|
Alphachris said: Well, I must admit that I am not experienced with Dungeons&Dragons or Pen&Paper games. In Europe, or specially here in Austria, they never really took off. The most similar experience I had might be a board game called "Hero Quest". |
Oh, I disagree. Here in Europe (I'm a german myself) Pen&Paper is as popular as in the US (that means it is even more niche than video-games). I agree, that D&D - while worldwide the most popular RPG and also the first one - is not so well known here. I personally learned late about D&D. I named it, because international it is more well-known. But in germany we appreciate other RPGs. A german company made a rip-off off D&D names 'Das Schwarze Auge' (DSA). It is probably the best-known RPG here in germany. Also Shadowrun was very popular here. Even some of the novels are written by german authors. I think after FASA got into trouble, for some time a german company owned the Shadowrun-license. Earthdawn is another game, that garnered some popularity over here.
There is a big RPG-forum in german: http://tanelorn.net/
So, at least in germany Pen&Paper is appreciated.
|
Alphachris said: My first contact with something called "Roleplay" was at school. We read some Drama in german class from Schiller and Goethe, where everyone had to read the lines of a character. After we finished reading (we were not Acting, just reading)) we interpreted the play and talked about its meaning, the intentions of the author, the motivations of each character, etc. So in that play I read the Role of Iphigenie (for example) and I was not supposed to read what I personally would like the story to be. I had to read the given text. So no freedom in roleplays. I had to experience the story through the eyes of a character, but in the greater context, roleplays meant analyzing and interpreting to me. |
That you describe is more 'acting'. With acting you play a character, but you have no or only very few freedoms to define that character. The script is already written. With the different forms of roleplaying you have control over your character. The script will be written as you play. Look here:
https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollenspiel_(Spiel)
As you see, roleplaying even existed before Pen&Paper, as childs play (Cowboy und Indianer oder Polizist und Verbrecher).
|
Alphachris said: So JRPGs are more like a theatre play to me... not a computerized version of a game that I almost heard nothing about. |
I agree, JRPGs (the computer-JRPGs at least) are like theatre play, novels or movies.
|
Alphachris said: Maybe that is simply a cultural thing. But there is a reason why Continental Europe and Japan are less enthusiastic about WRPGs. One reason may be that D&D or P&P are less common here. According to Wikipedia, since 2008 there hasn't been a D&D Publisher for Germany. |
I disagree that WRPGs less popular in Europe. (Japan is something different)
As Europe is not that much into console-gaming as Japan and the US, we play more on PC. And for a long time, WRPG are more on PC than on console. The golden age had Ultima and Wizardry, it was all out on PC. Look at the MUDs, early online-RPGs. Again I make my case about Germany, but we have quite a number on german MUDs: http://mud.de/dml.php
Some of the most used MUD-engines (game-engines for MUDs) are written by europeans: Lars Pensjö (Sweden, LP-MUD) and Lars Düning (LD-MUD - a LP-MUD derivate) and Jörn "Amylaar" Rennecke (another P-MUD-derivate, often called Amylaar-driver).
As you can see, the oldschool WRPG is very popular in Europe. And as I mentioned before Pen&Paper too.
Japan is different. I agree WRPG are not popular here. But Pen&Paper is popular. They have there own sort of Pen&Paper in Japan, called... JRPG (duh):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JRPG
|
Alphachris said: I share your opinion about JRPGs and I also do not count Pokemon etc. as a JRPG (As I stated, a JRPG is more defined by its story approach than by its battle system). A JRPG just follow a different story approach. You play a story and are supposed to think about what is going on. Not only the "Lore of the World", the background story. You are confronted with the main story and the intentions and motivations of the characters. Some JRPGs are so complex that you have troubles to fully understand what is going on. After I finished FF7 for the first time I realy liked the game, but I had troubles understanding some scenes. After my second playthrough I found the secret scene in the Shinra Village and finally I could really understand what was going on. It was alway there... I just couldn't figure it out 100% why cloud was acting strangely during the game. "Every player controls I character"... That is the point. In a JRPG, in my opinion, you do not "control" 1 Character. You control a party. And you should also think about your characters. Every character is a placeholder for a different point of view. In a WRPG, you play as character A (Warrior), than start again as character B ( Mage) and restart as a new character. You place your wanted personality in this character and want to have freedom of choice. In my opinion, this is a "self-centric approach". Your character is simply "You in the game". A JRPG follows a more holistic approach. You are not supposed to "be Cloud in FF7". You can like or dislike the character, but he is not controlled by you... he follows his own intentions. The latestest Final Fantasies even got rid of the "main character and his support character" approach. Now you have a party of more or less equal importance. Cloud or Squall were the most important characters of the Party and their struggle with their opponents Sephiroth and Cifer were in the main focus. But since FF IX Square started to follow a different approach. Zidane and the Princess Garnet were very important, but Vivis story ark was of equal importance. Final Fantasy XII or Final Fantasy XIII do not really have a "main character" which seems to put off many people on the forums. Thats because you are supposed to care about every character. Lightning may be the most advertised character in FF XIII, but the key to understanding the story lies in Vanille. |
Yes, exactly. That may create some great games (I talked about Pandoras Tower earlier), but I have difficulty to call it an RPG, like I wouldn't call Zelda or Heavy Rain an RPG.
|
Alphachris said: Ok, enough of that. So, my main problem with Oblivion was, that it was simplay lacking this holistic approach. Ok, there are no other characters. Fine. But the character is also a silent character, so there is no interpretation of the character motivations. I even do not know why i was in jail in the beginning. OK, that leaves the main quest. But the main quest is shallow. I was even somehow missing a connection between the main quest and the world. The world is in grave danger, i am supposed to save the world (and don not even know "Why me") and when i visit a City now one seems to care about the Danger. That was the breach that killed the game for me because the World doesn't seem plausible for me. I am to save the World, but I invest my time in becoming the leader of every guild (very important. That is like the world is going to end tomorrow and i spent my last time at the Casino to win a fortune which I would not be able to enjoy very long.). All in all, the WRPG simply feels lacking to me. When I hear RPG of the year, I want to enjoy a good and emotional story. And it is that simple for me. Non-linearity kills the joy for me because it seems almost impossible to write a thrilling story when your progress in the game is not defined. The thrill of a scene has to be built slowly. If you cannot ensure, that scenes A, B and C are seen before scene D, how can you make scene plausible and strong? |
Yes, surely, you can tell much more impressive stories, if you take away control over the character from the player. I didn't played Oblivion though, cannot say how good it was made. Baldur's Gate is one of the great WRPGs.
But on the other hand, JRPGs feel linear. What do I care if I save the world, if the character does it anyway. I can't do anything in this. He will not only save the world, he will do it always in the same way. The only way out or doing it a little different is loosing the game.
I think that are the concessions you have to make as a game-designer. More freedom for the player to explore, goof around and do thing differently - but less polished story. A more impressive story and better defined characters and connections between them - but less freedom for the player to define form the events.
|
Alphachris said: I hope I could make myself understood. English is a foreign language to me and this is not a simple topic. |
Englisch ist auch für mich eine Fremdsprache. 
