I recently spent an evening playing two multi-player computer games with four other people. This was an entertaining way to spend an evening and it got me thinking about computer games, role-playing games and possibly why our hobby is shrinking (so people tell me). What occurred to me whilst playing was that for a lot of gamers, computer games might well be a satisfactory replacement for role-playing games.
Computer games are the digital predators of existing and potential role-players.
Now, before a load of ’serious’ role-players decry me as an idiot for even suggesting that computer games can duplicate the role-playing experience let me say that a computer game cannot yet re-create a quality, intense role-playing session. This will not be possible until we have a computer capable of totally duplicating the job of a good GM; this would mean a computer capable of emotion, and skills in dramatic delivery and storytelling. Now, we have established that fact let me also say that this is as far as I take the argument, while others would follow on from this to the conclusion that computer games are inferior to role-playing games. The problem with this conclusion, and also the problem with the ‘computer games are never as fulfilling as role-playing games’ argument is it assumes you have a good GM, and that you are playing in a campaign with a modern view of role-playing: character development, story, atmosphere and so on.
Regrettably, I do not think the average role-playing session meets these criteria, and as a result the average player can find his need fulfilled by the modern computer game. I will explain, using various styles of play.
The dungeon crawl, or hack ‘n’ slash style gaming is essentially a computer game in another format; I don’t think I will get much disagreement from anyone on this issue. Now, go back a number of years and role-playing (or Roll-playing) the dungeon adventure was still better than playing it on the computer. If I were given the chance between Dungeon Master on my Atari ST or my teenage GM’s latest dungeon in AD+D (this is going back some time, mind) I would have chosen the AD+D game. Why? Simple, it had a social element, I was with friends having a laugh and no doubt talking about loads of other subjects while we gamed. Also, even at this tender age (13-14) I was role-playing the showdown with the master villain in the deep core of the dungeon, which was cool because we got to face off with him verbally as well as with swords, bows and spells. Now, I can easily see why gamers who have only experienced role-playing at its most basic (if that) level drift to computer games. Doom. Diablo. Half-Life. Delta Force. All these games provide a better experience these days; some of them even have better plots and a better sense of drama. They can also be played together, within an interactive computer world - thus the social advantage of the role-playing game is removed. One of the games we played at my recent multi-player fest was Delta Force, it demanded more co-ordination between players, and created more tension and excitement than any other roll-playing game I had played in. I was there, on that hill, shooting the terrorists through my sight, hoping to rescue the hostages. In short, for this style of gaming the computer is already a better GM.
Why bother with the effort even the basic role-playing session demands?
Of course, not all games are basic dungeon crawls or hack ‘n’ slash affairs. This does not mean they are character driven masterpieces either. Not all games are about story or characters; they are often about the resolving of tasks or the realisation of objectives. I would even go as far to say the average role-playing campaign is about goals, objectives (and to some extent winning) with the characters just being basic vehicles to interact in the world. Little strong role-playing goes on, players’ regularly pass character knowledge without speaking character to character and the majority of discussion goes on between players as if they are resolving a puzzle. This is not a dungeon bash, nor hack and slash, but neither is it role-playing as storytelling. Basically a game is being played, and little effort is being made to lift the hobby beyond that of a game. If a player is happy with this style of play, fine, but how far is it removed from say, a session of Baldur’s Gate? They seem very similar to me, especially since this game can be played multi-player and probably has a better plot than the one GM has scavenged together. No rules to figure out, and dodgy descriptions to endure, it is all there in graphical splendour, a puzzle to solve, a task to complete.
Why bother with the effort that a role-playing session demands?
Okay, now we come to the nirvana of role-playing, true character-driven drama, role-playing as storytelling. The computer cannot replace that, right? Of course not, but in this hectic world where fitting a campaign of this quality in seems ever more difficult, could it come close enough to tempt one away to the easier option? The example I can use is Final Fantasy VII. I have spent a good number of years on the outskirts of the role-playing hobby (for various reasons) and one of thing I did to satisfy my role-playing urge was to play FVII in a very dedicated way. I was absorbed by the story, the drama of the character relationships and was elated when a character realised his dreams, and saddened when characters died epically as part of the plot. It is a game, but it also tells a story. I realise little role-playing was going on, but this is only half the reason why I play in role-playing games, the other reason is to feel part of a well- written book, comic, TV series or film. I believe Final Fantasy VII filled this need admirably. Obviously, a good role-playing campaign is better, but due to modern life this seems forever harder to achieve. I would also say I would prefer buying and playing Final Fantasy VIII then playing in any of the other two styles listed above (more exercise in dice-rolling than anything else).
Role-playing has the potential to be as interesting and as involving an experience as literature, good TV or cinema, but I believe the average role-playing game being played does not reach this potential. This is fine, it is a game and as long as people are happy with it, no one should have any complaint. At the same time, all the more serious role-players casting generalisations about the nature of computer and role-playing games should really step back and think about it. The pros and cons of each style of game are relative to what you have been exposed to, a good majority of people may have experiences that tell them computer games and role-playing games are much closer together than you (or I for that matter) would like to believe. If this is the case why write adventures or design dungeons? Is it no wonder then that the young (the fresh blood of our hobby) do not take up the hobby or drift from it? Why go through the learning curve to realise what could be when the shelves are full of interactive, multiplayer computer games? Hell, your mates play these, but they would think of you as strange if you told them you did role-playing.
If role-players can so easily be pulled into the seductive simplicity that is the modern, networked world of computer gaming (and as demonstrated above, some may not be making any sacrifices based on their experience) is it not possible to pull the potential role-players who play computer games into our hobby? After all, Final Fantasy VII sold on a music industry scale, and as such it represents a large pool of people who could be interested in traditional tabletop fair.
Can we work to make the crossover easier?
Yes, and to some extent this seems to be happening as TSR is going to release an introductory role-playing game based on the hit computer game Diablo. I am not an observant industry analyst, so I cannot give you a well argued analysis of how this product will fair, but to me it is an interesting trend, and a positive one. After all, Video Games are mainstream, and can launch movies, comics and novels and role-playing games need some of that action. The Diablo RPG will be a full game, and will serve as an introduction to role-playing, ideally it will be advertised in every box of the computer game, and made available in every computer games outlet across the world; next to all those collectable card games that seem to have become ‘cool’ enough (profitable enough really) to take valuable shelf space in these high profile stores. I hope that the Diablo RPG does more than sell to existing role-players, but to do more than that it needs to be visible, and pitched as the way to play a more dynamic version of Diablo now, rather than waiting two years for the next computer game. You never know, it just might work?
I hope it has some success, as role-playing games do now need to steal some of the success of computer games, as potential role-players exist in their masses, and it is computer games they are playing. At the moment, it is computer games that are stealing from our hobby.
I have been lucky, and have played in campaigns that have ensured that computer games are only a short-term distraction - I always find the images, stories and characters in my head and the drama resulting from these elements can only be realised by GM’ing a good role-playing campaign with good players (or writing a novel, but this is another issue). Still, the hectic nature of modern life and the problems of finding/coordinating 4-5 busy people means that I still look at Final Fantasy VIII on the shelves, and wonder if I should just lose myself in that rather than wrestle with all the issues of running the various campaigns I have in my head.
It would be easier? I hope I can reverse this trend in myself, and I hope the industry can reverse the trend as well.