RPGs are becoming "less relevant" according to Bioware

I had already feared that this Warhammer game plays basically like a shooter - because it looked as such on the monitors on the Games Com.

This:

Originally Posted by DArtagnan
They don't want gamers - they want numbers.

RPGs WERE doing well, if not for other developers it was for Bioware. Of course, getting on consoles and focusing more on action-oriented gameplay = more sales at the end of the day.

The sad thing is like Bethesda, they're in a great position to dictate what sort of content goes in their "rpgs". But I guess ME sold more than DA.

Originally Posted by Relayer
But I guess ME sold more than DA.

It didn't. DAO is BioWare bestseller.

I don't understand it either.

Originally Posted by azarhal
It didn't. DAO is BioWare bestseller.

I don't understand it either.

Well Mike 'When you push a button something awesome has to happen' Laidlaw says DAO was "busted". There doesn't seem to be a lot of love for it left at Bioware. Those who really cared for the project, like Brent Knowles, saw the change in direction and left.

Greg's claim that RPGs are becoming irrelevant is nonsense when you consider the amount of money and resources being poured into SW:TOR. Although its an MMO it is still an RPG through and through in terms of storytelling and gameplay mechanics.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
Do they want to make this "RPGs are dead" to become a self-fulfillung prohecy - and rejoice later, because they "have been sooooo right" ?

The market will always be there. If they leave it, someone else will fill it. And that's a good thing!

Originally Posted by hishadow
Although its an MMO it is still an RPG through and through in terms of storytelling and gameplay mechanics.

There's storytelling in MMOs?

Originally Posted by Motoki
There's storytelling in MMOs?

So they claim! Now do 10 replies and you might get a reward!

Originally Posted by hishadow
The market will always be there. If they leave it, someone else will fill it. And that's a good thing!

Time for a migration from the high budget, low variety desert of mainstream developers to the lovely little oases of small, indie developers. Actually, we're seeing that already. The big boys keep pumping their money into marketing-team developed titles for diminishing returns while the little guys steal more and more of the market. I easily spend more on indie games now than mainstream ones.

Originally Posted by Menigal
Time for a migration from the high budget, low variety desert of mainstream developers to the lovely little oases of small, indie developers. Actually, we're seeing that already. The big boys keep pumping their money into marketing-team developed titles for diminishing returns while the little guys steal more and more of the market. I easily spend more on indie games now than mainstream ones.

I'd be happy just with more developers the size of Piranha Bytes. If you look at the credits it's a tiny company. Compare that to Dragon Age II. I think its quite spectacular what they're able to produce. Even with Bioware's industrial strength production chain, a small agile company like Piranha Bytes is still able to outperform them in most categories ranging from audio, music, gameplay mechanics, storytelling, world design. Runic Games and Crate Entertainment is probably someone who would fit in this category as well.

Originally Posted by hishadow
I'd be happy just with more developers the size of Piranha Bytes. If you look at the credits it's a tiny company. Compare that to Dragon Age II. I think its quite spectacular what they're able to produce. Even with Bioware's industrial strength production chain, a small agile company like Piranha Bytes is still able to outperform them in all categories ranging from audio, music, gameplay mechanics, storytelling, world design.

I do kind of wish there were more what I call mid-level developers. Ones who are bigger than Indie and have more than a few people, but aren't super massive like EA either. Here in the US, there used to be a lot of them but over time most got bought out and the few who didn't, like Bethesda, seem to be pushing aggressively to expand and become a large developer themselves.

Originally Posted by azarhal
It didn't. DAO is BioWare bestseller.

I don't understand it either.

Understand that it probably COST BW more money to make DA. Think of the long development time. Sales is only one half of the equation.

Profit = Revenue - Expenses

Originally Posted by Thrasher
Understand that it probably COST BW more money to make DA. Think of the long development time. Sales is only one half of the equation.

I don't know the hard numbers behind the cost of making DA vs. Mass Effect, but I think the reported development time (5 years) of DA is very misleading - the first couple years seem to have been limited to just basic concept work, with full-time production taking place much later on.

As far as the comments about RPG's becoming irrelevant, it is only Bioware's RPGs that are heading in that direction. It always seems that RPG's are headed towards mutation or extinction, yet there is always a healthy market for them. Whenever a bigger company stops making RPGs, another one takes its place. Bioware has moved into a hybrid RPG-lite realm, but Piranha Bytes and CDProject Red have moved into the market and are doing quite well (PB has obviously been around for awhile, but they almost disappeared after Gothic 3 and have had something of a strong reemergence with the Risen franchise and thankfully appear much more stable financially now). So there are still a few big-time developers in the genre, some strong middle-weights, and a very passionate, small-scale indie scene. I think RPG's will remain relevant for quite some time.

Originally Posted by Nerevarine
I don't know the hard numbers behind the cost of making DA vs. Mass Effect, but I think the reported development time (5 years) of DA is very misleading - the first couple years seem to have been limited to just basic concept work, with full-time production taking place much later on.

Perhaps, but x > 0.

Originally Posted by Motoki
I just played the Warhammer Space Marine demo. Now that series is supposed to be a strategy series but that game plays just like a shooter. It seems the strategy games are not immune from being action-ized and they've already pretty much have all been real time for years. It seems you have to have Sid Meier's name attached to get away with turn based these days.

Actually, Warhammer 40,000: Space Marine is a pure third-person action game. It's probably easy to confuse it with Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War — which is a strategy game series — if you're not familiar with Warhammer 40k itself, which is simply a (really cool!) setting. So no genre confusion there.

Oh, and I quite liked the demo for what it was, an action game utilizing the extreme badassery of the Space Marines to the max!

Maybe to them, relevancy is directly tied to profitability. As they are a part of EA it is not a surprise that this is the primary concern. These big companies have to cater to the more popular demographics, to cover the massive development costs in running their studios. This has no relation to the "creative" aspect of game making though.

They can do and say what they will - I believe other, smaller, more efficient studios will fill the RPG void (like some have mentioned in this thread: Piranha Bytes, Runic, indies, etc..). This is where we'll find the traditional single-player RPGs. This is a niche market now - but I don't believe it will ever die out.

Also, MMORPGs are hugely prevalent and profitable these days, so it is downright silly to say RPGs are less relevant. Granted, some MMOs are very action oriented and hybrid-like, but many still do carry on the RPG torch with deep mechanics and character development.

"RPGs are being made less relevant by Bioware." ..would be a more accurate statement.

Originally Posted by JDR13
"RPGs are being made less relevant by Bioware." ..would be a more accurate statement.

I think they're just trying to justify the direction they've taken their games. I don't think there's a shred of truth to the idea that RPGs are becoming less relevant.

Originally Posted by human_male


I think they're just trying to justify the direction they've taken their games. I don't think there's a shred of truth to the idea that RPGs are becoming less relevant.

This kind of obviously untrue statement's becoming really common (see recent Diablo statements), although this is actually less insulting than some of them. Big company makes a bland, copycat game/dumbs down a long-running series, gets flak for it, then states why anyone who doesn't think it's the best thing ever is clearly out of touch with modern gaming and really quite stupid, bless their little hearts. The sad thing is there are probably people who believe these statements and change their tastes accordingly.

It's all soulless marketing speak to defend an equally soulless game. I wish more of the interviewers would call them out on these things, but then I suppose they'd lose advertising.

f%$#% rpg traitors!
turning their backs on what made them relevant in the first place