After 35 Years, Why Hasn't Any Developer Learned the Secret of RPGS?

Why do you play RPGs? For the story, the challenge, the grinding to be somebody worthwhile in the world?

No, no, and no.

The one thing RPGs can do that can't be done elsewhere is attempt to give you unlimited ego fulfillment. It is like wanting to hire a hooker, but every game nowadays wants to treat you like you are out to work for a meaningful relationship with your arbitrary fantasy situation.

No. A game will have 500 people call you whelp, or order you about, and may or may not get to making the virtual sycophants that people's egos get off on. You start out in rags and if you work for 50 hours you can look fly, but no one in the game really cares.

Bioware, nobody cares about the freaking Dragon Age world, they want a bunch of Morrigans to get hot to jump your bones just because you are you.

Bethesda, nobody cares about your NPC schedules and freaking endless world lore. They want virtual people to acknowledge their lives would be crap if you didn't exist to grace them with your freakin badassness.

CD Projeckt Red, nobody cares about Geralt's moral decisions with consequences. They want people to acknowledge he is the Twilight-like paragon whom every lass wants to throw their panties at.

Ego fulfillment. That is the power of virtual worlds with virtual people who don't have ego desires of their own. They can exist solely to fulfill your ego desires. Ego fulfillment is the deepest fulfillment possible in a game, use the platform to give people what is impossible in the real world. They are paying you for this after all, they shouldn't have to work for your affection.

Originally Posted by Burress
Why do you play RPGs? For the story, the challenge, the grinding to be somebody worthwhile in the world?

Yes to all of those so I wont participate in another negative rant thread.

No developer has it down. RPGs flirt with their secret strength, but fail to distill it properly. The PC is made a rock star in every game, but nobody who makes these games have studied rock stars and what is so awesome about being one. So they get one thing right, but they water it down so you get a fat side of fast-food worker scrub in with your rock star treatment.

Why do you have to go door to door in RPGs to help people for a gruff thanks and a leveled reward? Rock stars don't do this. People have to go to their agent, then if they are lucky they can get an interview with the star, and the star shows up and acts however weird he desires and he receives worship. No matter what the rock star says, you don't dare get uppity, or the man you are begging for attention from will get up and leave. So rock stars say wild and crude things to people, and people take it.

You put a hint of snarkiness in one of your dialogue options in a game, people threaten to break your legs if you don't fall in line, and for the most part you have to take it. You have to go door to door to please people with no feelings like your own feelings don't matter, and you have to talk to them like they have feelings even when it hurts your feelings to take their crap.

What hangups are the developers putting on players, and why won't some genius come along and cash in on what everyone else can't figure out?

Couch you liar!

But on topic (title), there are developers who know the secret of RPGs.

Sadly, only three types of RPG developers exist today:
1. Those who can make a great RPG, but can't find a publisher (funds)
2. Those who suck at making RPGs, but have a big and evil publisher who invests millions into it
3. Those who can't make a decent RPG and can't find someone to fund it

There is no fourth option!

Originally Posted by joxer
Couch you liar!

But on topic (title), there are developers who know the secret of RPGs.

Sadly, only three types of RPG developers exist today:
1. Those who can make a great RPG, but can't find a publisher (funds)
2. Those who suck at making RPGs, but have a big and evil publisher who invests millions into it
3. Those who can't make a decent RPG and can't find someone to fund it

I know I just love to be an asshole sometimes as it provides me with entertainment, and some posters just deserve it sometimes.

Anyway I agree with your three types of RPG developers.

I feel like I am in an RPG now. Did anyone read any of the topic?

Might & Magic 6 & 7 were great in the "Ego fulfillment" department.
Ranks and prizes everywhere in your log.

You mean did anyone read any of the first post?
Yea, we did.
But with that title, it's a bit off-topic, dontcha think?

I don't think so. There is one thing that virtual worlds and people lack that our world does, rules and egos. No one takes advantage full advantage of that.

In Skyrim, you are the Dragonborn, and that is awesome everyone acknowledges that by your very essence your are superior to all of them (they don't have egos, so they can take this). But when Argenir the Greybeard starts talking down to you, can you pimp slap him like you ought to? No, you do get the choice to call him "master" though. Do you get an agent to help you sort out all the requests for services of the man who is the savior of existence? No, you have to go out in the weeds and ask the sods if they have problems you can solve for them.

That is an RPG which actually panders to ego fulfillment, and it doesn't do it 10% as well as it could and should.

Do rock stars play rpgs? No, they live them. The RPG lets everyone go as far with ego desire as imagination allows, and developers haven't quite pinned down that that is the one area where people can't get enough of it. They don't understand the power, so all heroes are errand boys in RPGs.

The secret is simple. Ego fulfillment is super awesome. Virtual worlds work however people want them to, and virtual people act however they are programmed. Use those two things to make an RPG which doesn't lose focus that combat, story, and leveling are only useful as they can grant the player ego fulfillment. Has any game done that? Nope. They think combat, story, and leveling are fun things in and of themselves. They are, but nothing is like ego fulfillment.

I hit on the very essence of what makes an RPG fulfill the desires of its players, I don't see how I got off topic.

You are totally off-base here.

What people want from RPGs is DILEMMAS! :

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q_LEbZ3ZSww

That was awesome, thank you so much for posting that vid. I have been in every one of those dilemmas so many times. It is all pure neuroticism. Am I having fun when I play an RPG, or am I in some kind of mental iron maiden at all times? I wonder.

RPG players want these kinds of problems right? Or the game would be easy. This isn't a systemic sadomasochistic relationship between dev and player at all is it?

Why not Daenerys or Margery as a dilemma? And who needs dilemmas, why not try for both? That should metaphorically be all the dilemmas in an RPG, and not a single one of those in that list at all.

I play for the stories. The games with deep stories are the ones I go back and play over and over again.

So to speak, there are very few virtual worlds. Some studios are working to implement virtual worlds but that is it.

So called RPGers play for the thrill of power questing, the power mongering that is ego flattering.

The player might be made a rockstar but the player wants to earn the status of a rockstar.

The player wants to start small and grows and the player wants to feel the growth is deserved. It changes the observation. They want the touring of small clubs at start (then no agent)
Later, in so called RPGs, players are sollicitated.
Usually, the pattern of power implies:
-door to door at start
-when big enough, players are sollicitated for a big quest.
Agents have no room in this configuration because there is no competiting offer in so called RPGs, it usually boils down to a few big places and you do not negotiate the fees on those ones.
The small fish that might remain in the later game is here to serve to flatter the player's ego, that is charity, the player has gone big but he might be given the opportunity to return what he earns to the smaller kind

etc…


Moral choices exist in the scope of making the player feel powerful. Usually, moral choices in so called RPGs mean the player's avatar is strong enough to make his own rules.

TW3 trailer on monsters tells that story.

Of Rivia does not respect the witcher code (dont not meddle), he is not bound by the law of his peers.
Then of Rivia does not respect the law of the land (the woman was legally tried and sentenced), he does not respect the common law.
He makes his own law because he is powerful enough.

The power trip looked for by so called RPGers.

Developpers might not have learned the secret of RPGs but they mastered the secret of socalled RPGs.

I understand your point of view Burress, and I do think ego stroking is a part of it, but no more so than any other situation in life - ranging from work to Facebook. We love ourselves and we love getting compliments.

That being said, I don't like simply being "the chosen one" in games. I really dislike that in fact. I like being rewarded for accomplishing something, which is why I really like games by Piranha Bytes. The character is generally not special beyond whatever skills he's got, and he has to be a part of the world like everyone else (factions are usually very well done in PB games). Also, it tends to be satisfying to master the combat and character systems in their games.

Beyond that, I also play games for stories and characters. The same reason I like reading books. Games, to me, are often just interactive books, where I can take an active part in the story.

For me the main aspect of CRPGs is always the early challenge starting as a real rookie, getting better through intelligent decisions over time and finally being the hero at the end of the game or at least have the satisfaction that I have accomplished something in this virtual world.

And indeed the Gothics are really good in this. They avoid auto-scaling enemies.
A wolf that is deadly in the early hours of the game is a piece of cake later.

So the main aspect for me is character development. The process of getting better to finish increasing challenging quests.
The feeling of "I have beaten" the game/main quest in the end makes me feel good.

For my part, this is not the most important aspect - and I could easily enjoy a game that didn't provide much of it, if it had other things more to my liking.

To me, the two primary aspects that appeal to me the most would be immersion and exploration. Games that make me want to see what's around the corner and which succeed in making me feel like part of an actual world, will all but certainly be desirable to me. With or without a powertrip.

It's key to appreciate that people want different things for different reasons - and while "ego stroking" is universally pleasant, it's not necesarily why we're all playing games.

Also, games evolve and our expectations change as we grow. Even if there was a secret, it would change once we'd had our fill of it.

There were many good replies and I want to address each of you.

ChienAboyeur

If you have played enough RPGs to be posting here, you have earned rock star status more times than you can easily count. How can you still want to re-earn this status each time you set down for some avocation? Have games shamed you in to believing you have to put more time in to their game than I put in to most of my college classes to have earned being better than other virtual egos?

I agree, the story exists for the ego fulfillment of the player, and the moral power that shapes the world is one expression of the importance of the player. But is it a power trip?

Well, here is the situation in the real world. You have a dirty ego, because you have to squeeze in with billions of other egos, and share and reciprocate ego pleasure in order for everybody to get some. There are religions based on ego shaming so that you fit in to this pinching scenario with as much grease as possible. But that is not because the ego is shameful or a lie, it is just because the world is set up to hurt where it matters most.

The virtual people have virtual egos. What good is a virtual ego? It doesn't feel any pain and it doesn't get any pleasure. The only purpose they serve is as a tool to satisfy the player's ego. The villains, big shots, and nobodies are mirrors of the real world that ring with the player, but the developer should never get confused that any deference to a virtual ego is a good of itself. It is only to ring with the player's real world experience, and then by the virtual rules of the virtual world, the consequences can appeal solely to the pleasure of the player. Why shouldn't they?

You talk about earning status. Earning is a dirty word, you should never earn anything in an RPG. You are due God status in a virtual world by having a real ego. Earning is a concept that rings with the player's real world experience, but the proper RPG will realize that the player is seeking relief from this horrid burden. That is why in a couple dozen hours in almost every RPG you go to the apex of status, it is an expectation. But developers don't recognize that the player is already due, and they make it actual freakin work. That is a developer being dumb, and they all are dumb to varying degrees about what they are actually doing.

Originally Posted by Burress
CD Projeckt Red, nobody cares about Geralt's moral decisions with consequences. They want people to acknowledge he is the Twilight-like paragon whom every lass wants to throw their panties at.

Speak for yourself sir! I don't think generalising about such things helps you make your point about fantasy power wish fulfillment.

For me, interpreting Geralt from a role-playing perspective, making moral choices and endeavouring to pave a neutral path through the extremities around him, is one of the joys of the series. Your "Twilight paragon" is quite frankly pointless and irrelevant for me.

I pretty much disagree with the entire post. Like Maylander I agree that ego-stroking is part of it but that it is not the whole thing. Most people do enjoy some attention and recognition regardless of the format - from peers at work, family, friends, games, social media, what have you. Just common sense in regards to human nature.

Where I pretty much totally disagree is the strength and amount as that tends to be far more personal. Some people may have very low self-esteem or narcissistic issues and may enjoy a very high degree of ego-stroking; their sense of self-worth and confidence may even depend on it - although at that level it is a psychological issue and not healthy. Some people may need almost no ego-stroking from others. Their personal sense of internal rewards and confidence are high enough that they rely on internal systems to maintain good self-esteem and care very little about what others think.

The majority fall into the less extreme ranges and level of self-awareness (meaning even though they may enjoy some ego-stroking they are aware of what is happening and try to not let others opinions influence them to much).

When one plays a game they can't help but bring their personality to it as well. Consequently some people may play to be all powerful and the chosen one. Others may want to live the life of a simple farmer. I see this all the time on Nexus. Many people share their stories on characters and they range from the childish and immature - characters who are omnipotent gods and where the slightest frown from an NPC deserves killing them - while others want the hardest struggle possible and want enemies they can't overcome.

It is also more complicated than the simplicity of the post tries to make of it. Most people (there are always exception) do not like to feel powerless and hopeless whether real life or a game; being unable to protect your friends/followers/companions, being unable to seek retribution/revenge from an enemy - these are things most anyone is going to hate and fear. Being able to get powerful enough over time - so you can right wrongs or seek retribution - is a fun aspect of games no question there at all. Some of this is ego stroking but I don't think it can be boiled down that succinctly. When my character gets his ass handed to him by the Thalmor I want to know I can come back later and pay them back. However if I can beat their ass with no effort, no work, right at the start of the game … why even bother playing? It is pointless. Even later I do not want to be all powerful. All those mods that make people god like with super powered abilities and weapons? Those tend to be for the ones who want their egos stroked, to be all powerful.

However it is very naive to think that is how everyone wants to play a game or assume that is the only purpose of an RPG. Like many posters here I enjoy games for many reasons - some of that is ego-stroking as I do like to be something more than just another peasant - there I agree with the OP - but I also don't want everyone fawning over me nor do I want to be all powerful because that is both boring and unnecessary for me to enjoy the game. I get a sense of satisfaction out of my own accomplishments. I want progression, I want to earn my skills, abilities, armor, and all of that. Just like real life - when I lost weight and became very muscular I did not take pills or seek surgery or quick answers. I studied nutrition and spent years in the gym - and the sense of personal self-satisfaction and confidence at doing it all myself fr exceeded the actual results themselves. Earning my first bachelors degree took me 7 years yet when it was done I knew I had earned it - I did not buy some online diploma or cheat nor was it handed to me. Major accomplishments at work mean so much more when I know I did my absolute best and put in my top effort. Things that are just handed to me I find far less satisfaction in - they are boring and mean nothing over all.

For me RPG and games in general are for the story, exploration, character development, role playing, some ego-stroking, companions and their interactions (relationships), and, to a lesser degree, combat that is challenging with some easy foes and some who may be unbeatable (it optional quests).

Some people may want something for nothing, to not earn anything. They see it as a dirty word it seems. Not me - their is a sense of satisfaction, of confidence in skill mastery, of fulfillment in overcoming obstacles, in games and real life that brings a powerful sense of pleasure and reward. I no more want everything handed to me in a game than I even do in real life. There is little worth or value in getting something for nothing (with exceptions and certain limits of course - real life is a one-shot deal after all and only a fool is going to not accept certain free handouts )

The primary goal any game designer needs to focus on is, is it fun? And when it comes to doing anything that isn't focused on starving to death or keeping your family safe, if you have that luxury then individuals crave a challenge. They produce art, play games, get an education, design and engineer, etc. If not challenged, their idol time can be wasteful and even destructive.

If it was all about story then you could get that from an Adventure Game, reading a book, or watching TV even.

I don't think anyone has failed to stroke the player's ego, in fact being "The Chosen" messiah is well known cliche.

When I ran a NWN PW I saw the effects of a lot of things tried and retried. A pure role playing server doesn't work. An action server has no depth. You have fun for a little while but you need a break to do something else.

You've got to give your players something to do and always challenge them. They may balk and complain at effort, but overcoming the challenge is a very rewarding experience. I increased the number of players when I made my server more challenging to about at the same level I was getting complaints. My complainers couldn't argue against that.