New Vegas is fully voiced, smart (mostly) and it is Codex's #7 of all time.
A game isn't
necessarily bad just because it is voiced. Making a game fully voiced is just an inherently limiting factor. Similarly, having a game like New Vegas not be voiced would've been hard and would probably feel awkward. Just look at some of the mods. The format just isn't made for it.
But would New Vegas have been better if it wouldn't have been made in the image of a first-person shooter, and instead had a classic top-down/isometric approach, supported largely by text? Absolutely, and much easier to build on. I still lament that we never got a real Fallout 3.
it makes us think, consider things, or favor creative problem-solving
I don't mean to argue with you, because I agree with the points you made in your post, but this p. much defines what an intelligent RPG is.
Oh, I agree, I just feel like calling it "intelligent" is just a set-up for misunderstanding. I think we can agree that older games were more of what you and I would agree on to be more "intelligent" here, but it is obviously not how
Majestik understood it. Things like this attracts "Yes, I am very smart"-people too easily, and people trying to make "an intelligent CRPGEEE" are going to degenerate into academic douchefaggotry almost immediately.
Who misunderstood what term though?
You clearly did, as did your boyfriend more than likely, and instead of accepting that, you're trying to rationalize why you're in fact correct after all, nyah nuah I am very smart, etc.
I say modern, large budget RPGs have diverged enough from the roots of the genre to warrant a genre distinction.
And nobody is contesting that, which you're understand if you were capable of rational thought.
You say "but they're cRPGs because they're on the computer! Filthy casual doesn't know what a cRPG is" You seem to be under the impression that I don't know the roots of the label cRPG or something? Is that it? Because I do. Computer RPG. Yes. Christ, I can see someone's parents got all the vaccines.
Yes, we are aware of the fact that you have now come to understand this; the issue, of course, is that you still try to rationalize your own error as correct "just because". You being ignorant is one thing - ignorance can be dispelled. You insisting upon your own ignorance like a petulant child is far worse, and all it does is mark you as an legitimate, actual,
retard.
Meanwhile in the world outside your own distorted head culture and language have moved on. Joe average self professed RPG fan who loves Skyrim and The Outer Worlds wouldn't know a cRPG if it bit him in the ass. He's never even heard the term. Would hate them if he played them. But you say they're the same genre of video games because they're on the computer and that's what matters?
"Language have moved on" is the battle-cry of the willfully ignorant. "The world" clearly
hasn't "moved on", since even Wikipedia gets the usage right. This really isn't rocket science. You're attempting to reinterpret an existing term simply to deal with the cognitive dissonance that arises from having been wrong, without any reason as to why that term should be reinterpreted.
Again, there may be every reason to call out different CRPGs as different - this is, after all, why we have the concept of subgenres, nevermind genre overlap. But that doesn't necessitate misappropriating one term as representative for something entirely different.
I'm not going point by point with you BTW. I'm not dealing with that much quote bloat over a semantics argument with a retard who thinks Diablo is a cRPG.
Diablo is absolutely a CRPG, because all CRPG means is Computer Role-Playing Game. It happens to belong to the ARPG subgenre of CRPGs. Things can belong to multiple things at once, whether it is a subdivision of distinct categories or not. If you can't comprehend that, you're pathologically autistic.