Why is D&D still Medieval?

[Bugbear]

These are things that exist. They are not things that move the game past the bounds that already existed in D&D. People (including fighters, because magic weapons) have been throwing around bigger and flashier effects from day one.

For all of 1E and 2E D&D there were plenty of classes that did little more then 'hit a foe' with few special effects.

I really don't know where we can go with this. You keep trying to define 'gamers' and 'gamers mostly' in ways I don't think many of the rest of us agree. Certainly not specific to 5e (5e, as well as 4e, have been a step less epic in scope compared to 3e, or heck Eldritch Wizardry and Arduin Grimoire in the oD&D era).

So, yes there are people that play D&D super hardcore gritty. 5E even has core rules for it, and there is at least one 'gritty' sourcebook out there. So, if that is what you are saying, then OK.

The rest of the gamers, when offered a choice between:

A. Your character can hit with a weapon and do some damage

And

B.You can use Lightning Strike to charge your weapon with energy, do more damage, maybe stun your opponent and possibly shot a arc as a bonus action at a nearby foe.

Now, I meet few players when given both options pick "oh, I want to just hit a foe and do damage".

The special effects have improved, but the core concepts haven't changed. People impossibly dodging and shaking off hits in modern movies are shown with more detail, but certainly don't outdo Die Hard or 60s era James Bond in terms of unreality. I'm honestly not sure what point this is supposed to make anymore. People have successfully pointed out that there was plenty of sci fi in the 70s when D&D started and plenty of swords and sorcery movies post 2000, and you never did regroup after that and make clear your point or what you thought on the matter. This argument seems to have meandered into 'they have better special effects now' which doesn't really support any point I can see one way or another.

I'm not trying to talk about Hollywood: my point was what "fans" like.

If you put out a action movie with no CGI period and only limited 'real' stunts and no explosions.....most action movie fans, that don't specifically like that exact setting, won't like the movie.

If you put out a movie with near endless CGI spam over the whole movie with no real stunts and lots and lots and lots of explosions....then nearly all action movie fans will love the movie.

It's the same with video games:

80's action video game: hit the foe with a sword and they fall down and fade from the screen.

21st century: massive colorful animated spam covers the whole screen as the character swings their weapon and hits the foe and causes even more massive colorful animated spam, and more massive colorful animated spam.

AND this is NOT about "just" the bland fact that computers and special effects have gotten better so they AUTOMATICALLY put them in everything. You DO NOT have to use super computer special effects: It IS possible to make a movie with out them. Even an action type movie.


So my point is MOST gamers LIKE and WANT special flashy abilities in the game. And D&D over the years has added more and more and more effects.

BUT the setting lags way, way, way behind. A character can be covered with lightning and force effect spam......but in the setting it is still 'strike two rocks together to make a fire to cook for dinner'. A character can teleport around, but still have to walk 100 miles to the next city.