How much does the setting of an RPG matter to you?

[rusty_shackleford]

[1998]

Not too much tbh. Sure, after a long playthrough of any particular setting usually I chose something entirely different for my next game. But I would play any setting, if I am somewhat interested in the game. If I would be forced to name one fav, it would probably something urban.

[OnTilt]

I was ready to say, "not very much", but after thinking on it some I think its possibly the most important part of a good RPG. Any game can give me numbers to go up, and a map to explore, but the ones that really stick with me have a world that I can get attached to. A lot of other things go into the equation to create that feeling, but the setting itself is a very key component.

This goes for any game or story, not just RPGs.

[Vergil]

Going to break the chain here and say it's decently important to me. If I can't find anything interesting about the setting how can I spend hours in it and create a character that inhabits it if I don't care about it?

[Val the Moofia Boss]

For me, setting and aesthetics go hand in hand. I prefer for my games to be set in really fantastical worlds and have good aesthetics, like Granblue Fantasy which is set on top of floating islands or Xenoblade Chronicles which is set on the backs of humongous Titans, Septerra Core, Warcraft, etc. But I will tolerate more mundane, Earth-like settings like Trails or The Banner Saga if they look good enough. But mundane settings with boring art direction like Skyrim doesn't appeal to me very much, and I'm instead mainly there for the gameplay (ie, Thief).

[Element]

Can make a game, and make me look past a lot of the faults eg. Arcanum.

[maidenhaver]

Its important when the game emphasizes the setting. If it doesn't matter then I don't care. If the game's a medieval fantasy trope, it needs to act the part. No california words.

[Xenich]

The setting is low on my list ultimately. The systems are the most important to me (though there are some settings that I am not as interested in), but unfortunately many of the concepts of play that I prefer in a system are considered "poor design", "Antiquated", etc... which greatly limit the what I tolerate as it concerns the setting. If the game has a mainstream modern action/RPG system with cheap mechanics and structure, the setting can then become a turn off.

[Xenich]

I was ready to say, "not very much", but after thinking on it some I think its possibly the most important part of a good RPG. Any game can give me numbers to go up, and a map to explore, but the ones that really stick with me have a world that I can get attached to. A lot of other things go into the equation to create that feeling, but the setting itself is a very key component.

This goes for any game or story, not just RPGs.

Many great RPGs of old were often driven mostly by the systems and those were some of the most enjoyable games to me (lets be honest, most AD&D modules are cheap fan fiction in story and writing, though I still loved them). When setting and story started to become a thing, I thought... great, more icing on the cake. Unfortunately, all of the things I enjoyed with the systems of the older RPGs started to be removed in favor of setting and story focus. There is a certain point where I would rather read a book than play a game that is all about setting and story.

A good system can make most things tolerable and in the rare chance you get both, it really is a diamond in the rough. These days though, systems are ignored (more specifically the negative game play elements) and games suffer greatly due to it.

[Ratcatcher]

Setting is important. I will stomach a sub-par game if the setting itself is interesting and captures my immagination, although I won't necessarily complete such a game, unless the story is also intriguing enough. I can otherwise endure a lousy setting, if I'm presented with stellar gameplay and mechanics, eg: Troubleshooter: AC. ******* urban environment. ******* idiot spoonist cult. ******* idiotic pokemon tier animal stories. Still, one of the best games I played in 2020.

[Nooneatall]

It's extremely important. This is also true for fantasy novels as well. It's better when they are fleshed out and lived in and have a long history.

[WaterMage]

Is extreme important. Pick Morrowind for eg, if was the typical generic fantasy setting, would`t be the same masterpiece. Same for geneforge.

The unique thing more important than the setting is making game mechanics and settings in line.

[J1M]

I don't enjoy oriental settings. Pillars of Eternity had the same problem with its vowel salad names and terminology.

[Irenaeus]

Extremely important. If it's a setting I don't like (like zombie apocalypse) I'll never play the game.

[Hauberk]

As others have said, it's important. The setting has to make sense. Simpler games can get away with more than RPGs, but if the setting is bad, other things will be as well.

[UltraFan123]

If the game's a medieval fantasy trope, it needs to act the part. No california words.

This 100%. Something that turns me off in some games that supposedly take place in a setting inspired by ancient times is that for some reason the in-story characters speak and act as if they were living in a Tumblr fanfic.

Example; the Hades games. First one was almost filled to the brim with Marvel Cinematic Universe jargon and the new second one is a crime against humanity.

[LemonDemonGirl]

I don't want to play something set in "Earth but has a different name like Gaia, Terra, etc". Additionally, I shouldn't be a "hurr humans only" type setting.
Oh, and no 'Earthly Swearing'. Let's hear some made-up curse words **** it!

[Norfleet]

Not at all. By the time I'm experiencing your game's setting, it's too late since I've already committed to it. Therefore, it plays no actual role in my decision process.

[BosanskiSeljak]

Premise >>>>> Setting.

3 ways this can go:

1 - **** tier, lacksidasical, illogical. All other elements of the game including combat, c&c, etc. can be perfect when zooming in the lens , but will always be marred by ******** decision making. Fallout 2 is a prime example of this.

2 - Mid tier, where most games lie. All other elements of RPGs present in the fame elevate or destroy it , making it impactful.

3 - Top tier, very rare. Inverse of #1 , elevates the work to a level to where unless the game is unplayable, it will be a good experience.

The only place setting has any importance is in 2, and it's competing with more important elements. Setting is also a much more subjective topic while premise, call to action, etc. is objective. Give me a ********, cliche, mid setting with a good premise over an amazing Setting with a **** one.

[fkirenicus]

Story, setting, and system - these are the three that remain. But the most important is story.
(actually, the best games combine story and setting in a brilliant way - e.g., Planescape: Torment; NWN2 Mask of the Betrayer; Dragon Age: Origins, etc....)

[Falksi]

Going to break the chain here and say it's decently important to me. If I can't find anything interesting about the setting how can I spend hours in it and create a character that inhabits it if I don't care about it?

You smashed that chain of 2 to bits!

[Vergil]

Going to break the chain here and say you're a ******.

[Vlajdimir Ermenović]

Quite a lot. Any rpg can give me numbers going up and lockpicking rolls, but will I be doing it in a setting I want to be part of? Look at ELEX, taking part in rebuilding a post-apo world where factions fight over how to go about it is fun. You always have something to look forward to. The world design is interesting because it's informed by that core idea. It's no substitute for good gameplay, but it does elevate good gameplay subatantially.

[Vlajdimir Ermenović]

If the game's a medieval fantasy trope, it needs to act the part. No california words.

This 100%. Something that turns me off in some games that supposedly take place in a setting inspired by ancient times is that for some reason the in-story characters speak and act as if they were living in a Tumblr fanfic.

Example; the Hades games. First one was almost filled to the brim with Marvel Cinematic Universe jargon and the new second one is a crime against humanity.

In general, no homogenizing styles - meaning styles that'll make the alleged premise irrelevant. Those styles include:

-LGBTQWERTYXDLMAO politics. If you put that in a game about King Arthur or about Starship Troopers or something, then we'll know you didn't make it because of King Arthur or Starship Troopers. They're means to an end to you.

-California **** + groids where there shouldn't be groids. A genie that talks like "bix nood gyatt" and a post-apo warlord that talks like "bix nood gyatt" will feel the exact same.

-Anime. You draw a random gacha loli waifu that looks and talks and acts like every other random gacha loli waifu, but you give her the name "Athena" so now it's a game about greek mythology and I'm supposed to respect it as such. **** off.

[Vlajdimir Ermenović]

I'd add Mass Effect's slashfic style, but it's honestly not homogenizing, it's just low-brow, so a detriment in its own lesser way.

[Irenaeus]

Planescape: Torment; NWN2 Mask of the Betrayer; Dragon Age: Origins

One of these is not like the others...

[NotAI]

Setting = Super Important

[Norfleet]

My question to all you people going on about setting being super-important: How possibly important can it be when the decision to play the game is made before anything is known about the setting?

[bloodedhunter]

If the setting is japanese high school, the author probably needs to be put on a watchlist.

[bloodedhunter]

I don't want to play something set in "Earth but has a different name like Gaia, Terra, etc". Additionally, I shouldn't be a "hurr humans only" type setting.
Oh, and no 'Earthly Swearing'. Let's hear some made-up curse words **** it!

Ok Fierfek.