Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Quick Links
RPGs can become much more “radical” but hardcore players are “resistant to change”, says Obsidian
![[Deleted User]](http://we.vanillicon.com/v2/e7c9305aa2cdf6069206388b4771c61d.svg)
[Deleted User]
Posts: 12,262
The user and all related content has been deleted.
Comments
PoE even has a story mode where you really don't even have to worry about combat stats, combat encounters are intentionally easy so one can focus solely on enjoying the story. Of course, you can also adjust that to include your traditional stat metagame while maintaining the same story choices.
I say: wow us. Show us what you mean, don't just talk about it. Because as good as it sounds, I'm having a tough time seeing what's stopping them at this point. Kingdom Come marries stats and story-telling intimately. It's one of the largest features that has driven it's popularity.
Maybe I'm just not interpreting his words correctly. But I feel like if Obsidian wanted to experiment, their playerbase would gush support for them over it. They've bought themselves that cred with their past few releases.
I know I'd check it out.
"Be water my friend" - Bruce Lee
“Microtransactions? In a single player role-playing game? Are you nuts?”
― CD PROJEKT RED
I think his overall point is that devs can only focus on so much and in turn offer a complete within budget game. All of those building systems take a huge chunk of that budget and development time. SO to focus more on worlds and intricate game-play advancements, would require ditching those traditional elements in order to offer broader options elsewhere.
Makes perfect sense to me, because you cannot deny that any RPG that has deviated from that traditional approach even slightly ( like the above cases) has received some serious backlash from purists.
It's the same issue many MMOs have faced, essentially on the same grounds.
For every minute you are angry , you lose 60 seconds of happiness."-Emerson
Clothing affected the way people reacted, cleanliness too. That's unique, and it's merely one of the chances they took. It paid off.
The idea that you will please everyone is foolish. If you think you can change the industry with an idea you have, copping out by blaming the consumers seems strange.
I liked pillars of eternity 1 because it was the game that I wished dragon age inquisition had been and while it would probably benefit obsidian to make the game after poe2 different I hope its because they have a genuinely good idea for a game and not because they want to make a bethesda open world game like so many others started doing.
The truth is that it just doesn't translate well, and games where it does work, such as PoE, remain niche and no amount of critical acclaim will give that type of game play widespread appeal.
There is no level of innovation that can be made without RPG fans screeching.
Ultimately, I think this boils down to your classic sandbox versus themepark discussion.
Telling a scripted story - which is what the traditionalists consider a pillar of an RPG - mandates restricting the player's actions so that it fits within the story. This is most easily achieved with a themepark design and standard vertical progression, resulting in a lot of very linear, very similar RPGs.
If you want to start offering more freedom within RPGs, it gets harder and harder to tell a good story because the player's actions often conflict with the story (it is for this precise reason that I hate stories in computer games). Balancing becomes a bigger issue. Lets say you face a boss half way through the game. In a typical RPG, you can pretty much guarantee a player's power because you've tightly controlled their progression so you can balance the fight for that power level. In a more open game, the player might be massively over- or under-powered due to earlier choices, resulting in a bad experience.
So, I believe that if developers really want to open up the potential of the RPG genre (which I hope they do), I think they need to reduce the reliance on story as the primary content, and this is where I believe the developer is referring to hardcore traditionalists. An RPG with minimal story?! Most people wouldn't understand. The traditionalists would argue it's not an RPG.
This is why even some of the more popular "sandboxes" like The Elder Scrolls and GTA are not actually sandboxes, they are still primarily themeparks with the majority of content coming from quests. You can still go off and treat the games like sandboxes, but the reality is the devs haven't provided you with enough tools to do much in the world.
I think this is also where Josh is referring to finding a proper scope to a project. When you start removing the traditional RPG aspects (linear story and progression), what do you have left? You have these interesting worlds that have been created, but pretty much nothing to do except kill stuff. It'd be pretty boring to just kill stuff without context. So, you need to start adding tools - proper crafting, political systems, housing, factions etc - and that is all risky and expensive.
I hope the genre gets there. I know personally that I hate story-driven RPGs and I want more open world / sandbox designs to be given a chance.
For example, I would love to be able to build a city in an RPG. I would start out just building my own house. Over time, I'd need to build facilities (like a well), attract new villagers, attract tradesmen, establish trading routes with associated agreements with other villages / towns. Eventually build a wall, and a keep, then larger walls etc. Defend my trade conveys from bandits, or train guards that defend them for me.
Or, an RPG that lets me establish my own bandit faction. Recruit some thugs, setup a base in the woods, establish stalking grounds, rules for engagement (don't attack if the wagon protected by 4+ guards for example), find fences for the stolen loot etc. This would then lead to the sort of emergent gameplay that keeps games interesting for a long time - having to re-establish bases when "the good guys" destroy mine, or breaking out bandits from the local jail, or bribing officials to remove a bounty.
Thats the sort of thing I want to see in my RPGs, but all I ever see is story and gear progression.
So whilst he bemoans gamers wanting stat based games, 2 of the best games i've played are stat based, both still going though AO is arguably in survival mode lol
i got a great idea let make a first person shooter game like CoD into a turn based rpg's but fans are " resistant to change " so my great ideas cannot be achieved.
no you can make a great game open world, sand box, shooter or whatever an fans will help it grow, if a genre is getting stale with copy paste it's not fans " resistant to change " it's you trying cash in on what players have already been their done that.
they want and are looking for a different take on the same thing they enjoyed, not a new turn based FPS with epic 40 hr story MMO that f2p with optional cosmetic cash shop.
I've said it before. RPGs are stuck in the 1970s. If D&D didn't do it, developers haven't really tried to expand or redefine that formula.
I get it. Business are risk adverse, it's safer to develop a known formula than to try something different. So we get clone games which do nothing for the genre except deepen our appreciation for the games that did take a risk. Innovation isn't some kind of corporate poison.
But, the D&D model is almost 50 years old. I refuse to believe that D&D is some kind of pinnacle of gaming perfection. Is that all we really want from our games, a combat system with magical overtones and an indifferent crafting system? Because that's all we're getting.
I'm totally disappointed that no game has tried to abstract a political system or make religion meaningful in-game or catering to the social side of game life. Those are my three big 'concepts' that games have missed out on for almost 20 years now.
The company that does step up and present some new idea, well thought-out and implemented well, stands to govern the next 50 years. They don't want to. They aren't risk takers.
Logic, my dear, merely enables one to be wrong with great authority.
But RPG fans are supposedly resistant to change, all change or just certain elements? He seems to focus on stat tweaking, well I am not sure that is at the heart of what most people think a RPG is about. But lets just say it is, I am not sure that needs to be removed to add story?
Stat tweaking has largely gone anyway, in how many RPG's do you now add stats to individual attributes as you go up each level. Often much of "level change" is done for you.
Finally I have some concerns that if you remove mechanics and just add story you end up with an interactive story, not a game.
But this is the guy who gave us PoE so rather than read to much into this, just going to wait for his next great RP game.
Breath of the wild is another great example. The absolute zealots of Zelda purity were the only ones who disliked the game and they probably never even actually tried it simply out of stubbornness. Eschewing the "traditional" is only bad if you do a shitty job of it.
Last example I can think of is Fallout. They basically Elder-Scrolls-erized it from the first few games. Sold better than it ever has in history of the franchise.
Make better games, stop making excuses. (referring the devs in general, I enjoy his games)
Be the Ultimate Ninja! Play Billy Vs. SNAKEMAN today!
The core basic ideas are sound for the mmorpg genre,it is how they are implemented that is cheap and lazy.EVERY single system,area of design in mmorpg's can easily be improved,we don't need super high tech or a bazillion dollars.
When mentioning Pillars 1/2,we are talking about BUDGET gaming.Budget gaming is NOT the developers best effort and that is where the real problems lie.
99% of the developers cannot afford to make a AAA game and what is left of the other 1% are also trying to cut corners in every aspect of the design.
Point being,it is not about change or evolving,it is about devs being able to financialy do the genre justice,to put forth their best effort,NOBODY is putting out their best effort.
Never forget 3 mile Island and never trust a government official or company spokesman.
The pressure you talk about to produce familiar titles effects the whole of gaming, gaming studios more than indie. Fans are never going to be happy, even when they really like the game. In some ways Josh seems to have just woken up to that.