The Drunken Lizard Pub

So, I reinstalled Fallout 2, and I've noticed a few things in that game that are sadly missing from more recent RPGs, and these are things that were pretty much standard fare as far as I recall in Ye Olden Days, and are mostly things I had forgotten had existed in the first place.
The first is text-description. You get little atmosphere-building text descriptions of areas. I haven't seen this in ages and it adds so much.
Everything is interactive to some degree. See a shelf? You can rummage through it. A bin, box, crate? Same thing, it's not just a graphic detail, it's an item in the world which you can interact with. Signs all say something, physical objects have text descriptions which serve as either setting detail or as clues. You can talk to anyone and have a conversation, and sometimes it surprsingly contains something useful.
The game doesn't hold your hand and point you in all the proper directions, or lay useful items at your feet, you are actually require to strategise, note things down, plan and explore.

What it boils down to is that Fallout 2, like the RPGs that came before it and very few since, cannot be rushed through with nary a second thought or glance around the world. Most RPGs these days you just run through, with map pointers showing you exactly where to go and that's that. What made RPGs the games they were was the time-taking, the things that were there as direct translations from what you'd do in a PnP game. Anyone who played tabletop RPGs knows how it is to search every nook and cranny, every container or room that the DM tells you is there, since if it's there it *must* be important ( ), and since computer versions were much richer and fuller graphically, all those things needed to be responsive in some way.

RPGs these days don't have these things, which is sad. So I guess my point in posting this here is that I hope Eschalon can recapture some of this, that the dev team keeps these old hallmarks in mind and doesn't succumb to the modern perspective of cRPG making.

Eh eh eh.
I agree 100%.
I'm 35 and I play with my best friends D&D and Warhammer Rpg (pen and paper, tabletop) since 1991. We are still playing (ok once a month because of work and family ).
Becoming an adult man, I thought eventually I could have stopped to enjoy rpgs. I work for a big industry services company fighting every day with documents, statistics, economics, etc. and someone thinks it's really strange that a "concrete" manager can enjoy "stupid fantasy games" (I'm the DM, my brother is a dwarf troll slayer, my first best friend is an halfling cook and my second good friend is a elf mage) , but I continue to appreciate every session (one of us works for a big company and often comes back in Italy from China or Germany only for our monthly rpg session... eh eh).
So I think I can continue to appreciate good CRPGS. The fact I find "modern" rpgs totally boring is related not to my age but to the lack of real rpg spirit.

SO i hope we can find a bit of it in Eschalon Book I.

gragnak wrote:Eh eh eh.
I'm 35 and I play with my best friends D&D and Warhammer Rpg (pen and paper, tabletop) since 1991. We are still playing (ok once a month because of work and family ).

I am so jealous. You live in the hills of Tuscany and still play Warhammer and D&D. *sigh*
Some of my fondest PnP memories of good games were with Warhammer, such a great system and world.

But anyways, yeah, here's hoping that Eschalon brings back the good RPG stuff!

Gallifrey wrote:So, I reinstalled Fallout 2, and I've noticed a few things in that game that are sadly missing from more recent RPGs, and these are things that were pretty much standard fare as far as I recall in Ye Olden Days, and are mostly things I had forgotten had existed in the first place.
The first is text-description. You get little atmosphere-building text descriptions of areas. I haven't seen this in ages and it adds so much.
Everything is interactive to some degree. See a shelf? You can rummage through it. A bin, box, crate? Same thing, it's not just a graphic detail, it's an item in the world which you can interact with. Signs all say something, physical objects have text descriptions which serve as either setting detail or as clues. You can talk to anyone and have a conversation, and sometimes it surprsingly contains something useful.
The game doesn't hold your hand and point you in all the proper directions, or lay useful items at your feet, you are actually require to strategise, note things down, plan and explore.

What it boils down to is that Fallout 2, like the RPGs that came before it and very few since, cannot be rushed through with nary a second thought or glance around the world. Most RPGs these days you just run through, with map pointers showing you exactly where to go and that's that. What made RPGs the games they were was the time-taking, the things that were there as direct translations from what you'd do in a PnP game. Anyone who played tabletop RPGs knows how it is to search every nook and cranny, every container or room that the DM tells you is there, since if it's there it *must* be important ( ), and since computer versions were much richer and fuller graphically, all those things needed to be responsive in some way.

RPGs these days don't have these things, which is sad. So I guess my point in posting this here is that I hope Eschalon can recapture some of this, that the dev team keeps these old hallmarks in mind and doesn't succumb to the modern perspective of cRPG making.

I am playing through this game again as well. Yep, the amount of atmosphere that old style games had was awesome. It really made you feel like you were there. I love that you can look at any object and get a descriptions.

A good example, NWN2. When this game out I was excited, it looked great in towns and stuff until I realized it was just eye candy and you couldnt look at anything or hardly enter any buildings. I remember one of the towns where you couldnt enter any buildings and the NPC's you had to interact with were actually outside all the buildings. Wasnt long after that I quit playing. Plus the dungeons were nothing but monster kill sessions. And dont even get me started about how linear it is.....

You know guys....the worst experience i have made in an ComputerRPG some time ago: I played Neverwinter Nights...I entered a room..full of bookshelfs and tables with stuff....in the first view seconds i was so excited...until i realize...you cannot interact with these things. Desperatly hovering above those things with the mouse...trying to klick them...nothing!!! After that i also quit playing....with a sorrow feeling of the old times.

Yeah, so many games these days with "awesome" graphics provide nothing but a fancy backdrop, there's no interaction with the environment. It's like something has to be in a specially-made operative container, like a crate, to be interacted with by the player.

Now, to be fair to NWN, the strength of that game was in it's tool set and ability to create modules and multi-player game worlds. Some of my best gaming was done on NWN role-playing persistant worlds. But yes, still not the most environmentally interactive game.

In replaying FO2, I'm reminded how far down we've come in cRPGs these days. We've gained graphics but lost everything else - and I actually really like the FO graphics, the only thing I wish it has was different resolutions and camera control. That's the one gain made in games now that's worth something.

But the atmosphere, the NPC personalities, the story, the *dialogue* options, the multiple ways through almost every situation... This should have been the gold standard but it still remains more or less alone.

Gallifrey wrote:Yeah, so many games these days with "awesome" graphics provide nothing but a fancy backdrop, there's no interaction with the environment. It's like something has to be in a specially-made operative container, like a crate, to be interacted with by the player.

Now, to be fair to NWN, the strength of that game was in it's tool set and ability to create modules and multi-player game worlds. Some of my best gaming was done on NWN role-playing persistant worlds. But yes, still not the most environmentally interactive game.

In replaying FO2, I'm reminded how far down we've come in cRPGs these days. We've gained graphics but lost everything else - and I actually really like the FO graphics, the only thing I wish it has was different resolutions and camera control. That's the one gain made in games now that's worth something.

But the atmosphere, the NPC personalities, the story, the *dialogue* options, the multiple ways through almost every situation... This should have been the gold standard but it still remains more or less alone.

I agree on your graphics comment. There is a grittyness about it that just looks authentic.

I would be fine with it if the RPG industry used this level of graphics for the next 10 years and focused only on gameplay story and content.

Saxon1974 wrote: I agree on your graphics comment. There is a grittyness about it that just looks authentic.

I would be fine with it if the RPG industry used this level of graphics for the next 10 years and focused only on gameplay story and content.

I'd actually *love* to see a proper turn-based computer version of the old Battletech tabletop game done with a graphics engine comparable to that of Fallout.
*sigh*

But for the next ten years, I suspect we're going to see the big budget titles get worse and worse, with a few gems here and there. But the indie developers will as a result gradually get access to cheaper, yet very solid, graphics engines for their games. Or rather I hope, I suppose would be the better word than suspect...

Gallifrey wrote:

Saxon1974 wrote: I agree on your graphics comment. There is a grittyness about it that just looks authentic.

I would be fine with it if the RPG industry used this level of graphics for the next 10 years and focused only on gameplay story and content.

I'd actually *love* to see a proper turn-based computer version of the old Battletech tabletop game done with a graphics engine comparable to that of Fallout.
*sigh*

But for the next ten years, I suspect we're going to see the big budget titles get worse and worse, with a few gems here and there. But the indie developers will as a result gradually get access to cheaper, yet very solid, graphics engines for their games. Or rather I hope, I suppose would be the better word than suspect...

I think I remember playing a battletech or was it battlemech RPG that was rather good a long time ago. Cant recall the name but it seemed like a late 80's early 90's RPG involving mechs.

Ok looked it up, yep was Battletech. I remember liking this game quite a bit. Maybe I will play it again.

Once they started making the non RPG related games I lost interest.

http://www.mobygames.com/game/dos/battl ... -inception

Crescent Hawk's Inception was a *fantastic* game, an absolute standout. The sequel, Crescent Hawk's Revenge, wasn't as good but still not bad. The first though is the best Battletech computer game ever made. It really combined the table-top strategy game of Battletech with the then-new RPG Mechwarrior component.

I never liked the Mechwarrior games, and Mech Commander was ruined by being real-time. Those games pretty much moved into standard FPS and RTS territory which I felt killed the spirit and grit of the source material.

Gallifrey wrote:Crescent Hawk's Inception was a *fantastic* game, an absolute standout. The sequel, Crescent Hawk's Revenge, wasn't as good but still not bad. The first though is the best Battletech computer game ever made. It really combined the table-top strategy game of Battletech with the then-new RPG Mechwarrior component.

I never liked the Mechwarrior games, and Mech Commander was ruined by being real-time. Those games pretty much moved into standard FPS and RTS territory which I felt killed the spirit and grit of the source material.

Cool, I have been on old game kick lately, so I will play this one as well thanks for suggesting it. Amazing, seems like all the good series have gone away from RPG.

I remember them making an RPG game in the Shadowrun setting which was rather good as well. They just did a remake and when I first saw It I got excited, then saw it was FPS, irritating!

Oh I know, the new Shadowrun game is such a slap in the face. Not only is it an FPS, all it is, is a team-based PVP shooter. There's no story, no nothing, just outfitting your guys and shooting up other players. It could've been a mod for Unreal Tournament for all that it is.
I would kill for a Shadowrun RPG along the lines of Deus Ex and Vampire: Bloodlines. Or heck, a party-based one with the turn-based level of rules detail of Temple Of Elemental Evil.
So much potential in the Shadowrun franchise...

Ironically, both Shadowrun and Battletech are FASA games, and all of them have had their licenses squandered.

Gallifrey wrote:Oh I know, the new Shadowrun game is such a slap in the face. Not only is it an FPS, all it is, is a team-based PVP shooter. There's no story, no nothing, just outfitting your guys and shooting up other players. It could've been a mod for Unreal Tournament for all that it is.
I would kill for a Shadowrun RPG along the lines of Deus Ex and Vampire: Bloodlines. Or heck, a party-based one with the turn-based level of rules detail of Temple Of Elemental Evil.
So much potential in the Shadowrun franchise...

Ironically, both Shadowrun and Battletech are FASA games, and all of them have had their licenses squandered.

Its a total shameful money grab. Its like doing sequels to movies just to make money. I would have bought it right away until I saw the FPS shooter part. I got pretty upset, how can you make a non RPG shadowrun game!!!!!!!!

I remember playing dues ex, but not that well, gonna have to play that one again too! Vampire was pretty good, much better than the first one they created.

Deus Ex is a shooter/RPG hybrid. In terms of game mechanics it's an FPS, but it's got a good story, lots of character customisation and many options for how you want to advance through the game (eg you can play a sniper, a melee fighter, a sneaky hacker, a run-and-gunner, non-lethal, a combination of bits and pieces) and you're generally rewarded well for your choices (eg if you go for sneaky close combat you'll hear some amusing and interesting conversations).
The sequel (Invisible War) is more shooter than RPG, but not as bad as the press it recieved.

The setting is a good dystopian cyberpunk set-up.

I used to play only fantasy RPG's as those are my favorite genre. With the exception of a few games here and there.....played wasteland\fallouts etc....

Well, they are still my favorite, but since there are so many out there and I have played them all I have come to appreciate some of the other genre's out there, even though there aren't that many RPG that are not the fanstasy setting.

For some reason I have a problem with fantasy worlds with guns, just mixing the 2 doesn't work for me. With that said I liked Arcanum, thought they did a great job of incorporating the steam age early type guns with the magic setting and all....

So, I think I prefer either the post apocolyptic setting with guns and no magic, or the fantasy with magic and no guns.

Im reading a novel in the setting called "Deathlands", that is a post nuclear setting in the USA, very similar to wasteland. I love to emerse myself into the subject of the gaming world I am playing in. Ok, im getting quite dorky here arent I

The ones that I have the hardest time getting interested in are set in a world similiar to our own....not sure what this says about me. Maybe I just dont like the real world

I do feel the fanstasy genre has been over done a bit, but mostly its just not been done well lately in my opinion.