Let's Put More 'Roleplaying' Into 'Roleplaying Games' | MMORPG.com

System · October 29

Let's Put More 'Roleplaying' Into 'Roleplaying Games' | MMORPG.com

Victoria poses that it feels like the MMORPG community as a whole doesn't actually like to emphasize thae opportunity to roleplay, but are players taking the roleplay in RPG for granted?

Read the full story here

Slapshot1188 · October 29

I think the biggest driver is the shift to "action" RPG controls. Where your twitch skills dictate the success or failure of your character.

It may make for a more fun game for some, but it's certainly strange to tie the ability of my Archer character who has had a bow in his hands for 30 years, to my ability to move a targeting reticule with a mouse and time the clicking of a button.

It's also resulted in a much more fast paced kind of game where nobody takes the time to read or listen to conversations in game. Click, Click, Click... go pew pew pew.

Nick_Shively · October 29

I personally think a lot of that has to do with the removal or simplification of sandbox elements or life skills in modern MMORPGs. In older MMORPGs, EverQuest, SWG, RuneScape, Tibia, Ragnarok Online, etc., there was a huge amount of player freedom and player actions directly affecting other players and/or the world they lived in.

Therefore, there wasn't necessarily a need to 'roleplay' because the games facilitated playing in a game that actually fit a role, however, the end result was still the same. Lots of players took on specialized roles and became well-known simply for playing the game in a different way, but not necessarily needing to 'pretend'.

Now we just get games where everyone is a nameless hero and lifeskills are a mini-game instead of a main component. There's a world auction house than can be accessed from every major hub and not individual vendors pedaling their goods around the world. Everything is easier, more streamlined, and thus has less character.

Angrakhan · October 29

The biggest issue, the elephant in the room if you will, is that RPG stands for "Role Playing Game" with an emphasis on the word Role. The idea is you, as the player, are playing a role in a game similar to how an actor plays a role in a play only unlike a play the script is an evolving story that can completely change course depending on the actions the player takes. A good Dungeon Master in a D&D TTRPG session manages this very well. They will come prepared not with a rigid story that either works or fails based on the player's actions, but rather a whole flow diagram laid out of key events and potential outcomes to see where the story goes.

Video games are very limited in being able to implement this. For sure there have been efforts, but even in an open world game where "decisions matter" you will find there are still only a handful of possible outcomes because of the limitations of building a game. Maybe generative AI will one day be able to change that so that an AI game master can radically change your experience in a game such that no two playthroughs will ever be remotely the same. Not that there's 1 of 8 possible endings, and only by the way, here's a guide to tell you which choices to make to see each one.

As such 'RPG' when it comes to video games has a very different definition than a TTRPG. In video game land it simply refers to a set of tropes you expect to see that if you have enough of them it qualifies as an RPG. A few examples are, levels, skills, gear, adversaries to defeat that grant xp and gear so you can get more levels and skills, quests, a story of which you're a key part. That's all great but while you find all of those things in a TTRPG they are just the framework and rules upon which you play your role. In video games they are all there is to the R in RPG. You are not playing a role with the same gravitas as you are in a TTRPG. Even in BG3, which as I understand has quite a bit of flexibility in the choices you make, the Dungeon Master (which is a computer program) cannot decide that based on your actions, you get teleported to a completely different world to take on an adventure unless the developers previously coded it to make it possible. All a TTRPG DM has to do is think of it on a whim and jot down some notes as to how that all should play out. Development time: 10-20 minutes on his or her lunch break before your next session.

From a technical perspective I think we're still a ways off from ever seeing a what I consider a true RPG on a computer or console. AI, in some form, will have to drive it if it will ever exist. Right now AI is too insanely expensive to run like that just for people's entertainment. Maybe in another decade?

Neoyoshi · October 29

I believe these elements can still exist in future mmorpg's, the developers just have to care enough about it's community to give the players the correct tools to allow that type of expression.

Japanese mmorpg's or even multiplayer games in particular have a much better chance of having these tools because of the player culture in japan calls for it.

Aeander · October 29

Story choices are all well and good, but it's build choices that get my neurons firing. Games like Guild Wars, Baldur's Gate 3, Kingdoms of Amalur, Path of Exile, Grim Dawn, and Last Epoch. Give me big skill trees, advanced class systems, and other exciting toys for me to play with.

Headquake · October 29

To me two thing can easily help with that in mmorpg. First force the player to have an interaction when they buy/sell item to each other ( fuck auction house ) and also bring back old school gamemaster that would take control of monster and create random event like a dnd gm like old school ultima online private roleplay server,

Aeander · October 29

Headquake said:

First force the player to have an interaction when they buy/sell item to each other ( fuck auction house )

How about no?

Ridrith · October 29

Roleplayers are going to RP no matter what, as long as the game actually gives them a space and features to make it happen. Having 'RP' tagged servers is a huge bonus. Putting superfluous features into the game that serve nothing more than to improve/add to immersion is another. Being able to WALK, sit in chairs, custom emotes, etc. That's really all it takes.

Moonguard on WoW is a MASSIVE server Alliance side. Wyrmrest is the Horde dominated server. These two communities though are incredibly large. There's plenty of tools through addons/mods that allows them to expand upon what's already in the game even more.

Moonguard has massive public events happening all the time.

FF14 on the other hand, I've recently went back and spent a month in the game. My god, Yoshi-P and Square need to do something about mods. Big time. Nude mods, paid nude mods, etc are everywhere. Mare allows you to instantly download anybody's mods around you if you share a code, you can go into linkshells that allow you multiple people in there without having to share codes, etc. The amount of modding going on in that game is insane. They're totally changing their character models, making them huge, etc. The porn creep in that game is ludicrous. I'll chalk it up to many of them watching so much anime that they often forget what is and isn't socially acceptable. FF14 went the wrong way where it concerns RP features through mods. Despite having tons of costumes, outfits, emotes, etc.

Nebless · October 29

One thing that kills Role Playing in a game is when an outside force, be it the game company or other players try to tell you just how you'll role play / what's acceptable or not.

Because role play means something different to every player. For me it means deciding on a personality for my character and playing him that way. SWTOR is probably the best for supporting that since you can be a 'good' Sith or 'bad' Jedi etc...

cameltosis · October 30

I found the article really difficult to read. As in sentence structure and terminology, not content. Took me a while to get through, and I still don't really understand the examples given.

I also feel like the author has a really narrow definition of what roleplaying is, mostly refering to personality / in-person roleplaying (which is fine) and engaging storytelling (which isn't roleplaying).

About the only thing I really agreed with is that roleplaying has diminished in MMORPGs.

Action combat has dramatically diminished combat roleplaying (my favourite type of roleplaying). I love combat roles. This, more than anything, is what helps me define my character and my approach to the game - also because the majority of content is combat-orientated, my combat role has increased importance. But, there are less combat roles today than in the past, and those roles have been watered down a ton, so they often don't make much difference in how you play the game, its more of a cosmetic choice.

Economic roles have been dramatically diminished. This type of roleplaying has largely been sacrificed on the alter of loot. Your choice of crafter really doesn't change the way you play the game very much and has minimal effect on gameplay.

In-character roleplaying (the sort referred to in the article) has been diminished. This was never really supported in terms of rewards, quests, or specific gameplay, this was always more of a sandbox feature. The devs would provide us with the tools - like emotes, expressions, moods, dances and the like - and then the community would use those tools for their own roleplaying fun. This still exists, but devs are giving us less tools than in the past.

The only type of roleplaying that I think has improved over the years is personality roleplaying. We're being given more choices of how we complete quests, in theory determining our personality. Are we good characters, or evil? Are we greedy, or generous? Quest choices let us play out these personality roles.......but it's usually extremely weak. The choices rarely have any sort of consequence or meaning, and can often be re-done. It's still an improvement on the early days of MMORPGs where this type of roleplaying didn't exist, but it's still miles behind something like The Witcher 3 which specialises in this type of roleplaying.

I'm sure there are other types of roleplaying that people can think of, but these are the main 4 I can think of that exist within MMORPGs.

Alverant · October 30

I think there needs to be a bigger non-combat role, otherwise it's just another "go here, kill everything" game. Real RP needs other people.

Valdheim · October 30

Private servers are where the RP is at!

A good friend of mine exclusively plays on private RP servers (mostly Ultima Online) and the stories he tells me make me consider doing the same, but unfortunately I just can't get into Ultima anymore.

riningear · October 30

cameltosis said:

. . .

Honestly this was a really difficult piece to write because "roleplaying" has such a massive definition and I didn't want to spiral out of control of the scope of what I was tasking myself to do.

I actually had a bit cut where I talk about EVE Online as a substantial roleplaying opportunity where everyone engages in, well, their role, but that's in part because of the structure of the game itself lending really well to expecting everyone to play their part. Rarely do we ever see projects work on such massive scales anymore; many have tried.

Basically, yeah I agree.

(Also to the commenter who pointed out the hell of FFXIV mods: I play vanilla for many reasons, and all my friends know I have some strong words about modding and roleplaying.)

Scot · October 30

I agree with most of the reasons posters have given, but not the technical difficulties of going from TTRPG to a video game. Role playing in MMORPG's has declined over the years and I doubt the technical difficulties have got worse over that period.

For me the biggest factor have not been mentioned, the drive to solo only gameplay. Solo players flooded MMOs from WoW onwards and they don't want to interact with other players. So the proportion of players who did want to role play plummeted and then the developers started to cater to the solo players. That meant reducing the importance of anything where interaction occurred be it player sellers, grouping, time outs for "fatigue", a crafting system where you could not make everything yourself and so on.

Once you remove all that interaction immersion roleplaying is in dire straits and what I think of as "MMORPG role playing" has to become far more staged. You have to organise it more because there is far less in the world to bring players together.

Roleplayers have of course fought back against this, they carry on even when MMORPG's are now made for the solo crowd. But it becomes harder with every new MMO, in many ways it is better to stay in the MMORPG you are already roleplaying in.

anthony20 · October 30

The only thing I can think of that goes on this is original eq eastern commons cave where it was laggy as hell dial up and u just looked at everybody’s wares seeing if you have enough pocket change for something magical

KnightFalz · October 30

You're free to put as much role-playing in to role-playing games as you wish. Most games have guilds so dedicated so that those inclined can gather together. It's not something that can be compelled on a person even if a game insists on player interaction.

mitech616 · October 30

I think we're missing the broader point here, but A LOT. What we're ignoring is that all these games are still VERY MUCH RPGs. The fact that they don't conform to Victoria's or someone else's ideal of olayer behavior and activities is wholly irrelevant!

By their very definition, these games have you playing a character, a "role" outside if your reality. You're playing as a different person through a story that isn't your own life. And for nearly ALL players, that is (and has always been) enough of an experience. What Victoria is actually lamenting is the lessening or spreading out of a LARP-style community. But that is NOT what defines an RPG.

Back when all RPGs were single-player, they were still an RPG. Back when MUDs existed (yeah, I played MUDs), 99% of players just played the game and THAT was the RP. When UO and EQ came on the scene, again 99% of players just PLAYED THE GAME, and that was the RP.

Fast forward to the creation of special "RP" servers on some popular MMOs like WoW and LotRO, and there is a NEW type of RP happening. An immersive, more dedicated, and more "severe" form of RP. And thst's all well and good. But to in any way believe that those RP servers are the "true" or only real form of RP in games is short sighted and shallow.

Most people just don't want to overly pretend, change their way of speaking, have an accent, or participate in strange online social behavior as part of their gameplay. They want to immerse themselves in a unique online world and experience. But they may not want to participate in what often becomes (in my experiences, as least) a weird cringe-fest of people who get way too serious about their online persona.

cameltosis · October 31

mitech616 said:

By their very definition, these games have you playing a character, a "role" outside if your reality. You're playing as a different person through a story that isn't your own life. And for nearly ALL players, that is (and has always been) enough of an experience. What Victoria is actually lamenting is the lessening or spreading out of a LARP-style community. But that is NOT what defines an RPG.

What you are describing isn't a roleplaying game.

Simply playing a game as a character isn't roleplaying. Like, not even close. Otherwise the vast majority of games would be RPGs.....and that's just not true. That would make Mario Kart an RPG, it would make all the Zelda games RPGs, every Assassins Creed would be an RPG.....and they just aren't.

Boiled down to it's most simple, roleplaying involves the player interacting (or playing...) with their role, then seeing how those choices play out in the game world. If you aren't making any choices about your role (or if there aren't any roles at all) then it's not an RPG. A character is not a role.

So, combat roleplaying, at it's most basic, is choosing whether to be tank, healer, dps or other role. For the most basic games, thats the only choice, but most RPGs with good combat roleplaying allow you to keep making further choices. Burst vs Sustained DPS. HoTs vs Direct heals. Mitigation vs Avoidance tanks. Different specs, different skills, different gear sets etc all play into this type of roleplaying, as each choice changes how the game plays.

Each type of roleplaying has different ways to interact with it. The LARP style roleplaying u are referring to is just one type of roleplaying. There are combat roles, economic roles, personality roles, hell, you could argue a game like The Sims has family/sexual roleplaying (its a very different experience playing the game as a batchelor, compared to say starting a family and having to look after kids).

elric_of_melnibone · October 31

Nick_Shively said:

I personally think a lot of that has to do with the removal or simplification of sandbox elements or life skills in modern MMORPGs. In older MMORPGs, EverQuest, SWG, RuneScape, Tibia, Ragnarok Online, etc., there was a huge amount of player freedom and player actions directly affecting other players and/or the world they lived in.

Therefore, there wasn't necessarily a need to 'roleplay' because the games facilitated playing in a game that actually fit a role, however, the end result was still the same. Lots of players took on specialized roles and became well-known simply for playing the game in a different way, but not necessarily needing to 'pretend'.

Now we just get games where everyone is a nameless hero and lifeskills are a mini-game instead of a main component. There's a world auction house than can be accessed from every major hub and not individual vendors pedaling their goods around the world. Everything is easier, more streamlined, and thus has less character.

Nailed it.

ET3D · October 31

The only game I experienced which I felt encouraged role playing was City of Heroes. A character had a background field, pure text which the player could fill. Other players could see this. This is a trivial thing to add, and it encourages players to tell others about themselves and lets others connect to other players and their concept. I wonder why other games haven't implemented this simple concept.

The other thing about CoH which IMO encouraged roleplaying was the range of possible looks. In most MMOs what you wear reflects what you found in the game, and, if not, what you bought with real money. Looking the way you want is an effort. In CoH it reflected how you wanted your character to look, and available up front.

So in CoH I could see someone who looked interesting, and check their bio and then perhaps connect to them. In other games I just saw similar-looking characters I knew nothing about. Trying to roleplay then becomes an effort, instead of something natural.

Lithuanian · October 31

[Wall of text]
For me, RP is kind of good acting. I become someone other. I have my role, I have to stick to the boundaries.
And to act well, I must be walking encyclopaedia.
Don't yell just now - let me explain. So, I decide to become an Elf. First - I must choose RP appropriate name. No, "Gul'dan", "President_Nixon", "Me_own_u_all_noobs", "UwU", "YOLO", "Darth Plague" does not fit. In order to have appropriate name, I must know at least basic Elf lore and language.
Few days of research later, I realise my name "Galhadrin el Anar" is Lore appropriate, is right within Elf language and has some normal meaning. So far - easy.
Now, to act as this "Galhadrin" I must know about game Elves. I spend some week in studying their history. Based on that, I choose my character's background. Background cannot conflict with local lore. So, my character must be at least in basic line with the lore.
Thus, my toon must know the lore, at least basic. Like his own Kings, the town he was born.
Then, my toon must define his own relations witht he world. To do this, I must study the lore: are my Elves in conflict with MudFrog race? What about TrollOrcs? Dwarfgiants? What do my Elves know about other races? How are they expected to behave towards all others? There could be that my Elves are in constant war with Humans and hate all Humans. Contrary, my Elves (lore says) have deep respect for SpitOrc race, considering these to be allies. Naturally, I must dislike one and like other.

When this easy work is done (few weeks of studies), I have to remember all this all the time and act accordingly.

Easy to say, such grand task is not for me and for me it seems impossible.
But all respect to those who can roleplay.

ET3D · October 31

Lithuanian, I think that's much easier if your first character isn't an RP one, and you only do that later. By the time you've played far into the game you get an idea about the lore, and can fit a new character into this. Then you can start roleplaying.

olepi · October 31

To me there are two basic levels or tiers of roleplaying. The first one is that your character plays a role in the game based on their skills or class. A tank's role is to tank, etc. A good RPG game lets you play it one way say as an archer, and then come back to play again as a shape-shifting bear druid. Those two roles should play differently enough so that you have fun both times.

My first MMORPG, DAOC, had this too. My first toon was a Minstrel and he played dramatically differently than my Spirit Cabalist. In a group they had completely different roles to play, my Cleric had another role to play. They were not interchangeable.

This got watered down because it was hard to solo some of the classes, and people wanted to progress while playing solo. It wasn't much fun to be a solo Cleric with no group to heal, and very slow to progress. Today's MMORPG's don't play like that; ESO for example lets everybody play about the same, with few skills that are radically different between classes. Everybody can do everything and therefore they have no defined role at all.

The second and more involved roleplaying is the person assuming a specific role and acting accordingly. Some games had roleplaying servers that required that. Few gamers want to go to this length but it can be fun if all do it. For example, in Pirates of the Caribbean Sea I was a member of a British Naval guild. We had regular drills for formation sailing and fighting using naval jargon. We also had classes with specific roles, so as a Freetrader my role was to set up and run industries to make ammunition and ship supplies. I had to transport goods around to do this and play a support role in naval battles. We pretended to be actual British naval captains and acted like it.

Today's action MMO's don't facilitate the first type of roleplaying, since the "class" you are is based on what weapon you have. Only a small number of skills are available and everybody can do everything. Want to heal? Equip the healing staff, for range equip a bow or a spell, for melee equip a sword. You can do everything and play every role. Roles mean little and there isn't much difference in multiple playthroughs.

Scot · October 31

Posters have been talking about the difference between immersion roleplaying and 'actual roleplaying'. To me both are roleplaying, but unless you are interacting with other roleplayers what are you doing in a MMO that you could not do in a solo RPG? Immersion was born in solo RPG's but you don't have to carry on wearing what are in effect blinkers about the world of roleplaying in MMORPG's.

Wargfoot · October 31

Watching people slaughter ye olde english at yonder shoppe is enough to cause me to permanently log out of the internet.

Howdy, Stranger!

Let's Put More 'Roleplaying' Into 'Roleplaying Games' | MMORPG.com

Comments

Howdy, Stranger!

Quick Links

Let's Put More 'Roleplaying' Into 'Roleplaying Games' | MMORPG.com

Comments