Why do Successful Fantasy RPG Developers Quickly Stop Making Fantasy RPGs? - RPGWatch Forums
|
Your donations keep RPGWatch running!
RPGWatch Forums » Games » General RPG » Why do Successful Fantasy RPG Developers Quickly Stop Making Fantasy RPGs?

Default Why do Successful Fantasy RPG Developers Quickly Stop Making Fantasy RPGs?

March 19th, 2019, 23:28
As someone who's primary interest in RPGs is good ol' regular fantasy and its close derivations I probably notice this more than most, but I can't remember anyone else ever having pointed this out, but why do companies who become successful & make their name in the business from excellent fantasy RPGs almost universally then cease making fantasy RPGs and suddenly take a huge interest in futuristic and shooting based games?

It's like some kind of almost universal trend that cannot be avoided. Something deep within the recesses of game development psyche. You can say you like the trend and you could also provide some good guesses as to why, but is there something more to this?

Bioware: Absolute industry legends after Baldur's Gate 2, sealed the genre reputation with Neverwinter Nights, but then just stopped. Their next big game was science fiction and set in the Star Wars universe, then their next venture took them all the way to their big futuristic shooter Mass Effect. While Dragon Age did eventually bring them back to the fantasy genre, most people agree that the fantasy offerings of this studio since the early 2000s have been the background games to their main favourite genre, that of space shooting.

Bethesda: Hot off of their huge success with Oblivion after the nearly as popular Morrowind, Bethesda suddenly decided to buy the Fallout name & took it upon themselves to spend the next decade just doing futuristic shooters as a result. Sure, Skyrim popped up & was utterly massive, but that was more like a blip in the development schedule as the company tried desperately to make Fallout it's main title while fantasy fans could do nothing but twiddle their thumbs and play Skyrim for the 20th time.

CDProjectRed: It took a few iterations, but finally The Witcher series went mainstream & the big bucks started to really roll in. Their defining game series now a genre defining classic. So what was their next move? They're making a futuristic shooter.

Whalenought Studios: From out of nowhere Whalenought arrived with a fun little cRPG called Serpents in the Staglands. In the world of relativity, this game was huge for them, it established their reputation in the genre and the industry and while not being a mainstream game earned them a reputation far beyond the likes of most independent studios. So their next project? A futuristic shooter.

Numantian Games: Similar to Whalenought, Numantian made an independent cRPG with a small development team that got much wider sales and recognition than most independent studios. The words on most people's lips being, hey, these guys have some real potential. What is the result when people now ask what are they doing for their next game? They've made a futuristic shooter, not even RPG but in the RTS genre.

Bonus: Hairbrained Schemes: While HBS got famous by making futuristic shooters, the infamous Shadowrun Series, this series was still quite big in the fantasy stakes and was almost playable as a strict fantasy fan. But even here, their next step is one step beyond and they now make games where big robots shoot each other, a definite step away from the last tendrils of regular fantasy.

Double Bonus: Obsidian Entertainment. Like HBS, they're not as a tight a fit for the trend as the first group of named companies, but one can't help but feel the same tug going on here. Of their early years, most of their fantasy games were rehashes of old IPs, however, one always got the impression they weren't 100% happy with making regular fantasy cRPGs. How quick they were to develop the futuristic shooter Alpha Protocol, and how much of their mainstream credibility rested with their expansion to Fallout 3, named New Vegas. The reaction to their recent big fantasy release Pillars of Eternity was huge, however, even here one felt that they were only delivering what someone else wanted, the kickstater expectations somewhat deflated by the not-quite-what-I-was-expecting end result & later enhanced as when they then made their own IP, Tyranny, it was a dower but more finely tuned subversion of the fantasy genre. & what are we getting from them next, they're going for the futuristic shooter again.

It would seem that the only developer who has both achieved huge success with a fantasy RPG title and is currently still standing and is renown in the industry for making good fantasy cRPGs is the lovely Larian. Perhaps that's why so many people are now reaching out to the likes of jRPGs and such interesting derivatives as the Dark Souls series, at least those guys keep delivering!

Edit: I also even forgot to mention this site's favourite developer, Piranha Bites, who gained fame with the Gothic series, who then chose to venture into firstly pirates and then after that now design futuristic shooters with the Elex series. Though here at least the guns are supposedly the weakest weapon to use and so are discouraged. Hence why I didn't remember to include them. One assumes, either rightly or wrongly, that in the sequel they'll more likely buff guns than nerf them further or maintain the status quo after seeing the fan 'complaints'.
Last edited by lackblogger; March 20th, 2019 at 09:21.
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#1

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
+1:

Default 

March 19th, 2019, 23:36
Dragon Age proves you wrong as apparently it's next sequel is still in development.

The real question is why do successful singleplayer RPG developers (quickly?) move on developing mmos or phonegames.
--
Toka Koka
joxer is offline

joxer

joxer's Avatar
The Smoker
RPGWatch Donor
Original Sin 1 & 2 Donor

#2

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,895
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)

Default 

March 19th, 2019, 23:40
You didn't read the post did you
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#3

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

March 19th, 2019, 23:53
Of course not. Just the title, the first paragraph and the last (darksoulsy) paragraph.
--
Toka Koka
joxer is offline

joxer

joxer's Avatar
The Smoker
RPGWatch Donor
Original Sin 1 & 2 Donor

#4

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,895
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 01:38
I think it is that while fantasy RPGs are popular, shooters way more popular and most developers seem to be running after mainstream success stories accolades and titles.

Take my workplace, pretty much everyone in my software dev team near me play video games. Most of them are into "RPGs" if you ask them, but they play stuff like The Division, Destiny, LoL or Fallout. Some of them are huge WoW fans, but don't seems to play much single player fantasy RPGs. One of them played The Witcher 3 recently for the first time, but that game is now so mainstream that it's not too surprising he heard of it.

I know a few who played Mass Effect, but none ever talks about Dragon Age. Two of them are huge Fallout 3/4 fans, but not that much into Skyrim/TES.

One of them is actually into pnp D&D campaigns, but I never hear him talking about fantasy RPGs, even the D&D based ones.

It actually feels lonely sometimes when we talk games really. Hell, my best friends only play RPGs, but the JRPG kind. He hates when there is too many storyline branching, lol.

Also, shooters are probably cheaper to make too (less combat mechanics, more linear, you usually don't bother much with role-playing outside character progression, etc).

So conclusion: shooter are easy, cheaper and more popular.
--
It's developer is owned by Sony which means it'll remain a hostage of inferior hardware. ~ joxer
azarhal is offline

azarhal

SasqWatch
Original Sin Donor

#5

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,241
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 02:41
Wait, a "shooter" is any game with guns in it!? But I guess crossbows don't count??
--
The very powerful and the very stupid have one thing in common: instead of altering their views to fit the facts, they alter the facts to fit their views….
-- Doctor Who in "Face of Evil"
Zloth is offline

Zloth

Zloth's Avatar
I smell a… wumpus!?

#6

Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Kansas City
Posts: 6,357
Mentioned: 22 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 06:25
The thing is the vast majority of RPG are fantasy (as they've always been). Most RPG developers are still making fantasy RPGs. Post-apocalyptic is probably a distant 2nd. While we're seeing something of a "surge" in sci-fi / cyberpunk RPGs in development right now, I'd wager it's still a small minority of the genre, with far more fantasy RPGs being released.

Don't get me wrong I like fantasy as much as the next RPG nerd but I for one will always welcome more variety in setting. Action gamers get not only fantasy and sci-fi but also modern day, Wild west, Samurai, etc. you name it…

And while fantasy is no doubt a great setting for RPGs because magic, monsters, and all that jazz, why does it (almost) always have to be Tolkien-esque pseudo medieval European fantasy? I'd love to see more departures from this like Shadowrun and Arcanum. How about fantasy based on Asian Middle Eastern or African cultures? (there's a whole one RPG ever based on African folklore AFAIK) Urban fantasy. Lots of possibilities that would add a breath of fresh air to the world we've explored countless times.

Even among the examples you gave, it's not as if the developers have abandoned fantasy:

Whalenought is planninng to create the standalone expansion of SitS "Banquet of Fools" with the Copper Dream engine.

CDPR just released Thronebreaker and it seems very likely they will make more games in the Witcher universe in the future; just not with Geralt as the protagonist.

Numantian is working on Lords of Xulima 2 (I assume the sci-fi RTS was a smaller budget project made to generate some funds for the sequel to their fantasy CRPG).

I think HBS will likely make more SR games (assuming M$oft lets them)

We all know Bethesda is working on Elders Scrolls VI.

While Tyranny wasn't a success, Pillars of Eternity 3 seems pretty likely.

As for Bioware, can the games they make even be considered RPGs anymore?

With the sheer number of RPGs being released today it's hard to distinguish one game from the rest. And surely developers, who are creative people, may also get tired of treading in the same old fantasy worlds as well from time to time. So perhaps a better question is, why are so many developers making fantasy RPGs?
--
Currently Playing: Heroine's Quest, Quest For Infamy, Planescape: Torment
daveyd is offline

daveyd

daveyd's Avatar
Turn-based lifeform
RPGWatch Donor

#7

Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: PA
Posts: 1,698
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 09:24
Originally Posted by azarhal View Post
Some excellent words.
That's some fascinating insight into the real world beyond our genre specific daily ramblings and one I too can relate to as well. Thanks for taking the time to provide some real life examples rather than wishy-washy philosophy.
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#8

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
+1:

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 09:28
Originally Posted by Zloth View Post
Wait, a "shooter" is any game with guns in it!? But I guess crossbows don't count??
This debate is older than the hills. To attempt to refrain from running through the usual motions of this debate I'll simply ask you, would DOOM be the same game if the protagonist used a crossbow, or even a regular bow? If it did & somehow made fantasy machine-gun-like cross/bows, would it even then still have been both the same game and equally as popular? So instead of questioning why guns are so different when talking to RPG fans perhaps you should be asking FPS fans why cross/bows aren't as popular to them to get the insight you require?
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#9

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 10:20
Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
Lots of points so separated below.
There's an awful lot to respond to in this post, so you'll have to excuse me if this is a long post in reply. You seem to have listed mostly 'accepted misnomers' rather than reality in a lot of cases here, so let's get going and make a start in responding & taking care of a few of these 'myths' you are perpetuating:

Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
The thing is the vast majority of RPG are fantasy (as they've always been). Most RPG developers are still making fantasy RPGs. Post-apocalyptic is probably a distant 2nd. While we're seeing something of a "surge" in sci-fi / cyberpunk RPGs in development right now, I'd wager it's still a small minority of the genre, with far more fantasy RPGs being released.
No, the vast majority of RPGs used to be fantasy. 30 years ago. And the reason for this is that the main developers of RPGs didn't alter their series as they went along. Wizardry, Ultima, Gold Box and Might and Magic games were all always firmly in the fantasy arena, their sequels were never an incident of doing something completely different. Some of these even went 'sci-fi' and gun-oriented towards the very end of the game/series or also made the odd shooter RPG.

Since those companies stopped being relevant & all died of exhaustion, most of them having made about 8-10 games in their respective series, the number of fantasy RPGs has actually radically reduced. Since 2007 regular fantasy is actually harder to find than any other setting with regards to regular western games with either a budget or general hype. Being on an RPG forum makes one prone to see 'lots' of fantasy games, but the reality is that the ones we see represent barely a scratch in the gaming world as a whole.

Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
Don't get me wrong I like fantasy as much as the next RPG nerd but I for one will always welcome more variety in setting. Action gamers get not only fantasy and sci-fi but also modern day, Wild west, Samurai, etc. you name it…

And while fantasy is no doubt a great setting for RPGs because magic, monsters, and all that jazz, why does it (almost) always have to be Tolkien-esque pseudo medieval European fantasy? I'd love to see more departures from this like Shadowrun and Arcanum. How about fantasy based on Asian Middle Eastern or African cultures? (there's a whole one RPG ever based on African folklore AFAIK) Urban fantasy. Lots of possibilities that would add a breath of fresh air to the world we've explored countless times.
While I agree with you that more varied fantasy setting would be welcome, the varieties are already there in the games mentioned. Practically none of the game companies in the OP are what you'd call pure tolkienesque fantasy. It also a massive misnomer that 'regular' fantasy is even tolkienesque, that's just the slur-word used by people who don't tend to like fantasy. Tolkien merely adapted existing fantasy and melded it into a setting, just because you have elves or fairies in a game does not mean it's tolkienesque, those fantasy creatures existed in folklore long before Tolkien.

Likewise, D&D was also an amalgam of all existing fantasy folklore, from ancient greek/Egyptian myth all the way to African and norse mythology. The Fighting Fantasy series even includes regular dinosaurs in their monster manual. Just because developers tend to focus on Elves, Dwarves and Goblins/Orcs does not mean any games which also include these types are providing a specifically tolkienesque fantasy setting, they are usually just providing some familiarity to the setting to help people settle in the entirely new and unusual world. There are no hugely popular titles based entirely around the works of Tolkien. It is you who have applied a false slur-name to a genre for reasons that were originally malicious in nature but you have accepted as 'actual fact' regardless of the reality.

Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
Even among the examples you gave, it's not as if the developers have abandoned fantasy:

Whalenought is planninng to create the standalone expansion of SitS "Banquet of Fools" with the Copper Dream engine.

CDPR just released Thronebreaker and it seems very likely they will make more games in the Witcher universe in the future; just not with Geralt as the protagonist.

Numantian is working on Lords of Xulima 2 (I assume the sci-fi RTS was a smaller budget project made to generate some funds for the sequel to their fantasy CRPG).

I think HBS will likely make more SR games (assuming M$oft lets them)

We all know Bethesda is working on Elders Scrolls VI.

While Tyranny wasn't a success, Pillars of Eternity 3 seems pretty likely.

As for Bioware, can the games they make even be considered RPGs anymore?
Well, they factually have abandoned fantasy, even if temporarily. It's all very nice suggesting they'll go back to it with later games but as you well know the extent of the quality and likelyhood of future games relies entirely on the sales of current games. If we were having this conversation in 2002 then this would be the equivalent of you saying "Well Bioware is planning a Baldur's Gate 3" or "Black Isle is planning Van Beuren".

The point being, there's not actually any real reason to alter the genre or series that made you the name you are. As said previously, all the old RPG series used to never alter from their trademark series & teams like Larian don't have a need to keep jumping around the genres. While it is indeed nice to have variety and while it's ok to pine as to why XYZ theme isn't explored more, why would you expect one specific developer to somehow shoulder all of these expectations for you? Aren't you just adding competition with yourself and setting yourself up for future fan-civil-war by diluting your development teams and fanbase with too much alternating opinion and objectives?

Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
With the sheer number of RPGs being released today it's hard to distinguish one game from the rest. And surely developers, who are creative people, may also get tired of treading in the same old fantasy worlds as well from time to time. So perhaps a better question is, why are so many developers making fantasy RPGs?
They really aren't. Fantasy RPGs are now just a niche genre within a niche genre instead of being the 95% sum of one of the most popular genres in gaming. In most cases its a case of developers trying everything they can NOT to make fantasy RPGs. I agree with you that some developers do seem to make fantasy RPGs in spite of their own desires, though why the 'tiredness' of one set of developers means that fans also have to be 'tired' of the genre is the misnomer in this paragraph. Let me ask you, do people get 'tired' of making shooting games? Lol no. You seem to forget that about 75% of all new games are some variety of shooting game, what actual percentage of all games released are fantasy RPGs do you think? Does literally one or two per year strike you as "OMG there are soooo many, someone please stop the flood!"…
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#10

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 13:04
Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
The thing is the vast majority of RPG are fantasy (as they've always been). Most RPG developers are still making fantasy RPGs. Post-apocalyptic is probably a distant 2nd. While we're seeing something of a "surge" in sci-fi / cyberpunk RPGs in development right now, I'd wager it's still a small minority of the genre, with far more fantasy RPGs being released.
Just to provide factual detail to this statement I have examined all of the RPGwatch Game of the Year Awards going back to 2008. Of the higher profile releases the futuristic/shooter section of the market has had more entrants than the fantasy section, as follows:

2008 - Closest fantasy title is Fable 2 ranked 8th that year vs. Fallout 3 and Mass Effect, positioned 1st and 2nd respectively.

2009 - Dragon Age Origins & Divinity 2 vs. zero futuristic shooters.

2010 - Zero fantasy vs. Mass Effect 2 and Alpha Protocol.

2011 - Skyrim, Dragon Age 2, Witcher 2 vs. Deus Ex: Human Revolution.

2012 - Kingdoms of Amalur (ranked 8th)? vs. Mass Effect 3 and lots of derivative shooters making the list for want of any RPGs to examine.

2013 - Zero fantasy vs. Shadowrun Returns and lots of derivative future shooter like stuff.

2014 - Divinity OS, DA3, MM10 vs. Wasteland 2 and Shadowrun Dragonfall.

2015 - Witcher 3 and Pillars of Eternity vs. Fallout 4, Shadowrun Hong Kong.

2016 - Tyranny, Grim Dawn (?), Dark Souls 3 (?) vs. Deus Ex: Mankind Divided.

2017 - Divinity OS2 and Torment (?) vs. Elex, Prey, Mass Effect Andromeda.

2018 - PoE2 and Pathfinder: Kingmaker vs. AtomRPG.

And for each Grimoire or Blackguards there's an Underrail or Mars War Logs etc. And for each expansion like Siege of Dragonspeare there's a New Vegas.

So let's list those games in a more easily readable way:

Fantasy titles:
Fable 2 (?)
Dragon Age 1,2,3
Divinity 2, 1, 2
Skyrim
Witcher 2, 3
Amalur (?)
Might & Magic 10
Pillars of Eternity 1, 2
Tyranny
Grim Dawn (?)
Dark Souls 3 (?)
Torment (?)
Pathfinder: Kingmaker

= 14 games but 19 if you include the (?)

Futuristic/shooters:
Fallout 3, 4
Mass Effect 1, 2, 3, 4
Alpha Protocol
Deus Ex 3, 4
Innumerable derivative hybrids
Shadowrun 1, 2, 3
Wasteland 2
Elex (?)
Prey
AtomRPG

= 15 games but 16 if you include the (?) and many, many more if you include all the derivatives that get named on years that were very light on RPGs, such as X-coms, Bioshocks etc etc.

So I would really like to know where this notion comes from you have about fantasy being the vast majority. What facts is your presumption based upon?
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#11

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 14:05
I found an old "love letter to Bloodlines" video 2 days ago (stumbled on it while trying to find more info about the Paradox ARPG) and it start with what RPG used to be and what they are now and you see that switch from sword&magic to scifi-shooters RPGs during that segment that as nothing to do with fantasy vs modern/scifi.

By the way, some of them are more like hybrids. Do we consider VtM:Bloodlines fantasy or not considering it focus on vampires (and werewolves and spirits if we take the whole White Wolf universe) the modern setting not even being required (the old VtM:Redemption game spawned a few hundred of years and started during the Crusade)?

Same with the Shadowrun games, they have guns and tech, but also magic, orcs, elves, vampires, demons, etc. It date back to 1989 too, so not exactly recent. Vampire the Masquerade is from 1991. Cyberpunk was 1988 for a more scifi pnp setting.

These are all alter-Earth pnp settings, the same with most "scifi/shooter RPGs" now that I think about it. The fantasy pnp settings are more from the 70s/early 80s.

There might be some socio-cultural element tied to the shift and it might not just be because humans are lazy and shooters are easier to make and more popular. Although, I do suspect that's a big reason why when it comes to video games.

Originally Posted by daveyd View Post
As for Bioware, can the games they make even be considered RPGs anymore?
They still have way more player agency than the notDatingSim!JRPGs do and you'll have an hard time telling fans of notDatingSim!JRPG that they are just playing adventure games with stats.
--
It's developer is owned by Sony which means it'll remain a hostage of inferior hardware. ~ joxer
azarhal is offline

azarhal

SasqWatch
Original Sin Donor

#12

Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 7,241
Mentioned: 21 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 14:10
Shadowrun 1, 2, 3
You might as well list all the fantasy shovelware from phones on the opposing side.

Prey
That disappointing mediocrity is not RPG.
--
Toka Koka
joxer is offline

joxer

joxer's Avatar
The Smoker
RPGWatch Donor
Original Sin 1 & 2 Donor

#13

Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 20,895
Mentioned: 129 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 14:21
Originally Posted by joxer View Post
You might as well list all the fantasy shovelware from phones on the opposing side.That disappointing mediocrity is not RPG.
I see Joxer is still calling the new Shadowrun games shovelware for phones.
Originally Posted by azarhal View Post
I found an old "love letter to Bloodlines" video 2 days ago (stumbled on it while trying to find more info about the Paradox ARPG)
Thanks for the Link it was a good watch even if it's a few years old.
They still have way more player agency than the notDatingSim!JRPGs do and you'll have an hard time telling fans of notDatingSim!JRPG that they are just playing adventure games with stats.
True but their latest game Anthem gets no interest from me.

Hopefully the next Dragon Age game sticks to the old formula.
--
"Remember EA thinks Single-player games are dead & gamers are all basically idiots."

Check out my news Thread it's updated weekly.
Last edited by Couchpotato; March 20th, 2019 at 14:31.
Couchpotato is offline

Couchpotato

Couchpotato's Avatar
Anti-EA Supporter

#14

Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: New England
Posts: 21,274
Mentioned: 45 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 16:02
Originally Posted by azarhal View Post
I found an old "love letter to Bloodlines" video 2 days ago (stumbled on it while trying to find more info about the Paradox ARPG) and it start with what RPG used to be and what they are now and you see that switch from sword&magic to scifi-shooters RPGs during that segment that as nothing to do with fantasy vs modern/scifi.

By the way, some of them are more like hybrids. Do we consider VtM:Bloodlines fantasy or not considering it focus on vampires (and werewolves and spirits if we take the whole White Wolf universe) the modern setting not even being required (the old VtM:Redemption game spawned a few hundred of years and started during the Crusade)?

Same with the Shadowrun games, they have guns and tech, but also magic, orcs, elves, vampires, demons, etc. It date back to 1989 too, so not exactly recent. Vampire the Masquerade is from 1991. Cyberpunk was 1988 for a more scifi pnp setting.

These are all alter-Earth pnp settings, the same with most "scifi/shooter RPGs" now that I think about it. The fantasy pnp settings are more from the 70s/early 80s.

There might be some socio-cultural element tied to the shift and it might not just be because humans are lazy and shooters are easier to make and more popular. Although, I do suspect that's a big reason why when it comes to video games.
A quick reply before watching the video because you raise some very interesting points about fantasy and futuristic settings. Yes, futuristic settings are just as much fantasy as ancient settings and there are unclear lines about which is which, but for something like Shadowrun it should be plain that it's primary mechanic is guns while the futuristic talkfest Torment's primary mechanic is not (I say with trepidation having avoided it like the plague).

And you could even whittle out loads of the other games I listed as "fantasy titles" if we are specifically analysing the misnomer of "Rampant Tolkienesque". The Witcher is barely traditional fantasy, Pillars of Eternity wanted to use guns, and even Dragon Age decided to make magic some kind of controversial element whereby you'd land yourself in trouble if you used magic. All of which is a far cry from 'traditional fantasy'.

I shall now watch the vid
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#15

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

March 20th, 2019, 16:35
So, having watched the part of the video you reference before he expunges every detail of VTM:B's story arcs I'll take a minute to point out what's going on here and why "it all started around that time".

He opens by saying that words and meanings change, that cRPG now doesn't mean what cRPG did in the old days. So he is presenting a justification of what he means by "what they mean now". He is admitting that what he calls RPG is different to what is 'traditionally' meant by RPG. He is assuming authority by use of argumentation and reference, in the usual essay format.

Does his opinion hold up though?

Well, he opens with another misnomer "a game in which you play a role.". A useless statement that means nothing to anyone and has been debunked a thousand times. So how does he attempt to further that sentence into something meaningful? He claims that the game should "[allow] the freedom to method act in a play in which your character truly exerts narrative gravity". Which is false. By this definition any Telltale game is more of an RPG than Baldur's Gate 2. It opens the door to RPGs being pretty much anything where, at some point, you can choose either the left or right path.

He's on the right track though with reference to the old tabletop games. The wonder of tabletop games was indeed that you could do anything and fully shape your adventure. He agrees that computer games in their current form cannot do this and that when computer games try to mimic this it's always currently going to be a 'scripted freedom'. In other words, provide a flavour of choice. All cRPGs have always provided the flavour of choice, just some in more complex ways than others. Even Dark Souls has some narrative choice. Even Icewind Dale has some moments of narrative choice.

What the cRPG does is assume you do not have friends around at the moment with whom you can play a 'proper' tabletop RPG. It assumes you are just playing a scripted module, just like the many modules that came along with the original P&P sets for people who couldn't be bothered to independently DM a game. The whole point of the module was not to provide choice but to provide a set taster experience of the P&P systems. It had nothing to do with the narrative beyond some instances of branching paths or dialogue checks.

Why this person wants to change the concept of RPG is beyond me and where he got indoctrinated is beyond me, but a good guess would indeed be certain developers in the background and foreground of game development, from people like Molyneaux (sp?) and his laughable Fable series to the 'gang' at Troika that wanted to make three incredibly complex games at the same time and over-exert themselves into unrealistic expectations and failed development three times over as a result. Such people could well be considered among the 'pioneer' developers in the distant future when computers can perform the DM role and people can do 'anything' in a game like in Star Trek's VR room, but by that point there won't be genres used as communication tools, they'll just be you telling the computer what you want to do today. "I feel like some starship cockpit battles today, put me in a cockpit and send some alien ships at me".

But this isn't a blame game and I don't think anyone at Troika or Molineux etc are the root cause of the love of guns overrunning cRPGs. You can't blame these people for the actions of all the developers mentioned in the OP. The eternal question of "what is an RPG", which has already been known and established but whatever, is not at the root of why so many developers seem to instinctively turn away from fantasy at the first available moment.
lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#16

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)

Default 

March 23rd, 2019, 14:44
Originally Posted by azarhal View Post
So conclusion: shooter are easy, cheaper and more popular.
This. Because the people DEMAND more and more graphically awesome looking games, the dev costs get higher and higher, too.

Shooters are - very cynically speaking - about nothing bit great graphics.
I do know that this is not true
(I'm still waiting for an Adventure game with Far Cry graphics !),
but it appears as if the reduced attention span of the younger generations are not good for grasping long and winded stories, or/and any sophisticated character progression system. Or ANYTHING detailed, even.

Even more cynically speaking, the long-term biological experiment performed by the big developing companies - only big ones do have enough money to do games with great graphics - has been a full success -

- like some kind of self-fulfilling prophecy : "People don't have the attention span to play RPGs. They want fast games."

A success, because developing so many short-attention-span games has imho led to people getting trained into having short attention spans even more. People imho simply unlearn (or never learn from the start) to follow long and winding stories.
This begins even with handhelds, I fear.

This is my personal opinion.

Originally Posted by lackblogger View Post
Molyneaux (sp?) and his laughable Fable series
I played Fable 1 for a shhort while (until I began to stumble upon autolevelling enemies - which I do really hate - which is why I never finished Wizardry 8, even although I wanted to.).
I loved that game, because its setting was so much different from the standard Fantasy setting ! They even had a twist on the race of Hobbits !
Imho so sad that they used such a formula for it. I really loved that setting.
--
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex, and more violent. It takes a touch of genius and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction." (E.F.Schumacher, Economist, Source)
Alrik Fassbauer is offline

Alrik Fassbauer

Alrik Fassbauer's Avatar
TL;DR
Original Sin 1 & 2 Donor

#17

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Old Europe
Posts: 18,688
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)

Default 

March 23rd, 2019, 20:39
Because the market is saturated and they want to hedge their bets.
Drithius is offline

Drithius

Drithius's Avatar
Laughing Gnome

#18

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 4,638
Mentioned: 9 Post(s)

Default 

March 23rd, 2019, 21:04
I'm willing to bet that most of those companies see themselves as "Video game developer that has created one or more successful fantasy RPG" rather than "Fantasy RPG developer". Taken that way, it's no surprise they are trying out other genres.
--
My Backlog
http://www.backloggery.com/mattynoaa
Nephologist is offline

Nephologist

Nephologist's Avatar
Keeper of the Watch

#19

Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 602
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)

Default 

March 23rd, 2019, 23:53
We have a winner!

lackblogger is offline

lackblogger

lackblogger's Avatar
retired poster
Original Sin 2 Donor

#20

Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,733
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
RPGWatch Forums » Games » General RPG » Why do Successful Fantasy RPG Developers Quickly Stop Making Fantasy RPGs?
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT +2. The time now is 19:50.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by DragonByte Security (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright by RPGWatch