| |
Site Navigation
Main
News
Forums
Games
Games Database
Top 100
Release List
Support Files
Features
Reviews
Previews
Interviews
Editorials
Diaries
Misc
Download
Gallery
Music
Screenshots
Videos
Miscellaneous
Staff Members
Privacy Statement
|
|
|
|
Hexy
High Emperor
Joined: 28 Jun 2002
Posts: 621
|
quote:
So... do you guys see any CRPGs on the horizon that, in your opinion, look like they'll be true to their roots, ie not dumbed-down or cross-bred with other genres?
MAYBE Beyond Divinity? Although they'll have to make a WAY better attempt than their previous game.
MAYBE Metal Hearts? Fable? The Fall? Dungeon Siege 2? I sincerely HOPE they're not old-skewl, but rather actual RPGs, since I know old-skool and want nothing to do with it.
Then, of course, we have lots of MMORPGs coming, like WoW, EQ2 etc which, IMO, have even MORE in common with the TRUE RPG concept, than old-school games.
_________________
Like some bold seer in a trance;
Seeing all his own mischance |
Sat Feb 28, 2004 3:09 pm |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
| Re: First the dodo bird, now rpgs |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael C
TOEE had the slow turnbased combat which I prefer, but everything else in this game was below standard: No real main story (explore the tower???), bad side quests, boring and repetive and not to forget very small gameworld, only 8-9 levels upgrade with the already way to simple (Maybe not for P&P, but for CRPG's) D&D rules, tons of bugs.
I didn't think the side quests were that bad at all, and as for repetitive game world I disagree also.
I do agree with the simple D&D rules. D20 is not that good. But I really can't think of a system that is more complex for crpgs that has come out in the last 4 years. Gothics isn't. WIzardry 7 was, but wiz 8 streamlined it into noncomplexity. Same with Morrowinds. Lionheart's special system was nice, but the gameplay intergration sucked. I only played the Div Div's demo but it seemed pretty simple throughout.
I loved Realms of Arkania or Darklands or even daggerfalls character generation and development. Put if I had to pick a game that came out in the last 4 years that had the most important character generation and development it would be ToEE (as in regards to game play and game reprocutions). Kotor used d20 and pretty much made it so you can't gimp your character, NWN is basically the same (unless you're really an idiot). I really think playing dumb and making the wrong choices should end up with a gimped character.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Mon Mar 01, 2004 7:06 pm |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
| Re: First the dodo bird, now rpgs |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Roqua
I didn't think the side quests were that bad at all, and as for repetitive game world I disagree also.
1 medium and 1 small sized town, First new area "quest" is a little one screen only area with some rocks and a few trees, second area only grasland on approx. 2 screen sizes, and a big "ogre" or something, and then there is TOEE, and thats most of it. Sorry, but that not what I call exciting gameworld for explorations, but ofcourse it's a matter of taste.
Almost all the side-quest in the beginning town "the medium-sized one", are connected to each other, as one big side quests, maybe it's just not my cup of tea, all this running from door to door and choose new conversation topics over and over again.
I do agree with the simple D&D rules. D20 is not that good. But I really can't think of a system that is more complex for crpgs that has come out in the last 4 years. Gothics isn't. WIzardry 7 was, but wiz 8 streamlined it into noncomplexity. Same with Morrowinds. Lionheart's special system was nice, but the gameplay intergration sucked. I only played the Div Div's demo but it seemed pretty simple throughout.
D&D rules have "ONE" additional feast every 2-3 level, which are the only time you think about the development of your character, unless, you have played D&D before, when you now, that there is only one good way, and don't think at all. I agree that not many CRPG's in the last years are very complex in character generation/building, but Wizardry 8 was certainly one of them. I don't want to even start to describe how Wizardry 8 character system works in all it's complexity, as it would take more time than I'm prepared to use now, but 100's of gamers has started this game all over many times, because they had problem finding their best party, and make a better decision in developing their characters. M&M games also had a more complex character building system, and far more interesting than any D&D game (3.5 or not) IMHO.
Divine Divinity and probably "Beyond Divinity" don't have a special complex character develop system, but it has many other interesting CRPG features like: Interesting NPC's, Many different sidequest, huge consecutive gameworld and last but not least good main story. All issues that I did miss when I played TOEE.
I loved Realms of Arkania or Darklands or even daggerfalls character generation and development. Put if I had to pick a game that came out in the last 4 years that had the most important character generation and development it would be ToEE (as in regards to game play and game reprocutions). Kotor used d20 and pretty much made it so you can't gimp your character, NWN is basically the same (unless you're really an idiot). I really think playing dumb and making the wrong choices should end up with a gimped character.
I'm pretty much agree with you here, except ofcourse the part about TOEE, I wonder how you see any kind of complexity in picking a "feast" 2 to 3 times during a game
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:41 am |
|
|
Michael C
Black Dragon
Joined: 09 Jul 2001
Posts: 1595
Location: Aarhus, Denmark |
quote:
Originally posted by Hexy
MAYBE Beyond Divinity? Although they'll have to make a WAY better attempt than their previous game.
MAYBE Metal Hearts? Fable? The Fall? Dungeon Siege 2? I sincerely HOPE they're not old-skewl, but rather actual RPGs, since I know old-skool and want nothing to do with it.
Then, of course, we have lots of MMORPGs coming, like WoW, EQ2 etc which, IMO, have even MORE in common with the TRUE RPG concept, than old-school games.
What precisly, is your definition of "old school" regarding gameplay?
Personaly, I'm glad that newer CRPG's have introduced "Auto-maps", "Journals", "Quest logs", 3D with enhanced graphics, Quick-keys and overall more user friendly interface, but regarding gameplay, I still think old CRPG's (1985- 1994) have very good CRPG features, not all perfect indeed, but certainly also not all bad.
_________________
Moderator on RPGdot.com Forum.
Member of the Nonflamers guild.
Member of the Sport fan club. |
|
Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:57 am |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
| Re: First the dodo bird, now rpgs |
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael C
D&D rules have "ONE" additional feast every 2-3 level, which are the only time you think about the development of your character, unless, you have played D&D before, when you now, that there is only one good way, and don't think at all. I agree that not many CRPG's in the last years are very complex in character generation/building, but Wizardry 8 was certainly one of them. I don't want to even start to describe how Wizardry 8 character system works in all it's complexity, as it would take more time than I'm prepared to use now, but 100's of gamers has started this game all over many times, because they had problem finding their best party, and make a better decision in developing their characters. M&M games also had a more complex character building system, and far more interesting than any D&D game (3.5 or not) IMHO.
Wizardry 7 had great character creation, I think that was lost in Wizardry 8. The best race to pick for a samari is a hobbit, that is rediculous I think. I think Wiz 8 was a great game (minus the long, drawn-out combat) but it lost so much being streamed-lined it is sad. I probably spend more time playing Wiz 7 than any other game, and it drives me nuts that Wiz 8 dumbed it down. I loved rolling for points, and then finally hitting the big pool after rolling non stop for 30 minutes. Catiography skill, finding skills in game. Feeling like your character's are super special because you put so much time and thought and care into creating them. Wiz 8 lost all that. Wiz 8 was a good game but I look at it like DX2: IW, it lost a lot of what it could be to be more simple and appealing to those who find rpg's intimadating.
I played wizardry 7 before wiz 6, and actually went out and bought wiz 6 to restart wiz 7 with a better party. And I replayed wiz 7 when 8 came out to start 8 with a better party (but I still have never beat 7)(or 8 ). But my first Wiz was wiz 1 on the NES.
I agree with what you say on ToEE and d20, but putting thought into a party I find more necessary than in wiz 8. Maybe it is the rolling for stats.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Wed Mar 03, 2004 5:16 pm |
|
|
Namirrha
Noble Knight
Joined: 03 May 2002
Posts: 218
Location: Utah County, Utah. |
I don't quite understand why rolling for stats is more thoughtful or complicated than say an RPG-like system as Diablo 2 uses, which allows points distributed to many skills, creating countless variants on basic character classes. Rolling for stats is enjoyable, yes, but much in the same way gambling is--you're waiting for that jackpot. I'm not saying Diablo 2 is an RPG, because it has so many other undeveloped features which I find important in an RPG, but why is one type of char. creation considered classic "old school" and therefore better, versus one which gives more flexibility and evenness to char. creation?
_________________
Give me the shadows, shield me from the light, and I shall let nothing pass in the darkness of the night. |
|
Wed Mar 03, 2004 7:15 pm |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
Darklands had point buy and I think it had the best system of them all. I don't think rolling is intrisically better, I do prefer it though because I feel alot more personal towards my party.
Unless there are a lot of variables. I just downloaded the Harn rulebook and they have two systems for character creation, rolling or point buy. I would choose the point buy because there are still a million variables I have control over. But when it comes to wizardry, in all previos wiz games samaria, lord etc were all "elite" classes, you couldn't just pick them, you needed the jackpot. It was a lot more indepth in my opinion.
Like the difference between morrowind and daggerfall. Daggerfalls custom generation was so indepth and personal (and had some dice rolling also, the best of both worlds, just like Realms of Arkania), I feel Morrowind lost a lot of it by "streamlining and simplifying" (dumbing down).
I hate when sequals are dumbed down, and morrowind and wizardry 8 were just as dumbed down as DX2: IW was in my opinion.
Diablo had no character generation at all, it did have character devopment by skill tree that has a lot of variables. You could say Div Div has a similar system though different. Character development is important to me, but character generation is more important. It all comes down to choices and variables and the ability to make good and bad decisions. FO made it so you could be a super gimp if you didn't put the effort into understanding the special system. AO is the same.
In Diablo you can't be gimped, you can be specialized in a few things, or have a more broad array of abilities, but never really gimped (unless your a barbarian and decide to focus on intelligence or something as dumb).
I don't know if I'm explaining myself well, I really can't seem to focus today. But its not about old-school, its about choices and variables and learning and exploiting a system.
"but why is one type of char. creation considered classic "old school" and therefore better, versus one which gives more flexibility and evenness to char. creation?"
I dont think its about classic oldschool, Harn is new to me and I think its the best. Flexibility is great, but eveness I do not agree with. Eveness means balance, and balance means simple (or usually does). I like complex and uneven systems that reward the player who puts the most time, thought, and effort into learning, beating, and exploiting the system.
I'm not saying that that is what every one wants or likes, but it is what I want and like. You have to agree that RPGs have been becoming more and more dumbed down. FPS's like rainbow six are becoming more and more complicated, space sims like X2 are becoming more and more complicated, flight and racing sims are becoming more and more complicated. But RPGs, which used to be made for a more intellegent group, are being made for main-stream dummies. So it happens that the more intellegent and complicated games end up being the older ones (old-school)from a time when RPgs were more complex, and less fast-paced action games.
Thats just my opinion at least.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Wed Mar 03, 2004 9:10 pm |
|
|
sharp
Village Dweller
Joined: 13 Feb 2003
Posts: 16
|
quote:
Originally posted by hoyp
quote:
Warcraft 3........complex
sorry, couldnt resist
Obviously have never played professional/expert players. Though warcraft is FAR less than starcraft. Those of you that say it's a massfest/clickfest play BGH money maps/newbies or don't play at all |
|
Thu Mar 04, 2004 6:24 pm |
|
|
The Hulk
Avenger, Defender
Joined: 19 Feb 2002
Posts: 728
Location: Southeast U.S.A. |
Rpg's to look forward to in the future: Divine Divinity 2, Elder Scrolls IV, and Gothic 3. 
_________________
"Mr. Magee, don't make me angry. You wouldn't like me when I'm angry."
-Bruce Banner
=Member of the Non-Flamers Guild= |
|
Tue Mar 23, 2004 10:23 am |
|
|
xSamhainx
Paws of Doom
Joined: 11 Sep 2002
Posts: 2192
Location: San Diego |
It's what makes money that sells. People complin about old school Rpgs not being made, well the franchises have dried up. Buy the new Fallout console title, if they see a blockbuster hit, someone will provide the cash to make a real Fallout title. Same with Starcraft: Ghost. Ill pick that one up as well when it hits, I want it to be successful so someone will come up with the cash to fund Starcraft2 research. If enough people flock to see the Dawn Of The Dead remake, chances are someone will see a profit in making one more close to the original. Or even remaking "Day of.." or whatever, but doing it right. Or even finally a killer zombie-slaying game. These people need to pay their bills too ,if they dont see profit in something noone is gonna front the cash it takes to make an old school title.
edited-toned down language a little bit
_________________
“Then away out in the woods I heard that kind of a sound that a ghost makes when it wants to tell about something that's on its mind and can't make itself understood, and so can't rest easy in its grave, and has to go about that way every night grieving.”-Mark Twain
Last edited by xSamhainx on Sun Mar 28, 2004 5:56 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Sat Mar 27, 2004 10:38 pm |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
You're 100% right that developers need to eat but copying successful trends isn't always the path to success. Lots of developers in the RPG gamespace set out to make an action-RPG and emulate Diablo. How many succeed and how many fail? I can think of lots of failed action-RPGs -- Sacred is the only one I can think of in a long while that might really succeed.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Sun Mar 28, 2004 2:00 am |
|
|
xSamhainx
Paws of Doom
Joined: 11 Sep 2002
Posts: 2192
Location: San Diego |
Yep Dhruin, a bunch of copycats they are! That can be good and bad I guess, Im glad the RTS style and convention seems to be set as it is for example. I enjoy harvest/build/destroy quite a bit. But yes, RPGs have turned into action/rpgs for the most part. There is some degree where you really have to go with a proven formula as the owner of a company. People buying stocks in the stock market are going to see what stocks have succeded in the past, and go with it. Occasionally taking chance on a longshot stock might just pay off. Same in games. But, you gotta be willing to take the chance!
It very well may mean the end of your company, if you lose your shorts on a Fallout3 that doesnt even cover it's production costs. I think many people are just so cranky about it because potentially great RPGs that were supposed to be good, ended up being sub-par. Lionheart, anyone?
They need to watch that movie-themed bandwagon as well. Alot of resources that went to truly terrible games like Gods and Generals fps and a few others could have been used for far better games. Sea Dogs2 really ticked me off, I have no doubt they had to really comprimise their original product to meet the desired E rating most movie themed games seem to have to require. Once you have Hollywood bozos sticking there noses in the middle of a project, the chance for a flop increases tenfold.
But then again, pretend youre the owner of Bethesda, and Disney shows up with a huge check for your struggling business. Just to switch a few things around, and the title of course....
_________________
“Then away out in the woods I heard that kind of a sound that a ghost makes when it wants to tell about something that's on its mind and can't make itself understood, and so can't rest easy in its grave, and has to go about that way every night grieving.”-Mark Twain |
|
Sun Mar 28, 2004 5:35 am |
|
|
Roqua
High Emperor
Joined: 02 Sep 2003
Posts: 897
Location: rump |
quote:
Originally posted by xSamhainx
There is some degree where you really have to go with a proven formula as the owner of a company. People buying stocks in the stock market are going to see what stocks have succeded in the past, and go with it. Occasionally taking chance on a longshot stock might just pay off. Same in games. But, you gotta be willing to take the chance!
It very well may mean the end of your company, if you lose your shorts on a Fallout3 that doesnt even cover it's production costs. I think many people are just so cranky about it because potentially great RPGs that were supposed to be good, ended up being sub-par. Lionheart, anyone?
First, how would buying FBoS increase the chances of a follout 3 being made? It increases the chance of a fbos 2 being made. They will connect the shorter dev time and the action oriented game play on a console as the formula to stick with, and stick with it. If you want PC RPGs to be made, buy PC rpgs. I'm glad FO3 was cancelled, it had RT combat. I'll wait for a dev team to pick it up that will make a true FO 3 with TB only. I would not like to see a Jagged Alliance 3 that is RT either. Or a Wiz 9.
Second, your stock buying example is in no way related to actual stock buying habbit. "People buying stocks in the stock market are going to see what stocks have succeded in the past, and go with it" As opposed to buying cattle in the stock market? Worldcom stock succeded in the past, will people go with it? What if the corp you are looking to buying stock in was a cash cow but is now mature? Mature corps usually grow less than, but at no more than the rate of GDP. In order to value a stock you need to pick preffered or common stock. The contract that coverns preferred stock is that they pay divedends per year with no maturity date (like a flat payment perpituity). In the formula that people use to see if they want to invest in that stock the need to plug in their own required rate of return. So the formula looks like this P=dividents payed/my personal required rate of return.
Common stock valuation is a lot harder. First you need to estimate the corps cash flows (by book value, liquidation value, or discounted cash flow models((they all have some work to figure out and then you have to accuratly choose constant growth or non-constant or both and when to use which)). Then you need to estimate your own personal required rate of return you need for investing. Then model it as a perpetuity. The formula would take to long to explain so I won't.
The point of that is to prove that you do not look at a corps past, you look at their future. Also what you want as a return is factured in there. To secure capital you need to know the questions capital backers will ask before trying to secure it. And the backers look at 3 things and have the ratio analysis all done, and if you do not have good answers for the questions they have from doing the analysis then you will not get capital. The look at solvency (claim on assets), profitability (return to owners), and liquidity (ability to meet current maturity obligations). Dev teams like trokia do not have the time or resources or people to get capital from anything but a publisher. Game publishers are not known for their business savvy or wise decisions. Games is a market that has abusable customers that come back for more. They can screw us and make money so they do.
Some examples would be the interview with the past owner of NWC on how the corp he sold his dev house to valued his game and forced him to develop. There are 5 million examples of how immature and plain dumb the gaming market is.
But saying old school rpg market is dried up is like saying opera or classical market is dried up. Just because it is not a cash cow like Briteney Spears, doesn't mean it is not profitable. Briteney makes money, should all music producers only go after Briteney fakes? Should hollywood only make TErminator 2 clones? LoTR would never have been made, and guess what? Producers had no idea LoTR was going to make that much of a return.
What was the last big budget turn based game made? ToEE was not a big budget game, JA2 wasn't, wiz 8 wasn't.
This punisher coming out had a lot bigger budget than the last one, which will do better? If x-men didn't have a big budget, would it have made money? If the same director of House of the Dead directed Resident Evil with the same budget would it have made money. You have no idea if the old school rpg market is gone since there is no reccent game to compare it to.
Is the treasure hunter movies like Indiana Jones dead or dried up? Run Down did well. How about spy movies or war movies? You could have said war movies was a dried up market before Saving Private Ryan. Or the rpg market in general before Diablo or Baulders gate or Fall Out. Making generalized assumptions about a market with no substance is rediculous. Where are the numbers or the examples? Give trokia a 10 million dollar budget to make a real rpg and I would bet my genitalia they would have a hit that is profitable. ToEE had a pretty good return and was a rushed buggy mess with hardly any marketing and horrible reviews.
Game devs are pushing their money on the mass market and aiming at the 8th grade level. What if the music industry or movie industry or even liturature industry did that? That is a bad model in the long run. Look at all the people that liked FO, JA, and games of that ilk on this site, we maybe don't have the numbers as games aimed at 8th garders, but we are numerous enough to make a semi-large budgeted "old school" rpg profitable. And we have the disposable income being older.
I could go on forever, but I will end here because no one is probably going to read this any way.
_________________
Vegitarian is the Indian word for lousey hunter. |
|
Sun Mar 28, 2004 7:09 pm |
|
|
Dhruin
Stranger In A Strange Land
Joined: 20 May 2002
Posts: 1825
Location: Sydney, Australia |
I agree. It may not be as big a market as others but the mass-market is filled with wannabes - it's hard to stand out. The old-school RPG market is wide open: a quality entry has the whole market for themselves.
But xSamhainx is right to a point. Big titles are routinely heading to $8-$10 Million to produce with the biggest games blowing out to ridiculous numbers (Half Life 2 > $40 Million). A hard-core RPG probably needs to be < $5M which just isn't enough for the big publishers to bother. We'll have to hope smaller publishers like Encore, Enlight and Strategy First fill the gap.
_________________
Editor @ RPGDot |
|
Sun Mar 28, 2004 10:32 pm |
|
|
corwin
On the Razorblade of Life
Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Posts: 8376
Location: Australia |
Roqua, one of the best posts I've seen you write. I agree with you too. Imagine the sales Gothic 1&2 would have had if they had the marketing clout of a big publisher.
_________________
If God said it, then that settles it!
I don't use Smileys, I use Emoticons!!
 |
|
Mon Mar 29, 2004 8:12 am |
|
|
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
All times are GMT. The time now is Thu Apr 11, 2019 4:29 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
