Decline What killed off oldschool RPGs?

[Roguey]

Actually, if I remember correctly Daigle's post, he pretty much said he didn't know about them, he didn't say if they were IE or not.

But I can't be bothered to search for his post.

https://www.reddit.com/r/baldursgate/comments/3fy8uo/soooo_what_next/cttrjyi/

Next up: Konung and Konung 2, the Infinity Engine games that time forgot.

Truth be told I've never played either, and I was surprised when I discovered they were long lost Infinity Engine games.

And a post last year from another Beamdog employee
https://forums.somethingawful.com/s...86742&pagenumber=358&perpage=40#post470794986

All of this looks incredible. I'm so stoked.

Only three more games left to EE!

I'm really looking forward to enhancing Konung

 

[FeelTheRads]

OK, I guess I remembered it wrong. That sounds like indeed he knows something.

I don't know about that second quote though. Are you sure that's a Beamdog employee?

"looking forward to enhancing"

These people and their rabid enhancing.

 

[Roguey]

OK, I guess I remembered it wrong. That sounds like indeed he knows something.

I don't know about that second quote though. Are you sure that's a Beamdog employee?

"looking forward to enhancing"

These people and their rabid enhancing.

He gave out a ton of keys and acts like a dev. It might actually be Daigle, I don't remember. Here's his one interaction with Sawyer https://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?threadid=3586742&userid=42391#post470808183

In many cases the 3E changes made the 2DAs and some functions cleaner than they were in other IE games.

Wanna come work on it?

 

[Sigourn]

There's a multitude of reasons why cRPGs aren't anywhere near as popular as they used to be. I can think of some:

- cRPGs are competing with triple-A RPGs made in 3D, very high production values, very high return. Games like Skyrim, Fallout 4, The Witcher 3, whatever shit BioWare decides to make, and so on. I only play RPGs, so I wouldn't know if there are other genres where there is such a massive difference between production values. A shooter is a shooter, sports game is a sports game, a racing game is a racing game, etc etc. But cRPGs and triple-A RPGs, though they belong to the same genre, are vastly different from each other. Not just in production values, but in size, scope, gameplay and interest.
- cRPGs have been around for many decades, with the best games the genre has to offer dating all the way to the early 80s. A kid that was 10 when playing these cRPGs is around 50 nowadays. FIFTY.
- cRPGs haven't really evolved in all these decades. Pillars of Eternity, from what I've heard, is pretty much Baldur's Gate. Just so I'm clear: a Codexer is more likely to willingly spend money on a good cRPG than on a mediocre cRPG. Evolution doesn't mean "sacrifice everything that made it good" (i.e. "dumbing down", which is what people really mean when they say "Fallout evolved under Bethesda!!!11!"). But you can most definitely evolve a genre by focusing on its strengths and trying to get of its weaknesses. cRPGs haven't really changed in that regard: all the same flaws are still there, the strengths haven't really been capitalized on.
- People aged 15-30 are more likely to have grown up playing console games than PC games. Console games are JRPG territory.
- Triple-A RPGs are easily accessible to children ages 6 and above. Moreover, the entire videogame spectrum is tailored for children ages 6 and above, with the exception of the more complex genres like strategy games (which I sincerely doubt could be "dumbed down": strategy games by definition are games that rely on complexity, whereas RPGs do not: complexity in RPGs is completely optional). The world has changed, and videogames with it. For there to be a boom in cRPGs again, the entire videogame spectrum would have to change.
- Moreover, these most popular RPGs tend to be multi-platform. Bethesda, CD Projekt RED and BioWare make the most popular RPGs by far, and they cater to the console market in addition to the PC market (or should I say: in addition to the console market, they cater to the PC market).
Games nowadays tend to go for spectacle. cRPGs are anything but spectacle.
- The ever-increasing need to make simpler games to sell more.

I guarantee you the day cRPGs truly go back to being the dominant form of RPGs we will also see a massive change in the videogame industry as a whole.

I saw a post on Facebook yesterday, and may as well adapt it to cRPGs:

There are RPGs designed for the masses and others for the Codex. But there are some that are for everyone: the masterpieces.

 

[Telengard]

The indie marketplace just isn't ready to make games with 10 novels worth of text, 1000 different spell effects, 100 different classes and variants, a chain of hundreds of feats and special abilities, and then to make it all challenging, and then to make it all pretty as a picture on top of it. And then to turn around and refine all of that in order to make it all fun to play. If you really want a game that ticks all of those boxes for you and doesn't cut corners, you're looking at 10 million. And if you want to make use of a team of top quality people (instead of just having one big name "involved"), and so have a chance at producing a top quality game (a good team has a chance at producing a top quality game, but no guarantee; a poor quality team has no chance at all), then start moving that money bar sharply up.

I don't want to read 10 books, play with 1000 different spells, or 100 different classes, hundreds of feats and special abilities.

Then you don't want an IE game, because that's what they were. And the very nature of what they were is why nobody wants to make them on a budget, and the only ones who try are super crazy, dumb people who don't know what they're doing. And whenever someone tries a smaller IE game, with - say - even 1/10 the amount of stuff (and it really should be even less), the pissing and moaning about the "betrayal" on here is a real sight to see.

 

[Egosphere]

There's a multitude of reasons why cRPGs aren't anywhere near as popular as they used to be. I can think of some:

- Triple-A RPGs are easily accessible to children ages 6 and above. Moreover, the entire videogame spectrum is tailored for children ages 6 and above, with the exception of the more complex genres like strategy games (which I sincerely doubt could be "dumbed down": strategy games by definition are games that rely on complexity, whereas RPGs do not: complexity in RPGs is completely optional). The world has changed, and videogames with it. For there to be a boom in cRPGs again, the entire videogame spectrum would have to change.


I guarantee you the day cRPGs truly go back to being the dominant form of RPGs we will also see a massive change in the videogame industry as a whole.

I saw a post on Facebook yesterday, and may as well adapt it to cRPGs:

There are RPGs designed for the masses and others for the Codex. But there are some that are for everyone: the masterpieces.

That is a little contradictory. The world changed, but strategy games survived, whilst crpgs did not. Even if RPG's complexity is optional does not necessitate the genre becoming dumbed down to what passes for RPG today

 

[Theldaran]

There's still the occasional pillow of infinity or an original sin here and there, but for the most part the genre has joined RTS games in the graveyard of genres.

Let's wait until Age of Empires HD releases, shall we. Spellforce 3 didn't sell well and Dawn of War 3 was abhorrent.

Ultimately, you never know when a genre can make a comeback. Just look at damn Crash Bandicoot.

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

There's still the occasional pillow of infinity or an original sin here and there, but for the most part the genre has joined RTS games in the graveyard of genres.

Let's wait until Age of Empires HD releases, shall we. Spellforce 3 didn't sell well and Dawn of War 3 was abhorrent.

Ultimately, you never know when a genre can make a comeback. Just look at damn Crash Bandicoot.

Pillars and DOS2 have both sold more than a million copies, right? That’s better than any IE title in its first decade of existence, except BG2. It’s just that when Baldur’s Gate sold half a million copies, that made it a AAA smash hit. Whereas these days over a million copies is only great for a AA studio.

Like it or not, this IS the comeback.

 

[Whiny-Butthurt-Liberal]

Ultimately, you never know when a genre can make a comeback. Just look at damn Crash Bandicoot.

Platformers neer went anywhere.

 

[imweasel]

TBH I do see old-school style CRPGs making a slow comeback. We just haven't had a huge multi-million smash hit yet... except for Undertale

Anyway, it is extremely difficult to make oldschool CRPGs that are engaging, immersive and don't overwhelm the average player with systems that he has just been introduced to. That would be the main problem IMO. You need a talented team of experienced and passionate designers with a deep understanding of RPG systems to pull it off, something that hasn't really existed since the demise of Black Isle, SSI, Troika and maybe early Bioware.

Pillars of Eternity, from what I've heard, is pretty much a shitty Baldur's Gate clone.

FTFY

 

[Theldaran]

Ultimately, you never know when a genre can make a comeback. Just look at damn Crash Bandicoot.

Platformers neer went anywhere.

It's just an example of dead games under a pile of dust making a comeback and selling like crazy.

Of course, CRPG are a different genre with its own problems. Why are the IE games so memorable? Because they poured everything they got into them. Nobody is willing to make the same kind of effort again, not Bioware itself, not Obsidian, not Beamdog, obviously. Bioware and Black Isle worked their asses off, and it shows. Nowadays it's all about the highest income with the lowest effort, the only thing that reminds of IE games in terms of scope are Twitcher games.

 

[Sigourn]

That is a little contradictory. The world changed, but strategy games survived, whilst crpgs did not. Even if RPG's complexity is optional does not necessitate the genre becoming dumbed down to what passes for RPG today

Strategy games survived because their sole purpose is to be complex. But RPGs don't need to be complex, and because of that most people jump ship on the simple RPG bandwagon.

 

[YES!]

In another thread I have come up with the one true and definitive answer. Crpgs are for playing. Most people, being very retarded, want easy games they can watch. Crpg fans want games, retards want art that is fun to look at and watch. That is why they have such a high tolerance for really awful, hands-off, no imput needed, click and watch RTwP combat. And why the rest of their games are so fucking retardly easy.

Real game players try and make good decisions and moves, the fucking retards want to make decisions and moves that look good.

This explains everything, especially the popularity of people watching other people play games over the internet (outside of competitive gaming since the retards will never be able to compete in shit).

 

[Davaris]

The indie marketplace just isn't ready to make games with 10 novels worth of text, 1000 different spell effects, 100 different classes and variants, a chain of hundreds of feats and special abilities, and then to make it all challenging, and then to make it all pretty as a picture on top of it. And then to turn around and refine all of that in order to make it all fun to play. If you really want a game that ticks all of those boxes for you and doesn't cut corners, you're looking at 10 million. And if you want to make use of a team of top quality people (instead of just having one big name "involved"), and so have a chance at producing a top quality game (a good team has a chance at producing a top quality game, but no guarantee; a poor quality team has no chance at all), then start moving that money bar sharply up.

I don't want to read 10 books, play with 1000 different spells, or 100 different classes, hundreds of feats and special abilities.

Then you don't want an IE game, because that's what they were. And the very nature of what they were is why nobody wants to make them on a budget, and the only ones who try are super crazy, dumb people who don't know what they're doing. And whenever someone tries a smaller IE game, with - say - even 1/10 the amount of stuff (and it really should be even less), the pissing and moaning about the "betrayal" on here is a real sight to see.

Correct. I don't want an IE game. I want a small game that blows my mind like Fallout 1 did. Baldur's Gate looked great, but for me it felt flat after playing Fallout. There were some fun encounters in it, but mostly exploring the areas felt like consuming content.

Correct. Big bitmap engines are not suited to Indies or small production houses, because they can't iterate the maps as easily as tile based engines. If you don't have tons and tons of money to spend on production values, that engine is not going to work out.

Big bitmap is the graphics whore engine of 2D. If a small dev uses it, its because they don't have the experience to know better, or they haven't had enough pain and suffering in their life. lol

 

[Ovplain]

Consoles happened, no big mystery here.

 

[YES!]

Consoles happened, no big mystery here.

Well, I guess that must be the reason why because clearly consoles were not nearly in as many houses as decent game playing pcs in the 80s and 90s. Consoles were a new invention of this century. Anyone who says different is a big liar.

 

[octavius]

Consoles happened, no big mystery here.

Well, I guess that must be the reason why because clearly consoles were not nearly in as many houses as decent game playing pcs in the 80s and 90s. Consoles were a new invention of this century. Anyone who says different is a big liar.

There were two different markets back then. Consoles were for kids, computers for adults and mature kids.
With PS2 and X-Box it was all consolidated into one market.

 

[YES!]

Consoles happened, no big mystery here.

Well, I guess that must be the reason why because clearly consoles were not nearly in as many houses as decent game playing pcs in the 80s and 90s. Consoles were a new invention of this century. Anyone who says different is a big liar.

There were two different markets back then. Consoles were for kids, computers for adults and mature kids.
With PS2 and X-Box it was all consolidated into one market.

Then why are the all the kids games so popular on this site? See my answer above.

 

[Morkar Left]

TBH I do see old-school style CRPGs making a slow comeback. We just haven't had a huge multi-million smash hit yet... except for Undertale

Anyway, it is extremely difficult to make oldschool CRPGs that are engaging, immersive and don't overwhelm the average player with systems that he has just been introduced to. That would be the main problem IMO. You need a talented team of experienced and passionate designers with a deep understanding of RPG systems to pull it off, something that hasn't really existed since the demise of Black Isle, SSI, Troika and maybe early Bioware.

Pillars of Eternity, from what I've heard, is pretty much a shitty Baldur's Gate clone.

FTFY

I disagree. You just need some designers who really want to make an oldschool rpg and actually know oldschool rpgs (and pnp rpgs), no matter what the market wants. It's not a sure way to make a good rpg but it's the premise for it. The cost for making actually one isn't that high compared to other genres (e.g. 3d action games, mmos etc).

 

[Bohrain]

Several reasons:
a) Popularity of tabletop RPG's declined, meaning there's less of a reason to cater to the taste of the demographic that developed a taste for simulating their mechanics. Also new people in the industry are less likely to be familiar with them.
b) Console players becoming more important demographic in relation to PC players.
c) 90's tech bubble made it possible for money to flow to uncanny projects such as Fallout.
d) Game development becoming less of a scene and more of a business. And in business environment the money tends to go projects that imitate something that made money a short while ago, which is everything but CRPG's.

 

[YES!]

I love how all these children who dislike and do not support or buy crpgs when they come out, or like them when they do buy one, have all the answers as to why they are so unpopular. Just look in the fucking mirror you fucking retards.

 

[Mastermind]

Diablo and Oblivion made RPGs onto mass market products and then X-box came,

xbox came well before oblivion. and in fact morrowind was on xbox where it was very much beloved by console gamers, so they can hardly be blamed for the subsequent dumbing down (not that that stopped Toddler from trying)

Let's face it, there are no devs left who can make a high quality RPG anymore, especially in real time. Sawyer is about the best we're gonna get.

 

[Kutulu]

>#1
(You)

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Several reasons:
a) Popularity of tabletop RPG's declined, meaning there's less of a reason to cater to the taste of the demographic that developed a taste for simulating their mechanics. Also new people in the industry are less likely to be familiar with them.
b) Console players becoming more important demographic in relation to PC players.
c) 90's tech bubble made it possible for money to flow to uncanny projects such as Fallout.
d) Game development becoming less of a scene and more of a business. And in business environment the money tends to go projects that imitate something that made money a short while ago, which is everything but CRPG's.

tabletop RPGs are for fucking nerds

 

[madrigal]

Complexity. Limitations in freedom and gameplay were accepted as the games were pushing the boundaries of the technology available, as computing power increased exponentially so did the possibilities. The level of complexity available made the required man power and budgets blow out putting it out of the reach of most creative people. Artificial limits of the technological complexity by creating consoles allowed them to thrive and out compete because they were less complex and had more users.