I find all your oppinions quite interesting, I'am currently working on the subject of future of cRPGs in the framework of my research on innovation methodology and this is part of my opinion on the subject: I have intentionally skipped most of the console cRPGs and MMORPG. I concentrate myself on single player cRPGs.
I think that Feanor is quite right as for the state of the cRPGs "scene", "industry" or whatever we can call it. The percentages used by him were probably the levels of favorable opinions of the game given by players.
The current decline of the cRPGs is a fact, and it is after all totally natural process for any technical system or process.
1st era of cRPGsIf the history of CRPGs is taken into account we can see that most of modern ideas actually was already known in the past: from Akalabeth (aka Ultima 0) in 1980 and even earlier roguish games from late 70s started development of what is known as cRPG now (they already used player statistics, used semi graphics for drawing map, had inventory, player had to eat, etc..). The peak of this period can be seen in the time of Ultima IV-VII which can be regarded as direct ancestors of
BG and Fallout series (and in many cases they are even more developed than those games, i.e. in Ultima VI the environment seems to be more interactive than in
BG - player can use many items on other items and on the game environment). In 80s the dialogue trees (selection of one of earlier prepared options) were invented and used.
As for Morrowind style game, it is already known since Ultima Underworld (which was released earlier than The Elder Scrolls :Arena).
Effectively after a peak in the beginning of 1990s with late Ultimas and Ultima Underworld arrived inevitably the decline of previous technological cycle: newer games were repetitive and did not provide anything new, the technological environment was not ready for the revolution. Then in the same 1992 there were published the games that constituted a future revolution for cRPGs : Dune II (first popular RTS) and Ultima Underworld (which offered textured pseudo 3D even before publishing Wolfstein 3D !). During several years afterwards not much happened in the cRPG world: of course we had Albion.
2nd era of cRPGsThe changing winds arrive for cRPG in the late 1996: Diablo is published (yes, I know many of you thinks it is not cRPG, but it depends only on definition of the genre, for me cRPG is all game that has game mechanics centered on the main character : he has some 'inborn' attributes and skills which can be improved with time, so the difference between for example Diablo and Duke Nukem 3D is that character of D. gains levels and increases his hit points, resistances, learns new spells, etc. while Duke does not).
Diablo is revolutionary because it uses high randomization and offers high replayability - it is a backbone of Action cRPGs.
In the same 1996 Daggerfall is published offering high liberty of movement and its open character development mechanics and uses randomization system for quests generation among other things.
In 1997 Fallout comes out offering totally new meaning to the cRPG mechanics with its still modern S.P.E.C.I.A.L system and turn based battle (targeting specific parts of body) and dialogues using dialogue tree system and all this with immersive story which approaches strongly artistic level that will be remembered even when technically the game will be obsolete,
Then in 1998 the offspring of Dune 2 and Ultimas appears : Baldur's Gate - an exemplary specimen of inter-genre fusion, cRPGs meet with RTS game play, In
BG we have the characters selection system known from RTS (rectangle drawn by mouse, keyboard combos), formations, pseudo-real time (that can be paused with spacebar and all dice rolls can be followed if needed) and in the same time we have all role-playing aspect (game mechanics based on 2nd edition of ADnD, dialogue tree and deep involving story),
The last revolution part is Planescape: Torment which arrives in '99: its novelty is the fact that by itself
PS:T reaches what can be called only the art, none of the earlier games arrive to this point (even Fallout), the game script and quest ideas have very high literary level, the same about graphical design and music that position this game exactly in the decadent times of Matrix, climax of goth ideology, simply the end of millennium:
PS:T is the experience of the 90s generation. What is more
PS:T brings together two styles of cRPG: western and asiatic (do you remember epic spells effects in
PS:T, skies opening to come in aid of the nameless one casting high level spells ? the same can be said about ideology lying under the layer of quests and dialogues of
PS:T, finally
PS:T is the game which implements romances and deep emotional involvement in the story on much higher level than Fallout or
BG1 - FF VII comes to mind)
MaturityOf course it is not the end of the time, cRPGs second cycle arrives to its maturity: In the domain of story driven/tactical CRPGs
BG2 appears with its add-on, but they are not revolution, they continue exploiting ideas which were created earlier, yes, they do it very well but they are not the revolution, all of
BG ideas were known before: romances are known from FF VII, from
PS:T, complicated quests were seen in both those games as well,
BG2 just makes it easier to digest for people which do not necessarily like weird settings or console game play style.
Very interesting is the approach presented in the tactical cRPGs domain: if Fallout Tactics engine would be used to make full blown Fallout 3 cRPG it would be magnificent from the game play point of view (use of semi turn based fight, sitting/laying, etc.), unfortunately we have got only tactical strategy with cRPG elements :/
In the simulation cRPGs domain, Morrowind is not the revolution (except for full 3D graphics, but can we call this a revolution) - in many points older Daggerfall is more developed so we can even talk about decline. Still it offers a good time for those who like this kind of open play. Arx Fatalis, published in 2002 offers also very huge liberty of movement, but it is not revolutionary, we may rather speak of the study (the game has rather rudimentary dialogue system based on cutscenes)
In the domain of the action cRPGs we have the situation similar to the story driven cRPGs: Diablo 2 develops very well ideas already created in Diablo, but it is not the revolution. Then there are quite a lot of games aspiring to this type, such as Divine Divinity which uses diablo-like system with many story driven elements known from Infinity Enginge.
Decline PeriodAnd this is the section that can be filled in by very long list of the games, looking by subgenre:
IE-like games have many clones, some are more successful than others: Gorasul, the legacy of dragon is clearly a game inspired by
PS:T and
BG series, however with all its bugs and terrible game play it fails to bring anything new to the cRPGs scene, Pool of Radiance II: Myth Drannor is a gameplay catastrophe with terrible functionality of the user interface, ugly GUI, ugly sprites, this game made in 2002 is a huge misunderstanding. Many people will disagree, however I place Arcanum also in the group of decline games - this game did not bring anything new to the genre from the functional point of view, graphically was obsolete in the moment of its publication and did not keep any ambiance (I have found it very hard to immerse in the game). Even if it was done by many fallout series creators, it does not keep the same level. The same reproach goes to Lionheart which is an example what happens when development times are controled by marketing specialists (small part of game is well detailed and the rest is pure hack and slash - game is not coherent) in addition Lionheart uses annoying full real time system, like in Diablo together with mutation of the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. system known from Fallout - in this configuration it does not work.
Temple of Elemental Evil presents itself somehow better, graphical level of areas is generally high (Hommlet's homes are magnificent! bravo for the graphical designer!), game mechanics has nothing to reproach in general, however battles are very slow (for some reason they seem slower than battles in Fallout) and quests are not satisfying at all, game's ambiance has very low quality. This brings me to the subject of so called "party based" cRPGs (
IWD,
IWD2, FT:BoS, ToEE) as opposed to "PC based" cRPGs (
PS:T,
BG series, Fallouts). Basically all party based cRPGs are supposed to bring value as "tactical cRPGs" because player can create all his group from what I have understood, while it is true for FT:BoS, it seems to be false for
IWD,
IWD2 and ToEE : their battles are even less tactical than those in
BG2, treating those party cRPGs as story driven cRPGs is a huge mistake, since player will never identify himself with the party, only with the single character, and all of these games have storylines which do not involve directly the player: he is always a sort of the mercenary - this way of the story construction can serve in the beginning, but in the end playing game simply becomes not interesting, there is no emotional interaction between game and the player. Taking this into account "party based" or "mercenary party" cRPGs are way to nowhere.
As for simulation cRPGs there were some attempts to make some new, but they were quite unsuccessful (terrible Mistmare for example).
Action cRPGs know also such terrible games as Harbinger. Dungeon Siege is better and even proposed some innovative features (such as seamless transition between indoor and outdoor areas + 3D graphics), but its replayability value is low comparing to Diablo 2.
Games mentioned in this section were published mostly between 2001 and 2003 ...
Problem child of 2nd eraSomehow I have the problem with Neverwinter Nights (or rather with Aurora Engine). Its most innovative ideas are : using modern scripting language (similar to Java), tileset use for very easy area construction, use of 3d graphics, dialogue tree system, application of ADND 3rd edition and orientation on the market gap between single player and MMORPG (sessions with DM instead of persistent worlds). And above all NWN is directed strongly to modders.
Personally I judge NWN as the failure/part of decline period for several reasons:
- From graphical point of view Morrowind released in the same time is better
- From physical point of view (and simulation/world interaction point of view) Morrowind is also much better (no levitation, no swimming, NWN uses false 3D ? no Z axis in the areas, etc.)
- NWN is a failure because it was strongly advertised to the
BG series players and NWN?s official campaign is a terrible deception.
- Lack of numerous features of the cRPGs known from earlier games in NWN?s basic version (worldmap support, cutscenes, party management, etc..).
On the other hand modding with NWN is very easy (much easier than with
IE games based on bitmap areas), so it can be considered as ?maturity? phase product (but not innovation-revolution phase since the games based on similar principle, where players can construct their campaigns, are known from the first era)
From the outset, Bioware should sell NWN as the game engine rather than a game. NWN is just one of many side branches of cRPG genre ? this style of games will always exist, however they do not bring the enormous values in global to the cRPG world, still NWN is very nice cRPG rapid prototyping tool.
Third era of cRPGsHere is where we touch the problem of new technological revolution in cRPGs. Second era started roughly in 1996, does it mean that 3rd era starts 10 years later, in 2006? It is really hard to say. It is quite possible that innovative technology that will be used in 3rd era cRPGs was invented in 2000-2002 games (as it was the case for Dune 2 for example). It also means that new technology that will contribute to cRPGs will have nothing to do with them basically (again, the case of RTS: Dune 2, which contributed for
BG creation). Other issue concerns the question: who creates those games? Generally revolutionary ideas arrive from earlier unknown developers (Bioware was not the top of the industry in the days when it released
BG, and 1st era revolutionary cRPGs were created initially in the ?garage? by hobbyists or by students of universities)
I have not finished my research yet, and for some of the newest games I cannot pronounce myself because simply I haven?t played them yet (this is the case of Oblivion). I can only review them basing on reviews of others and with example of Oblivion it is very hard (a lot of positive hype I know from the times of Morrowind ? the game is often very well judged after 1 hour of play, while it should be judged only when someone has really finished at least 50% of the whole game, Morrowind is also magnificent in first several minutes with its liberty of play, it becomes terribly boring after +150hours of gameplay and incapability to get PC interested in the main quest ? I have never managed to finish this game).
Concerning simulation games some future change can be given by merge of Sims type games with cRPG. Concerning story-driven games the revolution condition is very simple: many of the real artists must overcome their intellectual inertia telling them that computer games are for kids and kidults. The recognition of cRPGs as the XI art (after television/cinema which is Xth art) would surely help. Surely Planescape and some of Final Fantasy games were the first step to this goal.
Whatever will happen, surely we will see in the future a lot of cRPGs which will freeze our veins from excitement and not from boredom (upff: I have to uninstall
IWD2 which will bore me to death soon ?.)
2006 © Manveru (aka Michal Kurela)
Edited by Manveru, 27 August 2006 - 01:57 PM.
Also some things the characters in the game say are just absolutely hilarious, they really have a talent for dialogues.
