What do you think of my History of RPG's article?

[Godzilla]

http://www.griffon.cc/page38.html

 

It's a rpg/game fan type magazine a friend of mine runs, I wrote a piece on a broad-stroke history of RPG's. Very much opinionated :-) Any points/counter-points?

 

(just click the little next button to go to the next page when done reading,)

[Gregory DG]

Looks good! Glad to see Atari was included!

 

One thing I wonder about: Why wasn't one of the most influential RPGs in history included... Dungeon Master? There was a Sega CD version I believe if you're were just making it "Console RPGs" (Even though the page titles say, "History of COMPUTER RPGs.")

 

??

 

[Christopher Tumber]

Yeah, it definately needs to be retitled, "History of home video game console RPGs"

 

 

Which leads to awkwardness like:

 

"Adventure, credited by many people to be the first video game RPG."

 

Follwed by:

 

"The first console RPGs were actually E.T. and Raiders."

 

"First video game RPG" implys home computers, PCs, arcade machines, micros and mainframes, (And after you'd just mentioned Hack and Dungeon so you're contradicting yourself). But then you narrow it down to "consoles". So you're really comparing apples to oranges (Or apples to granny smith apples if you prefer.)

 

 

 

Wizardry - Proving Grounds of the Mad Overlord predates both ET and Raiders, btw and is far, far more recognisable as an RPG..

 

 

Chris...

[Godzilla]

yea, it was a 'console' history you are correct, with some introductory computer stuff as a back history (since computers very much pre-date consoles :-) ) And wizardry certainley deserves many a mention for its first person perspective and the genre of rpg that it single-handedly invented. I own a CIB wiz 1 for the apple :-)

 

Yes, Dungeon Master is a glaring omission. Damn. There are bound to be some. I wrote that article quite a while ago. I told him it was a console rpg history, but he chose to title it differently, I noticed. I also strayed from the path on occassion. Daunting task a 'history of electronic rpgs' thingy :-)

 

I don't know what powers he has to edit it, but I will see...

[Ze_ro]

I get an page asking me if I want to register your domain name... web page down?

 

--Zero

[Godzilla]

yikes! Must have exceeded the bandwidth requirements of my friends site or something, I'll ask him

[ZylonBane]

I know I'm going to regret this, but it has to be said--

 

"Adventure" is not an RPG. It is, as the name suggests, an adventure game.

 

A hard definition of what is and isn't an RPG is impossible, but at the bare minimum you have to have a set of changeable character statistics. Adventure doesn't have that. Neither do E.T. or Raiders.

 

(anyone who attempts to play the "but you're playing a role" card will be summarily kicked in the nuts)

[maibock]

lol

 

I also agree..

[Ze_ro]

Perhaps... but in that case, there were no RPG's on consoles at all back then. It could be argued that while Adventure is not a true RPG, it at least did it's part to inspire others to create RPG's.

 

The oldest game I can think of that would do stats tracking would probably be Rogue, back on the old Unix mainframes. I don't think Adventure (The mainframe text-based game, not the 2600 game) or Zork did stats tracking...

 

Anyone know what the first stat-tracking console game was? Dragonstomper?

 

--Zero

[Snider-man]

But, in "Adventure," you're playing a role!

 

OW! MY NUTS!

[Christopher Tumber]

But, in "Adventure," you're playing a role!

 

But in Space Invaders you're playing a role too!

 

They're ALL role playing games!

 

 

Chris...

[Godzilla]

well, e.t. and especially raiders really made me feel i was playing a role, the way the inventory affects what you can do and how it enables you to access more game areas and do new things has a real 'rpg' feel to me

 

and yes from some perspective, they are all 'role' playing games, even space instigators! :-)

[ZylonBane]

Perhaps... but in that case, there were no RPG's on consoles at all back then. It could be argued that while Adventure is not a true RPG, it at least did it's part to inspire others to create RPG's.

I think its part was pretty minor compared to the general D&D mania sweeping the country around that time.

 

I can't tell if Godzilla is joking or not, so I'll elaborate on the "Role-Playing Game" thing. It's just a name. The name is a label, not a literal description of the genre. "RPG" identifies games inspired by pen-and-paper fantasy-gaming. I got in exactly this discussion over on the TTLG forums a while back, so I'll paste what I wrote there--

This all wouldn't be an issue if people had left the term "RPG" in the pen-and-paper world where it originated, and instead used "CRPG" to refer to computer games which borrow significant aspect of RPGs.

 

Before you can define a CRPG, you have to define a traditional RPG. Some of the defining characterstics of an RPG--

• • Stats: You build your character from the ground up, and can explicitly mold how he (or she, or it) evolves over time.

• Skills: Your character can only do things as well as his stats say he can. Just because you know how to fire a gun, doesn't mean your character does.

• Story: Your character is directly involved in a plot which unfolds as you progress.

• Flexibility: There's more than one way to defeat most obstacles.

• Turn-based: You do this, they do that, repeat.

• So, when asking if such-and-such game is an RPG, don't compare it to other CRPGs... compare it to the origin of the term!

 

Another related genre is the Adventure. In an adventure, the character you play is almost always "anonymous adventurer guy". There's no character development... you just march around collecting treasure and solving puzzles. There may or may not be a plot. Usually only one way past obstacles. No skills, other than your own puzzle-solving abilities.

 

For instance, IMHO, System Shock 1 is an adventure, and System Shock 2 is an RPG. In SS1 you have an invariant upgrade path, via the cool toys you find. Character performance at all tasks is directly dependent on player skill. In SS2, you decide how your character evolves, and almost every action you perform (even walking) is influenced by the stats.

On computers and game systems, you'll often see RPG or Adventure prefixed with "Action-", indicating that it's not turn-based and that player reflexes are somewhat of an issue.

[Ze_ro]

Perhaps... but in that case, there were no RPG's on consoles at all back then. It could be argued that while Adventure is not a true RPG, it at least did it's part to inspire others to create RPG's.

I think its part was pretty minor compared to the general D&D mania sweeping the country around that time.

 

I wouldn't say that... The "Rogue" style of gameplay is still around even today. Just look at Diablo... it's pretty much the same thing, except with better graphics. Plus, Rogue spawned a whole genre of games that includes games like Nethack, Angband, ADOM, and many others... admittedly, this is more of a niche genre than say, Final Fantasy, but I think it's influence is more than people realize. Although most gamers nowadays have probably never touched Rogue, a lot of the 30-something programmers probably did back in their university days. I wouldn't say that Rogue was more influential than Ultima 3... but it was influential nonetheless.

 

As for calling Adventure and Raiders RPG's, I agree that it's a bit of an overstatement... although I usually refer to them as "adventure" games, I wouldn't correct someone for calling them RPG's. After all, they could technically be considered very primitive RPG's. Just look at newer platform games and Pitfall. Pitfall is very primitive compared to Super Mario World, what with no powerups, no level structure, and many other things that we take for granted in side-scrollers... but Pitfall can still be called a platform game.

 

Adventure has a number of attributes that I think allow it to be called an RPG:

• It has a definite quest (retrieve the chalice)

[*]You have an inventory system (albeit a very simple one)

[*]There is some strategy involved as to your progression

[*]There is some strategy involved in fighting the monsters (holding the sword properly)

[*]There are puzzles to be solved (finding keys in this case)

I also think including "turn-based" is a bad idea, as there are tons of RPG's that are NOT turn based. Take Ultima 8 for example. Although the game ultimately sucked (pardon my pun), it was not turn based at all... yet no one would say that it wasn't an RPG. People tend to think that once a game isn't turn-based, it's instantly a Zelda game, but that's not always the case. (Ironically, anytime someone calls a game "turn-based", I instantly think that it's a Final Fantasy game... which is often not the case.)

 

--Zero

[ZylonBane]

I also think including "turn-based" is a bad idea, as there are tons of RPG's that are NOT turn based.

Ummm, re-read the very last part of my previous post.

 

Regarding your case for Adventure being an RPG... by those standards you could just as well call Doom an RPG.

• It has a definite quest (reach the exit)

[*]You have an inventory system (albeit a very simple one)

[*]There is some strategy involved as to your progression

[*]There is some strategy involved in fighting the monsters (proper weapon selection)

[*]There are puzzles to be solved (finding keys in this case)

[Cybergoth]

Hi there!

 

Regarding your case for Adventure being an RPG... by those standards you could just as well call Doom an RPG.

 

To me, the main important aspect of an RPG, was raising a charackter. Experience points! That is was an RPG is all about!

 

No, neither Doom nor Adventure are RPGs.

 

And one of the first real RPGs on a console should be Gateway to Apshai for the Coleco...

 

Greetings,

Manuel

[NE146]

Yeah.. the whole deal to me with console rpg's was you started out really really weak.. and so you had to fight monsters to build up experience points and money until after many hours you were an invincible god with bad-ass weapons.

 

At least SMS Phantasy Star was like that. The console RPG's you see these days seem to always have you start out relatively powerful rather than as a complete weakling who can be killed easily by a blowfly

[ZylonBane]

But then they make up for it by pitting you against gods by the end of the game.

 

(hrm... anyone else think the emoticon selection we have kind of sucks?)

[Godzilla]

Just a note, griffons site is back up, so for any/many of you have may have missed the actual history of rgps article, you should be able to read it again. Link at the top of this thread

[Ze_ro]

... a complete weakling who can be killed easily by a blowfly

 

What always seemed retarded to me was how you'd start playing the sequel to a game, and suddenly your character was back to being a weakling, after killing all those gods and universes in the first game... what the hell happened???

 

--Zero

[Gregory DG]

What always seemed retarded to me was how you'd start playing the sequel to a game, and suddenly your character was back to being a weakling, after killing all those gods and universes in the first game... what the hell happened???

 

Hmm... Maybe the monsters got tougher? :wink:

[Godzilla]

cause the game wouldn't be much fun if you walked around spanking everything with ease?

[AtariDude]

I am kind of surprised that the Ultima series which got started on the Apple II series of computers was not mentioned. I would have also liked to have seen Rogue and Moria mentioned as they were popular RPGs that began their lives on mainframes before being ported over onto PCs.

[Godzilla]

agreed, Ultima definately should have been mentioned. It did, after all, appear on the nes/gameboy. It was definately a console oriented slant, so by the time the 2600 hit, i tried to stick mostly to consoles. And wasn't moria a 'hack' upgrade?

[sonnenhexer]

... Dungeon Master? There was a Sega CD version I believe if you're were just making it "Console RPGs" (Even though the page titles say, "History of COMPUTER RPGs.")

 

Hi,

 

does anyone know where to get a PAL-version of this game?

 

Michael