The 'Golden Age' of RPGs

[Tmoo]

Perhaps I'm just being nostalgic, but I feel the heyday of RPGs has passed with the PS2. Maybe I'm not looking hard enough for them this generation. It might have to do with me being older and having less time for gaming than before. Even so, there's a difference between RPGs past and now. It's as if there's a disconnect from how they were approached back then. For one, there were many, many more RPGs on older systems. I have yet to play Lost Odyssey and a few other RPGs that are heralded as upholders of the old style, so I won't make judgments on those. I'm talking about games such as Mass Effect, Fallout, etc. I understand that they're created by Western developers, but that shouldn't factor: Fable was a great RPG for the xbox, and its developer isn't from Japan. ME and Fallout are both shooters when you get down to core gameplay, yet they're labeled RPGs. I'll admit I'm biased, I just don't see shooting mechanics being part of an RPG as far as my experience goes with the genre.

I wonder how the younger generations view these games. I also wonder how they view the older games, the ones that we in our 20's and older grew up with as kids through school. Them having grown up in an era where HD graphics are considered normal, where turn-based gameplay is becoming outdated and niche, and where every game is expected to have competitive multiplayer, I can't fathom how different their perception of gaming is from my own.

 

[ribbit]

I myself grew up on Pokemon games, so I have a great love for turnbased RPGs like Dragon Quest and many others. A lot of kids now just sit around and play shit like CoD all day instead of getting into the good games. I agree that many of the great RPGs were from the PS2 (and PS1) era. Persona 3 and 4, Dragon Quest VIII, Final Fantasy XII, the few Tales games for it, etc.

Mass Effect is an RPG in its skill system and leveling. If you've played Dragon Age Origins, they're (somewhat) similar in that aspect, the latter being a much deeper RPG.

Fallout, on the otherhand, was originally just a normal RPG. Fallout 3 (plust New Vegas) on the otherhand is a first person RPG akin to Morrowind and Oblivion but with guns. It's worth a look. They're all great games.

One of my favorite RPGs is Deus Ex. People confuse it with a first person shooter just because it's in first person. It's completely different. You can't just run in guns blazing like a first person shooter, you have to be tactical like in an RPG. You can't just pull off headshots until your rifle skill is at maximum (which won't be till the end of the game) because at low levels the accuracy is terrible and the scope darts around making it hard to land a hit on anything.

There are good RPGs today, but they slightly differ from the old. Unless you get all the JRPGs. They're still the same(ish), like the newer Tales games. I'd say FFXIII but we all know how big of a mess that was.

 

[Martel]

The "Golden Age" of RPGs was, in my opinion, when the concept was first thought up. For the most part, RPGs haven't been getting any better or worse; they've stayed exactly the same since their creation. Therein lies the problem. With time, people expect things to get better. They don't. They remain exactly the same. There are some RPGs that are on-par with or better than those that were released on earlier generations: for example, Resonance of Fate easily stands up as one of the best RPGs of this generation or any other, for it's difficulty and attempt to differentiate itself from other RPGs with the battle system. The concept has been done multiple times before, but it is the way in which it is delivered that makes it feel special.

But others, like FFXIII, are significantly worse than those of the past, and the rest don't do anything to distinguish themselves, so they are seen as poorer for it. Maybe they are, but when looking at the idea of a "Golden Age", people seem to forget that there were bad RPGs in those days as well. They're just focused on putting down modern RPGs in favour for the older ones, which in reality aren't as good as they make them out to be.

My own personal opinion is that originality is dead. Obviously people are going to think that newer RPGs are worse than older ones if they've seen the exact same concept before; it loses a lot of the magic. I will never forget the first time I played a Pokemon game. Now I'm absolutely sick to death of them; I only played HG/SS for the nostalgia factor. If I was a little younger and I had started with the third or even the fourth generation, would I feel that way? It's doubtful, because the idea would still be fresh to me, and I wouldn't be quite so cynical.

With updated graphics is supposed to come updated gameplay to match, but that NEVER happens. People recycle things over and over again, but they're no better or worse than they ever have been. Look at the Pokemon series as a prime example of this, because it takes to the extreme: literally NOTHING changes in those games, and they don't even bother trying to hide it.

Gameplay-wise, nothing changes, and the rest - storyline, characters, soundtrack etc - just comes down to personal preference. I get very bored of playing the same type of game over and over, but I can still find value in RPGs of the current generation, and enjoy them just as much as I did older games. NieR is one of the finest games I have ever played, as the best example. Nippon Ichi titles always deliver some good quality humour as well, even though they don't change the core gameplay mechanics at all.

In my opinion, games like Mass Effect, Fallout and Borderlands aren't RPGs. They have RPG elements, yes, but they are not RPGs in truth. I think probably is due to my perception of RPGs, and due to the fact that the definition of what an RPG is has changed over the years; those of us who have been playing these games for years have a different idea of what makes up an RPG, and modern games like those really do not fit that definition. They can give themselves the label, but that doesn't mean that they fit into the category. FFXIII calls itself an RPG, and I'd describe it as more of an on-rails Action game, because it has very few RPG elements. What makes up an RPG these days is dependant upon the individual, and what they expect from that genre, whereas in the old days something either was an RPG or it wasn't.

I suppose there is only a Golden Age of RPGs if you've been around long enough to remember the older ones. I've met people a decade or so older than me who can remember older RPGs than the ones I started out with, and they have a totally different idea of the concept. If anything, theirs would be more accurate than mine, because RPGs haven't advanced at all. The concept has broadened, but the gameplay hasn't. There are rare occasions when things are delivered in such a way that it feels new, but for the most part the only thing that differentiates RPGs from one another is the storyline, and that is always a hit-and-miss thing.

Games get a lot more media attention than they did in the old days, and standards have changed, so of course it is going to feel as though there are more bad RPGs, and that in the old days things were better. I would say that in reality nothing has changed other than the people playing and reviewing the games. People want different things now, that doesn't make RPGs that stick to the roots of the genre bad, or any worse than the old ones, though. The problem is, for the most part, with the people, and not with the games.

 

[Tom Badguy]

I always thought the "heyday" or Golden Age of RPGs left with the SNES. Aside from a very few choice titles that have come out, the SNES had the best RPGs. RPGs nowadays seem more focused on pretty GFX than story and gameplay. Or they are a hybrid of game genres like Mass Effect and Fallout.

The Elder Scrolls games are a good RPG for this new generation. But if you're looking for the classic turn base, I'm afraid that it will be dead soon enough.

 

[Tmoo]

There are good RPGs today, but they slightly differ from the old. Unless you get all the JRPGs. They're still the same(ish), like the newer Tales games.

I might give Deus Ex a shot, then. There are definitely good RPGs from this gen, but I don't think the numbers of RPGs made now are near the amount that used to be made before this generation. At least, not ones that make it overseas. The handhelds have done a fair job of carrying the jRPG genre.

Games get a lot more media attention than they did in the old days, and standards have changed, so of course it is going to feel as though there are more bad RPGs, and that in the old days things were better. I would say that in reality nothing has changed other than the people playing and reviewing the games. People want different things now, that doesn't make RPGs that stick to the roots of the genre bad, or any worse than the old ones, though. The problem is, for the most part, with the people, and not with the games.

The definition of an RPG in my head usually involves some key elements to combat and presentation, like damage counters, hp, exploration, et al. It's hard for me to envision an RPG containing a different set of elements. Older gamers probably have a different perception of it from me. It does feel like games that would usually be in other genres are calling themselves RPGs now.

I always thought the "heyday" or Golden Age of RPGs left with the SNES. Aside from a very few choice titles that have come out, the SNES had the best RPGs. RPGs nowadays seem more focused on pretty GFX than story and gameplay. Or they are a hybrid of game genres like Mass Effect and Fallout.

The Elder Scrolls games are a good RPG for this new generation. But if you're looking for the classic turn base, I'm afraid that it will be dead soon enough.

I'm not a strict adherent to turn-based gameplay, but it is the most comfortable RPG style for me to play. Seeing it dwindle is humbling. When it comes to graphics, I'm of the mindset that immersion to the game's world and lore should be the goal of pushing the limit with the aesthetics. Great fidelity with visuals and great gameplay shouldn't be mutually exclusive, though unfortunately the gameplay side of things have fallen behind the times. Developers don't seem to know where to take the genre.

 

[ribbit]

I might give Deus Ex a shot, then.

Don't go in thinking it's a super traditional rpg. It doesn't have leveling up. But it does have the skill system that gets better as you upgrade them. On top of that, the tons of ways to complete each mission. The game gives you a lot of choices.

 

[Martel]

The definition of an RPG in my head usually involves some key elements to combat and presentation, like damage counters, hp, exploration, et al. It's hard for me to envision an RPG containing a different set of elements. Older gamers probably have a different perception of it from me. It does feel like games that would usually be in other genres are calling themselves RPGs now.

I'd agree with you, but I would go one step further, and say that the emphasis on those elements is what determines whether or not a game is an RPG. Something like Borderlands, which has a level-up system, a health bar, and a high level of exploration, I would not classify as an RPG, because the primary gameplay is that of a first-person shooter. When the elements of an RPG are just elements, and not the defining gameplay, I would say that the game in question is not an RPG. You can add elements from an RPG into a game of a different genre, and people frequently do so, but that does not, in my opinion, make the game an RPG, or whatever hybrid-name people would want to call it by. Taking my example of Borderlands, it is not a "First-Peson Shooter RPG", it is just a First-Person Shooter. You can incorporate elements typical to one genre into another, but you cannot fuse genres, because the gameplay will always be leaning towards one genre only.

Since RPGs have expanded to not become a solely Japanese thing, the definition has broadened considerably. I think when people say "Golden Age of RPGs" they're really referring to a time when if you were playing an RPG, it was a JRPG. To me, JRPGs are true RPGs; there are very few Western-made games that I would classify as true RPGs, and I don't think of JRPGs as JRPGs, just as RPGs, because back in the day that genre didn't even exist.