Sigourn
uooh afficionado
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2016
- Messages
- 5,696
I was in Leddit discussing what Roguelikes are. One user argued that games like Rogue Legacy or Spelunky are Roguelikes. whereas I argued that "Roguelike", by definition, is a game that plays "like Rogue", meaning turn-based has to be a requirement (else you can pretty much make a lot of different games using the same basic mechanics, and it wouldn't play like Rogue at all). Sooner or later it was going to happen that someone mentioned RPGs and another user said "there was no roleplaying in Rogue".
For this reason, I thought of three questions:
- Has "RPG" become a meaningless nomenclature because "roleplaying" itself is secondary to the genre, thereby grouping games like Wizardry, Fallout, Final Fantasy and The Witcher all in one category?
- How do you "identify" roleplaying games nowadays?
- And lastly, what do YOU think a roleplaying game should be?
I think the problem with the classic "what is an RPG" question is that a lot of users try to retroactively add meaning to games defined as "RPGs", without even questioning if it makes sense they are called RPGs to begin with. We all know what a sports game is, we all know what a racing game is, we all know what a graphical adventure is, and that is because they are either based on real life or based on their representation. But RPGs originated from Dungeons & Dragons, something that simply cannot be translated perfectly onto a videogame, even less so in its early years (PLATO mainframe on the 70s). Meaning there's no easy way to distinguish them.
This is not so much a "what is an RPG" thread, because I firmly believe there is no universal answer: the genre is poorly defined since it is not a "genre" but an umbrella term to define a lot of games that share similar things (whether it be an inventory, level progression, a story set in a fantasy setting, choices you can make that affect the story, among others) but no one connection point that ties them all together (in racing games there HAS to be racing; it doesn't matter if there are many cars to choose or few, it doesn't matter if you can mod your cars and give them new paintjobs, it doesn't matter if it is street racing or clsoed circuit racing, it doesn't matter if there's a story to go along with it or simple track progression, it doesn't matter if it is a "car" or a magical ship you are meant to race; what matters is that you have to be able to beat others to the finishing line).
These are my answers to the question posted above:
1. In RPGs, the issue is that "roleplaying" is that it is very vague: some people think roleplaying is being able to choose your stats, your class, and off you go; there isn't any dialogue choices, but hey, at least your combat skills and available equipment is limited by your class! Others think choice and consequence is everything, but I'd rather say "CHOICE" is everything: choice, by definition, implies consequence. Otherwise it isn't a choice (saying "Go on" and "You still haven't told me where these guys have gone to" isn't a choice if the NPC replies exactly the same).
2. Case by case basis. See what do you do in the game, what features does it have (inventory, stats, dialogue choices, story, among others), decide afterwards.
3. In my opinion roleplaying consists of the game reacting to my character. Roleplaying games require stats. They don't need to be "numbers" because what stats do is limit what your character can do, but these limits are also variable in that these can be changed at the beginning of the game or during the game (in this case, the progression must not be linear or else we kiss goodbye to "character uniqueness"). These limitations come in the form of combat (when there is) and dialogue (when there is). Your character can be hand-made or it can be a set protagonist, it doesn't matter. You must be able to act through the character. Last but not least: character progression is not "you find Sword in the first level, and Sword +5 in the second level". I'm talking about stat progression, what the character itself is able to do or not independently of the challenges thrown at him or other limitations in the way of available equipment.
Wizardry is a roleplaying game because your stats influence how your character fights (no talking that I'm aware of). Fallout is a roleplaying game because your stats influence how your character fights and talks. FINAL FANTASY ISN'T RPGs. You have no choice in how the story develops in Final Fantasy, you have no voice of your own; some games have linear progression and others do not (FFVII's Materia system, X's Sphere Grid, XII's License Board), but at the end of the day you can't act out your character properly since they have no say in any matter that matters. In The Witcher your stats influence in the outcomes of battles and you can choose your dialogue options during quests, as far as I've played.
DEUS EX is a roleplaying game, because even though player skill is significant, there's still character skill in combat/lockpicking/hacking and player choice in dialogue and quests. CALL OF DUTY isn't a roleplaying game, there's no character skill at all (at least in the ones I've played), no character progression (there's "weapon" progression, but this ties in with my earlier comment that "arbitrary progression" of equipment is NOT progression), no dialogue choices to make.
Anyhow, I'm interested to see what people have to say on the matter. I see a lot of shitposts incoming, but hopefully thoughtful discussion as well.
For this reason, I thought of three questions:
- Has "RPG" become a meaningless nomenclature because "roleplaying" itself is secondary to the genre, thereby grouping games like Wizardry, Fallout, Final Fantasy and The Witcher all in one category?
- How do you "identify" roleplaying games nowadays?
- And lastly, what do YOU think a roleplaying game should be?
I think the problem with the classic "what is an RPG" question is that a lot of users try to retroactively add meaning to games defined as "RPGs", without even questioning if it makes sense they are called RPGs to begin with. We all know what a sports game is, we all know what a racing game is, we all know what a graphical adventure is, and that is because they are either based on real life or based on their representation. But RPGs originated from Dungeons & Dragons, something that simply cannot be translated perfectly onto a videogame, even less so in its early years (PLATO mainframe on the 70s). Meaning there's no easy way to distinguish them.
This is not so much a "what is an RPG" thread, because I firmly believe there is no universal answer: the genre is poorly defined since it is not a "genre" but an umbrella term to define a lot of games that share similar things (whether it be an inventory, level progression, a story set in a fantasy setting, choices you can make that affect the story, among others) but no one connection point that ties them all together (in racing games there HAS to be racing; it doesn't matter if there are many cars to choose or few, it doesn't matter if you can mod your cars and give them new paintjobs, it doesn't matter if it is street racing or clsoed circuit racing, it doesn't matter if there's a story to go along with it or simple track progression, it doesn't matter if it is a "car" or a magical ship you are meant to race; what matters is that you have to be able to beat others to the finishing line).
These are my answers to the question posted above:
1. In RPGs, the issue is that "roleplaying" is that it is very vague: some people think roleplaying is being able to choose your stats, your class, and off you go; there isn't any dialogue choices, but hey, at least your combat skills and available equipment is limited by your class! Others think choice and consequence is everything, but I'd rather say "CHOICE" is everything: choice, by definition, implies consequence. Otherwise it isn't a choice (saying "Go on" and "You still haven't told me where these guys have gone to" isn't a choice if the NPC replies exactly the same).
2. Case by case basis. See what do you do in the game, what features does it have (inventory, stats, dialogue choices, story, among others), decide afterwards.
3. In my opinion roleplaying consists of the game reacting to my character. Roleplaying games require stats. They don't need to be "numbers" because what stats do is limit what your character can do, but these limits are also variable in that these can be changed at the beginning of the game or during the game (in this case, the progression must not be linear or else we kiss goodbye to "character uniqueness"). These limitations come in the form of combat (when there is) and dialogue (when there is). Your character can be hand-made or it can be a set protagonist, it doesn't matter. You must be able to act through the character. Last but not least: character progression is not "you find Sword in the first level, and Sword +5 in the second level". I'm talking about stat progression, what the character itself is able to do or not independently of the challenges thrown at him or other limitations in the way of available equipment.
Wizardry is a roleplaying game because your stats influence how your character fights (no talking that I'm aware of). Fallout is a roleplaying game because your stats influence how your character fights and talks. FINAL FANTASY ISN'T RPGs. You have no choice in how the story develops in Final Fantasy, you have no voice of your own; some games have linear progression and others do not (FFVII's Materia system, X's Sphere Grid, XII's License Board), but at the end of the day you can't act out your character properly since they have no say in any matter that matters. In The Witcher your stats influence in the outcomes of battles and you can choose your dialogue options during quests, as far as I've played.
DEUS EX is a roleplaying game, because even though player skill is significant, there's still character skill in combat/lockpicking/hacking and player choice in dialogue and quests. CALL OF DUTY isn't a roleplaying game, there's no character skill at all (at least in the ones I've played), no character progression (there's "weapon" progression, but this ties in with my earlier comment that "arbitrary progression" of equipment is NOT progression), no dialogue choices to make.
Anyhow, I'm interested to see what people have to say on the matter. I see a lot of shitposts incoming, but hopefully thoughtful discussion as well.