In the spirit of the summer when classes are done and Steam sales are midway through, how about a book review about perhaps my favorite genre, the CRPG? This book goes into great detail more than its history as it includes the configurations, the mods, and the unofficial patches recommended for a newcomer. It also explains the reverence behind CRPGs and the catalog will help you find classics you may have never heard of before. Anyone who loves role-playing games or tabletops owes it to themselves to read the first thirty to thirty-five pages, and anyone who loves RPGs, old or new, should own this book whether online as a PDF or a hard-copy to support the hard work of Felix Peppe and the 115 other volunteers who worked on this project for four years. This is a love-project made by old fans for new fans of the genre, and even if you hold no interest in playing these games it’s valuable to understand where these gamers came from and how the medium has changed with time.
As strange as it may initially appear as something worthy of reviewing, CRPGs, or to the uninformed, classic/computer-formatted Role-Playing Games, are my favorite gaming genre. They are often misunderstood as being outdated or an elitist group of games that are beyond perfection. In reality, they are a style of game that resonates with me the most because of their core values. Although the book itself does not provide its own definition for CRPGs—instead, it discusses the ambiguous definition of “old-school"—there is a simpler one that distills all the complexities into one phrase, “role-playing, or the act of playing a role, in a computer game.” With the commonplace nature of consoles, the terminology requires some refinement, but what the definition means is, “A game which puts the player—or party—into a role as a character by acting upon the world through choice to tell a story."
Now what makes this book review distinct from other reviews is it will not simply be a book critique—my thoughts are pretty much obvious, and the book demonstrates what appeals to these types of gamers in vivid detail and the divide between what gamers expect these days. Instead, this review will provide an educational theory response based on my knowledge of educational psychology, applying both Piaget’s stages of cognitive development and Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) in terms of the acquisition of skills/modes of learning while playing games. The value in approaching the book through this lens will hopefully explain the divide between players today and the past and illustrate how to guide players through familiarity to games previously thought inaccessible.
The Fallout Divide of Role-playing Development
Before we can begin to discuss the book’s merits for educational purposes, we must first understand what these two educational theories are, why they are applicable to learning how to play video-games, and what limitations they have in terms of video-games. These men are relevant because learning to play video-games slowly conditions players over natural exposure from their infancy how to think, how to act, and how to perform based on what environments they come from. This aspect is what Michael Abbott, a teacher who lets his classmates play Fallout 1 and Ultima IV with little supervision, notices as the core divide between old players and new, “These eager players are willing to try something new, but […] the required skill-set and the basic assumptions the game makes are so foreign to them that the game has indeed become virtually unplayable.”
Jean Piaget (1896 – 1980) was a psychologist who focused on understanding the nature of and the development of human intelligence, and his theory is still the primary basis for educational development today called the Four Stages of Cognitive Development. These stages are, in order of natural development and suggested ages: Sensorimotor (Birth – 2 years), Pre-operational (Ages 2 – 7), Concrete Operation (Ages 7 – 11) and Formal Operation (Ages 11 – 20). Assimilation (taking in new information and matching it with previous information) and Accommodation (altering previously held ideas with the insight from new information) are the mechanisms behind Piaget’s theory. It’s not necessary to understand all the details of every stage, but the best way to think of these stages are the following:
· Sensorimotor: the stage where motor skills, sensory language, object permanence, and the internal schema (or thought processes) are made (biological cognitive development);
· Pre-Operational: the stage where children begin to mimic thoughts and actions but they do not understand the meaning or the abstractions, only concepts and pattern recognition, and it’s very egocentric (framed all around the individual); however, they are naturally curious (the “Why?” phase);
· Concrete Operation: the stage where logic becomes concrete, patterns are the basis of learning, yet hypothetical/abstract thoughts remain beyond them; children make inductive (drawing inferences from witnessing something) thinking but not deductive thinking (applying abstract principles to predict future outcomes); children also become less egocentric/self-centered, and begin to understand things beyond them;
· Formal Operational: the stage where abstract thought emerges whether for real or imaginary ideas; metacognition, “thinking about what you think;” and problem-solving, learning to use logic and trial-by-error to solve dilemmas.
These stages might sound too abstract for video-games at first, but if you examine them closer you’ll perhaps remember a similar situation when younger. The first time you picked up a controller or a keyboard and mouse, did you not only learn hand-eye coordination but also learn the proper way to reach all the main buttons or to make your own configurations (WASD)? Did you ever watch your sibling, your parent or a YouTuber personality play a game and apply similar strategies because it worked? Did you ever find yourself understanding the ins and the outs of the game, yet you couldn’t name what those tactics were called other than noticing the patterns that led to success? Did you ever find yourself coming back years later to a game thinking it was brutally difficult only to become a master because you finally grasped the underlying mechanics—numbers, concepts, genre strategies outside of that game like kiting, etc. that made it easier? If you answered any one of these situations yes, then you have demonstrated for yourself how Piaget’s theory applies to video-games.
In contrast to Piaget’s theories of cognitive, biological development of intelligence, Vygotsky’s Zone of Proximal Development is based on the idea that intelligence is gained through social acquisition (or the nurturing) through their environments. Unlike Piaget’s theory, which is rooted in the idea that all children develop their minds in the same way; Vygotsky (1896 - 1934) assumed intelligence was the result of the social interactions (culture, adults, socializing) and the environments which built context for learning, and that interplay from what the child knows and what the child does not know is the display of intelligence. Essentially, for the purpose of this critique, Vygotsky believes in the nurturing argument for learning while there are internal schema (thought-processes) shaping children’s thoughts. Language and exposure to unfamiliar ideas are the primary tools in Vygotsky’s system, and the most applicable of his ideas is the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD).
The easiest visual demonstration is to imagine a Venn Diagram between what someone understands and doesn’t understand. Overlapping these two circles is the ZPD, highlight what aspects they share in common, and over-time these two outer circles merge into one when the child obtains full comprehension of an idea.
Applying this concept to video-games is more difficult due to the abstract nature, however, like with IQ scores as a simplistic view of Intelligence, a bell-curve can be made to show an approximation of what is going on. Perhaps it’s because I play way too much Fallout or Fallout-inspired games, but the Divide seemed a fitting term to showcase this process in action. (It should also be mentioned that the bias towards these games will be made apparent, so use this graph only as a demonstration of what a ZPD looks like for video-games. By mental processes, it’s both accounting for the amount of gameplay choices to make, the familiarity with controls, and the mental activity required to participate in the game based on what can be assumed as an average player.) The Fallout games, old and new, are the perfect example as a series because they cover a wide range of skills, mechanics, etc. yet with a similar basis for each game (the S.P.E.C.I.A.L. stats):
Before the fanboy tribes declare that I’m saying Fallout 4 or 3 are stupid games compared to Fallout 1, this graph is meant to demonstrate the skill-curve/accessibility of these games. The order is determined by more than simply choice as familiarity with gameplay elements, how information is conveyed to you, prior experience, etc. are all the important factors. In short, the left-end extreme is a game that is too demanding of the average player versus the right-end extreme where it accommodates almost everyone.
How this example relates to Vygotsky’s ZPD should be obvious , but to make it more clear: Fallout 1 sits in the category of “not known” to the average player whereas Fallout 4 is in the category of known (the sales of Fallout 4 compared to 1 prove this as a fact.) Fallout 3, NV and 4 are all first-person/third-person RPG hybrids where the gun-play takes the forefront. Fallout 1 and 2 are not isometric (more like 60 degrees) turn-based games that apply the same stats in terms of tabletop/dice-rolling combat. Fallout 1, 2 and NV employ higher level demands such as character role-playing, choices made for character builds, and an indifference to give the player some initial attachment. Fallout 3 and 4 employ the emotional father/son bond to manipulate players into caring for the world as a lost child or as a lost parental figure. Comparatively, while Fallout 4 and NV both utilize factions, which should offer more choices, how much depth are given to those quest-lines varies as well as the ability to say yes or no. This aspect is why Fallout 3, which offers no choice for factions and makes decisions as a moral good or a moral evil outcome, is more closer to the act of role-playing versus the limitations of being a voiced protagonist and parental figure in Fallout 4. In addition, the quest-log and sense of direction has become more streamlined with each passing game coming from the vague Pipboy notes of the old Fallout games to the homogeneous usage of quest-markers.
What this graph also demonstrates, and why it is helpful to think of it as the ZPD for CRPGs, is a practical solution for newcomers. If you want to get someone to try the classic games, instead of a sink-or-swim approach (or the “Git Gud” attitude), the best solution is simply to introduce more taxing games as players become more and more familiar and accepting of change. This aspect could also explain why Fallout 3 appealed to more audiences than New Vegas despite taking place after Fallout 3—outside of the obvious issue, bugs—because the demands resonated more with the previous generations (role-playing as a character, stat management, branching quest lines, alternative factions and moral dilemmas, etc.).
Coming back to what started this whole informative tangent, let’s revisit the chapter with Michael Abbot and see how we could address his problem with scaffolding—providing the necessary support to get someone started—when introducing old-school CRPGs to modern students. For full context, Abbott tries various “tests” of old-school games on his students to find their breaking points, which usually is resolved over a few days such as Fallout (CRPGs), Defender (arcade classics), Planetfall (Interactive Fiction), or Rogue (the original Roguelike). The Ultima IV test is one where he notices that many students fail, not because they fail to grasp the mechanics, the narrative or the required skills, but because none thought to read the manual for help. Although we may laugh at this excuse, players nowadays are conditioned with training sequences in games or the fact that many genres have become homogenized in their controls. Comparing Fallout 1’s controls to Ultima IV’s is not possible besides the fact that they use the keyboard and mouse, which is the root cause of discrepancy, not literacy issues—the students are not accustomed to relearning gameplay mechanics at the core of a genre. To understand this fundamental problem, we must look at the full conclusion provided by Mr. Abbot about his Ultima IV test:
"At least that’s what I used to think. Now it seems to me we’re facing basic literacy issues. These eager players are willing to try something new, but in the case of a game like Ultima IV, the required skill-set and the basic assumptions the game makes are so foreign to them that the game has indeed become virtually unplayable.
And as much as I hate to say it - even after they learn to craft potions, speak to every villager, and take notes on what they say – it isn’t much fun for them. They want a radar in the corner of the screen. They want mission logs. They want fun combat. They want an in-game tutorial. They want a game that doesn’t feel like so much work. I’m pretty sure I’ll continue to teach Ultima IV.
The series is simply too foundational to overlook, and I can develop new teaching strategies. But I believe we’ve finally reached the point where the gap separating today’s generation of gamers from those of us who once drew maps on grid paper is nearly unbridgeable.
These wonderful old games are still valuable, of course, and I don’t mean to suggest we should toss them in the dustbin.
But if we’re interested in preserving our history and teaching students about why these games matter, a “play this game and sink-or-swim” approach won’t work anymore. The question for me at this point is how to balance the process of learning and discovery I want them to have inside the game with their need for basic remedial help.
I love great old games like Ultima IV, but I can no longer assume the game will make its case for greatness all by itself (pg 25)."
Although my sympathies are with Mr. Abbot, his assumption that classics stand on their own greatness is one that perhaps is the most troublesome. Perhaps it’s nostalgia at fault, yet an educator should know you cannot simply hand a student Shakespeare and expect him to know much ado from nothing. Instead of going for one extreme, the obvious solution is to follow the same pattern as with the Fallout Franchise. What if the students started with Ultima VII? The interface and the controls would still take time to become familiar, but many “literacy problems” could be addressed with both familiarity with the world and its lore, the extra visual aids, and the removal of other stressful elements when it comes to learning a new series. Maybe even Ultima IX with “What’s a Paladin?” might be the catalyst required—in all seriousness, we want to introduce people to games with greatness first to inspire them to seek out what came before.
Probably a better teaching method would be to play a tabletop game and have students create their own maps, which will give them the basic skills to play older games. In addition, players could trade character sheets with other students to force them to reevaluate how to go about a game, and understanding the appeal of role-playing as many players complete games only once due to their time commitments. Older games are often shorter--compare the 8 to 10 experience of Fallout 1 to the 50 hour experience of Fallout --which is another good incentive to play older titles.
However, the main point to take from all of these ideas is there are far more reasonable ways to introduce players based on what they are familiar with, and then work backwards towards accommodating new information. Education has always been built upon this foundation, which is why classic literature is often connected with young adult or pulp-fiction to expand students' understandings. The value we gain from teaching kids how to play Fallout 1, XCOM or any other difficult game to master is that we are teaching children not only how to become better players but also how to apply skills they may use outside of games such as cartography and navigation, resource and stress management, dealing with failure, etc. Smarter players naturally result in the demand for more complex games, but we cannot expect to change people's minds towards these games if we do not offer helping hands to make them excel from their own merits.
Even for myself, as adept as I am in CRPGs, find Ultima IV impassable, for now, as it was the first free game I received from GOG. Sometime, however, I may reach that pinnacle on my own, but if you set yourself up for failure from the start then it shouldn’t be a surprise when it gets you nowhere.
Coming Back to the Page Where This All Started
Other than that section of the book and the initial problem of explaining what CRPG even means, the rest of the criticisms I have with the book comes more down to its more questionable aspects. The book is structured to be both an informative historical look at CRPGs, where they came from and where they are now along with nearly 400 one-to-two-page reviews on “notable” games in the genre given recommended mods, patches, or versions for the best experience. The latter sections devolve into a couple top 100 lists, which feels out of place given a book that explains how and why these games were great. However, the first problem that I have is the vague terminology of what is defined as a CRPG.
Featured on this list are the following titles: Fallout, System Shock 2, Star Control 2, the Legend of Zelda, TRON 2.0, Diablo, Dark Souls, the Columbine Massacre RPG, Cthulhu Saves the World, Borderlands, the Ys games, and a couple Tales of titles, and hundreds more. Remember what the traditional definition meant, “A game which puts the player—or party—into their roles as characters by acting upon the world to tell a story through your choices.” Some of these subgenres are more understandable than others such as Immersive Sims (Deus Ex, Thief, etc.) or even modern RPGs like Dark Souls as they immerse you into their world with some affluence. Others beg an explanation why they are even considered for the “History of CRPGs.”
Normally semantic arguments are ones I largely ignore, but the two series that kept screaming out to me, specifically because the authors mentioned them, are the XCOM games and the Paradox Interactive games. One could argue that these are strategy games, but if that’s the case then how are games like Legend of Zelda or the Tales of games considered on the list? It may sound pedantic and I’m not trying to sound entitled for some of my favorite games to be mentioned, but these are large omissions when there are strange inclusions that demand a basis of a definition. Honestly, CRPGs should be determined like Rogue games where they have major and minor factors to determine what is considered a Roguelike and a Rogue-lite (so an RPG mechanics game and a role-playing game.)
These problems are minor flaws on what is essentially the best beginner’s guide to learning the fundamentals of CRPGs, technical and gameplay related, which is why the first thirty pages are a solid read. The historical overview comes across too much like an old man complaining how things fell in and out of fashion, but it’s mostly informative to establish the basic context when it comes to video-games trends. What value this book does offer are the hundreds of games cataloged as you may peruse games you may have heard of before with tips on how to get the best experience, or you may stumble across new games out of curiosity when fresh out of games on your catalog. (What a delusion that will be after the Steam sale, right?)
Sources:
Overview on Piaget's Theory: https://www.simplypsychology.org/piaget.html
Overview of Vygotsky's Theory: https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html
Felipe Pepe's blog with more info on the actual book : https://crpgbook.wordpress.com/
Free Older Version (PDF) of The History of CRPGs: https://crpgbook.files.wordpress.com/2018/02/crpg_book_1-0-1.pdf
Comments