Final Fantasy fans explain what 'real' RPGs are

[Graagh]

Yes, well I probably didn't state any of the three things I was trying to say very well...

You are, I think, saying what I was trying to say - namely, that there's a lot of terminology being thrown around, and lots of people comparing one term to another, without anybody investigating where the labels came from in the first place. RPG's as we understand them today on the computer are not classical pen&paper days RPG's. Though the genre evolved from them trying to be as close as they could.

Adventure games, as I see them, are a grab-bag of pretty much any RPG-type game that doesn't fit the strict definition of an RPG. These would be Zork/Myst types, as well as King's Quest and the host of 3rd person platformers like Tomb Raider or the Harry Potter's. I realize you're saying that there's a strict definition of that genre, but I think it's artificially exclusive as well.

Maybe there's just too much variety for the old categorizations to be valid anymore. And that can only be a good thing...

 

[Sarvis]

Yes, well I probably didn't state any of the three things I was trying to say very well...

You are, I think, saying what I was trying to say - namely, that there's a lot of terminology being thrown around, and lots of people comparing one term to another, without anybody investigating where the labels came from in the first place. RPG's as we understand them today on the computer are not classical pen&paper days RPG's. Though the genre evolved from them trying to be as close as they could.

Yeah, pretty close.

Though I think the FF7 fanboys and the people here are doing it for the same reason: to exclude games and people they dislike. It's easy to dismiss a person who likes console RPGs if you can tell yourself they don't actually play RPGS...

Adventure games, as I see them, are a grab-bag of pretty much any RPG-type game that doesn't fit the strict definition of an RPG. These would be Zork/Myst types, as well as King's Quest and the host of 3rd person platformers like Tomb Raider or the Harry Potter's. I realize you're saying that there's a strict definition of that genre, but I think it's artificially exclusive as well.

Not really. Adventure is another definition that came from the early days of gaming, and pretty much defines games such as Kings Quest like you said. Many games commonly called Adventure, such as Zelda, are actually Action Adventure... which brings me to my next point:

Maybe there's just too much variety for the old categorizations to be valid anymore. And that can only be a good thing...

I don't think so.

For all the variety we have today we have the old terms, hybrid terms such as action adventure, new terms and combinations thereof.

I'm half asleep at this point... so that might not be clear. Basically the old terms only start to lose their usefulness when people attach an agenda to them and start making up their own definitions. I still maintain that when you hear CRPG you expect a certain style of gameplay, which has little or nothing to do with the storyline or how you can affect it...

 

[dojoteef]

Though I think the FF7 fanboys and the people here are doing it for the same reason: to exclude games and people they dislike. It's easy to dismiss a person who likes console RPGs if you can tell yourself they don't actually play RPGS...

That's not the reason I stated my opinons. True I like games like Fallout, PS:T, and now Bloodlines :D more than the FF's. That doesn't change the way that I define the games. I just think you are just way too caught up with terminology. What's the fucking point. I don't care if a game is termed an RPG, FPS, RTS, POS or whatever. All that really matters is the gameplay and the story (some people might not agree about the story part; and in my opinion it doesn't always have to have a story, but it can help to give meaning and purpose as to why you are playing). If it's fun, I'll play it. I don't have to know what genre it's in for it to be fun. The genre usually helps you determine what sort of gameplay you are going to run into, but it's completely superficial. I mean Dungeon Siege and PS:T are both considered to be in the genre RPG (for the life of me I can't understand why). Dungeon Siege is little more than a screensaver while PS:T takes thought and has plenty of depth and options. Despite both having abilities, random chance, etc, the gameplay (combat, dialog, etc) in one feels completely different than the gameplay in the other. A person would be hard pressed after playing these two games to say they are in the same genre. Guess what, the genre label doesn't help you determine much of anything when it comes to the gameplay of these two games, despite both being under the umbrella of RPG. Basically what it boils down to is games tend to be so complex that you blanketing them under a genre doesn't do justice to the gameplay. Each game should be judged by it's own merits since games within a single genre, as you put it, can vary wildly. You could give scores as to how much ability you have to roleplay, shoot things like in action games, strategize, etc.

Adventure games, as I see them, are a grab-bag of pretty much any RPG-type game that doesn't fit the strict definition of an RPG. These would be Zork/Myst types, as well as King's Quest and the host of 3rd person platformers like Tomb Raider or the Harry Potter's. I realize you're saying that there's a strict definition of that genre, but I think it's artificially exclusive as well.

Not really. Adventure is another definition that came from the early days of gaming, and pretty much defines games such as Kings Quest like you said. Many games commonly called Adventure, such as Zelda, are actually Action Adventure...

If you have a good defintion for adventure games give us one. Saying adventure games are games like Kings Quest (as you have repeatedly said in this thread) would be like me saying RPGs are games like Fallout. In your opinion that doesn't work, so if adventure games have a "strict definition" as you seem to believe, please do share, what is it?

Maybe there's just too much variety for the old categorizations to be valid anymore. And that can only be a good thing...

I don't think so.

For all the variety we have today we have the old terms, hybrid terms such as action adventure, new terms and combinations thereof.

I'm half asleep at this point... so that might not be clear. Basically the old terms only start to lose their usefulness when people attach an agenda to them and start making up their own definitions. I still maintain that when you hear CRPG you expect a certain style of gameplay, which has little or nothing to do with the storyline or how you can affect it...

See my first paragraph above. Adding more and more labels to make hybrid genre titles is ridiculous. Are we going to get to the point were we have genres such as Action Real Time Strategy First Person RPG? Come on, give me a break. I mean I can think of a game that comes close to that description: Battlezone II. If Battlezone II had more of an RPG element to it you could theoretically categorize it like this; all that it is missing is random chance (at least I don't think it has any dice rolls to it).

 

[Hajo]

In a local newspaper a writer used the FF series to define the term RPG. He even wrote it in a way as if there was no previous games that qualify as RPG.

I really wish the writers would check the field more thoroughly before writing wrong things that are then read by hundreds of thousands of people who don't seriously cross check the contents of the newspaper

He even forgot to include a link to this discussion

 

[Oyarsa]

Elemental Cranberry Sauce

Does the game in question intentionally encourage/support the human player to adopt, and through in-game options, define a role that can 1) differ from another human player , and 2) actually alters the in-game world in a noticeable and unique manner? Simply informing the player at the end that they accomplished their purpose therefore the village/town/country/world/universe is now safe fromr Evil-X does not count for this purpose. Rather, there should be in-game changes the human player can actually witness as feedback.

FO, FO2, Arcanum do (or at least attempt to move in this direction through the way NPC's react and the way events in the larger gameworld develop), even the Exile/Avernum series has some of this going on, the Wizardry series, M series and roguelikes do not.

Recently I've tried a few console RPGs. The most recent one was Star Ocean, apparently it is supposed to be something. Anyway I spent more time reading dialogue I had no part in than actually entering commands. Seriously, total time spent on combat was less than the huge unilateral narrations and discussions. My only choice outside of combat (for any of those I tried, including a number of FF titles) seemed to be where I'd wander and whether I would walk into people's homes and pinch their stuff from barrels and chests, not that they minded or even noticed. Of course plenty of 'crpgs' have allowed that kind of nosense.

Bottom line: Most games labelled CRPGs are dungeon crawls and hail back to Wizardry, MM1, & Rogue. Very few even attempt to move beyond that genre, and those that have simply demonstrate that the state-of-the-art is still in its infancy.

 

[dojoteef]

Watch out Oyarsa, that's just the kind of response that'll set Sarvis off. You can't define RPGs by roleplaying, it's gotta be by stats, duh! :wink:

 

[Sarvis]

First I'm going to post several definitions of the CRPG genre I just searched out on the web:

Role Playing
Games in which players create or take on a character represented by various statistics, which may even include a developed persona. The character?s description may include specifics such as species, race, gender, and occupation, and may also include various abilities, such as strength and dexterity, to limited degrees usually represented numerically. The games can be single?player, such as Ultima III: Exodus (1983), or multiple?player games such as those which are networked. This term should not be used for games like Adventure or Raiders of the Lost Ark in which identity is not emphasized or important, nor where characters are not represented statistically. - http://www.robinlionheart.com/gamedev/genres.xhtml

Computer role-playing games (CRPGs or simply RPGs) place the player in a fantasy or science fiction setting. Most of these games are similar to traditional role-playing games played with pencil and paper (notably D&D) except, in this case, the computer takes care of all the record keeping and nondeterministic elements such as die rolling. Most of these games have the player acting in the role of an "adventurer" who specializes in a certain set of skills (such as combat or casting magic spells). These skill sets are normally called "classes" and players can normally control one or more of these characters. Since the emergence of affordable home computers coincided with the popularity of pencil and paper role-playing games, this genre was one of the first in video games and continues to be popular today. Though nearly all of the early entries in the genre were turn-based games, modern CRPGs have introduced a real-time aspect, thanks largely to the success of Diablo and similarly designed games. Thus, the CRPG genre has folllowed the strategy game's trend of moving from turn-based to real-time combat. - http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.c ... me%20genre

RPG
Roleplaying Game. A game that is usually based on controlling one or more characters to finish some large and more minor quests while fighting and gaining experience points. - http://www.gamedev.net/dict/search.asp?Term=RPG

In fact, the only one I found who comes close to the definitions found around here is this guy: http://www.ringsurf.com/info/Entertainm ... enres.html

And he clearly doesn't know what he's talking about since he uses Final Fantasy games as examples of what you guys are saying!



For dojoteef here's some Adventure definitions from the same sites:

Adventure
Games which are set in a ?world? usually made up of multiple, connected rooms or screens, involving an objective which is more complex than simply catching, shooting, capturing, or escaping, although completion of the objective may involve several or all of these. Objectives usually must be completed in several steps, for example, finding keys and unlocking doors to other areas to retrieve objects needed elsewhere in the game. Characters are usually able to carry objects, such as weapons, keys, tools, and so on. Settings often evoke a particular historical time period and place, such as the middle ages or Arthurian England, or are thematically related to content?based genres such as Science Fiction, Fantasy, or Espionage. This term should not be used for games in which screens are only encountered in one?way linear fashion, like the ?levels? in Donkey Kong, or for games like Pitfall! which are essentially limited to running, jumping, and avoiding dangers (see Obstacle Course). Nor should the term be used to refer to games like Dragon?s Lair, Gadget, or Star Trek: Borg, which do not allow a player to wander and explore its ?world? freely, but strictly limit outcomes and possible narrative paths to a series of video sequences and linear progression through a predetermined narrative (see Interactive Movies). - http://www.robinlionheart.com/gamedev/g ... #adventure

In the terminology of console video games adventure, games are games which involve exploration of, and interaction with, the environment as a main facet of gameplay. - http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.c ... me%20genre

Adventure Game
A genre of games that typically are graphics, character and story based. The player usually has to solve a series of puzzles while being given a deep story. Examples of this genre would be many of the LucasArts such as Grim Fandango, the Monkey Island series, and many of the Quest series from Sierra Online. - http://www.gamedev.net/dict/search.asp?Term=Adventure

while you could make a case for FFX being an Adventure title under the first definition, it would be much harder to do so with the other two. Though you might be able to make a case for Arcanum to be an Adventure title under the third... heh.




Ok, now I'm going to try another tack... one which I wish I had thought of a while ago! Stay tuned...

 

[Sarvis]

A key point you are all missing, and which I hadn thought to actually elaborate upon before is that the term CRPG is <i>just a name</i>.

This is important, because names of things often do not resemble the original meaning of the name.

For example, my name is Michael. The literal meaning of Michael is "Like the Lord. One of the Archangels in the Bible." - http://www.babynamenetwork.com/detail.c ... ender=male

I think we can all agree I'm not very godlike, right?

You also have things like Tomahawk missles, which bear very little resemblence to actual tomahawks. You have Mustangs which are not horses, Daily Shows which only air 4 days a week... and so on.

This is in exactly the same way that a CRPG is not a roleplaying game.

More to the point, if what are now called CRPGs had been called something else, such as Tornaggers, no one would be trying to say roleplaying is required for a game to fit within the genre and everyone would be quite happy to accept that FFX and Arcanum are in the same genre.

In fact, this is demonstrably true when you consider roguelikes! They are even MORE directly descended from the PnP RPGs, yet NO ONE expects all the elements you guys are trying to assign to Tornnaggers.


Oddly enough no one expects roguelikes to be all about rogues...

 

[Oyarsa]

Aye, but a name must signify some quality or set of qualities (in the very least an expression of hope or intent as to the possession of those) or else it is rendered meaningless in terms of language and effective human communication.

Using your name as an example, there are multiple reasons it may have been chosen, some of them more informed that others. Perhaps it was a random draw or your parents just liked the sound of it. Maybe it was connected, in their minds, with someone whom they wished to honor or hoped you'd be like, a relative or celebrity. Or, perhaps, they looked up the meaning and thought, gee, it would be nice if our child would exhibit strength and faithfulness (and maybe sprout wings). However only the last one actually takes a definition into account whereas all else ignores or, worse, dilutes the meaning.

If the name is Computer Role Playing Game, then it ought to be reasonable to deduce that:
1) A computer is involved
2) Role Playing is attempted
3) It is a reacreational/educational activity

Add to this the pre-existence of RPG, or Role Playing Game, as a name in its own right, which conveys added meaning:
4) Bearing resemblence in form and/or function to (the pre-existing) PnP RPGs

Now one can argue from history and perhaps personal experience that roguelikes, et al. simulated the hack-n-slash nature of DnD, which is, good or bad, nearly ubiquitous with PnP RPGs. But that assumes certain things I will let others bandy about if they like. Frankly, my expectations when I was a 12yr old RPGer were different (and anemic) from what they are now as a 35yr old, and I am disinclined to let 12yr olds be the arbiters because we would never progress anywhere.

Now one of the definitions you give cites only fantasy (needs a rather robust definition itself) and sci-fi (ditto) as settings for RPGs, however that ignores an enormous weight of evidence to the contrary - Twilight2000, Boothill, a number of generic gaming systems, etc. so that's just silly. Yet it reinforces the idea of the need for a definition to signify something based on reason and knowledge.

 

[Sarvis]

Aye, but a name must signify some quality or set of qualities (in the very least an expression of hope or intent as to the possession of those) or else it is rendered meaningless in terms of language and effective human communication.

Using your name as an example, there are multiple reasons it may have been chosen, some of them more informed that others. Perhaps it was a random draw or your parents just liked the sound of it. Maybe it was connected, in their minds, with someone whom they wished to honor or hoped you'd be like, a relative or celebrity. Or, perhaps, they looked up the meaning and thought, gee, it would be nice if our child would exhibit strength and faithfulness (and maybe sprout wings). However only the last one actually takes a definition into account whereas all else ignores or, worse, dilutes the meaning.

If the name is Computer Role Playing Game, then it ought to be reasonable to deduce that:
1) A computer is involved
2) Role Playing is attempted
3) It is a reacreational/educational activity

Add to this the pre-existence of RPG, or Role Playing Game, as a name in its own right, which conveys added meaning:
4) Bearing resemblence in form and/or function to (the pre-existing) PnP RPGs

Now one can argue from history and perhaps personal experience that roguelikes, et al. simulated the hack-n-slash nature of DnD, which is, good or bad, nearly ubiquitous with PnP RPGs. But that assumes certain things I will let others bandy about if they like. Frankly, my expectations when I was a 12yr old RPGer were different (and anemic) from what they are now as a 35yr old, and I am disinclined to let 12yr olds be the arbiters because we would never progress anywhere.

Now one of the definitions you give cites only fantasy (needs a rather robust definition itself) and sci-fi (ditto) as settings for RPGs, however that ignores an enormous weight of evidence to the contrary - Twilight2000, Boothill, a number of generic gaming systems, etc. so that's just silly. Yet it reinforces the idea of the need for a definition to signify something based on reason and knowledge.

By your logic an Apache web server should be a Native American sitting in a bar handing out spiderwebs to everyone. Spiderweb software should be something that comes out of a spider's ass. Anyone who played Fallout should have become a horrible mutant... hrm... maybe they did?

The question is if the term used to describe Arcanum, Wizardry, Final Fantasy had been Torneggers would you still be trying to assign standards of roleplaying to them?

If not, then why are you trying to assign those standards to the same group of games just because they have the name CRPGs?

 

[dojoteef]

Excellent post Oyarsa.

Now to time to address Sarvis and his new spin on things. The problem that you are running into is one of naming conventions. The items you are discussing like the Apache web server, Tomahawk missile, etc are names of SPECIFIC entities, they are choosen for completely different reasons than a genre title. In fact they are most often chosen in a way that helps the project stand out from the crowd.

Genre titles tend to describe in as few words as possible the breadth of concepts that they cover. Would you be willing to say that genre titles for movies such as Horror, Comedy, Romance, etc have no direct relation between the common defintion and the genre defintion? Or how about book genres, music genres, etc.

Nice try with the argument, but it just does not hold any merit.

 

[Oyarsa]

Venues of Purple Perfidy

By your logic an Apache web server should be a Native American sitting in a bar handing out spiderwebs to everyone. Spiderweb software should be something that comes out of a spider's ass. Anyone who played Fallout should have become a horrible mutant... hrm... maybe they did?

Um, no. You are either obtuse or pretending to be to score points on the imaginary scoreboard. As clearly stated, naming a web server after a First Nations tribal group dilutes the meaning of that name. Spiderweb Software can be taken to be signifying their games draw you in and hold you fast. And, Fallout is appropriately named because it addresses the context in which the gaming experience occurs, both literally (in a fictional sense) and figuratively.

The question is if the term used to describe Arcanum, Wizardry, Final Fantasy had been Torneggers would you still be trying to assign standards of roleplaying to them?

If not, then why are you trying to assign those standards to the same group of games just because they have the name CRPGs?

If the term tornegger had been coined entirely at random in an effort to create a wholly new word to describe and contain a particular class of something, in this case some subset of games, it still pertains to qualities. Of course the person or group coining the term can assign whatever definition they like, the term is after all simple gibberish until meaning is assigned. However, that definition must be defensible and it must actully apply to all things said to be in its class.

So, if the name were tornegger (presumably you do not intend to indicate that they involve the ripping of ova) I would ask what is meant by that name/word and base acceptance or criticism on the grounds of the definition in relation to its intended application. The three games you just listed -can- be classified together, but they would need a name other than CRPG, unless you can demonstrate decisively that they all hold to what that name signifies.

If you were to argue that the name CRPG has been rendered almost useless through repeated misapplication, then you would have a point. But that is not the fault of the games, it is the fault of those people who have engaged in sloppy handling out of ignorance, laziness, or marketing agendas.

Edit: Thanks dojo.

 

[Sarvis]

Excellent post Oyarsa.

Now to time to address Sarvis and his new spin on things. The problem that you are running into is one of naming conventions. The items you are discussing like the Apache web server, Tomahawk missile, etc are names of SPECIFIC entities, they are choosen for completely different reasons than a genre title. In fact they are most often chosen in a way that helps the project stand out from the crowd.

Genre titles tend to describe in as few words as possible the breadth of concepts that they cover. Would you be willing to say that genre titles for movies such as Horror, Comedy, Romance, etc have no direct relation between the common defintion and the genre defintion? Or how about book genres, music genres, etc.

Nice try with the argument, but it just does not hold any merit.

Hrm... I guess I have to concede the point.

However I wouldn't say it doesn't hold _any_ merit, just not asmuch as I'd hoped.


Not going to deal with the definitions I posted at all, none of which mention the Choice or the ability to affect the plot?

 

[Sarvis]

Re: Venues of Purple Perfidy

If the term tornegger had been coined entirely at random in an effort to create a wholly new word to describe and contain a particular class of something, in this case some subset of games, it still pertains to qualities. Of course the person or group coining the term can assign whatever definition they like, the term is after all simple gibberish until meaning is assigned. However, that definition must be defensible and it must actully apply to all things said to be in its class.

Which all games did with CRPG, and would have with the made up term Tornegger.

So, if the name were tornegger (presumably you do not intend to indicate that they involve the ripping of ova) I would ask what is meant by that name/word and base acceptance or criticism on the grounds of the definition in relation to its intended application. The three games you just listed -can- be classified together, but they would need a name other than CRPG, unless you can demonstrate decisively that they all hold to what that name signifies.

They do, I've been trying to get you guys to see that for two threads now!

The problem is that you want to assign meanings to CRPG that were never there before...

My point here, and I'm not sure you are getting it, is that if any other word in the world had been substituted for CRPG when they released Ultima back in 1980 you would not be trying to add roleplaying to the definition.

If you were to argue that the name CRPG has been rendered almost useless through repeated misapplication, then you would have a point. But that is not the fault of the games, it is the fault of those people who have engaged in sloppy handling out of ignorance, laziness, or marketing agendas.

This "misapplication" is what you are engaging in right now.

Consider:

The term RPG, which grew into CRPG, has been in use since Ultima was released in 1980. The first game which actually contains many of the features you are clamoring for was released in 1995 (Arcanum.) Are you trying to say that the term, which was created to name games such as Ultima, was misused for 15 years?


It is not laziness or marketing which makes 3 out of 4 definitions I could find (those were ALL the ones I could find) define CRPGs in a manner so close to what I have been saying... it is historical precedent.

 

[Sol Invictus]

I will refrain from pulling an Ortchel, who would be making stupid comment about tornegger.

 

[dojoteef]

Not going to deal with the definitions I posted at all, none of which mention the Choice or the ability to affect the plot?

Oh please, will you let up on the choice and plot issue. It seems you never understood me or you keep trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. As I've said you have the choice to play the character as you want within the restrictions of the plot. In other words for those lacking reading comprehension, you get to ROLE PLAY. The ability to change the plot by the actions of the character can be a part of roleplaying, but I'm not going to get into whether or not it is a requirement of the genre. I just state that the genre should refer to the ability to role play.

 

[Sarvis]

Not going to deal with the definitions I posted at all, none of which mention the Choice or the ability to affect the plot?

Oh please, will you let up on the choice and plot issue. It seems you never understood me or you keep trying to make an issue out of a non-issue. As I've said you have the choice to play the character as you want within the restrictions of the plot. In other words for those lacking reading comprehension, you get to ROLE PLAY. The ability to change the plot by the actions of the character can be a part of roleplaying, but I'm not going to get into whether or not it is a requirement of the genre. I just state that the genre should refer to the ability to role play.

Whether or not roleplaying is required for the genre IS the discussion... if you won't want to discuss that why are you taking part?

As ironic and unintuitive as it may seem to you, a game does not need to be roleplaying enabled to be an RPG.

 

[Calis]

Re: Venues of Purple Perfidy

The term RPG, which grew into CRPG, has been in use since Ultima was released in 1980. The first game which actually contains many of the features you are clamoring for was released in 1995 (Arcanum.)

2001, and not really the first one with anything. Felt like pointing that out, because I am drunk.
Please note that the rest of what I'm gonna say has no bearing whatsoever on the stuff above. I will also say that the phenomenological definitions of a CRPG Google'd up by Sarvis are as good as anyone here can cook up, but that doesn't really have anything to do with my point either. My point has to do with this:

Add to this the pre-existence of RPG, or Role Playing Game, as a name in its own right, which conveys added meaning:
4) Bearing resemblence in form and/or function to (the pre-existing) PnP RPGs

Right you are (probably).
A resemblance in gaming experience to the P&P experience has been (a goal) in CRPG's since day 1.
Now, one can argue as to what constitutes a proper amount of resemblance to this, since people tend to emphasise different aspects of this experence. Most pen & paper GM's tend to limit the amount of influence that the players get to have on the way the storyline unfolds. Just like most CRPG's. Most P&P games I've been in, character advancement in the stat department played a pretty big role. Just like in most CRPG's. However, there's one point where many, many CRPG's fall flat on their backs compared to any decent pen & paper GM. It's a point that's largely subjective, but for me personally it's an essential ingredient of RPG's, whether they be P&P or on my PC:
Suspension of disbelief.
It doesn't matter whether or not your computer game provides a full or nearly-full "world simulation with cool plot for your character to walk around in, advance him/herself, and change stuff". A limited perspective, like in most old CRPG's, is fine. As long as the experience provided takes place in a self-consistent, somewhat logical framework. Once the man-behind-the-curtain feeling takes place once too often, it breaks my enjoyment of the game. Following examples are entirely subjective.
Example of suspension of disbelief done wrong: Baldur's Gate II. After the gazillionth kid came running up to me in the middle of a town filled with level 20 UberWarriors to get me to help him rid his parents' basement of evil hippie minotaur hooligans, I'd had it.
Example of suspension of disbelief done right: KotOR. People have complained about this game in the choice-department. They're right; the light/dark side choice is superficial and can be changed at the last possible instant. However. For me, the illusion of choice provided by the game satisfied my immersion needs, and the lack of any real consequences to my actions never bothered me.

Where am I going with this? Mainly: subjectivity. No one is going to argue with me that the name CRPG implies a resemblance to the pen & paper role playing game experience that spawned the genre. However, the pen & paper role playing experience is vastly different depending on the group you're playing with. Some groups tend to focus on the "game" part of it, where you optimize your stats & tactics and make your character into a badass, "beating" the game as it were. Other groups like to focus on immersing themselves in the persona of their character and fleshing out his/her reactions to things. (Once they take it to a live-action dress-up level, they risk being called fags on sites like this, of course)
Another group of players likes all of this in limited doses, but mainly likes it when the GM - be it flesh & blood or bits & bytes - presents them with a world that is believable enough to provide the immersive values they seek. This can be done through offering a good amount of influence as to what happens in the setting (Fallout), but can also be done through offering a huge, huge world with lots of stuff to check out and places to go (Daggerfall, MMORPG's). For me, making the little details of the way the setting is presented self-consistent and making the characters seem real is the way to go (Planescape: Torment).

Having said all that, we here at RPG Codex tend to favor RPG's of the first and third kind. Claiming other games aren't RPG's is silly, but these are the games we like, and that's the mindset opinions are presented with.

Conclusion? The damn things are impossible to define. Believe me, I've started on at least a dozen editorials with this subject ever since I started doing internet game site "journalism" in 1998. I never even sent any of that stuff to my editors. The main reason is that the RPG genre definition falls flat on its back when taken to the computer. For pen & paper, it isn't exactly an exact definition either (due to the differences in playing styles between groups), but at least there's some form of unspoken agreement as to what makes for an RPG. Once you try to define it exactly on a platform where many other more easily genres have characteristics similar to what you want to define, it's a hopeless task.

 

[Sarvis]

Re: Venues of Purple Perfidy

2001, and not really the first one with anything. Felt like pointing that out, because I am drunk.

Hrm... I guess I meant Fallout, though that was 1997.

Hrm... well, only makes it worse I guess! Now it's seventeen years between when the term was coined and when any games met the definitions people are bandying about... heh.

Where am I going with this? Mainly: subjectivity. No one is going to argue with me that the name CRPG implies a resemblance to the pen & paper role playing game experience that spawned the genre. However, the pen & paper role playing experience is vastly different depending on the group you're playing with. Some groups tend to focus on the "game" part of it, where you optimize your stats & tactics and make your character into a badass, "beating" the game as it were. Other groups like to focus on immersing themselves in the persona of their character and fleshing out his/her reactions to things. (Once they take it to a live-action dress-up level, they risk being called fags on sites like this, of course)

I pretty much agree with you here, but would like to add that for years after the first CRPGs technical limitations kept games from being much more than the "game" part of RPG.

Those were, and still ARE CRPGs and so are newer games that follow in that tradition.

Having said all that, we here at RPG Codex tend to favor RPG's of the first and third kind. Claiming other games aren't RPG's is silly, but these are the games we like, and that's the mindset opinions are presented with.

The only problem is that several people are trying to claim those other games aren't crpgs.

Conclusion? The damn things are impossible to define. Believe me, I've started on at least a dozen editorials with this subject ever since I started doing internet game site "journalism" in 1998. I never even sent any of that stuff to my editors. The main reason is that the RPG genre definition falls flat on its back when taken to the computer. For pen & paper, it isn't exactly an exact definition either (due to the differences in playing styles between groups), but at least there's some form of unspoken agreement as to what makes for an RPG. Once you try to define it exactly on a platform where many other more easily genres have characteristics similar to what you want to define, it's a hopeless task.

Just out of curiosity, what makes up that unspoken agreement as to what makes for an RPG?

I know... it's supposed to be unspoken, but this is writing so it's ok.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

Page six, anyone?

 

[Sol Invictus]

No.

 

[Otaku_Hanzo]

No.

My sentiments exactly.

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

I don't know... it might get there.

 

[Sarvis]

I'd say it's a given...

 

[Diogo Ribeiro]

Yeah, pretty much...