Poll: Would you play an RPG that hides stats from the player?

[Coldflame727]

I would love this, just as I would love a hyper realistic game. What I mean by that is, you don't see stats, you DO NOT get up and fight unhindered after being shot in the face, their is no difficulty, you get sleep deprivation, dehydration, can starve to death, and etc. Not many people would like that, but I would find it very refreshing. These days, most games I've played have been pushovers. And Dark Souls is fun, so don't bring that one up. Any other games that are very difficult, feel free to tell me about.

 

[RedEyesBlackGamer]

Sure.

Although I'd rather they just get rid of the stats altogether.

That is a terrible idea. It would completely take away character progression.

Yeah, you don't say. And I wouldn't be sorry to see it go.

Like I said to the last guy, I play RPGs for story, character and (sometimes) the gameplay, not so I can experience the excitement and cerebral depth of giving my fighter +2 to strength and endurance.

I don't particularly mind the presence of stats, but they're just busywork to me.

Then RPGs aren't the genre for you. Asking a genre to fundamentally change so you can better enjoy it shows that it might not be the genre for you. I'd like FPS to be more story driven and put less emphasis on the action. I don't like them that much in the first place. But me asking them to drastically change is unfair to fans of the genre and is unrealistic.

No one is asking for an entire genre to change. This thread is about whether or not you would play an (as in one) RPG that does stats differently. I think a game like this, if well-executed and properly balanced, could be a huge step forward in innovation.

But even if we revolutionized the genre it does not mean that all other RPGs would have to follow suit. The game mechanics in Call of Duty 4 were a huge innovation for FPS games, but you still have shooters like Bulletstorm and Serious Sam 3 that are doing their own thing.

No, you are talking about making the stats behind the scenes. He is referring to completely removing them.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

How do you figure?

RPG stands for "role-playing game." The purpose of the game is the story. Years of min/maxing DnD munchkins and video game stat-monkeys have socially created the idea that stats are what make an RPG. This idea has been grafted into the genre, but it still exists outside the core defintion of a "role-playing game."

A "role-playing game" is a game where the player PLAYS a ROLE in an unfolding story, and any system for determining pass/fail and limiting what the player can and can't do is sufficient to give the framework for playing a role in a story, whether it has stats or not.

So Mario is an RPG? Fantastic, fond memories of saving Peach in Mario 64.

No because you have no input in how the story plays out.

It's the difference between "acting out a role" in a story and "playing a role" in the story. In role-playing, you can have an influence on what happens in terms of plot and characterization.

And yes, I just claimed that most JRPGs aren't truly role-playing games, which is true.

 

[Thaius]

As long as they still have a way to generally be sure of some things; for instance, unless you were just born somehow, you would probably know about how good you are with a bow or a sword. So I think at least some basic information should be available on how good you are, since it only makes sense that the character would.

But all in all, it sounds interesting. Kind of reminds me of an idea I came up with a while ago about a superhero game where, instead of a tutorial telling you how to do things the character doesn't even know how to do until you do it, the controls are designed in such a way that the "tutorial" could consist of letting the player experiment and discover their abilities.

 

[Comrade_Beric]

I run a p&p rpg where I haven't even told them what system we're using. I have all of their numbers on character sheets I referrence whenever they try to do things, but their character sheets only have "Intelligence: Very Good" or "Strength: Poor" etc, and I allow them to change whatever it says on the page because the page is only their own impressions of what they can do, the numbers on my pages are the truth. When they improve, I don't tell them how they improved or what skills or attributes improved. They have to figure it out by doing. Of course, if they tell me they're studying something, I take that into account...

EDIT: For the sake of honesty, I should mention that I got the idea from the UFO games, particularly UFO: Aftershock. I just took the skill description uncertainty to its next logical step by allowing my players to change what it says based on their perceptions of themselves.

 

[Epona]

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

How do you figure?

RPG stands for "role-playing game." The purpose of the game is the story. Years of min/maxing DnD munchkins and video game stat-monkeys have socially created the idea that stats are what make an RPG. This idea has been grafted into the genre, but it still exists outside the core defintion of a "role-playing game."

A "role-playing game" is a game where the player PLAYS a ROLE in an unfolding story, and any system for determining pass/fail and limiting what the player can and can't do is sufficient to give the framework for playing a role in a story, whether it has stats or not.

So Mario is an RPG? Fantastic, fond memories of saving Peach in Mario 64.

No because you have no input in how the story plays out.

It's the difference between "acting out a role" in a story and "playing a role" in the story. In role-playing, you can have an influence on what happens in terms of plot and characterization.

And yes, I just claimed that most JRPGs aren't truly role-playing games, which is true.

To say that most JRPG's aren't really RPG's is as silly as saying that most cars aren't really cars. I mean, did you notice the RPG in JRPG? It seems that the industry thinks that JRPG's are in fact, RPG's made in Japan or in the Japanese style. Being able to collect hidden characters or not and being able to customize your characters abilities both seem like role-play and game altering elements to me. I really could have left Yuffie standing in that field and that would have cut out an entire side quest.

However, for the fun of it, could you tell me what you think IS a true RPG?

 

[RandV80]

Sure.

Although I'd rather they just get rid of the stats altogether.

Agree.

RPG's are suppose to be about talking to the characters, learning their stories, and acquiring spifftastic stuff that LOOKS cool. Stats just get in the way, making people go for ugly stuff simply because it's +1 damage. Sooner stats go away, the sooner people get to wear what they want to wear.

The go play an action game or a table top RP and leave video game RPGs alone, since stats are what video game RPGs are all about.

"Role Playing" does not equate to "Stats". Stats might be used as a tool to facilitate role-play in some games, but Role Playing without stats can and does exist.

Dragon Age, Skyrim are examples of games that are definitely "Role Playing" without having the "+1 damage" style stats that typify classical D&D.

???

While I have not yet played Skyrim (Xmas) so I'll have to get back to you on that, Dragon Age most certainly has stats/levels/numbers. In fact they are at their most anal in DA. A 4.2 armor stat versus a 4.1 armor stat!? Overboard much?

And who says D&D is the be all end all of video game RPGs?

Please name a video game RPG that has no stats whatsoever.

Sorry to bump from page 1, but I'm pretty sure the old Ultima games didn't use stats. I played all the way through Ultima IV an the only numbers I can recall are for your parties HP.

Anyways for the OP thread, it's a pretty good idea but the problem he's trying to address is more of a MMO RPG thing than a single player. There's nothing wrong with stats in itself, it's about how players use them and gameplay balance. With an MMO the playerbase tends to quickly go the spreadsheet route to maximize their stats, and developers have to balance the game content accordingly. And of course stats and gear also become status symbols to players, so a MMORPG quickly devolves into what I guess people have termed "roll" playing.

A single player game has a bit more leeway, when you don't expect the players to be maximizing effectiveness you can make the game content easier, so a player can make it through the game without really having to worry about stats.

So basically the idea lends itself more to MMO's where it would never be accepted, but it could work in SP but there it's not really necessary.

 

[Andreas Bergqvist]

I run a p&p rpg where I haven't even told them what system we're using. I have all of their numbers on character sheets I referrence whenever they try to do things, but their character sheets only have "Intelligence: Very Good" or "Strength: Poor" etc, and I allow them to change whatever it says on the page because the page is only their own impressions of what they can do, the numbers on my pages are the truth. When they improve, I don't tell them how they improved or what skills or attributes improved. They have to figure it out by doing. Of course, if they tell me they're studying something, I take that into account...

EDIT: For the sake of honesty, I should mention that I got the idea from the UFO games, particularly UFO: Aftershock. I just took the skill description uncertainty to its next logical step by allowing my players to change what it says based on their perceptions of themselves.

Awesome idea! I will try it out.

A great example of hidden numbers and mechanics is the red text weapons in Borderlands.

An rpg is not about the stats. It is about experiencing a story through a role with your possibility of choice. Look at LARP and FreeForm RPG for examples of rpgs without or with minimal and often hidden ruleworks.

And as someone stated early in this discussion, that numbers/stats makes the rpg an rpg and not an action game. Sadly all games have these numbers in them but usually it is only strategy games and RPGs that shows them to the player. Usually, not always.

thus;

Sure.

Although I'd rather they just get rid of the stats altogether.

Agree.

RPG's are suppose to be about talking to the characters, learning their stories, and acquiring spifftastic stuff that LOOKS cool. Stats just get in the way, making people go for ugly stuff simply because it's +1 damage. Sooner stats go away, the sooner people get to wear what they want to wear.

The go play an action game or a table top RP and leave video game RPGs alone, since stats are what video game RPGs are all about.

"Role Playing" does not equate to "Stats". Stats might be used as a tool to facilitate role-play in some games, but Role Playing without stats can and does exist.

Dragon Age, Skyrim are examples of games that are definitely "Role Playing" without having the "+1 damage" style stats that typify classical D&D.

???

While I have not yet played Skyrim (Xmas) so I'll have to get back to you on that, Dragon Age most certainly has stats/levels/numbers. In fact they are at their most anal in DA. A 4.2 armor stat versus a 4.1 armor stat!? Overboard much?

And who says D&D is the be all end all of video game RPGs?

Please name a video game RPG that has no stats whatsoever.

Please name a video game that has no stats whatsoever.(There are a few...)

 

[skywolfblue]

Sure.

Although I'd rather they just get rid of the stats altogether.

Agree.

RPG's are suppose to be about talking to the characters, learning their stories, and acquiring spifftastic stuff that LOOKS cool. Stats just get in the way, making people go for ugly stuff simply because it's +1 damage. Sooner stats go away, the sooner people get to wear what they want to wear.

See, the problem with this is that then it stops being GEAR and starts being akin to Team Fortress 2 hats. If there are no stats, there's no reason for your tank to wear armor, or use a sword and shield, as opposed to going into battle naked.

Which means that giving out the gear is no longer anything other than an asthetic reward, and that "everyone wearing what they want to wear" will soon devolve into "everyone running around in their starting underwear and beating people with their fists, wearing an absurd hat" because they think it's far funnier than it is. Search your feelings, you know it to be true.

Stats are good. Weapons are made for specific purposes... a bow should be better at shooting arrows than it is at whacking people over the head, and like it or not, numbers are the way we make that so.

A good thing to consider.

Personally, I have no problem with people going into battle wearing a tutu if they really want, it's their way of playing the game, not mine.

But there are ways to progress and advance gear in ways that aren't directly "stats" per-say.

Skyrim doesn't have any armor restrictions, any class can wear any armor. Even if the "Armor" stat went away I still think people would chose to craft better armor simply because it looks more awesome, or has more awesome special effect(s) (this armor burninates undead, that armor glows in the dark, yadda yadda).

You can make an "Upgrade" system (smithing and enchanting in skyrim did this, but it was kinda limited), whereby as the character levels up, the player can upgrade their gear with new % based effects (20% bonus to two-handed, 30% chance to dodge an attack), or new special effects. Perhaps with aesthetics like extra frills added to your armor as well. That way there is gear progression and that feeling of being "stronger", and the player can keep the set that they liked the look of. All that without having to have +1 style classical D&D stats.

 

[AetherWolf]

If you could respawn without losing hours upon hours of work (looking at you, most western RPGs) and the game wasn't ridiculously difficult, why not?

 

[Epona]

The argument about what is and what is not are endless. There really is only one objective view and that is "what the industry refers to as RPG's are RPG's".

 

[Fniss]

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

How do you figure?

RPG stands for "role-playing game." The purpose of the game is the story. Years of min/maxing DnD munchkins and video game stat-monkeys have socially created the idea that stats are what make an RPG. This idea has been grafted into the genre, but it still exists outside the core defintion of a "role-playing game."

A "role-playing game" is a game where the player PLAYS a ROLE in an unfolding story, and any system for determining pass/fail and limiting what the player can and can't do is sufficient to give the framework for playing a role in a story, whether it has stats or not.

So GTA and The Sims are now RPGs? Weird that.

Sorry, I've already proven this wrong on Page 1. Go read.

I your point is that RPGs is defined by having stats. So does Sims and GTA... In sims you assign personalities(stats) and your actions controls their different needs(other kind of hp bar). In GTA, all cars have different stats, you have life, different damage with different weapons. Your point being?

 

[Supertask]

I would play both, both have upsides and downsides. Though in a game that hides stats, it might serve to make the stats behind the scenes a bit fuzzy, so even someone who did get hold of the stats behind the scenes couldn't make a clear cut calculation. For example Sword A has the potential to do more damage than Sword B, but Sword A's damage is spread over a wider spectrum than Sword B, so it can also do less damage (at random) - maybe Sword B also gets a critical hit more often, but Sword A swings faster.

In fact this would be good even if you do reveal stats, since it means that any choice will not be clear cut, making the game more intuition and feeling than simply a boring calculation.

EDIT: Of course a potential downside of fuzzy stats is that the developers themselves will find it harder to calculate effectiveness, and thus harder to balance the game.

 

[skywolfblue]

Sure.

Although I'd rather they just get rid of the stats altogether.

Agree.

RPG's are suppose to be about talking to the characters, learning their stories, and acquiring spifftastic stuff that LOOKS cool. Stats just get in the way, making people go for ugly stuff simply because it's +1 damage. Sooner stats go away, the sooner people get to wear what they want to wear.

Well, this is why some games have separated clothing and armor, like Phantasy Star Portable 2.

I've never played that game, but I'm assuming it's similar to Transmorgify in WoW? Those are a good "best of both worlds" solution. Allowing stat lovers to have their stats while allowing those of us who care about appearance to choose what stuff we like best. I wonder why more single-player RPG's don't include this... Perhaps because it adds another layer of complexity.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

How do you figure?

RPG stands for "role-playing game." The purpose of the game is the story. Years of min/maxing DnD munchkins and video game stat-monkeys have socially created the idea that stats are what make an RPG. This idea has been grafted into the genre, but it still exists outside the core defintion of a "role-playing game."

A "role-playing game" is a game where the player PLAYS a ROLE in an unfolding story, and any system for determining pass/fail and limiting what the player can and can't do is sufficient to give the framework for playing a role in a story, whether it has stats or not.

So GTA and The Sims are now RPGs? Weird that.

Sorry, I've already proven this wrong on Page 1. Go read.

You proved nothing except that all of that is your own opinion. And here's mine...

First, what is "role-playing" exactly? Hit us up dictionary.com!

"role-play

verb (used with object)

1. to assume the attitudes, actions, discourse of (another), especially in a make-believe situation in an effort to understand a differing point of view or social interaction"

Nothing in there about stats, my friend.

To me, a role-playing game is a game whose primary feature is role-playing as defined above. While GTA and The Sims may, in a sense, feature role-playing, those are not their primary features. No, those are "sandbox mayhem" and "home building" respectively.

The industry definition of "RPG elements" is "stats, experience points, and levels," but that is a misnomer. Yes, I'm saying that the way that the industry definition is off and a role-playing game does not require stats in any way.

Again, just my opinion, just like everything else on this thread, including the "facts" that you "proved."

 

[Supah]

At least a "pro" mode or whatever where it is like that.

This guy might be on to something... kind of like Fallout New Vegas with the realism mode or w/e it was called, make it an option

If you wanted to take that a step further (those who played Diablo 2 will understand what I'm saying) Make two sets of online venues, one for normal players and one for those who turn off all stat tracking, kind of like normal and "hardcore" were separate for Diablo 2

 

[Sentox6]

The industry definition of "RPG elements" is "stats, experience points, and levels," but that is a misnomer. Yes, I'm saying that the way that the industry definition is off and a role-playing game does not require stats in any way.

That's the critical point though. "Misnomer" or not, that is the reality of the definition of "RPG" in a videogame context. Personally, I don't think the definition should change, either; to make it as broad as you're suggesting means nearly every video game in existence would necessarily become an RPG, rendering the label redundant. Essentially every video game with a protagonist is one where you assume a role.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

How do you figure?

RPG stands for "role-playing game." The purpose of the game is the story. Years of min/maxing DnD munchkins and video game stat-monkeys have socially created the idea that stats are what make an RPG. This idea has been grafted into the genre, but it still exists outside the core defintion of a "role-playing game."

A "role-playing game" is a game where the player PLAYS a ROLE in an unfolding story, and any system for determining pass/fail and limiting what the player can and can't do is sufficient to give the framework for playing a role in a story, whether it has stats or not.

So Mario is an RPG? Fantastic, fond memories of saving Peach in Mario 64.

No because you have no input in how the story plays out.

It's the difference between "acting out a role" in a story and "playing a role" in the story. In role-playing, you can have an influence on what happens in terms of plot and characterization.

And yes, I just claimed that most JRPGs aren't truly role-playing games, which is true.

To say that most JRPG's aren't really RPG's is as silly as saying that most cars aren't really cars. I mean, did you notice the RPG in JRPG? It seems that the industry thinks that JRPG's are in fact, RPG's made in Japan or in the Japanese style. Being able to collect hidden characters or not and being able to customize your characters abilities both seem like role-play and game altering elements to me. I really could have left Yuffie standing in that field and that would have cut out an entire side quest.

However, for the fun of it, could you tell me what you think IS a true RPG?

I said MOST, though that may have been an exaggeration. Games like Final Fantasy VII, Final Fantasy VI, and Chrono Trigger ARE role-playing games because, like you demonstrated above, the player can affect the story.

How do I define RPG? Well, what is "role-playing" exactly? Hit us up dictionary.com!

"role-play

verb (used with object)

1. to assume the attitudes, actions, discourse of (another), especially in a make-believe situation in an effort to understand a differing point of view or social interaction"

To me, a role-playing game is a game whose primary feature is role-playing as defined above. While Mario 64 may, arguably, feature role-playing, that is not its primary feature. No, that would be "platforming."

The industry definition of "RPG elements" is "stats, experience points, and levels," but that is a misnomer. Yes, I'm saying that the way that the industry definition is off and a role-playing game does not require stats in any way.

Because of DnD and video games aping DnD tropes, stats have become very strongly associated with role-playing games, but the are not required to create a game whose primary feature is role-playing.

Then again, just my opinion, just like everything else said on this thread.

 

[remnant_phoenix]

The industry definition of "RPG elements" is "stats, experience points, and levels," but that is a misnomer. Yes, I'm saying that the way that the industry definition is off and a role-playing game does not require stats in any way.

That's the critical point though. "Misnomer" or not, that is the reality of the definition of "RPG" in a videogame context. Personally, I don't think the definition should change, either; to make it as broad as you're suggesting means nearly every video game in existence would necessarily become an RPG, rendering the label redundant. Essentially every video game with a protagonist is one where you assume a role.

Nah, what I'm suggesting is that the quintessential aspect of the RPG should be the player's ability to make decisions that effect the story, and, by proxy, gamers shouldn't be so up-in-arms about games like Mass Effect 2 supplanting stats for a more action-based system of play.

Just my opinion though, and I know that it's not a popular one in circles of RPG fans.