- Joined
- Jan 28, 2011
- Messages
- 102,485
https://crpgbook.wordpress.com/2025...e-title-of-my-book-doesnt-make-sense-anymore/
How to define RPGs and CRPGs? And why the title of my book doesn’t make sense anymore
It’s been years since I posted here, but I wanted to address a few questions I get a lot. As the editor of The CRPG Book, I feel qualified to answer what are RPGs and CRPGs (as well as WRPGs and JRPGs) are in a very clear, concise and precise way: It depends.
More specifically: When? Where? And to whom?
Definitions tend to change as time passes, generations change and our collective perception evolves. For example, “Ancient Greek” refers to a civilization that would never have identified itself as either “Ancient” or as “Greek”. In English, they were Mycenaeans, Achaeans, Danaans, Argives, Hellenes, etc.
In a similar vein, the original 1974 Dungeons & Dragons, considered the foundational stone of RPGs, does not in fact call itself an “RPG”. While it talks about players selecting a role, it still considered itself a wargame – its cover is quite clear about this:
3 lines of text instead of 3 letters
As Jon Peterson explains in his excellent book, Playing at the World, the term “role-playing game” would only arrive years later, popularized by D&D competitors. They used it as a way to advertise their games as “not wargamers” and “D&D-like” without getting sued by D&D’s publisher.
But this wasn’t a clean process, there were other terms and acronym floating around. Role-Playing Game ➜ RPG sounds like an obvious abbreviation, but those were FANTASY Role-Playinggames:
A RuneQuest ad from 1979
The Rise of the
Video games were also caught in this mess. Once the first commercial computer RPGs (or FRPs) started to appear in the late 70s, early 80s, they used all sort of definitions to sell themselves:CRPGsFantasy Simulation
Journalists, critics and enthusiasts also began developing their own terms. There were some fun alternatives out there, like Computerized Fantasy Simulations (CFS):
- Temple of Apshai (1979) was a Role-Playing Fantasy;
- Wizardry (1981) was a Fantasy Role-Playing Simulation;
- Ultima (1981) was a Fantasy Role-Playing Game;
- Telengard (1982) was a Dungeon Adventure Game;
- Questron (1984) was a Fantasy Adventure Game;
- Phantasie (1985) was a Multi-character Role-Playing Odyssey.
BYTE Magazine, December 1980.
Now, you may be thinking“WTF is Zork, old man” “but Zork is not an RPG, is an Adventure game!”.
Back then, what we now call RPGs & Adventure games were all under the “Fantasy Games” umbrella. This may sound weird if you’re thinking about Monkey Island, Mass Effect and all the genres & subgenres we have, but back then computer games were all basically military games, sport games, or games about exploring fantasy worlds.
Computer Gaming World Magazine, March 1986.
During their first 10 years or so, Computer RPGs in the US were usually written about as Fantasy Role-Playing Games or Fantasy Adventures. Yes, some like Ultima had space ships and laser swords, but that’s Science Fantasy! Still counts as Fantasy!
For example, Adventure Construction Set was mentioned by Todd Howard as his inspiration for the editor in The Elder Scrolls games. This was an early software for making your own games, but don’t be fooled by a modern understanding of “Adventure” – you weren’t making King’s Quest:
Stuart Smith’s Adventure Construction Set (1984)
Only by the late 80s you see big video game journalists like Computer Gaming World‘s Scorpia adopting “RPG” as acronym and adding the “C” to differentiate them as Computer RPGs:
From Computer Gaming World Magazine, June-July 1987.
It should be noted that this concept of CRPG often also included console RPGs – as consoles are themselves computers and thus not tabletop RPGs. Here’s a 1990 article from Roe Adams III, who worked on both Ultima and Wizardry series, talking about the arrival of Japanese CRPGs such as Phantasy Star, Tengai Makyo: Ziria and – yes, he did – Zelda.
From Computer Gaming World Magazine, November 1990.
Everyone played cool for a while
Once we hit the 90s, video games go through many rapid changes. Consoles grow exponentially in popularity, reaching a new, younger audience, and opening the doors for the arrival of RPGs from Japan. There is also a boom of gaming magazines all over the world, and the Internet & online gaming start to take shape.
While there were countless game magazines, few would cover both PCs and consoles. If you’re a console magazine, all the RPGs are for console and 99.9% are Japanese. In a PC game magazine, all the RPGs are for PCs and 99.9% are Western.
So they’re all just called “RPG” in their respective circles. Further categorization like “CRPG” or “console RPG” appears rarely, usually only to make a point.
For example, Computer Gaming World magazine did a review of Final Fantasy VII in 1998. The author points out that “die-hard ‘traditional’ CRPG fanatics” might not enjoy some of its “idiosyncrasies from console game design”.
But he never calls it a JRPG or even mentions Japan. It’s just a “PlayStation RPG”.
The late 90s saw some games like Septerra Core and Silver break the mold by being PC RPGs inspired by Japanese RPGs, but the descriptions are very different than what you would expect:
Note how CRPG here means something entirely different.
The East x West, JRPG x WRPG Divide
While Final Fantasy VII was (poorly) ported from consoles to PCs, this was rare. Only a few 90s Japanese RPGs ever made to PCs, and several of these ports were exclusive to Asia, such as Suikoden 1:
Clearly the HD remake should’ve been based on this.
However, the 2000s saw the industry move towards multiplatform releases, as rising development costs demanded more sales and the Xbox gave a path for Western developers to enter the console world.
It was a long process… games like Fable, Morrowind, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, Jade Empire, Oblivion, Fallout 3 and Mass Effect were all important steps in this journey of developers like Bethesda and BioWare trying to adapt Western RPGs to the hardware, controls and audience of consoles.
Mass Effect’s dialog wheel was created to make dialog options easier to read on TVs when playing from the couch.
If Baldur’s Gate II and Final Fantasy X were universes apart before, now Mass Effect 2 and Final Fantasy XIII are both RPGs released worldwide in 2010 for PS3 & Xbox 360. Both RPGs from very different lineages, one critically acclaimed, the other highly controversial…
Like placing fans of rival teams in the same area, this was perfect for an “Us vs. Them” to emerge.
The chad BioWare & Bethesda duo in their peak vs. the virgin Japanese industry in crisis.
Western RPGs vs. Japanese RPGs.
WRPGs vs. JRPGs.
From my investigation, up until the 2010s the “JRPG” acronym would pop sometimes in media, but it was niche, of the chronically online in forums & message boards. Like how only a few sickos use the term “blobber” when talking about certain dungeon-crawlers, but have been doing so for almost 20 years.
A GameFAQs post from February 2008
This rise of “JRPG” acronym in mainstream seem to have various factors behind it – online drama about the state of Japanese games (Phil Fish’s infamous 2013 comment was a symptom, not the cause); evangelists for cult hits like Persona 4, Ni no Kuni & Xenoblade Chronicles; Dark Souls hitting media discourse like a meteor; and emerging platforms like YouTube & media sites bringing in a new generation of voices to the mainstream.
For example, Kotaku began in 2008 and always had plenty of writing about Japanese games – they talked extensively about Final Fantasy XIII & XIII-2. However, “JRPG” doesn’t appear on the website until 2012, with Jason Scheier using it multiple times in his review of Xenoblade Chronicles.
Posted in April 2012, days after the Xenoblade review. 852 comments. Ouff.
Kickstarter, The CRPG Book and today’s enviroment
Besides the WRPG vs. JRPG battle, another RPG conflict had been brewing underneath: PC vs. Console.
Now, people have been comparing platforms since we had platforms to compare. Here’s a 1983 article from Playboy magazine doing the “PC master race” meme 25 years ahead of time:
Look at Kevin jerking off on Playboy
But the multiplatform shift of the 2000s had some people very angry (myself included :D) at games being changed for console hardware & audiences. Deus Ex: Invisible War (2003) is an early example, and The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion (2006) and Fallout 3 (2008) are at the top of that list.
When the 2010s rolled in and the Kickstarter craze began, you suddenly had several studios riding this mix of nostalgia for the good old PC-exclusives and resentment towards consoles.
Peasants begone.
These weren’t just Western RPGs, they were PC exclusives! CRPGs! Da good stuff!
I mention all this because this was the context and framework I had when starting The CRPG Book in 2014. A world split between Western RPGs & Japanese RPGs. Consoles & PCs. CRPGs & JRPGs.
They played us all. We play them all.
In the end, Wasteland 2, Pillars of Eternity and Divinity: Original Sin all got a console ports. You can now play Baldur’s Gate 1, 2 and 3 on PlayStation, and all the new Final Fantasy and Persona on PC.
Wrath of the Righteous is the most CRPG-ass CRPG to have ever CRPGed and it’s multiplatform.
Which is great, a far better world than we had before. Can you believe it took an online petition for From Software to port Dark Souls to PCs in 2012?
But this all led to the meaning of “CRPG” to change. Again.
If every RPG is on computers AND consoles, what’s the point of the “C” in “CRPG”?
So many now read it as “Classic RPG” – The Baldur’s Gate games are CRPGs because they’re not JRPGs, not Action-RPGs, not roguelikes and not Soulslikes. They’re classy boys.
Honestly, this is not bad. Better than stuff like “party-based isometric RPG” or “Infinity Engine-like”.
The problem is… my book is called “The CRPG Book”. A title that no longer makes sense to a lot of people. I’m already seeing that in some recent reviews and comments online.
What can I do? Embrace it.
The CRPG Book is a snapshot of a certain view of the genre, from a certain set of people, in a certain period of time. That has its own value. If instead of me the editor was someone from Japan, it would have been an entirely different book, employing Japanese acronyms such as DRPG – “dungeon RPGs” – for games like Wizardry and Etrian Odyssey.
The real lesson here
You will never achieve an absolute, universal and eternal definition for anything. A lot of definitions you believe to be well-established are actually very recent and might disappear in a few years as the medium or the people change.
The best you can do is be clear about the definition you are using.
This is a flaw I see now in the CRPG Book. It opens with an article from author/game dev Jay Barson on how “Old-School RPG” is a meaningless term, but I didn’t foresee that even my very broad categorization could be hard to understand for future readers. I underestimated how much things can change.
Felt self-explaining, but even “computer” will likely mean something different in 50 years.
Back in the 2000s, when BioWare was at its peak, many saw RPGs as games about making choices. Which meant these people didn’t recognize old combat-focused titles such as Wizardry as RPGs anymore. But don’t assume the genre has matured enough for us to know better – now many people refuse to acknowledge games like Disco Elysium and Citizen Sleeper as RPGs because they do not have combat.
A final example I want to bring out is Rogue and its “roguelike” descendants – they began (broadly) as procedurally-generated RPGs that had turn-base combat, grid-based movement and permadeath. Over time, games like Spelunky and Binding of Isaac changed the public perception and the term became synonymous with a certain set of mechanics – mainly procedural generation and permadeath.
When this shift happened, part of the roguelike community tried to stop this “misuse” and establish boundaries. It’s when the Berlin Interpretation of Roguelikes was created and when others began pushing the use of “roguelite”. While this sparked some interesting conversions, in the end…
Gaze upon my well-argued definition and despair.
In the same way, you can bet that many tried to formally define RPGs – from elaborate point systems to sociological theories to “I know it when I see it”. However, no matter how well-crafted, none of these will ever become the definitive, universal definition.
Which does not mean they are useless!
On the contrary, they are important to contextualize analysis and discussion. Any academic knows this, as all they write must first be preceded by a long explanation of the definitions and framings adopted.
And honestly, those are far more interesting than opinionated rants. If you enjoyed this article, I guarantee you’ll have way more fun investigating the public image of RPGs in 1986 Japan than debating with a rando if Zelda is or isn’t an RPG.
