Dark Souls isn't an RPG

[sanquin]

Many games like Resident Evil 4 have merchants; merchants don't make a game an RPG. The central aspect of an RPG is ROLE-PLAYING, not combat. If you take combat out of Mass Effect, it's filled with role-playing, quite the opposite for Dark Souls. Yes, Dark Souls has SOME role-playing aspects to it, but that is not the main focus of the game. It's like calling Bioshock Infinite a platformer because it has SOME platforming. To be a platformer, the game's core focus must be platforming; to be a shooter, the game's core focus has to be on the shooting; etc. Dark Souls core focus is obviously on combat, thus it's not an RPG. That has nothing to do with how good or bad I think Dark Souls is. How can you honestly say with a straight face that the core aspect of Dark Souls is role-playing?

So the roleplay is less obvious. It doesn't give you your story to 'roleplay' on directly. But it IS there. I've learned that roleplay where very little story is given, and where the player is allowed more freedom in how they play, the roleplay is only better.

There's a story behind every area. There's a story behind every major monster and npc. The lore is incredible for this game, at least in my opinion. It's just that the world doesn't care about you. They don't spill their life story when you talk to them, and they don't particularly need your help. You're not the hero. You're there for you, and if you want to find out about the world, read descriptions, talk to npc's, etc. The story is for you to make yourself.

 

[AntiChri5]

So? NPC's do not determine whether or not something is an RPG.

Yeah, if you remove a central aspect of the game it stops being what it was. If you take the cars out of a racing game it stops being a racing game. Take the guns out of a shooter it stops being a shooter. And if you take the combat out of Dark Souls you have much less (there are still the covenants) options when it comes to defining your character. This argument is really silly.

I was starting to respond to your other arguments, about the gameplay, but then i realised it was completely besides the point. It's fine for you to dislike Dark Souls. Im not it's biggest fan. But it is still an RPG.

Many games like Resident Evil 4 have merchants; merchants don't make a game an RPG. The central aspect of an RPG is ROLE-PLAYING, not combat. If you take combat out of Mass Effect, it's filled with role-playing, quite the opposite for Dark Souls. Yes, Dark Souls has SOME role-playing aspects to it, but that is not the main focus of the game. It's like calling Bioshock Infinite a platformer because it has SOME platforming. To be a platformer, the game's core focus must be platforming; to be a shooter, the game's core focus has to be on the shooting; etc. Dark Souls core focus is obviously on combat, thus it's not an RPG. That has nothing to do with how good or bad I think Dark Souls is. How can you honestly say with a straight face that the core aspect of Dark Souls is role-playing?

I never said merchants made a game an RPG.

I agree with you that the central aspect of an RPG is roleplaying. Thats not the issue here. Where we disagree is that i believe roleplaying can happen within combat. Character build, playstyle and gear go a long way in defining a character, particularly in Dark Souls. Arguing what Dark Souls would be if you removed the combat is pointless, because if you removed the combat of Dark Souls it wouldn't be Dark Souls anymore.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

So the roleplay is less obvious. It doesn't give you your story to 'roleplay' on directly. But it IS there. I've learned that roleplay where very little story is given, and where the player is allowed more freedom in how they play, the roleplay is only better.

There's a story behind every area. There's a story behind every major monster and npc. The lore is incredible for this game, at least in my opinion. It's just that the world doesn't care about you. They don't spill their life story when you talk to them, and they don't particularly need your help. You're not the hero. You're there for you, and if you want to find out about the world, read descriptions, talk to npc's, etc. The story is for you to make yourself.

I'm not saying there is no role-playing in DS, I'm saying that's not the focus of the game. It's not a question amount of story and NPCs spilling their life stories, it's about how little choice you actually have in the game outside of combat. DS is just your character crawling through one huge dungeon. Yeah, you can make up your own little stories for various things and such, but you can do that with just about every game.

I agree with you that the central aspect of an RPG is roleplaying. Thats not the issue here. Where we disagree is that i believe roleplaying can happen within combat. Character build, playstyle and gear go a long way in defining a character, particularly in Dark Souls. Arguing what Dark Souls would be if you removed the combat is pointless, because if you removed the combat of Dark Souls it wouldn't be Dark Souls anymore.

I agree that there's role-playing within combat but it's only an extension of your character. If you create your character, give them their own personality and such, then you can't be railroaded into being say a rogue. You should be able to do plenty of things outside of combat that define and develop your character. If you removed combat from Mass Effect, it would still be Mass Effect (you can do the same with DnD). To me, removing combat and seeing what you have left is the true test for determining if a game is an RPG or not.

 

[Augustine]

I would have to say that Dark Souls IS an RPG, albeit a very subtle one. The game has a very elaborate story and plot, but the game does not give it to you - plot is hard to see unless you seek it out yourself. It is part of its unique atmosphere. Couple that with the fact that protagonist cannot speak as well...

What we have, then is:
Elaborate plot, and intricate world;
Character progression;
Control over the ending of the story;

That alone is enough to deem something an RPG in my book.

 

[AntiChri5]

So the roleplay is less obvious. It doesn't give you your story to 'roleplay' on directly. But it IS there. I've learned that roleplay where very little story is given, and where the player is allowed more freedom in how they play, the roleplay is only better.

There's a story behind every area. There's a story behind every major monster and npc. The lore is incredible for this game, at least in my opinion. It's just that the world doesn't care about you. They don't spill their life story when you talk to them, and they don't particularly need your help. You're not the hero. You're there for you, and if you want to find out about the world, read descriptions, talk to npc's, etc. The story is for you to make yourself.

I'm not saying there is no role-playing in DS, I'm saying that's not the focus of the game. It's not a question amount of story and NPCs spilling their life stories, it's about how little choice you actually have in the game outside of combat. DS is just your character crawling through one huge dungeon. Yeah, you can make up your own little stories for various things and such, but you can do that with just about every game.

I agree with you that the central aspect of an RPG is roleplaying. Thats not the issue here. Where we disagree is that i believe roleplaying can happen within combat. Character build, playstyle and gear go a long way in defining a character, particularly in Dark Souls. Arguing what Dark Souls would be if you removed the combat is pointless, because if you removed the combat of Dark Souls it wouldn't be Dark Souls anymore.

I agree that there's role-playing within combat but it's only an extension of your character. If you create your character, give them their own personality and such, then you can't be railroaded into being say a rogue. You should be able to do plenty of things outside of combat that define and develop your character. If you removed combat from Mass Effect, it would still be Mass Effect (you can do the same with DnD). To me, removing combat and seeing what you have left is the true test for determining if a game is an RPG or not.

I disagree about Mass Effect. If you remove the combat, it wouldn't be Mass Effect anymore. It would be close. It wouldn't be nearly as big a difference as that between Dark Souls and Dark Souls without the combat. But it wouldn't quite be Mass Effect. For example, I have six Shepards of varying personality. One for each class, and their character is based very much on their class.

Other then that, there is nothing more for me to really say. You have made your points well and articulated your position, as i hope i have. All ther is left is to agree to disagree on certain things. I don't think removing the com,bat is a good way to judge an RPG, you think it's the ultimate test. Fair enough.

 

[SecondPrize]

A game doesn't have to neatly fit in one box only. Dark Souls has a lot of basic RPG elements like its attribute and gear progression. The addition of survival elements doesn't make the rpg stuff go away.

 

[TheMigrantSoldier]

On the other hand, there are people who call Fallout 3 and Mass Effect RPG's as well, merely because they have inventories and dialogue trees...

I've seen people dismiss them as RPGs merely because of their real time combat elements and fPS/TPS gameplay.

 

[AntiChri5]

On the other hand, there are people who call Fallout 3 and Mass Effect RPG's as well, merely because they have inventories and dialogue trees...

They also have something rather important to RPG's, roleplaying.

 

[Mzuark]

It's really not, so I find it funny that people rag on Skyrim for not giving you any real choice when in Dark Souls it's not like choice matters in the slightest. It doesn't affect the game at all.

But you know those wacky Dark Souls fans, they can turn any flaw into a "plus"

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

I disagree about Mass Effect. If you remove the combat, it wouldn't be Mass Effect anymore. It would be close. It wouldn't be nearly as big a difference as that between Dark Souls and Dark Souls without the combat. But it wouldn't quite be Mass Effect. For example, I have six Shepards of varying personality. One for each class, and their character is based very much on their class.

Other then that, there is nothing more for me to really say. You have made your points well and articulated your position, as i hope i have. All ther is left is to agree to disagree on certain things. I don't think removing the com,bat is a good way to judge an RPG, you think it's the ultimate test. Fair enough.

The reason why I feel you need to remove combat because a character is not defined by his/her/its combat abilities. Just like Michael Jordan as a person is not defined by what he did on the court and his basketball playstyle, that is merely an extension of his person.

On the other hand, there are people who call Fallout 3 and Mass Effect RPG's as well, merely because they have inventories and dialogue trees...

They also have something rather important to RPG's, roleplaying.

This.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Ok...and? This thread has next to zero discussion value. Your OP is more of a statement than anything else. Not much to go on.

that was going to my response. Can this thread be locked

 

[Mr Dizazta]

Ok...and? This thread has next to zero discussion value. Your OP is more of a statement than anything else. Not much to go on.

that was going to my response. Can this thread be locked

If it didn't have any discussion value, it wouldn't have reached 3 pages. In addition, majority of the actual discussion is happening between other members in the other pages of this thread. Others have brought up NPCs, Stats, Classes, and Combat as a way of proving/disproving if Dark Souls is an RPG. I guess the big point I was trying to bring to the discussion was that Dark Souls' primary genre shouldn't be RPG but Survival Horror. But instead of bringing a counter argument to the discussion, you instead quote another user and bring literally nothing to the discussion.

 

[JagermanXcell]

Dark Souls has stats like an RPG but very subtly.
Dark Souls also has feelings of desolation and atmosphere, kinda survival horrorish.
Dark Souls has lore. I guess that means there's plot
Dark Souls has combat where you can choose between fast rapiers or big greatswords, so that means its an action game.
Dark Souls has characters, with arcs, so side quests.
Dark Souls lets you choose an ending, that means there's choice.

I guess that makes Dark Souls a damn good video game! :O
Ok maybe this joke's gone on too long, just trying to lighten up the mood since this thread has popped up before and I and many others more or less disliked it cause it went nowhere.

 

[Ieyke]

It's a Fantasy Action/Survival game.
It's not an RPG of any sort.

 

[Ragsnstitches]

It's a Fantasy Action/Survival game.
It's not an RPG of any sort.

Except for a fundamental stat system, a very prominent focus on character progression and most importantly of all, roleplaying.

RPG is quite an nebulous term and I see a lot of people desperately trying to covet it for their own personal usage. At the end of the day it's pure semantics based on personal preference. Just because it does not conform to your arbitrary restrictions as to what an RPG is, does not make it any less of an RPG, both officially and colloquially.

Dark Souls is an RPG and I'm confident you or anyone who says otherwise, cannot support claims to the contrary short of preferential bias or purist rhetoric.

 

[Insideout Ink Demon]

Ok...and? This thread has next to zero discussion value. Your OP is more of a statement than anything else. Not much to go on.

that was going to my response. Can this thread be locked

If it didn't have any discussion value, it wouldn't have reached 3 pages. In addition, majority of the actual discussion is happening between other members in the other pages of this thread. Others have brought up NPCs, Stats, Classes, and Combat as a way of proving/disproving if Dark Souls is an RPG. I guess the big point I was trying to bring to the discussion was that Dark Souls' primary genre shouldn't be RPG but Survival Horror. But instead of bringing a counter argument to the discussion, you instead quote another user and bring literally nothing to the discussion.

because I read the OP and there was nothing to it discussion value wise. Which made me think, "not much discussion vale there"
Then I saw someone mirror my thoughts in the first comments, so I thought "I'll quote them n let them know I agree"
Then you quoted me , carrying on the pointlessness. Then I quoted you, carrying it on further.
Will the pointless cycle break so we can create interesting discussions

 

[TristanBelmont]

Well, an RPG is a game where, by definition, you play a role. Though, by that logic, CoD, FIFA, Minesweeper, and Hide-and-Seek are all RPGs.

 

[Atmos Duality]

a) Semantics.

b) Who cares?

The (Un)Official Henpecking Nitpicking Internet Society!
THEY ALWAYS CARE. (The only source of more arguments than a married couple!)

Snark aside, you're right; it's all just semantics.
The endless argument over what specifically defines an "RPG" is heavily debatable.
(Stats? Decisions? Interpretation of "role"?)

Ultimately, it's pretty meaningless since the player assumes some sort of role, just by getting involved.
That role might be nebulous or directly defined, but it is a role all the same.

 

[Ieyke]

Well, an RPG is a game where, by definition, you play a role. Though, by that logic, CoD, FIFA, Minesweeper, and Hide-and-Seek are all RPGs.

Which is why that's not the definition of the RPG genre.

 

[Church185]

Which is why that's not the definition of the RPG genre.

Then, for the sake of argument, what is the definition of the RPG genre?