CRPG like BG3 vs. MMORPG (?)

[devasolar]

Aside from hardware issues, which are an issue with any game, I noticed that the expectations for games like BG3 were simply wrong for the really few players who wrote a bad review. Sometimes other CRPGs were cited whose design appealed more to the players, but sometimes it was simply things that had no place in a CRPG. This made me think that BG3 was seen by some players as a kind of MMORPG at first glance because they simply don't know anything else.

I wonder why MMORPGs have the abbreviation ‘RPG’ in their name, because in my opinion they have only marginally anything to do with the original idea of a classic role-playing game, there are simply too many similarities missing - and it ensures that the classification RPG can be misunderstood. It somehow dilutes and misinterprets the term.

Please correct me if I've got this wrong:

MMORPG:
- mostly OpenWorld
- Free character development based on experience points, no groups necessary (although quite often appropriate)
- Scaling of weapons and armour (not always, depending on game rules)
- Talents and skills scale with equipped items, buffs or level ups
- Grinding, crafting of items depending on the rules
- Regular respawning of generic creatures
- Trading in game items or characters in public markets, sometimes for real money
- a relatively short ‘main story’, then only seasons or just running around and doing things (grinding, looting)
- epic/difficult dungeons detached from the context of the ‘main story’, which can only be mastered in groups of real players, usually there are no friendly NPCs to fight with.
- PvP/co-op
- Infinite repetition possibilities of individual side quests, completion of daily tasks
- There is no ‘end’

CRPG:
- usually a closed world
- Free character development based on experience points, groups are absolutely necessary (otherwise it gets really difficult)
- Weapons and armour scale depending on the rules of the game, but then usually only with level increases and sometimes not with every level increase
- Talents and skills are rigid, usually only scale with level ups
- Grinding negligible, crafting of items depending on the rules
- Generally no respawning of generic creatures
- Trading in game items or characters in public markets, sometimes for real money, is generally not implemented in the games, but can only be found outside the game if it exists.
- a relatively long ‘main story’, possibly followed by seasons - no running around and doing things
- epic/difficult dungeons that you can/must complete with the NPC companions or in multiplayer mode. Usually these fights are designed so that you have to solve them in the context of the story and not detached from the context.
- Co-op, no PvP
- Infinite repetition of individual side quests only in exceptional cases, most quests are finished at some point, there are no daily tasks
- there is usually an end to the game

I'm sure I've forgotten a lot, but these are the points that show quite clearly that these are two completely different game principles.

To summarise, I would say:

MMORPGs are a kind of ‘competition’ like a sporting contest. Everyone wants to win and does everything they can to outdo their fellow athletes - and then revel in it. There's nothing wrong with that, but it can sometimes lead to weird and unfair behaviour. It's every man for himself, real communities among the players are repeatedly torpedoed by trolls or just plain arseholes. Due to the MMO aspect, this cannot be easily prevented.

CRPGs are a kind of ‘interactive book/interactive film/interactive series’. Everyone usually wants to find out the end of the story and works towards it. Other players (e.g. in co-op mode) can also mutate into arseholes here, but they tend to be the exception because you want to achieve a common goal.

What do you think? Am I completely wrong here? Unfortunately, I can't get much out of the MMORPG genre, even though I try it now and again and give many games a chance. But the result is and remains the same. They are just not games (at least for me) that should have the abbreviation RPG in their name, because the RPG part is far too small.

[Pan Darius Cassandra]

I don't think anyone's confusing BG3 with an MMORPG.

[jonnin]

This is too complicated, really.

MMORPG: the state of the world is tied to your character -- that is, everyone rescues the princess, every single player, and once rescued she appears in a room to give the next quest, and isn't there for people that haven't rescued her yet. So two players standing in the same place, one sees her, another does not... the 'world' isn't identical for two people at the same place at the same time, its instead different due to the state of their character's save file.

CRPG: the state of the world is global. If someone joins your party and takes over gale, you both see the same thing in the same place at the same time.

All the differences are offshoots of the above design difference. For example its possible to grind in MMO because the monsters have to be where they are for EVERYONE to do the "go kill 10 of em" quest or for some games, the "go kill 2500 of them" for a 'deed' (frowning at YOU, LOTRO). Some games have done away with the XP model (neverwinter online) while others let you level to some max by hitting the respawns (see: south park boars). But it all stems from having to keep the enemy spawning for more players, while the CRPG you kill them and they stay dead, usually (some have random spawns jump you, even old BG 1 and 2 had this, as does pathfinder, so its not a dead concept but you can't really "grind" them for levels either, its too infrequent).

[devasolar]

Originally posted by Pan Darius Cassandra:

I don't think anyone's confusing BG3 with an MMORPG.

;-) I hope so, because it wouldn't make sense. But off the forums in personal conversations, I came across this view and found it strange. Especially with gamers who have never played this type of game and don't know a classic computer RPG, which is usually based on a P&P or board game. I work in a software company and my younger colleagues rejected the game for precisely these reasons - because it doesn't work like an MMORPG. And they were (like any reviewers) very critical.

[devasolar]

Originally posted by jonnin:

This is too complicated, really.

MMORPG: the state of the world is tied to your character -- that is, everyone rescues the princess, every single player, and once rescued she appears in a room to give the next quest, and isn't there for people that haven't rescued her yet. So two players standing in the same place, one sees her, another does not... the 'world' isn't identical for two people at the same place at the same time, its instead different due to the state of their character's save file.

CRPG: the state of the world is global. If someone joins your party and takes over gale, you both see the same thing in the same place at the same time....

I agree with you. I didn't go into this aspect, but it is logical.

Nevertheless, I think this is only an enhanced explanation for the differences between CRPG and MMORPG. But you have good summarized this aspect.

[The Sylvan Learning Center]

OP, CRPGs are not RPGS.

Also MMORPGs are NOT RPGS.

Learn the correct categories before launching this discussion.

[devasolar]

Originally posted by The Sylvan Learnign center:

OP, CRPGs are not RPGS.

Also MMORPGs are NOT RPGS.

Learn the correct categories before launching this discussion.

That's why this discussion exists. All categories have "RPG" in their names. Why? I'm not an expert, which I also mentioned above. Perhaps you can explain your post in more detail. If you can contribute more to this topic, please share your knowledge with me (and the others). Many thanks. :-) I play games of this kind for more then 25 years and I think, I'm not a blind player. [Wikipedia and Google or KI-based apps have no more knowledge then you. perhaps...]

[DeMasked]

CRPGs are the Oasis to the MMORPGs Desert.

All the substantive content in an MMORPG could be placed into one Oasis cutting out a ton of wasted space and generic time sinks that are created to try and keep a player base around for as long as possible.

But in the end it all depends on the game itself. You can get good or bad CRPGs and MMORPGs.

I'd rather have a Large Multiplayer Online RPG with a start point and end point but the journey is all about how the community server chooses to get to an end. Where to attack, where to defend, what to invest in, etc...

[Panzerbjorne39]

You wrote this long butt post for nothing. Nobody makes that mistake or is making that comparison. MMORPG are very much RPG. The players are playin a role. Their character, and they get really into it. Some criticisms of the game are valid. Some are not. Lots of both flying around because these days everyone has an opinion and a platform to share it.

[devasolar]

All valid arguments. But I can't understand grinding quests like ‘Collect 500 dandelions’. Here it is completely irrelevant which ‘role’ I have taken on, how I have skilfully developed my character, which class I have or which talents/abilities. I have neither advantages nor disadvantages, at least none worth mentioning. With quests like ‘Kill 50 goblins’ or the respawning of opponents, which I then have to kill x times because I need the experience points, I can at least use that to some extent. Unfortunately, for me, that goes beyond the role-playing concept. (Maybe I'm also making a mistake in my thinking..)

So far, I have tried the following games/MMORPGs:

- Neverwinter Online
- Star Trek Online
- The Elder Scrolls Online
- Diablo 3
- Diablo Immortal
- World of Warcraft
- Middle earth: Shadow of war
- Fallout 76
- New World

I played this games for I was most comfortable with Neverwinter and Fallout, because there was an acceptable story behind them for me. But the grinding part is also very high here. Or some errands that take place outside the story (daily quests or season quests).

Maybe they're just not good games. I'm open to any suggestions. :-)

[The Sylvan Learning Center]

Those are all new mmos. They aren't very good. WoW and anything after it is pretty much garbage.

[jonnin]

Originally posted by The Sylvan Learning Center:

Those are all new mmos. They aren't very good. WoW and anything after it is pretty much garbage.

It really just depends on what the players want. The MMOS have strong points too, even the newer ones. Just have to find the $$ model you can live with, whether its microtrans or sub or F2P/P2W or other..

- PVP, not just whacking each other (you can do this in BG3!) but mini-games in arenas like capture the flag or variants of football/basketball like sports or large scale last man standing etc. I hate pvp, but a lot of people live and breathe it.
- large group efforts, like wow's original 40 person groups and later 20 person groups, nothing like that in BG3. Or the world bosses, one of them for that stupid orange sword.
- social life ... just being with friends, chatting as you do simple things like gather crafting materials.

its just a different kind of game. The quests are usually mostly stupid, esp the single player ones for leveling up. That isn't the point, the point is to get to max level, have the best stuff, do the hardest group content together or pvp against each other with the best gear. Everything else is leading up to that -- and the good mmos have a good variety of fun stuff at the endgame and whatever you had to do to get there ... is far less relevant.

Im mostly done with that scene... still play star trek a little, and warframe, but those are soloable mostly or short group efforts, not hours at a time stuff. The long group ... raids or big dungeon scenes of wow etc ... I can't dedicate uninterrupted time for them now.

-----------
if the question is what does RPG mean, not much is the answer. Some say stuff like diablo, with a fixed character, is still role playing. Anything where you control an avatar counts, and that is all it seems to mean now. It used to mean actual role playing, as in you had choices and character development and such, but not these days.

[devasolar]

Originally posted by jonnin:

It's just a different kind of game. The quests are mostly stupid, especially the single-player leveling quests. That's not what it's about, it's about reaching the maximum level, having the best stuff, doing the hardest group content together, or competing against each other in PvP with the best gear. Everything else is just a prelude to that...

I had this problem with Diablo 3. I was level 20 or so when I first played it... Then I played it through multiple times on the hardest difficulty (including Reaper of Souls) so that I had level 60 (or 70?) to start the Adventure Mode. Then I was pretty disappointed because it was boring. That was my first frustrating experience with online games that had that MMORPG feeling. And I realised painfully that the story behind Diablo3 is just ‘preparatory’ to the actual online game. It's a topsy-turvy world! (The story of Diablo is really good across all the parts!)

Originally posted by jonnin:

Everything that involves controlling an avatar counts, and that's all it seems to mean now. It used to mean real role-playing, with choices and character development and so on, but not anymore these days.

I totally agree with you. I find it a bit sad and at the same time very good that it took a game like BG3 to bring these considerations back to the table. This is currently the point where ‘the rabbit is in the pepper’. (however Deepl translates that now. :-D) [P.s. in german "wo der Hase im Pfeffer liegt"]

My huge opening post was supposed to show how the so-called ‘role-playing’ genres work today, and most of them are MMORPGs. The CRPGs are more of a niche, although they serve the role-playing character much better. However, the player community is much smaller because: you have to think more and read more. You have to spend a lot more time on tactical and organisational work. You should familiarise yourself with the rules in advance and you simply need a lot of imagination. If you only do that after you've stumbled into the game, it can be quite frustrating. ;-) I'm afraid, many players don't want that.

[Jarsonne]

Originally posted by The Sylvan Learning Center:

OP, CRPGs are not RPGS.

Also MMORPGs are NOT RPGS.

Learn the correct categories before launching this discussion.

Lol since when CRPG aren't RPG?

There's two CRPG tags, during the 80's to try clarify a category that is reserved fo Computers. And since a decade or a bit more.

Both only include RPG, CRPG is only a sub category. For MMORPG it's not much relevant in a RPG forum, like comparing any single player to any multiplayer, irrelevant, it's even different enjoyment mechanics.

[Яeplicant]

So, we're going to ignore the fact that both Diablo 3 and Shadow of War have been listed as MMORPGs?

It's "RDR2 is a RPG" all over again.

[The Sylvan Learning Center]

Originally posted by jonnin:

The MMOS have strong points too, even the newer ones. Just have to find the $$ model you can live with, whether its microtrans or sub or F2P/P2W or other..



That isn't the point, the point is to get to max level, have the best stuff, do the hardest group content together or pvp against each other with the best gear.

No that's what you do when the fun is completely dead, and you're desperately searching for a way to sustain the high.

We all started playing these games to get the feeling that we escaped to a (massively online) alternate dimension.