quote: Original post by Hase
Is there some truth to it? That message-board people are the same guys who play RPGs? Insecure, not happy with their lives, too scared to actually go out an change something for themselves?

Maybe the reason that RPGs are discussed most is because they are the type of people that most often visit this message-board. What traits cause that I don''t know. I don''t think it can be limited to insecurity or not being happy with your life. That''s just too broad.

I visit message boards because it stimulates my imagination and gives me new ideas. You can do this same thing by talking to friends, but message boards allow you to converse with people that experience life in different ways. Friends often live similar lives.



--
Todd
http://www.3dcgi.com/

quote: Original post by Some Guy

RPGs are essentially for the insecure and depressed. That''s why the player feels a sense of accomplishment when they win.

Taking this with a grain of obvious salt, as MKV advised, what would be your basis for this judgement?

quote:
Ever take a good look at an ad for a medieval RPG where a raging knight is fighting a dragon? Take a good look at his sword. Ever notice how RPG artists tend to make the sword really "special"? They give the blade extra thick with plenty of niches and cracks, and make the handle all screwed up. Also notice the knight''s facial expression: very, very angry. It never fails.

If you told me that with the scantily clad babe casting spells and the great, rippling muscles of the barbarian (alway Euro, btw) that they were appealing the teenager''s hormones, I''d believe you. But this doesn''t wash. It''s the hero myth, nothing more.

quote:
If you''ve ever taken a course in Psychology, you''d see that that derives from the artist''s insecurity and is meant to intice the possible player who sees it by targetting his insecurity. An RPG is meant to target every nook and cranny of the depressed minds of teenagers.

BS unless you back it up with something.

quote:
It is better to FACE reality rather than to face fantasy. Reality is all around you, and fantasy is just a psychological interpretation of reality. Face the latter, and you''ll only be facing what you THINK is real and not what IS real.

Nothing is real, depending on your school of thought. Reality is a matter of agreement.

Why, btw, do we have fiction? cRPGs are one of the better analogs to fiction that computers have. Read a good book lately? Seen any good movies? Escaping reality, eh?

Imagination actually is the greatest evolutionary adaptation the human mind has ever developed. Imagination can reduce stress, show you possibilities you''d never dreamed of, provide a safe environment to test out ideas, and generally be very pleasurable.

Given that RPGs aren''t a habit forming substance which will cause kids to break out the 12 guage and jack little old ladies, I don''t see the problem.

quote:
If you ask me, it''s better to make games that are just fun, and not games that target the young, human psyche. But that''s just me.

You''re gonna have to back this up with something dude. Otherwise it''s just hit and run.




--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

I have to agree with you rpg''s are good for stories and such but they are not the only way to pass a message. One game that I love is metal gear solid it has and extremely emotional story yet still has alot of action game play. I remember when maryl(cant remember how to spell it) got shot endless times by sniper wolf, it struck my like lightning I couldnt believe she was going to die and if you get the ending where she dies and snake finds out and yells out in anger at the loss of his friend (maybe more). That was one of the best action games I have ever played and it had a good story like any rpg.
I think the reason why people like rpg''s so much more is because the creators spend alot more time on the storyline but I think if developers where to concentrate on story in action games alot more people would find them as good as rpg''s.

OoMMMoO

"well, I am of the mind that the more computers you have hooked up to a server, the more computer power you have for controlling NPCs... So why not harness it?"

well I guess it depends on where you draw the line between single player and multiplayer. MMORPGs are sort of in between. On the one hand there are other players in the game with you, on the other hand they are not as important the the NPCs (I''m counting the monsters as NPCs). The only one I''ve played is EQ, I assume the others are sort of along the same lines otherwise they wouldn''t be in the same genre. Anyway, in EQ which would change the game more: taking out all the other players or taking out all the monsters? That''s why I consider EQ to be about 2/3 single player and 1/3 multiplayer. I think once an RPG goes all multiplayer it can''t really be considered an RPG anymore. Once you cut out all the monsters what are you fighting? You''d probably end up with something like Counter-Strike

Which is why I didn''t say to cut out the monsters. There should always be a goal to be achieved. That is what makes a game a game, or at least a game without a goal isn''t a game IMO.

I count NPCs as monsters as well, but my NPCs can fight better than any Diablo monster, because these creatures actually have their own skills at fighting and so you shouldn''t just wade through when you are surrounded, you should die (well, get captured at least ).

MMORPGs are still RPGs as long as they contain the same elements that an RPG has, but with the added bonus of having more players there

-Chris Bennett of Dwarfsoft - The future of RPGs Thanks to all the goblins in the GDCorner niche

quote: Original post by Anonymous Poster

[Snip] ...I think once an RPG goes all multiplayer it can''t really be considered an RPG anymore. Once you cut out all the monsters what are you fighting? You''d probably end up with something like Counter-Strike

That isn''t actually true, the multiplayer aspect doen''t have to be all player killing. Look at traditional P&P RPGs, the multiplayer aspect comes from players forming a team and working together. There''s no reason why this can''t work in MMORPGs, they just need to be designed to encourage this and move away from the kill everthing that moves combat oriented gameplay. So even though you are fighting computer controlled NPCs you will be fighting ALONGSIDE other players so it would still be considered multiplayer.

- Kaijin

"The student who is never required to do what he cannot do never does what he can do." - John Stuart Mill

Has anyone noticed that even this topic, which was originally a complaint about forum RPG saturation, has degenerated into a discussion of RPG structure????

It would be so nice if I saw one, just one post about old school adventure games.

quote: Original post by Captain Insanity

It would be so nice if I saw one, just one post about old school adventure games.

I am most confused.

If this is what you''re interested in, why don''t you post this?

No offense, but this isn''t ending world hunger. If you want different topics in the forum, all ya gotta do is TYPE.



--------------------
Just waiting for the mothership...

- I still think the general concept of my "Car Wars" game idea is cool, that is, making a game played IRL that is dependent on computer-generated and distributed info for play. Maybe the game as it is would turn out to be boring, but the cost of all the necessary hardware has been and continues to decrease. I am still broke though, and so I can''t afford to do anything with the idea right now. - Lubb