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

[loudestmute]

I'm curious to know if having clearly numbered but vaguely described statistics counts the same thing as no numbers for the player to look at. Probably not.

Back on topic: Yes, I'm all for it. Roleplaying should be reacting equal parts to the character you have and the context of the scene. With no numerical stats, you'll have to focus on decision making to define your character, even if those decisions are as shallow as "preferred method for slaying overgrown cellar rats". More importantly, getting someone to actually roleplay in an RPG is a futzy process when they refuse to see their character sheet as anything more than a min/maxing equation. Tossing those numbers into the great unknown will hopefully be the first step in a twinker's detox program.

Note to self: Start a tabletop gaming club billing itself as a WoW addict recovery center.

 

[babinro]

I like this idea in theory, but I don't think I'd like it in execution.

It would feel like a grind to test each new item extensively to get a feel on how much better it is against compared to your party. It would take a while just to compare against one character...let alone the typical 10 or so that makes up your typical RPG roster.

Also, while you remove the 'roll-play' from the game you also suddenly remove the realism as well. Why wouldn't the character themselves realize that they are proficient in one handed fighting? I suppose the entire party could be composed of people with amnesia...or they're all so cocky they feel they are superior to one another in every conceivable way.

Personally, I'm a min-maxer. I've always been that way, it's the D&D character creation takes 5 hours minimum personality of mine. I wouldn't like this concept primarily because of the grind in testing every aspect of the RPG on every single party member in order to be successful at the game.

 

[Pearwood]

Isn't that just pretty much Pokemon?

 

[Latinidiot]

I'd like to play a game that lets me figure things out that way, but I also intensely enjoy fumbling around wih stat optimizations, so I'd like to have a pie and ravenously devour it too

 

[King of the Sandbox]

Isn't that just pretty much Pokemon?

Uhm... Pokemanz has stats.

LOTS of them, that Pokemaniacs argue over.

 

[Twilight_guy]

You mean like every other game ever made? I think you fail to realize how games work. There are just as many numbers being crunched in the background whether or not its an RPG. Also, I feel obligated to make the blanket statement that everyone is ignorant of what defines an RPG because its name is so misleading.

 

[Pearwood]

Uhm... Pokemanz has stats.

LOTS of them, that Pokemaniacs argue over.

I was talking about EVs and IVs. Natures to a lesser extent too although they've at least highlighted the affected stats since Gen 4.

 

[caselj01]

This sounds like a very intriguing idea, however I think there would still be some problems with it. In real life its much easier to get an idea of the quality of say, a sword, because you can hold it, feel its weight, its balance, the sharpness of its edge etc. Thats something that you cant really do when you are looking at a picture of a sword on your computer screen (which is why they give you numbers for weight, piercing damage etc). Similarly its much easier in real life to tell how much you are improving at a certain skill because the action just feels a lot more natural when you have had some practice.

I would lean in the direction of an rpg where items and skills are described qualitatively rather than quantitatively, so that you would still have a good idea of what items/skills are higher than others, but you wouldn't know exactly.

 

[David Bjur]

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.

A munchkin is a person who seeks to become the strongest living being in the game and trys to get the best gear and experience orbs faster than anyone else. When they can kill a demi-god in one attack, then they have won the game.

 

[Sinathor]

The more stats and information, the better. If you find it confusing, play another genre. Almost all classic RPGs have been really stat-heavy and that's how they still should be. If you take away stats, they stop being RPGs.

This was probably my biggest disappointment with Skyrim, and one of the reasons why I didn't really feel like playing more of it. It feels like an action game and not an RPG.

 

[Psudo]

I'd like an RPG where stats are hidden but can be roughly determined by appearance (strength adds muscle mass or whatever), in-game tests (I can swim across this pond faster than you, so I'm a better swimmer.) or magic/abilities. Part of any talent should be the the ability to tell whether the other guy is using more advanced techniques.

Or everyone could wear heads-up displays that rate an opponent from zero to over nine thousand.

we love our numbers, its just a way to keep track of progression in the table top game.

Part of the joy of computers is that they handle the numbers for us. If a game can clearly communicate the same information visually ingame, isn't that inherently a more immersive, better experience?

If.

 

[Macrobstar]

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.

Im just gonna say this...

The weapons in COD all have stats

 

[JoesshittyOs]

Yeah probably. Fable 2 did something along the lines of that, and even though the latest game was a disaster, I still kinda sorta worked.

Your character develops based on how much you use each thing. I liked the magic tattoo things that you got, so I used magic much more than I really cared for. It was very rewarding to see your character develop from how you played.

 

[Sinathor]

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.

Im just gonna say this...

The weapons in COD all have stats

Way to completely miss the point of everything he said.

 

[Eventidal]

They could do what Monster Hunter does, in combat. When you strike a monster, the more powerful the hit, the flashier the visuals on the strike. There's a visible delay as your blade/hammer/whatnot makes contact, and that delay is longer the more powerful the blow. The red flash and other effects also get bigger, and the sound changes a bit. In this way, you can tell by the feel of it if you're hitting a weak spot or if you're not doing much damage.
I think an RPG without explicit stats could do quite well. It's something I would have questioned a generation or two ago, but now I think we as an industry are advanced enough to pull it off and make it good.

 

[Macrobstar]

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.

Im just gonna say this...

The weapons in COD all have stats

Way to completely miss the point of everything he said.

"Remove the stats and it ceases to be an RPG" plenty of games have stats, whats so magical about them that they gift the title of RPG to a game

 

[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.

Im just gonna say this...

The weapons in COD all have stats

Way to completely miss the point of everything he said.

Way to miss the irony.

 

[Joccaren]

An interesting idea that I think only Indie devs will ever make. All the major publishers are in it for wide audience appeal, and something like this would just confuse a lot of people, where its simpler to just be told you are good or bad at something. I think there may have been games similar to this that I played a while back, and I'll see if I can dig any of them up.

Things like how much a wooden shield blocks, and how much it slows you down, would easily be found by players and put online through doing calculations. People have done it for bullet drop, accuracy and scope zoom and such on BF:BC2, and I don't doubt in other games too. Items would become common knowledge eventually, and some sneaky bugger would likely look through the code to see how the level up system, and other systems, work, then use that info to figure out their rank in each stat, then know when they are levelling it. So really, the secret would eventually be spoiled, but only for those who want it to be.

Which leads in to something that might work: a 'hardcore' option for modern RPGs where such info is hidden from you. Can be turned on and off in the menu, and will hide all stat info and item info from you.

 

[starkiller212]

Meh, as long as there were still stats in the background they would eventually be figured out--and in the meantime you'd suffer in combat and other situations. Trial-and-error is a remarkably unfun gameplay mechanic, IMHO, and it sounds like that would be the only consistent way to learn what works and what doesn't.

I would play a game where only a few, obvious stats really matter and don't need to be seen by the player. For example, if there were only a few weapon choices, then obviously the dagger would be faster than the battleaxe, but would also have less reach. Such a game would have to have a greater focus on skill and realistic tactics, making it more of an action game anyway.

But ultimately in an RPG, I'd like to be able to take Suzie along with me because I find her interesting, rather than being practically forced to take whichever companion I believe is most effective (due to hidden or explicit stats).

 

[4RM3D]

I have had the same discussion a week ago:

http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/9.325360-What-makes-a-game-a-RPG?page=1

In short:

I hate people who use the 'roleplaying' argument, it's inane. Games will never allow the absolute freedom to 'roleplay', nor does playing as a digital avatar make a game an RPG.

The term RPG refers to gameplay elements borrowed from DnD and other tabletop games, the only element of said games that could be fully replicated in video games. It was originated by Richard Garriot's Ultima series, and the Wizardry series, which later inspired the first true "JRPG' as we know it, Dragon Quest. Therefore, games that continue from that lineage, and share that gameplay- level ups, epic quests, character growth and story, customization, etc., are RPGs. Not all games that HAVE those elements are RPGs, but the culmination of all these elements do. That's why Final Fantasy is an RPG, and why Skyrim is an RPG, and why Call of Duty or Gran Turismo are NOT RPGs.

And:

RPGS are all about statistics determining the results of actions, rather than the abillities of the player. The idea being that in a regular game you can't get past your basic limitations as a person, such as being weak, slow, dumb, or inherantly unlikable, in an RPG the idea is that someone can effectively take on the role of a character that is nothing like themselves and control it indirectly.

To understand what RPGs are you have to look at where they were invented, which also explains the meaning of the term. They did not just appear magically one day with an unknown origin, indeed we know pretty much where and when they were invented, and even who made them popular and put them into circulation.

RPGS are the child of wargames, which was where people would sit down and command armies to similate historical battles using sand tables and a lot of minatures, with statistics to represent each piece, and dice to determine the roll of fortune as to say whether an unreliable weapon like matchlocks were going to fire. As time went on they moved from historical simulation, into alternative history, and then eventually into pure fantasy as people found ways to try and simulate things like orcs and elves using the same numbers. Due to the price and complexity of entry you started also seeing these games reduce in scale from massive clashing armies, down to smaller, skirmish based confrontations where there was an increasing focus on invidual units and equipment. This eventually turned into the idea of games where each player would take on the role of a specific warrior and conduct the battle purely with statistics and dice.