The entire premise of LitRPG books is basically broken from the start and I can only assume the reason they're having their moment is due to marketing mixed with the current literacy crisis.
A book and a game are different mediums with different tools in their toolboxes. The entire structure underpinning a LitRPG is actively sacrificing the strengths of prose, in favor of something the prose just physically can't do.
It's not that there can't be good adaptations of books to games or games to other media. But there's a pretty explicit amount of "translating" to make it work that requires an understanding of both mediums. The Witcher games make changes to the material that tie into the fact that they're making games and that the cultural context of 2008-2015 is different compared to the 1990s. Works like Fallout do things that might be nice nods to the fans of the games like a brief allusion to the various skills in the opener for Lucy, but they don't have everyone using it as an actual template for how they interact with the world. Works like D&D novels and animated adaptations like Critical Role's campaign actively remove all the dice-roll related things because those are not appropriate to the actual story being told or their mediums.
LitRPG forgoes this entirely and just plops down game mechanics into the story world itself. It actively repulses me in the same way that "TV brain" prose does, where the writer clearly wanted a TV show or film instead. It shapes the story in ways that just don't work.
Return to Analysis index Back to Home