Ah but they will say "But its playing a role" so is halo, I play the role of Noble six and try to defend reach, its not an rpg. And choice dosent matter, look at ME1, end choice is
there arent consequences, the bad guy dies the same, any choices in 2 are shallow "ah yes we dissmissed that claim" what BS. (Oh they pulled that [censored] for DDA2 aswell, only guess what, its even more shallow, they litteraly just swap 2 words, and removed the epilouge making most meaningless choices more meaningless)
Another is to be polite or punch that reporter, again its meaningless, you still have to go through the smae crappy shooter mission to do that, its a game, meaning it should be defined by gameplay.

BW even shows its not your story in DA2, killed someone in DAO ? Not anymore you havent.

But hey aslong as people can have six with that socialy awkward/overly sixualised character they are happy.
I hate BW dumbing down rpgs, I hate it more they then get awards like "RPG of the year" when there are less dumbed down games that should have won, purely becuase they are more of an rpg.

Obviously people are stupid, but they apparantly seemed 'less stupid' back in the day, during the Golden Age of RPGs. Get a kid to play Wizardry 1 now, you probably couldn't, but when I was playing all those old school RPGs, it was nothing but kids playing them. I didnt even know advlts that played RPGs. Well, the kids from then are us now and we still like RPGs, the same cant be said for the generations to follow though.

Alpha Protocol, now thats a game were choices actually mattered somewhat.

I'd have been happy if I had been at your demographically wondrous school then.

I remember a line out the door when I picked up Mario RPG in 96. There was like 300 hundred people there at EB, all kids, or teens (like me). Lets see that many line up for any RPG now, except maybe a TES game, or a FF in Japan. Id also like to say that I dont think all kids are like X, or anything, not stereotyping etc. Nor is everybody in the world dumb sans me, just really dumb when they group together.

My personal favorites are things such as Final Fantasy games, Dragon Quest games, Kingdom Hearts, and Demon's Souls. I'd say Demon's Souls is an exception to the choice element (meaning there is quite a bit of customization and choices are actually very important) with the others providing a decent bit (though not as much as typical western RPGs) of choice in character equipment/fighting styles, but not personality or the way a character looks. Kingdom Hearts is something I would classify as being the farthest away from the traditional concept of western RPGs. Regardless, the choice in those games are, while limited, good enough for me. They just aren't very plentiful, I'd say, yet those games just captivated me for hours on end, somehow. Honestly, while thinking about it, I'm not entirely sure why, but I just liked them significantly. Minus the character look/personality customization, I'd say Final Fantasy games (particularly XII) actually play out very similarly to some of BioWare's games. Though, to be honest, I think BioWare's RPGs are very lacking the gameplay department in comparison, for some, inexplicable reason... resulting in me questioning the "G" part of BioWare's RPGs.

It may just be because I'm really tired, but I don't understand your point. What does it matter that they don't all line up? Maybe people today have more patients. :shrug:

Or are too lazy to actually stand in a line. Take your pick.

Lazy seems right.

"Why did all the local video stores die? I want a movie today."

"It's because people were too lazy to get up and get a game, so they all subscribed to Netflix, instead."

It's true, in my area. :glare:

Im talking about the demographic, there were more RPG gamers back in the day, then there is now. At least ratio wise. Not to mention 300+ people still go to game openings in my area, but its not RPGs they are lining up for.

Nintendo and Squaresoft can do that, yes. But you're again neglecting the change of times. I think if one would compare ten square miles of web store delivery addresses on release, you might get about the same numbers, if not more. Not statistically proven of course, but my anecdotal evidence is nearly inverse to yours. ^_^

€: RATIO. You mentioned it. Can't you combine this word with what I said about accessibility of games and needs of the industry? Surely you can see that, if the same group of people would like RPGs, but more people play games in general, the ratio would change a slight bit?

See, you're grasping the core of the issue, the weighting of RP against PG. Most Japanese games focus on the latter, while Western games always have been more about the aspect of role, and changed around this. We only see the development criticised in the OP link now since the industry is reachin many, many more people. The West is shifting and adjusting to bring out its strength, while Japanese games just didn't change that much. Most of those during the 90s and early 00s were recognisable offspring from old Ultima, D&D and Wizardry. Change in Japan was mostly one of style. Some series' didn't change at all, and Japan even has the only new Wizardry titles since the phenomenally grand W8.
But, as I stated already in the last thread, games that actually combine RP and PG to their fullest are very, very rare. Fallout and Arcanum are the most recognisable names.

I've been getting a few older RPGs on the PSP (remakes of Final Fantasy Tactics, Tactics Ogre, FF1 and FF2) and I'm enjoying them. The two latter are somewhat simpler, but the two "Tactics" ones are great. I don't think I'd ever really played a tactical RPG before, but I loved Ogre Battle for the N64 and the remake of Tactics Ogre was pretty much the only reason I bought a PSP (though the other games I mentioned plus some others were great to find as well). I wouldn't mind seeing more of that kind of game.

On Mass Effect: I love this series, but I wish certain aspects were a little more developed. It takes place in a large area of space but it doesn't really feel like the areas other than specific planets and quests areas really add much to the game. In Mass Effect 1 you could land on lots of planets and move around in your vehicle, sometimes killing enemies and finding resources, but it wasn't that atmospheric, and then in ME2 it was just probing planets for resources and then sometimes responding to distress signals. I also really liked the KOTOR games, so maybe I should give Dragons Age a try (since it seems I like Bioware so much - and yes I know that Bioware didn't do KOTOR 2).

I've played and enjoyed plenty of RPG's of assorted genres; Elder Scrolls, Final Fantasy, Fallout, Baldur's Gate, KotOR, Diablo, etc. I just don't think they should all be in the same genre. I often see people who are fans of the western style but HATE the Japanese ones. I don't think of any particular games in terms of what's not being made anymore, though I should note I haven't played the Ultima or Wizardry games (some of the old grandfathers of the entire genre). Rather, it's more a thing of no longer trying to emulate the massive choices available in a "true" RPG. In an older game I might try to enter a house through the door, a window, the chimney, etc. You mentioned buggy old games, and part of that was the effort to do too much. The older RPG's would have lots of features that were glitched or incomplete. I think what people are wishing for is games that try to make these features work, instead of removing them and concentrating on other features. Following this policy creates a theme of each game having "less", but also a theme of more polish, stability, and quality in what it does. You end up with some people preferring the newer ones, and others frustrated that companies increasingly don't "try" to give you all those options anymore. Daggerfall had some useless language skills, for instance, and a huge world you could have explored if there were anything in it. Morrowind had much better exploration and more useful skills; it also had less area and freedom, and fewer skills. Oblivion made it less likely to have abilities that were ultimately worthless, but it also had fewer skills. Factions were more complete and less filled with empty lines of dialogue hinting at things that never happen, but there were also fewer. Skyrim we know little about, but has fewer skills. There is a type of RPG, perhaps even the basis of the whole genre, that companies are less and less attempting to make. By filtering it out they may do a better job of making the game they are trying to make, but for the people who want to play that other type, the games are just getting worse and worse. You can't say "just play something else", because this IS the genre.

Often when things develop, whatever they started as is eventually no longer even part of the equation. What many people in America know as vanilla ice cream, has no vanilla in it. When given a sample of each, they often prefer the one that isn't actual vanilla. There was a "basis" RPG that the genre has been moving away from. Some people prefer the new one, and others see it moving away from the elements that made them like that flavor in the first place. It's hard to give any specific examples since it's just a gradual thing, no "this was an RPG and the next game wasn't", but that's how I see it at any rate.

Lets cut to the chase. You line up a bunch of kids from the 90s and from now. You think more people are going to grab the RPG or FPS? Giving them the choice of a decade equivalent (Obviously a 90s gamer would grab Crysis 2 over Secret of Mana, just because they'd never seen anything like that). Id say more will grab the shooter contemporarily. More grab the RPG in the 90s, 80s etc. Its not just the industry, its external force that have dumbed down our youth, given them little to no patience etc. I blame the drug companies and overt PC silliness that has taken over the US.

The three nerds from 1995 and 2010 take Ultima and Oblivion, respectively. The seven other people out of ten grab Duke Nukem and Call of Duty - if the ones from 1995 can be bothered to pick up such nerdy things at all. Looking at the sales of Dragon Age: Origins and CoD, this seems about right.
(Drugs? PC silliness? Explanation? Kidding?)

Combine that with the fact that creating something of visual attractiveness in 2010 takes four times the people and ten times the time compared to 1990, and you have the best explanation as to why developers have to do this. Under big publishers.

Me neither. Tactics Ogre is pure gold, as every Matsuno game.

Yadda yadda what could have been if he had not fallen ill during pre-production of FFXII blah blah. ^_^

Hey, hey. I said I loved RPGs, no?

Anyway, to give you a perspective from someone who currently attends high school five days of the week, I've gathered some knowledge about gaming among teenagers in my area:

1. Xbox 360s are really, really popular around here with a few PC players and PS3 players on the side. PS3s really aren't very popular around here. In fact, I think gaming PCs are more popular than PS3s.

2. The next Call of Duty or Halo game is typically the most popular. Some people are interested in games that combine RPG and shooter elements (such as newer Fallout games) while fantasy RPG and strategy games are rarely talked about... but I do know a small handful of fantasy RPG lovers in my school. I've never heard Japanese RPGs once get mentioned in my school, but I've had a couple conversations concerning Elder Scrolls games. One of the people loves WoW and mentioned the Dark Brotherhood as a favorite part of Oblivion. Another said he doesn't care for them much and likes more story-based RPGs. I believe he mentioned The Witcher. Also, even though it's not an RPG series, he recommended the Thief series. Strategy games have never been a discussion topic in my high school while I was around. I know one kid who likes Civilization games, but he told me back before high school. Girls typically don't seem to like video games as much as guys, in my school. There was one instance where a girl in my Biology class asked another guy why he liked video games so much. A couple other guys joined him in the explanation and all agreed on "shooting stuff". The girl said "that sounds stupid" and my inner RPG/strategy game/building simulator lover wanted to grind his teeth down to the gums. It was just one discussion they had and I didn't say anything because it wasn't my discussion to force myself into, but "shooting stuff" was the only thing they could use to describe why video games are fun? *grumble*

Anyway, throughout my general growing-up phase up until now, it's always been shooters and the occasional racing game that have been popular. I remember when people loved Pokemon, though. That was a fun time. I actually like Pokemon. I've always wondered who else was buying those RPG games off the shelf other than myself, though. A lot of the advlts in the area look down on games as unintelligent child's toys and a lot of the kids are focused on shooters instead of RPGs. Hmm...

In short, I'm a minority gamer, around here, with my PS3 and my RPGs and my Civilization games...

Bluntly put, it svcks. I can't share my excitement for the upcoming Skyrim with people I know in real life.

Then again, I don't socialize much, anyway, but I've overheard many a conversation in my short time on this planet due to listening taking up the place of talking.

Nerds are a sneaky bunch. The longer you stay out of the light of Lady Sun, the more Her rays hurt you. So old nerds avoid being seen, grab their games, and disappear into the shadows again. But that's a secret. Don't share it with those Box worshippers and their tan and sunglasses.

Well to be fair two of the three nerds also buy CoD. Back in 'the day' I think RPGs stood tall and maybe five out of seven 'other people' would give them a go - if only to find out why they were on the best-seller shelf in the store that week. With no preconceived ideas about them, they took them for what they were, and didn’t hold up genres to them to compare.

With little feedback for studios and publishers, probably the majority through sales, RPGs remained the same. It’s safe to say BioWare are working off the statistics of the social network... how many people who signed up and activated their games chose to play elves or dwarves? "Hmm, it seems 90% of our players chose a human character."

How many people completed the game?

What was the average time they’d played when they dropped it?

How many of those who completed it replayed it?

How many forumites coming from different quarters complained about combat, expecting something a little more...uh... action/adventure?

Oh and... how many of the players had also purchased and played Mass Effect, and how many forumites in the network, coming over from ME complained about the distinct lack of a voice on the protagonist?

Answers these questions with the stats on hand and you'll probably see a design sheet for DA:2. Human protagonist, shorter game-time, (I don’t think DA:2 even under heavenly circumstances would have been granted the development time DA:O had lavished upon it. It was always going to be shorter, in fact I’ve read interviews from devs saying they were too ambitious with DA:O "... it was too long.") and hit a button and something awesome happens. lol

Edit: I suppose it's a strong way to direct your business and products, with maybe a little hint of design by committee.

Again, ratios. There's more gamers than before, but the majority dont play RPGs (not that there ever was a majority, just saying that there were more). Really the arguing is silly. It takes five seconds to see that theres substantially less RPGs than in any previous era. Most of which are of a poorer quality than their predecessors. Whether it is the demographic or just the industry, we are in a RPG regression. Its blatantly obvious. No Im not joking about my latter statement. I cant take anyone serious that actually thinks we are in some kind of RPG pinnacle right now. If we are, then maybe its time for me to quit gaming.

Im not talking about any certain individual, just as a whole.

I'd agree, yes. It's just the first choice, I'd say. Have a few hundred hours of offline fun at your hands, or just six hours? You decide. ^_^

Anyway... For Dragon Age 2, the results from the online stats wouldn't really have been part of the initial design documents, as work on DA2 started about two months (iirc, from dev statements) before Origins was out. Then more and more people shifted from the DLC team, which I think is apparent in the somewhat degrading quality in those.
At any rate, yes, those stats will probably play a role in the future. But not in quite such a negative way. Necessarily. Statements about the stats for Mass Effect 2 were mostly followed by 'How could we improve those aspects so more people use them?' - most often cited of course was the very low number (~20%) of players who ever started a female Shep. Stats for ME led to Vanguard and Sentinel being extremely awesome to play in ME2, so it's not a bad thing at all that they have more direct feedback than the usual survey and consumer research procedures.
But yes, 'hit a button and something awesome happens' was kind of a clumsy way to put it. Sincere, but clumsy. I think that is rather admirable though, showing that the devs indeed didn't "sell their souls to the EA devil" or something. I'm especially fond of David Gaider lately, after he defended the less restricted romances against one of those standard white male devotees. Go rainbow! I'm babbling again. I'll shut up now.

I still think this upcoming year and a half is looking pretty good for RPGs. :shrug: I've got my eye on Skyrim, Kingdoms of Amalur: Reckoning, Deus Ex: Human Revolution, Dark Souls, Final Fantasy Versus XIII, and Final Fantasy XIII-2. Of course, that's just me, but that's an abnormally high number, it seems. Of course, if you're not into action-RPGs, those, alongside most modern RPGs, likely wouldn't interest you, but to be perfectly honest, I love RPGs that have real-time, intense combat. Of course, I'll take the general RPG elements in higher doses and have stats strongly affect everything, but the real-time, full control mechanics in a well-done action-RPG improve upon the, in my opinion, weakest part of the typical RPG and keep all the RPG elements I like, at the same time.

And there should be nothing wrong with that. Immersion is rarely achieved through spreadsheets alone. ^_^


(All this talk of statistics makes me hunger for a session of Academagia. But that beast devours my time...)

Sure, but its hard not to see that in an industry that is arguably at its height (gaming industry), we have the fewest RPGs of any era. We really only have two big RPG makers left, Beth and Bioware. The former only brings out a game every X amount of years and the latter arguably doesnt even make RPGs anymore.

I've got time and a disposable income... I'm easy. Get some BOOM! HEAD SHOTS! ... in CoD before donning my elven charms, and picking up my bow to prance around fetching things for folk for a thousand years.


lol, yeah I'm not in the group with the pitchforks, but man, EA is a total money-grubbing nightmare! It maybe doesn't get involved in the creative process, or put the chains on a studio, but its marketing is enough to smear BioWare's fancy coat in crud, also, release dates looming, I bet it goes from supportive partner to ferocious beeatch. :confused:

That was about nerds in upper school though. ^_^

EA marketing is pretty hit-or-miss, that I agree with. New [censored]? Nah. The Dante campaign? Grand. Slightly bad taste, but grand.

But there's good even in case the devs get annoyed and leave. Create a new studio, work small again. Surely you can find a publisher for a new project when you approach them with 'Hey, we're half the people who made Mass Effect and Dragon Age. Would you like to... Whoa, stop, that's enough cheques in my hands already! I'm not finished yet!'

Can't you tell, yet? I'm a really devoted Square Enix fan!

Then, there are the ones that are rising. They've got Ken Rolston working over at Big Huge Games. I don't know how long he'll be there, but he was the lead designer of Morrowind and Oblivion. The company making Dark Souls is also doing quite well, it seems. They have 200 developers working there, from the magazine I read. I'm no longer interested in BioWare's games, sadly, but I've got my alternatives. Of course, that's just the pessimist in me trying to be an optimist. However, I am a bit worried. From the Sony fan side of things, I know there were many more RPGs for the PS2 than the PS3, but it seems there are many more games, in general, for the PS2 and Xbox than there are for this generation of consoles. What's the reason behind that, increased complexity involved in making these more technically advanced games?


I am worried and it does concern me, but surely high quality RPGs will never completely die out. I have actually run out of RPGs I want to buy, though. I don't know how, but browsing the shelves at my local Best Buy/Gamestop, I realized there are literally no RPGs left on the shelves that I want. I'm not sure how to cope with this. I've never had every new game I want. There's always been something more that I want, but the RPGs seem so scarce that every mediocre one (Gothic IV, Two Worlds II) is a crushing blow and I have all the ones I want (available on a platform I have, I mean). If I had a decent PC, I would get The Witcher and if I had a 360, I would cautiously approach the new Fable games, but beyond that, I don't see much that interests me. I was always under the impression of "If I have money, it can buy me something good", but that's not the case, now... or at least it won't be until some newer games come out. I've got the HDTV, I've got the PS3, and I've got all the well-received RPGs for it that I can find and I have pretty much all that I want, more or less.

I never have a game to play. I'll blow through any RPG or strat game for the console in a week or less, then Im back at nothing. If this were the 90s, or 80s, we'd almost never run out of RPGs to play. Granted my PC could actually play games back then. I may rent the newest craze, but they usually lose my interest within a few hours. Years of gaming has refined my taste to elitist proportions. I wish I could be entertained by the average action game etc. but i cant. If Im not thinking, doing some sort of strategy, I find it a waste of time.