Are classic RPGs dying?

[zoothe]

With the news that the new PSU games will be an MMORPG (yes I know that nothing is certain yet), I started wondering what the hell happened to the classic style RPG...?! So? Do todays gamers just find them too boring, too easy, too simple? What is it? I have been playing Tales of Destiny and more recently Golden Sun and I must say: those are RPGs! That's the formula that started it all. I guess I'm just frustrated... but I thought it'd be cool to get other opinions.

[Demon Child]

RPGs are supposed to be something where you can just curl up in a dark corner and play for hours with no contact with reality. That and if something goes wrong in battle you know who to blame: you, not someone else who was supposed to help you but wandered off for some reason.<br>The online rpgs ruin the no contact with reality part of them.

[Goldark]

I've been addicted to Ultima Online for over a year, battling countless creatures, being killed countless times because I'd gone alone in the killing fields, or because people let me die because of their foolishness, but it was also a big chatroom, a place to gather and have fun, just like a pen & paper RPG meeting. That said, MMORPG and console RPG (which are BTW differen from calssic RPG like D&D based games) are completely different genere, not to be even compared, they share something but the resti is completely different is like comparing Diablo and Baldur's Gate, they both have character development, skills, weapons, magics, but besides that they are SO different, actually calling Diablo an RPG is just so wrong.<p>So, the console RPG aren't dying, is just a problem of wrong comparison.

[Neo48]

MMORPG's are the future. They allow us to do what you couldn't do in classics. Plus with new technology, company's want to take advantage of this. I like MMORPG's myself.

[zoothe]

I agree that MMORGPs and console RPGs are not even close to being the same, that's my point. All of these MMORPGs are coming out and being hailed as todays RPGs. If the classic console genre is not dying, where are they? Why do we see series like Phantasy Star turned from one genre into another? Didn't they did the same thing to Final Fantasy?

[Neo48]

I think your problem is that the classic console genre is not growing. People these days don't think about the classic system they want, they look at whats new on the market.

[Benoit]

Since when are the classic console RPGs dying? There are still plenty coming out! And yes, FFXI is an MMORPG, but after that it's back to the crappy (it's FF) classic formula.<p>You might want to check out Tales of Symphonia for GameCube when it comes out in the US.

[zoothe]

<blockquote>You might want to check out Tales of Symphonia for GameCube when it comes out in the US.</blockquote> <p>Of course! I can't wait for that game. Especially since enjoying ToD 1&2.<p>Also, to say that they're "dying" is not to say that NO more are coming out. They're just fewer and further between. Also, they tend lately to re-invent themselves with stupid gimmicks (ie: BoF: Dragon Quarter, Ephermeral Phantasia). No one seems to try to put out a straight forward RPG anymore.

[Flare137]

<blockquote>I have been playing Tales of Destiny and more recently Golden Sun and I must say: those are RPGs!</blockquote> <p>golden sun is awesome but its too short i love it anyway.<p>i also really like new RPG's<p>they should make a mix of both

[zoothe]

<blockquote>golden sun is awesome but its too short i love it anyway. </blockquote> <br>Yeah, but then you have Golden Sun: The Lost Age to look forward to. I actually don't mind the game being a tad short. I don't need a game to take 80+ hours to beat to enjoy it.<p>Define "new rpgs". NextGen MMORPGs aren't the same as the RPGs I'm talking about. It's like apples and oranges. I don't mind them, I just don't like the idea of them "replacing" the older style (that's what sucked so bad about PSO). Newer RPG's that follow the classic console formula (like Skies of Arcadia) I have thoroughly enjoyed.

[Neo48]

PSO wasn't a replacement. It was a new story to take advantage of the new technology.

[ill-intent]

MMORPGs do NOT have the depth of story that the "classics" have. I have not played one online RPG with a story to match ones like Vagrant Story or Lufia 2 or even FF7 (yeah, I know it's formula by now, but it was good when it came out). I'm not saying online games are crap, but they do lack facets that existed in the "traditional" types and vice versa. (as zoothe said, apples and oranges) <br> As for the replacing thing, I can easily see it happening, but not in the sense you think. Online games produce more income/profit for the companies so they're bound to release more of them. Offline games have to be entertaining, but have that "need to upgrade" factor (like sports games, racers, or fighters). A game you buy then spend months playing gains them nothing. (ah, the corporate world is a sad, sad thing, is it not?) RPGs like Shin Megaten III take 100 hours to finish and have multiple endings. (I've owned that game for a year and it's still got something new to offer) Did it ever get translated? Hell, no. Most of the traditional RPGs being brought over are parts of quick-release series or are very short in length. <br> What I think is dying, is the concept of an RPG with a deep, detailed story. That doesn't mean there won't be any good storys, but it's like giving up reading novels and only reading short stories. <p> Something will be lost.

[Neo48]

MMORPG's or not supposed to have better storys. They include you interacting with other people from around the world. Forming strategys for battles, and collecting a very wide array of weaponry. But the story is still there.<p>Obviously, it also depends on what you can enjoy. I've almost got 1000 hours played on PSO, and I'm still no where near becoming bored.

[zoothe]

<blockquote>PSO wasn't a replacement. It was a new story to take advantage of the new technology.</blockquote> <p>What I meant was that the original four games (being of a certain genre) are no longer what people think of when they hear or read the name "Phantasy Star". Now that name means PSO. That game has now killed what was to be expected when you bought a new PS game. Now, when someone (especially a player who is younger and/or got into the Phantasy Star world through PSO) hears that a new PS game is being released, they will expect a formula and style similar to PSO. Fine and dandy for them... but for fans of the original who look at PSO as blasphemy (like myself)... not so dandy.<p>And lastly, why does a game <i>have</i> to take full advantage of current technology? Just because online play is possible doesn't mean that every game should incorporate it. Actually, I prefer 2D games most of the time and I'd be more than happy with a new PS game that looks and plays like it could have been done on a 16-bit system. I can't be the only one if there are people out there playing these games still (even if it is on an emulator). Of course I know the answer to my own question: money. A game company is not going to make a game that looks and plays like it's 5 years old because no one would buy it. It's just sad.

[Werefox]

Yeah, it's really sad. Most people nowadays seem to be more interested in the possiblities hi-end technology offers than in good storytelling, which was always what made RPGs stand apart from other genres of games.<p>I guess what's left for us die-hard fans of story centerd games is to go digging around in games for some obscure systems searching for some forgotten jewels. (That's how I discovered PS, after all!!)<br><p>[size=small][Edit by Werefox on [TIME]1085758730[/TIME]][/size]