Maybe young people don't understand RPG

[AppleQueso]

Did I just walk into some parallel reality where Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls weren't incredibly popular?

Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls games are only barely RPGs. They're more action games than role playing. In fact, these are great examples of the phenomenon. RPGs are getting less popular, so anything that resembles an RPG has the role playing part watered down and replaced with action.

I fail to see how the jrpgs that dominated consoles in the previous generation have any more actual 'role playing' than the wrpgs that dominate consoles now.

[isiolia]

Did I just walk into some parallel reality where Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls weren't incredibly popular?

Mass Effect and Elder Scrolls games are only barely RPGs. They're more action games than role playing. In fact, these are great examples of the phenomenon. RPGs are getting less popular, so anything that resembles an RPG has the role playing part watered down and replaced with action.

It depends on how you view "role playing" IMO. You have more player choice in those games, even if the combat mechanics are more action oriented. A strategy game with a thousand lines of a linear story to read between battles is, in many ways, less of an RPG.

To me, it's something to look at not from the standpoint of the exact mechanics or presentation, but what the actual goal of the game is, or what particular gaming itch it scratches. "RPG" is simply more of an idea than a strictly defined genre.

I think if you look across the full spectrum, RPGs are more popular now than ever. Maybe there are fewer people lined up for console releases due to the grind/stat-happy players being majorly catered to by the current MMO market (and playing an MMO often leaves little time for other games).

[Hatta]

I think if you look across the full spectrum, RPGs are more popular now than ever. Maybe there are fewer people lined up for console releases due to the grind/stat-happy players being majorly catered to by the current MMO market (and playing an MMO often leaves little time for other games).

Sure, if you redefine a term with a 20 year old history you can make it mean whatever you want it to. Whatever you want to call it, there is very little out there that a fan of Ultima, Pool of Radiance, Wasteland, The Bard's Tale, Baldur's Gate, etc. would recognize. If you took Mass Effect or Oblivion back to 1995, gamers would identify them as "doom clones". This whole RPG/FPS hybrid thing started with Ultima Underworld, which was a branch off of the RPG Ultimas. In other words, the designers knew that they were doing something different from RPGs. It seems silly to argue that they're the same thing today.

Which isn't to say these are bad games. Fallout 3 is a fine game. It's just not the same kind of game that Fallout was. They just don't make those anymore.

[isiolia]

I think if you look across the full spectrum, RPGs are more popular now than ever. Maybe there are fewer people lined up for console releases due to the grind/stat-happy players being majorly catered to by the current MMO market (and playing an MMO often leaves little time for other games).

Sure, if you redefine a term with a 20 year old history you can make it mean whatever you want it to. Whatever you want to call it, there is very little out there that a fan of Ultima, Pool of Radiance, Wasteland, The Bard's Tale, Baldur's Gate, etc. would recognize. If you took Mass Effect or Oblivion back to 1995, gamers would identify them as "doom clones". This whole RPG/FPS hybrid thing started with Ultima Underworld, which was a branch off of the RPG Ultimas. In other words, the designers knew that they were doing something different from RPGs. It seems silly to argue that they're the same thing today.

Which isn't to say these are bad games. Fallout 3 is a fine game. It's just not the same kind of game that Fallout was. They just don't make those anymore.

If you brought Oblivion back to '95, they'd (rightly) see it as a sequel to Arena, which came out the year before, and wasn't labeled a DOOM clone.

The term has a wide definition, for video games and otherwise. I see it more like some games are trying to be pen and paper RPGs, others are more like LARP'ing. They're still part of one larger idea of playing a character.

[Hatta]

Sure, if you go with a watered down definition of RPG that includes everything, then yes RPGs are flourishing. But the only reason to do that is to ignore the very real plight that complex, turn based RPGs find themselves in.

[Jmustang1968]

Sure, if you go with a watered down definition of RPG that includes everything, then yes RPGs are flourishing. But the only reason to do that is to ignore the very real plight that complex, turn based RPGs find themselves in.

Ah there is the difference. There is a lack of old school turn based rpgs that is true, for good or worse. These gams are still easily rpgs though, they have just evolved to take more advantage of techbology and the hardware.

[Korpi]

Hatta, I do agree, but at least there's something to play. If you're into RPG's, can you not be excited about Skyrim? I'm not expert though. I found Morrowind to be definition of RPG, even though it's not turn-based.

It's turn-based strategy that is lacking. Civ 5 was supposed to be good, but it surely wasn't, and Elemental wasn't the successor of MoM and other fantasy strategy games that it was supposed to be. Don't think Total War series is doing too well lately. Only Matrix Games, Paradox Interactive and 1C seem to publish strategy games, big lack of turn-based games even there minus the hardcore wargames. Distant Worlds and Europa Universalis III are very good real-time strategy games though.

Too many MMORTS's, tower defense games, twitchy crap like SC2, Facebook games and strategy heavy JRPG's. Though there aren't too many of the latter at all, really.

[Jmustang1968]

Hatta, I do agree, but at least there's something to play. If you're into RPG's, can you not be excited about Skyrim? I'm not expert though. I found Morrowind to be definition of RPG, even though it's not turn-based.

It's turn-based strategy that is lacking. Civ 5 was supposed to be good, but it surely wasn't, and Elemental wasn't the successor of MoM and other fantasy strategy games that it was supposed to be. Don't think Total War series is doing too well lately. Only Matrix Games, Paradox Interactive and 1C seem to publish strategy games, big lack of turn-based games even there minus the hardcore wargames. Distant World and Europa Universalis III are very good real-time strategy games though.

Too much MMORTS, tower defense, twitchy crap like SC2, Facebook games and strategy heavy JRPG's. Although I don't think there's too many of the latter at all.

I really like civ 5. It has a couple issues but overall it is a lot of fun. Heroes 6 comes out soon too. Elemental has become a bit better with patches. Had a lot of promise, but was somewhat broken at launch.

There are a bunch of srpgs on the handhelds...

[Erik_Twice]

Sure, if you redefine a term with a 20 year old history you can make it mean whatever you want it to.

Role-playing games.

Now without role playing and barely with any game!

I also find the supposed 20 year history of the term quite...incorrect.


I do not find dungeon crawlers to be role-playing games. Wizardry or Eye of the Beholder allow no more roleplaying than Flight Simulator. They are strategic games. Hell, in those games you aren't even a single person, you are an entire party. I find no game mechanics in those games indicating that you act out in their role anymore than you act Doomguy.

I do not consider Fire Emblem to have any RPG elements either. They are also strategic games, with a levelling system and a quite detailed background for your troops but no roleplay. You are not any character and you do not act like them as there's no possibility of doing so.


Fallout 3 has roleplay. You create your character and act it. The game allows you to express yourself through your character by giving you dialogue choices and by giving you several options to develop the world around you. There's also combat, which is centric but not the focus at all.

You can change Fallout 3 for D&D and the above paragraph would stand the same. However, D&D is a better game. It gives you far more freedom, more choices, a more interesting combat system and other stuff that can be boiled down to chances to act and roleplay. Unfortunatedly, it also has steeper logistic requirements for the player, since it requires other suitable people to play with, a sizable amount of rulebook memorization and so on.

It's the same concept. Note D&D can have a complete lack of roleplaying if you play The Tomb of Horrors and not to have any combat if you build the game that way.

[ZenErik]

There are plenty of RPGs out there. It's just that Japan used to dominate the genre, but now big budget western RPGs are top dog. I haven't looked at numbers, but I would guess that overall RPG sales in the West have been on the rise.

We just don't get the variety of having 30+ JRPGs to choose from on a single home console platform anymore.