Incline What would have to happen for a 2nd cRPG Renaissance?

[deem]

Government regulations screwing over lootboxes

That's actually something that is happening in the EU. Several years ago Belgium, I believe, declared lootboxes a form of gambling and thus being affected by the gambling regulations in place. I don't know how many countries followed suit, I have not looked it up in a while.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

You can see an example of AI voice acting below (it's not great, but somewhat passable)

You sure it isn't just the Jaguar Spirit from Amazon Trail?

 

[Tyranicon]

You can see an example of AI voice acting below (it's not great, but somewhat passable)

You sure it isn't just the Jaguar Spirit from Amazon Trail?

Nvm I prefer the AI now.

 

[Denim Destroyer]

Like the real renaissance, the RPG renaissance was created to fill the vacuum formed from former big PC developers either moving away from the platform or going out of business. A second renaissance would need to come around to fill a similar void. Maybe a genre crash caused by people tired of playing games that focus too much on reskinning the classics?

 

[Falksi]

Just a random thought more than a firm POV, but I'd suggest that for any renaissance to happen we need to find an acceptable middle ground that makes the games sellable today.

I just had a playthrough of A Bard's Tale 4 cut short about halfway through due to corrupted saves, but up until that point was absolutely loving it. It was a superb blend of old and new, with most gameplay evolutions being understandable, enjoyable or at worst bearable, with most options adjustable.

Dragon Age: Origins was another example. Course I'd sooner have an isometric, turn-based view, but that's not gonna snag the sales which DA:O did for it's more mainstream approach. But it worked well and still held to it's core values enough to be enjoyable. What they should have done is then moved the game back towards it's roots with each entry, as opposed to popamoleyo.

Fuck knows how it'd happen now though. But Bard's Tale 4 really felt like a great step in the right direction.

 

[Tyranicon]

Just a random thought more than a firm POV, but I'd suggest that for any renaissance to happen we need to find an acceptable middle ground that makes the games sellable today.

I just had a playthrough of A Bard's Tale 4 cut short about halfway through due to corrupted saves, but up until that point was absolutely loving it. It was a superb blend of old and new, with most gameplay evolutions being understandable, enjoyable or at worst bearable, with most options adjustable.

Dragon Age: Origins was another example. Course I'd sooner have an isometric, turn-based view, but that's not gonna snag the sales which DA:O did for it's more mainstream approach. But it worked well and still held to it's core values enough to be enjoyable. What they should have done is then moved the game back towards it's roots with each entry, as opposed to popamoleyo.

Fuck knows how it'd happen now though. But Bard's Tale 4 really felt like a great step in the right direction.

I think an isometric, turn-based RPG with smart art design, good mechanics, quality-of-life improvements, (and most importantly) good writing, will sell very well.

I'm not just saying that because it's my specific wheelhouse, but because in my experience and interaction with other devs/players, it's what the market is really craving right now.

Ultimately, I think it really comes down to talent. One or two more great games that satisfy codex preferences will tip the scales and bring popular opinion here around. Maybe if KCD's sequel knocks it out of the park, or Colonyship, or something else. Even grognards appreciate good craftsmanship.

 

[Comte]

Everything is shit turn your computer off

 

[Falksi]

Just a random thought more than a firm POV, but I'd suggest that for any renaissance to happen we need to find an acceptable middle ground that makes the games sellable today.

I just had a playthrough of A Bard's Tale 4 cut short about halfway through due to corrupted saves, but up until that point was absolutely loving it. It was a superb blend of old and new, with most gameplay evolutions being understandable, enjoyable or at worst bearable, with most options adjustable.

Dragon Age: Origins was another example. Course I'd sooner have an isometric, turn-based view, but that's not gonna snag the sales which DA:O did for it's more mainstream approach. But it worked well and still held to it's core values enough to be enjoyable. What they should have done is then moved the game back towards it's roots with each entry, as opposed to popamoleyo.

Fuck knows how it'd happen now though. But Bard's Tale 4 really felt like a great step in the right direction.

I think an isometric, turn-based RPG with smart art design, good mechanics, quality-of-life improvements, (and most importantly) good writing, will sell very well.

I'm not just saying that because it's my specific wheelhouse, but because in my experience and interaction with other devs/players, it's what the market is really craving right now.

Ultimately, I think it really comes down to talent. One or two more great games that satisfy codex preferences will tip the scales and bring popular opinion here around. Maybe if KCD's sequel knocks it out of the park, or Colonyship, or something else. Even grognards appreciate good craftsmanship.

Well hopefully. But Kingmaker's sales were around 1m weren't they? Whereas by 2010 DA:O had sole over 3 times that.

Not saying you're wrong though, there's definitely a craving for more traditional RPGs even amongst normies on social media, what I'm saying is I'd be happy to bare with more middle-ground games such as DA:O if it gets us to that point eventually. I think that middle ground keeps normies attached enough to sell, but detatched enough to start fucking up proper RPGs too.

 

[gurugeorge]

For discussion purposes, the first cRPG Renaissance is largely considered to be between the mid 90s to the early 2000s. Games would include seminal works such as Fallout, Planescape: Torment, Baldur's Gate, Arcanum, etc.

While cRPGs are still most certainly a niche genre, over the last few years we've seen a strong resurgence in commercially and critically successful cRPGs, most notably led by Owlcat and Larian (although codex opinion remains... divided over game quality). There are also a large number of indies either released recently, in early access or in development that hold promise.

Discerning members of the codex, what would have to occur for you to consider a 2nd cRPG Renaissance at hand?

Isn't the Larian/Owlcat thing the ongoing 2nd renaissance now currently underway? I can't think when RPGs were this popular since the 1st renaissance. Or maybe it's more like RPGs now being a more firmly-established part of the gaming landscape since WL2/PoE?

I don't know how well Fallout, etc., did compared to sports, racing and fps games in their day, I shouldn't think they were that much bigger than the Larian/Owlcat games are relatively now. Basically, if "renaissance" just means, "the genre has become somewhat visible in the commercial landscape relative to other games, as opposed to nearly totally invisible," then in that case we are living through the 2nd renaissance.

The core audience for RPGs can't be more than maybe a few hundred thousand worldwide, what pushes the genre into greater visibility now and then is some gimmick, something that appeals to the normie crowd. At the moment, it seems to be a combination of co-op multiplayer and excessive phaggotry, with maybe a bit of normie nostalgia for the older wave.

 

[Tyranicon]

Well hopefully. But Kingmaker's sales were around 1m weren't they? Whereas by 2010 DA:O had sole over 3 times that.

Well it's no contest. Owlcat is AA at best, while Bioware is AAA. Nearly 200 people worked on DA:O, while Owlcat had what, a few dozen on Kingmaker? Also, a large and well-connected North American company compared to russkiland (no offense, I have some русские lineage in me too). The marketing budget must've been david vs goliath.

Honestly, seeing how AAA went, I think it's great that Bioware and others have fucked off and relaxed their grip on the industry. Now indies can thrive.

Isn't the Larian/Owlcat thing the ongoing 2nd renaissance now currently underway? I can't think when RPGs were this popular since the 1st renaissance. Or maybe it's more like RPGs now being a more firmly-established part of the gaming landscape since WL2/PoE?

We can see very clear parallels between the 90's renaissance to the last 4-5 years. In fact, we've come very close to satisfying even the codex's high standards. If a good KCD sequel, Underrail Infusion, Pathfinder game with good writing (and less pandering), and Disco Elysium with crunchy combat come out within a short span of years, I can practically guarantee we'll hear cries of the "second coming of incline" around these parts.

The core audience for RPGs can't be more than maybe a few hundred thousand worldwide

I think you're way undershooting. I don't have hard numbers but Kingmaker, Disco Elysium each sold over a million copies, and KCD sold 4 million copies.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

We probably need another world war or something

 

[Bruma Hobo]

Well hopefully. But Kingmaker's sales were around 1m weren't they? Whereas by 2010 DA:O had sole over 3 times that.

Such a tragedy, a heavily marketed EA cinematic game sold more than an unpolished PC-exclusive retro-looking CRPG made by a bunch of unknown russians competing with more established western studios. This is definitely not a healthy environment for more B*ldur's Gate clones.

 

[Fargus]

Fuck rpgs.

 

[Tihskael]

Disco Elysium knock offs like the one Sawyer is working on right now will be classified to be a part of the "2nd crpg renaissance".

 

[gurugeorge]

I think you're way undershooting. I don't have hard numbers but Kingmaker, Disco Elysium each sold over a million copies, and KCD sold 4 million copies.

By "core audience" I mean the audience that would buy RPGs regardless of whether they're currently popular or not - i.e. people like us. And I doubt that's much bigger than about 400k worldwide.

You get those larger numbers when some sizeable bunch of normies sit up and take interest on account of some novelty or gimmick that widens their appeal. With the current wave, first it was nostalgia from normies who had enjoyed the 1st renaissance, then it was Larian's co-op, currently it's the phaggotry of the Owlcat games/BG3. Those are all gimmicks that get the normie/NPC crowd interested, which bumps up the RPG sales numbers beyond the core audience now and then.

I suppose you could say that Bethesda games and BioWare games represent a sizeable stable normie audience for things-that-are-a-bit-like-RPGs, and they'll buy into RPGs proper if the circumstances are right; but when it comes to games that have some depth and complexity, I think it takes something new or gimmicky to get normies to buy into them.

 

[just]

i have to finish my game
then new era can begin

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

I think it's akin to catching lightning in a bottle. When we look at the period that RPGs really rose to prominence - the 80s-late 90s - we also have to look at all other forms of media to figure out why. You had many Sword & Sorcery movies catering to many ages, films like Conan The Barbarian for adults, Clash of the Titans for older kids. You had Magic: The Gathering blowing up, Forgotten Realms and all its novels. D&D sticking its head a little further out into the mainstream. I think what connected all of these fantasies together was the insular nature of the stories and lore that were told within them. The person engaging with whatever mythos was only ever seeing small parts of it through windows and that sparked our wonder at the mystery of it all. "Anything could be out there!" Our imaginations were allowed to make up for the lack of detail in a lot of cases, my mind recalls that scene in Neverending Story where the kid has to make it past those two Sphinxes to meet the oracle or whatever. "What culture put them there? Why? Who were all the dead knights?" Who knows. (I'm sure the book elaborates) Who cares. it's nice to have that mystery.

I'm not sure I'll be able to articulate this properly, but I think people were more conditioned to accept unusual types of fantasy, then something happened that stopped us from being as receptive to these one-offs. I almost think this has to do with how few people actually read to their kids anymore and expose them to many different kinds of fiction early to ignite that spark. As a result, we don't travel as far anymore. We'll never get an RPG in Oz because we don't even recognize how wonderful that setting is.

It also seems to me these days every moderately successful RPG pathologically needs to have sequels rather than just jumping around in whatever fiction it's established and telling a new story. Not to mention everything needs mountains of tedious detail and continuity. We're locked in these safe little bubbles for decades sometimes. Look at Bioware with Dragon Age and Mass Effect. Fucking no end to them. I don't even want to go back to Baldur's Gate either. Show me Calimshan or Thay. Bring me to the steppes of Turan! I don't think there will be another renaissance for a long time, as a society we've become too autisticly focused on trivia. Developers are too in love with using five-dollar words where a fifty-cent word will do. We must RETVRN.

We probably need another world war or something

- This is true, awful as it sounds. Some of the best fantasy came from fighting men returning from war and having all sorts of adventures in far off places to talk about or play around with. Gaming is downstream.

 

[Lord_Potato]

I don't know about that. Andrzej Sapkowski did not fight in any war, George R.R. Martin was a conscientious objector during Vietnam. And still they managed to write pretty solid stories.

Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft would probably die if you sneezed at them too hard. Neither one was a decent soldier material.

The only fantasy writers with actual combat experience were J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis.

 

[gurugeorge]

I don't know about that. Andrzej Sapkowski did not fight in any war, George R.R. Martin was a conscientious objector during Vietnam. And still they managed to write pretty solid stories.

Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft would probably die if you sneezed at them too hard. Neither one was a decent soldier material.

The only fantasy writers with actual combat experience were J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis.

IIRC Heinlein and Jack Vance had done military service.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft would probably die if you sneezed at them too hard. Neither one was a decent soldier material.

Bro you haven't seen an image of Howard have you?
Dude was an amateur boxer and weightlifter. May or may not have been soldier material but he was definitely sneezeproof.

 

[octavius]

IIRC Heinlein and Jack Vance had done military service.

Most American SF writers of their generation did military service, and even saw action.
It's a miracle none of the major writers were killed in action, but some were badly damaged like Kornbluth and Walter M. Miller.

I think experiencing a war first hand gives you a much more profound insight into life, the universe and everyting, than modern writers whose background is more like gender studies in safe spaces.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

I don't know about that. Andrzej Sapkowski did not fight in any war, George R.R. Martin was a conscientious objector during Vietnam. And still they managed to write pretty solid stories.

Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft would probably die if you sneezed at them too hard. Neither one was a decent soldier material.

The only fantasy writers with actual combat experience were J. R. R. Tolkien and C. S. Lewis.

Robert Jordan and Lloyd Alexander as well. But yes, not as many as I remember. To be honest, my mind sometimes bundles all pulp in with fantasy. Whether they be, war, western, crime whatever they're cut from the same cloth in a lot of ways. I'd even throw the likes of Lew Wallace in there with Ben Hur.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

I think experiencing a war first hand gives you a much more profound insight into life, the universe and everyting, than modern writers whose background is more like gender studies in safe spaces

Yeah I have the impression that modern perspectives need a fuckload of readjustment. Especially the postmodern ones.

 

[Lord_Potato]

Robert E. Howard and H.P. Lovecraft would probably die if you sneezed at them too hard. Neither one was a decent soldier material.

Bro you haven't seen an image of Howard have you?
Dude was an amateur boxer and weightlifter. May or may not have been soldier material but he was definitely sneezeproof.

Howard had a fragile health in his youth, and later, despite his trainings had a weak heart, which he treated by taking regular doses of Digoxin, a drug that also causes numerous side effects, including poor kidney function.

Besides his mental health was an untreated mess. After all, he killed himself because of terminal illness of his mother. Such fragile psyche is not a feature or a good soldier.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Such fragile psyche is not a feature or a good soldier.

It probably wasn't just that, considering he was around through most of the great Depression?
I suppose it was only natural he got depressed himself.