On the Familiarity of Settings

[The Feral Kid]

providing a rich and detailed gameworld

Exactly. A rich and detailed gameworld, something the novelty settings for one-time game slapped together by one designer in 3 months in between writing design docs can't have by definition.

Agreed. But how many times have we seen though pre-existing, supposedly rich settings being used as disposable because devs don't give a fuck or publishers are in a hurry to cash-in on the license?

 

[BearBomber]

providing a rich and detailed gameworld

Exactly. A rich and detailed gameworld, something the novelty settings for one-time game slapped together by one designer in 3 months in between writing design docs can't have by definition.

You've inspired me mondblut. Now I can see what we've omitted. There are no "gameworlds" in the computer games. There is just a bunch of static locations connected by wildness. Only game with real gameworld were Pirates!, and M&B, and 4X games. Is usual RPGs cities, countries, people are just sitting on their asses doing nothing. IMO countries should wage wars, buildings should be captured, NPCs killed. Imagine Might and Magic game where countries play simplified HoMM in the background. That + good historical setting would be awesome.

 

[nomask7]

Fact is, some historical settings (with some mythological elements included) have the potential to be a LOT more creative and interesting than yet another standard Sword Coast game. MotB was good, but the NWN2 OC was your standard been-there-done-that fantasy setting that you've played through for countless times already. Some historical settings could be incredibly refreshing. Mesopotamia, Ancient Germany and Gaul, Ancient China, Aztecs... lots of potential there, and you can include mythology into these settings easily.

Is there, though, any existing game that has an interesting & imaginative game world that's based on real history? The comment above seemed to imply that there not only were such games, but that their game worlds kicked the asses of game worlds that weren't based on real history. Absurd, I know, since it's the complete opposite of truth.

I'm squarely with M John Harrison on this one, so closely in fact that I want to quote him:

Substitute imagination for exhaustiveness, and inventiveness for research. As a reader I’m not interested in a “fully worked out” world. I’m not interested in “self consistency”. I don’t care what kind of underpants Iberian troops wore in 1812, or if I do I can find out about it for myself. I don’t want the facts about the Silk Road or the collapse of the Greenland Colony, sugared up & presented in three-volumes as an imaginary world. I don’t want to be talked through your enthusiasm for costume. I don’t want to be talked through anything.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

A wild west RPG is just begging to be made. Playing a zealot preacher, bible and gun in hand. Definately be my first character build.

World War 2 has yet to see a real RPG, or Napoleonic Wars, etc. Historical is the word to use I suppose.

It doesn't matter at the end of the day; unless an indy dev makes it, we will just get some action RPG anyway and the setting will be wasted.

 

[JarlFrank]

Fact is, some historical settings (with some mythological elements included) have the potential to be a LOT more creative and interesting than yet another standard Sword Coast game. MotB was good, but the NWN2 OC was your standard been-there-done-that fantasy setting that you've played through for countless times already. Some historical settings could be incredibly refreshing. Mesopotamia, Ancient Germany and Gaul, Ancient China, Aztecs... lots of potential there, and you can include mythology into these settings easily.

Is there, though, any existing game that has an interesting & imaginative game world that's based on real history? The comment above seemed to imply that there not only were such games, but that their game worlds kicked the asses of game worlds that weren't based on real history. Absurd, I know, since it's the complete opposite of truth.

That's right. There haven't been any RPGs in historical or mythologic settings yet that have been worth a damn. Except for the old "Dusk of the Gods" which I really enjoyed, one of the few games that don't rape the mythology they're set in. Which doesn't mean there's great potential in such games.

I'm squarely with M John Harrison on this one, so closely in fact that I want to quote him:

Substitute imagination for exhaustiveness, and inventiveness for research. As a reader I’m not interested in a “fully worked out” world. I’m not interested in “self consistency”. I don’t care what kind of underpants Iberian troops wore in 1812, or if I do I can find out about it for myself. I don’t want the facts about the Silk Road or the collapse of the Greenland Colony, sugared up & presented in three-volumes as an imaginary world. I don’t want to be talked through your enthusiasm for costume. I don’t want to be talked through anything.

Well, generally, nobody would expect a historical/mythological RPG to be incredibly close to its source material. Every historical or mythological game, also non-RPGs, I've played has had at least some inaccuracies. But that's not the point. When playing an RPG, you don't care about the accuracy of the historical period depicted. Slight inaccuracies aren't the problem. Especially when you combine it with mythology.

But, fact is, history has many periods which have a lot of potential to be made into RPGs. Or at least to *inspire* a new, original fantasy setting. Fantasy worlds are kinda based on history and mythology, because elves and dwarves exist in Norse mythology, many monsters are borrowed from Greek mythology and architecture and clothing styles look quite similar to Medieval Europe.

These typical fantasy settings (which borrow a LOT from well-known mythologies and periods of history) have become the standard now, and I wonder why nobody has yet created a new, fresh fantasy setting that borrows from *other*, less well-known periods of history and mythologies. Ancient Mesopotamia has a lot of potential there, as have South American natives. Or India. Or China. Yet all we see are Medieval Europe fantasy worlds.

 

[nomask7]

Why would you want those influences to be made explicit? I agree that something new is welcome. I don't want to be told where it comes from.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

I was wrong, Nethergate wasn't bad when it comes to Historic RPG's, and of course Teudogar is an excellent game.

Nothing else to write about though. There was one WW2 RPG, but it was somewhat lacking, especially the combat engine which was terrible. I cannot remember the games name at the moment.

 

[JarlFrank]

Ah, guess that was a misunderstanding. The influences don't need to be explicit. In fact, in a fantasy setting, that would be out of place.

I wouldn't mind having a historical RPG though that is set in real history, though.

 

[nomask7]

The irony of Nethergate, in the light of the last few posts here, was of course that it wasn't nearly as popular as Vogel's other games. I remember that when I bought my first Vogel game a while back Nethergate was offered for a discount price for anyone who bought Geneforge 5. The historical setting excited a negative gut reaction in me, so I forwent the opportunity.

It doesn't seem like I was in the minority.

I should try to fix that.

 

[Serus]

I was wrong, Nethergate wasn't bad when it comes to Historic RPG's, and of course Teudogar is an excellent game.

Nothing else to write about though. There was one WW2 RPG, but it was somewhat lacking, especially the combat engine which was terrible. I cannot remember the games name at the moment.

"Another War" it was called.

Darklands is one of the best rpg played for this reason alone - true (late) medieval setting with low fantasy elements. Sure there is a dragon and witches and whatever but they are few and between. Very low fantasy - i like it.
Its the only RPG game that deserves calling it "medieval" and not "pseudo/retarded medieval-like shit"

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

The irony of Nethergate, in the light of the last few posts here, was of course that it wasn't nearly as popular as Vogel's other games. I remember that when I bought my first Vogel game a while back Nethergate was offered for a discount price for anyone who bought Geneforge 5. The historical setting excited a negative gut reaction in me, so I forwent the opportunity.

It doesn't seem like I was in the minority.

I should try to fix that.

I bought it at full price, silly me.

It is the same with plenty of RPG's. If it didn't fit in with a stereotype, it didn't sell well unless the right advertising/word of mouth reached people. I actually enjoy Nethergate more than the Avernum and Geneforge games, you really should try it. It has two quite different playthroughs to boot, not to mention different outcomes for each. I say this while being a satisfied fan of both the Avernum and Geneforge series' (I prefer playing Avernum 1,2,3 in Exile format though).

Serus, yes "Another War". I have it around here somewhere. I didn't finish the game, mainly because the Combat engine was truely horrendous. If not for that, I was actually enjoying the rest of the game in a tragi-comic "bad movie" way. It was hilarious actually. I managed to kill off a Robotic version of Ribbontrop before leaving it for something else.

 

[bhlaab]

Why waste time researching dusty books when you can just make shit up?

Because quality of the world/time ratio is better when you use existing setting in the game, than when you create the new one.

That's ridiculous.

It just means that most of the lore work was already done for you by some donk in the 1970s

 

[DraQ]

I don't mind when shit is being made up, but it has to be good shit - solid and consistent, while most of the devs seem to have permanent mindrrhoea.

 

[BearBomber]

Why waste time researching dusty books when you can just make shit up?

Because quality of the world/time ratio is better when you use existing setting in the game, than when you create the new one.

That's ridiculous.

It just means that most of the lore work was already done for you by some donk in the 1970s

Ah right, actually is should've been "making setting based on history" instead of "using existing setting". You just have to work very long in order to make setting better than actual history.

 

[DraQ]

You just have to work very long in order to make setting better than actual history.

True that, because actual history is already consistent, realistic and whatnot. Still, the potential of a well engineered setting unlike anything that happened in human history makes the risk of failure at achieving such a lofty goal more than worth it.

 

[bhlaab]

You just have to work very long in order to make setting better than actual history.

True that, because actual history is already consistent, realistic and whatnot. Still, the potential of a well engineered setting unlike anything that happened in human history makes the risk of failure at achieving such a lofty goal more than worth it.

Especially when the whole thing is just going to be an allusion to 1960s race relations anyway

 

[DraQ]

You just have to work very long in order to make setting better than actual history.

True that, because actual history is already consistent, realistic and whatnot. Still, the potential of a well engineered setting unlike anything that happened in human history makes the risk of failure at achieving such a lofty goal more than worth it.

Especially when the whole thing is just going to be an allusion to 1960s race relations anyway

Wat.