How do you define an rpg?

[Wolfman Walt]

I'm curious as to what exactly makes something an RPG or just an action, strategy, etc game with rpg elements. I categorized it as a game that depends on the character's skills rather then the player's and that seemed to be the popular consensus but since there's no set definition, perhaps theres something better which can be used to define it as. This came about from an argument with a friend who called Oblivion an RPG and when I disagreed he decided to be retarded and not follow the logic line, but I was interested in your opinions and or ideas on the subject.

[Spazmo]

What you've got there is basically the core of the definition, but personally I would add that the player has to be able to define his own character and that the game has to react in a meaningful fashion to the choices the player makes. Basically, you could have a game like most of the Final Fantasies that has stats out the ass and basically depends on the character's skill, but because you're stuck with predefined characters and there's no meaningful choices, I would classify such a game as adventure rather than RPG. There's nothing wrong with a good adventure game, mind you. FF sucks for a variety of other reasons.

[Jesus Christ]

In order to have an RPG you must:

1) be able to choose the path of your character, not just choose how he fights his way through a pre defined storyline.

2) be dependant on your character’s abilities, not your own.

3) be able to act as cool as spazmo if you choose, or not.

4) have consequences for your decision which steer the plot, not the plot steering you decisions and the consequences.

[St. Toxic]

Yes. As they all cried, choice that matters is key. The choice of skills ( meaning mmo's shouldn't have the rpg in there, unless they follow the crpg formula of level = +skills; that is, unlike Oblivion, which is somehow skills = +level bullcrap ), the impact of chosen skills, the choice of action, the impact of chosen action.

People do dribble over the actual meaning of the words -- roleplay. I could basicly roleplay as a sub-commander in my bathtub, as a pirate in Curse of the Monkey Island or maybe as Clint Eastwood in CS. That's pretty much akin to larp, or perhaps arp would be more appropriate. In any case, what people seem to be missing is that you're the one doing all the rp while the game just throws shit at you; it doesn't make it a role playing game.

Jesus Christ once said, and this is off the top of my head -- afterall, we got the chap around to confirm / deny this shit -- but, Jesus once said; "Keep you friends close and your enemies closer." I guess that's what you're up to there Walt, sleeping with the enemy and whatnot.

1) not be made by bethesda

Man John, that's some insighful shit right there.

[johnnygothisgun]

1) not be made by bethesda

[VasikkA]

I usually define it verbally, but can write it down upon request.

What you've got there is basically the core of the definition, but personally I would add that the player has to be able to define his own character and that the game has to react in a meaningful fashion to the choices the player makes.

Furthermore, stats and numbers don't make something an RPG, in my opinion, unlike what seems to be the standard definition of an RPG in the gaming biz.

[Jesus Christ]

Jesus Christ once said, and this is off the top of my head -- afterall, we got the chap around to confirm / deny this shit -- but, Jesus once said; "Keep you friends close and your enemies closer." I guess that's what you're up to there Walt, sleeping with the enemy and whatnot.

I may have said something more along the lines of Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you. But an even smarter man said "He whose heart is in the smallest degree set upon Goodness will dislike no one."

1) not be made by bethesda

Bethsoft can make a good RPG...




They never have...




But they can.

[St. Toxic]

Oh right, it was Sun Tzu who said that. I always get you two mixed up. Must be the beards.

[Burnov]

2) be dependant on your character’s abilities, not your own.

Now I don't necessarily agree with this, as it sounds like bullshit.

You will always have to depend on your abilities as a person to navigate your character through it's virtual environment, it's just that the hardcore RPG gurus seem to operate on the logic that: the less interactivity the more of an RPG it is.

I also don't agree with the claim that an RPG needs an exceptionally developed story to be classified as such. Unless we're trying to equate RPGs to being "games on rails".

It's nice to have some sort of compelling story to accompany the game, but there's a line to be drawn between interactive fiction, and a game. The FF series to me honestly seems more closer to interactive fiction than an actual game. Albeit, very shitty fiction, and a very shitty game.

To me, RPGs come in shades of gray, the extreme RPGs, the boring ones are often a lot of arbitrary stat raising and mindless repetitive combat engagements to raise said arbitrary stats to a point where you can progress beyond a certain point.

In my opinion this quote more aptly characterizes what I consider to be the core definition of what an RPG is:

I would add that the player has to be able to define his own character and that the game has to react in a meaningful fashion to the choices the player makes.

The ability to clearly define and develop your character and have them interact with other character in some meaningful capacity is in my opinion the core of what an RPG is.

But think about it, even when you're playing "most" RPGs you're still in control, it's just manifesting itself in a different way. Some in a very marginal capacity, like most FF-style console rpgs, or something like neverwinter nights, baldurs gate, diablo, etc. However games with more robust, tile turn based systems, like fallout and jagged alliance, do offer quite a bit of personal control that will enable an outcome to be more determined by the player, or at least his/her decisions.

The ability to strategically place yourself and move in combat makes a significant difference in these two games. Some may decry the Jagged Alliance series as something other than an RPG, but really, fuck off. It's an RPG, just not the repetitive arbitrary stat accumulating type, same with fallout to a slightly lesser degree.

By this definition, it does leave room to classify games like Deus Ex, and Bloodlines, and the TES series as roleplaying games, which if you look at my technical definition, they would be. Just not as pretentious as RPGs that reduce the level of interactivity to a few button pushes inside a menu over and over again.

[Jesus Christ]

You will always have to depend on your abilities as a person to navigate your character through it's virtual environment, it's just that the hardcore RPG gurus seem to operate on the logic that: the less interactivity the more of an RPG it is.

If by abilities you mean reasoning, you are right. If what you mean is your hand eye coordination or tactical skills, you are way off base. If that was the kind of game I was looking for I would play an FPS or RTS.

I also don't agree with the claim that an RPG needs an exceptionally developed story to be classified as such. Unless we're trying to equate RPGs to being "games on rails".

It's is just like the children’s choose your own adventure books. "Games on rails" would indicate to me a linear story/game, a good RPG has a great story which is not in the least bit linear and instead woven by the reader/player as he/she advances.

It's nice to have some sort of compelling story to accompany the game, but there's a line to be drawn between interactive fiction, and a game. The FF series to me honestly seems more closer to interactive fiction than an actual game. Albeit, very shitty fiction, and a very shitty game.

Hallelujah!

But think about it, even when you're playing "most" RPGs you're still in control, it's just manifesting itself in a different way. Some in a very marginal capacity, like most FF-style console rpgs, or something like neverwinter nights, baldurs gate, diablo, etc. However games with more robust, tile turn based systems, like fallout and jagged alliance, do offer quite a bit of personal control that will enable an outcome to be more determined by the player, or at least his/her decisions.

The ability to strategically place yourself and move in combat makes a significant difference in these two games. Some may decry the Jagged Alliance series as something other than an RPG, but really, fuck off. It's an RPG, just not the repetitive arbitrary stat accumulating type, same with fallout to a slightly lesser degree.

An RPG is not all about COMBAT. The combat aspect is marginal. An RPG is about choices and consequences, action/reaction one should be able to choose to never fight and still have a great gamming experience.

By this definition, it does leave room to classify games like Deus Ex, and Bloodlines, and the TES series as roleplaying games, which if you look at my technical definition, they would be. Just not as pretentious as RPGs that reduce the level of interactivity to a few button pushes inside a menu over and over again.

If by your "definition" Deus Ex in an RPG, than...


please forgive me for saying so...


Your definition of an RPG SUCKS!

[Smiley]

An RPG for me, is where the world is shaped by your characters action.

[VasikkA]

An RPG for me, is where the world is shaped by your characters action.

You mean like Worms?

I pretty much agree with ol' JC here. In a roleplaying game, the outcome always depends on the character's attributes. You can 'command' your character to take action, but the outcome should be totally independent of you. Combat, story, stats and dies are merely building blocks to build a game around the RPG core. In Oblivion, the character is simply an extension of your arm, as it's you who determines the outcome of a combat situation, dialogue or a lockpick.

[Blargh]

but the outcome should be totally independent of you.

Like this ? Yet not ?

Honestly, if that were so, to the letter, the game(s) would not be games, would not be played. A symptom of wording ? Mere difficulty ? Total Independence intimates separation from any and all influence or control.

To echo of laughingly redundant fragments, or not.

Beyond the enth, to the doctorate.

[Koki]

I used to say that stats make RPG, but this was killed quickly.

Reading the mud you all write, it seems RPG's are about freedom for the player.

For example, let's take a typical quest: Take object O from location L. For example, the object is a sword, and location is The Mansion. Based on the genre it would look like this:

1. aRPG: After three maps of slaughtering wildlife the player arrives at the mansion where he discovers that mansion is empty and there are caves beneath it. After two maps of Caves, four of Catacombs, two of Lost City, seven of Caves, five of Forgotten Temple, and three of Hidden Fortress, player finds the sword after defeating the boss.

2. jRPG: Entrance is blocked by a thug who won't let party in. You have to do three minigames to convince him. In mansion suddenly major plot points are revealed(20 minutes of FMV and two hours of dialogue), and you forgot what you came here for. Because it turns out you are your own father and grandfather, your brother is main villain- well he is not really your brother because he is cloned from your left thumb and Living Force Of The Planet... and he wants to kill everything because he saw you hitting his mother(who really was you from second marriage after sex change) once. Of course all this is just a dream of a city which is really the brother's son which is also him from the future.

3. Real Solid cRPG: You have the mansion, you have the guards. You can slaughter the place. You can smooth-talk your way inside. You can sneak in. You can do any combination of these above.

[Smiley]

You mean like Worms?

Yes like worms on your brain, shooting rpg's around, destroying your grey bits. That's the kind of rpg's we're talking about, right?

[St. Toxic]

3. Real Solid cRPG: You have the mansion, you have the guards. You can slaughter the place. You can smooth-talk your way inside. You can sneak in. You can do any combination of these above.

"Real solid" would suggest all of the above, and;
x) Joining the ranks of mansion guards
x) Getting someone to do it for you
x) Blowing it up with a stick of dynamite
x) Buying it from the one-armed man
x) Poisoning the owner at the local bar, and later forging his will so that I get the mansion

etc etc.

EDIT: Meaning, I dispute it quite a bit: Slaughtering the guards, sneaking or smoothtalking my way in, is something I could do in Operation: Flashpoint, albeit with the Dynamic Dialogue addon.
It's as I said -- the choice of skills, the impact of chosen skills, the choice of action, the impact of chosen action.

((eg. Choosing Explosives as primary -- allowing me to handle explosives -- setting the bomb up in the alley, thank's to my Explosives skill -- reforging the story dynamically by blowing the shithole mansion up in bits = getting both the shit and gold nuggets for my actions. Say, I get the sword, but now the whole world see's me as an insane bomber or, I get the sword, but it's busted up thank's to the explosion; based on whether I let anybody see me or not. ))

[Jesus Christ]

Amen Brother Toxic.

Hallelujah!

Praise the Lord for CHOICES!

[Koki]

"Real solid" would suggest all of the above, and;

So I have poor imagination. Sue me(don't).

[Jesus Christ]

So I have poor imagination.

Don't fret Koki.

I love your imagination.

[Lynxer]

An anti-tank weapon firing an unguided rocket propelled granade.

kekeke