The Next Innovation in Gaming

[Mark]

(. . .) I have played in plenty of games where the GM really just read through an adventure and followed it with no improvisation. I would contend that those games can still be called RPGs; perhaps not particularly good or interesting RPGs, but it certainly isn't down to the level of a CRPG, either.

That kind of "DM" can, should, will, and in many ways already has been replaced by a computer which has resulted in such games (no matter the system) becoming non-RPGs. CRPGs, which have always been ill-named, are better than that sort of game in many ways.

 

[falcarrion]

I believe it will be software. the hardware is just around the corner. Tablets/slates and e-readers are the hot items being shown off at CES 2010. There bound to hit the game tables soon. We just need the software to be written that will amaze us.

 

[bySwarm]

Garyh - I don't know enworld really well but I've had that idea, and I know living (gameworld)'s too. These may be popular, but they aren't a phenomenon yet. Something giving a greater spark is needed, perhaps a development platform done in a new way making community efforts more manageable and easy.

This is something I've been thinking about and working on for the bySwarm site. I don't know that I've found the answers, and so I'll be looking for consistent feedback when we are at that stage. We're still just gathering setting concepts in order to choose one to use to guide the effort.

 

[Clavis]

The shape of the next "big thing" in gaming depends on whether you are considering existing gamers or the larger public. The next "big thing" for the existing gamer population is likely to be some kind of smart phone app that functions as a combination automated character sheet, random number generator, probability calculator (so you know if you should try a certain move, etc.) and rules reference.

As for something that will break big with a non-gamer population, a la Vampire in the 90's, that's a different story. IMHO the game that will draw current non-gamers into gaming will certainly NOT be D&D or anything like it. In fact, for any non-computer RPG to have any success in the wider world it will have to be completely disassociated from D&D. Likely, it will not employ number-based traits, or much math at all. It will be based on an interactive story model, and may rotate the role of story presenter. It will certainly not feature "kewl powerz", a focus on combat, or any features that computer games frankly do better. It will be something of an excuse for face-face socialization in a world that is becoming more depersonalized every day, although it will also be easily playable through social networking sites. It may very well be the sort of game that existing gamers will hate, and not consider a "game" at all. It's players will certainly not see any connection between their pastime and "D&D" or its players.

 

[Stormonu]

It raises the question (perhaps, again) as to where the threshold is between RPG and CRPG. But if no RPing is occurring beyond pointing toward a "role" in combat, then it raises the question where the threshold is between RPG and G. I am of a mind that not only does removing the "DM" cross that threshold but even severely reducing the function and responsibility of the "DM" crosses it.

Don't forget in this argument about the old "solo" adventures (such as the Riddling Maze of the Minotaur or Faerie Mound of Dragonkind that TSR put out). I think there is a market for games out there that don't require a DM, but that is a niche market within the niche market that exists. Though, it might work best in an RPG game where the players are, in a way, competing against each other as much as against a common enemy (Munchin is an example of this, though it's a board game, not an RPG).

It would have to be a game where players take on a bit of DMing themselves ("Okay, this monster is going to attack your character - I'll roll the attacks" or "I'm going to see if the king doesn't like your idea, and then I can try and present my plan to him") and they have some incentive to challenge each other (maybe XP if the make the other player fail, or a bonus to their own abilities the harder they make it for other players).

 

[Chrono22]

Be a person.

Information distribution and tactical decisions can be done lots of different ways, sure. But a computer can't realistically make an NPC get angry in response to a free-form statement or behavior by the PCs. The computer cannot realistically depict any emotional depth.

You could do this cooperatively, however that would mean the players having a lot more information about the background of events, and where the adventure is going. Plot twists would become far more rare.

This is a problem. But groups can still act democratically on limited information... knowing who holds the cards doesn't mean you know their hand or intentions. Keeping the mystery while simultaneously allowing the group to collaborate requires that you categorize the types of information that is shared. Some information should be known to every player except the one it effects. In this manner, each player can guide the direction of the story toward a fulfilling resolution for the others, and meanwhile the sense of mystery and surprise can be maintained in situations where it matters.
For example, suppose a player has a backstory that has a sworn enemy. It would be up to the other players to determine the methods that the sworn enemy employs against his PC.

I guess the biggest problem with this is that most DM's have a very strong feeling of artistic license. Many naturally assume they own the game and its direction.

 

[Yabanjin]

As for something that will break big with a non-gamer population, a la Vampire in the 90's, that's a different story. IMHO the game that will draw current non-gamers into gaming will certainly NOT be D&D or anything like it. In fact, for any non-computer RPG to have any success in the wider world it will have to be completely disassociated from D&D. Likely, it will not employ number-based traits, or much math at all. It will be based on an interactive story model, and may rotate the role of story presenter. It will certainly not feature "kewl powerz", a focus on combat, or any features that computer games frankly do better. It will be something of an excuse for face-face socialization in a world that is becoming more depersonalized every day, although it will also be easily playable through social networking sites. It may very well be the sort of game that existing gamers will hate, and not consider a "game" at all. It's players will certainly not see any connection between their pastime and "D&D" or its players.

You mean like How to Host a Murder? I think you're absolutely right about that.

 

[nedjer]

The shape of the next "big thing" in gaming depends on whether you are considering existing gamers or the larger public. The next "big thing" for the existing gamer population is likely to be some kind of smart phone app that functions as a combination automated character sheet, random number generator, probability calculator (so you know if you should try a certain move, etc.) and rules reference.

As for something that will break big with a non-gamer population, a la Vampire in the 90's, that's a different story. IMHO the game that will draw current non-gamers into gaming will certainly NOT be D&D or anything like it. In fact, for any non-computer RPG to have any success in the wider world it will have to be completely disassociated from D&D. Likely, it will not employ number-based traits, or much math at all. It will be based on an interactive story model, and may rotate the role of story presenter. It will certainly not feature "kewl powerz", a focus on combat, or any features that computer games frankly do better. It will be something of an excuse for face-face socialization in a world that is becoming more depersonalized every day, although it will also be easily playable through social networking sites. It may very well be the sort of game that existing gamers will hate, and not consider a "game" at all. It's players will certainly not see any connection between their pastime and "D&D" or its players.

While I think and post about how tablets should help develop 'shared gaming' it's good to see a post which talks about 'genuine' innovation or innovation inside tabletop gaming instead of technologies which may impact on tabletop gaming.

Which raises the question of who's running the show? Are gamers able to drive the industry or does branded industry run the gamers?

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

While I think and post about how tablets should help develop 'shared gaming' it's good to see a post which talks about 'genuine' innovation or innovation inside tabletop gaming instead of technologies which may impact on tabletop gaming.

Which raises the question of who's running the show? Are gamers able to drive the industry or does branded industry run the gamers?

Gamers drive the evolution of gaming.

Innovation can be driven by gamers, but might come from outside as well.

 

[jmucchiello]

Not yet.

Really, I think opinion on this aspect of the evolution of the game simply comes down to whether or not one believes that a computer can ever mimic a human.

Nope, not in yours or my lifetimes.

As for GMless RPGs, isn't Rune an RPG where the rules state that the players rotate GM responsibility?