"Roleplaying" bla bla bla

[Warden]

isn't getting involved in an environment or story a form of roleplay?

No. Do I roleplay if I read a book?
I'm merely interacting with this new world.. if you want to call that roleplay...

 

[Murk]

^ But you don't really get involved with a book... you just kinda of bear witness?

Unless you're doing one of those "choose your own adventure!!!" things, then yeah you are role playing, albeit in the most primitive manner I could imagine...

 

[MasPingon]

How old are you?

God, try to be more original. This question is used by every single retarded fetus on Battle.net as a synonym for "you suck!!11". How low can you go..

No , really. I also want to know if it's a personality problem or just a retardation

 

[SkeleTony]

@ The OP:

If you break down terms/words into their separate components(prefix, suffix etc.) to try and understand what they mean, you come away with poor understanding of the terms. "Politics" comes from the Greek "Poly" meaning "many" and "ticks" which are small blood-sucking insects. So "politics" must therefore mean "many small, blood-sucking insects". Pretty funny but not accurate as far as real understanding of the word goes.

Similarly "roleplaying game" does NOT = "a game where you play a role(like an actor in a play". RPGs are, were and always have been, at their core tactical, stat-based simulation games. Players use 'characters' which are composites of numerically quantified attributes & skills to try and overcome challenges.

If you read carefully before accusing someone of something he didn't say you'd notice that I, in fact, think that rpgs are as you described them in your last sentence.
But I guess it's more easy to philosophate out "cool" stuff (like most codexers do) than trying to be simple, read with comprehension, and get to the point without all the fluff.

I DID read carefully and I DID understand that you and I were in agreement. I am sorry if I was unclear and came off as a contrarian. My comment was meant as an elaboration/clarification, not as an accusation directed as you.

 

[SkeleTony]

I don't play role-playing games to "immerse" myself in a made-up role of a pixelled image - I do it for the challenge, combat, story, environment.

isn't getting involved in an environment or story a form of roleplay?

Isn't hunting down demonic alien beings in DOOM a form of roleplay? Therefore DOOM is a RPG by this idiotic misaprehension. In fact every single game ever created is now a "roleplaying game" and no one can have any idea what teh fuck anyone else is talking about when they say they enjoy RPGs/cRPGs anymore.

I repeat, breaking down terms into their separate components/words to try and arrive at their meaning is a good way to misunderstand and fuck up definitions. "Roleplaying" has fuck-all to do with roleplaying GAMING. Warden may be crude and a bit defensive but he is correct on this point. LARPing is certainly "roleplaying" but it is by no stretch of the imagination 'roleplaying gaming'. The latter involves character generation(and improvement/development) of composite quantified attributes where players pit their strategically developed collections of quantified stats, tactically against various quantified challenges.
The former(LARP) involves losers wearing costumes made of aluminium foil and drapery embarrassing themselves in public places while trying to manage some faux Shakespearean dialog.

 

[Hory]

isn't getting involved in an environment or story a form of roleplay?

No. Do I roleplay if I read a book?
I'm merely interacting with this new world.. if you want to call that roleplay...

That's the point. Reading usually isn't interactive and bidirectional - which roleplaying requires - but playing a game is.

 

[Hory]

Isn't hunting down demonic alien beings in DOOM a form of roleplay?

It's not an accurate form of roleplaying because of its simplicity. Just like, for example, climbing a 1 feet rock isn't "rock climbing". But please don't pretend that there's a big difference between hunting down demonic alien beings in DOOM and hunting down demonic undead beings in Diablo. Diablo isn't role-playing either. It may have a few more stats and variables than DOOM, but your activity is so limited in scope that just like for DOOM, it can't be called role-playing.

In fact every single game ever created is now a "roleplaying game" and no one can have any idea what teh fuck anyone else is talking about when they say they enjoy RPGs/cRPGs anymore.

I think every game can be placed on a role-playing scale (maybe except for abstract ones such as Tetris - or you can place it on "zero").

LARPing is certainly "roleplaying" but it is by no stretch of the imagination 'roleplaying gaming'. The latter involves character generation(and improvement/development) of composite quantified attributes where players pit their strategically developed collections of quantified stats, tactically against various quantified challenges.

That is correct.

The former(LARP) involves losers wearing costumes made of aluminium foil and drapery embarrassing themselves in public places while trying to manage some faux Shakespearean dialog.

Yes, LARPing usually doesn't satisfy the conditions for "game", but in the same way, Diablo (or many other dungeon crawlers) doesn't satisfy the conditions for "roleplaying".

 

[DraQ]

Last time I checked, books didn't feature controlable PCs.

 

[Hory]

*Subjective ratings apply.

 

[DraQ]

*Subjective ratings apply.

Why roleplaying complexity is higher in SS2 than in Diablo by whole 5 points?

Command deck shuttle bay Delacroix sidetrack would only bump it up by 1.

 

[Hory]

5 points out of 100 aren't a big deal. I considered that in SS2 the story is better developed and your involvement in it more significant and personal (e.g. the audio logs). In Diablo it just feels like a distant and generic excuse to have dungeon crawling.

 

[SkeleTony]

Isn't hunting down demonic alien beings in DOOM a form of roleplay?

It's not an accurate form of roleplaying because of its simplicity. Just like, for example, climbing a 1 feet rock isn't "rock climbing". But please don't pretend that there's a big difference between hunting down demonic alien beings in DOOM and hunting down demonic undead beings in Diablo. Diablo isn't role-playing either. It may have a few more stats and variables than DOOM, but your activity is so limited in scope that just like for DOOM, it can't be called role-playing.

In fact every single game ever created is now a "roleplaying game" and no one can have any idea what teh fuck anyone else is talking about when they say they enjoy RPGs/cRPGs anymore.

I think every game can be placed on a role-playing scale (maybe except for abstract ones such as Tetris - or you can place it on "zero").

LARPing is certainly "roleplaying" but it is by no stretch of the imagination 'roleplaying gaming'. The latter involves character generation(and improvement/development) of composite quantified attributes where players pit their strategically developed collections of quantified stats, tactically against various quantified challenges.

That is correct.

The former(LARP) involves losers wearing costumes made of aluminium foil and drapery embarrassing themselves in public places while trying to manage some faux Shakespearean dialog.

Yes, LARPing usually doesn't satisfy the conditions for "game", but in the same way, Diablo (or many other dungeon crawlers) doesn't satisfy the conditions for "roleplaying".

I think we agree on all the above but for some reason you thought I was on the other side...?

 

[DraQ]

5 points out of 100 aren't a big deal. I considered that in SS2 the story is better developed and your involvement in it more significant and personal (e.g. the audio logs). In Diablo it just feels like a distant and generic excuse to have dungeon crawling.

But it doesn't increase it's roleplaying complexity. H-L2 has decent story and characters, but it doesn't make it any more of an RPG.

 

[SkeleTony]

I would also add that, While Diablo has it's problems(too simple and real time) it is certainly closer to a RPG than SS2 and DOOM and the like.

 

[DraQ]

I would also add that, While Diablo has it's problems(too simple and real time) it is certainly closer to a RPG than SS2

Only by the virtue of to-hit rolls.

 

[Warden]

I DID read carefully and I DID understand that you and I were in agreement. I am sorry if I was unclear and came off as a contrarian. My comment was meant as an elaboration/clarification, not as an accusation directed as you.

Then I apologise I misundersood your intentions.

And one more time about why roleplaying doesn't mean much to me: When I play a (roleplaying) game, and I'm faced with a choice, tactical decision, path to take etc. - I don't start thinking; what would my rogue/fighter/barbarian from West Harbour with an xy background (which is totally irrelevant to me) do. Instead, I am thinking - what would benefit mostly my character in terms of xp and loot, to be as strong as possible and achieve a flawless victory. I don't see any benefit in "roleplaying" that West Harbour character - like, oh no, he would never accept that evil quest for that evil person (bye bye 10 000 xp). I simply wouldn't enjoy being limited by my character background. Therefore, I always try to make the best choice and roleplaying just isn't a factor in that because it's not a part of the game mechanics. That avatar (my character) is just me in the game's universe - an avatar I enjoy playing as which serves to overcome challenges. I simply don't see any reason why to limit myself with self imposed rules about what would he do and what wouldn't he do. I decide, not his background.

And you know I have 1 idiot to answer to per post quota, so:

No , really. I also want to know if it's a personality problem or just a retardation

Why, because you want to help me? Or.. you wanna feel better about yourself?
You know what.. lets role-play something we both enjoy. Come over here and we shall role-play what's the biggest stick I can stick in your behind without your eyes popping out, shall we?


[/i]

 

[SkeleTony]

Agree with ^. I could not care less about what my character's inner personal longings/conflicts/issues might be when I am deciding whether to open that chest in the corner of the temple but if the game designer made it so that opening that chest will result in the whole town killing me then that serves as a deterrent.

 

[TrustNo1]

And one more time about why roleplaying doesn't mean much to me: When I play a (roleplaying) game, and I'm faced with a choice, tactical decision, path to take etc. - I don't start thinking; what would my rogue/fighter/barbarian from West Harbour with an xy background (which is totally irrelevant to me) do. Instead, I am thinking - what would benefit mostly my character in terms of xp and loot, to be as strong as possible and achieve a flawless victory. I don't see any benefit in "roleplaying" that West Harbour character - like, oh no, he would never accept that evil quest for that evil person (bye bye 10 000 xp). I simply wouldn't enjoy being limited by my character background. Therefore, I always try to make the best choice and roleplaying just isn't a factor in that because it's not a part of the game mechanics. That avatar (my character) is just me in the game's universe - an avatar I enjoy playing as which serves to overcome challenges. I simply don't see any reason why to limit myself with self imposed rules about what would he do and what wouldn't he do. I decide, not his background.
[/i]

You are just a powergamer then. Just like the majority of players I guess. I does not mean others can`t enjoy the other aspect of it. It is more about crafting your own story and explore different possibilities.

 

[Section8]

I would also add that, While Diablo has it's problems(too simple and real time) it is certainly closer to a RPG than SS2 and DOOM and the like.

Wait, how is Diablo more RPG than System Shock 2? I'd put System Shock 2 ahead for a few reasons:

• Since both games offer sweet fuck all in terms of player character exposition, then "defining a character" is limited solely to functional elements. Character customisation in Diablo amounts to "how I kill stuff". Character choices in Diablo don't affect the way you approach the single minded challenge the game offers. In System Shock 2, distinct characters will behave and interact with the world in different ways, with different gameplay avenues open to them.
  
• Diablo's plot is about on par with Doom. There's no focus on any sort of narrative. System Shock 2 tells a well realised story through defined characters, and has an antagonist who is far more than a sprite on level 12 (?) of the dungeon.
  
• Both games require about the same degree of player skill, and use similar mechanics to give character skill relevance, so Diablo doesn't get an automatic pass because System Shock 2 is a first-person shooter.

I'd like to hear your reasons as to why Diablo is more like an RPG. Oh wait:

RPGs are, were and always have been, at their core tactical, stat-based simulation games.

That's certainly what they started from, but I fail to see how that description makes any distinction from the tabletop wargames that RPGs made a conscious move away from. It's like saying that "Popular music is, was and always has been, at its core the songs of african slave workers" - just because that's the predominant root. Times change, things move on, and like it or not, the definition of RPG now represents something a bit different.

What I don't get, is that you have people like yourself who want RPGs to be tactical games with miniatures, and people who want RPGs to be first person shooters. Now that's all well and good but I have to ask the question - We already have tactical wargames, and we already have first person shooters. Why relegate RPGs to a sub-class of either instead of championing the elements within the nebulous definition of "RPG" that make it something entirely different?

 

[Jasede]

S8, don't be silly. Diablo has thousand more things in common with a dungeon crawl than anything else. SS2 is just a shooter with stats and a story. Or actually, it's more like First Person Adventure/Horror Shooting Game.

Ah come on man. Do we really need to argue this? Diablo is an action RPG, SS2 is a First Person Adventure as Nintendo would call it, or to give it some more credit, an FPS with RPG elements.

That said, I would accept FPS/RPG hybrid too, but a hybrid is still less RPG than an action-focused RPG. Wasn't this discussed billions of times already?

 

[Section8]

S8, don't be silly. Diablo has thousand more things in common with a dungeon crawl than anything else.

Where does Gauntlet sit on your RPG barometer then? Warcraft 3? They both have an awful lot in common with dungeon crawlers. Here's my argument, and it's pretty simple - RPGs shouldn't be equated to every gameplay element present in historical examples, but rather the aspects that make them distinct from games that fit within other genre boundaries.

It would be stupid to try and categorise racing games as "games where you move from side to side dodging incoming obstacles" simply because Pit Stop, Outrun, Road Rash, Lotus Esprit, Chase HQ, Crazy Cars, Powerdrift and about ten billion other racing games had gameplay that was exactly that.

There's a lot of historical evidence that would suggest a scrolling background moving underneath a sprite is what makes a racing game, just like there's a lot historical evidence to suggest an RPG is game where you tactically command a squad in a series of combat encounters. With elves and dwarves. That doesn't make either case a definitive argument as far as what constitutes the genre.

You've got to look at the elements that are mostly unique - the defining elements of the genre, not just what is commonplace. Not every game with a first person perspective is an FPS. Not every side-scrolling game is a platformer. Not every platformer is side-scrolling. Not every game with puzzles is an adventure game.

SS2 is just a shooter with stats and a story. Or actually, it's more like First Person Adventure/Horror Shooting Game.

Diablo is just Gauntlet with indirect control. House of the Dead is a First Person Adventure/Horror Shooting Game. Typing of the Dead is the same thing, with more stats. A fax machine is just a phone with a waffle iron attached.

Ah come on man. Do we really need to argue this? Diablo is an action RPG, SS2 is a First Person Adventure as Nintendo would call it, or to give it some more credit, an FPS with RPG elements.

That said, I would accept FPS/RPG hybrid too, but a hybrid is still less RPG than an action-focused RPG. Wasn't this discussed billions of times already?

Yeah, but apparently you guys don't fucking learn.

Yes, Diablo has a lot in common with past RPGs, but the issue I'm taking here is that none of those common elements actually have anything to do with what makes an RPG unique. System Shock 2 does.

 

[JarlFrank]

Gotta agree with Jasede here. As much as I like my RPGs to have awesome story, depth and C&C, and System Shock does have more of all of that than Diablo, Diablo still is closer to the original concept of an RPG than SS2 is. You walk around dungeons, kill monsters, collect loot, level up your character. Just like in the first edition of D&D.

 

[MF]

Why, because you want to help me? Or.. you wanna feel better about yourself?
You know what.. lets role-play something we both enjoy. Come over here and we shall role-play what's the biggest stick I can stick in your behind without your eyes popping out, shall we?

Plane tickets, bitch!

The question about your age was genuine, but let's start over. Hi Warden, I'm 22, how old are you? How about a fucking lollipop, you angry cunt?

Nobody wants to help you, we just want to know why you feel the need to throw around crappy second-hand witticisms and insults everywhere in an otherwise civil discussion.

As for the discussion, I agree with everyone who says that Diablo is a prime example of an RPG. The discussion isn't about RPG definitions, however. We've had plenty of those. This one is about the merits of roleplaying. Roleplaying a character -witihn the limits of game mechanics, no LARPing (Jasede's definition)- can be fun, and I read the original post as a request to people who do enjoy this to share their thoughts and explain why they enjoy it. Then I re-read it and figured it was probably a troll.

You decide to share your thoughts anyway, and you get called names. Warden, you probably think you put the smack down on all idiots, but the reality is that you're a stubborn prick who will insult everyone with a different opinion. I would call someone who doesn't know the difference between empathy and compassion an idiot, but hey, who am I to judge the almighty smiter?

I stand by my first post on this thread, you're a troll. Or a self-absorbed autistic young geek who thinks he's figured it all out.

 

[Shannow]

And I have to agree with S8. Diablo is a hack&slash game. Mildly reminiscent of a dungeon crawl which is again just a sub-genre of RPGs. Claiming that levels, stats and elves are more defining features of RPGs than character interaction and story development sounds as simplistic as claiming tb was forced by technical issues.

 

[Section8]

Gotta agree with Jasede here. As much as I like my RPGs to have awesome story, depth and C&C, and System Shock does have more of all of that than Diablo, Diablo still is closer to the original concept of an RPG than SS2 is. You walk around dungeons, kill monsters, collect loot, level up your character. Just like in the first edition of D&D.

So a really drunk guy who can't walk, can't speak coherently and has no control over his bowels or bladder is a better exemplar of a human being than a nobel prize winning humanitarian by the virtue that the drunk's behavior is closer to that of an infant?

RPGs and gaming in general have had a pretty long childhood, and when they start to mature should we really be saying "your doing it wrong" to the progressives and championing throwbacks for their commonality to RPG infancy? Fuck that.