why real rpgs do not exist anymore

[Netchythenetch]

So I noticed a really sad thing lately.
I realized that almost every new game released nowadays by the video game industry (even the so called "action rpgs") lacks a fundamental aspect: the rpg aspect.
Take morrowind, for example. Yes, the combat system sucks. But is combat morrowind's core? No it isn't. Morrowind's best feature are its storyline, its environment, and its lore. Now let's take Skyrim. Yes, the graphics is good. Yes, the combat system is good. There is only one problem: its storyline. There is so little lore in Skyrim (compared to Morrowind, of course) that you can complete the MQ even knowing absolutely nothing about the Elder Scrolls' lore. And the MQ isn't even that good. Despite this, there are hundreds of people which write in forums saying that they have tried morrowind because of all the positive reviews and they were disappointed because, and I quote, "the combat system sucks, I ventured out of town and couldn't hit s**t". It is my impression that most people do not understand the true nature of games like these. On the other hand, Skyrim has a very big roleplaying community. This could mean there is still hope after all, but when all games the companies release are fps, multiplayer fps and "action rpgs" (which, in my opinion, are disguised fps), it gives me the impression that true rpgs are slowly dying. Gods, I hope I'm wrong.

[Tinker]

I would go further, I do not think there has ever been a computer role playing game. Some come closer than most, Morrowind and Never Winter Nights are two near the top of the list but even they breakdown if you consider the monetary system and things like not wanting to use a predefined scripted conversations to explore the plot.

Very few people these days know that the rpg format was originally played with paper, pencils and die. Drawing your own maps as you explored and asking questions about your surroundings were all far more immersive, and the pictures you created in your mind were better than any computer graphics.

[Netchythenetch]

I totally agree, but given the fact that the only "pen and paper" rpg I've ever played was Dungeons and Dragons (and for a short amount of time, although I had loads of fun), my topic was referring to computer rpgs (my bad, I didn't specify ).

It's just really frustrating to see tons of versions of "battlefield" (which in my humble opinion is the most boring and repetitive type of game ever) and not a single (decent) rpg. Dragon Age: Inquisition (which was one of my best bets) has proven a huge disappointment, since the stats are locked and the only purpose in the game seems to be to mindlessly split heads and sever limbs. What happened to quests like "deliver this note to this merchant"? Skyrim does that, but in order to complete such quest, you have to slaughter an entire cave full of bandits for an unspecified reason; alternatively when you deliver said note the reward you receive is greatly unbalanced.

Ironically, the only source of pretty decent rpgs left seems to be Kickstarter.

[Chris]

So I noticed a really sad thing lately.
I realized that almost every new game released nowadays by the video game industry (even the so called "action rpgs") lacks a fundamental aspect: the rpg aspect.

What is "the rpg aspect"? This is the crux of the matter, as different people want different things out of their role-play.

Personally, I find Morrowind extremely difficult to role-play in. I feel no personality in the characters, no connection to what's going on, and as a result I don't feel like I belong in the world. This is expounded by the MQ, which makes you feel like you're playing the wrong character if you're not a Dunmer. It's just a playground I jump in to, do various tasks, then leave.

Conversely, Daggerfall and Oblivion are much more easy and fun to role-play in, for me. The world feels alive, people doing their own thing and I'm just another person in the world and belong there. I can get more invested in what's going on with people, and do what I feel like the character would do as a person in the world. Characters express themselves more, and aren't all comically sour (seriously, even when Morrowind characters aren't angry towards you, they often still sound angry).

Don't forget where tabletop RPGs came from, too. D&D was derived from war-gaming, put into a medieval fantasy setting. Originally, D&D was all about killing monsters in dungeons and getting loot (hence the term Dungeon Master, since that's the player in control of the dungeon you play in). Combat stats were the only useful stats because the game revolved around combat. Any and all role-playing was done ad-hoc between the players, which incidentally is the main thing CRPGs lack (hence why some people say video games have never had a proper RPG). It wasn't until 3rd or 4th edition D&D that non-combat skills became mechanically useful.

There is so little lore in Skyrim (compared to Morrowind, of course) that you can complete the MQ even knowing absolutely nothing about the Elder Scrolls' lore.

So can you in Morrowind, too. The thing about the lore is, if people don't care, they'll just skip over it and look for what they need to do next anyway. You aren't required to know it coming in to the game, and you aren't required to learn it to figure out what to do.

Though interestingly, you get much more out of Skyrim if you already have an understanding of the lore than if you come into it fresh. Things like the painted cows if you're familiar with MK's The 911th Cow, or understanding Alduin's true essence. Heck, even smaller details like Paarthurnax's call for you to greet him by using fire breath on him, comes from a short passage in a book that hasn't been in the series since Daggerfall. Things like this are completely lost on people not familiar with TES lore, but they reward the players that do know the lore by giving a more filling experience.

In contrast, very little of what you learned from Daggerfall ever came up in Morrowind. In fact, the entire core of MW's MQ is built from things that had never been mentioned previously (or were changed to suit the game). Talos, the Tribunal, and even Dagoth Ur to a degree, were created for the game's story -- Dagoth Ur was originally the name of the volcano that covered almost all of the island, but Morrowind retconned that so there was plenty of livable land on the island, and the name was actually of a person that lives in the volcano, to which the volcano is only occasionally referenced by that name because the person is there.

And the MQ isn't even that good.

I enjoyed Skyrim's MQ more than Morrowind's. Morrowind's Ashlander or Great House quests are extremely tedious, to the point I want nothing to do with them again. Sure you can avoid it by killing Vivec, but you don't do that without metagaming.

Though honestly, I still say Daggerfall has the best MQ for a TES game. It gives you a reason for being there, and gives you things to do to advance the story, but it's not "save the world for us, hero!". Even in Morrowind, I feel forever pressured to go through it... the condition of your release at the start of the game is to go meet Caius and do what he says, and though Caius tells you to go do what you want for a bit, you're still expected to go back to him after you gain a few levels. You're basically conscripted into the Blades, and ignoring Caius is tantamount to treason (but of course that never happens, he waits forever like a good little NPC).

However in Daggerfall you basically start off with a note to meet with Lady Brisienna. This part of the MQ is timed, and there's consequences if you don't do it (you get a couple warnings, and if you continue to ignore her, she leaves you). After dealing with her, the next stage of the MQ doesn't even appear until some levels later, and then you just get some letters from various people that say, in rather vague terms, they have information you may be interested in. It's up to you to follow up on them, there's no obligation to. And if you follow through the MQ, you get sent on some interesting and unique adventures, but aren't the conveniently unique savior of the people.

Despite this, there are hundreds of people which write in forums saying that they have tried morrowind because of all the positive reviews and they were disappointed because, and I quote, "the combat system sucks, I ventured out of town and couldn't hit s**t". It is my impression that most people do not understand the true nature of games like these.

I have to wonder then, do you? Since you agree that MW's combat system sucks, I assume you mean to say that "couldn't hit s**t" at low levels is part of the true nature of RPGs. That I will heartily disagree with.

The reason tabletop RPGs work that way is because most enemies were designed to die in a few hits, and a single round of combat could take a full real-time minute or two in which each player only acts once. Enemies had to die quickly, but not too quickly. Also there's the fact that the exact placement and movement of characters were not measured, so the randomization was a basic way to determine if the person you attacked actually dodged your blow.

But with games like TES, you have the necessary placement precision and visual representation to see if your weapon connects. There's no need to randomize whether a hit actually hits when it can instantaneously check if the weapon actually touched the enemy, and it can instantaneously scale the damage based on skill level to keep the same amount of damage dealt over a given period of time.

[Netchythenetch]

My apologies, you are right. I didn't assume that I knew how all rpgs work, I just meant to say that Morrowind (is for me) a much better game because is not combat-centered. In my head I assumed that a quality rpg focused a lot more on the environment and the lore rather then on combat. Of course, I'm not the Speaker of the Universal Truths

Conversely, Daggerfall and Oblivion are much more easy and fun to role-play in, for me. The world feels alive, people doing their own thing and I'm just another person in the world and belong there. I can get more invested in what's going on with people, and do what I feel like the character would do as a person in the world. Characters express themselves more, and aren't all comically sour (seriously, even when Morrowind characters aren't angry towards you, they often still sound angry)

I must confess that I never played daggerfall, although now I'm really curious; I've played Oblivion, and I found it a really boring game to roleplay in, mainly because the npc conversations are almost inexistent and you can find the same setting in a "real life" context. Maybe I should clarify why I say this; I really loved Morrowind for its strange environment, its (again, for me) really great storyline and the exploration. Sadly, I can only compare it to Oblivion and Skyrim, since I've played only these three games. But the implementation of fast travel, in my opinion, annihilated one of the most immersive features of the elder scrolls: real time travel. I loved to hike from Balmora to Vivec, or from Caldera to Ald'ruhn, mainly because of the landscape and because I could bump into a daedric ruin or into a small cave. Of course, you can still do it in Skyrim or Oblivion, but you don't just "bump into" a dungeon, you already know it's there since your compass shows it in advance. Then, on quests, you had to rely on the directions given to you from npcs, which could be very confusing: but in the end, when you found the dungeon, it felt good. There was no compass marker to hold your hand.
As for the storyline, I found it very entertaining and not tedious at all (but I realize there are people who may think otherwise); like you say, you can completely avoid a great chunk of it by killing Vivec, which is pretty hard mainly because of the "alternative wraithguard". It's not a viable solution for roleplayers, but you can do it if you wish. In my opinion, Morrowind did not force you to quickly proceed though the MQ: the npcs actually advised you to flee, train some more and then, when you felt ready, try again. (I was truly scared the first time I went into the ghostfence, and I loved the fact that a game could make me so emotional. And no, it's not nostalgia speaking, I've played Oblivion before Morrowind.) Skyrim, for example, does not give you freedom of choice, but throws you mindlessly into your next quest; and due to the fact that most quests are scaled to your level, you can do it without any emotion. I could go on for hours, so I'll better stop now

I have to wonder then, do you?

Apparently not I'm sorry if I seemed arrogant in my previous post, it wasn't my intention.

[psi29a]

Everyone has their own opinions, no need to apologize for an opinion.

[Netchythenetch]

I just don't want to impose my opinion

[silentthief]

Hey Chris, none of this is meant to "troll" just to discuss a difference of opinion:

What is "the rpg aspect"? This is the crux of the matter, as different people want different things out of their role-play.

And since this is subjective, there can and will be varying differences of opinion.

Personally, I find Morrowind extremely difficult to role-play in. I feel no personality in the characters, no connection to what's going on, and as a result I don't feel like I belong in the world. This is expounded by the MQ, which makes you feel like you're playing the wrong character if you're not a Dunmer. It's just a playground I jump in to, do various tasks, then leave.

I will agree with this. There is a large undertaking in the mod world where the modders tried to move away from generic NPCs where they always say the same thing. If you were able to pull out the conversation engine, and instead make it more dynamic where the NPC replies based upon words you suggest, instead of clicking a list of the "given replies" on the side; then it would be more interactive. I believe that I heard Ultima has a conversation engine like this (but I do not know).

Conversely, Daggerfall and Oblivion are much more easy and fun to role-play in, for me. The world feels alive, people doing their own thing and I'm just another person in the world and belong there. I can get more invested in what's going on with people, and do what I feel like the character would do as a person in the world. Characters express themselves more, and aren't all comically sour (seriously, even when Morrowind characters aren't angry towards you, they often still sound angry).

Don't see the difference myself. They all have a scripted conversation engine with limited replies and only a small possibility of different outcomes. The conversations play out like a "choose-your-own-adventures" book.

Don't forget where tabletop RPGs came from, too. D&D was derived from war-gaming, put into a medieval fantasy setting. Originally, D&D was all about killing monsters in dungeons and getting loot (hence the term Dungeon Master, since that's the player in control of the dungeon you play in). Combat stats were the only useful stats because the game revolved around combat. Any and all role-playing was done ad-hoc between the players, which incidentally is the main thing CRPGs lack (hence why some people say video games have never had a proper RPG). It wasn't until 3rd or 4th edition D&D that non-combat skills became mechanically useful.

Depends on the DM and/or story. The mechanics of the game did not matter at all with regards to role-playing. Role-playing should almost never involve game mechanics. Its only when actions take over instead of conversation that the game mechanics come to play.

There is so little lore in Skyrim (compared to Morrowind, of course) that you can complete the MQ even knowing absolutely nothing about the Elder Scrolls' lore.

So can you in Morrowind, too. The thing about the lore is, if people don't care, they'll just skip over it and look for what they need to do next anyway. You aren't required to know it coming in to the game, and you aren't required to learn it to figure out what to do.

I will agree with that, and that is a consequence of computer RPGs. The MQ as well as most quests are fairly straight forward, and they have to hold your hand with those quests. I mean, with a computer "RPG" the quests usually break down into like 2 or three types anyhow: 1) kill someone 2) move an item from somewhere to another 3) get someone to say something required to you. These are universally set up to be able to do them now or next year or whenever, they wait for you. there is no consequence for having to rest up and heal or even for being bored and going to a different town and/or quest. IIRC there was like one quest in morrowind where you had a time limit for that quest (come back in two days, or something) and I remember it well becuz that quest could be impossible due to morrowind having a broken calender.

Though interestingly, you get much more out of Skyrim if you already have an understanding of the lore than if you come into it fresh. Things like the painted cows if you're familiar with MK's The 911th Cow, or understanding Alduin's true essence. Heck, even smaller details like Paarthurnax's call for you to greet him by using fire breath on him, comes from a short passage in a book that hasn't been in the series since Daggerfall. Things like this are completely lost on people not familiar with TES lore, but they reward the players that do know the lore by giving a more filling experience.

(unable to speak on this, I have played less than 5 minutes of skyrim in my life, same with daggerfall)

Even in Morrowind, I feel forever pressured to go through it... the condition of your release at the start of the game is to go meet Caius and do what he says, and though Caius tells you to go do what you want for a bit, you're still expected to go back to him after you gain a few levels. You're basically conscripted into the Blades, and ignoring Caius is tantamount to treason (but of course that never happens, he waits forever like a good little NPC).

Yeah, will agree with this as well. There was no time limit on this, you could go to Dagoth Ur day one (although you would probably die) or you could go there 100 years later, no difference.

Despite this, there are hundreds of people which write in forums saying that they have tried morrowind because of all the positive reviews and they were disappointed because, and I quote, "the combat system sucks, I ventured out of town and couldn't hit s**t". It is my impression that most people do not understand the true nature of games like these.

I have to wonder then, do you? Since you agree that MW's combat system sucks, I assume you mean to say that "couldn't hit s**t" at low levels is part of the true nature of RPGs. That I will heartily disagree with.

The reason tabletop RPGs work that way is because most enemies were designed to die in a few hits, and a single round of combat could take a full real-time minute or two in which each player only acts once. Enemies had to die quickly, but not too quickly. Also there's the fact that the exact placement and movement of characters were not measured, so the randomization was a basic way to determine if the person you attacked actually dodged your blow.

But with games like TES, you have the necessary placement precision and visual representation to see if your weapon connects. There's no need to randomize whether a hit actually hits when it can instantaneously check if the weapon actually touched the enemy, and it can instantaneously scale the damage based on skill level to keep the same amount of damage dealt over a given period of time.

Well, the random hit system similar to RPGs instead of auto-hit system is more real to me. If the animation system could support it, then the fighting system would resemble a fencing match with guard/parry and other defensive moves (more than just simply holding your sword or shield up in an effort to block). This is supposed to accomodate that you would get better at hitting as you got better at using your weapon. Even an expert is not assumed to hit 100%.

ST

[Chris]

Hey Chris, none of this is meant to "troll" just to discuss a difference of opinion:

No worries.

I will agree with this. There is a large undertaking in the mod world where the modders tried to move away from generic NPCs where they always say the same thing. If you were able to pull out the conversation engine, and instead make it more dynamic where the NPC replies based upon words you suggest, instead of clicking a list of the "given replies" on the side; then it would be more interactive. I believe that I heard Ultima has a conversation engine like this (but I do not know).

I think the problems I have with Morrowind's dialog are the UI, the single massive list of topics per NPC, and how response texts have to be designed around the fact that they need to include hyperlinks to follow-up topics. Daggerfall had text-only dialog too, and also had a ton of the things you could ask about, but the dialog felt much more naturally written, and the various topics were all neatly organized (it also helped that there were a good number of responses that it could randomly pick from, giving some variation to the same question). And you could see the actual question you were asking. Morrowind does have the LGNPC mods to help diversify NPC dialog, but IMO it still doesn't manage to make it feel natural... it doesn't help that it has spelling and grammatical issues in a number of places.

With regard to Ultima, I don't really know much about those games other than that TES was heavily inspired by them. However, one of the main guys to have worked on the series, Richard Garriott, is working on an Ultima-inspired game. It features a natural language dialog system, where you talk by typing in plain text and the game will parse what you say to have the NPC respond. That's something I'd love to see.

Don't see the difference myself. They all have a scripted conversation engine with limited replies and only a small possibility of different outcomes. The conversations play out like a "choose-your-own-adventures" book.

To me, the difference is the voice acting and dialog writing. An NPC talking feels more like an actual conversation rather than an info dump. Especially in Oblivion, how NPCs can even decide to talk amongst themselves, and their dispositions toward each other will affect the tone (and length) of the conversation. Yeah, the conversations could be downright silly and monotonous sometimes, but I still think it was more a positive than not.

Depends on the DM and/or story. The mechanics of the game did not matter at all with regards to role-playing. Role-playing should almost never involve game mechanics. Its only when actions take over instead of conversation that the game mechanics come to play.

Ah, but if all the role-play was originally 'out-of-game' (as they weren't controlled by the game mechanics), would it not be just as valid for a video game to have the role-play to happen outside of the game too?

These are universally set up to be able to do them now or next year or whenever, they wait for you. there is no consequence for having to rest up and heal or even for being bored and going to a different town and/or quest. IIRC there was like one quest in morrowind where you had a time limit for that quest (come back in two days, or something) and I remember it well becuz that quest could be impossible due to morrowind having a broken calender.

This is why I like Daggerfall's questing system so much. In Daggerfall, you don't get a bajillion quests all at once to do them at your leisure, because the majority of the quests are timed. If you get a quest and don't do it, you'll fail it. Failing a quest means you lose reputation with the relevant factions (and in some cases, you can actually gain reputation from that faction's rivals), which you then have to do more quests to repair that reputation loss.

If the animation system could support it, then the fighting system would resemble a fencing match with guard/parry and other defensive moves (more than just simply holding your sword or shield up in an effort to block). This is supposed to accomodate that you would get better at hitting as you got better at using your weapon. Even an expert is not assumed to hit 100%.

Trouble is that TES combat is real-time combat. A hit isn't even checked until your weapon makes contact with the enemy, at which point a dodge or parry animation won't work without being jarring. If the hit is calculated before the blow actually connects, you take control away from the player as you're forcing him to hit (or be hit) even if something should have happened in between the start of the attack and the actual hit. Take Skyrim's kill-cams for example... the killing blow is calculated the moment the attack starts, and if it calculates a hit, then you're forced to stand still and let the attack hit, despite the fact that you might want to move or quickly do something else. Enemies do this on you as well, and it's very infuriating.

It is not hard to hit something with a (non-projectile) weapon you're not very skilled with. If I swing a sword at a stationary object, chances are I'll hit it even though I don't know the first thing about proper sword combat. It'll be harder to hit a moving target, sure, but that says more about the target's agility and ability to move than it does my weapon proficiency (and in TES, this means the target can move faster and dodge blows by actually dodging them instead of relying on dice rolls to say it dodged). My skill, however, will determine how effectively I can cause damage when a blow connects. If I'm not good with a sword, chances are I won't be able to hurt even a stationary object as much as I could if I were better with it.

Ultimately I find the dice roll mechanics in MW are unfair toward the player. A dice roll can always say a clear hit becomes a miss, but a dice roll will never say a miss becomes a hit.

[Netchythenetch]

I think the problems I have with Morrowind's dialog are the UI, the single massive list of topics per NPC, and how response texts have to be designed around the fact that they need to include hyperlinks to follow-up topics. Daggerfall had text-only dialog too, and also had a ton of the things you could ask about, but the dialog felt much more naturally written, and the various topics were all neatly organized (it also helped that there were a good number of responses that it could randomly pick from, giving some variation to the same question). And you could see the actual question you were asking. Morrowind does have the LGNPC mods to help diversify NPC dialog, but IMO it still doesn't manage to make it feel natural... it doesn't help that it has spelling and grammatical issues in a number of places.

An NPC talking feels more like an actual conversation rather than an info dump. Especially in Oblivion, how NPCs can even decide to talk amongst themselves, and their dispositions toward each other will affect the tone (and length) of the conversation. Yeah, the conversations could be downright silly and monotonous sometimes, but I still think it was more a positive than not.

I enjoyed Morrowind's conversation box, mainly because it wasn't as simple as Oblivion's; you are right when you say it felt more natural, even because of NPC conversations, but it always seemed shallow and empty to me. Excluding the quest related npcs, every npc has merely two topics ("rumors" and the topic related to the town you're in), and they all say pretty much the same thing. Ok, the same could be said for morrowind's dialogue, but I think that voice acting has not the same appeal than written dialogue; you can write more detailed dialogue, and quest mods are not as irritating as they are in Oblivion because the NPC does not stare at you like a creep while subtitles appear under his face (I discarded a huge number of mods only for that reason: I know it may sound silly, but it has always bugged me). Personally, I'd replay Morrowind 100 times and more, and not get bored at all of the dialogues. On the other hand, I've played Oblivion a couple of times and I won't play it again (same can be said of Skyrim).