In the advent of Skyrim’s release, it seems appropriate to sum up everything that has happened thus far with role playing games in this editorial. The views expressed in this article are those by a man who stands in between the old and new. While effort is taken to offer the most balanced opinion possible in the subject, there will still be people who will be keen to point out various mistakes and philosophical complications from sources both mainstream and obscure. Whatever these criticisms are, this article was not written to entertain such notions. What this ultimately tries to express is that we should merely enjoy games as they are and not be caught up by things both old and new. Quality is what counts, and others need not be hindered from enjoying what their counterparts may not prefer.

The sight of an enraged nerd pushing up his glasses while talking about how video games are so watered down and catered to casual fans can be pretty funny, but there are some points that count in game development and marketing upon giving the progression of western-style role playing games a closer look. To do so, we must first look at a brief history of computer RPGs, mostly those made in the western hemisphere of the world. There is much history in the making of these vehicles of stories, visualizations, and products of imagination through the power of interactive media.

It all started with the desire to convert the classic pen-and-paper RPG into a digital experience during the 1970′s. This was achieved mainly with text-based adventure games, the most popular of which is Rogue. While not the first in its genre, Rogue stood out with its clever use of ASCII characters to map out dungeons and the use of movement keys to command your character to a certain direction. The trends set by these games evolved with the advancement of computer technology and role playing games start coming out in other platforms, especially in consoles.

There are distinctions between RPGs that most people in the western world would associate with dungeon-crawling and dragon-slaying, and those made in the eastern half of the world. The Japanese were not far behind in influencing modern RPGs. While counted as a separate genre, the JRPGs that were released in Europe and North America did have a sizeable audience. Certain elements like random enemy encounters, turn-based combat, and the party system has crossed over to western RPGs and vice versa. The gameplay elements traded back and forth between the two gaming cultures in terms of their role playing games have been a topic of discussion for decades now, and even new generations of gamers see the convergence between those that are fundamentally different.

Once graphics had improved to the point of being much less abstract than its predecessors, the attention turned towards the actual gameplay. With better control over the character, actions can now be taken directly through the controls. Blizzard Entertainment had taken in a group of developers who later became known as Blizzard North, and these guys had a simple concept to make RPGs a more hands-on experience, drifting away from the realm of complicated character sheets and various manuals that explain the mechanics. The game that exemplified this was Diablo.

Perhaps it wasn’t the first game to take a more direct and automated approach to role playing games, but it surely popularized and innovated this approach. Soon enough, the floodgates were opened and various games of this new hack-and-slash approach came and made RPGs more accessible to new players. As more titles came out with various new additions to the overall gameplay, eyebrows started to rise up as certain groups of people started to notice things that they didn’t really agree with. Most of these debates focused on the choice between top-down and first person perspectives in RPGs.

From here, the debate between the top-down isometric perspective and the first person perspective began to rage. The argument from the old school isometric crowd tries to counter the direct experience offered by first person is that character building must be dictated by the precepts and algorithms stated in the ruleset. Therefore, if you give a character adequate dexterity, for example, that character is able to dodge attacks more easily than someone who has less dexterity or agility. With the first person controls, you can just dodge as well as you please through your own mechanics. The new school refutes this argument as misguided and misinformed.

What the first person school tries to get across is the direct experience of “role playing” at its very essence, being one with the character and interacting with NPCs and enemies “as the character”. As for combat, it’s no longer just about clicking on enemies to take them out, but actually incorporating skill and intelligence in part of the player himself to engage the enemy as optimally as possible. If other mechanics like stealth and ranged attacks are called upon, the first person perspective offers certain advantages and challenges that offer a different experience from the classical isometric perspective.

These debates all come down to what various groups of people think about the priorities being undertaken by game developers. Old schoolers feel that gameplay has taken a backseat for aesthetics, while the new generation feel that these old timers are frowning upon innovation and experimentation. Whether you’re on one side or the other, the only real thing we can take from this is that we like good RPGs. Whatever we give for a good role playing game must pay dividends in gameplay experience, and that’s really what matters most in the end.

So whenever you see a guy who moans about how bad Fallout 3 or Oblivion really was and how games like Baldur’s Gate and Arcanum are no longer made, you should understand that he may have a point but he’s wasting too much time criticizing new games than taking time to find a way to enjoy them as new releases pave way to new ways to play role playing games “digitally”. The same can be said for whipper snappers who blow a raspberry at older games that don’t look as good as what they’re growing up with in this day and age, only caring about games with “awesome graphics”. In terms of singleplayer experiences, there is always a finite amount of replay value in even the most well-made of role playing games. Perhaps they should then look towards an online option for their gaming needs. This is where MMORPGs come in to provide replay value that is virtually unlimited.

Certain problems and challenges still hinder MMORPGs complete dominance of the mainstream market. While games like World of Warcraft has raked in unprecedented sums through quality and consistency, classical role playing elements seem to be lacking in these newfangled games. What they do have over their singleplayer counterparts is the ability to communicate and interact with other players, breaking the barriers between the so-called nerd and the outside world. All of a sudden, we’re seeing video game nerds with a pretty good amount of social skills, or at least enough to interact with fellow players through chat or VOIP. That’s contrary now to the classical image of a nerd, and this is bound to continue with the innovations that may take place in MMORPGs in the coming years.

Of course, that does not take away from the enjoyment that one may take from playing a quality singleplayer computer role playing game. But the most debated catalyst of change in RPGs of recent memory has been the casual gamer. Hasty and tempermental, the casual gamer feels no need to delve deep into lore and doesn’t care any less for whatever sophistication there may be in any ruleset. All he ever wants to do in a game is to kill things and be the hero, so recent releases have made effort in catering to these desires. Various things happen when developers try to please as many people as possible. While profits do increase, certain qualities of these games tend to take a nosedive. However, it’s not right to say that these new games are inferior to their predecessors just because they’re made to have casual gamers be just as excited about them as hardcore RPG fans are. There’s something else going on in the background while more people start to take video games as a serious medium.

The games that try to be casual from the get go are split into two, which are those that are good because they’re casual to begin with and those that are made casual forcefully, despite being in a genre that takes a bit more attention for more than just a quick playthrough. If you take an RPG and make it for casual fans to begin with and not just for the express purpose of making it more palatable, then perhaps we do have a problem. There have been games that may have had potential in their premise, but have suffered greatly due to the influence of people who want it to be profitable and easy to begin with. Quality titles nowadays are both casual-friendly and sophisticated at the same time.

In the end, it really is about quality of the gameplay experience that truly counts. Perhaps some may still complain about certain things like replay value and cohesiveness, but game design has never been a clear cut science to begin with. As it evolves, so will role playing games.