Well I hope that Ape''s argument has opened some of you people''s eyes... he was actually posting because of a very real problem that he had faced...

But - there''s another side to that argument. The people that bought the original Zelda - were they looking for an RPG, and finding the closest thing available on their platform? This could be important - would people who loved to play Zelda now rather play a more "advanced" game like Baldur''s Gate, or would the format of the original Zelda still be more to their liking?

To put it another way:
Is the current "Computer Roleplaying Game" a natural evolution of games like Zelda?


People might not remember what you said, or what you did, but they will always remember how you made them feel.
~ (V)^|) |<é!t|-| ~

I know that I loved Zelda, but I want to play games that are far more advanced in DIFFERENT ways than BG is. I want something that isn''t genre-lised... But I think I am one of the exceptions to the general rule (note that that was a generalisation in itself)

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

Yeah, I feel kind of bad about jumping to conclusions after hearing ape's questions about RPGs again. I realized that the public is going to catagorize no matter what though.

Fistly, I'd hardly say BG is that advanced really. I mean it looked pretty but everything else got boring after a fairly short time but that's beside the point.

The real problem is that publishers and the mass public aren't going to look at the different sides of the issue. They know what they consider an RPG, and we can't do much about it except try really hard to make a great game.

I like the fact that the public had a hard time putting Thief into a genre for instance. The developers had a great premise and they pulled it off beautifully and it didn't fit perfectly into a genre, and I think that they ruled for doing that. Poor Looking Glass though


"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.


Edited by - Nazrix on November 7, 2000 3:37:28 AM

Yeah, it is a shame that looking glass went under... They really did some good work.

Anyway, to the matter at hand, I was just thinking about what they consider an RPG, and how to make your RPG-esque game look LESS like an RPG. I am thinking that ISO is a definite RPG givaway, if you are controlling a small number of units... If you are in first person, then if it is a fantasy game it is going to be considered an RPG. Actually, Fantasy games on a whole are going to be considered RPG for the most part... Shame that really, RTS is the other that fantasy would fall into.

Anyway... How can you disguise your RPG to be more ''non-RPG-ish''?

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

That''s a splendid idea, dwarf. You''re all about deception, and I like that

I think I remember reading that in Thief they wanted to still appeal to typical FPS fans but add all the nice AI and depth they added. Sorta a similar idea.

It would be pretty difficult though, because RPG seems to encompass anything not in the other genres a lot of the time.


"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.

Well, if you can include something that is so revolutionary that they just can''t categorise it then you are set... That is likely to be a seller, provided that it is simple to understand and easy to control. IMHO

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche
          

yeah, good point. That should definitely be the ultimate goal. Also, that it is entertaining of course

I read that in Thief they had to do a lot of trial and error to make a game built on sneaking fun. The fact that no game before was quite like it made it more difficult to find ways to make the sneaking around a fun and challenging thing to do.


"All you touch and all you see is all your life will ever be --Pink Floyd
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur.
Need help? Well, go FAQ yourself.

A game comes to mind that could fit into more than one category. If you had an ISO RPG[-ish] then you could also include the possibility for a Dungeon Keeper ''possess'' command, so you could control your character in FP as well. You could then expand on that. Also, one thing that those publishers would take into consideration is GRAPHICS... Because they are blind to the game, not the graphics

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - Site:"The Philosophers'' Stone of Programming Alchemy" - IOL
The future of RPGs - Thanks to all the goblins over in our little Game Design Corner niche