Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Could you take a browser based RPG seriously?

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
heroinedusk.com is impressive. While it was only a demo and had very simple mechanics, the potential for a pretty awesome game is definitely there.

It works brilliantly on all screen sizes which is pretty cool and I've found myself going back and smashing away at it now and then just for fun, even without any story, real quest or deeper mechanics.

So my question is; if a browser based single player game which was something like this, but with well a well written story, more interesting combat, full party creation and more complex mechanics was released, would you play it?

I know I would irrespective of if it was a browser game. Just wondering what others thought.
 
Last edited:

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
The main issue is that the game needs to be online to play (dependent on server functioning, being paid for, developer being alive, interested in keeping the game working). Having to be online too.

So your fearful that factors not under your control could cause the game to be unplayable basically.

Okay, this is totally understandable.
 

Baron

Arcane
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
2,887
If someone makes a great RPG I'll play it on a browser, iphone or chip buried two inches within my brain.


Well... maybe not on iPhone.

There's a certain convenience to logging into a website, from any computer or mobile device, and continuing your adventures. I agree with Awor's concerns, rpg enthusiasts tend to play their games decades later and a browser game will probably shut down a year later... or worse, ask for subscription payments instead of once off. Aside from that, I could play a browser rpg, as long as it wasn't designed more for my mum than me.
 

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
If someone makes a great RPG I'll play it on a browser, iphone or chip buried two inches within my brain.


Well... maybe not on iPhone.

There's a certain convenience to logging into a website, from any computer or mobile device, and continuing your adventures. I agree with Awor's concerns, rpg enthusiasts tend to play their games decades later and a browser game will probably shut down a year later... or worse, ask for subscription payments instead of once off. Aside from that, I could play a browser rpg, as long as it wasn't designed more for my mum than me.

I pretty much feel exactly the same way. Good to hear that from bros.
 

Midair

Learned
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
101
If the kind of game you describe existed, I doubt anyone would refuse to play it because it was browser based. Personally, I wouldn't mind if every application simply started when you visit its URL. No download, install, or configuration. I realize web servers are not perfectly reliable and might not exist forever, but it just doesn't bother me. If something goes down, I can get over it.
 

V_K

Arcane
Joined
Nov 3, 2013
Messages
7,714
Location
at a Nowhere near you
Have you played Chimaera Stones? I found it a pretty solid, if short, game, despite being browser-based and having a bit of pay-to-win (you can buy in-game money for real-world ones. But unlike the popamole ftp games, this one is totally winnable without doing so).
 

Abelian

Somebody's Alt
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,289
One reason why I would not play browser-based games is because there's no guarantee the server will still be up when I want to replay it 10 years later. Also, there is the potential danger that the game would switch to a having monthly subscription fee.
 

Kaucukovnik

Cipher
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
488
I have prejudice against browser-based anything, because it's the road away from personal computing and towards the "wonders" of CLOUD.
I don't want full-fledged PC to become an expensive rarity, with everyone cloud-streaming everything through shitty pocket devices.

Physical world logistics are fucked up royally. Are we that eager to reach that point in the digital world as well?

So from me the refusal is more about making a statement rather than pure inconvenience.
 

DraQ

Arcane
Joined
Oct 24, 2007
Messages
32,828
Location
Chrząszczyżewoszyce, powiat Łękołody
If the kind of game you describe existed, I doubt anyone would refuse to play it because it was browser based. Personally, I wouldn't mind if every application simply started when you visit its URL. No download, install, or configuration. I realize web servers are not perfectly reliable and might not exist forever, but it just doesn't bother me. If something goes down, I can get over it.
:fight:
 

Dickie

Arcane
Patron
Joined
Jul 29, 2011
Messages
4,235
Steve gets a Kidney but I don't even get a tag.
Just because it's played in a browser doesn't mean it's hosted on a web server necessarily. I write HTML5 apps that I can take anywhere and run on anything by copying a folder and opening an HTML file with any web browser (well, not Netscape 4 or IE7 of course). With HTML5 web storage, it's easy to save data for future use (up to 5 MB), which was the main reason I did hosted apps before. You could also host an application and use the application cache interface to allow users to play it offline and would just need a connection to get the latest version of the game or if they cleared their cache or whatever. I'm actually currently working on converting a board game to an HTML5 app, so I can play it more easily. I'm sure I'll never finish, just like most people, but it's fun to work on anyway and it's amazing what HTML5 lets you do easily.

Anyway, my question is whether this thread is about how shitty it is playing games in a web browser for look and feel or about playing games that you have to be online to play.
 

Abelian

Somebody's Alt
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,289
One reason why I would not play browser-based games is because there's no guarantee the server will still be up when I want to replay it 10 years later.

So you wouldn't waste time taking a walk in a park because there might be a mall built over it 10 years later?

Not everything has to last forever.
If a game is bad and/or I don't enjoy it, then I'm perfectly fine with not playing or even seeing it ever again.

However, if I invest time into something that I enjoy, I'd like to think that I have something to show for my effort, or at least be able to do it once again in the future. Yes, I admit having some pack-rat tendencies, but I'm not a hoarder. For example, I don't archive my save-games (because I know I won't reload them), but if I enjoyed a game I no longer have, I will buy it again.

I think that a video game not having replayability is an unnecessary limitation. It reminds me of this book written with vanishing ink, so buyers could only read it within two months before the text disappeared.
 

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
I think the browser is approaching a point where games of real quality can actually be produced in it.

You guys need to consider what you want, and which medium allows for that kind of game to get made. For example, while I haven't played it much, a game like KOTC would be totally possible in a browser now. If it's done well and you can go full screen to get rid of the feeling of being in a browser, what is the real difference?

The online stuff I can understand. But to be honest hosting a game that doesn't require complex server architecture doesn't cost much money at all. Keeping it online for as long as the internet exists would cost basically nothing.

How would you feel about a one off pay per chapter fee? For example the game is 4 chapters long, you get chapter 1 for free then you can pay per chapter to continue. Maybe if you purchase all three chapters you get a reduced bulk price.
 

Kaucukovnik

Cipher
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
488
Hosting costs and difficulties are irrelevant, even simple text disappears from the net all the time.

Certainly wouldn't pay for access to a web page, be it a game or any other content.
The same way I wouldn't pay for a book to be able to borrow it. Now 1 year library pass, that's something different.

Regarding the look and feel, I also hate how web-like elements infiltrate regular games - glass-like buttons, UI composed of geometric shapes with gradients instead of good old drawn decorations...
 

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
ven simple text disappears from the net all the time.

wat? Nothing "disappears" someone has to physically remove it. It's all data and for it to be gone, someone has to remove it.

In terms of look and feel...that's easy to fix. There's literally no reason anything has to look web-like, that's just the designer/artist having shit taste.

You wouldn't be paying for access to a "web page" you'd be paying for game content much in the same way you pay steam and then download a game onto your PC. It's exactly the same thing except the game runs as an app in the browser.
 

Midair

Learned
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
101
Always-online will have ideological opposition even if it's not a practical issue. As far as technical capability or look and feel, I would say the limitations are significant. A browser is great for something like a text adventure with graphics, but KOTC is a stretch. Basic stuff like full screen smooth scrolling would be a challenge.

People have said web apps are approaching desktop quality for years, and they are still only approaching.
 

Cynic

Arcane
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
1,850
Always-online will have ideological opposition even if it's not a practical issue. As far as technical capability or look and feel, I would say the limitations are significant. A browser is great for something like a text adventure with graphics, but KOTC is a stretch. Basic stuff like full screen smooth scrolling would be a challenge.

Not really.

HTML5 allows for all of that to be possible.

The problem is the developers who are using the technology and their motivations for making games. Almost all the games on the chrome web store are MMOs which are free to play with micro transactions. This is because the devs believe that this is the way to make money with games on the web. It's really all their is so far.

What I'm saying is, the platform is pretty mature now...games of the quality of old classic SNES titles are definitely possible, with Web GL you can get create fully 3D games.

The great thing about the browser which, in comparison to a phone, is an advantage is that you have a full keyboard to work with as well as a mouse. So far a phone's main limitation as far as games goes is that they are focused on touch. I've yet to play a game on the phone that is able to get around this without virtual pads, and I've yet to use one of those that didn't feel like shit.

Not sure if you played the Google Doodle Dr Who game, but it was a cool little app that showed how an isometric tile based game with nice graphics and animations is totally possible in the browser - http://www.google.com/doodles/doctor-whos-50th-anniversary
 

Abelian

Somebody's Alt
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,289
As far as technical capability or look and feel, I would say the limitations are significant. A browser is great for something like a text adventure with graphics, but KOTC is a stretch. Basic stuff like full screen smooth scrolling would be a challenge.

People have said web apps are approaching desktop quality for years, and they are still only approaching.
If games with 3D engines likes Quake Live and Runescape are able to run in a browser, I'm sure a 2D game like KOTC is manageable.
 

Kaucukovnik

Cipher
Joined
Mar 26, 2009
Messages
488
Well, I'm not a fan of Steam either. Same for online activations and other DRM.
Limiting your customers' access can be always considered a DRM. There is no other reason not to allow the player to have the complete, independent package of a single-player game. Even if it is browser-based, the source doesn't have to be a remote server.

Probably the only payment for something I don't carry home with me is cinema - they at least offer bigger screen and massive audio.
And live performances, but that's a different beast altogether.



If games with 3D engines likes Quake Live and Runescape are able to run in a browser, I'm sure a 2D game like KOTC is manageable.
But why require a modern PC for Quake-like game, just to run it in browser? I'm pretty sure that a dedicated engine will always be immensely faster.
And thanks to browsers now managing to run 3D games, Firefox with a few open tabs with regular sites eats half GB RAM in no time.

EDIT: Manageable is the key word. Just because it is manageable doesn't mean you should do it.
 

Abelian

Somebody's Alt
Joined
Nov 17, 2013
Messages
2,289
But why require a modern PC for Quake-like game, just to run it in browser? I'm pretty sure that a dedicated engine will always be immensely faster.
And thanks to browsers now managing to run 3D games, Firefox with a few open tabs with regular sites eats half GB RAM in no time.
I'm not saying that it's optimal or even desirable, just that the technology is available.

One of my biggest concerns regarding the future of the web is all the bandwidth that going to be used for entertainment in the future, especially with more and more people using mobile devices to stream movies and music.

I agree with your earlier post about the increasing prevalence of cloud-computing. I'm not trustful enough of companies to give them access to all my files, especially after taking more than a cursory look at their end user license agreements.

Just read what happened to this guy, whose Apple cloud account was deleted by hackers by taking advantage of security questions. As an aside, it's a good idea to use made-up answers to security questions, since that information can't be phished or researched (ex. choose "what is my pet lizard's name?" when you actually never owned a pet lizard).
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom