-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
What is a "generic fantasy game"?
- Thread starter Some Nobody
- Start date
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Thank you. I'll even take the "generic action RPG", since aside from a fun battle system, there's very little innovative that I couldn't find in another game.
And Gears of War 3 was written by Karen Traviss, another best seller. Didn't stop the story from being ass.
Anyway, I'm still bitter over KoA. EA ruined it for me.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Answers like these (and there's been more than one of said) basically indicate to me that it doesn't really matter what the lore or story is as long as the trappings of fantasy exist at all.
It's basically indicating that developers shouldn't even worry about the tag and just try to make the best game they can make.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Basic plot was good, the way it was told was barebones and uninteresting, yeah.
Yeah, I thought it executed all the gameplay stuff well, just nothing that really blew me away as being innovative.
It had almost everything gameplay-wise though;
-Dialogue trees/persuasion
-Crafting/gem slotting
-Lots of loot
-Fun, responsive, combat with dodging, blocking, parrying, some combos, charged attacks, spells, traps, abilities, etc.
-Huge world, where you could actually choose where to go (even if each big area was connected by a small tunnel)
-Tons of quests, some boring fetch quests/etc. but many had interesting stories if you listened to all the optional dialogue
-Towns where you could kill anybody including quest characters
And lots more.
Fair enough, I was hesitant to include the writer as a point.
Karen Traviss doesn't seem to have any real history of writing original works though, whereas R.A. has dozens of original stories under his belt, so I felt that it was fair to use his history as evidence he could produce another original story. Plus Karen is pretty much guaranteed to make best sellers since she wrote Star Wars books, which I'm sure sell well on name alone.
I agree with being bitter over it though, but really what does EA do that doesn't make people bitter these days?
Net_Wrecker
Member
I think there needs to be a distinction made between "generic" and "bad." I don't think a game's setting being "generic fantasy" necessarily means the game is bad, it just depends on how it's executed. For example, my issue with Dragon's Dogma isn't that it's generic or old school or "classical" or whatever you want to call it, but that it's largely a lifeless world. Orcs, elvs, wizards, dragons, etc. can all still be made interesting through good writing and gameplay.
Hell, I'd LOOOOOVE a "generic" cyberpunk open world game done at a high level. That doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer a unique cyberpunk game even more, but it's the execution that counts.
Hell, I'd LOOOOOVE a "generic" cyberpunk open world game done at a high level. That doesn't mean I wouldn't prefer a unique cyberpunk game even more, but it's the execution that counts.
Finaika
Member
Didn't Todd McFarlane did the art for Kingdoms of Amatelur?
Yeah he did.
I'm not a big fan of his work personally, but I don't think it's fair to call it garbage.
The biggest problem for KoA's art IMO was the silly LOD engine they used where, even on PC, objects would be low detail until you got quite close.
Sorry but being written by times best seller doesn't ensure anything. He can write something original, but that doesn't stop them from being generic. Sorry if I sound like an ass by doing a kneejerk judgement since I've yet to finish the game because my computer broke and I am too lazy to reinstalled it, but how KoA present its lore, especially visual part feels generic to me. The wiritng of the dialog itself doesn't help very much to get my attention, even though they are certainly better from TES dialogue. Presentation, especially visual and sound is very important in video games. It is akin to prose and writing for written fiction that make them differ from each other.
The content itself might different substansially, but if it presented in generic way, it will ended up as generic.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Eh. Salvatore didn't really have much to do with how the lore was presented--that was all BHG. The initial Amalur website had tons of lore available surrounding not just Reckoning, but the MMO and lots of points before it. It was pretty in-depth and interesting in terms of the different stories they wanted to tell. Honestly its a shame so many people write the series off because what I read had so much potential.
That's why being a professional writer itself is not sufficient. Do you think it is possible for PS:T to achieve such fantasy-ness and weirdness if Avellone only acted as the lead writer? Game director and designer is as much as important in order to present the lore and setting of the universe. This is particularly vital point if the game is RPG or another lore-dependent game in order to make them more stands out.
Just a little, though. A lot of Souls' more interesting monsters look like something out of a supplemental D&D Monster Manual rather than the main one.
Especially stuff like the Chaos Eaters. I always felt they were a very intentional shout-out to the blobby, vaguely formed monsters you'd find in musty old RPG source books.
It probably was inspired by the similar looking monsters in Berserk, given that the Souls series has borrowed liberally from Berserk.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
As said already, anything that's too close to Tolkien fantasy can be called generic because it's frankly overdone. At this point, anything with elves, dwarves, gnomes, and maybe even goblins and orcs are generic. Imagine if all space opera sci-fi had the same alien races over and over? I don't mind having different races if you're gonna do some neat twist about them (and have them be different enough from humans to justify their inclusion as something special) but elves? Come the fuck on, enough with the elves and dwarves already.
Personally I tend to prefer "dark fantasy", such as Legacy of Kain and Demon's Souls. I'd probably like Diablo's setting too but I can't stand the click-spam combat gameplay.
Personally I tend to prefer "dark fantasy", such as Legacy of Kain and Demon's Souls. I'd probably like Diablo's setting too but I can't stand the click-spam combat gameplay.
lol? It transcends generic and goes into full-on cliché mode at this point.
Yikes. Can't disagree more. Amalur is full of fruity pastel colours and pixie dust. Some areas look okay, others are downright nauseatingly saccharine.
I'm saying that, and I have 80+ hours into the game. I activated every Lorestone I found, but unless they are voiced by Simon Templeman I barely pay attention because it's so goddamn dull. I like the game and all but the story and lore is mind-blowingly uninteresting. Sorry.
Meh. It does have a few quirky ideas, such as the Fae repeating their ancient songs and stories or the Traveller's mythos, but it doesn't really do much with those ideas from what I've seen, and I completed both of these faction storyline quests. Their absolutely hideous and saccharinely colourful artistic design doesn't help.
ROFL, are you for real? You think RA Salvatore isn't a goddamn perfect example of a writer of generic fantasy? Jesus, the dude wrote stories upon stories about a party of an elf (renegade dark elf, whatever), grouchy-with-a-heart-of-gold dwarf, cute-comic-relief-halfling-thief-who-always-gets-in-trouble, and strong-and-awkward-barbarian. If anyone asked me, "name a writer of generic fantasy", he'd probably be the very first I'd name (but to be fair I've never read stuff by Paolini, Terry Brooks or David Eddings and I hear they're quite the champions of generic fantasy).
Some Nobody
Junior Member
No wonder I've never cared for Souls. I can't stand Berserk.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
It's really not high fantasy without some elves, though.
Damn straight. Do you know how many shitty brown games I've had to sit through? Amalur was a perfect counter to the visual garbage my eyes have been forced to deal with for the seventh gen.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Hated what little I saw of the Anime myself, never read the manga, but Demon's Souls is absolutely awesome, and I dare say its link to Berserk is inspirational on some minor aspects of it at the most. But eh, your loss.
Vulcano's assistant
Banned
I think the easiest way to put it is this:
-There are a several fantasy tropes out there.
- If your game is considered fantasy because it uses these tropes as if it was checking boxes on a list, then it is generic.
- If you put too many of them in your game so that the ratio between tropes and new material is disproportionate towards tropes, then it may also be a little generic.
- This does not mean that it's bad, but that it is part of the genre of fantasy only because it is using tropes of fantasy.
--
Being inspired by Berserk does not necessarily mean much in a sense that things will be pretty consistent with stuff you do not like. The list of inspiration for Berserk is pretty wide and a lot of it comes from 80's fantasy films like Ladyhawke, and Dragonslayer.
-There are a several fantasy tropes out there.
- If your game is considered fantasy because it uses these tropes as if it was checking boxes on a list, then it is generic.
- If you put too many of them in your game so that the ratio between tropes and new material is disproportionate towards tropes, then it may also be a little generic.
- This does not mean that it's bad, but that it is part of the genre of fantasy only because it is using tropes of fantasy.
--
Being inspired by Berserk does not necessarily mean much in a sense that things will be pretty consistent with stuff you do not like. The list of inspiration for Berserk is pretty wide and a lot of it comes from 80's fantasy films like Ladyhawke, and Dragonslayer.
K
kittens
Unconfirmed Member
Anything that sticks too closely to Tolkien-style fantasy aesthetics. With that said, lots of games can by heavily inspired by Tolkien and still feel fresh and interesting. Games that do the style notably better than other games, for example. Good art is good art, no matter if it's an overplayed genre. Nice graphics help, too. Skyrim has a rather generic feel and it has mediocre graphics, but the art is very well realized.
And then there's steampunk, which always looks boring no matter what.
And then there's steampunk, which always looks boring no matter what.
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Haha.
/thread
Berserk turned into shit after Miura got obsessed with Idolmaster. Glad Souls series make shout out from his most outstanding stuffs, not the shit one.
To be frank though, Souls Series lore or story aren't particularly. They are actually, how I put it, too skinny. The information is too scarce due on how they are conveyed. But that what makes them feel so stand out among modern fantasy game.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Bollocks.
You can be colourful and beautiful without being saccharine and pastel. And you can be grim and dark and foreboding without being brown and boring. Dark Souls has absolutely gorgeous art, varying from ghoulish decaying cities and claustrophobic catacombs to majestic spires, lush forests and hauntingly beautiful vistas.
Fair opinion, I can see how the presentation could easily be considered generic. At first I thought it was fairly generic too, with the gnomish guys in the tutorial and all.
Generic is ultimately a very subjective word, and to me if something is truly original it probably won't seem generic.
To me while KoA had a fair share of tropes/etc. it also had (AFAIK) a lot of original things mixed in. Monsters had Boggarts, Brownies, and several others that I've never seen in a game before. The races, mainly the Fae, also seemed to have original customs, traditions, etc. that were at times fairly interesting to me.
I agree 100% that the lorestones were really boring to listen to, and they were implemented very poorly (it's super easy to cut the dialogue off, or not be able to hear it because you're in combat). I disagree that the story and lore were mind-blowingly uninteresting, but ultimately that comes down to opinion and I can't say that yours is wrong.
I played it with a SweetFX profile that helped to make the colors more realistic. I don't really think it was that far from generic in terms of art though anyways.
I had a strong feeling somebody would say something like this. I've never read any of R.A.'s works but I did a small amount of research on him before posting and his stories, in terms of plot/content and not tropes (tolkien derived races/etc.), seemed original.
Again, generic is ultimately a subjective word. By definition all it means is that something is characteristic of a group. By that definition, like you said, practically any high fantasy is generic.
Thank you for your opinion and insight into R.A. Salvatore.
P.S. I can agree that Dark Souls had interesting lore and art design. While it was apparently inspired by a lot of things (Berserk for one, as mentioned) it still is less tired than anything Tolkien-esque
The label "generic fantasy" is usually applied to anything that cuts too closely to the implied "default setting" of the classic tabletop roleplaying game Dungeons & Dragons. This is due in large part to how directly so many RPGs stole setting elements and even game mechanics wholesale from D&D. It doesn't help that D&D is itself the result of throwing 70s pop-fantasy into a giant blender, and printing the result into a book.
As a result, "generic fantasy" refers to stuff that is weighed down by setting tropes that date back to the 70s. Orcs, elves, dwarves, generic medieval fantasy that is actually loaded with anachronisms, an inexplicable lack of guns, the lack of contact with non-European themed cultures, the presence of ill-defined magic that is only used by "wizards" who possess certain traits such as being physically frail, the complete lack of monotheistic religion, and so on are pretty common examples of these tropes. All of these things have a tendency to be way more common than they should be.
Thankfully, things have changed quite a bit. Fantasy as a whole has moved in different directions in recent years. There is on the whole a lot less stuff that can really be called "generic fantasy" these days. Though we do get strange through-backs like Dragon Age and Kingdoms of Amalur.
As a result, "generic fantasy" refers to stuff that is weighed down by setting tropes that date back to the 70s. Orcs, elves, dwarves, generic medieval fantasy that is actually loaded with anachronisms, an inexplicable lack of guns, the lack of contact with non-European themed cultures, the presence of ill-defined magic that is only used by "wizards" who possess certain traits such as being physically frail, the complete lack of monotheistic religion, and so on are pretty common examples of these tropes. All of these things have a tendency to be way more common than they should be.
Thankfully, things have changed quite a bit. Fantasy as a whole has moved in different directions in recent years. There is on the whole a lot less stuff that can really be called "generic fantasy" these days. Though we do get strange through-backs like Dragon Age and Kingdoms of Amalur.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
He kept writing long after I'd outgrown his books, but I read quite a bit of his stuff in my youth and trust me, while his plot and storytelling had some ideas that were more or less fresh at the time, for the most part it was very much "generic". Not necessarily bad for what it was, mind you, if you take it as YA fiction it's decent for the most part, but yeah, he's pretty goddamn generic.
And I disagree that "any high fantasy is generic". Salvatore though, well, yeah. With him and McFarlane as artist, 'tis no surprise Amalur is what it is.
And I disagree that "any high fantasy is generic". Salvatore though, well, yeah. With him and McFarlane as artist, 'tis no surprise Amalur is what it is.
He kept writing long after I'd outgrown his books, but I read quite a bit of his stuff in my youth and trust me, while his plot and storytelling had some ideas that were more or less fresh at the time, for the most part it was very much "generic". Not necessarily bad for what it was, mind you, if you take it as YA fiction it's decent for the most part, but yeah, he's pretty goddamn generic.
And I disagree that "any high fantasy is generic". Salvatore though, well, yeah. With him and McFarlane as artist, 'tis no surprise Amalur is what it is.
Don't worry, I trust your opinion on R.A. since it is infinitely more informed than mine.
I used to eat up high fantasy when I was younger too, although I like to think some of the books I read weren't too generic.
I didn't quite say that you'd think any high fantasy was generic, but since as far as I can tell the vast vast majority of it is Tolkien/etc. derived it would seem that the vast majority of it would be generic for you (and probably most people).
NameGenerated
Who paid you to grab Dr. Pavel?
Two Worlds immediately sprang to mind.
If Oblivion is generic. Two Worlds is fucking generic.
If Oblivion is generic. Two Worlds is fucking generic.
daninthemix
Member
Heck, Oblivion is pretty generic. But it was also a stunning open world the like of which I'd never seen and an amazing soundtrack.
By your definition The Witcher is generic, and that's one of the best fantasy worlds you can find in games these days.
I'm yet to watch that one yet so I'll take your word for it!
Earthpainting
Member
I'm one of those people with a dislike of high fantasy. There's just something so lazy and lame about the constant re-using of the same few fantasy species and races. It comes across as Tolkien fanfiction.
I do admit my dislike of it is pretty shallow, as I have less issues if you superficially replace elves, orcs and dwarves with something almost identical, but with a new design and name. It's not a whole lot of extra effort to do this little step, and it makes your game's world more your own.
I think similarly of Japan's cat-girl races. Zombies fall into this same boring and generic tub as well. These things make me think "If they weren't willing to put in the effort in that aspect, why should I assume they were willing to be more creative in other aspects?" Perhaps a little bit unfair of me, and there are games out there that have proven me wrong by showing me their worth, but these games usually have a harder time to convince me.
I do admit my dislike of it is pretty shallow, as I have less issues if you superficially replace elves, orcs and dwarves with something almost identical, but with a new design and name. It's not a whole lot of extra effort to do this little step, and it makes your game's world more your own.
I think similarly of Japan's cat-girl races. Zombies fall into this same boring and generic tub as well. These things make me think "If they weren't willing to put in the effort in that aspect, why should I assume they were willing to be more creative in other aspects?" Perhaps a little bit unfair of me, and there are games out there that have proven me wrong by showing me their worth, but these games usually have a harder time to convince me.
NuSoardGraphite
Neo Member
This.
However, just because a fantasy world is "generic" doesn't automatically mean it's bad. Dragon Age is an example of a very generic fantasy world, but with enough specific details to make it interesting...and the game turned out to be pretty darned good.
Kindoms of Amalur is a game that wasn't particularly generic...it was heavily based on celtic faerie lore and well done lore at that, but the over-all game was relatively weak. Kinda fun, but not as satisfying as Dragon Age and other very well-done fantasy games.
Oh, I definitely agree with this. However, having a generic fantasy setting does mean a game starts with a little ground to make up compared to one with a totally original background. But games have and will make up for that fact quite often.
And for the record, I'd love more "generic" space opera, as long as it wasn't fully ship-based stuff.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
Sure it is, and yet, it would be better still with something other than lame elves and dwarves.
Generic doesn't mean it's going to be inherently bad, it can be used well or in clever ways, but I still prefer when fantasy settings at least try to come up with fresh ideas for races, lore, magic systems, etc.
Muffdraul
Member
The early FFs were certainly created by people who knew and loved D&D. The FF enemy roster has several that were lifted directly from the Monster Manual and had been created specifically for D&D. Like Mind Flayers, for example. The name "Final Fantasy" itself is obviously a cockeyed nod to "Dungeons & Dragons."
Virtually every Japanese video game designer from the 80s on was heavily influenced by Nausicaa, Laputa, etc. but that doesn't mean they weren't lifting from other sources.
GetemMa
Member
I'm with ya. I am bored to tears with Tolkien derivative fantasy and Zombies.
Jesus Zombies are over used.
Lets think of something else that people can mindless slaughter without feeling too bad about it.
Deified Data
Banned
Arena and Daggerfall, yes. Morrowind decidedly not. Oblivion...circumvents more Tolkein tropes than it gets credit for, and Shivering Isles totally puts it over the top in terms of originality since it's pretty much equal to the main quest in terms of length. Skyrim, as you say, has a very distinct art direction all its own that I wouldn't classify as "generic" in any way.
So yeah, I can't imagine why anyone would mention TES in a thread like this unless they haven't played them. Tamriel is easily the most compelling fantasy setting in games, IMO.
N
Noray
Unconfirmed Member
Nailed it namebro.
-Naturalistic elves at war with humans
-Dwarves that like to drink
-Medieval kingdoms, usually in a state of economic depression
-Proper nouns that use way too many apostrophes
Generally not a fan of this setting but some games do some cool things with it and put on their own touches (Witcher series and its darker take on medieval fantasy mixing it with some Slavic lore / Shining Force series and adding more anthropomorphism and slight steampunk/tech elements / FF1, early Ultima games, and early Might and Magic games with some heavy sci-fi at the end of the game )
-Dwarves that like to drink
-Medieval kingdoms, usually in a state of economic depression
-Proper nouns that use way too many apostrophes
Generally not a fan of this setting but some games do some cool things with it and put on their own touches (Witcher series and its darker take on medieval fantasy mixing it with some Slavic lore / Shining Force series and adding more anthropomorphism and slight steampunk/tech elements / FF1, early Ultima games, and early Might and Magic games with some heavy sci-fi at the end of the game )
Some Nobody
Junior Member
Almost fell asleep trying to click through those. Plus in general all those pictures still utilize the same "earth tone"-y color palette that I was originally talking about. As if they're trying to hold on to some semblance of believability despite making you fight all sorts of supernatural creatures. But I don't, personally, pay $60 for any believability outside of whatever it takes to make the game's internal logic work.
I'll concede that you and I are diametrically opposed in terms of art design, if you'll concede that more games end up looking like DS than KoA.
But that stuff is the best kind!
Dragon Age?
Nikodemos
Member
Arcanum has everything from that list, bar a single point. Which just goes to prove that, sometimes, a single change can turn it all around.
Similar threads
- Poll