Big Ideas: Why modern beats fantasy

Posted Oct 21st 2009 2:00PM by Akela Talamasca
Filed under: Culture, Features, Opinion

No matter how many times it's been reiterated, we just can't seem to leave the fantasy genre behind. It seems to be the default setting of both RPGs and MMOs, as witnessed by the fact that it's always a surprise when a new one of those comes out and it's not set in the fantasy milieu.

For my money, very few developers have used the fantasy setting to tell truly fascinating stories -- or, rather, stories that could only have been told in a fantasy setting. There are so many limitations inherent in the genre that don't offer a concomitant benefit that I don't know why we haven't moved on to doing more games in the modern urban setting instead. But let's take a look at what that genre offers us.

First, consider the general level of technology. In fantasy, there is a strict restriction in place that keeps things feeling, for lack of a better word, antiquated. No electricity, no combustible engines, no printing press. Infrequently, you might find very simple machinery using gears perhaps, or steam-driven tech, but that's pushing the convention a bit. Maybe some siege engine action, crossbows, pulleys, etc. This really limits the scope of what the game can comment on, and not just from a mechanical standpoint. The invention of the telephone alone changed the face of the planet in profound ways. Instant communication over vast distances allowed mankind to think on a global level, rendering certain aspects of cloistered, small village thinking irrelevant.

In the modern setting, the rise of complex machinery and electronic devices brings a rich skein of complexity to the proceedings. It's now possible to entertain entire stories around the adoption of new tech, and how that changes society. Sure, you could also do this based on some of the great military battles of history that depended on new tech -- like the triumph of the longbow over armored knights at Crécy in 1346 -- but that's a game with a prophesied ending. It can only end one way, and thus offers very little in the way of replayability. For better or worse, hitting things with sharp lengths of steel feels done to death.

This limitation can be gotten around by the use of magic, but that's a particular brand of deus ex machina that offers its own share of problems. Because the actual origins of magical power are almost never explained, and the execution of these abilities rarely explored in depth, it becomes nothing more than a way to have the analog of advanced technology -- like guns, for example -- in the fantasy setting without any of the enriching complexity or even ethic considerations that go along with it. All too often, the inclusion of magic in a game just seems like a cop-out.

NEXT >>

Tags: big-ideas, fantasy, featured, joystiqfeatures, opinion

5 Comments

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Your definition of fantasy seems a bit narrow. Fantasy basically covers any story or game where the physical laws of the real world are violated (magic, paranormal abilities, ESP, impossible tech) - so, anything from Lord of the Rings to Castle Wolfenstein to City of Heroes to Bioshock to Silent Hill can be classified as fantasy. Indeed, the hottest sub-genre of fantasy on the market these days is called Urban Fantasy, and features werewolves and vampires running around in contemporary settings - such as Twilight and TruBlood. Even alternate histories, where there is no magic, just a re-imagining of past events, qualifies as fantasy.

What you really seem to be objecting to is that game companies use that same narrow definition of fantasy when they make their games. For most companies, fantasy apparently must be set in a medieval world, feature orcs, elves and dwarfs, and be about fighting the ultimate evil. This is a lack of imagination on the part of the gaming companies, not a limitation of the genre. And there are a plenty that have broken the mold - the Myst series, Assassin's Creed, Shadow of the Colossus, and my favorite game of all time, Planescape - Torment, to name just a few.

A fantasy game, even one set in a medieval world, could be about anything - the power struggles within a thieves guild, protecting a caravan as it goes through vast deserts, finding the notes of a lost symphony, chasing a killer through time, raising and racing dragons for fun and profit, whatever.

So don't blame the genre, blame the developers that trot out the same tired tropes every year, instead of finding something new to do with it. The genre's fine. It just needs some new thinking. Posted at 3:10PM on Oct 21st 2009 by Nathan Long

The problem isn't fantasy, the problem is generic fantasy. And a generic modern world isn't going to be any more interesting than a generic fantasy world--or a generic sci-fi world. It's true in games, books, and movies.Posted at 3:36PM on Oct 21st 2009 by Rob

A great game where the conflict between "traditional fantasy" (i.e. elves, magic, swords) and "modern" technology (electricity, steam engine) is in my opinion very well portrayed was Arcanum: Of Steamworks and Magick Obscura, published in 2001.

In fact, there were also many related "social" issues which they player could get involved in, such as negotiating between two different city-states, one of which embraced technology and the other which limited and regulated it; or between an employer and its (orcish) workers on strike, &c.

Although it had some bugs, I remember playing it back in the day and loving every minute of it.
Posted at 3:59PM on Oct 21st 2009 by Matias Hernandez

I agree with Nathan, your defining fantasy strangely to me. You are not arguing anything but time periods. Shadowrun if you want to know is a Fantasy setting in a modern time period, not a modern setting with fantasy aspects. I wouldn't go so far to say as anything that is based on Earth with alternate time-lines is fantasy, though I understand where he is coming from. I also wouldn't necessarily include paranormal, that is more in the lines of science fiction (though these two genres often get lumped together). Medal of Honor is a modern game and they just don't particularly work well in RPG settings, in fact I can't think of a true RPG that has ever been made in a modern setting (Fallout fans, that's sci-fi which has equally frustrating tropes as fantasy, and yes I can't tell the difference between any of the medal of honor or splinter cell games, they are all the same games to me).

I also take issue with the fantasy must always have certain monarchy tropes and that you are always the serf. The definition of a knight is that of a lord, not a serf. And while it is true most games use a monarchy, this isn't necessarily true, I know of plenty of fantasy games that use a general anarchy which is awesome. And I also take issue with the fact that modern is freeing because it isn't in a monarchy. If you haven't noticed, class differences are just as strong in modern society as they were in the medieval times, in fact more so in many cases.

Your argument should be more based on "I am sick of the same story line over and over again." This is a true argument and one that is stated again and again. In MMOs it tends to be worse than usual, though Asheron's Call was a very refreshing fantasy that doesn't take the usual stories. Most other MMOs regardless of time period have been fairly lame when looking at story. It really is too bad that AC2 failed so badly. I always liked the idea of the most powerful mage in the world accidentally putting the world on track for total annihilation. Is a good story.Posted at 8:51PM on Oct 21st 2009 by Razakius

Looks to me like you are confusing the limitations of a setting for the limitations of video game writers. Blame Tolkien if you want to, he started the whole shoddy trend and almost everyone has been Aping him since. As for exceptions to the generic rule of RPG writing, I would like to add The Witcher to that list. That setting is a one game refutation of your entire column.Posted at 12:20PM on Nov 3rd 2009 by jklinders