posted
I was thinking yesterday about the state of roleplaying gaming. A friend of mine was frustrated at how a lot of companies seem to be moving either directly into computer gaming or altering their products try and piggyback off the MMO craze.
What occurred to me is that:
a) the tabletop RPG market has always suffered from oversaturation. The amount of products people are required to buy to keep companies alive is greater than the amount of products that are actually necessary to enjoy a good game. Companies keep churning out figurines, adventure modules and new editions to keep people paying, but only one person in your group needs to have the materials and even then most of the materials aren't really that important if you have a good DM.
b) Although I suspect it's going to burst eventually, MMOs (by which I mostly mean World of WarCraft) are a huge market right now that are getting a lot of people to play games that haven't played anything similar before. 4th Edition D&D is structured in such a way (I'm pretty sure intentionally) to be familiar to MMO players.
In the immediate future, this means "serious" roleplayers suddenly find themselves in a culture shock, where their beloved game is overtaken by philistines who care more about loot and stats than storyline. But in 5-10 years, I bet a lot of the people from MMO-land will have realized the massive potential that tabletop roleplaying offers - a game where you are truly limited only by your imagination instead of a computer game's rules.
Which brings us to:
c) Computer gaming has progressed at a pretty ludicrous rate. Twenty years ago, Myst was near the top of the line in terms of graphics. Now we have Crysis, rendering in realtime. The technical capabilities have also increased dramatically. And various levels of coding have been simplified and turned into editors so that average Joe can make a game with relatively little effort that would have been awesome 10 years ago.
While I was talking to my friend, all of these thoughts went through my head in the few seconds it took him to complain about RPG companies focusing on the PC world. And my response was "yeah, it kinda sucks right now, but I think in 10 years it is going to be amazing."
So basically, what do you think the ultimate form of "true" roleplaying will look like, and what technical capabilities do you think it'll have in 10 or 20 years? I'm defining roleplaying as:
1) Something that is not limited by a game's mechanics - you have the freedom that exists in modern tabletop games to change the rules on a whim and try whatever crazy action you can think of that could plausible work in a situation.
2) An industry that can sustain itself profitably, pretty much indefinitely. I'm sure there are those who argue that the version that exists now is already the "ultimate" form, wherein you don't necessarily need figures or tilesets or anything, just your imagination. But by itself that won't make money, and without companies trying to advertise it and get a profit in return, I don't think "true" roleplaying will ever gain mainstream acceptance the way computer games are (beginning) to.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
My friends and I are still (happily) on D&D 3.5. It's flexible, expandable, and can be played (as we do) only with books and dice. It can be balanced (by a good DM) to focus on story, character development, combat, treasure, or skills. I think this is the best system I've tried, and I find it a lot more fun than computer based RPG's which limit your options. I believe the only reason WotC released 4th ed was to sell more books. It wasn't broken, it didn't need fixing.
Posts: 354 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: I find it a lot more fun than computer based RPG's which limit your options
What I'm hoping for is a computer game system (most likely based on some kind of evolution of gaming consoles, television and that coffee-table-with-a-computer-screen-in-it that Microsoft made but I never heard anything about it since) that finds a way to retain the freedom of a traditional RPG but gives you the graphical capabilities of a computer game. I think it's doable with current technology but it would just be an expensive toy until the table PC becomes mainstream.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Although I suspect it's going to burst eventually, MMOs (by which I mostly mean World of WarCraft) are a huge market right now that are getting a lot of people to play games that haven't played anything similar before.
I don't. I think MMO's are basically here to stay for reasons abnormally similar to how drugs are here to stay.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:I don't. I think MMO's are basically here to stay for reasons abnormally similar to how drugs are here to stay.
Huh? "Abnormally similar?" More similar than normal? Compared to what exactly?
I see what you mean there to some extent. I certainly think MMOs in some form will continue to exist. But right now, everywhere I turn on the web (well, the sections of the web I frequent) I see an ad for a free MMO. And every now and then I click on it, and it invariably sucks. I don't think that's going to continue indefinitely.
MMOs can generate more revenue than a normal game, but they also compete against each other more intensely than ordinary games do. I think eventually the business plan of slapping together a mediocre MMO will become less lucrative, as all the free ones blur together and the subscription ones have to compete with the big names that have inertia and huge budgets. The second and third tier ones will still make money, but not much more than an ordinary game would. And then all the people jumping in on the MMO craze right now will move on to whatever the next big thing is.
The next big thing probably WILL be some form of massively multiplayer game, but I think it will take a form very distinct from what we think of as an MMO right now. (I read an interesting article discussing how Facebook is actually the largest gaming platform, and while a lot of current facebook games are pretty lame, there's a lot of potential there to tap into. They were working on a persistent civilization MMO that ran in Facebook, for example).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
An argument about table top gaming vs. PC games...
...
All I have to say is that [nerdrant] Magic The Gathering never needed to be online... or to reprint my uber-powerful rare card that was the only reason I ever won. [/nerdrant]
Posts: 2302 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Imagining playing in a holodeck feels kind like cheating. I mean, by the time the average person can do that, the human race wil have basically won at awesomeness.
There were some things about the execution that I didn't like (dice rolling too slow, for example), but yeah that's the gist of what I think could be common in 15-20 years. A few plausible steps up might include a screen that wasn't holographic but was kinda "3d-ish", so when you look down at it it looks like you're looking into a world instead of at a flat screen. The wolf was in the ballpark of what I'm imagining there. Yesterday I was
I think the act of actually rolling the dice is an important tactile part of the game. Simulated dice are never quite as satisfying to me. The annoying thing is when you have to add up a bunch of numbers (like from a huge fireball). So what I could see is a program wherein you roll the dice on the table, and then it automatically reads what the roll was (if it can scan the underside of the dice, it can tell what would have been on the top sides, then add up the result).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, but compared to the price of getting the table and software in the first place (even if, in the future, it is relatively cheap), getting a set of standard dice isn't exactly a breaking point. (The software would probably come with dice anyway. Players who are adamant about playing with their own weird dice are always free to do it the old school way).
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
I second D&D3.5 as my favorite RPG. It blends in nicely with d20 content (obviously) for fantastic diversity according the DMs skill.
BTW, I just created a nwe campaign and the first dumgeon will actually be a pyramid. I am modeling it after the Pyramid of Giza, but I have added more rooms, levels, et cetera.
I wanted to practice my Trig, so every hall is at an angle. Proportionately I have mapped a pretty good adventure, but I would love to create it more accuretly with a computer.
Is there a free drafting or map making program that would let me draw this better.
Right now I have lots of graph paper. I have a hallway that is 50 feet across, but because of the angle is 70 feet long by foot. I have had to draw several versions of my pyramid (2d general overhead view of each level and then a second 2d view of the walking distance of each hall.
I have a very crude cross section I drew to to visualize the place.
I would love to be able to view it as a cross section from different angles.
Any ideas? Google Sketch up and AutoCad are the first two programs that came to mind, but it looks like Sketchup is more for solid modeling and Autocad is too expensive.
Posts: 2445 | Registered: Oct 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I love pencil and paper RPG's. In high school there was a group of 8 of us that would get together during our lunch hour and play. We got in around 4 hours a week, and once a month we would meet on a Saturday for an extra session.
It is the most fun I have ever had. Not only was I able to participate in a grand storyline in which I was a main character, it built friendships between all 8 of us. The social interaction was the best part of it.
There is no better graphical representation of a fantasy world than the one that takes place in your own mind.
We did not play D&D however. We played a game called Runequest, which was the first game the creators of D&D made. In my opinion it is superior in every way. It went out of print long ago but a couple of us were able to find copies.
I am one that hopes that pencil and paper RPG's don't change very much. Video games are nice, but you always play as a hero that is really unable to die easily. D&D and other RPG's are unique in that often your character is pretty week, and it may take years and years of playing the same character before you become extraordinary.
Posts: 1937 | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
@lem: it's not quite what you'r looking for, but Blender is an opensource 3D program. Learning how to operate it may be a bit of effort (you can't figure it out just by poking around, you have to follow the instructions step by step for several pages to understand basic workflow), but once you do know what you're doing you can model the dungeon in 3d fairly easily.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am one that hopes that pencil and paper RPG's don't change very much. Video games are nice, but you always play as a hero that is really unable to die easily. D&D and other RPG's are unique in that often your character is pretty week, and it may take years and years of playing the same character before you become extraordinary.
I dunno. I died a lot in Dragon Age. A lot of times the games have a difficulty setting, and the "normal" setting is designed so the average person can start playing without feeling frustrated.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:We played a game called Runequest, which was the first game the creators of D&D made.
Um. No. Runequest was developed by Greg Stafford and Steve Perrin. Neither of them are Dave Arneson or Gary Gygax, who developed D&D. Perhaps you're thinking of Blackmoor, which was Arneson's first take on the fantasy RPG -- or Chainmail, which was the miniatures game they developed which was turned into D&D...? Again, neither of those are Runequest, though.
That said, let me say this: I love Glorantha. Runequest is a ridiculous mess of a game, and Glorantha is a mess of a setting, but at least they're both beautiful messes. There's a wonderful computer game called "King of Dragon Pass" that I'd recommend to just about anyone, provided they can find it.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:I am one that hopes that pencil and paper RPG's don't change very much. Video games are nice, but you always play as a hero that is really unable to die easily. D&D and other RPG's are unique in that often your character is pretty week, and it may take years and years of playing the same character before you become extraordinary.
I dunno. I died a lot in Dragon Age. A lot of times the games have a difficulty setting, and the "normal" setting is designed so the average person can start playing without feeling frustrated.
Normal is actually the setting optimized for the average gamer familiar already with that sort of genre game.
The easy / casual setting would be most appropriate for the average person as opposed to the average versed gamer.
Posts: 15421 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Normal is actually the setting optimized for the average gamer familiar already with that sort of genre game.
Yeah, I was conflating a few different things. 1) Geraine probably falls into the category of "average gamer familiar with the genre" as opposed to "average person," so as far as he's concerned the explanation is still valid, 2) Right now there is somewhat of a trend towards making the standard difficulty easier, making it easier to turn non-gamers into gamers. It may not have become the new norm yet (it may or may not become the new norm, period), so it was inaccurate of me to cast it as such, but the sense I've gotten is that this is the direction that gaming is going.
Posts: 4136 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
Perhaps you're thinking of Blackmoor, which was Arneson's first take on the fantasy RPG -- or Chainmail, which was the miniatures game they developed which was turned into D&D...? Again, neither of those are Runequest, though.
