Wednesday, May 30, 2007
Why Bother With Single-Player RPGs?
Over at ComputerAndVideoGames.com, Obsidian Entertainment CEO Feargus Urquhart talks about the danger to single-player RPGs posed by MMORPGs.
And I agree with him completely. I'll paraphrase his contention in my own terms: MMORPGs already have the "Wander aimlessly around a lifeless non-interactive world playing whack-a-mole with monster-shaped targets" genre pretty well sewn up, and made entertaining by the sheer power of multiplayer. So why would anybody want to do that in a single-player RPG when they can do it online with friends and get some kind of bragging rights in a whack-a-mole competition?
So he's pushing for more interactive single-player worlds. Worlds that respond to the player as a hero, instead of treating him as Generic Player # 29,371 that must not affect the status quo for the sake of the other thousands (or millions if you are talking WoW). Let the player kick over some anthills! Permanently change things! Mess around with the campaign world! Whatever.
To be honest, most recent western RPGs are pretty good in this respect (though they could always do better). I haven't played any of the Diablo-clones, and they like Diablo 2 might be pretty static. The "jRPGs" seem to be the worst in this respect, as much as I love 'em.
(Vaguely) related ravings:
* Are Graphics Really Killing Gameplay?
* The Rules of Roleplaying Games
* Making a Rogue-Friendly RPG (part I)
* RPG Design: Why Can't I Get Past the Stupid Door?
Read or Post Comments on the Forums
Labels: Game Design, Roleplaying Games
- posted by The Rampant Coyote @ 8:14 AM (Permalink)
