Anime Poll: CRPGs and the Japanese Question.

[Bruma Hobo]

Consider this:

Game A is a dungeon crawler with a minimalistic plot, where you choose the main attributes of your player characters (Strength, Intelligence, Charisma), fight monsters, grab phat lewt, and explore a maze in monocled turn-based fashion.

Game B is a clone of game A where you can also explore an overworld map and talk to NPCs. Since game A didn't design interesting social and travel mechanics, in game B you won't find things like hunting skills, thieving mechanics or dialogue options, and even your Charisma score won't affect the way you talk to NPCs (your PCs are still mute, btw).

Game C is like game B, but your main characters have predefined personalities, and they really love to say and do all sorts of things without your consent. Also, if the writers demand that your PC must act dumb for plot reasons despite his genius level INT score, then you're out of luck. Game journos love this game because it adds depth to a previously shallow genre with simplistic characters and plots.

Now, which of these games should be considered CRPGs and which ones shouldn't? Remember, these are all mechanically identical games, but despite that we must draw a line somewhere. Now do.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Now, which of these games should be considered CRPGs and which ones shouldn't? Remember, these are all mechanically identical games, but despite that we must draw a line somewhere. Now do.

If all three games have identical RPG mechanics, then all three are RPGs, regardless of irrelevancies such as NPCs, characterization, and plot.

 

[Gangrelrumbler]

I dunno, I think we should have a discussion regarding the definition of an RPG before we can discuss this question.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

If all three games have identical RPG mechanics, then all three are RPGs, regardless of irrelevancies such as NPCs, characterization, and plot.

What if I told you that mechanics are not enough to define a genre?

Spoiler

⢕⢕⢕⢑⠁⢁⣼⣿⣻⢿⣟⢿⡻⡙⡏⡏⣟⡽⡹⣹⢪⡻⢽⡫⠯⣻⢛⢿⣻⣿⣿⡿⣧⢍⠝⡍⡏⡎⡕⢵
⢕⢕⠸⡐⣠⣿⣗⢯⡺⡽⡸⡅⠕⢕⢐⠑⢕⠸⢙⢕⢱⢸⠸⢜⠴⡈⡜⡔⢅⢟⢞⣿⣿⣧⠨⡊⣜⢜⢜⡵
⢕⢌⢂⢀⣿⡷⡧⣯⡣⡹⡎⠪⣈⡂⣦⣁⣱⡱⣱⣡⢑⣘⡨⢮⢝⢞⣎⣖⣵⢳⣸⣯⣿⣿⣇⢣⢪⡪⣣⣻
⢕⢐⠄⣸⣿⣿⡝⣮⡪⡪⣊⢎⡔⣗⢳⢪⢻⠾⡻⡿⡻⣗⢾⢗⡿⢿⢻⡻⡾⣟⣶⣯⣿⣿⡇⡎⢆⢇⢇⢿
⢕⠐⠄⣿⣿⣿⡽⢜⡲⣇⣷⡛⢗⢙⠹⠘⠔⠑⠉⠘⠜⠑⠔⠑⢘⠈⠂⠊⠘⠈⠈⠘⠹⢿⡧⡣⡣⡣⡳⡽
⢅⠅⠄⣿⣿⣿⢝⢷⣻⡻⠁⠄⠄⠄⠄⢀⠄⠄⠄⠄⠂⠬⡀⡄⠄⠄⠄⡀⠄⠄⠄⠄⠁⠂⢻⣕⢧⢳⢕⣿
⠅⠂⠄⢻⣿⣯⠧⢟⣿⣔⠄⠁⡀⡀⠄⠄⠄⣀⠄⠄⡀⠩⠳⠵⠁⠄⡀⠄⢰⣁⠄⠠⠄⠄⠈⢿⣪⡺⡜⣾
⢵⣷⠶⣼⠏⣿⠹⡙⠄⠁⠄⠖⠂⠄⡀⠄⠄⠹⣾⠄⠄⢔⣻⣿⡳⠄⠄⠄⠈⡷⠠⠄⠄⠄⠄⣼⡟⠵⡭⣻
⡪⡂⡕⡄⢠⣿⣏⢌⢠⠰⡌⡢⠄⠄⠅⠠⠄⠐⠄⠄⡔⣵⢾⣟⣯⢧⢂⢠⢀⠄⠄⠄⣀⢤⢾⢦⣿⣇⢗⣿
⠜⣔⠄⠈⢘⣿⣯⡖⠔⠑⢜⢐⠁⢂⠄⠢⢐⠐⢀⢕⢝⡚⡟⠿⡿⣿⣪⡢⠳⣭⣊⢆⠣⠣⠣⠓⡯⢷⡣⣿
⠝⣾⠄⠄⢸⣹⣷⣆⢀⢑⢐⠰⢈⢐⠨⠨⠠⠐⡎⠫⠑⢌⠌⡈⡈⠪⠚⠷⠈⠰⢕⢟⢎⢎⠂⠌⣾⣿⢸⣺
⢅⠱⢷⢄⡀⢽⣿⣟⡀⠑⡐⢅⢃⠢⠑⠅⢅⢢⠈⠄⠄⠄⠁⠐⠈⢀⢀⢬⢤⢠⢌⠪⠲⢈⠸⡠⣿⢾⠱⣽
⡅⠄⠳⣝⠄⢸⣿⣻⡜⠆⠌⣐⡂⢅⠅⡍⡆⢧⢑⢦⠕⠔⠤⠤⠤⠳⢯⣯⢿⢵⠥⡧⣑⢄⠃⣆⣿⠃⢑⢵
⢆⠕⡠⡉⠃⠸⣿⣿⡸⠰⢁⢐⠄⡥⡪⠢⡸⡸⢊⠁⠄⠡⠡⠨⠐⠄⠈⠈⠫⡇⠟⣜⣖⡔⠥⣢⣻⠄⠄⡸
⡣⡣⡱⡨⠢⡀⢹⡗⡳⡉⢐⠄⠕⡽⢐⠁⠄⠅⠐⠈⠄⠄⠄⢀⢀⣀⣀⣀⠄⠁⠄⠨⣾⣗⡘⣆⣿⠄⠐⡌
⡪⡪⡢⡣⡃⢆⠸⣿⡢⡸⠂⡘⡩⠼⡄⢄⠰⡐⢔⠑⢍⢚⢙⢊⠣⠓⠝⢚⢹⢕⢕⢡⠺⡒⠕⠅⡾⣤⣐⢜
⡕⢕⢸⢨⢊⠆⡂⡹⣯⣪⡀⡄⢜⡽⡀⢢⠊⡊⡢⢑⢀⠄⡀⠄⠄⡀⠄⡊⠮⡪⡊⢆⢆⠯⢨⢢⠁⠄⣿⣽
⢎⢕⢕⢅⢇⣣⡱⠒⢿⡜⣖⡂⢚⡺⣎⢐⠄⡊⡐⠰⡀⡅⣀⡢⣐⢔⡰⡨⡘⡄⡣⡡⣏⡓⠇⠁⠄⠄⣍⣿
⡣⡱⡡⡣⣳⠞⠄⠄⠸⣿⣝⢮⣶⢪⡗⡄⠠⢂⠌⠆⡅⠇⠇⡓⡘⡘⡪⣚⠪⡪⡘⡜⡂⢪⡃⠄⠄⢀⣽⢿
⡕⢕⢕⢽⠁⠄⠄⠄⠄⡑⠌⠹⢹⢹⢭⢻⡅⡆⡈⡠⠠⠁⡂⠄⠄⠠⢀⠂⠅⡃⠅⠁⡄⡣⡂⠄⢠⢙⢄⢾
⡕⡕⢵⠃⠄⢀⠄⠡⠄⢈⢂⢀⠄⠁⠌⠈⠪⠒⠢⠐⡐⠡⠐⠠⠡⠈⠄⠌⠄⠄⢀⠌⡀⠊⢐⡴⠩⡓⠔⢝
⢎⢪⢸⠄⠄⠘⠐⠄⠄⠄⠐⡀⠌⡀⠄⢂⠠⠄⠄⠁⠄⠁⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⡀⠄⡠⠔⠁⠐⠐⡭⡨⡘
⢕⠅⢝⣕⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠐⠄⠄⠄⠠⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⡀⠅⠐⠁⠄⠄⠈⢀⠁⡒⡊⠌
⡕⣌⣄⣿⣾⣄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠂⠁⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⢀⠄⠄⠈⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈⠄⠄⠄⢂⠠⠠

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

I thought the question was going to be "which is the jrpg?"

 

[Falksi]

 

[Darth Canoli]

All of the above (A, B, C and D)

Because what you describe could be a cRPG but it could as easily not be one.

Edit: My bad, didn't read C as well as I should have C is not sending as strong RPG vibes as the others.
Then again, A and B could describe games which are not RPG at all.

 

[Alex]

Now, which of these games should be considered CRPGs and which ones shouldn't? Remember, these are all mechanically identical games, but despite that we must draw a line somewhere. Now do.

If all three games have identical RPG mechanics, then all three are RPGs, regardless of irrelevancies such as NPCs, characterization, and plot.

Normally, I would agree with your statement Zed. Video game genres, I believe, are determined by the specific kind of challenge they present and what kind of skill they require. This an FPS will require good aiming and spatial thinking from the player to face the challenges, while a platformer is much more about timing, precise jumps and exploration and adventure games are about solving puzzles integrated into a narrative such as mysteries. As such the "mechanics" of a game define what it's genre is. The issue, however, is that RPGs aren't really a genre. They are more of a descriptor about whether the game in question is "RPG-like" and while I don't think it is (at least purely) a subjective issue, it is not something that can be rightly asserted or quantified based on the presence or absence of this or that mechanic or aspect or narrative element or whatever you will have. Rather it requires taking the game as a whole and how it is played to discuss correctly.

For instance, since we are talking about Japanese things, I think it would be fair to call the king's field game an RPG. The game is a dungeon delver, with puzzles to solve and a sprawling dungeon to map. You face different types of monsters in there and slowly level and gear up your character. All in all, it seems made to recall to the table top RPGs, even if it is doing so indirectly, based on some other CRPG rather than a tabletop game. The game helps put you in the shoes of an adventurer and brings to mind a whole lot of the dungeon delving tradition. The same company that released king's field also released a trilogy of games called dark souls. On one hand, one might say the game is intended to be an RPG as well, being seen as a more action oriented and modern take on king's field. On the other, the focus of the game shifts so much into action that I don't think it is able to recall table-top games anymore. The game has very fun combat, interesting exploration and whatnot, but it doesn't bring to mind RPGs, even if there is arguably some of that quality left.

So, to answer Janco's question, all 3 games could be RPGs (not arguing wether they would be good ones) or not. A would probably be an RPG, but it is possible to spoil the effect with bad level design or trivial abilities, so that the game ends up being little more than an abstract strategy game. B would probably be still in the same boat as A, but the non-interactive aspects could either help or hinder how rpg-like the game ends up being. In Pool of Radiance and in Wasteland, these elements helped this aspect; they helped contextualise the central game-play of the game and thus make the characters seem less like an abstract pile of abilities and more like adventurers or rangers respectively. On the other hand, what little I played of the Etrian Odyssey games, however, these aspects seemed to detract more than add. Ignoring for now the ugly anime character designs, the narrative aspect of the game mostly seemed removed from the party, making these "story sections" seem disjointed from the RPG itself.

C could be an RPG but the plot definitely will get in the way of that. First, if the "PCs" have their own personalities then they feel less and less like the player's character. Even worse if the game also pre-defines how these characters gain abilities over time. Furthermore, frequently in these games what happens in combat and what happens in "story" seem like two different realities, making the game feel schizophrenic. For instance, your character being able to survive a direct hit from a cannon and resurrect mid-battle being killed permanently in the story by a stray bullet. While this kind of thing might never be particularly desirable, it is especially bad for RPGs. Finally, games like C frequently end up eschewing various aspects important to RPGs as well, such as exploration.

 

[Cryomancer]

A and B are CRPG's and C is a JRPG.

 

[JarlFrank]

Games A and B are RPGs.

Game C is a movie with tacked-on RPG mechanics

 

[Bruma Hobo]

Beware, by not voting for game C, you're throwing Betrayal at Krondor under the bus. :smug.

 

[V_K]

I'm with Zed Duke of Banville. "RPG" is not a stamp of quality.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

I'm with Zed Duke of Banville. "RPG" is not a stamp of quality.

Of course not, you're missing the point of this thread. A game like Quest for Glory is definitely closer to an role-playing ideal than a simplistic genocide simulator like Might and Magic, but that doesn't necessarily make it a better or more engaging game.

My point is that there are things beyond just "mechanics" that further define the CRPG genre, and those who believe there's a huge difference between game B and game C are already accepting this fact.

 

[Nortar]

If all three games have identical RPG mechanics, then all three are RPGs, regardless of irrelevancies such as NPCs, characterization, and plot.

RPG mechanic is a necessary, but not sufficient condition for a game to be a true RPG.
Compare River of Time and Blackguards.
Both of them have the same Das Schwarze Auge for their system,
yet the first one is an RPG without questions, and the second is a tactical game.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

I dunno, I think we should have a discussion regarding the definition of an RPG before we can discuss this question.

RPG stands for "Ruble Propagation Game" where you try to increase your collection of Rubles and hurry to trade them for a more stable currency like the Israeli Shekel before the value declines and you end up losing money.

 

[Null Null]

So JRPGs aren't CRPGs?

I prefer the Western style myself, but I have a hard time not calling, say, the Final Fantasy series RPGs.

It's like spaghetti vs ramen--you'd never confuse one with the other, but they're both noodles.

 

[mediocrepoet]

Beware, by not voting for game C, you're throwing Betrayal at Krondor under the bus. :smug.

Also BG, BG2, etc.

 

[V_K]

I'm with Zed Duke of Banville. "RPG" is not a stamp of quality.

Of course not, you're missing the point of this thread.

The point of the thread is that you don't like BaK
The point of all such threads is "don't call a game I don't like an RPG". All the theorising is just to cover this fact.

My point is that there are things beyond just "mechanics" that further define the CRPG genre, and those who believe there's a huge difference between game B and game C are already accepting this fact.

The hole in this logic is that between B and C there's a whole continuum of options. Which includes games like Wizardry 8 and Solasta, where "main characters have predefined personalities, and they really love to say and do all sorts of things without your consent" but those are based on the personality tags you've chosen at creation. Or games like Ultima and Baldur's Gate, where you get a blank-slate avatar but predefined companions. Or games like Gothic or the aforementioned Quest for Glory, where some aspects of the main character are predeined, while others are open for the player.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Beware, by not voting for game C, you're throwing Betrayal at Krondor under the bus. :smug.

Also BG, BG2, etc.

On further consideration, games falling into category C are clearly not RPGs and should be expelled from the genre.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

The point of the thread is that you don't like BaK
The point of all such threads is "don't call a game I don't like an RPG". All the theorising is just to cover this fact.

Not true , for instance I believe Gothic is an outstanding game with light RPG elements, while Arcanum is a mess of a game with outstanding RPG elements. I believe Gothic's the superior game, but I wouldn't hesistate to kick it out of the CRPG genre and place it among other action-adventure games like Tomb Raider and The Legend of Zelda. Also, I like Betrayal at Krondor, I just think it's overrated.

Defining genres might not make much sense when you think of them as collections of mechanics, but those who believe genres are defined by goals (mechanics being only means to achieve them, and not the only ones) will want to set boudries as soon as possible. Tacticool games pretending to be RPGs, fantasy novels with combat, action dopamine-boosters, and Disco Elysium, they all happen when you use RPG mechanics to pursue very different goals. and they will be a threat when the original players don't even know what they want.

So first we have to ask ourselves, what was D&D trying to accomplish back in the seventies? Stop following the letter of the game rules, it's the spirit what really matters.

My point is that there are things beyond just "mechanics" that further define the CRPG genre, and those who believe there's a huge difference between game B and game C are already accepting this fact.

The hole in this logic is that between B and C there's a whole continuum of options. Which includes games like Wizardry 8 and Solasta, where "main characters have predefined personalities, and they really love to say and do all sorts of things without your consent" but those are based on the personality tags you've chosen at creation. Or games like Ultima and Baldur's Gate, where you get a blank-slate avatar but predefined companions. Or games like Gothic or the aforementioned Quest for Glory, where some aspects of the main character are predeined, while others are open for the player.

I see no hole, this poll is solely about games A, B and C and all other games are not relevant. The fact is that those who believe game B belongs in a different genre than C while sharing the exact same mechanics, recognize that mechanics can't define CRPGs by themselves. Then, they can't use the good-old "X must be an RPG, because RPG Y is mechanically identical" argument.

 

[Maxwell's Demon]

Also, if the writers demand that your PC must act dumb for plot reasons despite his genius level INT score, then you're out of luck.

Unfortunately, intelligent people are ruled by vices (such as intellectual sloth) the same as everyone else. In fact, intelligent people are often worse than the unintelligent, as they are much better at rationalizing away evidence to avoid cognitive dissonance.

 

[plem]

Game C is like game B, but your main characters have predefined personalities, and they really love to say and do all sorts of things without your consent. Also, if the writers demand that your PC must act dumb for plot reasons despite his genius level INT score, then you're out of luck. Game journos love this game because it adds depth to a previously shallow genre with simplistic characters and plots.

what's described here could be considered bad writing for an RPG but a game's quality has no bearing on whether or not it's an RPG.
it describes limited roleplaying, but if A and B had no roleplaying at all then C couldn't possibly be more of an RPG on such merits.

the only logically consistent answers are:

A, B and C are RPGs;
A, B and C aren't RPGs;
C is an RPG, but A and B aren't;
C and B are RPGs, but A isn't.

everything else is simply contradictory, because B and C only add to A without taking anything away.
if A meets the minimum requirements for counting as an RPG, then necessarily so do B and C, and so on.

 

[Van-d-all]

Bah, all are cRPGs. Disco included. Sue me. Also, XCom isn't - it's a strategy/tactical game with detailed unit stats.

 

[Drowed]

As with any broad label, trying to define what an RPG is is a waste of time. They have been trying to define what art is for centuries and can't come to a consensus (except that 90% of it is shit, just like in RPGs), overarching classifications are always a waste of time. I know it may sound contradictory to say this on a site that literally has RPG in its name, but at the end of the day, there is a reason why "What is a Role-Playing Game, Discuss" is literally a meme around here.

Just look at the annual butthurt in every list of best RPGs of the year, part taking offense that a certain game is on that list and part complaining that another isn't. Call a game an RPG and throw it at the wall/Codex. If it sticks, that's good enough. If not, wait a few months and try again.

 

[rusty_shackleford]

trick question, full party control = tactical game