What Do You Think is the Future of RPGs?

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It was a Role-Play PvP server yet you say I shouldn't go there to role-play. Yeah. Gotcha.

Please cut back on the snide. I said the PvP trumps the RP on those servers. It doesn't on the regular RP servers, where there's plenty of roleplaying to be found, either as specific RP-only events (Silver Hand has these taking place in Stormwind, Orgrimmar and in specific chat channels, which doesn't really work for me, personally). You also encounter a lot of people roleplaying out in the world and a generally supportive attitude toward it except in the General channel, which, as I said earlier, is a toilet on pretty much every server.

Really, this just illustrates how MMORPGs hide behind a mask of RPGs while providing nothing but adventure games. It isn't like I can convince the ruler of Stormwind to take a course of action. All I can do is run through the logic path of the game to complete quests and grind honor/arena points.

Now you're not complaining about roleplaying, you're complaining that thousands of people don't have their play dictated by what you do. In any game that had that many players, whether MMORPG or LARP or even a really, really ambitious tabletop game, those running the game have to keep an eye on what's fun for everyone. Since every WoW server has approximately 5,000 people playing on it at different times a day, you're right, your play doesn't get to remake the world. Your actions get to affect you and your group, particularly via instances.

I've never had the pleasure of playing in a game where I was forbidden to even try to communicate with an NPC...and I hope I never do.

You can certainly try to communicate with the Horde in WoW, by using emotes. People manage it successfully all the time. I've adventured with individual members of the Horde in Kalimdor. We'd make it clear via emotes that we weren't interested in a fight and we'd cooperate just fine, salute, and let each other go on our merry way. I wasn't going to be able to exchange life stories with them, nor join the same guild, but primitive communication is possible.

Frankly, given what happens on roleplaying servers in MMORPGs where cross-faction stuff is allowable is the "good drow" phenomenon, where everyone has buddies on the opposite side and everyone (with a few rare, rare exceptions) are the rare exceptional good (or evil) members of a race. The WoW developers -- who played those other MMORPGs and played on those servers -- decided they wanted the Alliance/Horde conflict to be a central part of the game, and chose not to allow everyone to jump over the fence despite it. It doesn't prohibit roleplaying, and roleplaying certainly isn't limited to being able to play Drizzt and his many clones.

In any case, if you wanted a game where your personal actions would change the world, you should have played a game like NeverWinter Nights, which has more personalized attention from the DMs and is designed around smaller groups. Complaining that a game you share with 5,000 other people doesn't allow you to be the star is like complaining that chess doesn't accurately model medieval warfare: Neither of them are supposed to.

 

[painandgreed]

More of the same with some more internet tools for online gaming. Meanwhile, computer games like WoW will get more and more complex and allow for greater RP oportunities.

I'd like to see a cross between RPGs and boardgames. I have no interest in DDM, but maybe a version that was hald DDM and half D&D, allowed for character advancement and customization.

 

[Hjorimir]

Please cut back on the snide. I said the PvP trumps the RP on those servers. It doesn't on the regular RP servers, where there's plenty of roleplaying to be found, either as specific RP-only events (Silver Hand has these taking place in Stormwind, Orgrimmar and in specific chat channels, which doesn't really work for me, personally). You also encounter a lot of people roleplaying out in the world and a generally supportive attitude toward it except in the General channel, which, as I said earlier, is a toilet on pretty much every server.

Just because some people have some role-playing events it doesn't make WoW (or any other MMORPG) any more of a RPG. I could role-play Warren Buffet while I played Monopoly and my brother could play Donald Trump, but even though we're role-playing Monopoly still wouldn't be a RPG either.

Now you're not complaining about roleplaying, you're complaining that thousands of people don't have their play dictated by what you do. In any game that had that many players, whether MMORPG or LARP or even a really, really ambitious tabletop game, those running the game have to keep an eye on what's fun for everyone. Since every WoW server has approximately 5,000 people playing on it at different times a day, you're right, your play doesn't get to remake the world. Your actions get to affect you and your group, particularly via instances.

I never faulted Blizzard for their design of WoW and catering to a large audience. It's a great adventure game.

You can certainly try to communicate with the Horde in WoW, by using emotes. People manage it successfully all the time. I've adventured with individual members of the Horde in Kalimdor. We'd make it clear via emotes that we weren't interested in a fight and we'd cooperate just fine, salute, and let each other go on our merry way. I wasn't going to be able to exchange life stories with them, nor join the same guild, but primitive communication is possible.

Communicating to another player that I'm not in the mood to kill them isn't role-playing; it's one player saying to other they have nothing to worry about. But those limited emotes do not facilitate role-playing, but they were never meant to.

Frankly, given what happens on roleplaying servers in MMORPGs where cross-faction stuff is allowable is the "good drow" phenomenon, where everyone has buddies on the opposite side and everyone (with a few rare, rare exceptions) are the rare exceptional good (or evil) members of a race. The WoW developers -- who played those other MMORPGs and played on those servers -- decided they wanted the Alliance/Horde conflict to be a central part of the game, and chose not to allow everyone to jump over the fence despite it. It doesn't prohibit roleplaying, and roleplaying certainly isn't limited to being able to play Drizzt and his many clones.

I don't fault Blizzard for encouraging PvP, but I think that because I can't group with characters on the other side of the conflict you're talking about a game that isn't a RPG.

In any case, if you wanted a game where your personal actions would change the world, you should have played a game like NeverWinter Nights, which has more personalized attention from the DMs and is designed around smaller groups. Complaining that a game you share with 5,000 other people doesn't allow you to be the star is like complaining that chess doesn't accurately model medieval warfare: Neither of them are supposed to.

I never said it was supposed to. I'm saying that WoW isn't a RPG. However, it is a very nice adventure game and one I played for quite some time before I became bored with it and wanted to try something else.

Now I'm playing LotROnline. It's a fun adventure game too.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Just because some people have some role-playing events it doesn't make WoW (or any other MMORPG) any more of a RPG. I could role-play Warren Buffet while I played Monopoly and my brother could play Donald Trump, but even though we're role-playing Monopoly still wouldn't be a RPG either.

Since it sounds like the only thing that qualifies as a roleplaying game to you is "let me do whatever I want," I think this is a pretty pointless conversation.

 

[Hjorimir]

I think it is more along the lines of let me act with freedom and let those actions have an appropriate effect so the actions takes meaning. Don't get me wrong, I love MMORPGs and have been playing them since EQ hit, but I don't think the medium supports role-playing at all.

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

Personally, I'm seeing a decline in tabletop RPG-play locally. Those who play in my area also seem to be a greying population - too many easy distractions elsewhere for the young 'uns!

A significant point with RPGs I think is that you need a bunch of people together to play - yes, you can do it online via chat and utilities but it misses out important social aspects for me - and the recorded games I've heard this way have seemed stilted due to lag.

Speaking of recordings, perhaps it's a good thing that some people do record their game sessions - a piece of social history for future generations to access.

Basically, my concern is - there aren't enough people coming into the tabletop RPG hobby to sustain viable gaming groups in the longer term (decades). Your mileage may vary, I'm just recounting personal experience and my current viewpoint.

(Personally I think we should hijack Theatre people and sneak in RPG elements into 'Murder Mystery' Party Games, oh yes... )

Paul

 

[Andre]

That's good, because boardgames are currently healthier than they have ever been, IMO.

Cheers!

Just to nitpick a bit:

I think it depends on how one defines "boardgame". If you include all the old stand-by's (Monopoly, Life, Sorry), I suspect (I have no industry knowledge) that their sales have steadily declined over the past 20 years, as we've latched on to other entertainment options.

If you refer only to wargames and simulations, then the the 70's and 80's were the clearly the best of times. Literally hundreds of thousands of games were sold annually...for a while.

If, however, you're referring to the fairly expensive, well-made boardgames (everything from the typical Eurogame to modern wargames), then I think you're spot on. Game sales will likely never reach their earlier peak, and too many games look the same, but better games with better rules and production values are being released each year. They're not cheap, and finding players with the time and interest are a challenge. But there are some great games out there.

 

[Andre]

As for RPG's, IMHO I see them declining until someone finds a new paradigm. Based on my own limited experience, we're seeing a steady graying of the hobby, and older players have too little time to devote to gaming. (The typical problem - when we were young, we had time and no money; now we have money, and no time.)

I don't know what will change, but someone, somewhere, sometime will come up with the key element to reinvigorate the hobby. Maybe it will be a real-life Dream Park. Maybe it will be some combination of electronic aids and communication tools. Maybe it will be a simple, elegant system that significantly increases the fun, while moving the rules into the background (where they belong).

Or maybe the hobby will just die one day and be replaced by something better.

 

[MerricB]

But it's not a roleplaying game then. If they go the way of being boardgames, then we can say goodbye to pretty much everything that makes an RPG an RPG. May as well slit D&D's wrists right now.

Oh, I see... you're saying that they'll become more like boardgames, not that they'll become less popular as boardgames are (currently not doing).

Personally, I think it very unlikely the RPG will become more boardgame-like, but that you'll see some boardgame-like RPGs amongst the RPGs.

If there's anything I expect in the future of RPGs it is this: D&D will remain the top RPG in the US, UK and Australia. It will become easier to prepare for, but it will never be the equivalent of a boardgame (put it on the table and play!)

Cheers!

 

[Scribble]

Maybe it will be a real-life Dream Park.

It's the Dungeons and Dragons roller coaster ride!!!