Justin: Another aspect of simple gameplay is the ability to really get into the characters one plays, since there are few awkward rules to draw a player out of the game. One major difference between console and PC RPGs has always been the ability, in most PC RPGs, to have complete customization over one's character, while console RPGs usually use premade characters, with customization limited to changing the name. Which do you think provides a better experience?

Googleshng: Customization is always better for gameplay, but it makes it harder for a strong story, which, as mentioned earlier, is the direction most popular games have taken lately. If nothing else, customizable characters vastly increase a player's bragging rights.

Matt: It goes back to the same question, do you want to read a story, or use your imagination?

Brent: Well, I always took my imagination along for the ride in the story. At least, I did in Final Fantasy VI, for example.

Michael: In reading a story one must use their imagination in the first place. However, you have no control over the characters. The plus side about video games is that in certain games one can make the characters be whomever they want.

Matt: True, but less so when names, designs, settings, backgrounds, and dialogue is already filled in. It's similar to how some RPGs don't have the character speak, like Breath of Fire and the first Wild Arms. It allows you to feel more into the story in some cases.

Googleshng: Which again is the problem with games that rely too heavily on story.

Michael: With current technology, having total control over your characters pretty much means there is no story.

Brent: Exactly. Like Morrowind, it had a story, but you were in SO much control that it was dwarfed.

Googleshng: Go play Fallout, both of you.

Justin: I disagree... Neverwinter Nights, for instance, gives you about as much control as a pen and paper game, and yet it still managed to have a complex, detailed story, mostly due to the huge dialog trees NPCs had.

Brent: I disagree with that, Justin, to a degree. You had a certain amount of control, but practically had roadsigns for plot.

Googleshng: Dialog options, and multiple ways to tackle a given challenge, can provide a good story along with meaty gameplay. The only problem of course is that only one developer out there tends to capitalize on this.

Brent: I think we're entering into the tried-and-true question of "Where does the developer want me to go" and "Can I do this instead?" The inherent allure of choice is there in the most popular of our gaming titles. Is it any small wonder that RPG elements are being instilled?

Matt: Of course, you also have to ask, "Do I want to do this instead?" Final Fantasy VII had few options and did phenomenally. Crono Cross had dozens and most consider it a lower-tier game.

Justin: I remember a quote I read from a developer once, which went something like, "Make the player think he or she has seen 25% of the game, when the player has actually seen 75% of it."

Michael: Someday with processor speeds increasing, and storage media growing ever larger, we might find games that have their story "evolve" as you customize your character. It's something I've always pondered. Each time you play the game and change your character the plot can intelligently evolve and give you a fresh plot.

Googleshng: Just to keep us from drifting back to a previous topic, to get back to the question of whether characters are customizable vs. rigid, there's also the road of having preset characters which can participate in one of those oh so popular fixed stories, but have room to customize abilities for battle. Take Final Fantasy V, for example.

Matt: Yeah, Final Fantasy V did it well.

Brent: I know people who like Final Fantasy V, but not other games in the series, simply because of that customization factor.

Michael: We shouldn't forget that battles are a focal point of RPGs. Battles constitute a great percentage of gameplay in RPGs. Today that is where the greatest amount of customization can be applied.

Justin: What do you mean, Michael?

Michael: Take tactical RPGs for example. You're open to throw whatever characters you want into a battle, and those characters themselves are up to you to customize. PC RPGs can even have the rules of battle changed if the player saw fit.

Brent: PC Games have always had the edge in customization, and I really wonder why. Hardware really isn’t a factor anymore. Even console ports of PC games have fewer features than their counterparts, when it stands to reason they didn’t have to lose them.

Googleshng: It's simple. Console RPGs have always been more story-driven, while PC games have traditionally foregone story in favor of total player freedom. When you're pushing for the latter, customization is a boon, whereas with the former, it's a hindrance.

Brent: Good point, Google, but would you say we're coming to a point where the lines are blurring? Or is that still a pipe dream for those of us who have a PC and a console, and dream of gaming equality for both?

Matt: Perhaps the line shouldn't be blurred, since, as Goog said, the customizability can be detrimental to a story-driven game.

Justin: In addition, customization can allow for bugs to crop up that the developers never even considered a possibility. With PC games, developers can (and do) release patches to fix issues that crop up from one player's vision being something they never could have considered... with console games, it's better to just keep it simple.

Googleshng: As I ended up mentioning last discussion, they just appeal to different markets, and honestly tend to head farther apart over the years.

Brent: Hmm...so what we're experiencing right now is just something that may pass in time, since the markets will eventually diverge again as new games come out that revolutionize and further separate their particular genres?

Justin: It could be, but it seems that over the past year or so, console and PC RPGs have just been growing closer and closer together. Games like Anachronox are quite console-like, and games like the Baldur's Gate series are concentrating on story in a way rarely seen in PC RPGs beforehand. Morrowind even appeared on the Xbox.

Googleshng: There's always the occasional PC style console game and vice versa, but they tend to fade into obscurity quite quickly. And for that matter, the Xbox is more of a house for PC ports than a console in its own right. 8)

Justin: Well, the Xbox is still home for some of the most PC-like RPGs in the console sector.

Brent: I think that's Microsoft’s selling point in a nutshell, Justin.

Googleshng: Hence my last comment. Microsoft is really fishing the PC market for console gamers, rather than trying to win them from the other consoles.

Michael: On the whole, I don't see the markets growing closer and closer together. Certain games will do so, but on the whole, I don't see it happening in the foreseeable future.

Justin: Ok, I think that's all for today, does anyone have any closing comments?

Michael: Well, with another Roundtable under my belt, this is Michael saying au revoir.

Brent: The only thing I have left to say is that the next few months should prove interesting. At the very least, good fodder for future roundtables. Thanks for the sit-down, Justin, till the next time.

Matt: Farewell from Matt, and everyone be sure to spam Justin with requests to have me back.

Googleshng: I'd make a parting statement, but I have to shut down my computer due to a storm.

Justin: Thanks for reading, and I hope to see you next time!