I just can't get into RPG's

[Anteaus]

Ah, so youre not counting mmo's?

No. MMOs are designed for longeivity because that's how they make money. Also, MMOs for the most part are games that you can nibble at content over time. The stories tend to be skin deep and only exist as a way of herding you onto the next rung of the leveling simulator.

As a kid I didn't have access to many games, so I tended to play fewer games for much longer duration. As an adult, I have the ability to buy more games than I possibly have time to complete. By choosing shorter titles, I can play a wider variety. Admittedly though, I know I'm missing out.

 

[SlitheryDee]

If you think about it, any game that has a character and storyline is an RPG.

So for instance, I consider Halo to be an RPG. I consider Call of Duty an RPG.

I don't care what it's called so long as I know what we're talking about. RPG is easier to say than game which features a somewhat detailed storyline, exploration, loot, and some means of character skill progression and customization.

Even that could fit a lot of games that wouldn't necessarily be primarily RPGs though. By my definition the Bioshock games are RPGs too, which isn't precisely accurate.

 

[Insomniator]

Dota2 and SC2 have a lot of intricacies. If you think they don't then you are one of the reasons I can't play those games.

Personally I can't play DOTA2 type games with PUGS. To me it feels a lot like pulling nose hairs. Each time someone does something stupid a single tear rolls down my cheek. By the end of an hour my keyboard is wet and I can't type anymore.

I am much happier spending that hour playing a RPG where I control all the characters. Who cares if it takes me 4 months to play one game if I enjoyed every minute of it.

You misunderstand me, those are different kind of games. I just dont want to learn a million mechanics and build a character for 100 hours. SC and dota are extremely difficult games... but I'd rather compete in them then learn an RPG to play by myself.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Eh. I used to love RPGs. But as it turned out, I actually loved the constant improvement for everything mechanic, and the option to get around a hard part by outleveling it if it needs be. But the actual combat mechanics - especially jRPGs - are something I didn't care for but dealt with in younger days because the mechanics I did like weren't found in other places.

Now though? First Person shooters regularly have level-up mechanics. There's no need to put up with jRPG combat for that, so I don't. I'm much more into action RPGs, or other genres with RPG elements then I am into RPGs any more.

As for whether nearly everything could be an RPG - maybe, from a certain viewpoint. But how many genre is that true of? Action, adventure? Heck, survival horror has a very specific meaning, but how many games aren't you trying to survive scary monsters?

 

[BSim500]

If you think about it, any game that has a character and storyline is an RPG. So for instance, I consider Halo to be an RPG. I consider Call of Duty an RPG.

For most people, the game-genre criteria are a little less vague than "you play this guy" and "it kinda has a plot". :biggrin: True RPG's have a certain feel to them and there's several distinct sub-genres (first-person (Morrowind, Oblivion, Skyrim, etc), "Old school 1990's" (typically combining isometric (top-down-diagonal view) + "AD&D rules" (eg, Baldur's Gate = 2nd edition AD&D rules, Neverwinter Nights = 3rd edition, NWN2 = 3.5 edition), "hack & slash" (Diablo 2, Torchlight), turn-based vs real-time, etc. Whilst more modern games have simplified vs AD&D rules yet are still "true RPG's" (eg, Dragon Age, Witcher, etc), and whilst there's been many more FPS/RPG "hybrids" over the past decade (starting with System Shock, Deus Ex, etc), many so-called "Action RPG's" are often primarily just FPS's with more customization / configurable / upgradable weapons options making them a little more hybridy.

They're not what I'd call a "proper" RPG though. Just like being able to give squad allies orders without pausing doesn't make it a "Real-Time-Strategy" game like Age of Empires, Rise of Nations, etc. CoD & Halo certainly aren't RPG's in the common usage sense of the phrase (RPG's are often the exact opposite of "railroad maps" - that alone sets them miles apart). So many FPS's these days have "customisability" tacked in somewhere by default that it dilutes the RPG genre to call them all RPG's simply because you can buy and stick something on your gun. It's more a case of the FPS genre simply morphing / growing more complex vs early Doom / Quake, etc. Someone looking for a Dragon Age style experience is certainly going to know the difference in feel & gameplay between that and Call of Duty 34 - Ultra Hyper Modern Black Ops Assault Spectre's Warfare Reloaded : The Pre-Sequel Prequel's Prequel though.

 

[escrow4]

I'm in the same boat. I prefer the shorter, more story driven RPGs like Mass Effect and Dragon Age. I just don't have the time to play games that require more than 15-20 hours of gameplay.

That doesn't mean that devs should release 10hr "RPG's" and 5hr shooters. I expect any modern (I can't stand 90's RPGs anymore, just no) RPG to easily crack 50hrs and have a world you delve into. That is the whole point. On the contrary I absolutely hate multiplayer and certainly prefer a lengthy interesting single player campaign.

 

[Anteaus]

A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game[1][2]) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game

Simply playing a role does not define what RPG has come to mean. Most shooters do not contain decision points or character development beyond weapon or ability choice. Call of Duty doesn't quality. I get that people are judging the term Role Playing Game at face value, but there is a subtext.

 

[Anteaus]

That doesn't mean that devs should release 10hr "RPG's" and 5hr shooters. I expect any modern (I can't stand 90's RPGs anymore, just no) RPG to easily crack 50hrs and have a world you delve into. That is the whole point. On the contrary I absolutely hate multiplayer and certainly prefer a lengthy interesting single player campaign.

No it shouldn't. I'm not avocating that. I'm merely saying that I'm not in that group who complains everytime a game doesn't break at least 50 hours. I'm not saying you are either, but I think you get the gist.

 

[Morbus]

That's fine if you do, but the majority of gamers do not and so they don't.

The majority of player is wrong.

An RPG is a game where your choices impact the storyline. If they don't, then it's not an RPG. If they do, it may well not be an RPG either.

FPS? Not an RPG. Why? Because it's dependent on the player's skill, not his choices. A true RPG will allow a slow player to role-play a fast, skilled warrior. It will also allow a fast skilled player to role-play a slow ass warrior...

 

[artemicion]

If you think about it, any game that has a character and storyline is an RPG.

So for instance, I consider Halo to be an RPG. I consider Call of Duty an RPG.

Also, BTW, did you know that games like Halo, Call of Duty and Battlefield are MOBA's because they are Multiplayer, Online and involves players doing Battle in an Arena? Did I just blow your mind???

And Mario is a real time strategy game because you have to strategically jump over bottomless pits and strategically jump on top of goombas (but not the spiky turtles!) ... wait for it .... IN REAL TIME. ZOMG!

And let's not forget classic Third Person Shooter games like Contra, Command and Conquer, Kid Icarus, Peggle, Twisted Metal. Are you shooting things? Is it from a third person perspective? Then it's a Third Person Shooter!

 

[xantub]

I'm so totally the opposite. I actually prefer the slower paced RPGs (preferably turn-based). I tried Dota 2 and others like that and couldn't play for more than 30 minutes. I just didn't see the point of it. Doing the same map over and over and over.

 

[MagnusTheBrewer]

Not to pick on anyone but, is it really the games or, just short attention spans?

 

[futurefields]

I used to not be able to play RPG's at all, just couldn't figure out what to do or how to get into the meat of the games. I find them a lot easier nowadays.

 

[desura]

A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game[1][2]) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game

Simply playing a role does not define what RPG has come to mean. Most shooters do not contain decision points or character development beyond weapon or ability choice. Call of Duty doesn't quality. I get that people are judging the term Role Playing Game at face value, but there is a subtext.

Actually, many shooters do contain decision points. Call of Duty Black Ops 2 definitely did. As for ability choice...sure, they're called different guns, and effectively are the same as getting like that level IV fireball spell.

Role-playing means that you jump into the role of another character.

All the stat building shit is just long-division masquerading as gameplay.

 

[tinmann]

I was the same way but Fallout 3 changed that for me. Now I'm into anything Bethesda puts out with the exception of Rage.

 

[BSim500]

Not to pick on anyone but, is it really the games or, just short attention spans?

I think this indeed is the case (along with often having less time / shorter gaming sessions as you get older).

 

[pathos]

I'm so totally the opposite. I actually prefer the slower paced RPGs (preferably turn-based).

Same. I prefer the story and characterization of rpg's. I prefer my rpg's slow and methodical, as in turn based.

I think this indeed is the case (along with often having less time / shorter gaming sessions as you get older).

For me, it's the opposite. As I get older, I get more and more entrenched in playing rpg's, and much less likely to play twitch games, fps's, adventure games, or anything else that requires. I used to play the crap out of Quake, and then online verisions, as in Team Fortress, and Capture the Flag. Then, I played Quake 2 + mods, and Half Life + mods, unreal, and unreal tourney. I'm guessing though, the last fps I played....was Half Life 2.

Other than rpg's, I still enjoy fighting games, mostly the 3d types (soul caliber, tekken, doa, vf, etc), plus blazblue...but I only play those single player, or at best, with friends when they come over. I never play online versus other people.

But, thats pretty much it.

 

[xantub]

A role-playing game (RPG and sometimes roleplaying game[1][2]) is a game in which players assume the roles of characters in a fictional setting. Players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development.[

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Role-playing_game

Simply playing a role does not define what RPG has come to mean. Most shooters do not contain decision points or character development beyond weapon or ability choice. Call of Duty doesn't quality. I get that people are judging the term Role Playing Game at face value, but there is a subtext.

right, if you go by the strict definition of RPG, basically every game (short of Tetris) fits into it. You're always 'playing the role of some character'.
For games, the definition of RPGs is different, it's when the focus of the game is in giving you control over your character's (or party's) life. Adding a decision point to an FPS doesn't make it an RPG, or adding inventory, or adding stats. It has to be the focus.

A true RPG clearly divides what your character can do from what you can do. Thus, even though you may have cat reflexes, if your character's Dexterity stat is low, he/she should miss most of the time. That is crucial in determining if a game is an RPG or not. Many FPS gamers complained about how you could miss in Alpha Protocol even though the target was right in the middle of the cross-hair or targeting reticule, the reason is that AP was actually an RPG, and your character could miss where you wouldn't. Some people don't like losing this control over the game, and that's fine, RPGs are not for everybody, just like FPS are not for everybody.

 

[Anteaus]

right, if you go by the strict definition of RPG, basically every game (short of Tetris) fits into it. You're always 'playing the role of some character'.
For games, the definition of RPGs is different, it's when the focus of the game is in giving you control over your character's (or party's) life. Adding a decision point to an FPS doesn't make it an RPG, or adding inventory, or adding stats. It has to be the focus.

A true RPG clearly divides what your character can do from what you can do. Thus, even though you may have cat reflexes, if your character's Dexterity stat is low, he/she should miss most of the time. That is crucial in determining if a game is an RPG or not. Many FPS gamers complained about how you could miss in Alpha Protocol even though the target was right in the middle of the cross-hair or targeting reticule, the reason is that AP was actually an RPG, and your character could miss where you wouldn't. Some people don't like losing this control over the game, and that's fine, RPGs are not for everybody, just like FPS are not for everybody.

Did you even read what I posted? You're attacking the wrong side of this argument. All that stuff you described falls under the "subtext" I mentioned in my final sentence. I explicitly stated that simply playing a role does not make it an RPG.

The definition I cited says that players take responsibility for acting out these roles within a narrative, either through literal acting or through a process of structured decision-making or character development. In other words, a game in which you are just along for the ride, say your average FPS, does not qualify. The player has to actively participate in character development, such as through direct story interaction or branching character builds (stats, classes, etc). Those aren't the only ways, but they tend to be the most used.

You and I are on the same page.

 

[Moe Zart]

FO3 is as good as an RPG gets. If you only finished it "because the combat was cool" then RPGs aren't for you. You'll find most of those "old-school" RPGs like the first fallouts incredibly shallow and boring unless you're wearing nostalgia goggles.

 

[ToySoldier]

Does anyone else feel like this?

I do too. I grew up playing the 'Dice & Paper' RPGs like Dungeons & Dragons. I cant even get into Dungeons & Dragons Online. I usually just play against the computer with old school RTS's from GOG.com . RTS's like WarCraft 3 or Galactic Civilizations never get old to me.... maybe Baldur's Gate (1&2 Enhanced).

I'm making a RARE exception for Star Citizen. $43 million+ raised by fans/pledgers. BETA starts the end of this year or early to mid 2015. Alpha is starting soon but I'm not interested until the persistent universe is established in BETA.

The 'in-game' graphics trailer is pretty intense. The designers have upgraded to the CryENGINE (4th Gen).

The Star Citizen 'Squadron 42' trailer is worth a watch if you have a few minutes.

 

[xantub]

right, if you go by the strict definition of RPG, basically every game (short of Tetris) fits into it. You're always 'playing the role of some character'.
For games, the definition of RPGs is different, it's when the focus of the game is in giving you control over your character's (or party's) life. Adding a decision point to an FPS doesn't make it an RPG, or adding inventory, or adding stats. It has to be the focus.

A true RPG clearly divides what your character can do from what you can do. Thus, even though you may have cat reflexes, if your character's Dexterity stat is low, he/she should miss most of the time. That is crucial in determining if a game is an RPG or not. Many FPS gamers complained about how you could miss in Alpha Protocol even though the target was right in the middle of the cross-hair or targeting reticule, the reason is that AP was actually an RPG, and your character could miss where you wouldn't. Some people don't like losing this control over the game, and that's fine, RPGs are not for everybody, just like FPS are not for everybody.

Did you even read what I posted? You're attacking the wrong side of this argument. All that stuff you described falls under the "subtext" I mentioned in my final sentence. I explicitly stated that simply playing a role does not make it an RPG.
...
You and I are on the same page.

I think you got me wrong. When I said 'right' I wasn't being sarcastic or anything, I was agreeing with you, and just added my take on it.

 

[Anteaus]

I think you got me wrong. When I said 'right' I wasn't being sarcastic or anything, I was agreeing with you, and just added my take on it.

I apologize then. It sounded contrarian.

 

[waggy]

Personal pet peeve of mine with some RPG's is that they require too much investment to get immersed in the lore. I tried playing Shin Megami Tensei 4 for awhile and I had to try too hard to remember what all the spells did, because they had weird names, like "agi" were fire spells, "bufu" were ice spells, "zio" were lightning spells . . . I'd rather they had more understandable names (like fire, ice, lightning).

Same thing with Final Fantasy 13. Opening dialogue was all "fal'cie" this, "l'cie" that, Pulse, Cocoon, other gobbledygook . . . after about 2 hours I was just like, f this, I'm not even sure if these words are people, places, things, etc.

On top of that, it seems like a lot of RPGs are suffering from bloat, with each new franchise or sequel trying to come up with some new, overly complicated twist on how to level, progress, battle, etc. while retaining a lot of the features from past RPGs.

Anyway, not trying to imply that any of this is objectively good or bad. Just saying as a grown man without enough time to fully immerse myself into these games, it's just not an enjoyable experience. Much easier to stick with the simpler and familiar games.

/this

I love JRPG's. i don't mind the time effort in it. BUT some of the newer FF games and such has so mcuh fucking bloat and retarded shit in it they just weren't fun. Also it seemed they wanted to pack in more and more cut scenes. to the point casting a spell or summon took like a minute.

it was starting to hurt the game makers. people just werent buying them like they used too (also they would compare sales to COD and were gravitating to that).

ten they woke up. Square/enix said they are trying to go back to waht made them huge. with the release of Bravely Default for the DSI 3D. it's a great game that reminds me a lot of the old FF series.

I would love to see something along that lines for the PS3 or computer.

 

[jimrawr]

Does anyone else feel like this?

I don't have the time or desire to learn all the intricacies... I can't play the game long enough to get into the story anymore. I beat FF7-10 100% and knew everything about those games back in middle school and HS. Now though I just don't care... I can't tell if its the games or me. I just loaded up the Witcher 2 and there is so much crap... I'll never play long enough to learn it all. I have Skyrim and Kingdoms of Amalur installed but I'm not sure if I even want to bother. I DID beat Mass Effect 1-3... those were much simpler games however + it was a sci fi setting instead of the past.

I played ~45 minutes of the Witcher 2 and thought to myself the entire time, I'd rather just be playing Dota 2 or SC2 online. No story, just instant competition.

Agreed with you OP. RPGs used to be my favorite game type. Secret of Mana, Chronos Trigger, Lands of Lore, FF series.. I adored them. Now they seem overly complicated, and I cant get into them either. I watch a video and get so hyped, then get board after a couple hours. I also prefer linear RPGs and not ones with 500 million open quests at the same time, etc.