It's interesting to see some of the things that mean "role-playing game" to players of CRPG's.
Well, it's interesting. If you've watched the evolution of the genre I have, you'd find interesting examples of change.
All the earliest CRPGs were turn-based. There are still hardcore CRPGers who hated the Infinity Engine for abandoning turn-based gaming for real-time with pause (which has become the standard ever since). The last game to try and keep the turn-based gaming system alive was Troika's Temple of Elemental Evil (TOEE) in 2003.
There are a few turn-based strategy games still around, like (the new) King's Bounty and Heroes of Might & Magic series, but they're still pretty rare too. The fact is, turn-based had to go because everyone hates it in multiplayer mode, and it's just too slooooooow for modern gamers.
What's odd is the CRPG genre in the 80s established itself with a gaming convention that was completely contrary to the way most people played Pen n Paper RPGs: player control of a party of characters. (Although I do know some people who will play their own character and the character of a friend at the same time at a tabletop session, and there are other DMs who will play with 2-3 players who they each let control several characters.) It's something I've become attached to, and it's why I honestly don't like either MMOs or the "sandbox" CRPGs where I control one and only one character. (I got dragged into playing WoW by friends and it has its charms, but honestly I think after Cataclysm I'll probably swear off it & all other MMOs.) There's a certain tactical aspect to me controlling an entire party, and thinking about how to synergize their abilities & proficiencies, that I really enjoy.
The fact is, you can't really say story, dialogue, and "choices and consequences" defined the early CRPG genre, because they didn't. The early stuff was very hack-n-slash heavy, it's just that it was all turn-based instead of real-time. The "classics" of the 80s like Ultima, Wizardry, Might & Magic, and Bards' Tale were never very heavy on it. Bioware and Black Isle Studios can take credit for making such things a core part of the Infinity Engine games in the 90s. However, I think people have now become used to such things as defining the genre now.
I would say to me, now, at this point, yes, dialogue, story, engaging characters with personalities are important, but I still also think some of the "gearhead" stuff people would throw out (stats-mechanics-character progression) are as well, because they're so important in PnP RPGs. I still think a dividing line is if the game uses your character's skills to determine success, it's an RPG; if it relies on the player's skills of manual dexterity and hand-eye coordination, it's an action game. If it's somewhere in between, it's the infamous "hybrid/action-rpg".
Who knows. Sometime in the future, you'll be able to speak into a microphone what
you want to say, and watch the characters on screen react to it. That would be even better than choosing from a bunch of pre-written dialogue options written for you by the writers. However, that would require parsing and AI capabilities way beyond what computer programmers can do now. You'll hold a wii-type motion controller in your hands, and move your arms to swing your sword or position your shield, or maybe cast a spell. Then the games will really feel "first person".
Party control? You'll simply yell out your orders. "Alistair, go knock over the hurlock with a shield bash". "Anders, throw a mana clash spell on the emissary". "Oghren, protect Wynne from any attackers." And they'll do it. Without any additional micromanaging.
Boy, wouldn't it be cool to see it someday? I hope the technology to do it will exist at some point in the future. That's how I'd love to be able to play a CRPG.
Retour en haut
