RPGs defined

[Valiance]

Roguelikes are different than most RPGs...

That said most RPGs have the distinction which you mentioned.

Roguelikes which I have played (Nethack, Moria, ADoM, ToME, Angband, MAngband(!), and DCSS) all have that distinction.

However, they still have player skill, just it isn't personal moving and dodging, etc. It requires strategy, planning, ie: different kind of skill.

 

[Iron Lightning]

I challenge the internet to show me a statistic-lacking game that is unarguably an RPG. If someone can find this, well then I suppose I'd have to disagree with the OP.

I'd like to see a game without statistics. Show me that and you'll have divided by 0.

Quite true sir, I ought to have said "visible statistic lacking." Thank you for bringing my error to light, I will now fix my original post.

 

[Ilikemilkshake]

to me rpg's are all about customization, playing the game i in the way i want to play it... in other words role playing, so yeah choices come into it but so does number crunching if i want to play as a badass evil wizard then im gonna put all my experiance into magic skills and also do evil things in the game. The more skills/levels etc which are available the better...it really annoys me that most mainstream rpg's are taking to action game with rpg bits road (for example mass effect and fable)

 

[Volafortis]

RPGs are not determined by stats. They are not determined by combat systems. They are determined by creating a character, and playing the role of that character, Which is why two seemingly opposite games can both be classified as RPGs.

In Mass Effect, you do that. Mass Effect is an RPG. In Dragon Age, you do that, Dragon Age is an RPG. In Demon's Souls, you do that. Demon's Souls is an RPG.

Stats are a vital part to an RPG, but a game can have them, and still not be an RPG. For example, in Final Fantasy 13, you do not create a character and assume the role of the character. You are pushed into a pre-made character, which is fine, if you can choose the paths you can take for progression of the character, but in FFXIII, each path you can take to progress your character is strictly linear, you do not specialize beyond pre-assigned roles, and while you can choose between 3 roles, you'll need all 3 of them at some point, no none of the three roles they are given will be their "defining" role, unless the character was designed as such.

tl;dr: Role-playing defines an RPG, nothing else. In ME2, Deus Ex, Demon's Souls, etc... you do exactly that. In games like FFXIII, there is no role to fill, so it is not an RPG. It is only considered one by people who are too blinded by long standing opinions of the series to see why it isn't.

 

[Azure-Supernova]

I wholeheartedly disagree. I define an RPG as a game in which you play a role. That sounds stupid, I know, but bear with me. A game where you play as a character whose experience you shape through your choices and interactions with other characters is an RPG. It doesn't matter whether or not there are levels or experience points or stats. I would actually present Mass Effect as one of the best examples of what I'd consider an RPG. It goes against my definition somewhat in that the plot isn't completely altered based on your decisions, but you can create a unique individual character.

I agree with pretty much that. Though in all games you play a role of some sort, some are more flexible than others.

So whilst in both inFamous and Fallout you play a role, inFamous is a pre-fixed role and Fallout is one in which you define the role you play. Yes a key element of RPGs is definitely stats and abilities... essentially a ROLE PLAYING game is about... playing a role...

 

[Penguinness]

I played a DnD style game (something about warcraft 40k?) and it was aboout choosing your character, stats, skills then starting the story in which it was your choice what to do. In video games like Mass Effect, they take away the stats pretty much and implement choice in a different way. They're still very much related.

 

[Trippy Turtle]

To be fair almost every game except RTS's are rpg's because you play the main role in a game and the those who say that games are not rpg's because you don't have the ability to do whatever you want you are referring to sandbox games.

Edit: just pointing that out, my belief is that the only real rpg's are sandbox games anyway because they have a stat system and allow you to shape you own universe

 

[kingcom]

I wholeheartedly disagree. I define an RPG as a game in which you play a role. That sounds stupid, I know, but bear with me. A game where you play as a character whose experience you shape through your choices and interactions with other characters is an RPG. It doesn't matter whether or not there are levels or experience points or stats. I would actually present Mass Effect as one of the best examples of what I'd consider an RPG. It goes against my definition somewhat in that the plot isn't completely altered based on your decisions, but you can create a unique individual character.

Precisely my thoughts. A lot of people seem to hold the view that RPGs are defined by lots of lots of numbers. I disagree. An RPG is, or should be, a game in which you create and shape a character, with emphasis on characters and story, choices and consequences. it would be quite possible to take away all of the levels, stats etc from Mass Effect and it would still be an excellent RPG, because it offers choices and interactions.

Exactly. Turn Based RPGs are alot less RPG in my opinion, as you have less control over your character.

What about Fallout?

 

[kingcom]

I played a DnD style game (something about warcraft 40k?) and it was aboout choosing your character, stats, skills then starting the story in which it was your choice what to do. In video games like Mass Effect, they take away the stats pretty much and implement choice in a different way. They're still very much related.

Do you mean Warhammer 40,000? The Table Top RPG for that is called Dark Heresy (and Rogue Trader too i suppose).

 

[Penguinness]

Do you mean Warhammer 40,000? The Table Top RPG for that is called Dark Heresy (and Rogue Trader too i suppose).

Yeah Dark Heresy was the name.

 

[Axolotl]

Exactly. Turn Based RPGs are alot less RPG in my opinion, as you have less control over your character.

Personally I'm of the exact opposite opinion for the reason.

 

[Lazarus Long]

Nothing on a computer or console qualifies as a real RPG to this old fart. A roleplaying game involves two or more people at a table with some books and dice. "RPGs" on the computer are just using the name as shorthand for "This game has some math in it, and you can dress up your dudes." Nothing wrong with that, mind you, and I'm not really sure why anyone would get worked up over semantics and nomenclature.
CRPG, JRPG, Hack n' slash, action strategy shooter with inventory management and a side of fries? All that matters is whether or not you enjoy it.

 

[kingcom]

Exactly. Turn Based RPGs are alot less RPG in my opinion, as you have less control over your character.

Personally I'm of the exact opposite opinion for the reason.

I feel that in an RPG you are playing a role, so when you can't play that role as much, it's less of an RPG, because random numbers are playing the role.

Fallout has you playing far more of a role than the games you have listed. You chose how you play the game, how your character interacts with the world. The only difference is that there is a number system to be able to demonstrate your level of competency. Fallout has a percentile which represents that in a perfect situation you will have this much chance of hitting of course due to many factors this number can change so that an "expert marksman" (meaning the player is rarely going to be one and as such requires a system of rules for the player to be able to partake in the activity without the training and practice required) is represented by a high skill score. I agree that a Final Fantasy game would not be an RPG due to its inability to allow a play to actually roleplay but ones ability to roleplay is not altered by the combat system. In fact the strongest form of roleplay takes place in a table top enviroment, which always uses a turn based system. This and for the same reason as a video game, helps to ensure that the strength of the Player Character is never determined by the Player's reflexes.

 

[Vitor Goncalves]

RPGs are wargames wherein you control an individual defined by numbers so as to separate player skill/knowledge/ability and character skill/knowledge/abilty. It is not about choices, story or any of that bullshit. NetHack = RPG, Mass Effect = chest-high-wall-shooter.

Anyone agree?

Role playing game. Not Roll and Play the Game. Your defined the latest. But role-play means having a role stick to your characther. And to have a role, you need a story, a set, to fit that role in.

Role-play is primarily something defined by sociologists as what you do in society, what functions/duties do you fulfil and how does that fit in the whole of society and what contributions does it give to society.
Role-play is mainly associated with performing arts, you as an actor/actress, play your role in a giving story, with more or less freedom to choose and improvise depending on how much freedom you get from the producer/director to do so.
Role play is also largely associated with sex and sexual relations, as each intervenient will play a role to fulfil his/hers or both intervenients fantasies, like making a short story, an erotic one, but still a story, being so to such a point that it even gets to more formal situations.
Since the 70's a more recreational role-play developed, a bit before the first role play video games, role-play table top games and also the historical reanacting (and quickly spawned fantastic reanacting situations, both ancient and futuristic) demands from each participant to get into the story, personificating the caracther. In the first there is a dungeon master that gives out the guidelines, in the second there might be or not a game/reanacting master, but people will still have to be conscient of what the story is all about and what role do their caracther fulfils in it, and act accordingly.

Now just because you hate stories, and hate plots and hate choices, that doesn't mean you are going to change the definition of role play and particularly role playing games. Now if you tell me that role playing video games are just doing what you said and in many cases completely ignoring the rest or just make it as a nice decorative element on the background but very little related to the player's caracther actions (like on MMORPGs where your actiuons don't trigger any change on the storyline but instead they happen with the release of patches and expansions), in that case I can understand your point, just not expressed in the best way.

 

[Axolotl]

Exactly. Turn Based RPGs are alot less RPG in my opinion, as you have less control over your character.

Personally I'm of the exact opposite opinion for the reason.

I feel that in an RPG you are playing a role, so when you can't play that role as much, it's less of an RPG, because random numbers are playing the role.

But if it's decided by player skill your not playng a role, your just being yourself. If the RNG+stats are the primary determining factor of success or failure then you truly are assumning the role of another person because your skill is irrelavent it's thye characters skill that matters.

 

[Vitor Goncalves]

Nothing on a computer or console qualifies as a real RPG to this old fart. A roleplaying game involves two or more people at a table with some books and dice. "RPGs" on the computer are just using the name as shorthand for "This game has some math in it, and you can dress up your dudes." Nothing wrong with that, mind you, and I'm not really sure why anyone would get worked up over semantics and nomenclature.
CRPG, JRPG, Hack n' slash, action strategy shooter with inventory management and a side of fries? All that matters is whether or not you enjoy it.

True. I didn't mention on my post above, but making role play into video games limited much more the experience, and MMO ones actually make it even worse.

 

[MCDeltaT]

RPG's are normally separated into two categories: Western and Japanese. The difference is in their definition of RPG. WRPG's let you create a character to play a role in a greater story with choices to further define your character. JRPG's give you the character as your role, the character has always been defined in the games universe you just play that character.

 

[MercurySteam]

RPGs are wargames wherein you control an individual defined by numbers so as to separate player skill/knowledge/ability and character skill/knowledge/abilty. It is not about choices, story or any of that bullshit. NetHack = RPG, Mass Effect = chest-high-wall-shooter.

How someone defines an RPG is all up to them. The basic definition can be summed up by, of course, Wikipedia:

"A role-playing game (RPG) is a broad family of games in which players assume the roles of characters, or take control of one or more avatars, in a fictional setting. Actions taken within the game succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines."

For me personally, you make or take control of a character, customise their stats and equips as you level up, and (most of the time) choose a side of a moral choice system which may or may not alter the ending of the game.

Borderlands has most of these things, but no decent story or any moral choice system, Bioshock 1/2 have no leveling up and you can only customise plasmids tonics and maybe gun upgrades if you think they count. Dante's Inferno on the other hand has leveling up, a minor moral choice system and customisable relics yet it is an action adventure game.

You can have characteristics from non-RPGs in RPGs and vice versa. Mass Effect 1/2, Bioshock 1/2 and Borderlands are all unarguably RPGs, they just have different approaches.

In the end if a game dev says it's an RPG, then it's an RPG. If you disagree because it has more then just a stat system then it means you have an entirely different view of what an RPG is.

 

[MercurySteam]

RPGs are wargames wherein you control an individual defined by numbers so as to separate player skill/knowledge/ability and character skill/knowledge/abilty. It is not about choices, story or any of that bullshit. NetHack = RPG, Mass Effect = chest-high-wall-shooter.

Anyone agree?

No. Story, choices and all of those are RPG things. Mass Effect = RPG, whether you like it or not.

This man speaks of the truth.

If in a conversation, someone says Hello and you are given a choice between responding with G'day or Fuck Off then you are playing the character's role, and therefore you are roleplaying.

If it dresses like and RPG and farts like an RPG then there's a good chance it's an RPG.

 

[Axolotl]

It's supposed to be YOU,

And that's where you're wrong. It isn't supossed to be you, it's supposed to be siomebody else, that's the point of role-play. If you skil is important then it's not role-playing. You assume somebody else characteristics and skill not your own.