List CRPG ingredients by their importance to you.

[crpgnut]

From reading all the G3 loving and Oblivion bashing on the forums, I thought I was at the Codex. I'm still not sure, but I thought it'd be fun to list what is important to me in a crpg and compare that with the list of folks who prefer Gothic. Gothic is missing one of my main requirements so it's a B-game at best for me. However, several people will find my requirements to be unimportant so that Gothic can and is an A-list game for them :)

1. Character creation- This is my Gothic killer. I want to pick what I look like, what I'm wearing, my race, my skills, my classes. I don't want the game to force these choices on me. If I pick, it's my role-playing game. If it's forced upon me, it's their role-playing game. Big difference.

2. Exploration-I want a huge world to play in with lots of things to find. Variety is nice here, but not the end-all be-all. If I find 50 dungeons, even if similar, all is good. Item collection fits here too. I want to find stuff and then....

3. Item manipulation-This includes things like alchemy, crafting, spell building, lever puzzles, weapon and armor upgrades, etc.

4. Plentiful magic power- I want to be Pug of Crydee, or Belgarion of Riva. Not some little hedge witch who can cast 10 spells. I love games where you fill a
spell book :)

5. Stat/Ability/Skill manipulation-I want to tweak my character lots of times over the whole game. I want to see in-game effects of my gains in these areas.

6. Quickly resolved combat. Very few games have done combat so well that I enjoy multiple minute fights with each group of monsters. ToEE is an exception here. This is what I hated about Wiz8. It was the weakest aspect of the Ultima series too.

For me, story and memorable npcs are plusses. Neither are necessary for a good game. I loved Questron, Phantasie, Wizards Crown, etc back in the old days and none of these games had much of a story or any npcs. I made up the story myself with my imagination.

I'm a leveling-explorer crpger. I like things that increase: stats, skills, item abilities, etc and uncovering the black. These are my favorites in any game.

[dteowner]

Actually, your list is decent for me. I would cross #6 off the list, and #4 wouldn't be a major player (although I like that sort of thing), but the rest look good to me. I would add something about not being able to get "100's in every stat" as well. I love the way Wiz8 and MM7 forced you to choose and lose skills--no character/party could master every skill in the game. Force me to make some hard choices in character development!

[crpgnut]

I would add something about not being able to get "100's in every stat" as well. I love the way Wiz8 and MM7 forced you to choose and lose skills--no character/party could master every skill in the game. Force me to make some hard choices in character development!

I agree completely. MM7 was such a great game. Wiz8 lost me on the long combats but I'm going to replay it one of these days with the Wizfast mod.

[HiddenX]

for cooking a rpg u need

00) making choices with consequences
01) character development / many stats with an impact on the game
02) finding / buying / selling lots of different equipment (unique items, rare items)
03) a good nonlinear story - interesting main quest
04) great challenging dungeons / locked doors / chests / traps
05) riddles / hard too find secrets, items / mysteries
06) lots of fun, humor
07) cool spells
08) lots of conversation, conversation options to solve quests and avoid combat
09) (round based) interesting challenging combat with many options
10) interesting NPCs with a background
11) NPCs with a schedule
12) fantasy world with conflicts to solve
13) different races (groups, guilds) with various occupations
14) chance of winning prizes, medals, houses, ranks ...
15) deadly cool arch-enemies
16) making weapons and spells
17) many (not necessary) side-quests
18) much world interaction / manipulation
19) eastereggs
20) free world, setting borders with harder to beat enemies and hard to find items (keys), only.
21) good (non breakable) economy model
22) many different groups with different goals -> choose your friends and enemies
23) for party crpgs: interesting (funny) dialogs with your partners
24) surprises and twists, more than one story path

...

[txa1265]

This is where things get tricky - because for me story is at once all-important and unimportant. It is not a linear equation of independent variables ... there are interactions all over the place ...

[txa1265]

19) eastereggs

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/B00005UM20.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

And of course we all forgot the most important thing:
- Scantily clad women with oversized chests.

[chamr]

@txa: don't start getting all Shock on us! ;)


And of course we all forgot the most important thing:
- Scantily clad women with oversized chests.

You forgot to add "wearing the ever-popular impossible battle bikini"

[txa1265]

@txa: don't start getting all Shock on us! ;)

Hehe ... I just couldn't resist with the Easter Eggs comment ... I know what he means, but just got silly.

[magerette]

HiddenX, you should be making games(if you aren't) or at least consulting. If a game had even 75% of your list, it would mop the floor with most titles.

To parallel crpgnut's list:

1. Character creation:
For a single character crpg, I'm okay with a semi-pregenerated character, though I do like the gender option. But in some games, the story requires a protagonist to be a certain person. That's okay, as long as there are options to shape that char as you progress.
For party based crpg's, I want complete control, to roll and create all my own characters, including voices, appearence and class. I hate forming parties with generic NPC's, or NPC's who are merely there to advance the plot and serve no useful purpose.

I'm going to have to talk shorter or this post will be ten pages ;)

2. & 3. Yes and Yes

4. Bigger louder yes..(mage-erette you know) I prefer spells of mass destruction, but good specific buffs are also quite cool--as in IWD where those howling dead girls could decimate your party with a fear effect unless you had a specific counterspell.

5. Definitely-especially like crpgs that allow your skills to improve through use as well as by merely killing things and leveling.

6. We part ways here. The more strategic and complex the combat, the more attractive I find the game.(This probably stems from being initially a tb strat gamer) I need the battles to be involving enough to make me use all those hardwon skills, spells and abilities and wish I had more. This ties in with #15 on HiddenX's list--the archenemy. A lot of Baldur's Gate was redeemed for me by Jon Irenicus.

Exploring, looting and pillaging, honing skills and the feeling that the world has a great many unknown things to offer -good and bad-are what lure me on as well.

Finally, most importantly--consequences. The whole game is meaningless without the feeling that what you have chosen to do & be has a genuine effect in the game world.

Great idea for a thread, crpgnut.:)

[MasterLich]

Just one thing to add to the ones mentioned above: feeling of progress within a reasonable time. If I play a CRPG the whole evening without gaining a significant level (or improving the character otherwise) or progressing the storyline, things start to feel tedious. Same thing with a linear storyline and having to reload time after time trying to get past certain enemies without an alternative way to progress or go away and come back later. This is why hack'n slash stuff doesn't interest me anymore, as the nature of the whole game approaches that of a shooter.

Choices/consequences and a feeling of achievement are maybe the most important attributes for me in a CRPG, and they are related to the progress described above. Storyline is also important, but there are so very few newer games with a great storyline that I'm wondering if there are any people with ideas left.

[Corwin]

I love Hidden X's list!! WHat a game it would make. NUT, while I understand what you mean about character creation, I think I side much more with magerette. I may not get to determine what my Avatar looks like in Gothic, but I can develop him exactly HOW I want, so in effect I am CREATING the character continuously throughout the game and I don't have a problem with that. I hate been given a character and being told- this is a fighter and he will only be a fighter!! I don't buy games like that.

[cutterjohn]

Basically a copy and paste with comentary and re-ordering(slightly):

(I'll start here as I have approximately zero interest in what the OP considers to be character "creation"...)
1. Character creation- This is my Gothic killer. I want to pick what I look like, what I'm wearing, my race, my skills, my classes. I don't want the game to force these choices on me. If I pick, it's my role-playing game. If it's forced upon me, it's their role-playing game. Big difference.
(IOW off the list it goes as what a character looks like and how customizable it is, is just a cheap gimmick to me... sort of like full voice acting...)

1. Stat/Ability/Skill manipulation-I want to tweak my character lots of times over the whole game. I want to see in-game effects of my gains in these areas.

I moved this up to 1, as I consider this more to be the character creation that I enjoy. I do like to have a fair number of options for character creation, especially if the game doesn't really use a class based system. Also I would add in class/race selection here if applicable. This was always one of my favorite parts with RPGs back in the day. Oblivion failed me here by reducing an already shrunk skillset to almost pathetic levels.

2. Exploration-I want a huge world to play in with lots of things to find. Variety is nice here, but not the end-all be-all. If I find 50 dungeons, even if similar, all is good. Item collection fits here too. I want to find stuff and then....

Again, have to agree, I love being able to wander and explore the "world" that has been created for the game, which is probably why I actually sort of like Morrowind, and originally, thought that I might be able to stomach Oblivion...

3. Plentiful magic power- I want to be Pug of Crydee, or Belgarion of Riva. Not some little hedge witch who can cast 10 spells. I love games where you fill a
spell book

Magic is fun, IF it is a fantasy setting. I like to play mage or cleric characters in one char games, and always have both in party games. Yes, part of it is the utility that bring...

4. Item manipulation-This includes things like alchemy, crafting, spell building, lever puzzles, weapon and armor upgrades, etc.

Not nearly as important to e, but a nice gimmick if well done.

6. Quickly resolved combat. Very few games have done combat so well that I enjoy multiple minute fights with each group of monsters. ToEE is an exception here. This is what I hated about Wiz8. It was the weakest aspect of the Ultima series too.

OK, here I have to say I don't agree with at all. Long cobat usually means that the encounter is NOT a push over and that my char or party is having to work at winning, or may even be in over their head. These are things which I appreciate in RPGs. Again, Oblivion failed this test for me.

[GothicGothicness]

Already many great lists I'll make a rather short one, I could make a couple of 1000 pages though :D

0) NO BUGS ( Impossible I know... buit well as few as possible )
1) FUN! ( isn't this why we all play games? )
2) Story and setting ( If the story or setting is horrible I tend to lose interest... unless there is a lot of 1 )
3) Challange Easy == Boring
4) Variety ( Generic a la Oblivion no thanks )
5) Explore and freedom
6) Choices
7) Character development, wizardry sets the example here.
......

Wow I will stop otherwise I'll be up all night.

[Acleacius]

Yes, all very good list especially HiddenX's maybe you all should get together and make a game, while I focus on the vixens! :p

#1. Scantly clad vixens!

Oh wait, I got distracted what was the question again? ;)

[Lucky Day]

I gotta go with GothGothicness'esesess response.

the game must be
Entertaining
Intriguing
It must make me think

Or at least make me think by entertaining or intriguing me. This is why I also like Adventure games - ones that are not just a series of puzzles strung together with a thin veil of being connected.

A game must have some sort of intrinsic value that doesn't just seem repetitious and soulless to me.

I can enjoy a linear game if its interesting. Open ended games can lack direction. This is why games like Ultima IV and BG's work and Morrowind doesn't. They have a main quest that overarches all the others but you can go about it anytime you wish.

On the opposite end the Icewind Dales work wonderfully. Its intriguing story motivates you towards the goal (the two expansions for the first one fail though). The FF's are just silly button pushing - the games and and cutscenes seem disconnected. Playing is sort of like a lock to get to the next one - one that I'm not the least bit interested in. Playing it is sort of like watching those really long scenes in Matrix 2. Neither the action scenes or the story is all that interesting - its just in love with itself and the money it managed to spend on it.

Diablo 2 is like that too. It failed to keep my interest after 3 days.

"Sundance is weird. The movies are weird. You actually have to think about them when you watch them." - Brittney Spears

[JemyM]

CRPG did not mention NPC's and Companions which is important for me.

I like "self-thinking" companions that do not need to agree with the main characters every time they speak. Preferably companions with interesting backgrounds that might also better themselves throughout the game. It's ok if you do not have direct control over them as long as you can follow their stories next to the main characters own story.

Not many games have offered this though. Baldurs Gate 2 did for sure, Gothic 1-3 did, KOTOR ofcourse, Planescape Torment, Fallout & Dungeon Siege II. But I cannot come up with more than that right now.

[Geist]

In order of importance:

1. Story (Well developed characters, dramatic tension, philosophical insights, friendship, romance, enmity, joy, sorrow, kindness, hostility, fear, courage, hope, despair, loyalty, betrayal, deception, humour, irony, mystery, tragedy)
2. Complex moral choices
3. Dynamic world in which the state of the game changes in accodance with the player's action or inaction and then responds realistically to those changes.
4. Big, beautiful, atmospheric environments to explore.
5. Strategic/Tactical challenges (combat, dilplomacy etc.)
6. Everything else on HiddenX's Xcellent list.
Let's hope there is a big fat jolly game developer with a white beard and a sack reading this thread!

[Jaz]

I'd love to see a game with...

0) atmosphere and character! I just don't like generic, ruin-of-the-mill fantasy settings with dwarves and elves and wizards with pointy hats...
1) a well developed background, rich lore, a setting with a history
2) complex moral choices with several possible outcomes :); this includes the possibility to talk my way around combat
2) a story tied into the stuff above, preferrably with mean plot twists - or it should at least kindle all kinds of emotions in me, the player (joy, grief, anger... the whole gamut)
3) adjustable difficulty - being able to assign different difficulties to different parts of the game (as in System Shock 1 which had difficulty settings for combat, cyberspace and puzzles, plus a timer)
4) highly interactive surroundings
5) exploration (being able to roam huge stretches of land, different contries or planets, whatever)
6) puzzles which tie into the history and storyline and are thus solvable through either research or thinking or both
7) anything but birdy view
8) memorable bosses and NPCs, multiple possibilities for romance
9) choices regarding gender and looks... and paperdolling would help, too
10) a house of my own (and due to the interactivity I want to be able to do some hardcore interior decoration).

I don't care about stats, levelling, party management etc. I just want to enjoy the feeling without getting tied down by accounting.

[Corwin]

Well Jaz, it's the Sims for you!! :biggrin: I'd forgotten about SS having different difficulty sliders for different aspects of the game; it was SO far ahead of its time in SO many ways!! Remember being able to crouch down and then lean out and peer around a corner without being seen; those who still haven't played it really need to!!

[Jaz]

I love the Sims, even if it failed in the 'memorable bosses' department.

Morrowind was nearly there with its house-and-interior-decorations aspect. I spent weeks collecting lanterns to put them on the roof of one of my houses so I could see it from afar in the dark, and I spent hours decorating tables with forks and knives and plates and bowls and glasses etc., even arranging the food on the plates. Just wished I could have invited someone for dinner.

[Geist]

...it should at least kindle all kinds of emotions in me, the player (joy, grief, anger... the whole gamut)

I remember reading an interview with Peter Molyneux in which he talked about wanting to create a game that made people cry. Actually, he often talks about the need for computer games to evoke deeper, more complex feelings. While his games to date haven't reflected that desire, he does make an important point, and hopefully one day he'll succeed in implementing his vision. While many computer games are fun, I haven't yet found one which delivered the strong emotional impact of a really good book or movie.
Gothic 3, however, did an excellent job of evoking the feelings of grief and anger (especially when trying to play it on 1gig of RAM), so it looks like game developers are making some progress in this field:)

[Maylander]

For me it's rather simple - if I'm going to properly roleplay in a world, it must be a world with consequences and atmosphere. Also, I prefer to have a certain amount of meaningful dialogue. Last, but not least, I need a bit of challenge - if it becomes too straight forward or easy, I quickly lose interest.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

@txa: don't start getting all Shock on us! ;)
You forgot to add "wearing the ever-popular impossible battle bikini"

There is a great book out there dealing with this cliché : "Chicks in Chainmail" ! (http://www.amazon.com/Chicks-Chainmail-Esther-Friesner/dp/0671876821/sr=8-1/qid=1169125623/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/103-1708971-1571813?ie=UTF8&s=books)

Me, I don't have such a list, but I believe that HiddenX has sais already what I would seem to be important.

A few points I would like to stress for my own opinion :

- Exploration. I'nm a gamer of the "explorer style" of gaming, and this is simply essential to me.

- Character progress. I simply love watching a char "grow". ;)

- difficulty not too strong, because I tend toi give up relatively early. The difficulty sould be set within the options of the game anywhere in the game.

- not too much fighting. I want a "role playing game", not a "fight playing game" !

- no rely on items aka item collecting.

- a slight emphasis on dialogues. I love reading.

- Story, story, story ! I need something to be immersed. And to me, that is the story.

Well, I think that's it for now.

I'd like to have the ability to ride horses and have them as beasts of burden, this would be very nice. :) (Sacred, Dungeon Siege)

[Sorcha Ravenlock]

1. Character creation- This is my Gothic killer. I want to pick what I look like, what I'm wearing, my race, my skills, my classes. I don't want the game to force these choices on me. If I pick, it's my role-playing game. If it's forced upon me, it's their role-playing game. Big difference.

I fully agree with that, and it is a big part of why I can't get into Gothic either. Most important for me is choosing my sex, I just can not roleplay a male character. I've tried in various games, but I am a woman and I just can not relate to a male character.


2. Exploration-I want a huge world to play in with lots of things to find. Variety is nice here, but not the end-all be-all. If I find 50 dungeons, even if similar, all is good. Item collection fits here too. I want to find stuff and then....

Up to a point... if the world is huge but empty, or all dungeons offer exactly the same loot, I would rather have a smaller, more linear, but fully fleshed out world.
I do want variety in the scenery and caves, the bigger the world, the more variety. Different architecture and so on can really help with that as well.

I love collecting loot, buying, selling and inventory tetris (believe it or not) although I do prefer a larger inventory over a small one.


3. Item manipulation-This includes things like alchemy, crafting, spell building, lever puzzles, weapon and armor upgrades, etc.

Here we disagree. I hate pull-the-lever puzzles with a vengeance, one of the reasons I can't get into a lot of the older CRPGs. Alchemy, crafting, and so on I like in the beginning and get bored of fast as an option, it is okay, but it should not be a main feature.
Weapon and armor upgrades are fine, and I quite like, exept for those games where I end up with an inventory full of gems I don't know what to do with (I'm looking at you, NWN2) or where every item has 6 enchantments and three gemslots and it is impossible to quickly see which one is the better one (that is you, Sacred).
NWN1 and Diablo 2 got the balance right for me though, and so does Morrowind, where alcemy and enchanting are optional.


4. Plentiful magic power- I want to be Pug of Crydee, or Belgarion of Riva. Not some little hedge witch who can cast 10 spells. I love games where you fill a
spell book :)

Yes, nothing to add here.


5. Stat/Ability/Skill manipulation-I want to tweak my character lots of times over the whole game. I want to see in-game effects of my gains in these areas.

Yes, I love levelling up, getting new skills, feats, attacks, and so on.


6. Quickly resolved combat. Very few games have done combat so well that I enjoy multiple minute fights with each group of monsters. ToEE is an exception here. This is what I hated about Wiz8. It was the weakest aspect of the Ultima series too.

I agree, combat should resolve quickly, and situations should be solvable with various options, not just combat. Not enough games reward stealth for example.


For me, story and memorable npcs are plusses. Neither are necessary for a good game. I loved Questron, Phantasie, Wizards Crown, etc back in the old days and none of these games had much of a story or any npcs. I made up the story myself with my imagination.

For me this is very important, although I can enjoy games that don't have it, I prefer games that do. And well fleshed out NPCs and dialoge are more important to me then the overal story.


I'm a leveling-explorer crpger. I like things that increase: stats, skills, item abilities, etc and uncovering the black. These are my favorites in any game.

Yes, this combined with memorable NPCs and well written dialoge makes the perfect RPG for me :)

[crpgnut]

Interesting feedback folks, thanks! I seem to be alone when I say that the story and dialogue doesn't matter that much to me. This may be because I started playing crpgs/D&D after moving from wargames. I love a deep lore system, but I don't want the main story to be the reason for playing. I'm never able to get into adventure/crpgs like Planescape: Torment/Gothics. The unending reading and chit-chat with the npcs bores me to tears. I don't care about your story, I wanna make my own :D It's the primary reason that TES is the perfect series for me. My only gripe with TES is that each game has less skills/abilities/factions, etc than the game before. The main quests in Morrowind and Oblivion are forgettable. Bethesda should drop the main quest idea altogether, instead chosing a handful of important questlines for the various guilds. They need to put consequences back into the game in some form as well. You shouldn't be able to do every quest with one character, it's retarded.

[Delirious Nomad]

Without a challenging turn based combat system it'll be hard for a game to win my love and money.
Next is a rich character development with lots of meaningful skill and feats to choose on level up and by practicing.
Playability is important: If the game is constantly loading or the mouse control and interface is not working properly it's hard for me to get immersed.
An explorable and non-linear RPG is what I like.
Sure, a sense of accomplishment is important and made me an exclusiv RPG gamer.
I prefer setting over story. I can make my own story in my head.
Least important: Graphics. If the gameplay is there, I can play an ASCII RPG, though i really like to be flashed by a new game graphicwise.

[Lucky Day]

Playability is important: If the game is constantly loading or the mouse control and interface is not working properly it's hard for me to get immersed.


this is the reason I can't get into Gothic. I know most at this site are fanboi's of it, and I trust you that's its a great story, however, I just can't get past this. To me the clunkiness makes it unplayable.

---

I love pull the lever puzzles. I tended to make those in all my dungeons for NWN.
Turn Based is tiringly out of date. I can enjoy Pause and Play just fine. I will admit there was too much text for me w/ Planescape..I couldn't finish it. I just felt too bogged down.

I don't know what the deal is with people wanting complex moral choices these days. I don't think people actually like this when its down. I certainly didn't like it the one or two in Ultima 9. I look at conversations and I try to figure the "right" one. Its sort of like open endedness: people clamoured for it until they saw it done in Morrowind. Now every dev realizes they need focus in their games even if it means babysitting them to the next quest. As for graphics..sorry I'm adverse to Avernum. Only nostalgia helped me to play thru U3 and U4 again.

The way I like dealing with quests is open ended discovery. Don't launch the player right in the middle of the problem, let them discover a (the) problem after a bit of play. Start it off generic and then they discover something much bigger going on that no one quite realizes.

[Acleacius]

Lucky Day
"I certainly didn't like it the one or two in Ultima 9"

You know, imo to this day U9 still has the single worst quest ever in a game and it's made 10 times worst because the Ultima series was built around virtues like compassion.
There is a quest in U9 where you have to convince a father whom stole bread (or some food) to feed his children, he was wrong and dissevered to be executed.

Now get this, in a world where the king has lost control of his kingdom to horrible (they even respawn though I am not sure if the NPCs know this, ;) ) beasts and rampant violence from bandits, but the king can magically call a super hero to come save him.
Of course there is certainly no possibility a peasant could survive much less go out to fish or hunt.
So here we are the bastions of virtues like compassion tricking some poor guy that he is a criminal because he cared enough about his family to make sure they had something to eat.
Oh btw this guy was in a sort of limbo area not dead or not alive apparently he was executed for this heinous crime, of course I lost all respect at this point. :(

"I look at conversations and I try to figure the "right" one."

Isn't that RPing of a sort you are searching for "your" correct answer whether you like to play good, neutral or bad characters?

[nameless hero]

My List,

1) Complex Combat System (Severance, Gothic 1&2)
2) Linear Gameplay (Gothic 1&2)
3) RADIANT AI
4) Gothic 2 size world
5) Items variety like in Oblivion

These are the most important ones.

[abbaon]

Unique moments: Show me something I've never seen before. Preferably emergent, so I get the ones you designed for and others you didn't expect. I'm sure the scripted betrayals in your noble elf drama are perfectly lovely, but I've seen them.

Multiple solutions to problems: Multiple paths, tools, and weapons. Not dialog options. "Pick an option from this list; good ones get you treasure, bad ones get you a fight!" is the stupidest game system still in use.

Elves: Presented as emaciated savages with filthy hair and needle-sharp teeth, who live in hollow mounds of mud on the sides of trees that resemble wasp nests.

Please. Just once.

[Zaleukos]

I dont really care about the classification of a game as long as it is fun, but these are things I find important in the officially recognised RPGs I enjoy.

DOs:

The most important issue to me is that there should be multiple solutions to problems, allowing different kinds of characters to be playable.

Having alternative paths (Arcanum, to a lesser extent Gothic 2) with different questlines is nice.

Having many alternative solutions to quests. Anyone remember the squirrel outside Seattle in ZakMckracken? Not an RPG, but relevevant. You could bludgeon it with a golfclub, bludgeon it with a loaf of stale bread, bribe it with peanuts... Among RPGs Gothic 2 has a few of those instances and so does Arcanum.

Character customization options that makes each instance of restartitis feel unique. Can be done by having enough skills and items... Should be coupled with having lots of alternative ways of solving problems.

Believable NPCs that I interact with a lot. Gothic 1 and 2 stand out here. Gothic 3, Oblivion, and to some extent Baldurs gate are negative examples.

Non-linearity helps the replay value if done right. I think Morrowind solved this nicely by simply having tonnes of optional quests that could be done in any order, making it possible to save 75% of them for a different kind of character.

DONTs:
Railroading: Being forced or guided through ONE path in a not so subtle manner is a cardinal sin in RPGs. Neverwinter Nights OC and individual Oblivion quests (due to the compass) comes to mind...

Combat and quest done in a way so that glaring flaws in NPC AI become too obvious, or these will kill any sense of immersion (NPCs running in front of your swinging sword in Oblivion and any "follow me" quest in Gothic 3 are negative examples...). Turnbased or realtime doesnt matter, as long as it is fluid enough. I still find the combat in the almost 20 year old gold box games excellent, even though it is turn based.

Reality features that disrupt the flow of the game without adding to difficulty or gameplay in any meaningful way. Limited inventory in Baldurs Gate forcing me to trek back to a shop for selling or buying arrows, limited inventory in Oblivion/Morrowind (Daggerfall had an excellent pack horse feature for this), weapons breaking out of the blue in Realms of Arkania 2:Star Trail forcing me to go back across half the map... It all adds to gaming time but disrupts the flow of the gameplay.

Add any pointless trekking around. God solutions are to put shops strategically close to insta-travel points (G3 is ok), making the inventory unlimited, or allow insta travel to "services" (otherwise incredibly bug-infested Age of Pirates: Carribean Tales got this right).

Lawnmowing. I shouldnt have to lawn mow the world for experience or tightly plan my character build to win the game (Gothic 2 NotR falls in this trap and does it badly, even though I enjoy the game, Oblivions level scaling also punishes some builds rather heavily).

Having tonnes of useless skills (Realms of Arkania games with a direct translation of PnP rules come to mind) that you dont know if you ever will need, mixed with one or two that you WILL need.

Button/lever/jumping puzzles: Why? These rarely make sense.

[magerette]

Elves: Presented as emaciated savages with filthy hair and needle-sharp teeth, who live in hollow mounds of mud on the sides of trees that resemble wasp nests.

Please. Just once.
:)

Actually, this is a pretty historically accurate take. Elves/fairies were usually perceived as malevolent beings, kidnapping, ensorceling and tormenting mortals in a variety of creative ways before Tolkein got hold of them. They could appear beautiful, but it was only as a glamour to mislead the unfortunate who came across them.

Yes, I'd like to see a game abandon this cliche also-Dark Elves are not quite it--they're just the flipside of the golden glowing ones.

[Cormac]

:)

Actually, this is a pretty historically accurate take. Elves/fairies were usually perceived as malevolent beings, kidnapping, ensorceling and tormenting mortals in a variety of creative ways before Tolkein got hold of them. They could appear beautiful, but it was only as a glamour to mislead the unfortunate who came across them.

Yes, I'd like to see a game abandon this cliche also-Dark Elves are not quite it--they're just the flipside of the golden glowing ones.

I think that The Witcher represents elves as vanquished or defeated, so your wish -- and Abbaon's, and mine too -- will come true at least that one time. (But Darklands also represented elves/dwarves/kobolds, etc. as they were perceived in western myth. Ah, what a game.)

[KazikluBey]

My dream RPG would contain these components:

A low/no magic medieval setting, somewhat like Darklands'. The game world should have rich lore/backstory and have things happening and changing while you play, so that it doesn't seem like the world is there simply as a playground for your character to explore. Practically every NPC should have, if not a backstory, then at least a "reason" to exist, a goal in life. If this means you need to scale down the playable part of the world, then so be it. Quality over quantity.

Since magic equipment would not exist or be exceedingly rare, copy ththe equipment from Darklands as well. And maybe the alchemy. And possibly the saint system, depending on the setting.

Choices without the clichéd clearcut good/evil alternatives, and with consequences that are logical in a gameworld sense, but not always easily predictable.

A non-linear storyline that does not let you save your universe/world/country/city/village from impending doom - it should be personal, meaning that your character should be able to follow the storyline for him-/herself with a variety of motives.

Experience is gained from finishing quests, not through monster grinding, much like in V:tM - Bloodlines. Experience would be spent in a point buy system, also somewhat akin to Bloodlines.

Full party control in the turn-based combat, á la ToEE. Party NPCs with personalities like in BG2 is a definite plus, if not, then a party creation system like in Darklands.

[Corwin]

I hated Darklands!! Bored me to tears and I never came close to finishing it!! Magic Rules!! :)

[Cormac]

The Church Triumphant rules.

[Acleacius]

Didn't Atari end up with the ownership of Darklands?
It seems like an "EA duh! moment" reguarding System Shock franchise, for Atari not to do at least an updated version if not a full sequel.

With all the great ideas, I am beginning to believe the real RPG designers are lurking on this board. ;)

[Corwin]

While we could write and design one, I don't believe we have the resources to actually make one!! :)

[xSamhainx]

Interesting feedback folks, thanks! I seem to be alone when I say that the story and dialogue doesn't matter that much to me.

You arent alone here, my feelings exactly. If I want a good story, I'll read a book or watch a movie. It's like when people talk about playing DVDs or Cds on a pc or a console. That's what I have a DVD player and a stereo for, you know. Stories are for the books and movies, I play games for the experience of being the story myself.

While I do like a bit of brief conversation to help with the immersion into the virtual world, please dont dwell on it long, make it short and sweet. Give me engaging and challenging gameplay, nice graphics, a huge world to explore, a bit of danger, and some goals. A few chainmail bikinis dont hurt either! ='.'=

Like Ive always said - Give me something to save, wind me up, and let me go!

[GothicGothicness]

That's what I have a DVD player and a stereo for, you know.
What people have those things... I thought it was 2007 now :D everything is done on the computer. It plays DVD's better than DVD players..... it plays music better than the stero..... games.... it can offer you a long story ( movies can't ), graphics sounds and music ( books can't ) making your own choices ( books / movies can't ) unless it is one of those adventure books LOL... gameplay ( books and movies can't ) all this combined makes for a great experiance. Besides you need to use your brain in many games!

[Jaz]

I prefer electronic media over printed ones, too - I do all my proofreading on a computer, of course, my XBox serves as a media center with a server for storing my digitized CDs and DVDs, but there is a certain very important advantage paper books still have over PC games:
I can take a paper book to the toilet and read it in peace. Same goes for reading in bed. I could do this with a handheld game, too, in some circumstances even with a notebook, but I doubt hubby would like the ruckus (provided he wanted to sleep). Even if I used a headset, the typing or button-smashing would cause the bed to wobble ^_^. And having a notebook sit on my lap while taking a dump? Not sure if I liked that.

[KazikluBey]

I hated Darklands!! Bored me to tears and I never came close to finishing it!! Magic Rules!! :)
Sure, it wasn't the 8th wonder, and it takes a lot of grinding through rather boring combat to finish, but a lot of the basic game mechanics were just awesome.

And magic is nice, but for once, I'd like an RPG where you can't throw magic around like it's confetti.

[xSamhainx]

Nah, I'll stick with the dedicated electronics. I'd rather dust them up and wear them out than my dedicated gaming stuff ='.'=

I do like electronic editions of books tho, easy to get some good titles for very cheap on Amazon instead of running to the store, and can put them on several devices.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Most important for me is choosing my sex, I just can not roleplay a male character. I've tried in various games, but I am a woman and I just can not relate to a male character.

That was a reason for me why I never bought Kult. (http://www.rpgdot.com/index.php?hsaction=10075&games=562)

And a paper handbook is for me a strong reason to actually buy a game. I consider it a kind of copy protection.

Especially meanwhile playing an RTS, task-switching between Acrobat Reader and my game isn't my cup of tea ...

[Maylander]

I'd like to see more RPGs in different settings than the usual medieval one. Eastern middle ages(Samurais etc), Norse Myth, Indians, older settings like Egypt, Greece, Rome, and so on and so forth. History is full of interesting times and settings, and there aren't that many games taking advantage of this (such as the TQ setting in a proper cRPG could be good).

[Sorcha Ravenlock]

After playing NWN2, I'll have to add: a proper ending. What happened to hapy endings anyway?

[txa1265]

After playing NWN2, I'll have to add: a proper ending. What happened to hapy endings anyway?

I think there is a difference between a 'proper ending' and 'the chance of a happy ending'. ;)

[crpgnut]

Yep, I agree about NWN2. It didn't end at all. I'm guessing that we'll find out more about our party in an expansion. I'm not sure that I want to play high level characters though. I generally hate AD&D past level 10 or so.

One thing that is nice about the different genre blendings is that I get to sample other types of games without having to pay for one. I enjoyed Deus Ex, Spellforce, System Shock 2, etc., for the blending in of different types of gameplay. I don't have time to play non-crpgs, but I enjoy crpgs that successfully blend in other genres.

[Sorcha Ravenlock]

I think there is a difference between a 'proper ending' and 'the chance of a happy ending'. ;)

Oh, i agree. But NWN2 wasn't a proper ending, nor a happy one ;)

[CelesteGB]

Oh, i agree. But NWN2 wasn't a proper ending, nor a happy one ;)

Rats, I haven't played NWN2 yet. I hate ambiguous or sad or indifferent endings. Well, let's see what they have for the expansions :)

[txa1265]

Oh, i agree. But NWN2 wasn't a proper ending, nor a happy one ;)

What makes you say that? I thought it was an 'ending' more than many games ... it wasn't traditional, but I wouldn't say it 'wasn't a proper ending' ...

[Maylander]

I didn't mind the ending at all, it wasn't a classic fairy tale "and so they live happily ever after", but the plot did come to an decent end.

A little note, let's not discuss this too much in the general forum, since this might be a bit of a spoiler for those who haven't played it.

[txa1265]

A little note, let's not discuss this too much in the general forum, since this might be a bit of a spoiler for those who haven't played it.


Agree - I set up a new thread in the NWN2 spoiler section (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1249) for this.

[Acleacius]

Sorcha Ravenlock
"After playing NWN2, I'll have to add: a proper ending. What happened to hapy endings anyway?"

I am glad it wasn't just me, I was sitting there waiting and my jaw just dropped, I just couldn't help but think, "Is this a joke? You must be kidding."
It wouldn't even necessarily have to be happy but that seems like complete nonsence, at least in reguards to the party.

Anyway yes I agree completly if I am going to be spending 30 more hours in a story based game, a very important ingredient (besides the bikinis) it sure the hell needs to have at least some decent sense of closure.
I mean unless the dev says upfront this is a Epsodic, comic book styled RPG, even then the cliffhanger should be at least modertatly well done.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

Just found an *very* interesting entry in the official Drakensang forum, German-language part. It's here. (http://www.anaconda-games.de/forum/viewtopic.php?p=48105#48105) (I hope the link works.)

To sum this German-language entry up, it says that the poster found sone things in BG2 that annoyed him or her *very* much.

In short :

- In BG2 one can find items with full descriptions, items, that breath the term "legendary". They are often connected with a single person's name.

What annoys the poster is the fact that there is kind of an hiatus between their legendary state and the fact that they can be found in odd-looking, muddy dungeons. It's like as if I'd explore a long forgotten cave and find the crown of Queen Mary there, to exaggerate it.

He (or she) complains that this doesn't bear the image of a logical world where things have their places according to their importance, but rather these items are placed to give the gamer some kind of high reward for "clearing" a dungeon (the poster mentions Blizzards action-RPGs there).

So not the items themselves are important, but instead they are only placed there as some kind of reward. It doesn't really matter what kind of items they really are.

And what's worst, complains the poster, is that the most powerful and most legendary items can be bought in the shop round the corner.

- Dungeons often breath the look and feel as if a designer had thought "how can we guide this gamner through it ?". They are unrealistic, because they are only designed to bear monsters which are merely used as cannon-fodder, with the level of difficulty increaing further into the tunnel.

They do not look as if the constructor of these dungeons had a certain purpose for them in mind while constructing them.

- Dialogs not adapting the style of play : The poster writes that even when the gamer has played an "good" character and the reputation has reached great heights, the character still gets "evil" dialog options. he game doesn't see that the gamer wants to be nothing but "good".

- only armor : Everyone runs around with armor. No shirts, no jeans, no socks, no shoes, nothing. Only chain mail armor, plate mail armor, etc. .

- The poster would like to see a home for the character. He doesn't need to be a homless one, wandering round.

- The poster would like to have the ability to let a certain biography chosen for the character, his home town, the profession etc. . The way people react towards him should be different in his home town where everybody knows him, and according to the way he behaved before he went on journey, out of town.

I believe these are very interesting points not really considered in this depth so far.

[txa1265]

- Dialogs not adapting the style of play : The poster writes that even when the gamer has played an "good" character and the reputation has reached great heights, the character still gets "evil" dialog options. he game doesn't see that the gamer wants to be nothing but "good".

I have always found that to be an interesting conundrum ... you want to allow players to 'fall from grace' as it were ( ;) ), but also allow some depth of character development and role-play. Too often dialogue trees look like skill trees - once you've started down a path you pretty much have one choice that makes any sense, so what is the point of having the choice?

[CelesteGB]

Just found an *very* interesting entry in the official Drakensang forum, German-language part. It's here. (http://www.anaconda-games.de/forum/viewtopic.php?p=48105#48105) (I hope the link works.)

To sum this German-language entry up, it says that the poster found sone things in BG2 that annoyed him or her *very* much.

In short :

- In BG2 one can find items with full descriptions, items, that breath the term "legendary". They are often connected with a single person's name.

What annoys the poster is the fact that there is kind of an hiatus between their legendary state and the fact that they can be found in odd-looking, muddy dungeons. It's like as if I'd explore a long forgotten cave and find the crown of Queen Mary there, to exaggerate it.



- Dialogs not adapting the style of play : The poster writes that even when the gamer has played an "good" character and the reputation has reached great heights, the character still gets "evil" dialog options. he game doesn't see that the gamer wants to be nothing but "good".

You can roleplay these as well. For example, Kleban "Blackstaff" Arunsen (pardon spelling but too lazy to look it up) gave a really nice item to a good adventuring friend who then handed it down to a niece/nephew to give them a hand in adventuring but apparently they couldn't cut it combat-wise.:D How about a famous adenturer wanting to settle down and sold his precious item to buy a farm and raise a family?

Regarding dialogue options, suppose your character just snapped under the stress of trying to save the world and go on a rampage? I know on a couple of occasions, I've wondered about snapping myself as my cursor lingered over the evil option:lol:

I never look a gift-horse in the mouth;)

I remember in BG2, I had Imoen stealing some stuff from a merchant and just rationalized that she *was* a thief but was doing it behind my back and it was for saving the world.;)

Celeste

[fridi]

Not the story itself is important to me, but the way of telling it. I need dramturgy creating emotions, I want to remember impressive situations (and characters) that fill the world and it´s adventure with life and uniqueness. Isn´t this THE advantage over other genres?

As empty and unimportant as Oblivion could get, it had a cool „ending“ that was almost worth playing (and buying) it.

I like the „dark eye“ system, thus I like games where magic is NOT thrown around like confetti.

We read what is important to you, let me ask one question:

Would you like a game where


...you are NOT the official hero but accompany the „chosen one“? (you might still be important to his success)
...your character sometimes has no success – if it helps the dramaturgy?
...you have to do important choices again and again BUT KNOWING what consequences will come?
...you know that you NOT know something important or will NEVER be able to do a certain quest because of missing talent. Like Books or spells in a language you cannot and will not be able to speak?


To put it in a nutshell: would you like to experience a variety of bad emotions, fears and restrictions for dramatic reasons?

[Squeek]

First I want to point out that role-play gaming is a two-way street. To work, each side needs to do its part. In theater, that’s the writer and his troupe on the one hand and the audience on the other (as explained in Shakespeare’s Henry V). In gaming it’s the game maker on the one hand and the player(s) on the other. It’s an agreement, a kind of bargain, which must be made in order for it to work.

Here’s my list of ingredients that game makers need to put in a CRPG:

#1: The gaming world – The good stuff has to be in there or there’s just no point. There should be interesting characters to meet and cool places to go with plenty of heroism and adventure along the way. There must be drama (conflict). Essentially, the gaming world has to provide all the elements for good fantasy-adventure storytelling.

Most games force the story on the player via the main quest. That can work out very well. Ideally, though, the gaming world should provide plenty for the player to be able to create his own great stories.

#2: Roles – Whether the player chooses his role or it’s forced upon him, it needs to be good from the beginning, and it needs to grow. CRPGs should provide clear information about the character and his inventory (KOTOR did that best, IMO).

#3: Good Combat – Over the years, I’ve read plenty of boasts on forums from folks who claim they don’t give a hoot about combat. I’ve got news for them: You’re in the wrong genre. Combat has always been an essential element of RPG (not the hypothetical games nobody makes or plays, I mean the real CRPGs that are really made and played).

#4: Balance – First and foremost, CRPGs are games, and games should be challenging the whole way through. This may be the hardest part of all.

So CRPGs need to be set in fantastic worlds, provide wonderful roles, feature cool combat, and be challenging for the player throughout the game. Easy, right?

[crpgnut]

@Fridi

1. Nope. I want to be the hero, though it doesn't have to be a beloved hero.
2. It would help if you clarified this bit. I don't know the word dramaturgy. If dramaturgy is just dramatic writing, then this could ok if used sparingly.
3. Again this is vague. If you mean if I'm forced into making some negative choices, that can work out ok only if those choices would not go against my role. A paladin isn't going to destroy a village even if a greater good would result. It's against his very nature.
4. Yes! Missing out on quests/items/subplots because of a lack of skill is the single greatest reason to replay a game.

As far as the nutshell...If the game is more about the drama than the character then the game is going to suck badly, IMHO. I play games to escape bad emotions, fears, and restrictions. Negatives should be weighed heavily against fun. If the negative feelings, story elements, etc become prevalent, then the game would be a drag to play.

[Lord Alex]

Interesting discussion, which conveys the "wide" range of opinions on what constitutes a computer role-playing game. My list is pretty close to HiddenX with a few minor tweaks, so I'll refrain from generating my own. But, I will state that there definitely seems to be a fork in the CRPG road, where some prefer "sandbox" (Elder Scrolls) and others prefer "story" (anything by Bioware).

I guess I prefer something in between, and this harkens back to my days of playing and DM'ing pen-and-paper D&D. As a DM, you want the player to feel they are in control... that they are, in essence, writing the story by their very actions. However, as any good DM will tell you, this freedom is an illusion.

A good DM tries to predict how the plot might evolve and devises an overall structure or framework for the proceedings. This structure has definite plot points and events that "trigger" based on the player's actions. Done well, it appears to the player that they are walking into town Clint Eastwood-style and doing whatever they can that is allowable by the rules (and their alignment). But, in truth, the DM is only showing the player what is proper for them to see at that point in the narrative.

For my money, a good CRPG will accomplish the same thing. It will make me feel like I have the freedom to explore the world and go and do whatever I wish to at any time. However, the game rules (and the underlying story elements) will limit my access to key plot points, so the story plays out as it should in a somewhat linear fashion.

Though I'm not a huge fan of Oblivion, I feel it actually did a fairly good job of this. It made you feel like you were the architect of your own adventure while allowing you to participate in an epic quest. Baldur's Gate 2 and the Fallouts did a fairly good job of this too.

Where I dislike Oblivion's approach is the stream-lined gameplay used to achieve its goals. The mini-games were a mindless waste of time and energy, and the combat (though improved over Morrowind) can still be unbearably boring. I'm fine with playing in a sandbox, but don't rip out the strategy.... (aka baby with the bath-water).

[Alrik Fassbauer]

#3: Good Combat – Over the years, I’ve read plenty of boasts on forums from folks who claim they don’t give a hoot about combat. I’ve got news for them: You’re in the wrong genre. Combat has always been an essential element of RPG (not the hypothetical games nobody makes or plays, I mean the real CRPGs that are really made and played).

Oh, a member of the "dungeon crawling" faction here.

I do know that combat is in every RPG that I've seen this far - but that sounds as if you would say that there's no car without gas (as fuel). So, solar-driven cars cannot be ?

And believe me or not, the climate change is paying its toll. We will be ALL forced (sooner or later) do abandon gas-driven automobiles to a huge part ...
Even now, the storms and hurricanes become bigger and more furious. That is only a tiny piece in the whole climate change, and I expect people wanting to pollute the world even if they cannot breathe anymore (or at least nothing but dust).

[Alrik Fassbauer]

However, as any good DM will tell you, this freedom is an illusion.

Totalitarian systems are based on the same belief (1984).

[Lord Alex]

Totalitarian systems are based on the same belief (1984).

Haha... yeah, some of my former players, in former Dm'd campaigns, would have agreed with that comparison... One player, in particular, would often cite a particular instance of this illusory freedom as a "Dungeon D$ck." Looking back, I can see the guy had a point.

As with politics, no system is perfect. Too much freedom in games and you have a pointless level grind. Too little, and you feel like you are strapped into an amusement park rail-car, with images flying by that you cannot affect in any meaningful way.

The middle-ground is the sweet spot in my most humble opinion.

[Squeek]

Classically speaking, RPGs allow gamers to assume the roles of characters in fantasy-adventure stories. We all want to enjoy it, and who doesn't like a great story? But I prefer the idea of questing for adventure, of going out and searching for it. Main quests offer a great story, and that's fine. But there really ought to be more than that—preferably a lot more.
I guess I prefer something in between, and this harkens back to my days of playing and DM'ing pen-and-paper D&D. As a DM, you want the player to feel they are in control... that they are, in essence, writing the story by their very actions. However, as any good DM will tell you, this freedom is an illusion.
You make a good point, Lord Alex. But a DM is just one person. The difference here is that these games are played using a computer. We all know about computers, of course. Sometimes I want to throw mine out the window, but they're certainly good at what they do. They process information quickly, and so they can be very useful in role-play gaming.

Just consider the conversation we're having now. Our comments are processed through automation, from our computers, through our ISPs, across the Internet, and to the forum's server; and when I click on "Submit Reply," my post is made in a matter of moments. If the packet-switching decisions were being made by a single human being each hop along the way, instead of by routers and switches, how long would it take to complete a post? Minutes? Hours? Days?

A computer is capable of keeping track of a lot of variations, like the kind that can result when an RPG player makes choices throughout the game. It would take forever if a DM had to keep track of all of that (and he would be driven crazy). But computers handle that stuff quickly, and they don't mind at all. With the help of computers, there can be all kinds of variations and twists, each influenced to some extent by the other.

That begs the question, why haven't CRPGs already achieved a lot more of that? It's because RPG-making progress isn't being driven by technology. These games are made by businesses, and their efforts are market-driven. They're limiting the scope of their efforts in response to what they view as business realities.

It may be that, in order to make the ultimate CRPG, a business would have to hire a huge staff and invest a whole lot in order to get it done. They may have to charge hundreds of dollars for that. I can see why they would be reluctant to do that. But if they did, I would buy it.

[Alrik Fassbauer]

The middle-ground is the sweet spot in my most humble opinion.

I agree. A game with *total* freedxom is seemingly not possible at this moment - AND it would needs a LOT of more designiung time ! - Just to find out what kind of choices players might make ... ;)

An adventure is nevertheless a story - and when I read a book, I have to admit that I have no sort of freedom whatsoever at all. Yet I can feel highly entertained. :)

I think, immersion could be one key to success. :) Let the people "dive" into a game - or book - so deep that they "live" with the story.

Offer puzzle pieces / mosaic stones in doses, not too much that the gamers become bored, but just as much that the same gamers become (and stay) thrilled.

I'm currently playing Keepsake, and it's a bit astonishing for me with how few elements such a story can unfold and keep me (the gamer) interested.

So, from this point of viwew, I'm really enjoying it. :) I don't feel "railroaded", although I actually am. The "freedom is an illusion" works here perfectly, although the devs don't let me feel this way : I can freely explore the whole building - at least those parts the devs let me have acess to. ;)

So, this "freedom is an illusion" is a dangerous thought (or doctrine), from a certain point of view.

From another point of view, it just works quite good (I mean gaming here). In Chess, you alsdo have no real freedom, yet people have developed thousands of ways to play it. ;)

So, the point is, where do I use this "doctrine", and to which point ?

[fridi]

@Squeek

Hey, all right you´ve said.
But you forgot something: A computer can process thousands of information a DM can´t.
But: on the other side a DM can improvise! To benefit from all the collected information the computer has to know how to react on them. Thus, those alternative ways have to be designed, scripted and programmed, which costs time and money. You said it, a business doesn´t have endless time and money.
So it´s clear we will never see the perfect crpg...get back tp pen&paper :)

[Squeek]

@fridi

You may be right! I might have to do that!

[Corwin]

Finding a decent PnP game at a convenient time is the problem!!

[Geist]

Would you like a game where


...you are NOT the official hero but accompany the „chosen one“? (you might still be important to his success)
...your character sometimes has no success – if it helps the dramaturgy?
...you have to do important choices again and again BUT KNOWING what consequences will come?
...you know that you NOT know something important or will NEVER be able to do a certain quest because of missing talent. Like Books or spells in a language you cannot and will not be able to speak?


To put it in a nutshell: would you like to experience a variety of bad emotions, fears and restrictions for dramatic reasons?

Yes, I would definitely play a game with those elements, especially 1 and 2. The RPG designer's obsession to constantly cast the player as a world saving hero has got to be one of the most overused and unimaginative concepts in the industry. Even fairy tales have more complexity and variation in the roles of their protagonists.
I also agree that failure and defeat can be a powerful and interesting dramatic device. It occurs all too frequently both in real life and in literature, yet, in games, rather than letting the player live with and face the consequences of failure, the approach most often used is to simply force the player to repeat the given episode over and over until he/she is successful.

[fridi]

gosh, someone´s willing to lose to get a more complexe and interesting story in return. didn´t dare to find someone here :)

Many of the great storys (books) out there use the failing of the "hero" as an important story element. A book (with the story in the fore) featuring an all mighty hero with no flaws is just boring. and though all heros have flaws, we can identify with them. so why don´t we want to play such heros in rpgs?
it would
a) give a better story, less straight-line and
b) help me to identify with the hero.

the problem is, of course, that playing a game to most of the players mean to have fun, no negative feeling allowed. sad though, and therefore reserved to p&p rpgs which are more about complex stories/situations.

what do YOU think?

[Maylander]

I agree, in general there can't be highs without lows, and the new trend is to make sure that players never get frustrated or upset in any way, and that nothing will give "headbanging frustration". In my opinion this means less negative sides, yes, but it also means more boring games. This goes for game mechanics as well as hero development and personality.

[Geist]

I would love to play a Shakespearean tragedy. Even a Simplicio Simplicissimus or Don Quixote type character would be a lot more fun than the stereotypical hero whose chief aim lies in the fanatical pursuit of wealth and power.
However, this opinion appears to be in the minority.
We had a related discussion regarding the lack of complex and morally challenging themes in games on this thread: (http://www.rpgwatch.com/forums/showthread.php?t=1444)
Just as concerns the topic of more mature themes in general, I'm also not entirely sure whether playing a simplistic power-hungry hero is truly representative of most gamers' desires, or whether we simply accept it as such due to a lack of alternatives.