Why is there such huge lack of sci-fi RPGs or ARPG?

Sci-fi isn't just hard sci-fi.
Hard is just one of the subgenres.

Well nigger, I wouldn't really mind some new space fantasy game either. Or space opera that isn't strategy or shooter.
We just don't have one.

Is there a single person giving a fuck about it?

Cut that shit out.

MGR did a pretty good job at justifying having both swords and guns on the futuristic battlefield.
It can work.

There is a lack of proper sci-fi games in general.

Metal Heart: Replicant Rampage was a sci fi arpg, unfortunately it also sucked ass. Shadowrun on the Genesis was a better ARPG.
Eeh, doubt it. We'll see if cyberpunk 2077 is any good. Otherwise it's looking sparse right now.

Mars: War Logs isn't terrible. Get it cheap. It's a sort of indie Witcher 2 sort of thing. Set on Mars.

sci-fi settings are boring you idiots

...

Speaking of P5 - it looks like shit even by persona standards.
Maybe not as terrible as P3 or 4, but still much worse than PS1 games.

Yeah, that's what we're doing here all days long.

Because no one with the skills to make video games grew up on Sci-fi, and even if they did, they have no interest in doing so. Also to note is that normalfags don't like that setting because of how mechanical and cold the future feels. Fantasy has a more organic and down to earth feeling, making it more for people to relate then distant future settings.

Honestly? I know it's an FPS but you should check out Halo._ It has some pretty great lore.

Yeah, but then it's basically fantasy. If I don't have entire chapters dedicated to how my new cyberware works and is socioeconomic implications than what is even the fucking point

Debatable. It's also basically Technomancer.

Has nothing to do with how hard it is to write that stuff, most people just aren't in to sci-fi for whatever reason.

New Calla Dooty comes out being all sci-fi and shit and normalfags just hate the fuck out of it.

This, pretty much. This is your daily reminder that "NO SCIENCE FICTION IN MY FANTASY" fags utterly ruined Might & Magic.

...

You mean AI controlled drones. Sci-fi writers today seem determined to keep everything as grounded in the 20th century as possible.

I hate how RPG's are all about the story now instead of your ability to fuck with the world and be free.

...

People complain about lack of content when you're not forced down some story line.
Most can't handle freedom and responsibility to entertain yourself rather than just consume coming with it.

I was making fun of the mentality that "IT"S THE FUTURE YEAR, so no melee allowed".

It's as ignorant as the old idea that planes and tanks negate the need for ground troops.

I know that nobody mentions Fallout 4.

But its actually sci-fi rpg, so it counts.

Not really, since melee is already negated negated today.

Only katana waving weeaboos think(hope) that melee is going to make some magical comeback.

You seem very confused, user.

Both sci-fi and medieval fantasy RPG are overdone.

We need more modern day setting RPG like Persona, or historical fiction like Shadow Hearts.

I don't consider it RPG. It's an open world shooter, akin to borderlands.
You might argue it to be ARPG at least.
I had like 20 hours of fun with it, but then I found myself repeating the same shit for 10th time, so I removed it

I don't disagree its not an rpg.

...

RPG - Rushed Pretentious Game

It has experience and levels.
For most people that's enough to call shit RPG without thinking, but then they sometimes start thinking.
Give guy a break.

If that's enough to be an RPG, then every single AAA game on the market is an RPG. Call of Duty has XP and levels, fam.

I would think ground troops would be used as garrisons while Navy and drones do most of the fighting.

Everything is now an "RPG"!

That's the problem with genre defining and frequent "Mario is an RPG" shitposting there.

Way of the Samurai franchise doesn't have EXP and levels, yet it's one of the most in-depth role playing game series to date. Guess what, people call it adventure more often than not.

I think it can be blamed on ignorance. The millions of people who have never played a tabletop RPG (which the entire genre stemmed from on PC and consoles), but grew up on a diet of action games with "RPG elements" cannot rightly be expected to understand what an RPG actually is. There's nothing stopping them from educating themselves, though.

Only useful definition of RPG excludes video games.

I agree. Nothing against humans at all, but if it's not human, it better be more different than cheap special effects makeup could do. I am so sick of just barely different non-humans. It especially bothers me in video games when everything is drawn/modeled from the ground up anyway, and thus coming up with designs only requiring the sort of changes that you can stick onto a real life human actor on a tv budget is irrelevant.

Incidentally, I've wondered why Souls games don't get more clones either. Seems to be a rule that only games/genres I don't like get a million clones, the ones I do get little to none at all.

I've traditionally preferred fantasy myself, but this right here is about half the reason. The art direction of fantasy media is by no means perfect, but it more consistently works for me than sciifi stuff. Which is basically never. Whether it's environment design or simply clothing design, I never like how sci-fi looks. At best, some looks less bad than others. Though with that said, I don't think it's a matter of being more or less relatable, more that fantasy is more likely to be stylized, and scifi is more consistently realistic.

The other thing about fantasy that wins for me is that it's more likely to give characters innate spiffy powers, in scifi if anybody does anything cool it's technology. I've always preferred innate powers over technological powers. Even in fantasy stuff, I'd vastly prefer attaining your own fire magic to simply having a magic fire sword. In sci-fi, the magic fire sword is almost always the only option, even when the setting has extradimensional beings or whatever that basically have some scifi version of magic without the need for technology. Humans in scifi almost never get their own cool innate powers.

This reminds me, I really do like this structure of shooter, with one big interconnected world you can backtrack in, as opposed to a one-direction series of maps/missions. Stuff like Fallout, Stalker, Borderlands, that sort of thing. And I've been wishing there was a concise term that described that type of shooter, as opposed to the straight linear kind. As-is there's no good concise term to describe that style of game structure that I want more FPS to use. Maybe "open world shooter" is finally it. Also, that's another type of game I wish got more clones and knockoffs.

Quick, post books that would make good vidya.

We have a thread right there

i really miss high sci-fi fantasy settings.

it seems we can't have elves inside huge mechas swinging katanas while filling the horizon with tech missiles in space anymore.

we're on the age of "no fun, no imagination" now, so everything is realistic medieval setting where you are a disenteria-ridden peasant being poor and having a horrible life.

I blame the industry a bit as well. A lot of the early major budget games were various types of RPGs, so suddenly everyone was desperate to get their game called an RPG because of the word association.

Did you came from PSO2 by any chance?

But user. D&D created RPGs.

Why did Shadowrun sell so well it warranted like two sequels each with Director'sCut then?

Yes?

The last one of those i played was XenobladeX, it was definitely sci fi but it was mostly alien environments with a bit of futuristic still like dolls, NLA, and the weapons and armor.

The game pretty decent in my opinion, except for the story, which the premise was good, but the execution was shit.

no that was final fantasy

I know you're just trolling, but for those who aren't aware, Final Fantasy (and every other JRPG) is chockfull of references to D&D.

For the same reasons cawadooty warranted 12 sequels

its an established franchise within an established setting

try getting out a hybrid (which is fucking retarded considering this is a 90s thing to clearly distinguish between the two) and see what happens

Why does sci fi have to be mechanical?

So, E.V.O. in space?

actually theyre dragon warrior references

I think it's pretty good for a mid tier/budget ARPG and it's a huge improvement on Spiders previous games

I just want to make it clear that when I say I like fantasy, I absolutely do not mean I like this sort of stuff. Not even if it does have exactly one dragon thrown in for a little spice. I DO NOT want my old-timey stuff remotely gritty and hopefully not too heavy on the realism either. I like fantasy better because it tends to be the more colorful light-hearted option of the two.

Suffice it to say, fantasy having a bit of a resurgence does me no good when games like The Witcher series have decent production values and all, but tend toward the gritty mud peasant side of the scale. Even if Geralt himself isn't a diseased mud peasant in an ugly tunic, or important characters like Ciri look alright, you still end up seeing way too much of that stuff regardless. Magic and monsters is good. Medieval realism is BAD. In fact, I'd go so far as to say I don't even really care that much for the medieval setting period. You could put magic and monsters and such wacky flashy fun stuff in an otherwise modern day setting and I'd be just as happy.

>acquire Shadowrun: Dragonfall legally with currency
>have to watch as enemies who out-damage my teammateswho out-damage me run past everyone and up to my face to shoot a grenade into my esophagus each time I reload a save

Have you ever tried Underrail? More futuristic/post apocalyptic than Sci-Fi but there are futuristic things to it, and the dev put quite a bit of work into it to make sure it was a good well rounded game.

I don't even know what to say, user. Those games have MANY issues, but being hard isn't one of them.

Not videogames.

Unsage

Because people are not so creative. Also, being a space bug that can form and change sounds really cool.

Because it's too much work. They're also grimdark/no fun shit. I want to go on a lighthearted adventure in fantasy-space land with aliens that actually look like aliens instead of blue-skinned humans.

What did it improve on Mars: War Logs, which I liked?

...

I should really get around to reading those books, I have the first one laying around but barely started reading it, wasting all my non gaming free time with you fucks here. I m just at the part where they reached Science Cultists status

I read through the 2nd book up to The Mule, but I stopped there. Currently rereading book 1.

Science fiction has a higher barrier of entry because it requires scientific explanation for a lot of the shit that goes on, and if it isn't thoroughly thought out and plausible then nerds will rip you a new asshole for it.

Science fantasy is a little easier, as is fantasy in general, because you can just take the magic route, in which you don't actually have to explain much in great detail because it's magic and you don't gotta explain shit faggit.

Sci-fi RPGs are shit because of several reasons

1. no proper lore behind the galaxies involved, people just do stupid shit like create planet that is ice 24/7 and then add some dark skinned humanoids that survive there with lifespan of 300 years because LOL BRO I DONT KNOW JUST LIKE IT OK?

2. unlike mediaval fantasy where 100% of shit can be explained by MAGIC sci-fi has to explain shit with science in atleast appropriate manner which reduces alot of stuff you can actually put there, alto there are many universes where they just shoehorned some bullshit about "mind-powers" from "ascended beings" which is just space magic.

2.1: Star Wars did this one right because it created a FORCE, which is present everywhere and in everyone and can be used to either create civilisations or destroy them, FORCE has no morality compass its neutral.

3. Races in space tend to end up being different version of humans with just their heads looking different, ofc libshits always try to make everyone hold hands even when its some passive race made of yellow frogs being in same room as some hyper aggressive race of Snake people whos only goal is to enslave planet after planet.

So to make successful Sci-Fi fantasy you will need something like Star Wars universe where VARIETY OF NON HUMAN-LIKE aliens hate and want to murder each other but are willing to work together with other aliens that share their traits like greed, pacifism, warlike behaviour or some other

If you're into that, check this out. Prepare for body horror though.

sivatherium.narod.ru/library/Ramjet/01_en.htm

Seems so obvious yet for some reason every Diablo clone sticks to fantasy, mostly even the same grim dark fantasy. Something like Helldivers but with RPG elements and deeper gameplay.

Outlaw star videogame when

It's actually very easy.

In fantasy, you say "magic, thus shut up"
In Sci-fi you say "this thing does this thing don't ask why or how shut up it just does". Not that you CAN'T do fantasy the sci-fi way, that's how you get shit like Full Metal Alchemist, which is cool as shit.

Like for example, Biocuck's mass effect fields or element zero in Mass Effect, which is literally just magic with about 40 pages of "it's totally not magic you guys it's totally science" and set rules like "humans have to be exposed to element zero in the womb to have super space powers and there's cancer and shit because science and serious", just like you can set a rule for magic like "can only be used by faggots in robes who get drunk off herbal potions"

It's not a higher barrier of entry, not really, the same rules apply, you just have to explain it differently without actually explaining how it works.

So if you were to apply this to fantasy, it would go "If you carve geometric shapes into the earth in these patterns, the ley lines react and correspond with the caster's thoughts"

All you have to do with sci-fi is to say "shut up this non-existant element fuel thing works" and namedrop some recent or popular theories without actually having to elaborate on the how. Here's an example from some random wiki on how this narritive thing works.

Notice how it never says HOW it's manipulated or used, just that it IS manipulated or used.

Essentially, sci-fi is wordy fantasy when you get down to it.

Intergalactic bounty hunter rpg when?

also note that

Doesn't really go into what Element Zero is, just that it REACTS this way, which is like setting in-story rules for magic.

Like "you can't use a fireball spell in a rainstorm because a fire spell requires the correct weather conditions, and cannot be cast in a water dominated area, which is it's opposite element"

Alternatively, you can go full Numenera and say

Slavs could make a game like that with less than 1 million dollarindus

Might and Magic is one of the longest running Sci-fi RPG series
You have fallout, underrail, Shin Megami Tensei, Shadowrun, Contact, Star Ocean and even more shit
What do you even mean by a "huge lack"?

can you name others?

...

you kinda need to specialize user

keep it down to like 2 aspects and grow your character later

So why is Technomancer bad? I was planning on getting it my next paycheck…

Clunky gameplay, buggy as shit. It's just trash, like every other game that developer made.

Literally go Shooty-Talky, that is basically the way I have always played the games and it has never failed me at all, also with the grenade spam in your face just keep one inparty dude as the Doc Wagon Mule and nearby at all times. Do not go tech or magic until a second playthrough where you know what the fuck will come next.

have you played Bound by flame?

its the same perk-based-upgrade system and clunky gameplay.

and i mean that, its the EXACT same gameplay, but instead of fire you get technomancy

prey2 neverever

Isn't that what like 90% of all sci-fi media is about, anyhow? I mean, almost every race in Star Trek is just human with a funny forehead and weird haircut. Even a large segment of the Star Wars races are at the very least humanoid. Babylon 5, StarGate, Farscape… it's all just humans with skin color tweaks, bad hair, and superficial deformities.

At least in Phantasy Star, the Space Elves are actually just a genetically enhanced strain of regular humans - and the robots are generally more /clang/ than they cyborg.

If you want actual aliens in your sci-fi, you're pretty much fucked, because the problem with creating aliens for sci-fi TV shows or as playable races in games, is that self-inserting faggots can't "identify" with or empathize with them.

That's why Bioware wouldn't let Sheppard fuck a Hanar or Elcor crew member.

...

sage does not work like that

No it isn't. I could make a long walk of text to argue otherwise but I'm just gong to post a review I agree with instead.

rpgcodex.net/content.php?id=10350

Also, it's not an AAA game. I have no clue why some anons seem to think it is.

Isnt there a DnD side thing about space and magic? Planescape, or something? I remember crustal spheres.

But that is all I fucking remember.

Say it with me, faggots:

INTERNAL CONSISTENCY

For fuck's sake, this is basic-ass shit. I have no idea why it needs like three paragraphs of explanation, high fantasy and science and shit is at its best when it is internally consistent.

Read Mistborn, then Alloy of law, then realize that Sanderson can take this setting into the fucking future with science being applied in advanced methods to allomancy.

Thanks, Zionmax.

Basically only the Starflight games, Star Control 2 and Mass Effect 1 have done the science fiction genre justice as far as video games go.

Terrible taste.

I'm not saying it's the best thing on paper, but the first trilogy was alright, and I'm liking how he transitioned the setting into the second trilogy. It's a neatly made little setting that gets my /tg/ nerd going and makes me think it's actually usable in a game, unlike other settings that only seem to exist for the explicit purpose of breakage.

But I do agree it's not Sanderson's strongest work, even, and I find myself worrying he cannibalizing it for more and more Way of Kings stuff.

Try reading.

Why dont we have SCI-FI but also feels like it the CURRENT year at the same time like pic related.

I dont have the pics but I'll describe it. You can see people casually messing around in regular 90's/00's cars and regular clothing and there is like futuristic robots and machines broken in the area as if they been abandon of at least a decade.

Because it's really hard for someone whose enthusiasm is mostly in awesome mechs and tech to extrapolate fashion.

Frogs do not get paid like Slavniggers.

I'd rather not play such a game, faggots and dindus everywhere… It would be nice with a retro futuristic game though. Or anything, I honestly don't read much science fiction anymore both since I sort of outgrew genre fiction and the genre shat itself about the same time the space program did and now there's pretty much only SJWs left writing it but after seeing all that amazing 70's, 80's and 90's science fiction art as I grew up and having read the classics of the genre my imagination is always sort of drifting towards that sort of stuff.

I'd give a more thought-out response, but I'm tired so here:

We're in the future. That's it, really. The only difference between us and shit you'd see on Star Trek minus the ships and shit is just some proper research into shit like AR, androids, AI, etc. It's boring to look at shit we already have. Top that off with people having zero imagination these days, and there's your answer. The only next thing we can explore with sci-fi is cyberpunk, which I'm waiting on to become popular despite how I know full well that'll it will be steampunk 2.0. Making sci-fi shit is also heaps more work on an aesthetic level if you want shit to look detailed. But mainly it's all about the lack of creativity and the fact that everyone simply can't get enough of tumblr-tier GoT fantasy garbage.

Yup thats the artist I am talking about.

Pretty easy to find the rest of his pics, but current year I mean it feels like its 2016 in the pics but there is futuristic tech everywhere being treated like its old and run down a bit.

simonstalenhag.se/

I don't think it feels like 2016 at all, reminds me of my childhood more than anything else. Both the dated stuff and the futuristic stuff invoke nostalgia for me. But I get what you're saying, I like the aesthetic of worn and rusty futurism too. Most contemporary media either go for a generic look or the Apple look which really hate.

The art is clearly inspired 90s rural Scandinavia. Slightly decaying 80s architecture (exaggarated of course) in the background, nature everywhere and the non-sci-fi tech like cars make it pretty obvious. It does feel like 2010s Bydloland though.

If there was a game like this it would be extremely comfy.

Though I am not sure what type of game it should be. 1st or 3rd or 4th person point of view. Action RPG? Open world exploring? The plot? Killing bad cops? I think from his art work there are some biological monsters and robots that have gone mad and killed people so I can see a survival game type game, not necessarily like RUST or any thing like that but a 3rd or 1st person game where the region you live in is getting more things getting haywire and find a way out?

I dont know how to describe it but I feel if its like Mass effect or any other type of hero game where you are the hero that needs to save the day wont really do well since it really isnt slow paced comfyness. Anyone get what i am trying to say?

Yeah, maybe an atmospheric adventure game? I could see Daedalic pulling something off in the same style.

I reckon part of it was because a lot of us grew up in that transition period where tech exploded and started meandering off in different directions, and all the new exciting stuff was mixed in with the old, familiar and hard-wearing. Whereas now moore's law has ended (or been ended deliberately) everything's converged again into samey bullshit, not to mention the culture of eradicating or replacing anything that isn't current.

It is a shame as sci-fi is ripe with scenarios. Possibly more than fantasy.

Kind of hope that the sci-fi game From Software are making isn't just Souls with a sci-fi skin. I'd like them to go all in or at the very least, make shooting a viable and fun approach.

damn shame

If there is something I hate about sci-fi, it is that it is too Star Trek centric. It's not as bad as fantasy, which is way more of a D&D/Tolkien ripoff, but it is still pretty bad. These two genres are pretty wide and people still insist on making the same shit over and over.

All deep space opera sci-fi media looks the same to me. There are much interesting stories to be had while grounded to a planet (not to say deep space stuff can't be interesting, but not unless they put some serious imagination) yet they insist on their unoriginal space militar/political drama. Just look at big sci-fi writers such as Philip K. Dick, Isaac Asimov or Gibson; most of their stories happened in Earth, and they were pretty varied because they were not bound to space battles and crew interactions.

Fantasy settings are even worse
>How does magic work, you say? Well, I don't fucking know! It's magic, I ain't gotta explain shit. Magic just is, and wizards just know it because they are very old or because an old master taught them, but there is absolutely no fucking clue as to where did these spells come from. Maybe they come with age and virginity.
>There is also some epic quest laying around. It may involve big ass spaceship ground battles between two or more clusterfuck country-sized empires called kingdom, or it may not. Who cares, just look at my terribly original wolbildin'.

this comic may appeal to you

nmg.thecomicseries.com/

Is how I expect the reception for that game to go, given the modern video game audience.

I would love to see a Revelation Space game. It's a good middle-ground between space opera and hard sci-fi, and Alistair Reynolds is perfectly willing to do commercial work for hire.

Blame major publishers and, to some extent, casuls. Fantasy is the way-to-go for non CoD audience games and using "default" fantasy setting is safe, the result is clones of same bland shit. Casuals, too, expect fantasy to be generic and, unless some effort is made, a different fantasy is unappealing to them, and publishers and effort are 2 things that don't go together.
Also some more shit about modern fantasy:
>Magic is semirare and respected, takes ages to learn but even some peasant with crossbow is just as dangerous/useful and people still learn magic for combat.
>Weapons are just damage. Armor is just small damage reduction.

p.s. I've read almost everything Azimovs, are the other two just as good to read now?

Yes, they definitely are. For William Gibson, start off with Neuromancer, and for Philip K. Dick, start off with Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (A big improvement over the movie).

Reminds me of Monster Hunter. Though Monster Hunter never really goes into detail about its world's origins, the series taking place in the far-far future of a once futuristic planet totally ruined by warfare is canon. There are implications Hunters could be the descendants of super soldiers and their equipment is re-discovered lost tech. "Magic" in Monster Hunter is purely tech based, i.e. the elemental weapons.

NIGGA GOT TOLD

I want to hunt mythological creatures with modern weapons.

I want to hunt the minotaur with a .505 Gibbs large game rifle.
I want to remove harpies with airburst grenades.
I need to hunt skinwalkers with state of the art hardware.

would it be a game about hot-glueing girls' nipples?

Be careful what you wish for.

Want space ninja simulator? Warframe
Want sequel to Dragon Dogma? DD Online
Want new game from your favourite dev? it's shit

Enjoy having the tides turned and being hunted like a rat, you lunatic.

That's what makes it more exciting.

Because people confuse SF with Science Fantasy. You end up with a setting that isn't good at being either.

Also there isn't the generic Tolkien/D&D cliché setting to fall back on so it's much more obvious when your writers lack imagination.

You misspelled "pants-shitting terror."

Star Ocean, SMT and shadowrun are still getting new games to this date. Then there is shit like Pokemon and Digimon.
If you want more old games you have the entirety of Metal Max, Etrian Odyssey, Geneforge, Albion, God Eater, Final Fantasy 7 and 8, Ultima, certain Breath of Fire games and Phantasy Star

Is that blob on the thermal camera a wild boar or something else? You'll never know :^)

Endless excitement 150km from nearest civilization!

have you ever had a skinwalker experience

...

what happened to fantasy settings?
what are some good fantasy books to read?
i read the first and second books in the last apprentice series, they were nice

All i want is a cuhrazy futuristic arpg where the whole plot is you get fucked over and decide to get revenge.

Fuck you, I don't ever want another revenge story, that's become the default video game plot, and it's trite as fuck.

Black Company
Garrett P.I.
Malazan is alright if excessively autistic about worldbuilding
Prince of Thorns series is good and relatively short
All of these treat magic as pretty hardcore important shit and none of them have generic elves though I think Garrett P.I. has some fairly generic gnomes, trolls and fairies.

Default is chosen one story what are you talking about.
Also, most revenge stories don't have a non retarded and competent, morally gray protag, if almost all cases.

Not outside of fantasy. AAA can't stop riding the revenge train. It's been ubiquitous the past few years.

Assuming that you've read Tolkien I can recommend a few authors…
Lord Dunsany
Eric Rücker Eddison
George MacDonald
Robert E. Howard
Fritz Leiber

Stay away from popular plebs such as Moorcock, Sanderson and GRRM.

Read you some Conan
Also check out Abercrombie's The First Law trilogy, it's pretty good

First of all, ask yourself the question, has any AAA game done any kind of story right?
Second, they could hardly be called an actual revenge story.
Is what you are probably alluding to. There are rarely any motive outside of "lol plot needs it", actual betrayal, and you getting fully shitcanned, and the antagonist is only there to give you a longer term goal than to just complete each level, just like a chosen one story.

Doing it poorly is still doing it.

Also should mention that Bakker and Abercrombie are meme authors. If you sport a fedora and a neckbeard you might like them but if not they're not really worth reading.

The most of the ones I can think of are like this. Just take Max Payne for example.

Yes, but that doesn't mean that it's universally shit because you can only live poorly and never lived in a (atleast) middle class family. Anything can be shat upon if you take the worst examples, and there is not a single good one done yet. I'm sure whatever kind of story you prefer have been done so many times that the exact same kind of logic applies to it as you apply to what i'm saying.

New Vegas was a good revenge story.

I love max pain but come on, the dude goes mad and fucks himself up in the process. The only thing he's "competent" in is killing. A revenge should be cold, calculated and meticulous.

Arguable, As benny is just a means to an end. He doesn't have any impact whatsoever in the end, he's just a stepping stone to get the plat chip, and then when you do whatever with him, (let him go/kill him) move up to the bad boys league and do whatever with new vegas. You could argue that it was (the freedom of choice to do what you wanted with him) what made the revenge story good, but then that would just further prove my point that he was not relevant in the overall plot other than to get the platinum chip from. Not to mention that couriers are very similar to chosen ones, which is especially appearent in the lonesome road

I agree with you on NV's revenge plot. There's no real emotional connection between the player character and Benny. Benny didn't care about the player character. The player character has no idea what Benny cared at all. It's like making a revenge plot about chasing down the guy who drunk hit-and-run you.

FIrstly, Lonesome Road is the shittiest of the DLCs, and Ulysses was written by Chris Avellone, who just copied Kreia from KOTOR 2. That, along with the writer's general desire to retcon the setting turned the Courier into a soapbox, making the player justify things that happened simply because the writer made sure to railroad the player into making it happen. The only way you could ascribe 'Chosen One' qualities to the courier is because Ulysses ascribes it.

Not really, it was elaborated that chosen ones were bad ass and each of them played a mayor role in something that shaped the wasteland atleast once.
Also the previous logic which was used against the revenge story could apply here as well

Yeah, just like in the good Hong Kong action movies.

But we aren't talking about good hong kong action movies.

Point me to this please, because the only thing I remember even remotely related to what you're saying is Marcus. Also, did you miss the part where the tunnelers were going to turn the Mojave into a lifeless shithole? That would nullify near anything the Courier achieved, essentially wiping the slate clean.

The Heavy Metal movie blended magic and advanced technology and didn't even bother explaining how that works, but it was still awesome.

There is no reason the two can't co-exist.

Or you could just check any wikia for the couriers deeds but just from the top of my head
To be fair it get's stolen but you recover it anyway.
Basically all the mayor events, the courier took part in.

Yeah, if he failed which is impossible as long as you play the game and load a save when you die.
Also doN't forget that since the tunnelers didn't get to the mojave, that's one other world saving important event to add to the list of what the courier has achieved.

The point was that the courier was one of eight.
Blame the game, and how shoddily it tried to implement rep. Each faction by the end wound up making the courier do bloody everything for some unfathomable reason. I won't complain though, especially since it led to Arizona Killer.
DLC. Important, sure, but not world-saving.

Huh? Tunnelers are still there and still migrating even if you get the best ending (no nukes) - ending slide makes special mention of it.

Which yet again plays into the argument that each had an important role to play.
Iirc they were decoys, but i may remember wrong, but then again, either works for my argument.

Yet they don't fuck up the wasteland as it was said they would.
And we both know that was only there so that the enemies aren't only locked into a dlc, but let's disregard that for obvious meta reasons, because the the devs obviously put it a reason for them to be there.

True, but even if you go house/independent you still need to do hoover dam battle.

Sure not worldsaving per say, but it follows a general formula
Sure this is very boiled down and could be easily painted as anything really, but i think it drives the point home that the respective areas the dlc take place in is greatly influenced by the courier, and it's main conflict gets resolved by the player.

I love how your IDs are the same color

Huge lack of sci fi period. Basically the culture changed; science is viewed with skepticism, space exploration is viewed as a waste of money; all in all a complete reversal from my childhood growing up in the 80s and 90s with Star Treks (of all flavors), and all kinds of mech / sci fi / space themed cartoons from japan

watch interstellar

i just watched that movie based purely upon your recommendation user thank-you that was great

"I FUCKING LOVE SCIENCE" disagrees. It's all the rage these days.

No but is there really anything else the protag needs to be good at in that kind of revenge story? If he never fucked up in other areas he'd just be boring.

...

j-jeeze user

you're embarasing me

why are you browsing Holla Forums anyway?

Same to you user, same to you

FO? MGS? Deus Ex? System Shock? Crysis? Dead Space? Half-life?
RTS/RTT with either advanced modern-military fiction or a SF setting (SupCom, Dune 2)?
4X games (endgame Civilization, MoO)?
Most /m/-related stuff (BattleTech/MechWarrior, Front Mission)?
Capeshit games (Prototype, Infamous)?

There are a lot of good games based on or heavily influenced by science fiction, just not too many found amongst RPGs when compared to fantasy.

You might be thinking of Spelljammer. There's D20 Modern too, I guess.

These games do have significant portions dependent on science-fiction staples, but the majority of the experience in playing these games are more fantasy-based. OP was just opining at the lack of "pure" science-fiction RPGs.

I guess you can't really call them pure fantasy either, so they all just fall under the umbrella term of speculative fiction.

Digimon is such a weird case. I want to say that it's on the harder end of science fiction - many of its motifs and themes are technology-based, and not just the over-all plotlines. The digital world itself is believable from a science fiction stand-point. However, it's never fully explained how it's able to cross into and affect the real world. At least with Serial Experiments Lain, there's at least some explanation in that the ambiguity of the series presentation could mean that a number of scenarios were simply simulations/illusions made by Lain herself given her ability to alter human memories.

With Digimon, I just take it on a game-by-game or series-by-series basis. The .hack and SAO games at least keep their digital worlds better contained from what I remember, so they're easier to categorize even if their in-game settings are distinctly fantasy-based. Fucking metafiction.

Of course, just because something isn't the hardest of sci-fi or the strictest of fantasy doesn't mean a series isn't good: I understand that much. It just makes it harder to recommend to people like OP who are looking for things that are very specific.

MGS have straight up magic and ghosts though.
It's not fucking sci-fi.
At least not as a whole franchise.

It's as much sci-fi as star wars. It counts.

Sci-fi is much harder to write for as opposed to their basic fantasy counterparts, due to the larger scale and complexity.
You're also asking for A-RPGs which are rather complicated to make.

No such thing

I wouldn't say there's a lack of action RPGs at all. The reason a considerable fraction suck ass though is because of the pervasive influence of Diablo and the vomit Black Isle Studios shat out in the late '90s.

I'm holding out hope that Cyberpunk 2077 is good.

I mean yeah, Witcher 3 was clearly consolized, and so Cyberpunk 2077 will likely be as well… But Witcher 3 had enough good elements to make me think Cyberpunk could turn out fun.

But user, in doing so, you will become one of them. What difference does it make, technology or mythology?

I can think of reasons for why that is or isn't the case. So out of curiosity, what do you mean by this?

What exactly would you define as a "pure" sci fi thing?
Star Trek? Stargate? Dune?

Just as any genre or mode of literature, science fiction has clear traditions, themes, methods of presentation, etc.

The "purest of the pure" (note the quotation marks) would likely be described as follows:
sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/genre_sf
sf-encyclopedia.com/entry/hard_sf

Defining this canon (protocols, conventions, or whatever) is the subject of entire books, lectures, and grand concepts (the mega-text).

Perhaps there is no such thing as "pure" science fiction. However, the same can be said about objectivity vs. subjectivity (in games journalism, for example). Humans are generally incapable of being truly objective. However, the striving for and admiration for objectivity shouldn't be frowned upon - indeed, it is a requirement in some fields.

Taking another example, you might say there's no such thing as an RPG in this day and age. Everything in videogames now has xp, stats growth, levels, open-world, narrative, player choices, whatever. Still, there are videogames that are unambiguously developed in the RPG tradition. Whether it's a dungeoncrawler or a game focused on actual roleplaying, both are genealogically derivative of player experiences in table-top. The same can't be said of a game whose roots are clearly that of an FPS or platformer.

At any rate, the reason I was asking what you meant by "no such thing" when it comes to "pure" science fiction is that you could've gone a number ways. You could be remarking on the mixing of genres and traditions, which results in the dilution of everything (which is I think is what you're doing right now). Alternatively, you could be complaining that science fiction is actually an oxymoron in that strict adherence to science means disregarding things that are fictitious.

I can't convince you that there is such a thing as pure science fiction (no quotation marks), especially when the roots of sf (proto-sf) are muddled in themselves. All I can say is that you should try to understand what it is you want out of something - and in order to more easily find it, a common definition can only be useful to you.

This might be a digression, but I dispute your definition of "RPG".

The formal quality of the genre is the abstraction of the player from their performance. That is to say, the role playing is in the mechanics, not necessarily the narrative (hence why JRPGs are marked by characters rather than western RPG's which allow the player the ability to craft at least part of their characters narrative. The character's narrative presence itself being incidental to the genre).

The RPG genre stands opposed to "action" as a genre. That is, something which directly relies on the players dexterity, awareness, reflexes, and manipulation of the game geographically.

I only bring this up because things like stat growth, exp systems and levels, and things like that are only accidents of the genre and a byproduct of this abstraction. They are not definitive qualities.

Because action is more accessible and palatable, it's why we see "action RPGs" (in reality they are just action games which feature customization schemes) take the form of action games, rather than "action RPGs" taking the form of RPG games with incidents that traditionally belonged to action games.

Only useful definition of RPG excludes video games.

Falloutanon, is that you? I won't dispute your assertions when it comes to abstractions and the definitions of an RPG. God knows this thread doesn't need another can of worms opened up. I'm just expressing the parallels in difficulty when it comes to defining a genre.

I can't remember, but were you the one that coined "adventure wargame" as a replacement term? I know somebody here did, and I kind of like that term.