Kotaku 
001.jpg)
Enter your username and password.
Denver, 2:45 PM
Wed Dec 2
63 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip us:
Editor-In-Chief:
Brian Crecente
| AIM | Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Stephen Totilo
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Editor:
Michael McWhertor
| AIM | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor, Japan:
Brian Ashcraft
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, East Coast:
Michael Fahey
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Oceania:
Luke Plunkett
| AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editor, Weekends:
Owen Good
| AIM | Twitter
Correspondent, San Francisco:
AJ Glasser
| AIM | Twitter
Columnist:
Leigh Alexander
Columnist:
Tim Rogers
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
09/16/09
09/15/09
I'd like to see RPG designers think about making their (important) NPCs less 'dynamic setting furniture' and more like artificially intelligent entities with their own motives in the context of the story. A mundane example: asking an NPC the same question ten times in a row doesn't elicit the same response ten times in a row. Instead, the NPC begins to ask you if there is, just perhaps, something wrong with you (the player), or maybe you don't understand, or maybe you're just *trying* to piss me off?
09/15/09
A game requires personal time investment, character or gameplay growth with a person and the 'need to keep playing'. The whole save the world, become the hero bit works quite well when it's role-playing because it's escapist and fits the grand scheme of things. When it becomes too mundane then it needs to approach the human side of 'what if I had a second chance to do x in life or a chance to do it differently'.
It's probably why say rpgs set in high schools have an audience and probably why they try to make every rpg hero younger.
More than having an rpg that's about having a good day - the question is would you continue to play a game that's just about having a good day or a bad day? The scope of doing such a game exists but it will be a very short game because unless as someone mentioned it's like 12:01 or groundhog day where you repeat till you get it right, it's not impossible odds to overcome as you'd realize it's just a game moreso when it's closer to reality than when it's further away from it.
09/16/09
Personally I love contemporary or sci-fi settings, and that's why I love the smt series -- even more persona.
I also love the suikoden series. You never see the whole world and the story is almost always a small scale war (I mean, comparing to other rpgs). Yet you can see your character growing in such a spectacular way, together with a castle and your own army.
09/16/09
09/17/09
09/17/09
09/15/09
You don't need to save the world. You just need a goal which is very important to the character, and obstacles that are so much greater than yourself.
and you might just not be able to achieve your objective, what matters is that the character went through incredible trials and prevailed for the sake of his/her objective.
the new Prince of Persia tried the subversion of saving the world, but a lot of people just didn't get it
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
Yeah! Now you can have a boringass cubicle job with FUCKING AWESOME DRAGON SCALE ARMOR (+12 defense). Now when you hit on Debra, she's gonna know what's up (+20 luck with the ladies).
09/15/09
In fact there are plenty of RPG's already that fit in between. Such as Contact DS, which is about racing against a rival group of adventurers to collect treasure. Or there's Disgaea, about becoming the strongest overlord in the netherworld. Or The World Ends with You, which... well, I don't want to spoil the story, but it's not about saving the world.
Granted, the majority fall at the "destroy the evil emperor and restore the world to order", but there are some good exceptions.
09/15/09
So, at least that makes for something different.
09/15/09
Only this time... it's different.
Project Needlemouse
2010
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
09/15/09
There's conflict in endeavors other than saving the world, you know. This can extend to RPGs...
Actually, some of the comments below remind me of ANOTHER genre that has some overlap with JRPGs, and that's the nurturing sim. Actually calling it a sim (same with calling a dating "sim" such) is a misnomer, because it hardly simulates nurturing in real life, but you can have a plot involving raising a kid and keeping them safe, and not have to save the world.
09/15/09
PS. Totilo, thanks for bringing this up to him at least. As an RPG fan, I'm sick of saving the world, and think that falling back on it as a plot device reveals a lack of talent in crafting a story. Few good movies (or, more accurately, few movies with compelling stories) have plots that involve saving the world; for games to have compelling stories, one thing they'll need to do is let go of their old crutches.
09/15/09
Just hanging out and raising some crops while flirting with the ladies =)
09/15/09
Now, it's unfair to single out RPGs for this. How many games as a whole are about saving the world? The vast majority of games in existence that have a plot are about this very topic.
I started thinking about things like adventure games that dropped the scale. In the 90s, Full Throttle wasn't about saving the world, but about saving a person as well as saving the hero's way of life. The villain wasn't going to take over the world, but he was going to replace all the motorbikes with minivans (MINIVANS!) and completely ruin the freedom and lifestyle of the bikers.
Even more recently, the Phoenix Wright series is never about anything more than protecting a few innocent people. Only one or two cases impact people outside the ones in the courtroom. But you feel just as triumphant saving your childhood friend from personal demons as you do killing a big evil demigod and stopping the world from blowing up.
So I guess now I'm genuinely curious too. I mean, I love my epic RPGs, but I have to admit that I had a lot of fun in Persona 3 and 4 just going to school and making friends...
09/15/09
Strictly plotted games are very frequently about maintaining the status quo (save us from x, stop y, etc.). Many that are not are usually about returning the world to some perceivedly desirable status quo from which it has been disrupted (destroy criminal syndicate x, bring down nefarious empire y). In short, they are about maintaining or restoring some state which existed in the past and people have decided they like.
Basically, the player usually acts as a mediating force in the game world, rather than a... creative one. It seems like we always experience stories from the point of view of those who react to others' actions, rather than seeing the instigators.
I'm not sure what I would suggest as an alternative - it's just a trend I've noticed that I think is not intrinsic to the medium.
09/15/09
09/15/09
I think that's touching on what the heart of this article is getting at. The narratives are generally very impersonal.
In some ways it comes with the medium, but not exclusively. That is to say, most game characters are not just the character, but they are an extension of you. In some games, you only play the role of getting the character from point A to point B where they will develop without your input (like Metal Gear - but I'm sure we've all done things considered out of character for Snake), but in others, the character is very much you (like Fallout 3) or an aspect of you that you explore. Either way, the guy sitting on his butt with the controller in his hands is a huge part of the experience and the narrative needs to account for that. Unlike a book, you're in the thick of things instead of peeping in through the window.
These are great ways to involve a player in a narrative - although preference is subjective - but the problem is that the narratives themselves rely on tried-and-true archetypal, if you will, methods of generating conflict that requires resolution. The reason, I feel, is because we are playing the characters. We are the actors. It's difficult to explore the three classics - man vs. man, man vs. nature, man vs. himself - when you relinquish a portion of your authorship control to someone else. For example, in a play or movie, the character reacts as directed and can only react in that way. In a game, there's no determining how the character may react unless you pull the player out. This can be seen in Metal Gear or RPGs where suddenly, you're sitting on the sidelines and the plot is developed for you. One of the easiest ways to keep the player invested is by utilizing the 'status quo' as the glue to the story, as you've mentioned. It's instantly recognizable and we all know what to do.
To take a more personal narrative, or to explore less-traveled issues of conflict, if you will, ultimately depends on the player agreeing with what you're trying to do. For example, a plot where your entire goal is to murder a puppy may be interesting to explore from a character standpoint (wouldn't you be curious what makes such a guy tick?), most people aren't going to sign on for it. Hell, we see even today that games that attempt to explore evil rarely do so - instead of a real role reversal, you're treated to a skin swap that paints the bad guy as the good guy and the good guy as the bad guy; in that game, nothing has really changed. For example, the "good guy" is a jerk so you're suddenly justified for what you're doing.
I'm totally distorting my point, sorry. The short of it is that when I say, "not exclusively," I mean that there is a dependency on the player's involvement in the story, so there's a large risk in deviating from working with 'status quo' stories. And we all know how this industry loves risk.
09/15/09
Yeah, that's why you've used amnesia as a plot device five games in a row. Pfft.
09/15/09
09/15/09
Imagine Mass Effect where instead of foil a huge evil plot, your main objective is to find your characters sister. It could still have alot of drama, but it just wouldn't have to be along the lines of the tried and tested "Save the Galaxy" formula.
09/15/09
09/15/09
It's basically your typical RPG, but a more homely setting (but still, loads of drama). Think "King Lear" vs. "Death of a Salesman".
09/15/09
@Gortexfogg: That just sounds like Animal Crossing or Harvest Moon.
09/15/09
I never felt any realy emotion towards any of the bad guys in Mass Effect, for the simple reason that I knew how it was going to unfold. An evil guy isn't threatening if you can be almost certain that after all that monolgue and 'evil' music, he's just going to be a boss to defeat. I like bad guys that really give you a good reason to hate them beyond "I will destroy 'x' with my super weapon of doom!"
09/15/09