Do RPG fans have survivorship bias?

It's complicated. Has quality of RPGs declined? Or do gamers just get more picky / jaded as we get older? Or is it just that people are more inclined online to voice their complaints / criticisms than praise a game?

I recently played Fallout 1 for the first time in over 15 years. It still had many qualities I like but also things I strongly disliked (like the fairly frequent random encounters w/ trash mobs). And combat moves so slowly. I'd still say it's a good CRPG and it's still playable, but probably wouldn't tolerate some of the shortcomings if they were released in a modern game.

I think many older gamers view the classics with rose-colored glasses 'cause we first played them when we were younger / less experienced gamers. So yes nostalgia is a huge factor. And it isn't really "fair" to compare a game made a couple decades ago with a recent one.

That said, there is something about classic CRPGs that seems to be absent from most recent "old school" CRPGs. Many of the classics tended to be more challenging (both in combat and lack of handholding), but there were other interesting touches. For ex: Will we ever see another CRPG where having a low intelligence actually completely alters your character's dialogue as in FO, Arcanum, or NWN? It seems like no dev. would be crazy enough to devote that much extra work to something only a handful of players may even see / appreciate.

There's also the effect of those of us who played classics as a kid / teen are now older. We have full-time jobs, bills, responsibilities which means much less free time. If I'm going to put tens of hours into one game it damn well better be enjoyable. I can't put up with filler content anymore, though I was probably a lot more willing to overlook it then.

Perhaps developers have also changed their approach due to more player feedback, including feedback on the pre-release. Some of my favorite recent CRPGs are Shadowrun and Expeditions: Viking but even on the highest difficulty they're way too easy. Perhaps they received a lot of complaints that it was too hard in the beta and they overcompensated. Or maybe this is because more people (in the general gaming population) are likely to avoid a game if the general consensus is that it's hard. I sometimes see comments about Age of Decadence that "I haven't played it yet because I heard it was extremely difficult".
 
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
2,315
Location
PA
What I notice with modern games is that there is far less emotional binding/experience with them. There just is no story in most Action-RPGs. Only Combat and Loot. and that's it.

I love Drakensang 2 so much because it makes me feel. Have emotions.
For example - but not only - just by looking at the beautiful environment, together with this music (Elven Territory, anyone ?).

The only kind of "emotion" Action-RPGs of today create are : Adrenaline.

And, also, less challenge. In the Realms Of Arcania (now TDE) games you had to equip your characters with warm clothes in winter in order to let them survive. If not, then illnesses and death were following. I don't know of no other game of today that goes into detail like that.

Or micromanagement in general : Blizzard showed us to get rid of that completely. I have witness SWTOR getting rid of micromanagement almost completely, too. Are we people considered as too dumb now so much that we are not able to do any micromanagement ? Is this a training we received through Blizzard and all the other games that got rid of it, too ? Are we trained now to rather have fast reflexes thanh thoughtful, logical planning ? What does this mean for RL ? Weren't games in the past centuries used as a kind of training for later life, too ? What does this mean if the Gaming Industry trains them like "you do not plan into the future" and "you don't need any micromanagement" when this carries over into RL ?
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
What I notice with modern games is that there is far less emotional binding/experience with them. There just is no story in most Action-RPGs. Only Combat and Loot. and that's it.

I love Drakensang 2 so much because it makes me feel. Have emotions.
For example - but not only - just by looking at the beautiful environment, together with this music (Elven Territory, anyone ?).

The only kind of "emotion" Action-RPGs of today create are : Adrenaline.

And, also, less challenge.

Going by how the vocal complainers are when a game storyline isn't "blow all the shit up" with all the characters being action stereotypes in AAA games. I'm not surprised personally.

Challenge is something else, the majority of gamers just want to play the game, not get frustrated by it. Also, your example isn't a challenge, it's micromanagement. ;)

Or micromanagement in general : Blizzard showed us to get rid of that completely. I have witness SWTOR getting rid of micromanagement almost completely, too. Are we people considered as too dumb now so much that we are not able to do any micromanagement ?

Not dumb, lazy.

So lazy that some gamers still find a way to complains about there being too much micromanagement when there is barely any at all.
 
Joined
Oct 13, 2007
Messages
7,313
What I notice with modern games is that there is far less emotional binding/experience with them. There just is no story in most Action-RPGs. Only Combat and Loot. and that's it.
I'm playing through NieR: Automata right now so that's sounding pretty silly to me. Batman games have plenty of story (with Arkham City's being particularly good). Dragon's Dogma has some good story in it. The Mass Effect games are criticized because of the ending which is not something that's going to happen in a series with a weak story. Seriously, even Just Cause 3 which is a straight up action game specifically about blowing shit up has a story! They did a pretty poor job of it but they tried. What action RPGs have you been playing lately, Alrik?
 
Joined
Aug 3, 2008
Messages
8,238
Location
Kansas City
None, to be honest. I'm dabbling around with Torchlight a little bit.

No, I don't want action games anymore. I want slow games. Slow, but better story.
No speedruns, please.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
A lot of adventure products have been released lately.

What I notice with modern games is that there is far less emotional binding/experience with them. There just is no story in most Action-RPGs. Only Combat and Loot. and that's it.
?

Indeed, vid products are now designed to less engaging, less involving.In the past,engagment and involvement were a big measure of the quality of a game.

Now, it is not because of the lack of a story. Most products come with a story these days and players scream when products do not come with a (scripted) story.

As to being bound or engaged, in the past, it was also done by gameplay.

Since story prevails in vid products, it is better to say that stories fail to provide an emotional attachment etc

Because vid products are all about story these days.
 
Joined
Mar 29, 2011
Messages
6,265
A hard question to answer.

I think it's a very complicated topic - and it's impossible to make it into some kind of rule, no matter what your thoughts might be.

Personally, I think a lot of passionate fans tend to feel a sense of loyalty towards the developers of games that gave them the greatest pleasure in the past.

Certainly, to me, that would seem very prevalent on the Codex - as well as around here, only less so.

But it's merely my perception.
 
Back
Top Bottom