Re: What is role playing on a computer?

"Simon Craig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> In that case I disagree. The CRPG populace play the stuff with the best FX.
> They want simple 'easy to use' game play so they can pick it up and go. They
> want to see the wonders of the new world they are exploring. They will enjoy
> this and next month they will go onto their next Quake clone or Tomb Raider
> 9.

I see no reason to think this is true. Time and time again, games with
no story or reason or quality (pick your deficiency or combination
thereof) have failed. They last about a month as you have said. When
we talk about good game design (which I am), we're looking into the
decisions that create something akin to the
semi-graphically-sotry-deficient CS or the story-intense-graphically
deficient D2, rather than the Shadowbanes or Strifeshadows. If your
demographic has an attention span of 1 month, that's not a demographic
that anyone here is interested in, you're describing people who dont
like computer games.

> However this is why role playing aspects are not developing as well as
> arcade aspects in games.

I see no reason to agree to this. My contention is still that there's
no hard rules separating the 2 genre's (Doom genre vs Ultima genre),
just common differences in interface.

> So 'yes' the gaming public want stories. I agree. But role players that want
> a CRPG want more and are being fobbed off. Fobbed off rightly because they
> cannot support big bucks companies with their poor spending power.

I have personally refrained from ever saying, players want stories. I
hate stories, so it would be a stretch for me to even think that way
(I'm showing my bias now). CRPGers like stories, as all RPGers tend to
believe good storylines and good playmechanics should go hand in hand,
without one outshining the other...which in most games would require a
LOT more story :p