Richard "General British" Garriott leaves NCsoft

[mondblut]

Imaginary world is a playground for exploration and combat, not a goal in itself. Social interaction, plot, C&C, whatever - they are just icings on the cake. They might be all nice and tasty, but hardly edible when cake itself is lost.

Torment and Oblivion are two sides of the same coin, post-RPGs where the core RPG gameplay cake was omitted in pursue of whatever fancy icings their LARPing auditory desired, whether plot-C&C-dialogues, or immershun. And it was Garriott who started the trend of taking this "roleplaying" buffoonry literally and mutilating the original gameplay - that is, a single-player digital imitation of a D&D adventure - to conform to the expectations of the "it's about playing a role" crowd, who were kicked out of their D&D gaming groups for bad over the top acting.

Custom parties gone ("you can't roleplay 8 dudes, silly"), turn-based combat gone ("it is not immersive"), stats over most basic 4 or 5 almost gone ("roleplaying isn't about numbers"), "RPGs" turned into FPS or action-adventures with some dialogues thrown in - all this is ultimately Garriott's legacy.

 

[Alex]

It's hard for me to hate on figures like Molyneux and Garriott (although at times they DO make it plenty easy to do so). You have to wonder... did they get too much power, too many yes-men telling them they could do no wrong, so they started to believe their own hype? Did the system change and prevent them from really doing the games they wanted to, so the marketing "let us help sell your game" shaped something unique into a samey mold? Or a situation like Michael Scott in The Office - where someone good at selling (i.e. designing) gets put into a management position, where they're not terribly effective? Management and actual in-the-trenches design work are apples-and-dingoes different from one another.

Actually, if I had to guess, I'd say it's that the industry moved on, and is no longer the industry that allowed Molyneux or Garriott to bloom. Circumstances are as important as the talent of the person put into said circumstances, and the point where Molyneux and Garriott needed to step down and let new blood with better skillsets for the current AAA industry step into the limelight has long since passed.

Why? Did their games sell that badly? I was under the impression that fable 2 was selling ok, and I have no idea about Tabula Rasa, but I didn't think it did that bad... Or maybe you are talking about game quality instead of financial success. In that case, what kind of skillset you think one needs to produce good games with AAA(AA) restrictions? I mean, besides being a magician .

 

[SuicideBunny]

I have no idea about Tabula Rasa, but I didn't think it did that bad...

dunno bout the american servers, but the eu ones are emptier than auto assault's or earth and beyond's before those got shut down, there is constant rumormongering of nc pulling the plug any minute, and german amazon carries the ce for less than plaync charges for the direct download version (at least it did when i decided to give it a spin).
it's also a pretty uninspired game, no matter how you look at it. the only nice thing about it is some c&c in a few questlines.

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Imaginary world is a playground for exploration and combat, not a goal in itself. Social interaction, plot, C&C, whatever - they are just icings on the cake. They might be all nice and tasty, but hardly edible when cake itself is lost.

Torment and Oblivion are two sides of the same coin, post-RPGs where the core RPG gameplay cake was omitted in pursue of whatever fancy icings their LARPing auditory desired, whether plot-C&C-dialogues, or immershun. And it was Garriott who started the trend of taking this "roleplaying" buffoonry literally and mutilating the original gameplay - that is, a single-player digital imitation of a D&D adventure - to conform to the expectations of the "it's about playing a role" crowd, who were kicked out of their D&D gaming groups for bad over the top acting.

Custom parties gone ("you can't roleplay 8 dudes, silly"), turn-based combat gone ("it is not immersive"), stats over most basic 4 or 5 almost gone ("roleplaying isn't about numbers"), "RPGs" turned into FPS or action-adventures with some dialogues thrown in - all this is ultimately Garriott's legacy.

You, Sir, are a genius.

This is exactly what i think as well, and I was just going to write and, lo and behold, someone has already done it.

 

[Wyrmlord]

Custom parties gone ("you can't roleplay 8 dudes, silly"), turn-based combat gone ("it is not immersive"), stats over most basic 4 or 5 almost gone ("roleplaying isn't about numbers"), "RPGs" turned into FPS or action-adventures with some dialogues thrown in - all this is ultimately Garriott's legacy.

The amazing thing is that those quotes aren't even satire; those are the exact things that you find people saying.

But ironically...I like Torment. Even though what you say is right. I suppose it is because the game had alot of cool things to find and discover (the Sounding Stone hidden at the Fortress Of Regrets, Pharod's Bronze Sphere, Pharod's hidden storehouse, the Siege golem's entropic blade,.etc), and it was all mixed in with some high quality production values, with the Disney voice acting legend Tony Jay (Shere Khan, Frollo) voicing the main villain, and some good quality music. Yes, all that is icing, but it's damn good icing.

 

[mondblut]

I like Torment too. It has great story, awesome characters, excellent dialogues, beautiful atmosphere, fascinating locations... But as soon the NPCs shut up, the game falls apart. Good icing, bad cake.

 

[Thrasher]

Custom parties gone ("you can't roleplay 8 dudes, silly"), turn-based combat gone ("it is not immersive"), stats over most basic 4 or 5 almost gone ("roleplaying isn't about numbers"), "RPGs" turned into FPS or action-adventures with some dialogues thrown in - all this is ultimately Garriott's legacy.

 

[Texas Red]

Custom parties gone ("you can't roleplay 8 dudes, silly"), turn-based combat gone ("it is not immersive"), stats over most basic 4 or 5 almost gone ("roleplaying isn't about numbers"), "RPGs" turned into FPS or action-adventures with some dialogues thrown in - all this is ultimately Garriott's legacy.

 

[1eyedking]

Imaginary world is a playground for exploration and combat, not a goal in itself. Social interaction, plot, C&C, whatever - they are just icings on the cake. They might be all nice and tasty, but hardly edible when cake itself is lost.

Torment and Oblivion are two sides of the same coin, post-RPGs where the core RPG gameplay cake was omitted in pursue of whatever fancy icings their LARPing auditory desired, whether plot-C&C-dialogues, or immershun. And it was Garriott who started the trend of taking this "roleplaying" buffoonry literally and mutilating the original gameplay - that is, a single-player digital imitation of a D&D adventure - to conform to the expectations of the "it's about playing a role" crowd, who were kicked out of their D&D gaming groups for bad over the top acting.

Custom parties gone ("you can't roleplay 8 dudes, silly"), turn-based combat gone ("it is not immersive"), stats over most basic 4 or 5 almost gone ("roleplaying isn't about numbers"), "RPGs" turned into FPS or action-adventures with some dialogues thrown in - all this is ultimately Garriott's legacy.

Fuck...you know? I agree with you. A lot.

The Witcher was good on a "wow, this world really feels alive, non-generic, and there's a lot of thought put into every character, and every choice I make" level, but it fucking sucked hard on the "lets get down to the numbers, combat and party-planing" kind of stuff which I'm very into.

It's because of this reason that I believe Fallout to be a superior game than Torment. PS:T was a nice experience, but it didn't feel like gaming. It was something that felt different, in a good way, that is lately happening a lot but in a really, really bad way (read: Oblivion).

But don't confuse LARPing with Role-playing. Whereas when you LARP, you simulate, when you role-play, you *think*. You think what your character would say, or what would be really cool to say and watch the NPC's reaction; think why a certain NPC acts the way he does, and generally gloat whenever you own their asses or curse when they own yours; think how the choices you make affect the world around you, the ultimate difference between a game and real life, and what makes RPGs so unique. It's the kind of satisfaction you get in real life when you taste the rewards of a well-made decision (or the sting of a particularly bad one), a satisfaction that goes beyond delivering a critical to the goblin's head (but not by much :D ). You guys are forgetting that the man himself, Gary Gygax, was abhorred by the current evolutionary path of RPGs which were leaving character development as an after-thought in favor of an excessive amount of rules, numbers, and combat-oriented gameplay.

I mean, are you gonna tell me you didn't grin in delight when you found there was a "Hey Lloyd, catch!" line at Golgotha?

I like Torment too. It has great story, awesome characters, excellent dialogues, beautiful atmosphere, fascinating locations... But as soon the NPCs shut up, the game falls apart. Good icing, bad cake.

Yes, but NPCs don't tend to shut up a lot in Torment

 

[mondblut]

The Witcher was good on a "wow, this world really feels alive, non-generic, and there's a lot of thought put into every character, and every choice I make" level, but it fucking sucked hard on the "lets get down to the numbers, combat and party-planing" kind of stuff which I'm very into.

Exactly. Witcher, just like PST, Bloodlines, to a lesser extent Arcanum and Ultima 7, is another case of a game which did amazing job with every bit of bonus fluff while failing miserably in a basic (RPG) gameplay itself.

As a matter of fact, I started to think this is mandatory, a game cannot do all that added stuff right and stay a proper hardcore RPG at once. Whether this is a matter of less than infinite budget, or inherent to the nature of number-crunching, tactical gameplay, is debatable, but I am sure we will never see a game which can successfully meld TOEE and PST.

But don't confuse LARPing with Role-playing. Whereas when you LARP, you simulate, when you role-play, you *think*.

I define LARPing as taking drama over game mechanics. And on the side of developers, as a will to sacrifice the amount and significance of game mechanics in favor of increasing drama.

You think what your character would say, or what would be really cool to say and watch the NPC's reaction; think why a certain NPC acts the way he does, and generally gloat whenever you own their asses or curse when they own yours; think how the choices you make affect the world around you, the ultimate difference between a game and real life, and what makes RPGs so unique.

All this is fun and nice, but having control over a party of 8 and switching to overhead turn-based mode for combat doesn't prevent from experiencing anything of this at all. For us oldtimers, that is

You guys are forgetting that the man himself, Gary Gygax, was abhorred by the current evolutionary path of RPGs which were leaving character development as an after-thought in favor of an excessive amount of rules, numbers, and combat-oriented gameplay.

Eh? While the rules and numbers were fewer in Gygax' times, his 1st ed AD&D was *all* about combat.

Yes, but NPCs don't tend to shut up a lot in Torment

"Torment was great up to Curst, but after that..." - this is a line I've heard at least a thousand times Replace Curst with "after Barcelona" for Lionheart, "Giovanni mansion" for Bloodlines, etc.

 

[1eyedking]

I define LARPing as taking drama over game mechanics. And on the side of developers, as a will to sacrifice the amount and significance of game mechanics in favor of increasing drama.

Then again, don't confuse LARPing with good, old-fashioned role-playing. I don't see any C for Combat or T for Tactics in RPG, you know.

All this is fun and nice, but having control over a party of 8 and switching to overhead turn-based mode for combat doesn't prevent from experiencing anything of this at all. For us oldtimers, that is

The bad thing about that is that it gets stale too soon. You can only throw so many challenges and dungeons at the player before he gets bored of killing, scouting, thieving and dying for no apparent reason than to level his characters up. Rescuing the Ancient Medallion of Good from the Evil Necromancer in the Caves of Death can catch your attention once, perhaps twice with dual-wielding, but three times?

The point I believe you're trying to make, however, and one that I agree with, is to make those little details details, and not the main course of the game. But you must still add them. They should be mandatory. What's pasta without sauce? I wouldn't say it's pasta...

Eh? While the rules and numbers were fewer in Gygax' times, his 1st ed AD&D was *all* about combat.

It was? You should double-check utility spells, thieving skills, quest creation and race/class descriptions.

"Torment was great up to Curst, but after that..." - this is a line I've heard at least a thousand times Replace Curst with "after Barcelona" for Lionheart, "Giovanni mansion" for Bloodlines, etc.

The moment you hit Curst you're already 4/5 into the game, so it doesn't matter (much). Most games tend to get worse by the end, when the deadline's noose gets tighter around the developers' necks. It does when you're only 1/2 like in Gothic, or 1/4 like in Lionheart.

 

[ushdugery]

When I played Quest For The Avatar a year or two ago, I really found it fascinating. I mean, you start out as ordinary guy just sitting outside, when suddenly the whole place transforms and you find a gypsy's hut somewhere. The gypsy asks you questions about your sense of virtue, and then you are transported to another realm.

The whole circumstance is so wierd and interesting, like a modern and revised version of the Alice In Wonderland story. Though I just haven't played much of the game, but I should get around to it someday.

Almost sounds like "dieing earth" the game now that would be awesome.

 

[J1M]

Tabula Rasa didn't sell well because it wasn't strictly better than wow, and that's what it takes to get people to switch mmos.

 

[Drakron]

You can only throw so many challenges and dungeons at the player before he gets bored of killing, scouting, thieving and dying for no apparent reason than to level his characters up. Rescuing the Ancient Medallion of Good from the Evil Necromancer in the Caves of Death can catch your attention once, perhaps twice with dual-wielding, but three times?

That is not true, the IWD series are a example of how Dungeon Crawls can be successful.

The key issue is this, you either go the IWD route or you go the PS:T route but if you go the PS:T route you might as well go with doing a Interactive Novel because you are favoring character interactions and storyline above the rest to the point the RPG mechanics became unneeded or a burden.

And that is the shorcommings on the jRPGs were the only thing RPG for players to look forward are just the Boss Battles.

 

[mondblut]

I don't see any C for Combat or T for Tactics in RPG, you know.

A "role" in oldschool RPG meant "you play a role of a fighter" - that is, "being in character" here implies you "roleplay" by rushing into melee instead of digging up elaborate traps. No improvised theater there. In fact, choosing this controversial misnomer for the genre was its biggest mistake and marked the way to its downfall.

And when drama queens got into the twice misnomered computer RPGs - a derivative single-user simulation of a multi-player tactical adventure game which hadn't anything to do with silly drama in the first place - the ruinous effect doubled.

The point I believe you're trying to make, however, and one that I agree with, is to make those little details details, and not the main course of the game. But you must still add them. They should be mandatory. What's pasta without sauce? I wouldn't say it's pasta...

This is correct. As long as pasta isn't forgotten in process. In which case, I'd rather have a pasta without a sauce than a sauce without a pasta...

It was? You should double-check utility spells, thieving skills, quest creation and race/class descriptions.

Nonetheless, every Gygax module was a dungeon crawl. Would-be LARPers, err, "real roleplayers", were scoffing at AD&D for being a "hackfest" as early as in early 80s, when Gygax was in charge.

Most games tend to get worse by the end, when the deadline's noose gets tighter around the developers' necks.

That's what happens when the gameplay itself is faulty and has to rely on additional content to be fun. Games like Wizardry 7 or goldbox series never had endgame problems, even if budget allocated on sidequests or drawing new characters was exhausted.

 

[Wyrmlord]

Nonetheless, every Gygax module was a dungeon crawl. Would-be LARPers, err, "real roleplayers", were scoffing at AD&D for being a "hackfest" as early as in early 80s, when Gygax was in charge.

And from all that scoffing came Steve Jackson's GURPS and the emofest World Of Darkness.

"And the planes have been dying ever since..."

 

[Carlos' Bitch1]

Most games tend to get worse by the end, when the deadline's noose gets tighter around the developers' necks.

That's what happens when the gameplay itself is faulty and has to rely on additional content to be fun. Games like Wizardry 7 or goldbox series never had endgame problems, even if budget allocated on sidequests or drawing new characters was exhausted.

Exactly. Even if the developers ran out of brilliant "icing" the underlying "cake" was still interesting and required thought, planning and intelligence using the tactical combat engine.

 

[1eyedking]

[...]the emofest World Of Darkness.

Ugh...

Don't get me started on WoD.

Exactly. Even if the developers ran out of brilliant "icing" the underlying "cake" was still interesting and required thought, planning and intelligence using the tactical combat engine.

I strongly disagree. Most dungeon crawlers by the end tend to be eeeeaaasy due to designers gone apeshit giving the player way too many powerful items and spells.

It's actually at the end that the "icing" really shines: the story is about to reach its climax, and you're caught in the full momentum swing (read: finding out it was the Mortuary all along, exploring the Fortress of Regrets, etc.).

 

[janjetina]

Gameplay!=combat. Combat is just a part of gameplay. Dialogue is also part of a gameplay.
In PS:T, as well as in other good RPGs, game mechanics are implemented in dialogue - dialogue options depend on your statistics.
Calling dialogues in PS:T "icing" with combat being "the cake" shows that you failed to understand what the game was about. Given your misuse of the term LARPing , you'd probably consider reading a book LARPing, as any good book tends to make its reader identify with its character(s).
Dungeon crawling and experience farming without background story, character interaction and choices and consequences are a tedious and rarely provide any intellectual or emotional stimulation.

 

[Imbecile]

Generally, each individuals "cake" is different. The original goal may have been a "d&d campaign", but for starters not all pen and paper rpgs were d&d.

I've run pen and paper sessions for single characters and a group, and I've been a part of sessions, where respectively plot, characters, atmosphere, investigation and combat have been the focus. Saying an RPG should be a a "single-player digital imitation of a D&D adventure" doesn't move us any further forward as each adventure is different.

There is no fucking cake, just a lot of ingredients. Get more and more ingredients together in one game and more and more players will start to agree that a game is an RPG.

 

[PorkaMorka]

The bad thing about that is that it gets stale too soon. You can only throw so many challenges and dungeons at the player before he gets bored of killing, scouting, thieving and dying for no apparent reason than to level his characters up. Rescuing the Ancient Medallion of Good from the Evil Necromancer in the Caves of Death can catch your attention once, perhaps twice with dual-wielding, but three times?

I disagree. A properly done tactical combat game can keep the player's interest for a very long time, if it is well balanced to keep the challenge up and enough options to keep things from getting too formulaic. A game that makes you think can really keep it's appeal for quite a while.

The community for Jagged Alliance 2 is still going strong 9 year's after it's release.
http://www.ja-galaxy-forum.com/board/ub ... =cfrm&c=11

Even the comparatively simple and old as hell gold box engine lived on for a very, very long time with the FRUA construction kit, which kept a solid community well into the 2000s.

Properly done, gameplay will hold the player's interest long after he runs out of plot he hasn't seen before. Ja2 is really great for this point because most people are still playing the original campaign after all this time, just with a ton of tweaks to improve the combat, ui and difficulty.

 

[1eyedking]

OK, then that means that Temple of Elemental Evil isn't boring.

Kinda, like, not true, right?

 

[S_Verner]

He didn't become retarded. He just changed his vision. He created the first MMORPG.

And had his dream of a living, breathing world ruined by morons.

Remember when he talked about the Beta?

Then open beta started and these morons got pissed that the deer stopped spawning when they killed them in the hundreds, utterly wiping them out and leaving none left to breed.

MMO's have the potential to be good, they really do, but most people do not.

 

[S_Verner]

Tabula Rasa didn't sell well because it wasn't strictly better than wow, and that's what it takes to get people to switch mmos.

Even that doesn't work, because one's characters are like goddamn hostages.

 

[PorkaMorka]

OK, then that means that Temple of Elemental Evil isn't boring.

Kinda, like, not true, right?

But due to poor encounter design I couldn't even be bothered to finish ToEE once and I'm a obsessed with turn based tactics, really obsessed.

Just because you made a good engine doesn't mean I want to play "slaughter 500 bugbears in it".

If someone went through and tweaked the encounters to be more tactical then yes, ToEE would be a fun game. As is though, only a few battles have a variety of enemies that make you really think. Like that one with the spell casters, archers and melee all facing you at once.