General News - Will The CRPG Genre Die Again?

I don't see how him having a narrow definition of crpgs makes his opinion any less nonsensical or immune to criticism.

He's using his own definition and talking like it represents a universally agreed upon thing when, in reality, he's probably in a small minority with that way of thinking.

Originally Posted by TheMadGamer
First computer rpg’s will die. Then all PC games will die. Then PC’s will die. Soon after cats and dogs will get along. It will be chaos. It will be anarchy.

Lots of cats and dogs get along. Does this mean we're already there? Are
RPGs dead? What am I typing this on right now?!?

Originally Posted by JDR13
He's using his own definition and talking like it represents a universally agreed upon thing when, in reality, he's probably in a small minority with that way of thinking.

Just one more post about this and we'll summon our own version of Candyman…

I'm still waiting for the first death, seriously. After that happens maybe then we can discuss future fatalities.

The entry cost for producing RPGs is low enough now that indies can continue to develop new games in this genre. You might see some of the big names drop out, like EA.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I don't see how him having a narrow definition of crpgs makes his opinion any less nonsensical or immune to criticism.

He's using his own definition and talking like it represents a universally agreed upon thing when, in reality, he's probably in a small minority with that way of thinking.

Him and quite a few others, everyone of them having a lot of viewers. Actually, most if not all videos on "CRPG" video games mean the classic definition.

I doubt it's his own definition, it existed years before his channel; it's just that the acronyms have adapted over time as Couch said, most of those people don't have the same PnP roots. For ex. Mortismal Gaming has played one PnP game long ago, still has fond memories of it, but he's not hardcore.

Video games became dominant and it didn't make sense to say "Computer RPG" anymore when it was obviously for computers, it became RPG. It did make sense to have a category for the old-school RPG video games though, hence "Classic RPG", etc. I could put links of them explaining that but it's boring

You're right, it's a narrow definition, like ARPG or JRPG and so on. What we call CRPG in the Watch, they call RPG, that's the broad term which is used widely by almost every channel, magazine and website but it doesn't tell much about the type of RPG, so isn't that useful to have them?

In the end I don't care about those acronyms, nor should anyone. Different people from different background with their jargon, which happens to have evolved differently (here for ex). I just find silly that, instead of watching the video and debating on its subject, most people only read the title of the thread and are debating whether or not the author is stupid, without making the slightest effort to understand what he meant.

Sorry if that has upset people, some seemed to have appreciated others of his videos though, and the subject may be recurrent but as are many others. We do have a sort of peak in the genre, it didn't feel completely irrelevant.

Originally Posted by JFarrell71
Just one more post about this and we'll summon our own version of Candyman…

Oops

Originally Posted by Couchpotato
Ah yes I remember this.

He caused a small riot last time with his CRPG meaning.

I'm sure Redglyph remembers as the discussion went the same way on another video he shared earlier this year. I brought up how names and genres evolve over time.

I do, and I do understand why nobody is eager to submit those news, really

For me, Crpg is also in contrast to console style rpgs. Zelda, Final Fantasy and the like. Sure, the frontier between console rpg and c-rpg is slimer, nowadays, but there are still games that are primarily meant for Mouse & Keyboards while others are more meant for console controllers.

Originally Posted by JDR13
I don't see how him having a narrow definition of crpgs makes his opinion any less nonsensical or immune to criticism.

He's using his own definition and talking like it represents a universally agreed upon thing when, in reality, he's probably in a small minority with that way of thinking.

We could call his definition NCRPG: Narrow CRPGs ;-)

For me personally every definition, which excludes games like Gothic, is useless. But I can understand people having different tastes.

Maybe newsbits about articles using the NCRPG definition should simply mention this in the headline and then these discussions could be avoided.

Originally Posted by Redglyph
You're right, it's a narrow definition, like ARPG or JRPG and so on. What we call CRPG in the Watch, they call RPG, that's the broad term which is used widely by almost every channel, magazine and website but it doesn't tell much about the type of RPG, so isn't that useful to have them?

I don't really differentiate between "crpg" and "RPG" anymore when talking about RPG video games even if it's a PC exclusive. I don't think many people do nowadays. I do differentiate with JRPGs though and will always say "JRPG" if it is one due to how different (imo) they are compared to Western RPGs.

As far as the "classic" definition, even that is debatable. Like HiddenX said, some people seem to leave out certain games for some inexplicable reason. By doing that, they do seem like they're trying to push their own definition.

Not that there's anything wrong with someone having their own personal definition. However, if they're only talking about a specific type of crpg, classic or otherwise, shouldn't they start off by mentioning that?

I believe we live indeed in a different age, regarding gaming.

A few days ago, I bought a Lemmings figurine at gamestop. And I thought : "We, this was a different age, then".

I do believe that a game like Lemmings isn't possible these days anymore.

Regarding C-RPGs (that's how i usually write it), the point is : Rather not the look, but rather the feel. Or, vice versa, depending on the view point.

Here's mine : I don't want to repeat myself again, but what defines a lot of more action oriented RPGs these days - and a lot of non-action RPGs as well - is the fact that they all tend to look dark. And feel dark.

It's all over the same themes "all over and over and over again, my friend",
which makes it boring for me. Rescue the world again from unspeakabvle horrors/dangers/plagues ? Been there, done that.

Rising into ultimate power so vast that not only dragons, but also gods can be slain ?
I've seen that (although not played that), too.

It speaks imho volumes about the player base that games WITHOUT these themes just wouldn't sell well enough.

Although … Stardew Valley kinda shows that it is possible …
But NO major game publisher or development studio would dare THAT !

Development costs have risen so far, that no non-Indie studio would dare building non-blockbusters.

Thus, the only art or form of diversity in gaming - especially in C-RPGs - consists of Indies doing something different - and since they get profits from smaller margins, because they games are developed with not-so-great graphics sometimes ( compare Mass Effect with Stardew Valley, to put 2 extremes against one another ! ) ,
because of that, we get diversity from smaller companies.

And I'm totally in for Diversity !

Which is why I prefer smaller companies over Microsoft, Google, Face Book, Apple.
These megalocompanies simply do not give me the same "amount" of diversity,
which a myriad of small companies is able to do.

To me originally a cRPG was a way to call a "Baldursgate-like", like a Souls-like or Roguelike, only "Baldursgate-like" seemed inconveniently long and impractical to use. Since there is no accepted definition in any official language, neither I was wrong to assume that, nor were other people to assume anything else. It's just one more word that has become flimsy and vague over the years as it has no traceable origin and people have randomly picked it and dragged it around, usingit in a number of different ways.

I don't know what the article creator was meaning by cRPG, but it's obvious that at this point it's a debate of semantics, more than anything else. I personally think he meant "will the Baldursgate-like genre die again?". That being the case, he kindof has a point, there was a decade where the scene lacked any game of that style worth remembering, possibly until the release of Dragon Age Origins.

That said, I would make a counter-query: "Did quality journalism die the day internet allowed anyone to make websites and publish news?"

Originally Posted by JDR13
Not that there's anything wrong with someone having their own personal definition. However, if they're only talking about a specific type of crpg, classic or otherwise, shouldn't they start off by mentioning that?

You're probably right, that would have been more methodical. He's been streaming the same genre for a long time, and that's not the first time someone talks about that and how PoE revived the genre, so he must assume people know what he means. He also gives many examples.

He's definitely not as precise and thorough as others like NeverKnowsBest and Noah Caldwell-Gervais, maybe that's why his videos are shorter. We can't have it all.

Originally Posted by Alrik Fassbauer
And I'm totally in for Diversity !

I saw what you did there

Seriously though, I mostly agree. I'd just suggest a slight different point of view, games like Lemmings or Indie in general could sell, it's just so much more difficult for them to do so because of the huge offer on the market. So a good idea, a good product, even a good sales strategy may not be enough.

But I'm glad they keep trying, I enjoy them more than blockbusters which rarely dare something too innovative.

Originally Posted by Nereida
That said, I would make a counter-query: "Did quality journalism die the day internet allowed anyone to make websites and publish news?"

Isn't "quality journalism" an oxymoron?

Baldursgate-like works for me It's certainly more intuitive, and those who know what a "classic" <insert definition here> RPG is, must know what BG is. And if not, who cares.

Originally Posted by Redglyph
Baldursgate-like works for me It's certainly more intuitive, and those who know what a "classic" <insert definition here> RPG is, must know what BG is. And if not, who cares.

But for some people Baldur's Gate was the beginning of the end of CRPGs. Only Goldbox RPGs are true CRPGs!!!11!

Alright old timer I'll get off your lawn as Goldbox RPGs are ancient at this point in time.

Redglyph everything written or posted on the internet is an oxymoron.

I don't think you guys know what an oxymoron is

Originally Posted by Pladio
I don't think you guys know what an oxymoron is

An oxymoron is a figure of speech that juxtaposes concepts with opposing meanings within a word or phrase that creates an ostensible self-contradiction.

I do this almost every day with everything I write.

Man, those gold box games sure as heck set a standard in seriously great computer gaming that has yet to be matched, yet alone surpassed. For me, only the first four Wizardry, first three Might and Magic game, and Bard Tales trilogy hold a candle to what the gold box era delivered to all us fortunate gamers.

Originally Posted by Nereida
That said, I would make a counter-query: "Did quality journalism die the day internet allowed anyone to make websites and publish news?"

Newspapers are struggling. Newspapers are dying out, one by one, and some try to adapt to the internet.

Maybe, one day, there won't be any printed Newspapers anymore. Or,maybe, only as a luxury thing.

Maybe, one day, we won't have books anymore, either, or only a very few printed books anymore.

And i say "newspapers", because for decades, newspapers were THE source of quality journalism !