What's more important in a CRPG?

[Brocken Jr.]

I have trouble separating story and setting tbh.
Even a reused setting is very different when written by a different author.

They're both the product of writing. (Although in a game setting also comes from art/music and other things.) I think "story" here means plot, for example PST and KOTOR2 are pretty much the same story but in different settings.

 

[JarlFrank]

I have trouble separating story and setting tbh.
Even a reused setting is very different when written by a different author.

Setting exists even in a game with next to zero writing.

You could have some kind of post-apocalyptic fantasy setting with exploration-focused globetrotting and dungeon crawling. Something like Elder Scrolls with no NPCs, or Dark Souls or something. It would have a setting, even if there's no story as such.

Imagine an RPG where you explore places like this:

That's a setting. You can construct a setting with thick atmosphere just by the level architecture and visual style you use. No written story is necessary.

Even roguelikes, which don't have a story beyond "go into dungeon and fetch item" have a setting.

 

[Falksi]

Just thinking about a comparison, and I enjoy the original 94 X-Com WAY more than I do Terror From The Deep. Combat is great in both games, story absolutely minimal, but the setting makes a huge difference, and I think it's a good example of how important setting is.

X-com '94 captures the feeling of an Alien Invasion amazingly and is my most played game ever, just like Morrowind captures the feeling of an Alien World amazingly too. Terror from the Deep I think I've finished 3 times coz there's nothing tense about aliens in the sea, and it wouldn't get a look in my top 50 most played games ever.

 

[RNGsus]

Imagine an RPG where you explore places like this:

Minecraft?

 

[Tyranicon]

From a sales/long-term marketing perspective...

Characters. If you want to build a franchise, good characters matter more than combat, setting or story.

Look at some of the best-selling video games of all time: Pokemon, Grand Theft Auto, Legend of Zelda, Resident Evil, [whatever game you really like], etc.

Your first thought will probably of the people or monsters that inhabit it. It's astounding that creative people still don't understand the very basic concept of their audience needing to connect with human characters rather than more abstract ideas.

 

[octavius]

Imagine an RPG where you explore places like this:

That's a setting. You can construct a setting with thick atmosphere just by the level architecture and visual style you use. No written story is necessary.

You can like use your imagination. That's like totally awesome. What a concept.

 

[Sigourn]

Without a good setting I'm not drawn into the game enough to bother with good combat or story.

Without good combat I can't be arsed to progress to see the story.

Most RPGs have shit stories.

Nicely put.
If the setting is interesting, I'll play it even if it's the worst game ever made.
But between a game with bad combat and a game with a bad story, I'll take the bad story any day of the week.

 

[Tyranicon]

Without a good setting I'm not drawn into the game enough to bother with good combat or story.

Without good combat I can't be arsed to progress to see the story.

Most RPGs have shit stories.

Nicely put.
If the setting is interesting, I'll play it even if it's the worst game ever made.
But between a game with bad combat and a game with a bad story, I'll take the bad story any day of the week.

Some games really shouldn't have stories in the first place. Here's a dungeon, build a party, you're good to go.

 

[Tihskael]

chicks without dicks

game is about gays fighting in space over control of big space butt

 

[Thonius]

chicks without dicks

game is about gays fighting in space over control of big space butt

I mean it sounds not as retarded as some animu settings. At least they have like motivation for it idk.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

If it doesn't have good combat I can live with it if necessary. Most RPG combat is shit anyway.
If the game doesn't have a good setting I won't play it as long. Needs to be interesting enough without over-saturating the experience. Setting and story quality are usually tied together in RPGs. Very few are purely one or the other.
If it doesn't have a good story I'll usually cease playing as soon as I realize it. If there's no greater motivation for playing, there's no point.

 

[Zombra]

Recent arguments have convinced me that setting is more important than story. I didn't really think about it before. Just went back to look over some of my favorite games, and all of them have very strong settings, and some have weak stories. Gameplay is still king, but if I could I'd change my vote to gameplay > setting > story.

I guess if the gameplay is good and the setting draws me in to a fascinating place and time, I feel like I'm making a great story even if there isn't much prewritten stuff to speak of.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

Combat > Setting > Story.
or
setting > Combat > Story
I view setting and combat as equal. The ideal case is if they are complimentary. Story doesn't really matter much in a game.

If combat is shit and the setting is shit in a game, why would I want to play the game? I could just watch a movie, read a book, or get a visual novel without having to deal with the shit combat. At the same time, if the setting is shit, the story won't be good since it is dependent on the setting.

 

[Inhabitants of Khorinis]

Going over the top 101 rpg codex games, trying to find the reason why I like them:
Planescape - setting, story
fallout 1/2 - setting, story
arcanum - setting, story
VTMB - setting, combat
deus ex - combat, story
gothic 1, 2 - setting, combat

I can do this all day.

 

[Zombra]

You're not Outlander !

 

[Tyranicon]

All this talk had me wondering. Has there even been a RPG released with good combat in the last 5 years?

KCD has... decentish first-person combat. Pathfinder: Kingmaker has goodish RTwP, not so sure about it's turn-based version. Battle Brothers was released in 2015 so it doesn't count. Darkest Dungeon might make the cutoff date.

Haven't tried Solasta, but that runs on 5e so....

I feel like I'm missing an obvious one.

 

[Zombra]

Has there even been a RPG released with good combat in the last 5 years?

https://rpgcodex.net/forums/threads/death-road-to-canada.113868/

 

[0sacred]

setting > combat > story

I can't deal with tripe shit settings anymore. Bland worlds make me lose interest fairly quickly.

I played Thunderscape just for the setting.

 

[ExposedBrainMatter]

RPGs don't even need combat. There are plenty of pen and paper games without it. But the problem is nobody is big brained enough to make it work in video games, because "rpgs" without combat tend to just turn into VNs like Disco Elysium. And if the setting sucks, the story almost certainly does as well.

 

[fantadomat]

The combat is the least important thing in a rpg,exploration and setting/writing are the top. The kodexian top 101 shows that,all the games have mediocre or bad combat but excel at everything else. While the combatfag games hardly make it on the list. Combat exist to keep you focused by diversification of content,you will get bored if all you do is read. The amount of combat fagz just shows the decline of the site. People that enjoy only the combat in rpgs are pretty dumb and simple,not able to gasp a higher ideas and enjoy a good story. People like rusty,that think fallout3 and skyrim were some amazing classical rpgs lol.

 

[undecaf]

Setting is much more important than many people realize. From the choice of setting, everything else flows: the story and the gameplay.

This is very true, of course.

But if we speak in broader terms, you can have good and fun gameplay in any setting. Where setting comes into play on an individual base is more about preference of grand scale themes at play in the game.

I, for example, am not very keen on fantasy settings. Wizards and elves and fireballs and such bore me. But there are exceptions where the specific kind of gameplay strikes my fancy in a manner that I don’t really mind that the setting is what it is. It’s fun inspite the setting.

RPGs don't even need combat.

True. But it’s hard to make that sort of game fun to play long in a computer. Meaning, making all those things that you are able to do in it compelling enough to carry the same sort of weight combat does, and from thereon out to fill the void that combat has left.

It’s different when you play with your posse around the table.

 

[T. Reich]

All this post-necro discussion and barely a mention of SYSTEMS.


Systems > exploration = combat > everything else.

RPG is defined by its roleplaying system. If the system is shit, RPG is shit. If the system is barebones, is it even an RPG?
Frankly, a good system is good to play even in abstraction. If you've never theorycrafted, are you even an PRG player?

Exploration comes second. Sure, there are some superbly-furnished straight corridors of a game you can play through, but that limits replayability and excitement.
Also, adding unexciting short appendices doesn't count either.
For me, that's another definitive quality of a good RPG - being able to explore around, stick your nose into every nook and cranny, being able to take an ultimately rewarding detour and forget about the main "epic quest" for a while.
Basically, what's more fun?

Combat is also important, because frankly that's what the systems are there for.
Boring or obtuse combat will make the game a slog to play through, excellent combat will make the other lackluster elements more tolerable.
Frankly, an excellent variable combat is an exploration in its own form. If you can approach the same encounter in very different ways, it's super rewarding in terms of fun. Even if the game itself is a proverbial linear progression of 10x10 rooms.
But combat in an PRG can't be good if the systems are shit.

Setting, story? The dressing, the spices. You don't eat the dressing over the "meat and veggies" (which got theor wn flavour in the first place) unless you've got shit taste.
Setting don't matter. Blaster or a wand of magic missiles? Plate armor or hard shields? What's the fucking difference?
Story don't matter. Fate of the world? Fate of the village? Nature of a man? Cool story, bro. How does the game play?
A good story or setting makes an already good RPG better. It doesn't make a bad RPG good, at best it makes it tolerable.

 

[good fucking shit happen]

All this post-necro discussion and barely a mention of SYSTEMS.

Combat = system

 

[Cat Dude]

Fallout franchise has botttom of the barrel turn based and action combat.

 

[Cat Dude]

RPGs don't even need combat. There are plenty of pen and paper games without it. But the problem is nobody is big brained enough to make it work in video games, because "rpgs" without combat tend to just turn into VNs like Disco Elysium. And if the setting sucks, the story almost certainly does as well.

Disco Elysium is a point and click adventure game with rpg elements thrown together.