Poll: RPG's: Old vs New

[mykalwane]

Both mainly suck since what is popular in old and new is away from the idea of an RPG. An good RPG is much like a good Chose-Your-Own Adventure books, and everything is defined by your choices. The popular games are strictly linear with little choices that generally don't change that much. The concept of an Role Playing Game, is you are playing a role, getting lost in the role you play. That is why a lot started with idea of playing the role of a knight or mage or whatever. Though you may be playing a character, but that character is defined by you. That is what a good RPG should be, but that is not what is the popular games are. So there are more game made that aren't an RPG since that is where most of the money is.

 

[Valkyrie101]

New ones [...] generally [have] better stories and more engaging characters/dialogue.

... I have to ask:"Where? Show me!" I may have missed some games in the past.

Dragon Age and Mass Effect for one (well, two). And, contrary to the opinion of everyone else in the world, I thought Fallout 3 was better written than Fallout 1. The former didn't really have any dialogue other than the bare basics of setting the scene and telling me what I needed to know, the characters weren't set up with personalities and the player responses were sorely lacking.

 

[Cowabungaa]

I have to say 'New' as they have become deeper and more complex but some old RPG's will forever remain greats.

Deeper and more complex?! I beg to differ. Just look at the endless possibilities in Arcanum, for example. New RPG's don't hold up a candle next to those in terms of complexity and scope. Sure Fallout 3 and Oblivion are more shiny, but you can do far far less in them.

 

[Humble85]

Dragon Age and Mass Effect for one (well, two)

Better story/more compelling compared to what? On what reference do you base your observation? I found Dragon Age and Mass Effect both fun and interesting, but not exceptionally well story or character wise.

And, contrary to the opinion of everyone else in the world, I thought Fallout 3 was better written than Fallout 1. The former didn't really have any dialogue other than the bare basics of setting the scene and telling me what I needed to know, the characters weren't set up with personalities and the player responses were sorely lacking.

THAT is blasphemy...just kidding well, 3 is probably better written, because it has a straighter storyline. Fallout 1 was more of a: "go get this, find your own way" which made F 1 and 2 so awesome, and 3 not so much. I dont think the characters in 3 have much of a personality, though they didnt have any in Fallout 1 and 2 to begin with. But the Player responses in the first two installments were definitely better!

Deeper and more complex?! I beg to differ. Just look at the endless possibilities in Arcanum, for example. New RPG's don't hold up a candle next to those in terms of complexity and scope.

Very Very much seconded! I loved to rob banks in Arcanum, sneak into peoples homes through the windows and build stuff from scrap metal. Ive never seen this anywhere else.

 

[Grey_Focks]

I found Dragon Age and Mass Effect both fun and interesting, but not exceptionally well story or character wise.

I....Okay, you got me. If you don't find the characters from Dragon age or mass effect interesting or deep, you need to tell me what game's characters you DO find interesting. The characters in those game, even a good portion of the NPCs you talk to once or twice, have, IMO, more depth to them than most protagonists from other games.

 

[Rewold]

I don't really know how to explain it but I think FF7(started replaying it yesterday) just has something I don't feel today's RPG's have.

A massive cult following of obsessive Cosplaying fanboys who refuse to let it go as a distinctly mediocre game with a predictable storyline and the least functional magic system in the series?

I thought FF7 had the best magic system in the series with FF9 close second...I guess our tastes are worlds apart.

 

[More Fun To Compute]

The last two RPGs I felt like playing have been Wizardry 8 and Bloodlines, which I'm currently playing. I guess that I fall on the side of old RPGs since both Sir-Tech and Troika shut down years ago.

 

[Humble85]

If you don't find the characters from Dragon age or mass effect interesting or deep, you need to tell me what game's characters you DO find interesting.

The whole party from Planescape: Torment, to a variing degree. If i had to pick some, i'd say the Nameless One and Morte, since they are integral to the storyline and both have tons of depth. I personally favor Morte, because of his background (wont spoiler) and because hes a freaking floating skull. Also, I very much liked Virgil from Arcanum, he is a real "friend" from the beginning of the journey and you really cared about if he liked you, and what he thought of your actions.

To clearify, i didnt say i thougt DA:O and ME had shallow characters...i found them interesting, fun to be around (garrus in ME 2 was a real buddy!), but just not exceptionally well.

The characters in those game, even a good portion of the NPCs you talk to once or twice, have, IMO, more depth to them than most protagonists from other games.

I agree with you on that one. But just because characters in other games are shallow and badly written, shouldnt mean that we declare everything even remotely good officially as awesome. Again, i liked DA:O and inner-party relationships felt great and i were quite fond of some of my teammates. They had their depths, but it was all very formualic and nothing that would - at least IMO - make it the benchmark for awesome deep and interesting characterdesign.

 

[similar.squirrel]

Old. But I'm all for re-releasing them with new engines.

Say Fallout 2, for example. Amazing game, probably the most immersive RPG I have ever played. The sheer scope of the game is astounding.

But the extremely slow turn-based combat and the mid-90s graphics qlways give me a headache after 45 minutes.

I'm in no way advocating that it be re-released with the Fallout 3 engine, because that thing is abysmal when it comes to anything but scenery.
And I don't advocate the inclusion of voice acting, either. Any more so than in the original game.

Just make it a teeny bit less migraine-inducing.

 

[xXGeckoXx]

I have to say 'New' as they have become deeper and more complex but some old RPG's will forever remain greats.

I second this.

 

[Continuity]

I have to say 'New' as they have become deeper and more complex but some old RPG's will forever remain greats.

lol!! Good joke, you had me rolling of my seat there... you said it straight like you meant it! comic genius

"become deeper and more complex"


HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

*explodes with laughter*

 

[BoxCutter]

I may be biased here because the only old RPG I can remember playing is Diablo & Diablo 2. Which were by no means bad games, but I can't recall enjoying them more than I enjoyed the Mass Effects, or Dragon Ages of recent memory.

I'm going to have to go with the new school.

 

[Nwabudike Morgan]

A lot of the same people who made the RPGs I played back in the day are still making them now, which has meant, in my experience, the stories are just as good as they've always been but as games, as things you play, current technology has made them much, much better.

 

[MrGamer]

Fallout 1 still continues to hold my happiness.
-Good Writing
-Good Freedom
-Good Balance
-Interesting Characters
-Actually an RPG and not an Action RPG like the newer ones. With more of a focus on story and stats rather than gunplay, and explody messes.

I love Fallout 1. The newer ones aren't bad but there so mainstream and afraid to do anything difficult or fun to appeal as much as the oldies do. I do like Mass Effect 1.

 

[pantsoffdanceoff]

Whatever Category has Morrowind in it.

 

[Mr.Kitetsu]

both old and new. the older rpgs had good stories and gameplay, other than the good rpgs
there was bad rpgs with bad stories and bad gameplay
this goes for new rpgs too.