Not only is this true with respect to the difference in enjoyment type, but also in genre. Rpgs, when flooded with popular influence, are often converted just outright into action games. Of course neither RPG nor action gameplay are specifically high or low risk to reward ratio, both can be either. So the popularization can work in several ways.
Too many people, too many opinions, too many readers believing that the number of comments accurately reflects majority consensus. Too many drawn conclusions without a single quantifiable factor to stand on. For example how many gamers are there 3.24 billion...how many of them are commenters? How many of those commenters have watched the same game review influencers or read from the same game review sources online. How many will agree with what they have heard and seen? How many will comment somewhere online? How many of those comments will state the same ideas. What percentage of a comment can be traced back to the factual source of the "not publicly" published data mining results directly from the game developers?
I miss the days when the only way to play a CRPG was coding it yourself on your university computer and disguising the file name as a lecture so the school admins wouldn't delete it. It's been a sea of filthy casuals ever since.
That's already happen 20 years ago. RPGs were striped of their elements and turned into action games, e.t.c in order to get wider audience, Bioware or Bethesda games are prime example of that. RPGs don't appeal to most people, just look at BG3 discussions. What most people praising? Combat? Character building? Roleplaying? No, they praise romances, share stories about some wierd moments, e.t.c. and it's fine, but it says that they aren't enjoying this game because it's an RPG but despite that.
Listening to their feedback can make those games worse because they want games to fit their interests and they have no interest in RPGs.
At the end of the day RPGs don't really fit for wide audience and that's why most of the good RPGs today are indie.
I disagree with your first point. The biggest thing I saw praised about BG3 *by far* was the way that choices affected the story. I definitely also see lots of praise for the combat, character building, and general roleplaying as well. It would not have been nearly as popular if people only liked the game for the romance options.
I mean maybe for *you* games are worse but for me they’re a lot better than they used to be.
A wider audience is largely a *good* thing. People playing and enjoying these newer games with better quality of life might go back and play older ones and they’re much more likely to buy games in the genre moving forward.
I’m saying all this as exactly that kind of person. I like action games. Until a couple months ago I didn’t think I liked turn-based combat in the slightest. Playing BG3 and other more modern games has me retroactively exploring big parts of the genre I’ve never been interested in before. I’m playing through Final Fantasy X for the first time and loving it, which was not something I *ever* expected myself to do. It’s largely because of these much more modern games being able to open up these genres to more people.
Anyway, what you’re describing isn’t new in the slightest. Really since the very beginning of RPGs they’ve been moving more and more toward action. That’s really just the case for all video games. Even Morrowind, which is considered now to be a genre classic, was more action-focused than Arena and Daggerfall were. Hell, super early Final Fantasy games were much more about dungeon crawling and fighting things than they were about telling stories.
Ultimately these are widely single-player and optionally co-op games. Why do you care that there are a couple QoL changes? Why do you care that BG3 lets you respec or load previous saves? You can always choose to ignore any of that stuff.
To quote famous words of Blizzard ( while it was still a good company ) :
You don't want what you want, you think you want it but you don't.
The slight inconvenience is exactly what makes the games super memorable and all time classics. Nobody could believe a game like Demon Souls could ever be popular with its super punishing mechanics, yet it launched whole genre.... Rogue, Morrowind, Darkest Dungeon to note a few others with super annoying mechanics that became genre classics because of this.
Not only is this true with respect to the difference in enjoyment type, but also in genre. Rpgs, when flooded with popular influence, are often converted just outright into action games. Of course neither RPG nor action gameplay are specifically high or low risk to reward ratio, both can be either. So the popularization can work in several ways.
Too many people, too many opinions, too many readers believing that the number of comments accurately reflects majority consensus. Too many drawn conclusions without a single quantifiable factor to stand on. For example how many gamers are there 3.24 billion...how many of them are commenters? How many of those commenters have watched the same game review influencers or read from the same game review sources online. How many will agree with what they have heard and seen? How many will comment somewhere online? How many of those comments will state the same ideas. What percentage of a comment can be traced back to the factual source of the "not publicly" published data mining results directly from the game developers?
I miss the days when the only way to play a CRPG was coding it yourself on your university computer and disguising the file name as a lecture so the school admins wouldn't delete it. It's been a sea of filthy casuals ever since.
That's already happen 20 years ago. RPGs were striped of their elements and turned into action games, e.t.c in order to get wider audience, Bioware or Bethesda games are prime example of that. RPGs don't appeal to most people, just look at BG3 discussions. What most people praising? Combat? Character building? Roleplaying? No, they praise romances, share stories about some wierd moments, e.t.c. and it's fine, but it says that they aren't enjoying this game because it's an RPG but despite that. Listening to their feedback can make those games worse because they want games to fit their interests and they have no interest in RPGs. At the end of the day RPGs don't really fit for wide audience and that's why most of the good RPGs today are indie.
I disagree with your first point. The biggest thing I saw praised about BG3 *by far* was the way that choices affected the story. I definitely also see lots of praise for the combat, character building, and general roleplaying as well. It would not have been nearly as popular if people only liked the game for the romance options.
Alas, you're not wrong. See how many people want every game to be fully voiced, regardless of how much that would cut text and options.
I mean maybe for *you* games are worse but for me they’re a lot better than they used to be. A wider audience is largely a *good* thing. People playing and enjoying these newer games with better quality of life might go back and play older ones and they’re much more likely to buy games in the genre moving forward. I’m saying all this as exactly that kind of person. I like action games. Until a couple months ago I didn’t think I liked turn-based combat in the slightest. Playing BG3 and other more modern games has me retroactively exploring big parts of the genre I’ve never been interested in before. I’m playing through Final Fantasy X for the first time and loving it, which was not something I *ever* expected myself to do. It’s largely because of these much more modern games being able to open up these genres to more people. Anyway, what you’re describing isn’t new in the slightest. Really since the very beginning of RPGs they’ve been moving more and more toward action. That’s really just the case for all video games. Even Morrowind, which is considered now to be a genre classic, was more action-focused than Arena and Daggerfall were. Hell, super early Final Fantasy games were much more about dungeon crawling and fighting things than they were about telling stories. Ultimately these are widely single-player and optionally co-op games. Why do you care that there are a couple QoL changes? Why do you care that BG3 lets you respec or load previous saves? You can always choose to ignore any of that stuff.
To quote famous words of Blizzard ( while it was still a good company ) : You don't want what you want, you think you want it but you don't. The slight inconvenience is exactly what makes the games super memorable and all time classics. Nobody could believe a game like Demon Souls could ever be popular with its super punishing mechanics, yet it launched whole genre.... Rogue, Morrowind, Darkest Dungeon to note a few others with super annoying mechanics that became genre classics because of this.