Dark Souls isn't an RPG

[ZippyDSMlee]

RPGs are not what you think they are. Is it a hybrid? Maybe Zelda is action RPG now called CRPG, Lulzrim falls under that category as well. But more often than not that just describes the game play while something like Survival Horror is more how deep the mechanics go. Dead space and the first few RE games are SH but I would not lump them under the action game banner.

 

[DoPo]

So that's why characters have social skills and attributes in PnP and (at least some) LARPs. Because in order for your character to speak, say, German, you yourself have to know German, and in order for your ultra-good-at-talking character to bamboozle somebody with a conversation about spoons, you yourself have to be an avid spoon enthusiast. I always wandered why would I need to put points into Language or Speechcraft, or Knowledge: Spooons on the character sheet - it turns out, I was merely rating myself. And I suppose we roll the dice and do some arithmetic based on those numbers because...we like the sound of dice and we are addicted to maths. That really clears it up for me.

Say, what's the custom when you have a character that knows Alchemy or similar? Do you bring your alchemy beakers, materials, and stuff to the game, or is the GM supposed to supply you with them?

I know there's a diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, etc. skills. But each player's speech ability does come into play even with those kind of skills. To properly bluff, you need to make a series of semi-believable lies that lead into a rather unbelievable lie instead of just coming out with that unbelievable lie.

All those times I've said to my GM "I want my character to do X", without specifying the exact words my character is going to use, and rolled the dice don't count, in that case. Cool, thanks for letting me know The One True Way Of Playing Games?®©.

I know you are trying really hard, but you could at least lay off the outright misinformation. If I make a character who is a good singer, I don't want to sing myself - I suck at that, I just want to say "my character sings a moving melody" and that's it. I do not play characters because I can do what they can - in fact, it's just the opposite - I want them to do what I cannot. Therefore we have skills and skill checks in place - they allow us to do exactly that - say "my character does X" and then roll the dice.

 

[EternallyBored]

I know there's a diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, etc. skills. But each player's speech ability does come into play even with those kind of skills. To properly bluff, you need to make a series of semi-believable lies that lead into a rather unbelievable lie instead of just coming out with that unbelievable lie.

I've played a lot of table top RPGs in my life, and I have never met a DM that actually required you to act out every social skill check in a belivable manner, or at all. At most, you may be required to come up with a summary or outline of what you want your character to do, if it's something really off the wall you may get a penalty to your roll, but I've yet to meet a DM that will deny an attempt at a social skill check just because the player can't come up with a good lie, song, or speech themselves, that's like requiring the bard in your party to write actual lyrics to all his songs..

Now, most good DM's I've played with do reward bonus XP for actually acting out a conversation in a believable manner, as an incentive for roleplaying well, but again, I've never seen it actually required as part of the attempt, especially if the player is relying heavily on skills and dice rolls.

 

[Someone Depressing]

Is it a game in which you are given responsibilities or the choices of a man/woman, and made to play their role as the main form of storytelling?

If so, it's an RPG.

Zelda falls into "RPG" sometimes, due to the mostly frea-roaming and many, many sidequests in the games. Just don't call it an RPG on a forum (or at least get some popcorn) because the fans who are willing to discuss the term "RPG" on the internet aren't the kind of people you'd want to meet in real life anyway.

Dark Souls is, yes, a very interesting mix of survival horror and RPG. I'd imagine, if Silent Hill ever gets good again *fingers crossed* then it'll probably incorporate RPG elements, such as weapon types or specific levels (because everyone else's doing it).

For the whole secondary RPG elements aspect... RPG elements can add a lot into a game, such as Bioshock - even if it was tiny - and Skullgirls also has a few (the game tracks what characters you play as and how good you are, and uses this system to pit you against certain players) but all in all, they're usually mercilessely thrown in because fuck yeah XP.

 

[Syzygy23]

snip

if i have to be honest i wouldn't really consider games like the "Longest Journey" and "Mass Effect"(or most games really) rpg's. Instead, games like Mount and Blade are rpg's. games where your thrown into the world to do as you please. Not have a set story line to follow.

RPG is kind of a nebulous term to begin with. You usually play some sort of role in ANY given game. Call of Duty? You play the role of a soldier. Chrono Trigger? Play play the (primary) role of Chrono (and his friends)

Perhaps instead of labelling a game "RPG" and "Not an RPG" we should just affix a sliding scale of "Amount of Player Agency" and "Player character progressions depth".

 

[Spearmaster]

Well looking through my AD&D books ill just have to disagree with you. There was never a limit put on what you could or couldn't do. In Dark Souls there are great limits and restraints put on the player that make any kind of "role playing" impossible other than stat build and weapon choice.

What kind of restraints? they give you several covenants with different alignments to choose from. You can decide to play offline, invade others for your profit or help others. You can decide to recreate virtually any enemy in the game and roleplay as them. The only limit is your own imagination

You can't do EVERYTHING but that constraint applies to any video game.

I don't see where you roleplay as anything, you just fight as someone, the covenant choices are little more than that of a perk that you have to unlock by meeting some requirement or another. Playing offline, co-op or invading are no different than options available in many non-rpg games. As far as limitations...well what are your options in the game? Well there is fight...and that's pretty much it, combat, its the point of the game and its done by design. I would say its more along the line of a create you own character castlevania game which is the most accurate comparison I can come up with. I feel it falls well short of an rpg but many rpg claims do. I could say free roaming action game with jrpg elements at best.

So you only consider games with prewritten characters as roleplaying games? Isn't half the point of roleplaying to make up your own characters?

Spoiler

Where did I say that? I only said your options are limited as to what you can do no matter what you create your character to be. All the role play things you make up in your head can never be reflected in the game-play of Dark Souls. Aside from the occasional you-tube video showcasing Dark Souls players creativity in trying to escape the confines of a limited game.

 

[MrBaskerville]

I view it as an action adventure, and a damn good one at that, It mostly reminds me of games like Shifters, Warriors of Might and Magic and Deathtrap Dungeon only a bit more polished and well thought out (understatement of the year!).

 

[DjinnFor]

Despite thoroughly enjoying the game, I cannot honestly say that Dark Souls in an RPG, JRPG or WRPG otherwise. The games overall emphasis on survival, loneliness, and its theme of inevitability that the Age of Darkness will happen no matter what the Chosen Undead does seems to point in the direction that Dark Souls is a part of the Survival Horror genre.

First off, lets look at the game's class system. For one it is entirely pointless outside starting stat investment and equipment. You can start out as a Pyromancer but by the end of the game you can be decked out in heavy armor and have a great ax.

NPC interaction seems to be relegated towards merchants and only a select few NPC who aren't merchants. The way the game handles NPCs and how majority of the will eventually turn hollow was when I stop thinking of Dark Souls as just an RPG and more as a Survival Horror.

EDIT: Since I can't think of anything else to add to the OP, I will simply ask that if you agree that Dark Souls is more Survival Horror than RPG or vice versa. Or do you believe that using blanket terms to describe a game does that game a great disservice?

Dark Souls is as much an RPG as Infamous is an RPG. That is, it uses a scant handful of RPG mechanics to enhance the gameplay with absolutely no emphasis on them.

I disagree that it is a survival horror game. It has ominous atmosphere in some places and some use of limited resources to enhance the gameplay, but it is in the same boat as Resident Evil 4/5/6 in that respect.

It is an action adventure game.

 

[lapan]

Where did I say that? I only said your options are limited as to what you can do no matter what you create your character to be.

That applies to every single game ever.

All the role play things you make up in your head can never be reflected in the game-play of Dark Souls. Aside from the occasional you-tube video showcasing Dark Souls players creativity in trying to escape the confines of a limited game.

But rolplaying is all about creativity. If you play D&D/live action RPGs you play out a character you invented in the confine of the games rules. How is Dark Souls any different?

What does a computer game have to be for you to consider it an RPG?

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

your assuming that you need a story inorder to role play.

Spoiler

you don't.

true role play comes from deciding on your own what you want to do.

You do need some kind of narrative as that is in the definition of a role-playing GAME.

All those times I've said to my GM "I want my character to do X", without specifying the exact words my character is going to use, and rolled the dice don't count, in that case. Cool, thanks for letting me know The One True Way Of Playing Games?®©.

I know you are trying really hard, but you could at least lay off the outright misinformation. If I make a character who is a good singer, I don't want to sing myself - I suck at that, I just want to say "my character sings a moving melody" and that's it. I do not play characters because I can do what they can - in fact, it's just the opposite - I want them to do what I cannot. Therefore we have skills and skill checks in place - they allow us to do exactly that - say "my character does X" and then roll the dice.

Doing and saying are 2 different things. You can't just say "my character says a funny one-liner" after a kill, you actually have to come up with the one-liner yourself, that's part of role-playing and how a person's speech skill comes into play. Same thing with bluffing. A bard singing a song is no different than a ranger making an attack (it's all in the roll and the skill/attack) whereas bluffing is different than those 2 things.

I've played a lot of table top RPGs in my life, and I have never met a DM that actually required you to act out every social skill check in a belivable manner, or at all. At most, you may be required to come up with a summary or outline of what you want your character to do, if it's something really off the wall you may get a penalty to your roll, but I've yet to meet a DM that will deny an attempt at a social skill check just because the player can't come up with a good lie, song, or speech themselves, that's like requiring the bard in your party to write actual lyrics to all his songs..

Now, most good DM's I've played with do reward bonus XP for actually acting out a conversation in a believable manner, as an incentive for roleplaying well, but again, I've never seen it actually required as part of the attempt, especially if the player is relying heavily on skills and dice rolls.

Like I've said before if you wanna have your character be funny, you have to be funny yourself. Bluffing also takes some player skill as well.

 

[cthulhuspawn82]

I know there's a diplomacy, bluff, sense motive, etc. skills. But each player's speech ability does come into play even with those kind of skills. To properly bluff, you need to make a series of semi-believable lies that lead into a rather unbelievable lie instead of just coming out with that unbelievable lie.

No, I think telling your GM what you are trying to accomplish and rolling the dice are all that should be required of a player. I know this from the time we played a game of "Vampire the Masquerade" and I was trying to charm a girl back to my place so I could make her a ghoul. The DM wanted me to role-play the "seduction" part. My response was "I have never asked a girl out before" to which he said "Neither have I". At that point we realized we should just stick to dice rolling.

 

[DoPo]

Same thing with bluffing. A bard singing a song is no different than a ranger making an attack (it's all in the roll and the skill/attack) whereas bluffing is different than those 2 things.

Look, you keep saying that and you keep being wrong.

"I spin a tale of how I was lost to make the guard let me go"

"OK, roll bluff"

"I got a X"

"Here is how you did and what happens"

You keep insisting that has never happened to me. It has. Your bluff rolls are well below the DC, I'm afraid.

 

[Savagezion]

a) Semantics.

b) Who cares?

Seriously, who cares what belongs in what genre? What insight is gained by cataloging something into one genre or the other? Video game genres in particular are so broadly defined, if they're defined at all, that knowing a game's genre can tell you very little of what playing the game is actually like.

I care about genres but think they are currently weak, unstructured, and ill defined. However, PS2 and before, these genres worked and covered everything.

I think genres will need to be readdressed soon. I think the genre name should be chosen off of it's user interface and/or combat model. Like I would be cool with categorizing Heavy Rain and Mass Effect both in a "cinematic" genre. Mass Effect has combat but it could just be considered a sub-genre of cinematic(Cinematic FPS). Also the terms "Action/Adventure" contains about 5 different types of games now with sub genres of their own. This past gen really shook up the genres and next gen is looking to do more of the same.

It's nice to be able to ask "What kind of game is this?" to have someone quickly reply Adventure TPS. And now you can think of 4 games to compare it to. Instead of currently the person responding has to list 4 different games that may seem different. Imagine if he said, "it's a mix between Gears of War and Uncharted" (which is how you say it in our current system) But that statement will throw people off making them think wtf? How? Those games are totally different. WIth the previous system you'll probably automatically see how it could compare to both of those two games if you have played them.

What type of game is this?
*precise genre*
Ah, I see. Say no more.

 

[DoPo]

What type of game is this?
*precise genre*

"Erm, what does this one do?"

Given the wide variety of games out there, you would need an equally large amount of genres to capture them in [footnote]also you'd probably want more as the variations don't lend themselves well to getting in a tight definition, thus a "smaller" more focused genre tags would be better suited for describing games. The tradeoff is, of course, that you may need half a dozen tags per game at least[/footnote], so I guess the above is going to be a more frequent response.

 

[EternallyBored]

What type of game is this?
*precise genre*

"Erm, what does this one do?"

Given the wide variety of games out there, you would need an equally large amount of genres to capture them in [footnote]also you'd probably want more as the variations don't lend themselves well to getting in a tight definition, thus a "smaller" more focused genre tags would be better suited for describing games. The tradeoff is, of course, that you may need half a dozen tags per game at least[/footnote], so I guess the above is going to be a more frequent response.

See, that's the problem with trying to label precise genres, even movies have trouble doing it, and they just have to tell a story, critics will still argue over the subtleties of action movie classification, and people still quibble over what qualifies as a tragedy or not.

Games have the added difficulty of trying to include gameplay into their genre classification, as well as story. RPG is such a meaningless term that includes very nebulous gameplay requirements, and as this thread proves, we can't even agree on what the specifics of that genre requires to be considered an RPG. Good luck trying to mix story genres into the mix with gameplay elements.

In the end, its just a descriptor, calling Dark Souls an RPG is only as useful or vague as you make the rest of your description. I can think of at least a dozen genres you could fit Dark Souls into if you really tried, and the value of those genres only extends to how you spin your description of the game.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Same thing with bluffing. A bard singing a song is no different than a ranger making an attack (it's all in the roll and the skill/attack) whereas bluffing is different than those 2 things.

Look, you keep saying that and you keep being wrong.

"I spin a tale of how I was lost to make the guard let me go"

"OK, roll bluff"

"I got a X"

"Here is how you did and what happens"

You keep insisting that has never happened to me. It has. Your bluff rolls are well below the DC, I'm afraid.

The DC changes based how you got about telling the lie.

 

[Savagezion]

What type of game is this?
*precise genre*

"Erm, what does this one do?"

Given the wide variety of games out there, you would need an equally large amount of genres to capture them in [footnote]also you'd probably want more as the variations don't lend themselves well to getting in a tight definition, thus a "smaller" more focused genre tags would be better suited for describing games. The tradeoff is, of course, that you may need half a dozen tags per game at least[/footnote], so I guess the above is going to be a more frequent response.

I like the idea of multi genres. Like 'Adventure FPS' and such. I do believe that very soon RPG will either be phased out entirely, or get a more specific defintiion and/or name. If the game has combat, it is important to mention the combat model. Everyone seems to pretty much agree with that. However, I think a more acurrate way to do it is throw in GUI with combat model. Like say, you make a FPS engine but you want to focus it on something unique for that genre like platforming and not shooting. If you have ever tried to define Mirror's Edge to someone in real life, it is very apparent the genre system in place is balls. But if we look at the GUI, it is a FPS GUI. Tt mostly uses melee combat though, messing up the whole "shooter" part even though you actually see shooter aspect from the outside in.Clear as mud? Anyways maybe first person camera needs it's own name. Just because it is first person doesn't mean the game has to play like a shooter. Let's go with VR (virtyual reality) for now. SO we'll call CoD a VRS. Mirror's edge is primarily a platformer game. So it would be a VRP. However, platforming needs a new name. To many other things compete for that word too much. I say we use calisthenics since I can't think of anything better atm. Mirror's Edge would be a VRC. It would make genres plug and play and the customer know exactly what your talking about.

Really, a lot of games fall under that catagory now days. But today's media influences future media. A system like that will seem crazy to casuals because they are mostly covered with a story premise in the film industry. Having a 20-30 genres may seem overly complex from the the outside in. However, it will have a 6-8 genre key.The first 2-3 letters will be the most important for describing the game. It could be a VR - ShRPG. That looks crazy but the VR is enough for most people to know if they want to play it.

 

[EternallyBored]

Same thing with bluffing. A bard singing a song is no different than a ranger making an attack (it's all in the roll and the skill/attack) whereas bluffing is different than those 2 things.

Look, you keep saying that and you keep being wrong.

"I spin a tale of how I was lost to make the guard let me go"

"OK, roll bluff"

"I got a X"

"Here is how you did and what happens"

You keep insisting that has never happened to me. It has. Your bluff rolls are well below the DC, I'm afraid.

The DC changes based how you got about telling the lie.

uh, no, that's entirely up to the DM, the DM's I've been with only up the DC based on how hard the NPC is to lie to, and what the PCs are trying to convince the NPC of.

You seem to be confusing DM discretion with the actual rules of the game, your DM may have required you to actually act out the lie and give DC bonuses or penalties based on it, but that is entirely up to the DM, and many DMs just don't do that. Tabletop games give a massive amount of leeway to the game master to make up or improvise their own rules and traditions.

Please stop pretending that just because you play a game one way means that those are the rules everyone follows, especially in something as nebulous as tabletop games.

 

[Phoenixmgs_v1legacy]

Same thing with bluffing. A bard singing a song is no different than a ranger making an attack (it's all in the roll and the skill/attack) whereas bluffing is different than those 2 things.

Look, you keep saying that and you keep being wrong.

"I spin a tale of how I was lost to make the guard let me go"

"OK, roll bluff"

"I got a X"

"Here is how you did and what happens"

You keep insisting that has never happened to me. It has. Your bluff rolls are well below the DC, I'm afraid.

The DC changes based how you got about telling the lie.

uh, no, that's entirely up to the DM, the DM's I've been with only up the DC based on how hard the NPC is to lie to, and what the PCs are trying to convince the NPC of.

You seem to be confusing DM discretion with the actual rules of the game, your DM may have required you to actually act out the lie and give DC bonuses or penalties based on it, but that is entirely up to the DM, and many DMs just don't do that. Tabletop games give a massive amount of leeway to the game master to make up or improvise their own rules and traditions.

Please stop pretending that just because you play a game one way means that those are the rules everyone follows, especially in something as nebulous as tabletop games.

If you want to make a character believe something that's quite unbelievable, you can make a series of more believable lies that lead into them believing the unbelievable. That is literally part of the game; making say 3 or 4 lies that are a DC 20 check to believe something that would normally be a DC 40 check vs one lie that is a DC 40 check is literally party of the game.

 

[Jadak]

It's a game, you play a role...

So umm...Yeah.

And if you want to be super picky, it also has loot collection and stat grinding. Fits the bill for me.