To me anyways, it seems fantasy RPGs are everywhere. I don't understand why people like them so much. To me, they all seem to share the same basic Tolkien inspired fantasy world. The developers of Pillars of Eternity just announced a sequel is in development, but on the surface how is it any different than Sacred, Dungeon Siege or Neverwinter Nights? The same could be said for other game genres as well. Are developers scared of trying something new? If they do try something new, are they afraid people won't like it/try it?

If we are talking AAA:

Compare it to the Hollywood movies... do you see a lot of innovation going on there? No, of course not. And that has a simple reason. Blockbusters costs A TON of money. If a Blockbuster flops, even a big movie or game studio will feel it. A smaller one will start flailing. And a publisher will stop producing sequels, maybe even shutter the dev studio.

If you invest 100 million bucks into producing a game or movie, you want to see a RoI. Because of that you a) try to reach the broadest audience possible, and b) minimize risks as much as you can.

That means, if a studio tests the waters, its usually NOT a blockbuster (see how the first installment in most series was a way lower profile title, even if it was coming from a big, well known studio)... you are risking a lot as you might experiment with genres (see Borderlands for example), you are experimenting with peoples expectations (for example releasing a science fiction RPG), or at the very least you are skinning the same old with a new story and characters.

You don't know yet how the market will react. You might have an idea that you are on to something, but until you release it, you don't know if players feel the same.

So, its the exact opposite for titles that do get budgets upwards of 10, maybe 20 million $. Only series that have proven themselves in the wild usually get so much money thrown at them. That is also the reason for the Sequel-mania. If it worked 2 years ago, lets crank up the spectacle and see if we can cash in this year too.

There are exceptions (Destiny was not cheap AFAIK and was kind of a big gamble), but mostly, that is why Blockbuster games seldom are really innovativ. Not until that innovation has been proven in a cheaper game.

And of course, once a genre / series / hook gets overused and stale, the industry is FORCED to innovate and find greener grass again for some years. Usually though this will involve cheaper games with smaller budgets to test the waters before going all in AFAIK.

As for the question at hand: I think its a mixed bag.

1) As stated above, the industry is avoiding risk when it comes to blockbusters. This is smart, and makes sense. You do not produce a Blockbuster for 100 million $ if you are not damn sure the formula does work in the market.

2) There just seems to be a lot of demand for tolkien-style high fantasy. Hey, I would be the first one to complain about that, I love my tolkien stories, but the 100st mediocre copy of that tends to get stale, and I love new and innovative concepts more than the same old. More love for steampunk and grittier fantasy would be nice...

But again, it seems I am a minority in not being so fussed about tolkien cookie cutter fantasy. Thus I am satisfied to get my kicks from smaller and maybe Indie games.

3) Genre conventions: I find it hard to believe how rigid some peoples mind is about what is "right" or "wrong" in a certain genre... insert the smallest dose of steampunk into your cookie cutter tolkien fantasy, and some people will grasp for their torches and pitchforks.

I was told once "mixing fantasy and present day / science fiction doesn't work, there is no fanbase for that" when suggesting that for a game. That certainly is not true, though the fanbase of orcs in space certainly is smaller than the fanbase of fantasy orcs in loinclothes or cookie cutter aliens in space. But the point is that there are people evangelizing the "you cannot do that, like, ever!" sentiment, and being quite vocal about it.

Dead space, Mass effect, Deus ex. Then there are the space flight rpg's. I'm sure i could rattle of a big list if I had the time right now.

Because the "fantasy universe" is highly developed and almost everyone likes it :) and it is "easily jusifyable" compared to sci-fi

Example :fighting with "lightsaber" sword is stupid when you have lazer guns, hydrogen bombs and robots and whatever your mind could think of. Its pretty hard to think of something cool(like fighting with sword) that people are familirar with and at the same time justifying why your character are doing this (why they don't bomb the s*ith out of each other?)

Because the "fantasy universe" is highly developed and almost everyone likes it :) and it is "easily jusifyable" compared to sci-fi

Example :fighting with "lightsaber" sword is stupid when you have lazer guns, hydrogen bombs and robots and whatever your mind could think of. Its pretty hard to think of something cool(like fighting with sword) that people are familirar with and at the same time justifying why your character are doing this (why they don't bomb the s*ith out of each other?)

Well, that hasn't stopped on of the biggest Fantasy-in-space operas, Star Wars, from still making tons of money with movies and games. Even though light sabers work, like the rest of the "physics engine" in Star Wars, with pure magic (I would call it the Force, but then I would get hanged because its not the Force according to the canon, its just the way physics work in galaxy-far-away star wars takes place in).

I think RivieraKid has a point. There are even some high profile Sci-Fi RPGs, though they happen to be shooter RPGs mostly, because when you have guns, swords kinda stop making sense... unless you also introduce magical ninjas called jedis. And make them superawesome and stuff.

Borderlands actually is also an RPG. Just because its Firstperson and concentrates on shooting stuff, people see it more as a shooter than an RPG. But leveling and loot collecting, as well as an elaborate singleplayer campaign and free roaming scream RPG really.

But then I that still does not make for an awesome amount of choice. Either tolkien high fantasy, or sci-fi in space... Deus Ex might be kinda different, still pretty much sci-fi.

Where are all the other things in between, the Steampunk stuff, the prehistoric stuff and all? There are Indie titles, and there are the odd AAA title every few years that might qualify (Maybe Horizon:Zero Dawn will qualify as RPG? Being postapoc, it qualifys as sci-fi AND prehistoric, kinda :))...

but really, there is a LOT of RPG themes that are underserved right now.

Additionally, role playing games fit will into what a single person does and can do.

I can just be me (my avatar) if I want. I can go solo, do my role, play some quests, and have fun by myself.

I can join my real world friends if I want, we can go together, play our roles, play some quests, and have fun as a group.

I can join strangers in the game if I want, we can form a dynamic group together, play our roles, play some quests, and have fun as strangers.

Other genres can work, but tend to not be as dynamic. By the numbers, the large RPGs are a small number of games, especially compared to the puzzle games, action games, social games, and other genres on mobile. Yet overall those are single player doing their own thing alone on a private device.

RTS certainly had a heyday, and I love the style. But playing them alone gets boring once you've mastered the game. Playing online means coordinating with friends which takes effort, and the pick-up matchmaking games online more often than not is met by hostile angst-driven cheaters and script-kiddies, or if that is how you like to play, getting hooked up with a slow, non-aggressive, slow-building defensive player. Now matter how you like to play, such systems end up with a relatively small number of players who are like-minded to whatever style you've got.

The current designs fits well for all skill levels. Beginners start out in beginner areas and interact with those at the same level, even if they are not quite the same skill. As the person's characters advance they move to new areas of similarly leveled characters and work on quests together. Players can be as social as they like, or be alone as they like. It works well, and is popular with a big section of players.

Its the same reason a lot of games go with World War II as a setting. Familiarity. People tend to generally know what Elves, Dwarves and Trolls are. There's enough wiggle room to put a semi-unique spin on those, but it's not like in Sci-fi where someone names their race the Qzz'Urthans, and they look like nothing at all recognizable. People have a hard time relating to them, and at the very least the game is going to have to spend time explaining what they are, and why the player should care about them. Of course the other option sci-fi has, is to go with easily recognizable trope aliens, like Space Bugs, or Space Lobsters or humanoid cat people, etc.

Also, going with the fake fantasy races, one can avoid the trap of accidentally being racist to an actual group of people. Imagine we replaced elves and dwarves with, well, actual ethnic groups. If we replaced dwarves with german people, and then said, "yeah, they're all short, squat, with big noses and hate trees and love to mine gold..." You can kind of see how that wouldn't go over well. Though that does tend to highlight just how much fantasy games tend to overdo racial stereotypes. It also lets people explore some darker aspects of human nature, with worlds where most elves are slaves (DragonAge), or most orcs are slaves(EarthDawn) without having to worry about how they might misrepresent an actual group of people.

I personally believe this goes for all games; you can step in the shoes of a protagonist and be whatever you want to be and do what you want to do, what is not impossible in real life (most of the times). In RPG this is even more applicable, because you can become one with your avatar, develop it further and further and experience lots and lots of adventures. Some sort of relation develops between the player and its avatar.

Its kind of a trope -- same as "space marines". We tend to like and make these things because they're established enough to be familiar, yet they're not closed systems so we can change and expand without alienating people. Fantasy also spans a wide berth though, so probably seems bigger than what's objectively Tolkien-esque -- for example, I wouldn't say that the Final Fantasy or Dragon Warrior franchises have much in common with Tolkien's world, even if they took some inspiration from it; but they do very much fall under the heading of Fantasy.

I do agree though that there are other worlds and mythos and real cultures that are largely untapped. There are relatively few games that tap Norse mythology, for instance, or (especially outside of Japan) the Japanese feudal period or themes of, say, Bushido; almost no games have explored African themes, Native American themes, Central American themes, or South American themes. Very few games have explored a more-or-less contemporary setting for game styles most-closely associated with fantasy or historic settings (Earthbound is a notable example). American West themes are pretty untapped (check out Boot Hill Heroes).

There's inspiration everywhere and its a shame games haven't branched out more.

There's definitely untapped potential out there...

I'd love to play some kind of a Bethesda-style Wild West RPG, if they weren't busy rehashing Tamriel and Fallout.

Or a Carribean pirate RPG that's not Pirates! Gold or the remake.

One game that I can't believe hasn't been made (well) is a Roman gladiator simulator/management game. First-person Mount&Blade style combat for arena matches mixed with something like a business simulator for running a ludus.

A good remake of Darklands...

A Bronze Age RPG modeled on the Odyssey or the Aeneid.

Monty Python and the Holy Grail - The Game. Help, help, I'm being repressed!