Why the hell aren't there more "space opera" / futuristic CRPGs?

[Davaris]

From a world building point of view, science fiction can do anything fantasy can, perhaps even more given it's scope.

The ratio of fantasy to space opera RPGs must be something like 100 to 1, if not even worse. Off the top of my head, I can think of only 6 genuine space opera CRPGs, all in two franchises: Mass Effect and Star Wars. No isometric ones to speak of. Add to this maybe one or two closely related genres such as future history/planetary romance/dying Earth, and you can add Torment: Tides of Numenera to that list. Aside from that there are a couple of old pre-1995 things like Albion and Megatraveller, and a couple of upcoming indie games like Stellar Tactics and The New World.

That is still tiny compared to the seemingly hundreds of fantasy RPGs that have been released on PC since the 1980s, and space opera accounts for probably less than half the number of games when compared to post-apocalyptic CRPGs, a smaller literary genre. I'm guessing there are about 20 or so of those, in the form of stuff like Wasteland, Fallout and UnderRail, meaning a tiny sub-genre of science fiction is doing better than the one where alien worlds, social ideas and intelligent species are commonplace.

I see lots of generic fantasy games appearing all the time as smaller releases or indie games. Some of them are shockingly bland distillations of fantasy as a fiction genre, with characters like 'Scottish-accented-Dwarf #375'. To be fair, aside from Planescape Torment, I can't think of many that seem written by someone familiar with Moorcock or Wolfe or Gaiman. Since the RPG is kinda a genre created by geeks for geeks, why are there so few space ones? Why hasn't someone, say, adapted Traveller into a CRPG? Why is there no Star Trek RPG? Or Babylon 5 RPG?

I would love to see something like a space-UnderRail even, but can't InExile or whoever do an isometric Traveller RPG?

Did you check how well those old sci-fi games sold compared to fantasy? I bet if those kinds of RPGs made a lot of money, the mercenaries of the game industry would have been all over them like flies on hot shit.

One of only two sci-fi shows I still enjoy re-watching is Blake's 7. It was amateurish and low budget, but it really had something IMO, and would make a great setting for an RPG.

 

[Dedicated_Dark]

So acc. to this poll we have more sci-fi fags than fantasy fags.

SO WHERE THE FCK ARE ALL MY DAMN SCI FI GAMES!!!

All we got were a few Shadowrun games. Where are the proper crpgs, where is my fckn Deus Ex sequels. Fck CDProjekts GTA in the future. Fuck your worthless bland garbage outerworlds, I want competent writing and interesting universes. Sci-fi can do so much shit.

Where are the Ghost in the Shell & Bladerunner of games!! How does a sci fi fan survive around here. Go make an RPG in Dead Space's universe, that was somewhat interesting sci fi. Where are the industrial sci-fi, steampunk, dieselpunk, cyberpunk, yourmotherisapunk and shit!

If Mass Effect sold so well, why don't we have more shit like that from competent studios.

Why do we yet not have any proper sci-fi top down tactical crpg made for the PC!!

THIS IS BULLSHIT!!

 

[Bigg Boss]

I've been saying that for years. Then they made The Outer Worlds. A cruel sense of humor indeed.

 

[Butter]

I want a proper wild west RPG.

 

[Bigg Boss]

Deadlands.

 

[Butter]

Deadlands.

Meh. No vidya adaptation, and it's got genre mixing. I'm sure it's possible to do something completely straight.

 

[DalekFlay]

The argument I usually hear is "generic fantasy sells better" but Mass Effect was a pretty big hit. Might be one of those things where perceptions are wrong but dominate decision making anyway. Or maybe space opera stuff costs more to make, somehow.

 

[d1nolore]

Anyone remember Whale's Voyage?

 

[Squid]

Or maybe space opera stuff costs more to make, somehow.

Don't operas require a good amount of singers? That's probably why. Not to mention getting them into space too. Can't be cheap.

 

[Dedicated_Dark]

The argument I usually hear is "generic fantasy sells better" but Mass Effect was a pretty big hit. Might be one of those things where perceptions are wrong but dominate decision making anyway. Or maybe space opera stuff costs more to make, somehow.

I can understand games like Mass Effect costing a bit, but what's the excuse for all the isometric games falling back to either fantasy or fallout-like! A sci-fi game like wasteland 2 will much more interesting than whatever wasteland 2 ended up being. A Shadowrun game not made for mobile first would be nice as well.

Weird that Fantasy is considered to sell when Star Wars exist.

 

[DalekFlay]

but what's the excuse for all the isometric games falling back to either fantasy or fallout-like!

That's probably more about nostalgia pumping than anything. The bluntly stated goal of projects like Pillars of Eternity was to emulate the very generic fantasy setting of Baldur's Gate. Same for Wasteland and... well, Wasteland... and UnderRail/Atom with Fallout.

 

[JarlFrank]

The argument I usually hear is "generic fantasy sells better" but Mass Effect was a pretty big hit.

It's a stupid argument for which there are plenty of counter-examples, especially if you're an indie who only needs moderate success rather than a blockbuster.

The Trese Brothers' games sell well enough to keep them in business, and Star Traders is probably one of their best-selling ones.
Mass Effect sold really well. Did it maybe even out-sell Dragon Age?
Elex did sell pretty well, probably about the same level of success as the Gothic and Risen games, I'd say possibly better-selling than Risen 3.
Star Control II is still a well-known classic, and there was a goddamn legal battle over the sequel/remake between the original creators and the new owners of the trademark.
In non-generic fantasy, Planescape Torment is a cult classic which may not have sold that many copies right after release but stayed a steady seller over time, and Morrowind sold really well when it came out and is still remembered as a classic.

Good games set in settings that aren't generic fantasy regularly sell well. But since about 80% of the market is generic fantasy, the statement that "generic fantasy RPGs sell the most" is factually true. But that's only because the majority of RPGs released are generic fantasy. It's a logical fallacy to say "this setting sells the best" when it's the most commonly used one. If there are no space opera RPGs, how can you say they don't sell? You need to have a sample size in order to make any statistical statements. And the high amount of fantasy RPGs also means that plenty of them don't sell, but they don't receive much attention so nobody bases any market theories on those.

 

[Heroic Liberator]

The argument I usually hear is "generic fantasy sells better" but Mass Effect was a pretty big hit. Might be one of those things where perceptions are wrong but dominate decision making anyway. Or maybe space opera stuff costs more to make, somehow.

I've personally known people that weren't RPG fans in general which have played the Mass Effect series solely for their interest in SF. Just like there might be some hardcore fantasy lovers that play fantasy RPGs for the setting, I think that it's safe to assume that we're talking about a mostly overlapping audience of RPG enthusiasts along with a few genre enthusiasts on each side, so the popularity argument is complete bullshit.

 

[Dedicated_Dark]

Just like there might be some hardcore fantasy lovers that play fantasy RPGs for the setting.

I think most people played Shadowrun due to the love for the setting than anything gamey.

I would've never played it with its clunky ass gameplay if it wasn't sci-fi. At this point I think a lot of SF fans are just desperate for anything worthwhile..

 

[DalekFlay]

I've personally known people that weren't RPG fans in general which have played the Mass Effect series solely for their interest in SF.

I'm a sci-fi nut and have definitely bought games/movies/shows I wouldn't normally like just because they had a cool sci-fi setting/design/etc.

 

[Taka-Haradin puolipeikko]

One possible reason that there isn't as much sci-fi games is that developers may think that space opera game needs 2 combat systems (space fights & away team/boarding/ground action).
With fantasy game you can get away with just one and have lesser workload.

 

[DalekFlay]

One possible reason that there isn't as much sci-fi games is that developers may think that space opera game needs 2 combat systems (space fights & away team/boarding/ground action).
With fantasy game you can get away with just one and have lesser workload.

Wasn't there a rumor it is the space fight aspect of Starfield that has it in development hell at Bethesda? I remember reading something like that and commenting that it really wasn't necessary for their genre (see: Mass Effect, Outer Worlds).

 

[Heroic Liberator]

One possible reason that there isn't as much sci-fi games is that developers may think that space opera game needs 2 combat systems (space fights & away team/boarding/ground action).
With fantasy game you can get away with just one and have lesser workload.

A SF doesn't have to be set on a scale greater than a planet or be done with filler space fights as with KotOR.

 

[ItsChon]

Underrail brings glorious incline to the Sci-Fi genre. Can't think of anything else other than the KotOR games which are good, but definitely not close to the same level.

 

[Cael]

Or maybe space opera stuff costs more to make, somehow.

Don't operas require a good amount of singers? That's probably why. Not to mention getting them into space too. Can't be cheap.

No, it isn't. All you need is pay for the gunpowder:

 

[Dedicated_Dark]

Underrail brings glorious incline to the Sci-Fi genre.

It is still too post-apocalyptic underground to be proper sci-fi. And I assume most of it's quest design & stories are inclined towards post-apocalyptic stuff than anything else.

 

[rohand]

It appears to me that Space Operas breed much more shooters (FPSes) whereas Fantasy does the same for RPGs.

 

[Comte]

Cause faggots want swords and knights and fairytales.

 

[ScrotumBroth]

I wouldn't mind an RPG in Homeworld setting.

 

[Mr. Magniloquent]

Scifi space operas with their futuristic backdrop are farther from the familiar human experience. The medieval existence was universal and lasted for centuries, so there is a wealth of culture, stories, myths, and history to draw from. It's far easier to create an identifiable settings an narrative from this. In space you've got to re-invent the wheel, or something entirely new. The technological aspects also obviate much of the character's worth the same way magic can in medieval fantasy. The suspension of disbelief for magic is more easily managed than technology, because it's further removed from reality while simultaneously having a wealth of tradition to draw from.

tl;dr - Medieval fantasy is more personal, flexible, and is easier to write due to the immense pool of prior art to draw from.