piece of work. I recommend it. (But I'll be damned if you do not believe that the game is frustrating)

And even Demon's Souls is just following in the footsteps of earlier Japanese roguelikes, like Baroque.

Demon'sssssssssss Souls >> http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1321-Demons-Souls

[fohfoh]

For the record... Demon Souls is a recent game that's a totally interesting piece of work. I recommend it. (But I'll be damned if you do not believe that the game is frustrating)

And even Demon's Souls is just following in the footsteps of earlier Japanese roguelikes, like Baroque.

Demon'sssssssssss Souls >> http://www.escapistmagazine.com/videos/view/zero-punctuation/1321-Demons-Souls

Ha ha ha. Perfect explanation of demon's souls.

[Futaba]

RPGs will never die. People like GRINDAN FOREVER too much. RPGs with cool next gen graphics are going to take a while to make because there's an expected 40+ hours of gameplay for most RPGs, not 6-8 like most other stuff that gets cranked out.

I really like Demon's Souls for an Action-y RPG (heavy stat and grinding reliance, but dying removes your gains so you have to be cautious and also not suck), I think it's pretty similar in style to the Monster Hunter series which is equally addictive I hear. I'm also interested in trying out White Knight Chronicles and the PS3 remake of Tales of Vesperia. I think The Witcher was the last PC/Western RPG I really was a big fan of, though Fallout 3 was ok (I didn't play DA: Origins yet). CD Projekt RED are awesome, releasing a total remake of a badly localized/translated game for free with tons of re-recorded dialouge and code fixes... that's absolutely a standup move.

These games take time, especially with the amount of work involved in making a next-gen title a real graphical standout and then coming up with decent characters and a decent plot that will last 50 hours or so for the average person. (and enough enemies, levels, and distractions to keep you from dying of boredom) Not being willing to put in that work is the reason most of the next-gen near-launch RPGs were not exactly standouts. I predict you'll see quite a few more RPGs in the next few years as the teams payed to do launch exclusives finish up their next title.

[rheffera]

If DA:origins is anything to go on, yes. The genre is dead to anyone who is over the age of 16.

[kyanwan]

RPGs will never die. People like GRINDAN FOREVER too much. RPGs with cool next gen graphics are going to take a while to make because there's an expected 40+ hours of gameplay for most RPGs, not 6-8 like most other stuff that gets cranked out.

WHAT?   May I remind you, one of the most lived, most epic, most perfect, most imitated RPGs of all time, was invented IN THE UNITED STATES by none other than the father of the ultimate RPG - Gary Gygax - yes, I speak of D&D.    D&D had infinite storyline - it's not about grinding, it's about enjoying the story, having some fun - having character depth.   6-8 hours of gameplay is NOT a game.   People are too un-creative these days.  

It's not dying at all. Simply, WRPGs are getting better and JRPGs are getting shittier.

Although, I clearly doubt that there will ever be another WRPG like Planescape: Torment (the greatest story in a video game of ALL TIME), there has been some great WRPGs this gen: Mass Effect, Bioshock, Dragon Age: Origins, to mention a few. JRPGs on the other hand are not holding up as well. The only great console JRPGs this gen are: Tales of Vesperia, Lost Odyssey and Valkyria Chronicles. (I don't consider Demon's Souls an RPG, mind you.)

THIS.  

IMO, The west invented the RPG - we did it - not Japan, Not Korea.   With awesome titles like Oblivion, Fallout, Mass Effect, Fable - we're taking our rightful place as the master of the RPG.  What level can you hit in the best game ever?    

20.

Level 20.    That's it.  Level 20.   You can hit L20 - but to become a master, you need to play literally forever.   Guess who World of Warcraft borrowed their leveling design from?   Yeah.   They borrowed it from the BEST of all time.   You can max out in no time, but how long until you're *really* maxed?   Exactly.   Ditto with all the best stuff - great gameplay isn't about maxing your level in 2 years of grinding.   It just flies over some people's heads huh.   If D&D were about killing kobolds 5,000 times over to make L10 - it woulda never made it to age ... 40.  40 years.   That's a long time for a game to live, isn't it?   They're doing it all wrong.  All of them.  

Even MMO - there's no contest.  Ours are bounds superior.  The foreign games, while they may make some great console stuff - they just can't *touch* US-designed games.   The best sellers across the board - the most massive titles ever - ALL made by the best.  

TBH - I haven't seen any J-made RPGs that I would have enjoyed playing since the PS2.   Nothing.  They're just cookie-cuttering the same crap out over and over.   No innovation at all.

----

You know, I never thought of Bioshock as an RPG - but now that I think of it. ... o.O

[Jesta23]

They're just cookie-cuttering the same crap out over and over.   No innovation at all.

I never understood the reason behind this.

Lets take the most popular game in America for example. Football.

30 years ago, it was almost the same as it is today. The only thing that has changed is the presentation of it. Football is fun, they know this, so they dont go out of their way to try and innovate on its game play, and come up with new ideas to to make it better. They take the current game, and replay it, giving it new story lines each year. (different teams doing better or worse each year.)

Of course football is not a video game, but why do video games have to be different? why cant something be fun just because its fun?

If you took any old rpg that was really fun, cloned it exactly,  and only changed the story, the characters, and the graphics engine. It would be another best seller. It would be a fantastic game. And most importantly, it would be fun again.

[Proin Drakenzol]

If DA:origins is anything to go on, yes. The genre is dead to anyone who is over the age of 16.

As there is no way this position could possibly be supported (as it is inherently false) I demand your specious reasoning be posted to the internet so that we may heckle and ridicule you.

[kardz]

They're just cookie-cuttering the same crap out over and over.   No innovation at all.

I never understood the reason behind this.

Lets take the most popular game in America for example. Football.

30 years ago, it was almost the same as it is today. The only thing that has changed is the presentation of it. Football is fun, they know this, so they dont go out of their way to try and innovate on its game play, and come up with new ideas to to make it better. They take the current game, and replay it, giving it new story lines each year. (different teams doing better or worse each year.)

Of course football is not a video game, but why do video games have to be different? why cant something be fun just because its fun?

If you took any old rpg that was really fun, cloned it exactly,  and only changed the story, the characters, and the graphics engine. It would be another best seller. It would be a fantastic game. And most importantly, it would be fun again.

Then you didn't clone it exactly, you changed it completely.

[Jesta23]

Then you didn't clone it exactly, you changed it completely.

Not the mechanics. Which is what a game really boils down to. 

Look at the halo series, very little has changed over the 3 installments. Other then story. Yet if an RPG tried to do the same thing, it would be trashed for lacking innovation. And called a cookie cutter game.

[agentspliff]

I miss the old days of D&D.  4th Edition is, well...  let's just say imho Pathfinder is was 4e should have been.  I wasn't a *big* fan of 3e, being a 1st/2nd DM, but it wasn't bad, and I used it a couple times to get non-gamers into it as a gateway D&D.  4e tossed the baby out with the bathwater.  And regardless of what Hasbro told us, the real reason wasn't to fix D&D or make it appeal to a wider audience, but rather to force people to buy more books. 

As far as RPGs on PC/consoles.... yeah, Planescape and Baldur's Gate are my faves, though I'll grant Dragon Age has it's moments, Fallout 3 is really nice, and I like Mass Effect.  JRPGs on console though seem to have been dragging.  I liked Chronotrigger, FF6, 7, and FF tactics, but after that it seemed that they started aiming at style over substance.  Don't get me wrong, there have been some interesting games, but...  nothing really spectacular. 

I'll admit, my Ps3 exists for fighting games.  Nothing else on console really has gotten my attention since the PS2 era.  (God, let them make Chronotrigger 3 or something...)

[Proin Drakenzol]

I miss the old days of D&D.  4th Edition is, well...  let's just say imho Pathfinder is was 4e should have been.  I wasn't a *big* fan of 3e, being a 1st/2nd DM, but it wasn't bad, and I used it a couple times to get non-gamers into it as a gateway D&D.  4e tossed the baby out with the bathwater.  And regardless of what Hasbro told us, the real reason wasn't to fix D&D or make it appeal to a wider audience, but rather to force people to buy more books.

I think 4e is far better than 3/3.5e and way closer to 2e than 3e ever was. I also think that Pathfinder is total garbage, but I always thought Paizo's stuff has kind of sucked giant donkey balls.

[agentspliff]

]

I think 4e is far better than 3/3.5e and way closer to 2e than 3e ever was. I also think that Pathfinder is total garbage, but I always thought Paizo's stuff has kind of sucked giant donkey balls.

I hate responding to obvious trolls, but I have to ask, how the heck do you figure that 4e is closer to 2e?

[Proin Drakenzol]

]

I think 4e is far better than 3/3.5e and way closer to 2e than 3e ever was. I also think that Pathfinder is total garbage, but I always thought Paizo's stuff has kind of sucked giant donkey balls.

I hate responding to obvious trolls, but I have to ask, how the heck do you figure that 4e is closer to 2e?

Heavier tactically, simplified and streamlined skill systems, better role/organization of classes.

Other reasons I like 4e: less attempt at "simulationism" and more focus on game balance, toned down wizards (and I normally play arcane spellcasters), beefed up martial characters, removal of class-alignment restrictions, removal of ECL (rather they release a balanced PC version or not at all), streamlined and simpler encounter design, better handling for traps, attacker rolls for all to-hits, the entire Power system.

It's not a troll at all, asswipe, it's my honest fucking opinion.

[TorturdChaos]

Personally I think they are dying out.  I guess I should clarify what I think of when I think RPG - because a lot of games list don't stick with me as RPG's.  I'm thinking of the Final Fantasy's, Shadowhearts, Star Ocean, Chrono Trigger & Cross - and Kingdom Hearts (more or less) - games like that.  While I love diablo 2, I don't really consider that style of game an RPG - nor do I consider Oblivion or Dragon Age an RPG - although I'm not sure what to call them.  Nor are Devil May Cry or God of War style games and RPG in my opinion.  More of an Action Adventure.

I actually was just thinking the the other day - man I haven't seen a good RPG in a long time.  maybe its just that my definition of RPG hasn't changed since I was 13 or so and first played FF7 and was hooked.  But I have agree my idea of a good classic RPG hasn't been put out in a while, and its rather depressing...

I mean when i look up RPG on GameFAQs i do see Baldur's Gate, Aion, Diablo 1,2 &3, Dragon Age, Fable  and so forth- but that doesn't stick in the classic RPG category with me


EDIT
Also -
Making a clone of the mechanics of a game does not guarantee a great RPG (not hit or top seller, but great.  It may be a top seller just because its riding the success of its predecessor)

Take Legend of Legia for example - first was was great IMO.  The whole Arts system of combat was well thought out, and different from anything around at the time - and I think is what really made the game, without the Arts system it wasn't a block buster game.  If they had tried the same game with a standard turn bases system, I think it would have failed.
Now take Legia 2.  New story, same combat mechanics.  But the story felt kinda lack luster i guess.  Didn't hold up to the first one.  Same innovative combat system, but not as great of a game.

[DaggerLite]

What most people seem to think of as a true RPG (including myself) is the typical linear but in-depth storytelling RPG. But aside from the fact that you can live into the role of the main character, there's very little role play in them. In fact, I doubt most people will even live into it unless the main character is really bland and generic. Personally, I never lived into any Final Fantasy characters at all, even if we had the occasional choice of dialogue. It's the great and epic story that makes a good RPG.

You still can't deny the fact that sandbox games have a much greater role play element in them, but this is an element I think most people are not actually interested in. Diablo(clones) and MMOs can't be denied their RPG classification either, even if it bases it's success more on gameplay than anything. You just can't say it's not an RPG just because they lack the aspects you're looking for in one: a somewhat linear and in-depth story.

I honestly haven't played that many typical RPGs as of late, so I can't really say whether the newer stories got through to me or not.

[kyanwan]

Here's something that I consider great in RPGs.  

Complexity combined with simplicity.   You should have a choice, to play either way, and have an equal amount of fun.  

If you want to be the ultimate beastly beast who tears up anything in-game, you can do it.  You can tune your character so insanely - that it just blows your mind away.   It's the most complex game out there.  

Go thru the list there -

- FF6
- Chrono Trigger
- Chrono Cross ( 40 CHARACTERS! )

There were deep storylines, crazy amounts of options, even many combinations to be discovered to enhance your gameplay.  They were well done.

Style over substance.

Fancypants graphics don't make a great game.   Too many are all about the FMVs, cutscenes, effects, etc - how much of your gameplay do these special things take up?   1%?  10%?    Look at one of the most miserable games of recent times ( yes, I played it finally - and it was disgusting imo ) -  MGS4.   What did they do all wrong?   There's no gameplay.  IT SUCKS ASS.

Too heavy on the feed, too weak on the interactive.

I liked Portable Ops more.  That's BAD.

People are forgetting what gaming is all about - it's about the gameplay.  It's about the fun.  It's about the depth of the game, discovering how to play better, building an advantage by using the game's built-in-depth ... to make you a better player.

Even some games with a great storyline - they've got just the beginnings of a storyline.   That's it.  

Hmm ...

makes me think a bit.   Who did the older RPGs?

Game designers ... or writers?

I see a game often mentioned as one of the best games of all time:  Chrono Trigger.  

Who did the story and characters for this game?

Akira Toriyama

What is Akira Toriyama?  

A writer / artist.

IMO - computer programmers are terrible for creativity ... outside of devising new ways to crunch numbers & process data.      The better they are and more devoted to the trade - the more they've got all of the personality of a doorknob.   Having the personality of a doorknob ... does not a good story produce.  

The people involved in these project designs - need to be purely creative.  If these titles are done by creative people & writers ... then they need better writers & artists.