There is a good post on this here. My personal beef is the idea that games seem to be be called RPG games if they include levelling up and gaining stats. I even have this beef with games that I...
My personal beef is the idea that games seem to be be called RPG games if they include levelling up and gaining stats. I even have this beef with games that I adore, like Final Fantasy. If you are given the role, then it is an adventure game, not an RPG. You cannot roleplay if your role is pre-defined. There are some 'kinda sortas' in that, like choices between paragon and renegade in ME, but really that isn't a choice. Compare that to Skyrim, which is not really known for its open story compared to say Morrowind, but you can join what you want, kill (mostly) who you want, and ignore the main story forever without consequence. Even if what happens in the world is pretty much set (eg Baldur's Gate) you can still make it a solid RPG if you allow the character design and definition to be the player's.
Fallout in its later releases (particularly 4) has almost completely lost that - and that is why 'Shandification' suddenly appears lacking. Instead of building your own character in your head, and defining them by their actions instead of a provided story, you get handed a role to play. In return you get a partial choice of ways the story can play out, but it really isn't an RPG. It is an adventure with level ups.
Ah, but reading that response...I love forced terminology! Proper academic work is full of it, I don't think it's something which should be only kept there. Gives communities flavor and allows for...
Ah, but reading that response...I love forced terminology! Proper academic work is full of it, I don't think it's something which should be only kept there. Gives communities flavor and allows for in-community knowledge building that can be built up without just pulling from academics all the time. The word has stuck with me for years after seeing this, so I enjoy it. Plus what the video is getting at with its invented term isn't just non-linearity, it's the convergence of setting and story that is born from non-linearity. The rest of that response is some combination of "duh" and "who cares," so I don't feel too compelled to address it :P Anyway, that's beside the point...
I'm not really sure what you're getting at, in relation to the topic at hand. Don't get me wrong, the strange ways that we've blurred roleplaying in video games are super interesting (Errant Signal getting into this a bit) and I'd love to hear what anyone thinks about that. To me, Fallout 4 and to a lesser extent Skyrim represent this strange middle-ground where they try to have it both ways. You're a character in the story they want to tell, but they leave in a lot of vestigial clearly-roleplaying things and you're never sure quite how deep they go. (I think ES talks about this somewhere as well, not sure if that's in the video I linked or not though) It's like they took everything that allowed for the older games' power fantasies to exist, pushed them to the limit, and adapted them into this mostly predefined but still barebones story. It's so at odds with itself that it's almost a plus just for how weird it all is. In Fallout 4 and similar games, I'm not asked to be a predefined player character all that much, nor am I really able to roleplay as a character of my creation. All I'm asked to be is myself, the player. The player character is just an avatar for my power fantasies, but dropped into a game that still has tiny bits of things that encourage roleplaying and things that encourage following a proper story. It's fuckin weird and kinda cool. I don't want that to continue to be such an overwhelming norm in RPG-type games, but it's a strange development for sure.
...but beyond being a related (interesting!) concept, I'm not sure what you mean. Sorry if you're just trying to jump off in another direction (in which case, please ignore me), but the combative nature of the linked reply makes me unsure if you're doing that or if you're engaging with the video.
As for the term "RPG"...I'm indifferent, really. I see what you mean, but even the roots of what are called RPGs on computers didn't care much for roleplaying. Wizardry and Ultima and all that borrowed ideas from the systems and settings of tabletop RPGs without doing much to try and emulate them, and largely that has been the case all along. Most video game RPGs are similar to playing a tabletop game with a party of murder hobos and a DM desperately trying to railroad them, and while that's certainly not part of the RPG ideal, it's still pulling from parts of those games and any bit is as valid as any other. Plus it's so far gone that I don't see the point. I'd rather fight the people that call Zelda games RPGs instead.
The issue the post describes is that there was already a term for 'shandification' - non-linear narrative. Making a different word that no longer contains an embedded description of what it...
The issue the post describes is that there was already a term for 'shandification' - non-linear narrative. Making a different word that no longer contains an embedded description of what it actually means just makes what you are saying less accessible to others. It's the worst sort of academic pomp (and I say that as an academic whose field at times feels like 90% jargon).
The way it applies here is that games like Fallout offer non-linear narrative in a few different areas: character, event, and sequence. Non-linear narrative in character is the idea that you define your own role. Applied to event, and your choices/actions determine what happens. Sequence is the idea that you can do things in different orders.
Fallout 3 offers you a fair amount of non-linear narrative in character (you're stuck being a human vault dweller, and you're pre-set up with friends and enemies as a child, as well as a father backstory, then you get to define from there). It offers some limited amount of sequence (you can choose to do side stories in particular orders or not at all, but you can't eg serendipitously skip to later stages of the main quest even if it would make sense), and a teeny tiny amount of event (your choice right at the end). Fallout 4 adds a snippet of event (multiple choices) a decent amount of sequence (you can now blend together multiple threads of the main quests) at the expense of a HUGE amount of non-linear narrative applied to character. The problem with both of these is you are stuck in a middle ground where if you make your own role the game will feel like it's constantly railroading you, but if you don't the game world seems empty and pointless.
It isn't just non-linear narrative, though. Non-linearity is part of the concept, but again the focus is on an effect of non-linearity, particularly on how it places much more power in the hands...
It isn't just non-linear narrative, though. Non-linearity is part of the concept, but again the focus is on an effect of non-linearity, particularly on how it places much more power in the hands of setting.
In terms of accessibility, I also disagree. If there's a term more specific than general ways of describing non-linearity that gets at this concept...it's obscure and not open to a lay audience anyway. Introducing your own working terminology has no added barriers: it assumes nothing about the vocabulary of the audience and goes out of its way to build the idea up in front of your eyes instead of assuming you knew it before. Because of that, it could really be any word. "Shandification" works because he attaches a story about a book that he likes. It's making it personal, attaching the concept to the human story you just got. It was clearly effective, it stuck with me and was constantly referenced by other people on youtube doing similar work (who I don't feel comfortable mentioning by name anymore, sadly). That has power because it helps the community they're working within, in this case gaming / video essay youtube, build on ideas from within itself. It's knowledge on a subject traditionally only approached by academics which is able to be learned, passed on, and built upon without ever crossing paths with academic writing. As much as I appreciate academics, their way of speaking about a thing shouldn't have a monopoly. A discourse community creates and works with its own vocabulary, expecting it to leech off another one with the very real and material barriers that academia has is Very Not Good.
Jargon becomes a problem when it turns into a barrier for entry, something which doesn't happen when the entire piece is just a definition of that jargon. If he used it and left the definition as a footnote in something not just about that concept, then that'd be different. But as it's used here, the word is just a shorter and "sticker" way to say "the idea which I am explaining with the entirety of this video."
Also I somewhat disagree with you on 3 and 4, because while I do think they're self-defeating in the way you describe, they're also fulfilling in the way I got into before: the player power fantasy. They're not empty and pointless because by de-emphasizing the character, they become content-filled playgrounds for blowing shit up, looting, and crafting cool stuff. It's a severe flaw and not a worthwhile tradeoff, but it is replaced with something. There's a goal there, they almost want you to feel like you're fucking up and doing dumb silly shit as you. It's like they saw the kind of people who skip dialogue and play around in games as sandboxes and decided they wanted to leave just enough that it still looks like a big cool RPG, but actually put all the focus on what previously would've been a distraction from the important bits. Of course, if you're like me and your favorite thing about Fallout is talking to people...that doesn't work so well. Blowing stuff up is only fun for a little while. Basically, I agree with how you describe them, I just think there's another element which fills that void.
This would work if they were filled with content - there were a few areas of 3 that were like that that, and slightly fewer areas in 4, but by and large those games were empty and flat. There's a...
they become content-filled playgrounds
This would work if they were filled with content - there were a few areas of 3 that were like that that, and slightly fewer areas in 4, but by and large those games were empty and flat. There's a reason people rave over NV. You don't need to have either a strong player character or a blank canvas to roleplay with, but if you aren't going to have that you need something else. I enjoyed 3 and 4 a lot, but they were definitely lacking in the game design aspect. Thankfully they are Bethesda games so modders stepped up to the plate.
There is a good post on this here.
My personal beef is the idea that games seem to be be called RPG games if they include levelling up and gaining stats. I even have this beef with games that I adore, like Final Fantasy. If you are given the role, then it is an adventure game, not an RPG. You cannot roleplay if your role is pre-defined. There are some 'kinda sortas' in that, like choices between paragon and renegade in ME, but really that isn't a choice. Compare that to Skyrim, which is not really known for its open story compared to say Morrowind, but you can join what you want, kill (mostly) who you want, and ignore the main story forever without consequence. Even if what happens in the world is pretty much set (eg Baldur's Gate) you can still make it a solid RPG if you allow the character design and definition to be the player's.
Fallout in its later releases (particularly 4) has almost completely lost that - and that is why 'Shandification' suddenly appears lacking. Instead of building your own character in your head, and defining them by their actions instead of a provided story, you get handed a role to play. In return you get a partial choice of ways the story can play out, but it really isn't an RPG. It is an adventure with level ups.
Ah, but reading that response...I love forced terminology! Proper academic work is full of it, I don't think it's something which should be only kept there. Gives communities flavor and allows for in-community knowledge building that can be built up without just pulling from academics all the time. The word has stuck with me for years after seeing this, so I enjoy it. Plus what the video is getting at with its invented term isn't just non-linearity, it's the convergence of setting and story that is born from non-linearity. The rest of that response is some combination of "duh" and "who cares," so I don't feel too compelled to address it :P Anyway, that's beside the point...
I'm not really sure what you're getting at, in relation to the topic at hand. Don't get me wrong, the strange ways that we've blurred roleplaying in video games are super interesting (Errant Signal getting into this a bit) and I'd love to hear what anyone thinks about that. To me, Fallout 4 and to a lesser extent Skyrim represent this strange middle-ground where they try to have it both ways. You're a character in the story they want to tell, but they leave in a lot of vestigial clearly-roleplaying things and you're never sure quite how deep they go. (I think ES talks about this somewhere as well, not sure if that's in the video I linked or not though) It's like they took everything that allowed for the older games' power fantasies to exist, pushed them to the limit, and adapted them into this mostly predefined but still barebones story. It's so at odds with itself that it's almost a plus just for how weird it all is. In Fallout 4 and similar games, I'm not asked to be a predefined player character all that much, nor am I really able to roleplay as a character of my creation. All I'm asked to be is myself, the player. The player character is just an avatar for my power fantasies, but dropped into a game that still has tiny bits of things that encourage roleplaying and things that encourage following a proper story. It's fuckin weird and kinda cool. I don't want that to continue to be such an overwhelming norm in RPG-type games, but it's a strange development for sure.
...but beyond being a related (interesting!) concept, I'm not sure what you mean. Sorry if you're just trying to jump off in another direction (in which case, please ignore me), but the combative nature of the linked reply makes me unsure if you're doing that or if you're engaging with the video.
As for the term "RPG"...I'm indifferent, really. I see what you mean, but even the roots of what are called RPGs on computers didn't care much for roleplaying. Wizardry and Ultima and all that borrowed ideas from the systems and settings of tabletop RPGs without doing much to try and emulate them, and largely that has been the case all along. Most video game RPGs are similar to playing a tabletop game with a party of murder hobos and a DM desperately trying to railroad them, and while that's certainly not part of the RPG ideal, it's still pulling from parts of those games and any bit is as valid as any other. Plus it's so far gone that I don't see the point. I'd rather fight the people that call Zelda games RPGs instead.
The issue the post describes is that there was already a term for 'shandification' - non-linear narrative. Making a different word that no longer contains an embedded description of what it actually means just makes what you are saying less accessible to others. It's the worst sort of academic pomp (and I say that as an academic whose field at times feels like 90% jargon).
The way it applies here is that games like Fallout offer non-linear narrative in a few different areas: character, event, and sequence. Non-linear narrative in character is the idea that you define your own role. Applied to event, and your choices/actions determine what happens. Sequence is the idea that you can do things in different orders.
Fallout 3 offers you a fair amount of non-linear narrative in character (you're stuck being a human vault dweller, and you're pre-set up with friends and enemies as a child, as well as a father backstory, then you get to define from there). It offers some limited amount of sequence (you can choose to do side stories in particular orders or not at all, but you can't eg serendipitously skip to later stages of the main quest even if it would make sense), and a teeny tiny amount of event (your choice right at the end). Fallout 4 adds a snippet of event (multiple choices) a decent amount of sequence (you can now blend together multiple threads of the main quests) at the expense of a HUGE amount of non-linear narrative applied to character. The problem with both of these is you are stuck in a middle ground where if you make your own role the game will feel like it's constantly railroading you, but if you don't the game world seems empty and pointless.
It isn't just non-linear narrative, though. Non-linearity is part of the concept, but again the focus is on an effect of non-linearity, particularly on how it places much more power in the hands of setting.
In terms of accessibility, I also disagree. If there's a term more specific than general ways of describing non-linearity that gets at this concept...it's obscure and not open to a lay audience anyway. Introducing your own working terminology has no added barriers: it assumes nothing about the vocabulary of the audience and goes out of its way to build the idea up in front of your eyes instead of assuming you knew it before. Because of that, it could really be any word. "Shandification" works because he attaches a story about a book that he likes. It's making it personal, attaching the concept to the human story you just got. It was clearly effective, it stuck with me and was constantly referenced by other people on youtube doing similar work (who I don't feel comfortable mentioning by name anymore, sadly). That has power because it helps the community they're working within, in this case gaming / video essay youtube, build on ideas from within itself. It's knowledge on a subject traditionally only approached by academics which is able to be learned, passed on, and built upon without ever crossing paths with academic writing. As much as I appreciate academics, their way of speaking about a thing shouldn't have a monopoly. A discourse community creates and works with its own vocabulary, expecting it to leech off another one with the very real and material barriers that academia has is Very Not Good.
Jargon becomes a problem when it turns into a barrier for entry, something which doesn't happen when the entire piece is just a definition of that jargon. If he used it and left the definition as a footnote in something not just about that concept, then that'd be different. But as it's used here, the word is just a shorter and "sticker" way to say "the idea which I am explaining with the entirety of this video."
Also I somewhat disagree with you on 3 and 4, because while I do think they're self-defeating in the way you describe, they're also fulfilling in the way I got into before: the player power fantasy. They're not empty and pointless because by de-emphasizing the character, they become content-filled playgrounds for blowing shit up, looting, and crafting cool stuff. It's a severe flaw and not a worthwhile tradeoff, but it is replaced with something. There's a goal there, they almost want you to feel like you're fucking up and doing dumb silly shit as you. It's like they saw the kind of people who skip dialogue and play around in games as sandboxes and decided they wanted to leave just enough that it still looks like a big cool RPG, but actually put all the focus on what previously would've been a distraction from the important bits. Of course, if you're like me and your favorite thing about Fallout is talking to people...that doesn't work so well. Blowing stuff up is only fun for a little while. Basically, I agree with how you describe them, I just think there's another element which fills that void.
This would work if they were filled with content - there were a few areas of 3 that were like that that, and slightly fewer areas in 4, but by and large those games were empty and flat. There's a reason people rave over NV. You don't need to have either a strong player character or a blank canvas to roleplay with, but if you aren't going to have that you need something else. I enjoyed 3 and 4 a lot, but they were definitely lacking in the game design aspect. Thankfully they are Bethesda games so modders stepped up to the plate.