FeelTheRads
Arcane
- Joined
- Apr 18, 2008
- Messages
- 13,716
Battle Brothers -> Only game.
DE -> No game.
DE -> No game.
Battle Brothers -> Only game.
DE -> No game.
he has to win a game award for RPG first, we have standards hereOnly if you identify as one or are called one by Kotaku.
My two favourite games of the year, and perfect complements to each other. I get my combat fix from BB and my storyfag fix from DE.
Being 100% gameplay and mechanical implementation doesn't qualify as a game?Battle Brothers doesn't qualify as a game then, it's just a combat module. Same with D:OS
he has to win a game award for RPG first, we have standards hereOnly if you identify as one or are called one by Kotaku.
Only if the gym is run by Stalin.he has to win a game award for RPG first, we have standards hereOnly if you identify as one or are called one by Kotaku.
And this is a beginning of story about him deciding to buy a gym membership. But will it be enough to win RPG Award?
That was not the point, we were talking about stats x player reflexes. Unless you are now going "yeah stats matter, but it's 20% from character stats and 80% from gear stats, so it doesn't count". If that's the case, I'm out of this crazy talk.Gear is something your character wears. It is NOT part of your character - like inherent attributes, skills, etc. - but something your character uses like a tool.Why the distinction between character stas and gear stats? How is that acquiring better gear is not character progression and one of the core features of an RPG?
Only your character can do X, but everyone could take your character's sword and bash someone's head in with it. In theory, anyway, possible arbitrary game-restrictions ignored.
Gear can have progression on its own, but gear progression is not character progression.
"But it's both only numbers on a screen"
Yes, so is the color of the walls and the fact that a button is clickable. Everything is only 0s and 1s here.
But within the game world and setting, a character's abilities and stats are (usually) very much separated from their gear.
Diablo 3 has cooldowns, so that makes it a fundamentally different game? BTW, Diablo 2 also has them, but they aren't so explicit: https://diablo.fandom.com/wiki/Casting_DelayI hate myself for saying that, but the fundamental difference is cooldowns. No matter how fast you click in DM, you won't be able to deal more damage than cooldowns allow you to. Not so in Diablo, where it's all about how fast you can click.
If you don't like it, you can always GTFO and start your own site you know.
Of all misinterpretations of the RPG genre, the worst is the insipid claim that role-playing games are defined as "games with role-playing". Similar to thinking that adventure games are games with adventure, that shoot-'em-ups, shooters, and shooting games are identical, etc.
The fact that you even read it is kinda sad. My brain just skip it.If you don't like it, you can always GTFO and start your own site you know.
Go and chocke on a cock, you fuckin leprechaun.
I can believe we lost Bubbles to your pathetic and fetid butthurtness and we can still read your inane pseudo_monocled shit around here.
Arguably that's the issue here. Despite what the genre's name would suggest, some people would rather classify the games in accordance to how much do they resemble the '80s blobbers.Who among us is truly fit to judge what a role playing game is? Do we not assume a role in every game we play?
the worst is the insipid claim that role-playing games are defined as "games with role-playing".
Improvisational theatre and collaborative storytelling are no doubt interesting hobbies for those who enjoy that sort of thing, but they shouldn't be conflated with RPGs.It doesn't matter what definition you take over RPGs, none of them are "game with this specific form of combat that I like". Even on tabletop RPGs there already plenty of games that are not centered around smashing vermins.
Except they fucking are. Screech your autist lungs out, but the genre started with P&P, and that's exactly what it meant, hence the name. MUDs did exist, and their text descriptive nature was closer to tabletop gameplay than blobbers ever were.Of all misinterpretations of the RPG genre, the worst is the insipid claim that role-playing games are defined as "games with role-playing".
It isn't necessary for every RPG to have identical combat to D&D, but as a game moves away from particular combat aspects, it does become less like an RPG.
By those metrics tactical games like XCom would be the most exemplary cRPGs.Dungeons & Dragons emerged from miniatures wargaming, and combat was one of the three fundamental components (with the character-related and exploration aspects) of Role-Playing Games from the beginning.
DM cooldowns are whole-character cooldowns (well, technically, half-a-character - but they still preclude you from using any ability, not a specific ability), not ability cooldowns. The latter don't stop you from clicking as fast as possible to maximize damage.Diablo 3 has cooldowns, so that makes it a fundamentally different game? BTW, Diablo 2 also has them, but they aren't so explicit: https://diablo.fandom.com/wiki/Casting_Delay
Why can't this be looked at in the opposite way. If RPGs emerged from miniature wargames then it follows that there was a desire to create something new and distinct from miniature wargames, which is where the improvisational storytelling and exploration aspects come in. Moving further away from a reliance on combat as a fundamental component isn't moving further away from RPGs, it's moving further away from wargames; if anything it is making RPGs more uniquely their own genre that doesn't rely on being defined by the very style of game it chose to separate itself from.Improvisational theatre and collaborative storytelling are no doubt interesting hobbies for those who enjoy that sort of thing, but they shouldn't be conflated with RPGs.It doesn't matter what definition you take over RPGs, none of them are "game with this specific form of combat that I like". Even on tabletop RPGs there already plenty of games that are not centered around smashing vermins.
Dungeons & Dragons emerged from miniatures wargaming, and combat was one of the three fundamental components (with the character-related and exploration aspects) of Role-Playing Games from the beginning. It isn't necessary for every RPG to have identical combat to D&D, but as a game moves away from particular combat aspects, it does become less like an RPG. Removing combat entirely makes it impossible to consider a game an RPG, just as would removing the character aspects (imagine an "RPG" with no progression, customization, equipment, inventory) or removing exploration.
By those metrics tactical games like XCom would be the most exemplary cRPGs.Dungeons & Dragons emerged from miniatures wargaming, and combat was one of the three fundamental components (with the character-related and exploration aspects) of Role-Playing Games from the beginning.
Are you implying it isn't?By those metrics tactical games like XCom would be the most exemplary cRPGs.
I think it's an extremely unique representative far from the genre's center of mass, not something you'd give as a first example of what cRPG is.Are you implying it isn't?By those metrics tactical games like XCom would be the most exemplary cRPGs.
Time to merge general discussion and RPG discussion me thinks!