4 ms·

Anyone find that RPGs don't seem like a natural/obvious/fundamental game genre -- they are more like an accident of history? People who have not followed their

Anyone find that RPGs don't seem like a natural/obvious/fundamental game genre -- they are more like an accident of history? People who have not followed their ancestors in game evolution would probably find RPGs strange and arbitrary.

Gianteye 16y ago
I always thought that RPG's make their impact by giving people a constant stream of small, finite rewards. Growing numbers and flashing lights are something that just seems to fill people with an addictive pleasure, e.g. slot machines. What strikes you as unnatural about RPG's? Do you think there will be some kind of generational shift where their popularity will wane?
- amichail 16y ago
  The stats, character classes, etc. are strange. There is no reason why a game should appear so complicated and require so much assumed knowledge. Moreover, there seems to be way too much stuff to collect. And if keeping the right stuff is important, it's not at all clear what the tradeoffs are. The quests tend to be rather similar and are not much fun. There's also too much grinding. BTW, I also find RTS games to be strange... sure they are a natural progression beyond games like chess, but they are not as fundamental as chess. There's too much to learn and it's not obvious why people would find them fun.
  - Pahalial 16y ago
    As you say yourself, RTS games are a natural progression of simpler strategy games. Yes, they're more complicated, but isn't that exactly the kind of progression you'd expect? Or, to rephrase, exactly how do you see games progressing within a genre if not by adding at least some complexity?
  - masklinn 16y ago
    RPG simply grow out from pen-and-paper RPGs, which are basically collaborative storytelling. > Moreover, there seems to be way too much stuff to collect. And if keeping the right stuff is important, it's not at all clear what the tradeoffs are. I'd like to know what kind of RPGs you're talking about here. In most good RPGs (e.g. the great days of Black Isle & al), packratting is very much optional. Packratting tends to be a characteristic of A-RPG more than "Western" (aka "true") RPGs. > The quests tend to be rather similar and are not much fun. > There's also too much grinding. Same question as above, a good RPG is a crafted experience, and a well crafted experience is terrific. Would you per chance be talking about MMORPGs? > but they are not as fundamental as chess. There's too much to learn and it's not obvious why people would find them fun. Chess and go and other such games are simplifications of war from a general's point of view. They're played by people who want to battle strategically without shedding blood. RTS are "realifications" of those, standing closer to actual wars. That's why they're fun: you build yourself, you set up strategy and tactics, you try to understand your opponent's and react to that, ...
pavlov 16y ago
Strange is a word that doesn't mean very much. (My grandfather uses it a lot: for him, any food that's not obviously salty or sweet is simply "strange.") There are few things in culture that are natural or fundamental. Except for brief periods of "cultural purification" such as the Akhnaten period in Ancient Egypt and 20th century Western modernism, civilizations seem to have a tendency towards more complex artistic forms that will appear strange and arbitrary to an observer who doesn't understand the context. For example, I can't follow Japanese Noh theatre, but it's not inherently any more "difficult" than some piece in London's West End -- both require a huge amount of cultural background to be understood.

Gianteye 16y ago

I always thought that RPG's make their impact by giving people a constant stream of small, finite rewards. Growing numbers and flashing lights are something that just seems to fill people with an addictive pleasure, e.g. slot machines. What strikes you as unnatural about RPG's? Do you think there will be some kind of generational shift where their popularity will wane?

amichail 16y ago
The stats, character classes, etc. are strange. There is no reason why a game should appear so complicated and require so much assumed knowledge. Moreover, there seems to be way too much stuff to collect. And if keeping the right stuff is important, it's not at all clear what the tradeoffs are. The quests tend to be rather similar and are not much fun. There's also too much grinding. BTW, I also find RTS games to be strange... sure they are a natural progression beyond games like chess, but they are not as fundamental as chess. There's too much to learn and it's not obvious why people would find them fun.
- Pahalial 16y ago
  As you say yourself, RTS games are a natural progression of simpler strategy games. Yes, they're more complicated, but isn't that exactly the kind of progression you'd expect? Or, to rephrase, exactly how do you see games progressing within a genre if not by adding at least some complexity?
- masklinn 16y ago
  RPG simply grow out from pen-and-paper RPGs, which are basically collaborative storytelling. > Moreover, there seems to be way too much stuff to collect. And if keeping the right stuff is important, it's not at all clear what the tradeoffs are. I'd like to know what kind of RPGs you're talking about here. In most good RPGs (e.g. the great days of Black Isle & al), packratting is very much optional. Packratting tends to be a characteristic of A-RPG more than "Western" (aka "true") RPGs. > The quests tend to be rather similar and are not much fun. > There's also too much grinding. Same question as above, a good RPG is a crafted experience, and a well crafted experience is terrific. Would you per chance be talking about MMORPGs? > but they are not as fundamental as chess. There's too much to learn and it's not obvious why people would find them fun. Chess and go and other such games are simplifications of war from a general's point of view. They're played by people who want to battle strategically without shedding blood. RTS are "realifications" of those, standing closer to actual wars. That's why they're fun: you build yourself, you set up strategy and tactics, you try to understand your opponent's and react to that, ...

pavlov 16y ago

Strange is a word that doesn't mean very much. (My grandfather uses it a lot: for him, any food that's not obviously salty or sweet is simply "strange.") There are few things in culture that are natural or fundamental. Except for brief periods of "cultural purification" such as the Akhnaten period in Ancient Egypt and 20th century Western modernism, civilizations seem to have a tendency towards more complex artistic forms that will appear strange and arbitrary to an observer who doesn't understand the context. For example, I can't follow Japanese Noh theatre, but it's not inherently any more "difficult" than some piece in London's West End -- both require a huge amount of cultural background to be understood.