How do you feel about innovation in RPGs?

[Prime Junta]

Fallout 2 has everything Fallout offers.

AND MORE!

Spoiler

More is not always better.

 

[Lilura]

Fallout 2 has everything Fallout offers. Gothic 2 has factions. JA2 is not pure RPG - it is tactics first and foremost.

"Pure RPGs"?

Jagged Alliance 2 has more reactivity in its questing, critical path, exploration and dialogue than Gothic, Gothic 2 and Gothic 3 put together.

Just because it allows for solo all the way up to three squads of six, employs a strategy mode, and has the best tactical combat ever seen, doesn't eliminate it from the equation.

Gothic 2 is... a popamole, and is nowhere near the calibre of Deus Ex or even System Shock 2, the two most monocled popamoles by far.

No one says Gothic 2 is perfection or a masterpiece, except you.

But Jagged Alliance 2 and Deus Ex can be called masterpieces, and no one blinks an eye. Especially for JA2 because it's 2d isometric and turn-based.

As can Fallout be called a masterpiece, but not Fallout 2. Every veteran knows why. You don't see anyone of good taste holding up Fallout 2 while ignoring the superior seminal.

 

[Egosphere]

I'm getting burned out on RPGs. They're stale and hidebound. When you crack open the virtual box you know exactly what you're going to get. You're a nobody/low-level adventurer starting from circumstances beyond your control, destined to rise to fame and fortune by killing thousands of mooks, to save/rule the world, by carefully considering which points to put in which slot of a spreadsheet and which shiny to equip in which slot. And then there's some kind of cliffhanger to make room for the next installment.

A lot of what you mentioned doesn't need a 'revolution' to solve. PST, New Vegas, Bloodlines etc. are games that avoided those tropes. All you need is a good writer or a good game designer to solve these issues, but unfortunately both are in very short supply.

I guess the easiest way to make something interesting is to have your character be a 'somebody' before the game even starts, like being a drunkard-detective in DE. It gives your character some roots and makes exploration/character's behaviour more coherent. Most of the time in rpgs you're playing a meandering adventurer slash killer hybrid, a person who pesters random strangers for quests and then goes off to kill the wildlife beyond the city walls. Giving your character a specific purpose before the game even starts would rewire your interaction with the world to be more believable (and interesting).

A stat system which gives you lots of options to role-play, but doesn't force you into becoming a demi-god by the end of the game, wouldn't go amiss either.

 

[Nifft Batuff]

The problem here is the Murphy Law. Consolitis and ARPGs are examples of the Murphy Law. So fuck innovation.

 

[Hobo Elf]

Grimoire is the most innovative western CRPG I've played in many years, and among the best. We've had nothing *but* crap attempts at innovation for so long that I feel that just making games in the old, good way is an innovation itself. So, in that context, yes, I wouldn't mind having more of that "innovation".

 

[RoksCQ]

All RPGs should be like Realms of Arkania or Darklands

Everyone should have to roll a top tier full team in Realms of Arkania 1 with the rng giving you scores that don't even result in a real character (e.g. oh not enough avarice ! too much claustrophia !)

It's worse than wiz 6 char rolling by a mile -- and don't even mention all the trap skills strewn about.

 

[RoksCQ]

The classics - Ultima, Wizardry, M&M - are the perfect example for innovation through evolution...

It's criminal in fact how underappreciated or simply missed by newer gamers ultima 4 is... A completely different concept and approach to your final purpose via virtue and the shrines for meditation etc (setting aside the small easy dungeon crawls after the main work of the game is done). Following ultima 4 up with 5 6 and 7 where you could load your old character and have npcs respond to you by name and at least somewhat acknowledge you've been a piece of the world was immersive as hell.

 

[Alienman]

The only innovation I want is better AI and world simulation.

 

[Tito Anic]

Jagged Alliance 2 has more reactivity in its questing, critical path, exploration and dialogue than Gothic, Gothic 2 and Gothic 3 put together.

Just because it allows for solo all the way up to three squads of six, employs a strategy mode, and has the best tactical combat ever seen, doesn't eliminate it from the equation.

But can you do a pacifist run in it?

Gothic 2 is... a popamole, and is nowhere near the calibre of Deus Ex or even System Shock 2, the two most monocled popamoles by far.

But they dont have factions. Also Arx Fatalis can everything Deus EX, SS2 does.

As can Fallout be called a masterpiece, but not Fallout 2.

Why? Fallout 2 is same as Fallout but only bigger.

 

[Verylittlefishes]

Yes, please.

By the way, I bought Disco Elysium. And you should buy it too. Praise the sun!

 

[Alphard]

The poll makes no sense. It all depends what you consider an "innovation". Is it a change for better or worse?

Better graphics? Ofc, gimme the best immersion

Action combat? Best thing happened in video games

Better writing? Sure.

Less C&C? no

Less interactivity? Nope

Streamlining and monkey proof difficulty?
Thanks for saving me money

Microtransactions, focus on marketing, paid reviews, leftist propaganda etc?
You're killing games

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

We need better ways of handling non-combat encounters. Reducing a complex action or exchange to a single dice roll brutal and not generally satisfying. It makes sense for a simple knowledge check, but dialogue could really use help. We see people test the waters with things like stealth, but there is a lot needing innovation.

 

[Quillon]

Any universal innovation will come from

better AI and world simulation

And other innovations will only make sense in the particular game which does the innovation according to its setting/lore/rules etc.






But first we need to define

Yeah but what is a RPG?

At its core, you play A character and everything else reacts to that character. So codex must accept that any game where you directly control/alter sentient (c)NPC/s is less of an RPG before beginning to accept any "innovation" :D

 

[Rahdulan]

The only innovation I want is better AI and world simulation.

I think you're ultimately right because they're vital foundation blocks, but those two are not strong enough in marketing terms for any big budget project to pay attention to in any significant fashion. I also imagine for most players reaction would be "eh, it's cool these NPCs have schedules or prices fluctuate", but they'll never engage in any way past that because simulationist elements are like sunlight to vampires for your regular player. Almost all good pirates games are underrated and overlooked for the precise reason because they fall on the simulation side of things, for example.

Not to mention there are titles out there like Pine and Outward that try to iterate, but whether they have appeal or not is a separate matter.

 

[thesheeep]

I'd prefer getting better games over getting more innovative games.

 

[Quillon]

Here's some super awesome mega brilliant innovative ideas for a party based RPG with blank slate leader type character:

Omit mind attributes and emphasize testing the player's mind with strategic & tactical decisions instead of the character's and reward/give penalty to character's personality/leadership skills depending on the results which will be used in how NPCs view/react to him.
Vary the physical attribs. /and maybe make them learn by use.
Let companions develop+equip+customize themselves depending on PC's *developed* personality and individual relationship with him.
Use command system in combat via shouting/earpiece/whatever depending on the tech level. With each command taking time/action points that companions may or may not obey depending on the stuff above and the command itself("rush into the fray!">lower success chance of obedience )

Add mood/morale system...fill in the blanks & make the game, easy peasy. It'll be SO INNOVATIVE, you can't believe!

 

[Fenix]

It's not enough to just make another power fantasy as another sequel in another franchise, or even to create a new franchise that's clearly inspired by some other franchise. We need new gameplay, new genre mashups, new systems, new worlds, new stories.

I agree, but in same time I think old classic formuls could be enjoyable, and today they arn't simple because of execution.
Bland banal people who are a product of culture which produce people who are bland, banal and generally formatted till 0 so they spit identical mononucleos ideas which lead to a stale games made alledgedly according to classic formulas without actual understanding and substnce of it.
I think we not lacking ideas, not only - but execution.
There were a lot of games that didn't try to innovate or revolutonaz but were enjoyable - because of execution.

I think in current point RPGs need not innovation, but more like resurrecting things which were good and now lost (and there are many), looking at what worked and doing well the basics.

I think it's impossible, and that's the major problem.
It's cultural thing I noticed for example in films - if you try to watch new films, those from aspiring directors for exmple, you will notice strangest thing ever - their films often looks like if they had NO IDEA whatsoever about cinematograph of 20th century and anything it achieved then.
Like if they are all Mowgli of some sort - at least in cultural aspect.
This is actually destructive cultural gap when old generation can't transfer its cultural baggage, so instead of some progress or at least stability society looks like every next generation was literally found in the jungles - they are barbaric and alien.

So that's not going to happen - all basics were lost and nobody gives a fuck - why, if they can reinvent the wheel and those who know that will die soon anyway.

I think the biggest issue I have if not the lack of innovation itself, we have seen very interesting ideas floating around. The problem is the lack of commitment to it.

These cases looks more like marketing moves. They promised, later thay took their promises back.
Or devteam belived in that, but bosses flicked them on the nose which is essentially the same, just more sophisticated.

We've had nothing *but* crap attempts at innovation

Yeah, that's the problem I think - in most cases I think devs spit out word "innovations" when they are like - we don't want to learn, don't want to work on thins and think through that.
Let's call it innvovations and cut all corners! U-hu!

 

[Verylittlefishes]

if you try to watch new films, those from aspiring directors for exmple, you will notice strangest thing ever - their films aften looks liek if they had NO IDEA whatsoever about cinematograph of 20th century and all it achieved then.

Spoiler

 

[Tyranicon]

Man I just want better writing in my games.

 

[Verylittlefishes]

Man I just want better writing in my games.

I know some Estonians.

 

[M. AQVILA]

Fuck innovation, innovation is decline, keep making Black Isle (plus Baldur's Gate) games forever.

 

[laclongquan]

Man I just want better writing in my games.

That was a horrible requirement.

Do you know a boatload of bad writers from novel industry? They're flooding into game industry because they can not compete over there.

 

[Tyranicon]

Man I just want better writing in my games.

That was a horrible requirement.

Do you know a boatload of bad writers from novel industry? They're flooding into game industry because they can not compete over there.

I feel personally attacked.

 

[laclongquan]

IF I have to read those horrible, horribly soulless written texts in game I will feel personally attacked too.

 

[HarveyBirdman]

If a game doesn't innovate in some way, then I don't want to play it, because I've already played it before.

Innovation can happen on lots of levels. Writing should be the easiest way to innovate.
>Find a good combat/character system
>Figure out a really cool setting
>Congratulations, you now have a franchise. Write interesting, innovative shit for it.

But nobody seems to even get this part right. Instead, they dick around with traits, or whatever, like in the Outer Worlds.

Nota bene:
I'm not saying to never innovate on systems and gameplay.
I am saying that the above is the easiest way to pump out good games, and yet nobody does it.

I take that back. Successful companies do exactly that.
Assassins Creed, Far Cry, Call of Duty, Battlefield, Halo, Crysis, Unchartered, Grand Theft Auto, etc., etc. They change a few gameplay elements to match new technology with each iteration, but otherwise stick to formula.

Now let's name modern RPGs with sequels of similar quality. Dark Souls. Is that it? I can't think of another. (And what to you know, Dark Souls copied and pasted Dark Souls 1 with new skins and stories into one of the best modern RPG franchises around).

It's funny, because you'd expect that these highly corporatized franchises would suck badly. But for their target audiences, they are consistently good.
What do RPG developers do for their target audiences? Abandon them to please those audiences that prefer Call of Duty anyway.

So what I'm really trying to say is: RPG devs are mostly a bunch of autistic cunts with neither a coherent vision for their own games, nor any business sense.