List CRPG ingredients by their importance to you.

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).

Squeek said:

#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).

Click to expand...

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).

Lord Alex said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Alrik Fassbauer said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

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.

Lord Alex said:

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.

Click to expand...

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.

Lord Alex said:

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

Click to expand...

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 ?

@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

@fridi

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

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

fridi said:

Would you like a game where

1. ...you are NOT the official hero but accompany the „chosen one“? (you might still be important to his success)
2. ...your character sometimes has no success – if it helps the dramaturgy?
3. ...you have to do important choices again and again BUT KNOWING what consequences will come?
4. ...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?

Click to expand...

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.

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?

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.

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:
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.

Revived in the light of recent events:

Tell us what is important for you in a CRPG!

HiddenX said:

Revived in the light of recent events:

Tell us what is important for you in a CRPG!

Click to expand...

Which version, or which post should I use as a guideline?

Tell us your CRPG preferences - what comes first in your mind - no need for lists

0.7 is the current version

definition (must have) and (should have)
nice to have
tags

I can't really list them by importance because every RPG element is important to me. Ideally, the game has to deliver on all the pillars of RPG gaming for me to dig it.

Now, I can overlook some missteps if the other elements are really strong. For example, in the game I'm playing right now (Dungeons and Dragons Online), I'm not too thrilled with the crafting system. That said, it doesn't ruin the game for me because every other element which I like in RPGs is well represented and strongly executed.

I've said this before, but here are the things an RPG has to have for me to really like it.

1 - Exploration. There has to be a strong sense of exploring and finding new things. This ties in to exploring items and inventory management as well. If the game lacks exploration then I will become bored quickly.

2 - Advancement. There has to be a sense of skill/character/whatever advancement going on. You're getting stronger, better and more efficient as you go. If a game lacks advancement then it's nothing more than an action game.

3 - Narrative. There has to be interesting stories being told, whether through side quests or a main quest. If the story is lacking then the gameplay better be gold or else I'm probably not going to be playing for long.

4 - Combat. There has to be interesting combat gameplay to tie in with the first 3 pillars. Combat can enhance the exploration, the advancement and the narrative. A game lacking combat would not be a game-breaker, but I would hope that the other elements it brings to the table would be very strong and also tie in with the other points.

These days I pretty much only play RPGs that have these elements going in them. All 4 of them are equally important to me.

My CRPG preferences.

Character Development
C1) (MH) you can control one or more characters (=party)
C2) (MH) you can develop your party (stats and/or skills,…) by questing
C3) (MH) you can equip and enhance your characters with items you acquire

Exploration
E1) (MH) by exploring the gameworld you can find new locations
E2) (MH) you can find items
E3) (MH) you can find NPCs
E4) (SH) you can manipulate the gameworld in some way (levers, buttons,…)
E5) (SH) the gameworld can affect your party (weather, traps, closed doors, …)

Story
S2) (MH) you can interact with NPCs
S3) (MH) you can follow quests (at least one main quest)
S6) (SH) you can make choices
S7) (SH) your choices have consequences

I don't care about the actual story. I rarely read large pieces of texts in books for instance, and I don't care about the movies when the game is busy loading. I only read the conversations very carefully.
As for the tips, hints, etc, that explain the keys and menus: I do read them but hardly pay attention to them, because I am so impatient to start playing. Often I regret my impatience later on in the game when I don't know how to use something.

As for S5, (SH) the story is interactive:
I think you're right HiddenX, that may be covered by S6 and S7, unless you mean with S5 that there are completely different story paths and outcomes I think.
More than one game ending, different story paths, is pretty essential to me: MH. I like it when I have to play the game several times to learn all the ins and outs of the game.

Combat: does not really matter, all tags (non-combat, action, strategic, tactical, sneaker, thief like, pausable real time, real time, turn based) are fine with me.

Genre, no:
J-RPG: Manga Style graphics, turn based combat

POV
(tag) 1st-person
(tag) 3rd-person
(tag) Floating camera

Setting: doesn't really matter.

crpgnut said:

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.

Click to expand...

1. Exploration, definitely.

It's the reason why PB games are so close to my heart - and why I've been able to overlook so many flaws.

It's also the reason Skyrim and Fallout 3 are at the very top of my list - even despite their serious flaws when it comes to mechanics.

Yes, I think both games have a TON of areas that feel unique and which reward you just for going there. That said, I think they should reduce the amount of explorable locations by a factor of 10 - and just spend 10 times the effort making each location that much more unique.

So, overall - I'd favor a balance between a big world and the sense of rewarding exploration. I'd say Gothic 2 is close - very close - to the ideal balance, but it lacks variety when it comes to the flavor of the areas. Skyrim is probably the king for me, because while many locations look similar - there's just SO MUCH unique content when you stop to think about it.

Exploration is almost enough to make me enjoy pretty much any game. It's also a big part of why I loved Bioshock Infinite so much - as the actual shooter gameplay was very traditional, and I'm not a shooter fan.

However, it should be noted that I don't consider exploration a CRPG feature specifically. I think it's a feature that fits with almost any genre - and will enhance almost any genre.

2. Atmosphere/immersion

A fully realised world is key to my enjoyment. I want to FEEL as if I'm in another place. I want to be transported and forget where I am IRL. Again, PB games are excellent in this way. They really know how to nail that atmosphere - and I honestly think Risen and Risen 2 are on par - if not better - than Gothic and Gothic 2 in this way. Gothic 3 might just be the best of the bunch for the sheer power of the scenery - but ultimately - it ends up not feeling unique enough, and the entire desert area is all but forgettable.

3. Character creation/development

As I mentioned in another thread - I consider this THE defining feature of the RPG genre. I adore creating my own persona - and I love development systems that are rich and intricate. I don't think balance is THAT important - though developers should always spend a reasonable amount of time getting it right.

I also MUCH prefer games that start you out as a weakling - and where everything you find is important. In fact, I prefer that everything you find be important THROUGHOUT the game. I hate how in most games - you end up throwing away one super magical weapon after the other - because you can't bother making room in your inventory.

As for the development system in itself - I think the best example I can come up with is D&D 3.5th edition. I love the flexibility and the options available. I love the use of small numbers instead of huge numbers. It makes every evolution and every level tangible and something you can really feel. It's just the perfect balance of the flavor of having classes and the freedom of developing your character as YOU want.


4. Story.

Yes, I do need a good story. Presentation is possibly more important than the story itself. I DO NOT like text-based games - and I DO NOT like subpar voice acting. I've become enough of a production-value whore to demand proper voice acting and quality cut scenes.

I don't mind clichés as much as the average person. I care more about execution than plot.

What I particularly like is when story-tellers understand the human psyche - and they know how to write plausible and compelling characters - even within a fantasy world.

Very few writers know how to do that, however. The Witcher 2 was a prime example. I like PB writing as well, because it's wonderfully low-key and everyone has a motivation you can believe.

I DO NOT like Bioware storytelling for the most part - because it's too for-effect and too heroic. It's hard to take seriously.

Bethesda writing is mostly awful - though I think they've improved. I actually liked most of the writing in Skyrim.

….

That's pretty much it for what I think is most important. All other elements are important - but I can probably deal with shoddy executions if the above is in place.

Lord Alex said:

….
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.
…

Click to expand...

I'm quite agree with you, but in practice it doesn't work if you start read anything about the game. Because the time you start the game, many players will already have finished it and replayed it multiple time and will whine there's no real choices. and many players with save and reload to check and will whine there's not choice. then the illusion of freedom will explodes, and all the work and sweat spend to build the illusion will end to serve to nothing, just waste of time and resources.

I'd go further, for me a line of choices needs be coherent and each line of choice needs be coherent. And stick to that would allow rather interesting gameplay and replay value. Alas plenty players will apply the replay and reload tricks and will whine that doing this isn't coherent with doing that, no realism. That's a superficial point of view but there's nothing to do against it, go try such design approach and you'll just get bashed by the crowd of superficial players.