Op Ed

Hooked Gamers - Dragon Age II: The Decline of the Classic RPG.
There is no question about it, the classic cRPG is dying out. So why bring it up now then? The reason is because one of the few big developers who have remained adamant about catering for players who want to play the classic cRPG is BioWare. Their breed of cRPG was popularised with the Baldur’s Gate series just before the new millennium. This consisted of some defining aspects: detailed character creation (not just customisation); immersive character interaction; strategic-based combat that required thought and timing; and a deep, engaging story that was shaped by the player’s choices. This was a game that could only truly be experienced on a PC. It required a fair amount of work on the developer’s part, but players were rewarded greatly for their efforts and paid the developers back justly.

View : : :
27.
 
Re: Op Ed
Mar 7, 2011, 15:15
27.
Re: Op Ed Mar 7, 2011, 15:15
Mar 7, 2011, 15:15
 
killer_roach wrote on Mar 7, 2011, 14:47:
CRPGs aren't dead... so long as there's a market for them, somebody will make them. The question is whether the die-hard CRPG base is large enough to support such a title with top-tier production values and still present a large enough of a return on investment to make it worth the while of a major publisher. On that merit, I don't think so.

The first question is totally disconnected from your conclusion. Your question is "whether the die-hard CRPG base is large enough to support such a title with top-tier production values and still present a large enough of a return on investment to make it worth the while of a major publisher". The answer is yes, DA:O did it.

(I know you're going to throw the DAO sales figures back at me, but I'd also posit that the changes made to DA2, whether you like them or not, will be perceived by the majority of DAO buyers as a net positive for the game)

That has nothing to do with whether CRPGs are viable in the AAA market. They are obviously viable and profitable. Bioware is simply chasing a bigger market. There is no market large enough, we are a profit driven industry now and creative concerns are secondary. If DA:O had sold 10 million copies they would be asking how can we make it sell 20 million like Call of Duty? The answer in this case is to hotrod the combat, give the females unbelievable breast sizes and dumb it down. When the design philosophy for the game is "push button, awesome happens" well I think you know where I'm going there.

There is no dollar figure that is adequate so long as there is a perception that more copies could be sold by dumbing the game down. It's convenient for people to call the people upset with the changes a niche but the reality is that most publishers dreams of big casual gamer bux these days and so every game chases the lowest common denominator.

This comment was edited on Mar 7, 2011, 15:22.
Avatar 51617
Date
Subject
Author
1.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
2.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
3.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
4.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
5.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
6.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
9.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
   Re: Op Ed
12.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
    Re: Op Ed
14.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
     Re: Op Ed
11.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
   Re: Op Ed
7.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
39.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
8.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
16.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
10.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
13.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
15.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
17.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
18.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
20.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
21.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
22.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
23.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
24.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
   Re: Op Ed
25.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
    Re: Op Ed
 27.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
    Re: Op Ed
28.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
     Re: Op Ed
29.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
      Re: Op Ed
34.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
       Re: Op Ed
40.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
        Re: Op Ed
32.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
19.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
26.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
31.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
30.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
33.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
41.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
42.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
   Re: Op Ed
35.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
37.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
38.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
36.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
43.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
44.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
45.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
46.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
47.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
49.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
50.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
52.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
   Re: Op Ed
53.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
    Re: Op Ed
48.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
51.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
55.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
56.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
   Re: Op Ed
57.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
    Re: Op Ed
58.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
     Re: Op Ed
59.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
      Re: Op Ed
61.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
       Re: Op Ed
54.
Mar 7, 2011Mar 7 2011
60.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
62.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
63.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
65.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
66.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
   Re: Op Ed
67.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011
    Re: Op Ed
64.
Mar 8, 2011Mar 8 2011