Originally posted by OldTimeGamer

The video role-playing game industy developed the way it did because of the way computers and Computer Science developed during the history of classic role-playing games.

Early video role-playing games could not compete with the kind of games a kid with a high reading-age could produce wifh his friends with some books, dice, figures and some imagination from as early as the 70s. So instead the implementation was partial and people have become attached to, and argue over, these bowdlerised games.

The common-place MMO frozen, fixed plots still have some element of genuine role-playing they are just, well, inflexible.

We understand why they did it, they were trying to attract the PnP RPG crowd to play their games so they used some of the terminology as an incentive.  That doesn't change the fact that there really is very little in common between a PnP RPG and a computer RPG.  It doesn't matter what you call it, it matters what it is.  Unfortunately today, there are lots of people who have never had any kind of RPG experience except behind a keyboard and just have no clue how little their pixelated warriors allow them to actually roleplay because they have no actual frame of reference.

Originally posted by Axehilt

Originally posted by Cephus404

It just means that these are not RPGs.  They ought to come up with a different term.

What part of '25+ years of videogame RPGs being this way' was unclear?

You're a bit late to the party to try to fight that fight.  

I'm not trying to get them to change anything, but words still have meanings and using the wrong terminology, no matter how widespread it is, is still wrong, especially when people's entire arguments in these threads is "I talk funny in a game, therefore I'm roleplaying".  It's about as silly as saying "I make VROOM  VROOM noises when I walk, therefore I'm driving a car!"

Originally posted by nariusseldon

With the full co-operation and licensing from PnP RPG like AD&D.

I am sure there was this big debate about what RPG should be in those days, not unlike today's debate about MMO.

BUT ... the term sticks. Would anyone consider Baldur Gates NOT a RPG? Ultima not a RPG? Even the hack-n-slash Action RPGs are pretty much standard terminology. This is a perfect example of things changes, progress made, and language uses evolve.

It doesn't matter who consented, any more than a bicycle manufacturer getting consent from airline manufacturers to call them airplanes.  Getting permission to misuse a word doesn't stop the word from being misused.

Would I think any of those games are RPGs?  No, because the term "RPG" in video games does stick, but the expanded version "role playing game" does not.  They're just not "role playing games", they are "RPGs".  The problem comes when people try to conflate the two and act like what you can do in a "role playing game", you can do in an "RPG", or worse, what you can do in an "RPG" is the same experience you get in a "role playing game".

They are two very different animals.

These past few arguments being made have made me wonder how many people have actually role played in an RPG.

Here's the thing: Pen and Paper games aren't all that special.  You know why?  They're just a collection of rules to make it easier for someone to inspire a character.  It baffles me that people honestly believe there is a solid disconnect between P&P role-playing and video game role-playing.

YES, video games obviously have more constrictions (thereby some may argue do not grant you the best experience), but you can still do many fantastic things in these virtual worlds with a sense of uniqueness.  I'm talking about VRPGs like Dragon Age, Neverwinter Nights, Baldur's Gate, Elder Scrolls, etc.

Role-playing is not something ANYONE, regardless of the medium presented, can throw upon you.  The player has to make the concious choice to role-play, and in that the options are nearly limitless.

Everyone who is complaining about progression as an indicator of RPGs, let me reassure you that ideal has NEVER been a primary philosophy of role playing.

And yes, I focus on role playing because these are role playing games.

In my experience, MMO's have given players many more opportunities to engage this experience, almost as well as P&P.  Legitimate RPing exists in a community, hence why P&P became a sort of cult classic early on.  Games like Elder Scrolls suppliment this need by making the community driven by the computer, which is fine on the surface level but ultimately you can see through the thin veil.

MMO's give you an organic community like the old days.  If you're strictly talking about game mechanics like level progression, crafting or plot, you have lost the real foundation of role-playing UNLESS you are arguing for those mechanics in such a way that it binds you (and your character) to the community you wish to RP with.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by OldTimeGamer

The video role-playing game industy developed the way it did because of the way computers and Computer Science developed during the history of classic role-playing games.

Early video role-playing games could not compete with the kind of games a kid with a high reading-age could produce wifh his friends with some books, dice, figures and some imagination from as early as the 70s. So instead the implementation was partial and people have become attached to, and argue over, these bowdlerised games.

The common-place MMO frozen, fixed plots still have some element of genuine role-playing they are just, well, inflexible.

We understand why they did it, they were trying to attract the PnP RPG crowd to play their games so they used some of the terminology as an incentive.  That doesn't change the fact that there really is very little in common between a PnP RPG and a computer RPG.  It doesn't matter what you call it, it matters what it is.  Unfortunately today, there are lots of people who have never had any kind of RPG experience except behind a keyboard and just have no clue how little their pixelated warriors allow them to actually roleplay because they have no actual frame of reference.

The classic role-playing scene has actually spawned a lot of people who work in the computing industry. Even an eleven-year-old who started playing classic role-playing games in 1977 would be able to take an degree in Computer Science during the 80s and subsequently work in the computing industry. Learning to run a game with dice, rules and mental arithmatic is actually a reasonable way to prepare to learn how to program - there is plenty of synergy.

So the people who were playing classic role-playing gamers were amongst the people writing the computer role-playing game, which intially were very limited in what they could do - in part due to how  the limted ways a computer could interact with a human during those early times.

Nowdays single-player computer role-playing games, such as the latest  version of the Elder Scrolls, are far more flexible and probably come closer to what those original video game programmers would have wanted to program.

Typical MMOs are branched off older single-player computer role-playing games, which is why they are so primitive in some regards. However the range of MMOs is actually very varied and if a MMO player knows the games that are available whithin even this seemingly narrow range, he or she can experience role-playing closer to the classic experience.

If someone starts to think crafting, trading and other non-combat activities are important to an MMO then they are definitely moving in the right direction as they are thinking about game-play beyond mere hack and slay combat.

A very considered response to this thread.

I would agree that building communities in an MMO is very important - it makes the game more sociable, encourages people to stay playing a game and improves the chance that the random character you might meet is worth interacting with.

Originally posted by OldTimeGamer

The classic role-playing scene has actually spawned a lot of people who work in the computing industry. Even an eleven-year-old who started playing classic role-playing games in 1977 would be able to take an degree in Computer Science during the 80s and subsequently work in the computing industry. Learning to run a game with dice, rules and mental arithmatic is actually a reasonable way to prepare to learn how to program - there is plenty of synergy.

So the people who were playing classic role-playing gamers were amongst the people writing the computer role-playing game, which intially were very limited in what they could do - in part due to how  the limted ways a computer could interact with a human during those early times.

Nowdays single-player computer role-playing games, such as the latest  version of the Elder Scrolls, are far more flexible and probably come closer to what those original video game programmers would have wanted to program.

Typical MMOs are branched off older single-player computer role-playing games, which is why they are so primitive in some regards. However the range of MMOs is actually very varied and if a MMO player knows the games that are available whithin even this seemingly narrow range, he or she can experience role-playing closer to the classic experience.

If someone starts to think crafting, trading and other non-combat activities are important to an MMO then they are definitely moving in the right direction as they are thinking about game-play beyond mere hack and slay combat.

Just because people who used to PnP game made computer games doesn't mean they were successful in translating that experience to the computer world.  It may be just me but I don't think it is possible to have the same essential experience you get sitting around a table with real people, with a human GM, as you can get in an online world with computer AI.  The fundamental problem is that the computer is inherently limited in what it can do.  It cannot react to the unexpected, therefore it simply does not allow the unexpected.  You ride it's rails whether you want to or not.

However, in a good PnP RPG, you're not stuck to anything but basic physics in the game.  I've played many characters that never once engaged in any form of combat, yet had long, interesting existences.  Whether or not the majority of PnP RPG players ever rise above the simplistic "duh, I swing my Sword of Kewlness +2 at the dragon", the ability to go farther is there, it is possible to do so much more.

You can't do that in an MMO no matter how hard you try.

The difference between the two is fundamental.  An MMO is a game.  The purpose of the game, like it or not, is to kill things, or aid in killing things.  You kill, you get loot, you get XP, you level up, you get better gear, etc.  In that, it's really not any different than your typical single-player FPS.  In Halo, you kill things, you get new weapons and ammo, you get better at things, etc.  In Dead Space, you get new weapons and ammo, you develop skills, you craft better weapons, etc.  If you take out the multi-player aspects, most MMOs are pretty much like Skyrim, although Skyrim is actually a lot freer than most MMOs.  I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'm saying it's a true thing.

However, with a true PnP RPG, you start off with a blank slate.  There is no inherent purpose in an RPG.  The only point of playing is to have a good time.  You're not pushed down a pre-programmed path with no deviation like you are in a computer game.  The players make a definite difference in the game world, it changes depending on their actions.  That's simply not true in an MMO.  No matter what you do, you are not going to make any kind of lasting effect on the game world because everything that happens, you're not the only one who does it, everyone else does too!  With very few exceptions in an MMO, everyone does the same thing.  MMOs are inherently limited because the world of an MMO is hard-coded instead of fluid like a PnP RPG.

That's not saying MMOs are bad, just that the two are inherently different experiences, caused by their fundamentally different natures. 

Originally posted by Cephus404

 

We understand why they did it, they were trying to attract the PnP RPG crowd to play their games so they used some of the terminology as an incentive.  That doesn't change the fact that there really is very little in common between a PnP RPG and a computer RPG.  It doesn't matter what you call it, it matters what it is.  Unfortunately today, there are lots of people who have never had any kind of RPG experience except behind a keyboard and just have no clue how little their pixelated warriors allow them to actually roleplay because they have no actual frame of reference.

And why should they? I played a little bit of PnP RPG (how about that? PnP RPG for the old table top games, RPG for CRPG) when i was in grad school ... and it was not a better experience than CRPG.

I was playing AD&D, and in particular, the accounting is just horribly cumbersome without a computer. Combat slows to a crawl with die rolls and stuff. Sure it is a bit more free form, but you are still mostly casting magic missiles and fireballs at monsters.

Personally, i would be happy to forgo that "roleplaying" just to get the combat game more playable. There is a reason why CRPG is 10000x more successful/popular than PnP RPGs.

Originally posted by OldTimeGamer

 

I would agree that building communities in an MMO is very important - it makes the game more sociable, encourages people to stay playing a game and improves the chance that the random character you might meet is worth interacting with.

I think people are holding onto old ideas of what community means here.

1) There is no reason why you have to focus on a "server" community in a MMO. With all the social tools, chat, x-realm grouping, friend list on STEAM/battle net and what no, no one needs to restrcit themselves too play with others on the same server. That is an old concept that begs to be broken. If i met a new friend, who also play the MMO i play, why can't we play together just because we are on different servers?

2) There is no point in encourages people to stay playing a game. You should encourage people to stay friend and play together DISREGARDING what game it is. Many of my guildies in WOW moves to D3. Why should i force/beg them to stay in WOW? I should just play whatever game i like, and if they like it, they can join me in the new game.

3) Random character is just random .. you can always quit if you don't like the guy. I met and made friends with people in WOW, D3, and what-not .. there is really no need to encourage anything. The "quit" or "befriend" button is just a click away.

Closely translating the flexibility and potential of classic role-playing games was literally impossible in the early days of computing but this does not mean that we will never get there.

What you are expessing with regards to computing is a scepticism about gaming artificial intelligence and responsiveness. I've seem computing improve from mainframes, which used magnetic tapes, to systems that can play Jeopardy - I'm far more likely to never say never when it comes to the flexibility of computer games.

In a classic role-playing game you are not even necessarily bound by the rules of physics (ever heard of Toon the Cartoon Role-Playing Game) or dogged by complex accounting (Ghost Busters role-playing game). Murphy's Law issues often point out where conventional classic role-playing games inadvertently break the laws of physics too.

Remember not all MMOs are like World of Warcraft and even if they are people can still use such a MMO as a chat session with 3D avatars if they find this more interesting than the game-play offered.

The reason I brought up classic role-playing games on this thread is because if someone is trying to understand why other MMO players choose not to craft and trade then they need to understand the overall experience of the game.

If an MMO is built around a primitive twitch combat system then you might find people are unwilling to do other things unless they are just as cool and just as fast. Such gaming might attract people with short attention spans who just want to fight.

The non-combat, social activities, which fans of standard MMOs describe as role-playing, probably would benefit from being part of a less frantically paced game with increased human interaction and a responsive, flexible game world.

Originally posted by OldTimeGamer

Closely translating the flexibility and potential of classic role-playing games was literally impossible in the early days of computing but this does not mean that we will never get there.

What you are expessing with regards to computing is a scepticism about gaming artificial intelligence and responsiveness. I've seem computing improve from mainframes, which used magnetic tapes, to systems that can play Jeopardy - I'm far more likely to never say never when it comes to the flexibility of computer games.

In a classic role-playing game you are not even necessarily bound by the rules of physics (ever heard of Toon the Cartoon Role-Playing Game) or dogged by complex accounting (Ghost Busters role-playing game). Murphy's Law issues often point out where conventional classic role-playing games inadvertently break the laws of physics too.

Remember not all MMOs are like World of Warcraft and even if they are people can still use such a MMO as a chat session with 3D avatars if they find this more interesting than the game-play offered.

The reason I brought up classic role-playing games on this thread is because if someone is trying to understand why other MMO players choose not to craft and trade then they need to understand the overall experience of the game.

If an MMO is built around a primitive twitch combat system then you might find people are unwilling to do other things unless they are just as cool and just as fast. Such gaming might attract people with short attention spans who just want to fight.

The non-combat, social activities, which fans of standard MMOs describe as role-playing, probably would benefit from being part of a less frantically paced game with increased human interaction and a responsive, flexible game world.

Twitch combat is not primitive. Nor is it about short attention span or ADD (although you didn't use it). Its about the fact that no matter how elaborate the non-combat activities are, in the case of economy, it never reaches the depth of gameplay games such as Transport Tycoon or some other business-sim has. They are all too often just not good enough. Everything relating to economy (gathering, crafting, trade) is repetitive and trivial. If everything can be done by a bot, its not good enough. Games such as Vanguard had to go their way to prevent using bots and macros. This is a sure sign of failed design imo.

Originally posted by Quirhid
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.

This is the key to good MMOs. Good combat mechanics, and with synery to other classes.

Originally posted by Quirhid

Twitch combat is not primitive. Nor is it about short attention span or ADD (although you didn't use it). Its about the fact that no matter how elaborate the non-combat activities are, in the case of economy, it never reaches the depth of gameplay games such as Transport Tycoon or some other business-sim has. They are all too often just not good enough. Everything relating to economy (gathering, crafting, trade) is repetitive and trivial. If everything can be done by a bot, its not good enough. Games such as Vanguard had to go their way to prevent using bots and macros. This is a sure sign of failed design imo.

Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.

However you do acknowledge the common mis-match between the combat and the non-combat activities.

Also you are explicitly mentioning game design. If players feel the need to complain about people not participating in the non-combat side of an MMO then this is probably due to poor games design.

Co-op play has been around at least as long as the Gauntlet arcade game although it is admittedly a good feature of MMOs.

For me the holy grail of MMO is integrated, consistent combat, non-combat and in-game relationship building set within an interesting, well-written setting with flexible, responsive content.

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Quirhid
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.

This is the key to good MMOs. Good combat mechanics, and with synery to other classes.

The key to a good MMORPG is a game that is a canvas to create an interesting and engaging community of players...

Originally posted by OberanMiM

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Quirhid
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.

This is the key to good MMOs. Good combat mechanics, and with synery to other classes.

 

The key to a good MMORPG is a game that is a canvas to create an interesting and engaging community of players...

^Pretty much nailed it on the head

Originally posted by nariusseldon

And why should they? I played a little bit of PnP RPG (how about that? PnP RPG for the old table top games, RPG for CRPG) when i was in grad school ... and it was not a better experience than CRPG.

Then I suspect you didn't play a very well-done game.

I was playing AD&D, and in particular, the accounting is just horribly cumbersome without a computer. Combat slows to a crawl with die rolls and stuff. Sure it is a bit more free form, but you are still mostly casting magic missiles and fireballs at monsters.

PnP RPGs aren't supposed to be fast action games and you can certainly use a computer to automate a lot of the more cumbersome aspects.  Then again, if all you're doing is constant combat, I suspect you're not taking advantage of the full range of choices that can be made in a PnP RPG.  I guess that's not too surprising as most people who play combat-heavy games naturally gravitate toward combat.  They play the games to kill things, not to roleplay.

Personally, i would be happy to forgo that "roleplaying" just to get the combat game more playable. There is a reason why CRPG is 10000x more successful/popular than PnP RPGs.

Sure, you don't have to have a group of friends and time to get together.  You can sit down at your computer in your underwear and play with a lot of people.  It's popular because it's simple.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Just because people who used to PnP game made computer games doesn't mean they were successful in translating that experience to the computer world.  It may be just me but I don't think it is possible to have the same essential experience you get sitting around a table with real people, with a human GM, as you can get in an online world with computer AI.  The fundamental problem is that the computer is inherently limited in what it can do.  It cannot react to the unexpected, therefore it simply does not allow the unexpected.  You ride it's rails whether you want to or not.

Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper.  The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells.  There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all.  All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.

Originally posted by Valecruiz

Originally posted by OberanMiM

Originally posted by nariusseldon

Originally posted by Quirhid
Atleast in combat, MMOs have atleast one edge: Co-op play. Not many SRPGs have it.

This is the key to good MMOs. Good combat mechanics, and with synery to other classes.

 

The key to a good MMORPG is a game that is a canvas to create an interesting and engaging community of players...

^Pretty much nailed it on the head

Yep

Originally posted by maplestone

Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper.  The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells.  There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all.  All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.

 

Computers can't handle the unexpected and don't even allow you to do anything unexpected.  If you're slogging through a dungeon, you can go a few pre-determined ways.  You can't decide to pull out a pickaxe or use magic to blow your way through a wall and go a different way, you can only do what the programmers have decided you can do.  Things you can do in a PnP RPG just can't be done at all in an MMO.

Originally posted by Cephus404

Originally posted by maplestone

Computers are great at simulations and book-keeping - the animations that computers can do today are amazing, the inventory management and attribute management are far superior to handling it all on paper.  The problem is that for all the animations and stats, the worlds themselves are hollow, lifeless shells.  There's no ecology, there are no NPC moods/personalities, there's very little emergent behavior at all.  All the world details I used to dream about farming out to computers as a PnP GM are still being hand-coded room-by-room, quest-by-quest in MMOs.

 

Computers can't handle the unexpected and don't even allow you to do anything unexpected.  If you're slogging through a dungeon, you can go a few pre-determined ways.  You can't decide to pull out a pickaxe or use magic to blow your way through a wall and go a different way, you can only do what the programmers have decided you can do.  Things you can do in a PnP RPG just can't be done at all in an MMO.

They can be in MMOs it just like real PnP RPGs you can do what ever you want so long as it's in the rules and the GM lets you do it.  The same is true with MMOs, you can do what ever you want so long it's in the rules and the devs allow you to do it.  When they made SWG did the devs expect players to make walls out of houses?  I doubt it but the system let you do it.  The problem is that as MMOs "advance" Devs/studios are getting more and more controling, now they only want you to do what they made for you, no thinking outside of the box allowed.