Putting the 'role' back in role-playing games since 2002.
Donate to Codex
Good Old Games
  • Welcome to rpgcodex.net, a site dedicated to discussing computer based role-playing games in a free and open fashion. We're less strict than other forums, but please refer to the rules.

    "This message is awaiting moderator approval": All new users must pass through our moderation queue before they will be able to post normally. Until your account has "passed" your posts will only be visible to yourself (and moderators) until they are approved. Give us a week to get around to approving / deleting / ignoring your mundane opinion on crap before hassling us about it. Once you have passed the moderation period (think of it as a test), you will be able to post normally, just like all the other retards.

Not Accessibility, but Dumbing Down

Iznaliu

Arbiter
Joined
Apr 28, 2016
Messages
3,686
Hey, nothing personal. I understand. Just that I think that "complexity" isn't usually a first impression type review feature/problem. Its not something most folks say "this game is too difficult for me." That would be a strange exclamation, but I suppose I understand your point. I think SimCity may have a claim to being too difficult or such, based on how much micromanagement. Just don't believe any RPG ever made me stop, pause, and say "This is too esoteric." There are conventions in RPGs and you either are in it, or you aren't. I don't have sympathy for folks who want Oblivion with every release.

Some people do do this, especially with Steam etc. allowing you to choose from a huge range of games.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
288
This is the best argument you've made so far in this discussion.

Sure, the failing gaming industry thinks exactly like you do, the fact remains that RPGs are disturbingly popular and have been since PC games were first a thing. But focus groups and marketing and you live in a bubble where there is such a thing as an average customer, a fantastical entity which apparently only likes shooters.

Your claim that they don't sell as much as other games is just not true, they do sell as much as other games, there's just less of them. The best selling game of all time is probably WoW. An RPG.

Exactly the opposite: I realize that the gaming audience is split into segments (just like consumers in any other field), and the segment that enjoys shooting, hiking and playing sports games on their console is much bigger than the segment that expects complex battle systems, branching story lines and engaging itemization. You, on the other hand, seem to think that the law of supply and demand does not apply to RPGs: people will buy any number of copies you decide to throw on them, and only malevolent or stupid AAA studios prevent this from happening out of their hate for RPGs or misunderstanding of the market, the very thing that they used to build their multi-million dollar companies.

But then again, if we consider WoW an example of a hardcore RPG, I'll agree with anything else you've been saying.
 

Atlantico

unida e indivisible
Patron
Undisputed Queen of Faggotry Vatnik In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
14,491
Location
Midgard
Make the Codex Great Again!
But then again, if we consider WoW an example of a hardcore RPG, I'll agree with anything else you've been saying.

Now now, let's not move goalposts and let's at least attempt to be intellectually honest. Wow is a completely obtuse game that is just as hard to get into as any hardcore RPG. It's the antithesis of accessible, it's expensive and requires a ridiculous time investment on top of that.

Just because you can't explain its popularity, doesn't mean anything. Except that your premise is wrong.

Exactly the opposite: I realize that the gaming audience is split into segments (just like consumers in any other field), and the segment that enjoys shooting, hiking and playing sports games on their console is much bigger than the segment that expects complex battle systems, branching story lines and engaging itemization. You, on the other hand, seem to think that the law of supply and demand does not apply to RPGs: people will buy any number of copies you decide to throw on them, and only malevolent or stupid AAA studios prevent this from happening out of their hate for RPGs or misunderstanding of the market, the very thing that they used to build their multi-million dollar companies.

Allright, that's great and I agree, the gaming audience is split into segments. We're not debating that. We could debate whether or not your definition of these segments make any sense, but that's really another thread.

Rather your claim that the RPG segment is a fraction of a fraction is a point of contention. Because it isn't actually small. It's one of the main pillars of PC gaming and always has been and is a reliable source of income. Supply and demand and all that. The dumbification of RPGs through the years has been the result of a rather cynical idea from your friends and colleagues at EA marketing (and their ilk) that by dumbing down RPGs you'll get all the RPG segment and some of the action oriented segment as well, because the RPG segment can't really go anywhere else. Smart thinking? No. It's greedy and it's born from the need to ever expand and it's based on a faulty premise, that the RPG segment will continue to buy these dumbed down games. But that doesn't happen.

And this doesn't even apply to RPGs, it applies to every single type of game. Take another genre like horror/survival games. Dead Space was moderately successful, sequels were dumbed down for a larger audience and ended in a spectacular flop that nearly killed the studio developing the series and killed the series. This is not an RPG, but it is a segment with a limited appeal, which was dumbed down and made a p. generic shooter by the third installation. You know, to appeal to the largest audience. And it failed.

Here's the reality. You can't make a game that appeals to everyone. You can't even make a game that appeals to more than one segment of gamers. This is why dumbing down games is smart on paper, but doesn't work in reality. Because of this mentality more franchises have been put on indefinite hold and studios dissolved than just accepting that your segment of the market is finite. That doesn't mean it's unprofitable, it just not going to grow as fast as your expectations of profits are. Gaming is part of the entertainment business, and even the movie studios have realized that you can't make an action-adventure-horror-comedy-drama and have it succeed, even though it touches all the big market segments. Gaming studios and publishers have not learned this and I wonder if you have.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
288
Just because you can't explain its popularity, doesn't mean anything.

Wow's popularity has nothing to do with it being obtuse, just as Facebook's popularity has nothing to do with how hard or easy it is to use. They are both popular because a lot of people (not everyone!) like spending time with other people in various ways.

If I was wrong and WoW was popular because of it resembling an RPG, we would see a much bigger demand for single-player RPGs. As it stands now, though, most of WoW subscribers don't care about other RPGs, MMO or otherwise.


This is why dumbing down games is smart on paper, but doesn't work in reality.

Unless our realities are completely different, this is where you're wrong. "Dumbing down" games has worked amazingly well, and has allowed multiple studios and publishers to profit from it. Yes, "dumbed down" games also have to be good in other ways, so if you make a bad "dumbed down" game, it won't sell. But if you manage to make an awesome shooter or an awesome sports franchise, it will sell millions of copies for years and years. I don't see Ubisoft or Activision going out of business any time soon. What I see is Inxile and Obsidian balancing on the verge of bankruptcy, having to resort to Kickstarter and Russian tank MMO contracts.

Gaming studios and publishers have not learned this and I wonder if you have.

Gaming studios will do whatever is most profitable, as long as it stays profitable. If your point of view was correct, the studios that make hardcore RPGs would swim in money.
 

Atlantico

unida e indivisible
Patron
Undisputed Queen of Faggotry Vatnik In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
14,491
Location
Midgard
Make the Codex Great Again!
Wow's popularity has nothing to do with it being obtuse, just as Facebook's popularity has nothing to do with how hard or easy it is to use. They are both popular because a lot of people (not everyone!) like spending time with other people in various ways.

I didn't claim that Wow's popularity was because of its obtuseness and inaccessibility, but despite it. Why you refuse to read, comprehend and then post when replying to me, will just have to remain a mystery. There is no connection between Wow and Facebook. You're just fabulating now.

If I was wrong and WoW was popular because of it resembling an RPG, we would see a much bigger demand for single-player RPGs. As it stands now, though, most of WoW subscribers don't care about other RPGs, MMO or otherwise.

Not really, and for a supply/demand purist like you pretent to be you miss the obvious fact that wow is saturating its market segment. There is simply no more demand for a wow-like game, but like the multitude of me-too wow clone making companies, that's what you inferred should happen. Makes no sense. A market can easily be saturated and no further demand is called into existance.

Unless our realities are completely different, this is where you're wrong. "Dumbing down" games has worked amazingly well, and has allowed multiple studios and publishers to profit from it. Yes, "dumbed down" games also have to be good in other ways, so if you make a bad "dumbed down" game, it won't sell. But if you manage to make an awesome shooter or an awesome sports franchise, it will sell millions of copies for years and years. I don't see Ubisoft or Activision going out of business any time soon. What I see is Inxile and Obsidian balancing on the verge of bankruptcy, having to resort to Kickstarter and Russian tank MMO contracts.

Mass Effect was dumbed down and went down in flames. (ME:A)
Dead Space was dumbed down and went down in flames. (DS3)
Dawn of War was dumbed down and went down in flames. (DoW3)
Resident Evil was dumbed down and went down in flames. (RE5+6)
Splinter Cell was dumbed down and went down in flames. (SCC)
Diablo was dumbed down and went down in flames. (D3)
Dragon Age was dumbed down and went down in flames. (DA2)
Deus Ex was dumbed down and went down in flames. (DX2)
FEAR was dumbed down and went down in flames. (F2+3)
Command and Conquer was dumbed down and went down in flames (C&C4)

These are from the top of my head, all started with in a specific subgenre, were major successes within their genre and were all dumbed down in order to appeal to the mythical and non-existing broader audience. So dumbing down games has universally been a bad strategic move that has killed franchises by the droves.

But dumb games sell and that's what keeps EA, Activision and Ubisoft in healthy business. You're just making the fallacy (like EA marketing) that because dumb games sell, we can make the genre specific successes sell even better if we just make the dumb like the big sellers. That's not possible and has been repeatedly demonstrated through decades now.

Gaming studios will do whatever is most profitable, as long as it stays profitable. If your point of view was correct, the studios that make hardcore RPGs would swim in money.

No, gaming studios are risk averse by nature, they go for what they think will hurt them the least if it fails balanced against the biggest theoretical profit if it succeeds combined with the time and effort needed to publish a game. After all, they can't publish everything and cater to everyone they want with different games - so they try to amalgate. This does not work and results in spectacular failures and annoyed fans.

Again, dumb games sell just fine. Dumbed down games do not.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
288
A market can easily be saturated and no further demand is called into existance.

Just like the market is easily saturated for hardcore RPG's. See, you agree with all the pieces, now would you just please put 2 and 2 together and you'll get to my original point.

Mass Effect was dumbed down and went down in flames. (ME:A)

ME:A was just as dumb as the very successful ME2-3. The reason it crashed and burned was because of poor production values, not because it was dumber than ME3. Like I said, making a "dumb" game does not guarantee success. Making a good "dumb" game does.

I would also like to point out that none of the franchises you mentioned have anything to do with "hardcore" RPG's, except for (maybe) Dragon Age: Origins and (arguably) Deus Ex.

As a counter example to your examples, the Elder Scrolls become less and less of an RPG with each game, and more and more successful. Same with Fallout. How does that fit into your theory?

Finally, let me just say, you don't seem interested in discussing the sales of hardcore RPG's vs shooters, which was my original point. We've discussed the growth of games market, the kickstarted indies, the "dumbing down" of various genres, but you didn't name even one hardcore RPG that has sold more than a successful shooter like e.g. GTA5. As much as I like arguing over internet, this discussion is too all over the place even for me.
 

ilitarist

Learned
Illiterate Village Idiot
Joined
Oct 17, 2016
Messages
857
Less numbers is not just about more accessibility. It's an easier job to make those numbers work. Most complex number-heavy games have imbalances which would have been less of a problem in a story-focused game.

Sustaining a complex system only makes sense when you have a huge game with a huge playerbase so that enough people see problems and you have to fix it with money they through at you, so you see it in MMO and MOBAs and RTS and so on. Or in singleplayer sandboxes a la Paradox Development games (Europa Universalis, Crusader Kings) or Dwarf Fortress where you don't care it's unbalanced and there are right answers to problems presented as a controversial choice. If it's not either of that you get an oldschool RPG where you have to play for several hours and read guides to understand that you always need a Rogue in your party and 2/3 of skills in a game have no practical appliance.

One way of making a game more complex without making it a mess is making it more complex in different ways. I.e. Skyrim vs Morrowind made character sheets much simpler in some ways but made it much more comlpex in other ways. They turned complex set of numbers that revolved around two systems (combat system that told NPC to cast biggest spell and rush to attack and dialogue system that gives answers according to NPC class, faction and disposition) into several systems that adapt more complex combat system, simpler yet more varied dialogue system and new systems like scheduling, reaction to environment, going to a specific place or hunting player etc. In most cases player still only cares about combat and dialogue and those use lighter number usage (not sure about combat though) but still other systems create a more complex world. Still it's more suitable for sandbox or minigame-game a la Sid Meier's Pirates.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Just that I think that "complexity" isn't usually a first impression type review feature/problem.

The problem is not complexity per se, but the type of complexity that is involved in cRPGs. Some MMOs can be quite complex if you consider the amount of combinations, classes, spells, etc.; yet they have a huge fanbase. The difference is that they allow you to play with minimum information, each class use repetitive commands and have way less reading. The bar for entry is lower. cRPGs are different. You have to passively absorb huge chunks of information in order to play the game right. In order to master the system you will need to play many times, try different things, etc., but you can’t do the basics without reading a bunch of text-descriptions, planning your build, etc. The bar for entry is higher. In MMOs you can play with smaller bits of information that are complex on the aggregate, while in cRPGs you need bigger chunks of information that are already complex in their own right. That’s the difference.

People need to be reminded and schooled about what the real meaning of cRPGs. There is a potential fanbase out there, but they are dormant or got lost in other genres. Dishonest developers that labelled everything that has a sword as a “cRPG” are part to blame, but players are also too lazy to make an effort and learn something new.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
As it stands now, though, most of WoW subscribers don't care about other RPGs, MMO or otherwise.

But just because it seems obvious to you that WoW's players don’t really like cRPGs, it doesn’t follow that MMOs being labelled as cRPGs didn’t let to confusions in the game market. Labels generate player’s expectations over the time and these expectations affect the way proper cRPGs will be received and how developers will react to the feedback. The most popular segment of games labelled as cRPGs end up affecting, if not implicitly dictating, the nature of the whole genre. That’s why the most successful cRPG in recent times has co-op mechanics and MMO graphics. To disregard that because you know that MMO players don’t like proper cRPGs is foolish because they think that every cRPG should be MMO-like. The fact that the creator of Fallout was talking about how to make cRPGs more accessible due to criticisms made by these people is a sign of the times.
 

Delterius

Arcane
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
15,956
Location
Entre a serra e o mar.
Don't be retarded. Strategy games and RPGs are some of the most complex genres out there. It's no wonder it's also two of the genres that sell less compared to other genres, like sports, first person shooters, adventure games or "cinematic" games.

Have ever even seen someone who never played videogames trying to navigate a 3D environment? Their brains collapse in on themselves as though they are playing the Virtual Boy. That's the Action gameplay equivalent of someone who only plays Sonic booting Fallout for the first time.

But then again, forgive me, you're the guy who thinks that a stat range of 1 through 10 is 'Advanced Math'. So here's another perspective.

Theorycrafting in World of Warcraft is more complex than that of any CRPG and nobody complains about that. The reasons are obvious: A) theorycrafting is done by a minority for the benefit of the community -- which often enough misleads the casuals but that's another story -- and B) the game accomodates casual players in difficulty brackets. Everyone has the same illusion of accomplishment in WoW and its ilk, wether they actually understand what they are doing or not. As far as most people are concerned, WoW is a very casual Action game of cooldown management where the math doesn't really matter beyond DPS and OverhealPS.

And that's just WoW. Theorycrafting in some Korean MMOs is so downright obnoxious that they become trade secrets not to be shared, ever.

That didn't stop those RPGs from making bank.

The same applies to all the other genres you listed. Adventure games are barely games anymore, they are more akin to interactive television from the 1960s-1990s. The same applies to 'cinematic games'. Shooters employ weasal tactics, such as random respawn points and tacking on RPG mechanics, to give its players an illusion of skill and advancement. I would comment on sports games but unlike you I don't talk about things I don't know much about.

The niche appeal of the million or so copies sold by D:OS and PoE has less to do with how OMG CEREBRAL these games supposedly are than the fact that more people are inclined to buy Action games than they are RPGs. Once you account for that all genres can, are and have been dumbed down for a mass audience. Action, Adventure, Strategy, you name it. This leads to a feedback loop where more people become versed in the basics of certain genres when compared to others, which is why D:OS (one game with 1.3 million + on PC, sourced on Steamspy) and the Soulsborne series (at the time, a total of 8 million copies sold in between 2 games and all platforms) are, proportionally, both 'breakthroughs' in their respective genres.
 

Machocruz

Arcane
Joined
Jul 7, 2011
Messages
4,318
Location
Hyperborea
Using series with momentum as an example of dumbing down = more sales is not a solid argument. The next Elder Scrolls will sell gangbusters off of the strength of Skyrim, even if it is more complex and difficult. There are other...qualities that these games have that draw in people past the RPG/hardcore gamer geek audiences. That the games are simpler is, imo, incidental. Correlation, not causation. There are other, equally dumb open world RPGs that are nowhere near touching Bethesda's popularity.

On the flip side, I'm curious to see if Fallout has lost momentum because of the major changes in 4 (which sold off of the massive love and hype for Fallout 3). No polling was done that I know of, but I haven't seen the same love for the final product that other Beth games have received. Sales =/= customer satisfaction.

Also, when you're selling Skyrim level numbers, how many of those people you think read previews and reviews extensively and would know that one game is less complex than the previous? Forums, or the gaming "community," are a fishbowl/echo chamber, not representative of the majority of consumers who play or have played video games. Most people who buy games are not part of the in-crowd who know all the details of games, and these 'normals 'are the ones who get your sales numbers up past, I would say, 10 million. And by the time they'd realize the game is a handful, the company already has their money.
 

Sigourn

uooh afficionado
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
5,624
Don't be retarded. Strategy games and RPGs are some of the most complex genres out there. It's no wonder it's also two of the genres that sell less compared to other genres, like sports, first person shooters, adventure games or "cinematic" games.
Boy, you really are serious when you talk about advanced math, aren't you?

Nigger, can you understand an analogy or do you want me to draw you a picture? I never said RPGs were "Advanced math", only that you can't throw hundreds of mechanics and stuff at a player who is new to the genre, just like you wouldn't throw advanced math to a first grader.
 

Sigourn

uooh afficionado
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
5,624
Have ever even seen someone who never played videogames trying to navigate a 3D environment? Their brains collapse in on themselves as though they are playing the Virtual Boy.

My 67-year old father who has never played a videogame doesn't seem to have that problem. Neither does my 63-year old mother.

Stop talking out of your ass because you are trying to pretend the most faithful games to reality are "hard" to comprehend, holy crap.

I'd rather drop this now instead of arguing with retards who can't face reality.
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
Action, Adventure, Strategy, you name it. This leads to a feedback loop where more people become versed in the basics of certain genres when compared to others, which is why D:OS (one game with 1.3 million + on PC, sourced on Steamspy) and the Soulsborne series (at the time, a total of 8 million copies sold in between 2 games and all platforms) are, proportionally, both 'breakthroughs' in their respective genres.

But you can’t explain the appeal of D:OS and Soul’s series just with the fact that more players are versed on action games. The co-op mechanics on D:OS allow people to spend time together while they are playing a game, which is also one of the main reasons why MMOs are so successful. The Souls series is moved by the competitive atmosphere which is a time-honored tradition since arcade games.
 
Joined
Dec 17, 2013
Messages
5,110
People ARE intimidated by numbers, so game publishers want to remove them from the equation. However, in an ironic twist, that in itself is not a bad thing. Reliance on numbers is an archaic left-over from the days when hardware was so weak, everything had to be abstracted at a very high level. But stat or number based gameplay is generally not very interesting, because it typically involves very little player skill. Think of Fallout dialogue or some kind of skill check, your "stat" decides whether you succeed or fail, which is boring.

I would have no problem with numbers being replaced by actual system that require player skill to master. However, the publishers want to replace numbers with something even dumber, like reflex based hopping around or button mashing or something along those lines.
 

Black Angel

Arcane
Joined
Jun 23, 2016
Messages
2,910
Location
Wonderland
I never said RPGs were "Advanced math"
only that you can't throw hundreds of mechanics and stuff at a player who is new to the genre, just like you wouldn't throw advanced math to a first grader.
Mate, that's exactly what you're saying. None of these 'hardcore RPGs' required new players to read big ass manuals and immediately have a week's worth of knowing the game mechanics (thus, first grader having some degree of knowledge in advanced math) like you said before. How else do you introduce new players to RPGs? Like I said, you only really need basic math and also actually pay fucking attention to deal with hardcore RPGs character creation and early game. So no, we don't need to make it more accessible like you wanted to. And like I've said before and you totally ignored, hardcore RPGs like Age of Decadence doesn't have big ass manuals, it was pretty clear and transparent with its mechanics in character creation screen AND all over the game playthrough, AND there are still people who needed help anyway (and also fucking retards but that's just because the game is not for them).

So why RPGs doesn't sell like shooters and other genres? Most of the problems lies in marketing strategy like many had pointed out in previous pages.
 

Sigourn

uooh afficionado
Joined
Feb 6, 2016
Messages
5,624
I never said RPGs were "Advanced math"
only that you can't throw hundreds of mechanics and stuff at a player who is new to the genre, just like you wouldn't throw advanced math to a first grader.
Mate, that's exactly what you're saying.

Mate, that's exactly what I'm not saying. It's called an analogy. Complexity isn't just defined by "math", you know that, right? A lot of stuff is complex in real life, and math isn't involved in any way or form.

Would you have preferred if I said "only that you can't throw hundreds of mechanics and stuff at a player who is new to the genre, just like you wouldn't ask a novice repairman to build an engine"?

Sending someone who has never played a cRPG to play Realms of Arkania is suicidal. You've got to get them started with stuff like Fallout (any Fallout).
 
Self-Ejected

Lurker King

Self-Ejected
The Real Fanboy
Joined
Jan 21, 2015
Messages
1,865,419
So why RPGs doesn't sell like shooters and other genres? Most of the problems lies in marketing strategy like many had pointed out in previous pages.

That doesn’t explain why some genres receive more funding from big publishers in the first place. It’s the other way around. Studios that develop shooters have more marketing because these types of games tend to sell more, and they sell more because there is more demand for this type of game. You can’t artificially create demand for cRPGs with better marketing.
 

Darkman

Educated
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
49
WOW is the best selling game of all time and is ironically the best example of a game that started as a dumbed down game (not always bad) and was further dumbed and streamlined to appeal to the masses

WOW at the time it came out in the later part of 2004 was an extremely casualized and streamnlined MMO . Compared to shit like EverQuest and Ultima Online, the most successful MMOs before it, it was extremely casual . If you died in EQ you had to run back to your corpse completely unarmed and unarmored to acquire all your gear back. Assuming you died going down fighting with all your equipment and items, imagine trying to survive the same area completely naked or using welfare replacement gear. If you died in Ultima Online, people were able to loot your body. Someone could kill you and literally steal all your equipment.

Mobs had so much aggro in EQ and weren't "leashed" so if you pull one you had to run out of the zone to reset aggro. In WOW, mob leash area is only about 50 ingame yards or so. Aggro was so important that there were entire classes designed solely around crowd control. This meant that you could literally do nothing alone including killing simple mobs. In WOW you could get to max level soloing on any class. It wasn't fast or easy but it was very doable on any of the 9 playable launch classes. There was no instancing in older MMOs. If you entered a dungeon or raid, you had to contend with the players currently residing inside that dungeon as well as the normal AI residents.



WOW was a massive success because it harnessed the community aspect of MMOs, leveraged a popular IP, and cut out much of the insane time sinks and frustration features of MMOs that the average player didn't want to deal with.

Now WOW is currently 6th expansions in and it has been steadily removing more and more rpg elements each expansion.

Compare an older stat screen to a newer one

OLD WOW STATS

hit.png


KNBGCPLOVNKX1299716155353.jpg


So many stats that you needed to scroll down to view them all. Need to use two images to display them all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODERN WOW STATS
newStatsPane.jpg


Really simple


Current WOW has made leveling up to max leveling a complete joke, questing mobs are never in danger of killing you no matter how poorly you played or how mediocre your equipment is. Classes have been pruned to toddler levels with a lot of complexity and of situational abilities have been removed. Dungeons are so easy that you can mindlessly pull everything and AOE it all down. Buffs have been either entirely removed or baked into passives

Honestly, you could write a small novel on the number of elements removed from wow

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/3g8nez/comprehensive_list_of_all_rpg_elements_removed/
 

Delterius

Arcane
Joined
Dec 12, 2012
Messages
15,956
Location
Entre a serra e o mar.
Have ever even seen someone who never played videogames trying to navigate a 3D environment? Their brains collapse in on themselves as though they are playing the Virtual Boy.

My 67-year old father who has never played a videogame doesn't seem to have that problem. Neither does my 63-year old mother.

Stop talking out of your ass because you are trying to pretend the most faithful games to reality are "hard" to comprehend, holy crap.

I'd rather drop this now instead of arguing with retards who can't face reality.
What are you even talking about?

Yes the example was an exaggeration. The point was that there is such a thing as not being able to navigate a three dimensional space in videogames. There is such a thing as not being capable of playing the fundamentals of an Action game. Of being intimidated by the more complex releases of that genre, just as you, Sigourn, appears to be overwhelmed by a screen filled with basic math operations. I know lots of people who never made the transition to modern 3D games and they get easily nauseated with a FP perspective.

What does being 'faithful to reality' even have to do with anything I said? Holy mother of God. Games can be more or less complex within their own genres without having anything to do with realism.

I get that you think that the 4 basic math operations are, in fact, examples of Advanced Math, but now you're just unhinged. If you're not trolling, you need help.

But you can’t explain the appeal of D:OS and Soul’s series just with the fact that more players are versed on action games. The co-op mechanics on D:OS allow people to spend time together while they are playing a game, which is also one of the main reasons why MMOs are so successful. The Souls series is moved by the competitive atmosphere which is a time-honored tradition since arcade games.
I don't want to dismiss anything you said, because I do agree. I do think multiplayer plays a factor in both D:OS and MMOs. Absolutely. Everything is way more fun with friends.

But what I meant to say is that the Souls series and D:OS are both comparably niche within their own genres and that the difference of sales is due to how the Souls series belongs to a much larger and more popular genre, Action. My proposal is that more people can instinctively understand the fundamentals of an Action game than an RPG or a Strategy game. Therefore, even a niche Action game can outsell a niche RPG.

My argument is that while we already understand the opposite, that games can be watered down to achieve a wider market, we tend to apply that only to the smaller genres (Strategy, RPG, Adventure). But Action games can and are also dumbed down. Compare shooters from the past and how all the randomness of the CoD Era makes for shitty play. Compare, say, the Souls series to Assassins Creed or the Batman games.
 

Atlantico

unida e indivisible
Patron
Undisputed Queen of Faggotry Vatnik In My Safe Space
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
14,491
Location
Midgard
Make the Codex Great Again!
Finally, let me just say, you don't seem interested in discussing the sales of hardcore RPG's vs shooters, which was my original point. We've discussed the growth of games market, the kickstarted indies, the "dumbing down" of various genres, but you didn't name even one hardcore RPG that has sold more than a successful shooter like e.g. GTA5. As much as I like arguing over internet, this discussion is too all over the place even for me.

I don't see the need for a qualifier, I couldn't even describe a hardcore RPG on a PC to you, I've never seen one. Nor do I know what a "shooter" is exactly. Is Deus Ex a shooter? Is it RPG? Is it hardcore?

I'd never categorize GTAV as a "shooter", it's as much an RPG as anything else. You do quests, play a character etc. Or it could be called LARPing sim I suppose. One of the worst aspects of all GTA games is the shooting part and it hardly defines the game.

So your original point, isn't up for discussion, because it's qualified in your own mind.
 
Self-Ejected

buru5

Very Grumpy Dragon
Patron
Joined
Apr 9, 2017
Messages
2,048
WOW is the best selling game of all time and is ironically the best example of a game that started as a dumbed down game (not always bad) and was further dumbed and streamlined to appeal to the masses

WOW at the time it came out in the later part of 2004 was an extremely casualized and streamnlined MMO . Compared to shit like EverQuest and Ultima Online, the most successful MMOs before it, it was extremely casual . If you died in EQ you had to run back to your corpse completely unarmed and unarmored to acquire all your gear back. Assuming you died going down fighting with all your equipment and items, imagine trying to survive the same area completely naked or using welfare replacement gear. If you died in Ultima Online, people were able to loot your body. Someone could kill you and literally steal all your equipment.

Mobs had so much aggro in EQ and weren't "leashed" so if you pull one you had to run out of the zone to reset aggro. In WOW, mob leash area is only about 50 ingame yards or so. Aggro was so important that there were entire classes designed solely around crowd control. This meant that you could literally do nothing alone including killing simple mobs. In WOW you could get to max level soloing on any class. It wasn't fast or easy but it was very doable on any of the 9 playable launch classes. There was no instancing in older MMOs. If you entered a dungeon or raid, you had to contend with the players currently residing inside that dungeon as well as the normal AI residents.



WOW was a massive success because it harnessed the community aspect of MMOs, leveraged a popular IP, and cut out much of the insane time sinks and frustration features of MMOs that the average player didn't want to deal with.

Now WOW is currently 6th expansions in and it has been steadily removing more and more rpg elements each expansion.

Compare an older stat screen to a newer one

OLD WOW STATS

hit.png


KNBGCPLOVNKX1299716155353.jpg


So many stats that you needed to scroll down to view them all. Need to use two images to display them all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODERN WOW STATS
newStatsPane.jpg


Really simple


Current WOW has made leveling up to max leveling a complete joke, questing mobs are never in danger of killing you no matter how poorly you played or how mediocre your equipment is. Classes have been pruned to toddler levels with a lot of complexity and of situational abilities have been removed. Dungeons are so easy that you can mindlessly pull everything and AOE it all down. Buffs have been either entirely removed or baked into passives

Honestly, you could write a small novel on the number of elements removed from wow

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/3g8nez/comprehensive_list_of_all_rpg_elements_removed/


Not entirely true, most of the stats are still there, Blizzard just didn't deem them important enough to be listed because they're all dictated by the few stats that have been in the game since vanilla. You can view these stats on your character screen using certain mods.
 

Darkman

Educated
Joined
Jul 6, 2016
Messages
49
WOW is the best selling game of all time and is ironically the best example of a game that started as a dumbed down game (not always bad) and was further dumbed and streamlined to appeal to the masses

WOW at the time it came out in the later part of 2004 was an extremely casualized and streamnlined MMO . Compared to shit like EverQuest and Ultima Online, the most successful MMOs before it, it was extremely casual . If you died in EQ you had to run back to your corpse completely unarmed and unarmored to acquire all your gear back. Assuming you died going down fighting with all your equipment and items, imagine trying to survive the same area completely naked or using welfare replacement gear. If you died in Ultima Online, people were able to loot your body. Someone could kill you and literally steal all your equipment.

Mobs had so much aggro in EQ and weren't "leashed" so if you pull one you had to run out of the zone to reset aggro. In WOW, mob leash area is only about 50 ingame yards or so. Aggro was so important that there were entire classes designed solely around crowd control. This meant that you could literally do nothing alone including killing simple mobs. In WOW you could get to max level soloing on any class. It wasn't fast or easy but it was very doable on any of the 9 playable launch classes. There was no instancing in older MMOs. If you entered a dungeon or raid, you had to contend with the players currently residing inside that dungeon as well as the normal AI residents.



WOW was a massive success because it harnessed the community aspect of MMOs, leveraged a popular IP, and cut out much of the insane time sinks and frustration features of MMOs that the average player didn't want to deal with.

Now WOW is currently 6th expansions in and it has been steadily removing more and more rpg elements each expansion.

Compare an older stat screen to a newer one

OLD WOW STATS

hit.png


KNBGCPLOVNKX1299716155353.jpg


So many stats that you needed to scroll down to view them all. Need to use two images to display them all.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MODERN WOW STATS
newStatsPane.jpg


Really simple


Current WOW has made leveling up to max leveling a complete joke, questing mobs are never in danger of killing you no matter how poorly you played or how mediocre your equipment is. Classes have been pruned to toddler levels with a lot of complexity and of situational abilities have been removed. Dungeons are so easy that you can mindlessly pull everything and AOE it all down. Buffs have been either entirely removed or baked into passives

Honestly, you could write a small novel on the number of elements removed from wow

https://www.reddit.com/r/wow/comments/3g8nez/comprehensive_list_of_all_rpg_elements_removed/




Not entirely true, most of the stats are still there, Blizzard just didn't deem them important enough to be listed because they're all dictated by the few stats that have been in the game since vanilla. You can view these stats on your character screen using certain mods.

Yes, but most of the more interesting stats were flat out removed.

Spell pen and armor pen are completely gone. Armor pen was actually as good as if not better than agil/str for melee classes vs high armor targets. Added interesting gearing options instead of "just stack main stat for everything!"

Spell resistance is completely gone. Spell resistance gear usually gave up secondaries on their stat budget. Once again a lot of interesting gearing options for different fights removed from table. Do you want to do less dps in exchange for greater survivability on harder fights with lots of elemental damage going out?

Hit and expertise gone. PVP far more of an RNG fest for melee with key abilities get missing and dodged/parried more often.

Resilience completely removed. PVP and PVE gear are effectively the same no more trading extra damage PVE gear (extra secondaries) for greater survival with more PVP damage reduction ( resilience)

Spirit stat and extra mana regain on gear gone. Some healers are way more mana inefficient than others and are thus completely constrained by their class mechanics on long mana intensive fights with no option to gear to help fix their weaknesses.
 
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
288
I'd never categorize GTAV as a "shooter"

So you do know what a shooter is or at least what it isn't.

I couldn't even describe a hardcore RPG on a PC to you, I've never seen one

Have you seen Age of Decadence? Pillars of Eternity? You know, the games that I've mentioned as examples for several posts now.

So your original point, isn't up for discussion, because it's qualified in your own mind.

Why are we discussing it for several days then? :)
 

As an Amazon Associate, rpgcodex.net earns from qualifying purchases.
Back
Top Bottom