Shadowrun CRPG
Someone should license Shadowrun for a debut on the XBox. I'm tired of hack-n-slash games that call themselves RPGs. More and more often game developers are leaning toward the kill and advance model, and rather than incorporating compelling roleplaying stories, they're building a linear story where you just kill everything.
The most recent video game that I played that called itself an RPG was Sudeki. Now, people are saying Sudeki is a bad game, and I've not yet decided if I want to dispute that, but it has elements in common to other games that people do like, such as Baldur's Gate: Dark Alliance, which simply stunk, in my opinion.
When was the last time you could really interact with a person in a CRPG? In Sudeki, you don't interact with people, really. You pick from a couple of menu options of things you can say to each person. People in town are friendly and can be talked to. Creatures out of town are evil and must be destroyed. There is no middle ground. Not only can't you talk to these presumably intelligent (spellcasting) creatures to get yourself out of a jam, but you can't kill off the dumb townspeople.
And these RPGs are so linear. My walk from the first town in Sudeki to the second was as linear as it gets. There is no alternate route to take through the forest to get there; I must stay on the path provided. I guess the game designers were so busy creating the textures and maps for that one path that they couldn't be bothered to create a second. Likewise, the entire game is layed out this way. The towns are simple, the paths between them are direct.
Moreover, the paths are entirely too long and the stories, although like reading a book from end to end (something that roleplaying at a table is rarely like) are hideously difficult to remember unless you spend every contiguous hour from it's beginning playing the game to its conclusion. Some companies even boast about the number of hours of gameplay. "Over 40 hours of fresh content!" A game should never be measured in how many hours of fresh scenery it provides, especially if it forces you to walk past every inch of that scenery in order to complete it, slaying everything that gets in your path.
And combat. Let me say this about combat and RPGs. It's a concept that we talk about at the gaming table a reasonable amount. My character - who grew up in Illumina and was raised by wolves and has held a magic sword since it fell out of this slain father's hands and knows the woods as if he were a tree - my character can probably kill things pretty easily. Why on Earth should this be tied to my ability to mash buttons in a precise pattern? RPGs should be turn-based, not realtime. Gah!
What we need is a better system and a new genre. I present Shadowrun.
Shadowrun takes place in a not-too-distant future. The world is run more by corporations than government. Technology is pervasive - you can jack your brain directly into the 'net, and get body modifications that make you mostly cyborg. To complicate matters, nobody is entirely certain what caused the great reawakening of magic, but it was probably the native american shamans and the Great Ghost Dance. With the return of magic to the world you'll also see races of "metahumans" such as orcs and trolls - genetic mutations in the main strain of the human genome that are awakened by the magic.
What's the point of the game? In Shadowrun you typically play the part of a Shadowrunner going on "runs", or missions. Runs are covert operations, usually funded by an anonymous "Mr. Johnson" to do the dirty work of a powerful individual or corporation. You usually have a group with particular skills that does the run together and splits the fee when the job is done. It sounds pretty simple, but it never is.
Why does this model work for video games? Well, by itself maybe it doesn't. But I propose a few changes to the typical computer RPG to go along with the change of genre.
First, dialogue is always in layered menus. I can't remember what PC game it was (maybe the Temple of Elemental Evil?) that had circular cadcading context menus. I think this could work very well for dialogue. Assemble a sentence from a series of phrase parts rather than having preconstructed phrases prepared for you. Why would you know what you should ask someone about? Sifting through the options would make this aspect a little more realistic.
You should also be able to talk to your enemies. There might be no chance that you can talk them down, but at least give you the option to say things like "these aren't the droids you're looking for" and get away with it. Wouldn't that be too cool?
Also, each run should be mostly self-contained. I suppose this is like a mission log in a way, but it's slightly different. When you start playing the game, you should be able to select how long you want to play, and the game should generate a run based on your preference. Every so often, it could throw in a two-parter, just to spice things up.
If you wanted to carry an over-arcing plot, you could sprinkle pre-desigend runs in amongst the randomly generated ones in such a way that it would seem like just another run to the player. But then something different and unique would happen. Still, the duration of the run would be determined by the length of time available for play. All of this could be set up on an in-game web site that posted potential contracts for runs.
Playing this way offers interesting options for network play because you can gather a group of the required skill types for a fixed amount of time, play, and be done. Either start over or not.
If you do things in a run that might have an effect on future missions, this would be written up in the game log. For example, if you blow up a DocWagon, they might be less inclined to show up when your 911 bracelet transmits your flatline signal. Of if you ticked off a cop, he might show up in a later run to hunt you down. Each of these is self-contained, though. For people who follow from mission to mission, it'll all fit together. And for people who don't, it will seem like just another game. The main point is that you don't need to remember that you shouldn't mess around near Lone Star headquarters, the game just smacks you to remind you when you do.
I don't know. I have been told that my CRPG model won't sell, and that's probably true. But I can't be the only one who is tired of picking up pointless powerups and has to get the whole story spoon-fed to me because it's all prewritten.
Comments
Comment by Xyth on .
I think the least linear RPG I have played in the recent past was Morrowind. There were so many alternate roles for your character to take that it could be played over and over. The training of skills, especially thief type skills was neat. You get skill by doing the skill, not killing stuff. Worth a look if you missed it.
Comment by Owen on .
Nah, I played Morrowind. My issue with Morrowind is that it was too open-ended. I liked the ability to solve problems however I liked, and to do whatever I wanted, but there wasn't enough of a direction from the get-go to motivate me to care about doing one thing or the other.
Comment by Dan on .
Well, Fable will be the next big rpg out for XBox...but since you play the character from Youth to Old Age...I don't know if that'll be too open-ended for you...but it looks sweet. But, even though I like Sudeki, it IS too linear. I don't need to be dragged by the nose EVERY second...but it is right purdy, though.
Comment by Owen on .
That's the think about Sudeki - it's very pretty. It's hard not to like a game that pretty. On the other hand, it makes for getting bored quickly, although I am anxious to see where my nose gets dragged next.
Fable. If history does repeat, Fable is going to be a disappointment. I admit to not reading too much about the actual game, but I suspect that: 1) They call it roleplaying because they don't know how else to codify it. 2) The game is more of a toy like B&W than a game with a real story.
I could be totally wrong, and once again, the game looks very pretty. Too pretty to ignore. But I wish that some of these pretty games could have more substance. I hope Fable proves my expectations incorrect.
Comment by Pat on .
I've been wanting a good Shadowrun RPG for years now. I was trying to work out a reasonable way to make a MMORPG in the shadowrun world back when Ultima Online first came out. I think the biggest problem is getting the whole matrix thing to integrate with real life. There is supposed to be a correlation between what exists in real life and what's in the matrix, so you can disable specific locks and alarms and such, but it'd require alot of design to make that work correctly. Also, game time in the matrix is theoretically WAY slower (more things happen in a shorter period of time) than real life, and negotiating that without making people wait horrendous periods of time would require taking alot of the flavor out of it. I also think it'd be cool to allow people to actually design their own software, but that's probably not feasible.
Comment by Dan on .
GameSpy did another preview for Fable....
http://xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/fable/537969p1.html
Comment by Pat on .
According to the official shadowrun site, Microsoft owns the computer game rights to Shadowrun, but have no plans for it. They probably got it from FASA when they got Mechwarrior.
Comment by Owen on .
Well, that Fable review sets me at ease somewhat. It's more of a roleplaying game than I would have imagined, and it possibly solves Morrowind's problems of having just anything to do. It's definitely worth a rental come September 14th.
It doesn't surprise me that Microsoft owns the rights to Shadowrun, and would surprise me just as much to see it turn into yet another dry first-person war game or massively-multiplayer paycheck-eater.
As for writing custom programs for matrix combat, all I have to say about that is Paradroid.
Comment by Dan on .
The more I read about Fable, the more I can't wait for it...
http://xbox.ign.com/articles/537/537930p1.html
Comment by Josh on .
It is true that Microsoft owns the rights to Shadowrun, but it is not true that there are no plans for it. MS had something in the works for Shadowrun - I think Bungie was originally working on it because the project was dropped to focus on Halo 2. The project has since been reassigned to another crew and is again in development.
Comment by Owen on .
Can you provide a web site that corroborates this? I'd like to know more.
Comment by poomba on .
google for "shadowrun microsoft bungie" and you'll hit a few rumor sites that mention the shadowrun game rumors. Do realize that these are rumors about a shodowrun GAME, not RPG. One site claims it's being made by members of the Oni team *shudder*.
Comment by poomba on .
Pessimism aside, I've been imagining a Shadowrun CRPG for a long time. The system I'd like to see would be all about contacts (as the RPG is). You find/buy/earn contacts and they can send you on runs that they hear of/set up. This would mean a LOT of 'quests', but many you might never do (unless you can eventually get all of the contacts, which would mean it's linear). My idea was to dynamically create missions and levels for the runs. I'm sure someone at Bungie is talented enough to make a system of modular buildings, streets and such that could be randomly organized into a level for a each job (city, desert, jungle, docks, whatever) and have your team of runners do the job however they chose, whether it be guns blazing, stealth, diplomacy, social engineering, hacking. That and turn-based combat.
Comment by sumonut on .
there is a shadowrun rpg on the snes i think..get an emulator an try it its nice..
Comment by Anonymous on .
Executed well, Shadowrun would be very popular. It would pull both sci-fi and fantasy fans as well as the players interested in a modern setting.
Comment by albert on .
there are 2 video game versions of shadowrun released in the u.s.(3 in japan). one for super nes; the other for sega gensis. in my personal opinion, the sega version is a lot closer to the paper-and-pen shadowrun than super nes. on the sega, you have the ability of using contacts, mr. johnsons, and stores like that of the rpg. also you could raise the attributes and skills that are given to you like the rpg.
Comment by Anonymous on .
I was just thinking about MMO's, and how they are all dissapointing compared to EQ, and even it has it's downs once you get to the end game.
I was posting my "I quit" message on my EQ2 forums, much the same as I did for L2, HZ, SWG, AO, etc.., when I thought about Shadowrun. I used to play it on paper and fondly remember the platform game also. I was thiking, "Man! I wish there was a SR MMO, that's something I could retain interest in!" All of that led me here of course.
Just wish they'd make an MMO based in the SR world. At the very least yes, an Xbox title.
Comment by Owen on .
I'm not sure how I feel about a person who likes EQ dictating the look/feel of a Shadowrun game. I get this oogy feeling like I'm drowning in slime.
Comment by Anonymous on .
I would gladly contribute to the funding to the making of a Shadowrun MMO, but I think it would be a shame if a company attempted to create it without actually knowing Shadowrun, (experienced the hours of play round the table every friday afternoon). It should be done by a company which wouldn't just cop in on the nama knowing that we Shadowrunners WOULD buy it, just because it was Shadowrun, Microsoft is ideal, -i don't think they need MORE money-.
Comment by morgan on .
The owner (creator) of Wizkids games bought the licenses from FASA for shadowrun. I talked to him shortly after he bought them at a convention. I was interested in the gaming license. He assured me that as the (former?) VP of games at Microsoft that they would make an excellent shadowrun game. I had my doubts then. It has be more then 3 years since then.
I agree with you that the shadowrun world would be a great RPG world to make a game in. My thought is to dynamically create the mission using a LISP type language
(Clips) to create content on the fly and have allot of tags on the character to record things that have been done, such as killing a cop means they are hunting you.
I would leave out most of the Matrix stuff from shadowrun as that is more of a sideshow for most players.
I think the basic flaw in most CRPG games is the lack of depth in the world. We don%u2019t really need the world to be the prettiest, we need it to be BIG. I would have (in the beginning) a flat world map that you could jump into at points and the number of points would increase as you gained tags (experience or encounters).
Comment by yd on .
I'm thinking of a couple of points about your idea of what better RPGs should be like. This paragraph is here because the following is not a proper introduction; I'm a bit too lazy to shape this whole text properly.
For any MMOG it entirely comes down to the choices you make when outlining the gameplay mechanics you want to pursue. Even if you manage to capture the innermost essence of what defines the shadowrun universe in terms of your gaming world and characters, it'll all be completely useless if you don't nail the gameplay area, choosing just which elements you want to develop in such a way that you're still left with something fun to play in the end.
The big problem with porting a pen and paper RPG system to a computer game is the fundamental flaw that computers are dumb. The sky is not the limit; you have to be very selective of what gameplay elements you choose to develop, because you can only invest on an extremely limited subset. This is why in most games you're confined to shooting your weapon and casting your spells; if there is a door you may open it or use your lockpicking skill, but 98% of the time you can't choose to steal some explosives from the construction site down the street and demolish the door and the surrounding wall (this is what makes pen and paper systems so involving -- you're limited only by your imagination), unless that's what the developers wanted you to do.
The common response to this by players is the idea that maybe developers should just start thinking of, and implementing, more choices into their worlds: "give us something that's truly interactive, with that organic feel that you can talk to anyone, do anything you can imagine". Unfortunately the amount of time and money required tends to grow exponentially when you add different subsystems that need to seamlessly interact with all your other systems. It becomes apparent that investing into increasing levels of complexity and interwoven interaction between all your systems (to create that truly realistic feel that you're not so limited by the game's mechanics but rather by your own imagination) is more of a long term strategy. I do not think we're at the stage where a group can just sit down for three years and end up with the type of RPGs that most console RPG players envision and push for. But we're breaking new ground with (most) new game cycles.
Games like GTA are making an interesting attempt at integrating a bunch of different stuff together into one product. I'm thinking of what made GTA 3 successful, and then the improvements that have subsequently made Vice City and San Andreas even more appealing to the people who enjoyed the first game. They've been basically selling the same game ever since GTA 3, but adding more and more systems into it, more flexibility, a bigger world, different styles of interactivity. Even if you loathe the GTA series, you'd be a fool not to take notice of what they're doing; it's working tremendously well (at least I believe so, as far as sales), and the different types of interactive systems their newest GTA edition boasts can translate almost directly into cooler RPGs in the future, from designers who are paying attention. I don't want to sit here and dissect GTA though. It doesn't even touch a lot of the systems that are essential for good RPGs, and it's only worth a mention because it's doing what most RPGs also strive to do, which is add more options for the player to do things and interact with the world in interesting ways.
Moving on to another point. Because of the way graphics technology is advancing, the trend right now is to come out with better and better graphics as a necessary selling point; the amount of money and talent this feature alone requires is just ridiculous. As the market becomes more expensive to compete in (and more competitive, but that in itself is a good thing), investors want more assurances that you're maximizing commercial success with every new game. What this means is that more time and resources are dedicated towards graphics and proven gameplay concepts, and this makes it harder to break new ground in terms of creating new, more interesting game systems.
Smart game developers are quickly realizing that the formula for surviving in the industry while still remaining true to the ideal of creating fun new games is to come up with the simplest possible concepts yielding the most amount of fun per dollar hour of development. Enter games like the sims, and katamari damacy (ok, maybe katamari was just some jap's pipe dream that actually ended up getting made, but my point still stands as it's an addictively simple game). Think about the sims for a minute if you have any experience with it. The Sims 2 is actually somewhat simpler to play than the first. It has a few new systems and cooler details, but that's about it. If you have any imagination in terms of game design, you can probably think of a dozen awesome things that could be done with that game; pretty much any system you can think of could be beefed up into something a *lot* deeper and more intricate, creating a monster of a game with endless possibilities. But why? Any one idea you can think of would take a whole 1-3 year cycle between concept and storeshelves. Isn't it more effective to take that time and make The Sims 3, identify a few new systems that are simple to implement and will yield maximal amount of new players, and implement those instead of trying to take any one particular system into unparalleled (even if undeniably awesome) new depths?
That's enough points, this text is already twice as big as I'd intended. My main point is that a great RPG is a culmination of a lot of different systems; because of the way the market works, each of these systems ends up being furthered separately in separate games. Because there is a strong tendency right now towards games that attempt a wider variety of simpler things in order to have more predictable commercial success, we won't be seeing a lot of new RPGs that emphasize depth rather than fluff for a while. But contributing factors are always changing, so obviously things won't stay the same way for very long. As developers gain more experience in integrating different systems and creating more interactive worlds, it's only a matter of time before they gain the confidence necessary to attempt RPGs with the increased depth we all hope for -- whether they're successful or not remains to be seen.
I always hate to mention this because I consider it an insult to the reader's intelligence, but all of the previous statements are obviously personal opinion, except hard figures which have only a 50/50 chance of being made up for the sake of bolstering my argument. Therefore what I write may not reflect the views of anyone else!
Comment by Dom on .
Yeah, although it may not be extremely profitable, it is still worth the development. Just look at Restricted Area, the worst shadowrun game made yet. So many people bought that game and it's doing great. If only some real development went to exand the genesis version of shadowrun, i'd nut myself.
Comment by Dom on .
Yeah, although it may not be extremely profitable, it is still worth the development. Just look at Restricted Area, the worst shadowrun game made yet. So many people bought that game and it's doing great. If only some real development went to exand the genesis version of shadowrun, i'd nut myself.
Comment by malakai on .
This coversation may be dead by now, but in my opinion, the best way to make the shadowrun RPG, would be to combine Deus Ex style play, with Neverwinter Nights modding ability (or perhaps Morrowind?). Basically, maybe not so much of an online only game as like a lan game with the ability to customize everything you can. I'd even say with the ability to import your own 3DSMax models and whatnot. That seems like it would be the best way to make this game successful. Also, the German public seems to have a really big fanatical interest in cyber-punk (going by sterotypes I suppose), so maybe a release there wouldn't hurt too much.
As for an online MMO of Shadowrun? Well... it would have to be more like a combonation of a shooter/RPG in my opinion, but you would be able to use the astral plane as a sort of 'second vision' kind of like the predator in AvP, where you could ONLY see invisible things and astral beings. I'm more than willing to help out in the mapping aspect of this if anyone really wants to have a go at this. I REALLY WANT TO SEE THIS GAME. Personally I think this game would have to be created by the public modders and not-so-much the big corporations, as they might water it down due to budgeting or whatever. Well, just my $0.02 if anyone still reads this.
Comment by maevian@gmail.com on .
To the anonymous poster wanting to contribute to a shadowrun MMO please e-mail me at maevian@gmail.com . Or if anybody else would like to contribute or know people who may be interested please contact me. I have started a company that is planning on developing it.