On the progression of RPGs: two steps forward, one step back

by Mike Benedetto

Brian Thorpe persuasively argues (in "As time moves on. The progression of RPGs") that RPGs were more enthralling when the characters were left as blanks for the player to fill in. He's got a point -- there's little or no room for interpretation in most games of recent years. Everything in terms of plot and characterization is established for us, with little room for free exploration, and no way to really identify with the main characters.

The problem is, these issues have emerged from an even stronger demand on the part of players for substance in RPGs. The psychological realism of playing the character may make for an intense experience... but where do you go from there? Primitive console games like Dragon Warrior and FF1 don't allow you to do much more than fight evil, period. You can be as motivated as anything, but the fruits of your excitement will never appear on the screen -- nothing strange and wonderful ever happens in those games as a result of your actions.

Until computers are capable of the dynamism and creativity that humans are (which is a long way off), there's no way to replicate the joy of a pencil and paper game in a console game. And the only way to get out of the cycle of inane, generic good-and-evil themes is to make games that are character driven and have strong plots.

I crack out my old games every now and then, too. The feeling of control is very calming, and a nice change from linear, prescript games like FF7 or Xenogears. In the end, though, I'll take the latter. They were an even nicer change from the formless, simplistic games that preceded them.

Original Editorial: As time moves on. The progression of RPGs