[ragnar]

Why is it that noone can do a game in a proper medieval setting, without adding spells and monsters and all sorts of other fantasy elements? Do the game developers have so narrow imagination that they can't see the medieval times without the fantasy? Before I began playing Thief 3, I believed that the Thief series was in a proper medieval setting and I was quite disappointed to discover that it was a fantasy game. And besides, I don't think the fantasy elements (so far) adds anything to the game experience, rather the opposite.

It's not like there isn't any way to do them without the fantasy. I would really like to see Umberto Eco's book The Name of the Rose made into a game (it has been made into an excellent movie starring Sean Connery in his best form). It would be a really interesting environment to explore, with the library and it's windling stairs and all the other places in the monastery and at the same time you should solve a murder mystery.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

That's the problem with conventions, ragsie. At risk of sounding bigoted, I think most people who create and play these kinds of games don't know anything beyond the stereotypical Dungeons & Dragons tunnel vision. Nearly all they get off on are the magic spells and monster-izing, especially in single player and multiplayer RPGs. It seems every single one of them with this kind of theme has nothing but variations of such elements. But I think the reality is that most gamers don't give a damn about truly historically correct games, there's practically little to no market for them. You really do have to stick a fricking dragon, orcs, and magic spells for them to sell.

Personally I absolutely have zero interest in fantasy games. I have never gotten into RPGs, paper or digital, and I have next to no interest in playing them. Probably the only exception would be Neverwinter Nights, for some reason that game attracts me. Otherwise I find that entire thing boring. Some strategy games are more historically spot on, but it's nothing but fighting wars and hoarding resources, and strategy games bore me anyway.

But, I'd say you and I have a more particular interest in historically accurate games. Sadly they are very, very few and far between and whatever drivel comes out is usually mediocre at best. Versailles 1685 sounded good at first, until I read some reviews and decided it was a half-ass job, not much invested in terms of accuracy and production quality (and I hate that goddamn ugly graphics engine it uses). I would love to play a murder mystery set in a historically correct Middle Ages. I'd also love a game set in during the Renaissance period in Venice.

I wouldn't count on a trend in historically correct games any time soon. There is that one action/adventure coming out for PS2, but it's gladiator and chariot races and violence. Boring.

[ragnar]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Personally I absolutely have zero interest in fantasy games.

And yet you like Thief.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I have never gotten into RPGs, paper or digital, and I have next to no interest in playing them.

And here we come to Deus Ex, which most often counts as a RPG. Besides, there *are* lots of (paper variant at least) that *are* set in historical locations.

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

Probably the only exception would be Neverwinter Nights, for some reason that game attracts me. Otherwise I find that entire thing boring. Some strategy games are more historically spot on, but it's nothing but fighting wars and hoarding resources, and strategy games bore me anyway.

Perhaps you would like Crusader Kings. It's historically (more or less) correct and not only about wars, but it's important to marry off your sons, daughters and other important people to the right people so they inherit a bigger empire.

Otherwise I agree with you. I want historically accurate games.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

I just had to post this screenshot from Versailles 1685, along with a very biased and chronologically disrespectful* complaint: YOU CAN'T WALK INTO THIS WORLD!! You can only pan around 360 degrees. I can almost cry. I mean, look how rich and sumptuous everything was during that period. Wouldn't you just love to have this game remade entirely in real time 3D (maybe using the Unreal engine), with EAX sound? Just imagine how luscious it would be to walk through this hall, beautifully dressed people whispering left and right (the sound effects surrounding you), glistening surfaces and a very high level of interactivity with objects and characters, all while you go about trying to solve puzzles or whatever else. *siiiiighhh*

* Chronologically disrespectful because I know this game came out in 1997.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by ragnar

And yet you like Thief.

I like Thief for its gameplay, superlative sound design, and general atmosphere. I don't like the zombies or other supernatural creatures.

And here we come to Deus Ex, which most often counts as a RPG. Besides, there *are* lots of (paper variant at least) that *are* set in historical locations.

I like DX because it was hard to categorize - RPG+FPS+Adventure+Tactical. The RPG system was simple enough that I didn't have to worry so much about stupid skills building and 'charisma' points or whatever. Very important: it was science fiction, not medieval fantasy - no stupid magic spells, no orcs, no dragons, no killing 50,000 rats in a crypt just to level up.

Perhaps you would like Crusader Kings. It's historically (more or less) correct and not only about wars, but it's important to marry off your sons, daughters and other important people to the right people so they inherit a bigger empire.

If this game is a strategy I don't want it, thanks.

[Ninja Dodo]

I personally don't mind fantasy... it's waaaay overdone but it's a setting like any other and still holds the potential for good stories. The Gothic series is a good example. The fact that it doesn't follow the D&D format helps though.

That said, I really like period stories. I love Steven Saylor's Roma Sub Rosa novels... a series of intelligent mysteries set in Rome against the backdrop of such events as the Catilinaian Rebellion and the civil war between Caesar and Pompey. A game built around that would be awesome.

Although films like Kill Bill seem to have initiated a surge of interest in Japanese samurai culture which we will likely get rather tired of in time I think it would be interesting to see a game set in feudal Japan.

[Jackal]

Well, it multiplies the amount of research significantly. But I'd say it mostly comes down to degrees of escapism. For those with an interest in history, period pieces have loads of fascinating detail to capture the imagination. For others, that's not enough. The setting has changed, but the players are essentially the same. So writers push it one step further, and we get dragons, elves, and necromancers. Or focus on an era that carries its own mythology (Egypt and Atlantis, anyone?)

The same is true for sci-fi. Obviously it's harder to predict what innovations the future will bring, but while we eagerly wait for a Tonka toy to send us photo evidence of water on Mars (which is totally absorbing for many people), most writers go more for fantasy than science - aliens, time travel, molecular transporters, etc.

Personally, I'm sick of the standard fantasy fare. I got hooked on Tolkien young, but everything since has felt like nothing but a rehash (which most of it is). I agree there's lots of room for great historical stories. I'd probably use a real historical event as a backdrop, even for a fictional story, but something like The Name of the Rose would make a terrific game!

[fov]

I have not played them, so I'm not sure about this - but what about Conquests of Camelot and Conquests of the Longbow? They're adventures, not RPGs, I think.

-emily

ps On second thought, anything Arthurian will probably have some magic in it, so I don't know if it fits your criteria. But the Robin Hood game wouldn't.

[Kingzjester]

Oh, man, it would be so cool! Playing from a perspective of a confused half-christian-half-pagan (holy shit: awkwardness galore and I think it is grammatically correct to boot!) knight, running around the land killing the invading Moors and Turks, and Jews in diaspora, converting pagan serfs and subjugating them to my heavy fist in my mythril suit of armor!

[Erkki]

Europa 1400: The Guild
http://www.gamespot.com/pc/strategy/europa1400theguild/index.html?q=Europa+1400

Hmm... got a surprisingly high score from Gamespot (8.5). I didn't think it was that good, but I didn't play it for very long either. Probably because I suck in strategy games that require a lot of micromanagement.

But it had some really cool parts. It was mostly about running businesses and building a dynasty. You could influence politics etc. I don't know if it was very accurate, but it didn't have any fantasy as I recall.

[Crunchy in milk]

Originally Posted by Kingzjester

Oh, man, it would be so cool! Playing from a perspective of a confused half-christian-half-pagan (holy shit: awkwardness galore and I think it is grammatically correct to boot!) knight, running around the land killing the invading Moors and Turks, and Jews in diaspora, converting pagan serfs and subjugating them to my heavy fist in my mythril suit of armor!

Yes well put. Some fantasy stories do implement alternate 'races' such as elves and the like to illustrate divisions of the human race in a more PC fashion.

I don't mind a good fantasy story but I don't read/play them for the magic or the pointy ears, hell I don't really enjoy the hacking and slashing much. My main interest has always been playing someone underhanded (simply because the setting lacks forensics of any sort meaning I can get away with a LOT more) or a religious zealot. I really dig fantasy settings that allow a writer to explore alternate concepts of faith. I laugh at the idea of going all blase' on fantasy because Tolkien did it all first.

When I get tired of medieval europe inspired fantasy I try to switch to eastern fantasy, unfortunately the usual fare is story after story about the emperor of Qin or the unification of Japan by Nobunaga and the Taiko. Excitement!

[Jackal]

Originally Posted by Crunchy in milk

I laugh at the idea of going all blase' on fantasy because Tolkien did it all first.

And who did that? I could care less if Joe Smith from Idaho did it first. It's the fact that others just copy with no imagination that makes me blasé. The writers that put some effort into creating original fantasy worlds are worth reading. But that excludes a lot of them.

[Bard09]

I personally think as far as writing is concerned, fantasy storylines are immensely easier to pull off than those based in history. This isn't even taking into consideration time put into research.

The whole problem that a lot of us are seeing with fantasy is that it's resorting to the epic structure that Hollywood and video games have increasingly been developing over the last 15 years. It's damn hard to create a historically-based storyline with a climax comparable to saving the world. There's no apocalyptic spells, devil-worshipping wizards, no convienant magic as a deus ex machina to save the day.

Even historically-based movies such as Gladiator resort to fiction when it comes to the events of the plot. If there ever really was a Maximus the way the movie treated him, Rome would have been in riots.

Think about it: almost all of the adventure and RPG games with some touch on histoical elements have incorporated the supernatrual or "fantastic" in some way. Broken Sword has its demons and templars, Sierra's old King Arthur game has mysticism and religious paraphenilia, the list goes on.

It's hard to make a historically-based plot "epic" in the way that magic and the supernatural can. It takes a good writer to write a suspenseful, exciting plot in the palace of Versailles, whereas it only takes a mediocre one to turn Louis XIV into a fascist demon-worshipping demogogue out to destroy the world.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Bard09

It's hard to make a historically-based plot "epic" in the way that magic and the supernatural can. It takes a good writer to write a suspenseful, exciting plot in the palace of Versailles, whereas it only takes a mediocre one to turn Louis XIV into a fascist demon-worshipping demogogue out to destroy the world.

Bingo. I'm still waiting.

[Jakek]

I'd like to see a game based around the Gothic tribes. Ostrogoths and Visigoths, maybe an attack on the Celts. For some reason everybody ignores that bit of history, even though it shaped much of Europe. In short, I want to be a barbarian. I'm tired of being a Roman or a magical knight.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by Jakek

...I want to be a barbarian.

Well, you could start by belching in public as much as possible.

[Jakek]

I'm constantly beltching and pillaging. For once I'd like to do it in a world where I can womp some Germanic ass without getting arrested. The tourists out here are so touchy.

[ragnar]

Originally Posted by Bard09

It's hard to make a historically-based plot "epic" in the way that magic and the supernatural can. It takes a good writer to write a suspenseful, exciting plot in the palace of Versailles, whereas it only takes a mediocre one to turn Louis XIV into a fascist demon-worshipping demogogue out to destroy the world.

Precisely, and why do we accept mediocre stories when there is fantasy elements in it and not when there aren't?

[ragnar]

Originally Posted by Intrepid Homoludens

I like Thief for its gameplay, superlative sound design, and general atmosphere. I don't like the zombies or other supernatural creatures.

Yeah, notice the smilie in my post.

I like DX because it was hard to categorize - RPG+FPS+Adventure+Tactical. The RPG system was simple enough that I didn't have to worry so much about stupid skills building and 'charisma' points or whatever. Very important: it was science fiction, not medieval fantasy - no stupid magic spells, no orcs, no dragons, no killing 50,000 rats in a crypt just to level up.

More importantly, it is made in a world that felt like it *could* be the future for us. And there are many rather bad RPG systems, that doesn't mean that every one is. RPG:s should be about playing a role, not about gaining levels and killing monsters.

If this game is a strategy I don't want it, thanks.

To be one that so often bitches about other people's closed mindedness for innovation and progress, you're quite narrowminded when it comes to game selection.

[Intrepid Homoludens]

Originally Posted by ragnar

To be one that so often bitches about other people's closed mindedness for innovation and progress, you're quite narrowminded when it comes to game selection.

Ah, but you've forgotten. I have sampled some strategy games in the past. My disinterest in them is not without experience. Sooooo, back at ya!!