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

[RhanathShadowhand]

Every single game is RPG actually. In Half-Life, you role-play as Gordon Freeman. In Halo you role play as Master Chief. Sure you don't level up, but it's still an RPG. Take Half-Life for example, the only numbers you have are your health, your suit power, and the ammunition you have. What else? Nothing, no weapon stats, no NPC stats, you don't see any of those. So yes, everyone actually played an RPG without stats.
And on top of all those, I'd not play an RPG game(RPG that has level up and stats and sort of open world etc., unlike HL or Halo) without the so called "numbers".
Hell, even table top RP games have stats. There are formulas there, like "2D10 + Speech Skill = Your chance to deceive someone". Sure you can just simply not show the "numbers", but then how will the character know if he has level up? You're going to say "Oh look! Looks like you leveled up, man that's hard thing you did there, without the numbers and shit". Essence of the RPG is "being whoever you want to be". If I want to be a bard that has awesome speech skill and lute playing skill, then I'll be one and the stats will tell me if I'm good enough.
RPG is not real life, so someone can't come and say "oh dude you're good at that" or "dude why don't you use steel shield, that'd protect you better". Yes they can, but only on text, because it'd take a lot more space than what we use these days, if we wanted to record all these lines of speech. And because of that, it can't be one or two people that says this, many people has to say it, and they have to be unique, because you can't make the same NPC come out of nowhere in a dungeon and make them say "use steel shield". Essence of RPG is the "Numbers".
Even the essence of life is "Numbers". So why would you get rid of it?

TL;DR: No.

 

[JWW]

I think this thread proves that there needs to be a reclassification of games. They've changed so much that broad definitions like "role-playing games" just does not cut it.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Well, since the numbers are what make it an RPG, I'm gonna say: Emphatic no.

Who the hell plays an RPG to not understand the stats behind item A or character B. That would make it an action game... and not an RPG.

Edit: People on this site seem very confused as to what is an RPG (video game). Sorry, but RPG may be a misnomer, but the numbers are still what make it so. "Role play", that is more akin to improv acting, is better suited to the other kind of RP - table top.

Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG.

I'd just like to disagree with you very adamantly.

What you're describing is 'Roll-playing' or 'munchkinism', and goes against everything that role-playing is, at least, in my opinion.

I don't even know what this "munchkinism" is. Is it supposed to be an insult or something?

Either way, you're right, it is your opinion. Too bad it's incorrect in terms of video games. Video game RPGs have always been about stats/levels/numbers. Perception of choice, talking with townsfolk, etc are just a facet of some RPGs. When a reviewer talks about "RPG elements" in games from other genres, they are certainly not talking about making choices - they are talking about stats/numbers and levelling.

Without stats and numbers, the game ceases to be an RPG and becomes an action/adventure game.

No, it's not really an insult. It refers to someone who pretty much breaks an RPG game down into a spreadsheet of numbers only to find the best and most efficient way of being the perfect machine at whatever they endevour to do, be it melee combat, sorcery, etc., while eschewing any actual character interactions, story elements, etc. (i.e. y'know, role-playing.) It's not wrong, or bad, it's just.... frowned upon by those that are there to role-play.

And I'm sorry, but I still disagree with you, as it seems, does the majority about a videogame RPG requiring numbers. Useful? Sure. Necessary? Absolutely not.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Every single game is RPG actually. In Half-Life, you role-play as Gordon Freeman. In Halo you role play as Master Chief. Sure you don't level up, but it's still an RPG. Take Half-Life for example, the only numbers you have are your health, your suit power, and the ammunition you have. What else? Nothing, no weapon stats, no NPC stats, you don't see any of those. So yes, everyone actually played an RPG without stats.

Well that's one of the main issues with RPGs;

There is no strict definition of a "role-playing game"!

Personally I consider a role-playing game to be one that allows the player to create their own character and role in the game world and proceed how they please to some extent.

With that defintion in mind, the games you mentioned are not RPGs.

Here is what Tim Cain (creator of the Fallout series) considers an "RPG";

Spoiler

I think an RPG should be about creating and playing a "role". First, an RPG should always include some kind of character creation system, to let the player choose what kind of character to play, and I prefer that the game let me name my character, although I can see why some games don't allow that so that they can include voice overs that talk about the character.

Second, I think RPG's should be about choice, and that choice should matter in some way. The player should be able to decide how to play their character and the game should react to that choice in some way. NPC's should change their behavior, or vendors should change their prices, or the storyline should change and the game should offer a different ending.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Personally I consider a role-playing game to be one that allows the player to create their own character and role in the game world and proceed how they please to some extent.

This. A million, kajillion times, this.

THAT is role-playing. Y'know, being able to play the role you want.

Well, since you (and this so-called majority - [sub]was there a poll done that I missed?[/sub]) present no valid argument to the contrary, you may view it that way, but it's still incorrect.

No need for a poll, nearly every response, save one, disagreed with you.

And we've presented valid arguements, you just brickwall them, out and out dismissing them as 'incorrect'. I even conceeded that your particular brand of RP was a perfectly valid form of RP, just not a popular or favorable one, so don't try and accuse me of the same.

I've presented my arguments already, and any further interaction would probably just devolve into a stupid flame war (not necessarily between us) so I'll just refer to my argument about "RPG elements", the fact that there are currently no RPGs that don't include stats and numbers while many offer no character choices in gameplay, in order to discern which is useful and which is necessary, and agree to disagree with you.

Cheers!

Ooook, so you basically agree that you're unmovable on the subject? Then why even comment in a discussion at all? Just to be counted? Don't worry, we're aware of munhckins' existence. We don't have to be reminded.

And no, this isn't flaming at all, it's civil discussion. Though the fact that you seem to be worried about it devolving into it despite no instance of it thus far, bely your rigidity in your opinions perhaps more than you realize. Some might even call it a 'cop-out'.

Not me though, I'm classy.

 

[Arrzarr]

As a min/maxer with a maths fetish? No.

As an interesting experience in trying to max hidden stats? Maybe.

To the discussion about what an RPG is, in the video game world, the very mechanic of an upgrade system can be expressed as "RPG elements". What is an upgrade system if you don't know the stats?

 

[RhanathShadowhand]

Personally I consider a role-playing game to be one that allows the player to create their own character and role in the game world and proceed how they please to some extent.

Quoting myself, to make sure you read it all.

Essence of the RPG is "being whoever you want to be". If I want to be a bard that has awesome speech skill and lute playing skill, then I'll be one and the stats will tell me if I'm good enough.

I was talking about two different definitions of "RPG":
1) Games that you role-play as some pre-defined character.
2) Games that you get to create your own character and be whoever you want to be.

EDIT: also this:

One last thing - acting is role playing. Except for improv, actors read from a script. A script allows no choices - but is still role playing. You just happen to be playing a specified role.

 

[Brawndo]

Essence of RPG is the "Numbers".
Even the essence of life is "Numbers". So why would you get rid of it?

TL;DR: No.

The essence of life is not numbers. There are very few things we can definitely quantify with human beings - pretty much just weight, height, and measurements of body parts. But even if I know your bicep is 18 inches around, I don't know if you are jacked or just a fatass unless I actually see you or someone describes you to me using qualitative labels. And even with inanimate objects which are easier to assign numbers to, we still tend to look at their qualities. For example, we don't say "wool is 4 in Warmth and silk is 2 in Warmth." Instead, we say "Wool is a fabric that is coarse, thick, and not particularly comfortable on the skin. Silk is thin, smooth, and does not breathe well" (or whatever, I'm not a fabric expert).

Old text-heavy RPGs on the Amiga and similar systems used to be like this. If you examined an item, the game would give you a blurb of text about its qualitative attributes, not its quantitative ones. Partly this was because of the limitations of graphics so they had to describe items to you, but at the same time it was more fun reading that the dagger was "steel, light in your hand, and had an inscription on the gold hilt" instead of "Steel Dagger - Weight: 2.0, Damage: 4.0, Value: 20".

But that's just my opinion.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Personally I consider a role-playing game to be one that allows the player to create their own character and role in the game world and proceed how they please to some extent.

This. A million, kajillion times, this.

THAT is role-playing. Y'know, being able to play the role you want.

One last thing - acting is role playing. Except for improv, actors read from a script. A script allows no choices - but is still role playing. You just happen to be playing a specified role.

That is all. ^.^

If you get bogged down in semantics, yes, it's role playing, because you're playing a role. That's the thing though... 'A' roll. One. And you don't get to change anything about it. That is not role-playing.

Please note the hyphen. It helps differentiate the two.

 

[RhanathShadowhand]

For example, we don't say "wool is 4 in Warmth and silk is 2 in Warmth." Instead, we say "Wool is a fabric that is coarse, thick, and not particularly comfortable on the skin. Silk is thin, smooth, and does not breathe well" (or whatever, I'm not a fabric expert).

Not a mathematician myself, but I know that in life everything is actually numbers and maths. Sure you don't say "Wool is 2 points warmer than silk", but you say "Wool is slightly warmer than silk." which is the way of saying it for people that are not fabric-experts. People who are experts on that say "Wool is %50 warmer than silk".

EDIT:

If you get bogged down in semantics, yes, it's role playing, because you're playing a role. That's the thing though... 'A' roll. One. And you don't get to change anything about it. That is not role-playing.
Please note the hyphen. It helps differentiate the two.

Typo! And, what do actors do? Do they "act"? What is acting anyway? Having a role in a movie/play and playing that role? So by that definition can't you say "Acting" is "Role playing"? So "Role Playing" is playing a role that has been pre-defined. Actors don't get to choose their characters if they accept the job.
Actually, when you create a character, it's still a pre-defined character, just not defined by the developers, but you.

 

[SwagLordYoloson]

Too the haters claiming that RPGs need stats, Role-Playing-Game doesn't have the word stats in it.

 

[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.

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?

They have a few stats, but not all that many. Most equipment has basically Armor/Damage and a Special Effect. No long list of +5 Light Damage +2 Iron Resist +4 Swimming. Most of the Special Effects are percent based, and scale with level so don't count as "stats" (or at least as I interpret the word "stats") because the whole idea of "stats" is to encourage you to replace your stuff ASAP.

I guess the thing I was trying to drive at is, in DA and Skyrim you're more interested in the aesthetic and awesome special effect of an item, then you are in the fact that it had some extremely small incremental +1 upgrade from your last weapon. So it's not the stats that are really interesting or important, its how it looks and the whacky things it does like stealing enemies souls or exploding on contact with undead. This is what I mean by "no stats" or "stats aren't important".

All games run on numbers, so depending on how you define it no game is completely stat-free. I recognize this. But stats should serve only a minor role behind Aesthetics and cool effects.

 

[Darkmantle]

depends how it was handled. things like that make me go apeshit if I want to say, play a fighter, but for some fucked up reason I always miss or do piss all for damage with melee weapons. I can't remember the last game that happened to me it, but I know it resulted in me throwing a fit.

 

[ChupathingyX]

Essence of the RPG is "being whoever you want to be". If I want to be a bard that has awesome speech skill and lute playing skill, then I'll be one and the stats will tell me if I'm good enough.
I was talking about two different definitions of "RPG":
1) Games that you role-play as some pre-defined character.
2) Games that you get to create your own character and be whoever you want to be.

The reason why I didn't quote that part was because I agreed with it. The part that I did quote is the part that kind of confused me because I wasn't entirely sure what you meant.

My fault, I should have worded it better.

EDIT: also this:

One last thing - acting is role playing. Except for improv, actors read from a script. A script allows no choices - but is still role playing. You just happen to be playing a specified role.

I know you didn't write that but I don't think we should bring cinema.theatre into this discussion.

In movies/theatre yes, the actors are given scripts with a set of lines to read. In an RPG, however, you're given a script with various things to say and do, and it's up to you to decide which one to choose.

 

[King of the Sandbox]

EDIT:

If you get bogged down in semantics, yes, it's role playing, because you're playing a role. That's the thing though... 'A' roll. One. And you don't get to change anything about it. That is not role-playing.
Please note the hyphen. It helps differentiate the two.

Typo! And, what do actors do? Do they "act"? What is acting anyway? Having a role in a movie/play and playing that role? So by that definition can't you say "Acting" is "Role playing"? So "Role Playing" is playing a role that has been pre-defined. Actors don't get to choose their characters if they accept the job.
Actually, when you create a character, it's still a pre-defined character, just not defined by the developers, but you.

Again, role-playing means I get to play the role any way I want. Actors do not get this benefit. (Excluding improv. Improv is probably the ONLY way acting could ever be construed as role-playing.)

As for your last comment... of course the character is made by me is pre-defined somewhat. Thing is, I can re-define it at ANY point. Y'know, on the fly, depending on what ROLE I want to PLAY.

See what I did thar?

 

[RhanathShadowhand]

EDIT: also this:

One last thing - acting is role playing. Except for improv, actors read from a script. A script allows no choices - but is still role playing. You just happen to be playing a specified role.

I know you didn't write that but I don't think we should bring cinema.theatre into this discussion.

In movies/theatre yes, the actors are given scripts with a set of lines to read. In an RPG, however, you're given a script with various things to say and do, and it's up to you to decide which one to choose.

So you say what makes an RPG is the choice but not the stats?
How about an RPG game that has no choices? Take Shadowflare for example, that's a straight-forward RPG game. Yes It's an odd example but still. And Diablo too, it's prety much straight-forward, you don't get to choose, but you create your own character, so it's an RPG game. Because you can create your own character. And now quoting myself again(sorry for that):

And, what do actors do? Do they "act"? What is acting anyway? Having a role in a movie/play and playing that role? So by that definition can't you say "Acting" is "Role playing"? So "Role Playing" is playing a role that has been pre-defined. Actors don't get to choose their characters if they accept the job.
Actually, when you create a character, it's still a pre-defined character, just not defined by the developers, but you.

EDIT:

Again, role-playing means I get to play the role any way I want. Actors do not get this benefit. (Excluding improv. Improv is probably the ONLY way acting could ever be construed as role-playing.)

As for your last comment... of course the character is made by me is pre-defined somewhat. Thing is, I can re-define it at ANY point. Y'know, on the fly, depending on what ROLE I want to PLAY.

See what I did thar?

You don't get to change your "pre-defined" character "on the fly". In most "RPG" games, you have to restart the game. Unless you use a character/save editor

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Again, role-playing means I get to play the role any way I want. Actors do not get this benefit. (Excluding improv. Improv is probably the ONLY way acting could ever be construed as role-playing.)

As for your last comment... of course the character is made by me is pre-defined somewhat. Thing is, I can re-define it at ANY point. Y'know, on the fly, depending on what ROLE I want to PLAY.

See what I did thar?

You don't get to change your "pre-defined" character "on the fly". In most "RPG" games, you have to restart the game. Unless you use a character/save editor

Disagree again. Sure, in SOME simplistic, older RPG's like the original Final Fantasy, you were stuck with it. but then even they introduced jobs. The job system was designed very much for this specific reason.

Argue that.

I mean, if you want to get bogged down in spreadsheets, or simplistic, almost remedial rpgs, then go right ahead. But don't presume to speak as the end all know all of what RPG's are SUPPOSED to be when there is a world of diversity out there that I refuse to close myself off to.