.I was thinking about the way I termed this document and that I never strictly define that the RPG that I refer to in this document is a CRPG (Computer Role-Playing Game). This is due to the fact that I have been limited in my research on pen-and-paper RPG's and my reasons for writing this document was to deal with the Computer Games Industries implementation of these much loved games. I just thought I would try to right that in the event that you don't care about computers and are an avid AD&D fanatic (for example), and you were just wondering what I have against your beloved game/world/experience. Sorry to stop the whole flamefest right here, but there you have it.
I must apologize to people about my apparent "narrowness" of vision. I am stuck back in the medieval times fighting demons with magic and a world filled with dragons, while some of you are stuck in the present day with yuppie style RPG's and yet others are off in the distant future with their RPG's. I am just going to say that I have remembered you all, but I can only really what I see is relevant to me, and I have not really had a chance to play any of these other RPGs (unfortunately). This document may give you ideas on how to implement different features, and how not to get stuck with the old systems that are just not getting any better. I think there still may be a lot in this document that may benefit you (such as the "Anatomy Combat System" or the "Isometric and 3D" implementation discussions) and I definitely hope that it changes your view on RPG's as much as I intend it to.
Although it is true that Diablo II is NOT an RPG (I hope that this does not come as a shock to anyone) I have included it as a basis for my discussions. It is relevant to Isometric tiling and also is useful for examples when discussing Combat and Magic topics due to the fact that it uses systems for these. Diablo II is a roguelike game and is often called an RPG by people who are ignorant of the difference (i.e. The ROLE part of Role-Playing Game). I think most of you would agree with me that the points that I have discussed that have included in their examples Diablo II, are still relevant to both Roguelike games and RPG's.
When I speak of depth I am talking about a number of things, but
mostly I intend is that the game has enough content for it to be entertaining
upon replaying it. This is known as the replayability factor, something that
is sadly lacking in almost all gamed today. Other things that depth pertains
to include Character Interaction with NPC's, Branching Dialog for stories, Greater
choice for the player [than just endless slaughter], Background to the story,
Reasoning and Background for each included element (i.e. reasoning as to why
races are included), and generally a complete game. Articles that relate to
this are "Adding
Reason, "I want a dragon NOW! Daddy! NOW!"", "My
Learning Experience Approach", "Standard
Time and the creation of a short-game scene", "Linear
vs. Interactive", "A
story-less RPG" and many others. Depth is not easily defined,
but that is as close to a definition as you are going to get .
(New) Note about RTS combination with RPG
Real time strategy games are continuously adding elements of the RPG genre into them. In turn, RPG games are implementing RTS strategies in their creation. There is a new breed of games coming in and they will be in the form of cross RPG/RTS games. I have suggested before about elements that can be added into RPGs from the RTS side of things, but the additions that directly come from the RTS playing field will follow. Inventories have been discussed as possible additions to current RTS games. This would bring them more into line with games like X-Com (though, it was a Turn Based Strategy with RPG elements). Other elements that directly relate to RPG/RTS cross genre games are multiple units, inventories (already stated), stronger characterisation for RTS, and strategy elements for RPGs.
I want it clearly stated here about what I am trying to achieve with this document. This document started off as a combination of all the discussions at GameDev.Net and there was also a main contribution from my own thoughts and beliefs. I do not expect everything that I talk about in this document to be used and put in one game. I do not want to make a game that only uses these new systems. What I want is for people to realize that the system that has been being used for a long time now is flawed and can do with some improvements. You can't change the world overnight, but I hope to make my little dent in this genre of games for the long haul. I did not think that I really needed to state this, but recent events have led me to believe otherwise. I hope that you take this document the way that I release it and the way that I intend it.
Note about where this is all going
At the moment I am laboring to come up with some pictures for this document.
There is far too much text for the amount of graphics (none) that is in it.
Hopefully I will be able to get some images made once I get back to my place.
The other thing that needs to be done is some character work. It has been said
that there is not enough character in this document and that I need to lighten
it up and make it a little more humorous and less like a textbook. I have so
far strayed away from my usually chirpy nature and my numerous smiley faces
because I have been too lazy to get a copy of the smiley faces. I hope to characterize
this document more to that which most of you expect from me, and I hope to get
the images done soon. Once I have my basic engine completed, I will use some
screenshots and a bit of graphic editing to get the required results and the
point across. Thank-you everybody for your continuing support and ideas
I hope you find this document informative and/or useful...