RPGs cannot have action-based movement or combat, Fallout: New Vegas is not an RPG

[rusty_shackleford]

Battletech barely passes as a videogame.

 

[Sigourn]

Dialogue? Stats? What?

Let's take PS:T, FO, FO2, BGII, Arcanum, Morrowind, New Vegas, Gothic II (haven't played VTM:B nor W8), and see what they all have in common:

- All of them have dialogue. Moreover, all of them allow you to, at different times, choose what do you want to say.
- All of them have stats that aren't just linear progression. You build your character from the start (in most games, with the exception of Gothic II), and afterwards how to keep developing it (all of them).
- All of them have combat based on these stats.
- Equipment progression isn't forced: you aren't obligated to use Power Armor in Fallout when you acquire it, for instance.

There are more things one could find in these games. A common mistake people make is "if it doesn't have dialogue, then it cannot be an RPG!". Not really: it's less about "if it has it or doesn't have it", and more of a "if it has it, how is it used?" kind of thing.

If a game:

- Has dialogue.
- Has combat.
- Has equipment progression.

But:

- You can never choose what to say: your character talks by himself.
- The combat isn't based on stats, so all characters play the same.
- There's equipment progression, but it works essentially as upgrades: once you acquire Infinity Sword+1 the Infinity Sword disappears.

Then it is not an RPG. Let's take Wizardry:

- Stat-based combat.
- A manner of dialogue, or if you want, expression: you can choose not to engage certain enemies to keep your alignment/change your alignment.
- Has non-linear, non-forced equipment progression.

That definitely sounds like an RPG to me. It also has to do with expectations: if your expectation is that an "RPG" is about going on an adventure, then yeah, most games will be RPGs to you. But I think all of us can agree that a game with no combat whatsoever cannot be an RPG.

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

There are more things one could find in these games. A common mistake people make is "if it doesn't have dialogue, then it cannot be an RPG!". Not really: it's less about "if it has it or doesn't have it", and more of a "if it has it, how is it used?" kind of thing.

But I think all of us can agree that a game with no combat whatsoever cannot be an RPG.

I think you make a very good point about dialogue and I would make the same point about combat. Disco Elysium will have barely any combat; I think it would still be an RPG even with no combat. Just because killing stuff is the most common way your stats/skills affect the game world in an RPG, that doesn't mean it's essential. Whether an RPG with no combat would be any fun to play is a separate question.

 

[Sigourn]

You can play D&D PnP without any character interaction whatsoever, basically munchkins. Does that make it not-RPG? Most D&D based boardgames can be played like that.

Well, that's basically what I mean by "dialogue isn't necessary".

By the way, I didn't mean to say that a lot of people say "if it doesn't have dialogue, then it isn't an RPG". It's more of a "a lot of people think dialogue defines RPGs", when in fact it is how dialogue is used that defines RPGs.

I think you make a very good point about dialogue and I would make the same point about combat. Disco Elysium will have barely any combat; I think it would still be an RPG even with no combat. Just because killing stuff is the most common way your stats/skills affect the game world in an RPG, that doesn't mean it's essential. Whether an RPG with no combat would be any fun to play is a separate question.

Oh, sure. Disco Elysium is a good example because there will still be stats, and it would work even without combat. I'd argue that a game with no stats that rules how your character behaves can never be an RPG. But likewise, just "having" stats isn't enough: it's a matter of how they are used.

I'd say the single, most important quality an RPG must have is:

- The ability to express the individuality of your character/party of characters.

You can achieve this through different ways: combat, dialogue, and so on. But most games not belonging to the RPG don't care about this. Incidentally, this is why I also think "experience levels" mean jack shit. They are a measure of the level of your character, but nothing else: it's a linear progression, and if I have linear progression in a character level 20, the only difference between my character and my brother's level 22 character is how much time did he spend playing the game. Things are completely shaken up when you add skills and more into the mix, and suddenly two level 22 characters can be different, and there you can begin to see an RPG.

 

[HeatEXTEND]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adventure_game#Point-and-click_adventure_games

 

[Kyl Von Kull]

Is "I have no mouth but I must scream" an RPG?

The one constant in everyone’s definition is some form of character building/progression, so of course not. I don’t think anyone has tried to roll out a definition that would let I Have No Mouth slip through.

 

[Mr. Hiver]

Stop saying there is no definition of RPGs.

There is one now.

http://www.rpgcodex.net/forums/inde...-the-definition-of-an-rpg-redux.122032/page-3

The most fundamental core feature that distinguishes RPG games from other genres are the limits on immediate gameplay options and the very content imposed by character abilities (usually expressed as skills, traits and perks, but also equipment) that the player can only evolve and shape strategically, but cannot directly override through his own skills.
This relates to combat, story, quests options, exploration and C&C, depending on what each game is focused on.

The fact is its not a hard specific exact border but covers a whole range of variations, so for example, games that have increased importance of player skills over character skills usually fall into the action-rpg range.
Over the years we have seen all kinds of different approaches to this basic formula in terms of how much character and player skills override and upstage eachother, but as long as you have any kind of limitations imposed by character abilities the game falls under a wide umbrella of the genre.

This doesnt have anything to do with the quality of any individual game, which is a different matter.

Thus, the genre covers an area in between practically completely player driven games on one side and the CYOA games and similar on the other.

What we could call True RPGs are at its center. Games like Fallouts, Planescape, Arcanum, ToEE and many similar ones - are there because the content they are focused on is limited and specified through character abilities of different kinds.

They you have different RtwP games further out, although some are closer to the center then others. And real time hybrids which have greater or lesser importance of character abilities not just in combat but in all of their content.

 

[Risewild]

I see the Codex also likes to have the "what is a RPG" debacle from time to time. Over at NMA, (usually) new members come up with that from time to time and the cycle starts all over again.
So I will just cheat and post what I posted there already in a few threads:

Not this again... What is or not a RPG is back.

The whole thing about a game being a RPG is that the characters controlled by the player mainly use their own capabilities to deal with the world and achieve/fail things. If the player controls and does everything that the character should be doing, it stops being a RPG.

I once again see people confusing the gaming genre RPG with the term "role-play". They are two different things. In the genre you decide what your character(s) do, but they have to do it themselves, in the term, you pretend and act like your character. They are two very different things. That is why there are P&P/TT RPG and then there is a different kind of genre called LARP, because in the first, you control characters and decide what they do, but they have to do it themselves using their abilities, in the other, while you still have characters with abilities, the focus in on how you pretend your character does things (many times it even overwrites your character abilities).

No amount of squirming or yelling changes that. We have many genres in gaming, and there are genres that already include what people are saying about "what a modern RPG should be". Those are Action, Adventure, Shooter, Simulation, etc.

People these days like to say that RPG is a game where someone can assume one or several roles in a game. But that is just bullshit. You assume a role in pretty much 100% of the games these days. Other games allow to assume several roles. For example, games like Team Fortress, you have classes and each have a particular role. By that definition Team Fortress games are RPGs and not Shooters. Other games like Metal Gear Solid V give your character the choice of what he can do or focus on doing, Snake can be a stealth expert that specializes in infiltration and espionage, he can focus on being a cowboy, riding on his horse using pistols, he can focus on using artillery and blow things up, he can focus on relying on support from base using his helicopter and supplies, he can focus on collecting weaponry and vehicles from the battlefield, he can focus on disarming mines in war zones, saving and extracting soldiers, destroying enemy heavy troops and armored vehicles, and so on... Is Metal Gear Solid V a RPG, no, it is an Action Adventure game.

Now why aren't those games and many others like them RPGs? Because gaming has many genres and they are from those genres. I don't understand the obsession people have these days with trying to cram games into the RPG genre. It is like there are no other genres or that RPG is the king of genres, so any game has to be a RPG.
You have inventory? Then you're a RPG. You have experience points? Then you are a RPG. You have level up or upgrades? Then you are a RPG. You have quests? Then you are a RPG. You have dialogue? Then you are a RPG... Never mind that RPGs don't need any of the previous things, if a game today has any of those, it becomes a RPG, it's just like magic.

I have wrote in this forum so many times about this that I should just start quoting all my previous posts instead of typing more stuff... Here is one of my past posts about what is a RPG:

First roleplaying game was Dungeons and Dragons (Pen and Paper) and so we can see what a roleplaying game is by looking at how it worked.
Then we can see through history what other RPGs share in common with the first and we can define what a RPG is by seeing what all of those games share in common. And no, controlling a character, leveling said character up or do quests are not the only things that make a RPG. Pretty much 99% of games have you controlling a character in some way, today most games have some kind of leveling up and/or quests, but that does not make a RPG, those are elements that were first encountered in roleplaying games, but are not what made that genre being a specific genre.
We also need to deconstruct all of the RPG genres too, because RPG has subgenres:

• cRPG
• Action RPG
• Tactical RPG
• jRPG

Why are these genres also RPGs? Because all RPGs have the same base element:
-The character or characters you roleplay use their own skills, strengths, abilities, weaknesses, and faults to interact with anything in the world. A RPG uses the character to interact with the game world, not the player. That is the fundamental rule of what a RPG is. From P&P to cRPG, Action RPG, Tactical RPG, jRPG, etc, It is always what they all have in common.
Your character(s) have stats and values and those are used in everything (usually using some kind of "dice roll" or RNG), from hitting the enemies to convincing someone that a lie is truth, from unlocking a locked door to sneak past enemies, etc.

People say that what is important in a RPG is good choices and story, a good and reactive world, believable characters, good combat system, action, dialogue, and whatever else people prefer, but that is still not what a RPG is. That is all what makes a good RPG for each of us, not what makes a RPG.

For example World of Darkness RPG system didn't have character levels, characters do not level up. World of Darkness is a RPG and has one of my favorite RPG systems ever (it is the same used in Vampire the Masquerade cRPGs too). So leveling up is not what a RPG is.
For example people say that a RPG needs quests. But quests are just objectives, and pretty much most games have objectives in one way or another. Quests are not what makes a RPG.
Etc.

Those things are not what makes the RPG genre but what enriches it instead.

I guess this one can also be relevant:

That is why Richard Garriott says that RPG is different from roleplaying game.

They are two different things. You can have role-playing in many game genres (including RPG genres), but that doesn't make all those games become RPGs.


Another game I just thought that is not a RPG but has so called "RPG elements": This War of Mine.

EDIT:
I just thought of applying the same example I used for Borderlands, in a past post, but this time for STALKER:
If you grab STALKER and remove the "RPG Elements". You still have a barebones FPS that is still mechanically playable. Same problem as Borderlands, it will be unbalanced as hell, it will be boring as hell, but it still plays like a FPS.
Now remove from STALKER all the "FPS elements" and you have no game.

Do that to a real Shooter RPG like FNV and if you remove the "RPG elements", you will cripple some of the dialogue that is based on character skills and stats but you will still have a bare bones FPS. Your weapons will deal base damage because there is no skills to increase that, your weapon's sway will always be the most possible, although crouching, using iron-sights and taking something like steady minimize that a lot (in case of using steady it removes sway completely for a time), and those are not "RPG elements", so you will still have them in the game anyway.

Remove the "FPS elements" from FNV and you will still have a RPG. Combat will be more boring and unballanced because you can't just use VATS continuously forever (you have to wait for AP to regenerate based on your AGL value) although you can still pick perks that speed that regen, and even fill some of the AP when you kill enemies. But in general you still have a pretty playable RPG.

This happens with the other hybrid game series I mentioned before. Warlords Battlecry and Spellforce.

Basically in those two series, the RPG in them are the "Heroes". They behave exactly like characters in many RPGs do, they have the stats and skills, they level up, they have inventory, they have abilities, etc. And they are implemented in the game exactly like they would be in a different RPG.

If you remove the heroes and replace them with any basic unit that does not have those "RPG elements" (basically you're removing all the "RPG elements" used in the game), the game still plays like a any RTS.

If you remove all the "RTS elements" from the games (base building, resource points gathering, unit spawning, army control, etc) the game still plays like any other Action RPG. You can control the hero and fight the enemies that are on the map, get items, do quests (that do not involve destroy enemy bases, because there are no bases anymore) level up, equip stuff, etc.

Those games are all real hybrids, and still work with and without each "genre elements".

See the difference when I say the elements matter only on how they are implemented and wrapped by the full game (full package).

 

[SkiNNyBane]

RPG is not an exclusive genre. It can spread its tentacles across a lot of other "real" genres, such as action, strategy, tactics and incorporate into them to create new RPGs. HoM&M is an RPG and Expeditions is an RPG and Jagged Alliance is an RPG and Dungeon Master is an RPG and Dark Messiah is an RPG. These seemingly differing playstyles have something in common which is a character development in some format. May it be "stats", "skills" or "abilities".

Yea I dig this way of looking at it. RPG being not a genre but a characteristic. In that light we can think of games like Fallout 1 as adventure rpg and something like deus ex an fps rpg. But I do think that there are few main aspects that make an rpg, but not necessarily all of them need to be present: character building, role playing, c&c, world building, and maybe others I can't think of. Another way I can think of it is that an rpg is when a game doesn't solely focus on story and action but has other means of interact or immerse with the world, be it exploration, character sheet or choosing multiple ways to complete a quest.

 

[Poseidon00]

Gr8 B8 M8

Have a good Christmas.

 

[Fairfax]

You can play D&D PnP without any character interaction whatsoever, basically munchkins. Does that make it not-RPG? Most D&D based boardgames can be played like that.

Yes.

I do not, and I stress NOT, believe that the RPG is “storytelling” in the way that is usually presented. If there is a story to be told, it comes from the interaction of all participants, not merely the Game Master–who should not [be] a “Storyteller” but a narrator and co-player! The players are not acting out roles designed for them by the GM, they are acting in character to create the story, and that tale is told as the game unfolds, and as directed by their actions, with random factors that even the GM can’t predict possibly altering the course of things. Storytelling is what novelists, screenwriters, and playwrights do. It has little or no connection to the RPG, which differs in all aspects from the entertainment forms such authors create for.

As false to the game form as the pre-scripted “story,” is play that has little more in it than seek and destroy missions, vacuous effort where the participants fight and kill some monster so as to gain more power and thus be able to look for yet more potent opponents in a spiral that leads nowhere save eventual boredom. So pure hack and slash play is anathema to me too.

Tactical, and strategic, play is a fine addition to the RPG, and if it is in-character, something I see as desirable. In this category fall such things as exploration, economics, politics, and even intrigue.

 

[Soulstones]

Lacrymas fighting the good fight! Let me add more objective truth to the Codex jrpg faggot lovers!

RUNNING SIMULATORS ARE NOT GAMES
AT ALL AT ALL AT ALL

 

[Abu Antar]

Whose alt was this guy?

 

[rusty_shackleford]

Lacrymas fighting the good fight! Let me add more objective truth to the Codex jrpg faggot lovers!

RUNNING SIMULATORS ARE NOT GAMES
AT ALL AT ALL AT ALL

average modern action game is more of an RPG than your typical jrpg is.
jrpg genre never evolved after the 90s

 

[TemplarGR]

It is true that a proper RPG does not introduce real human skill in the player avatar but instead relies solely on the avatar's stats.

BUT, this does not preclude real time movement or combat. For example Morrowind was pretty close to the proper definition of a CRPG, despite being real time.

Fallout New Vegas and games like it, are called Action-RPGs. This is because the combat is partially based on character skill and partially based on player skill. They are not pureblooded RPGs and they are not pure Action games either. And since combat is not the only element that defines an RPG, it is unfair to remove the RPG label from these games, just because they introduced some action controls into the combat system.

So no, New Vegas is definitely an RPG. Fallout 4 is also an RPG, even if butthurt people on the codex will disagree.

 

[Risewild]

Any RPG with real time combat is an action RPG. For example Diablo.
But in Diablo it is still the character's skills that decide if the attack hit, if the character "dodge", etc.

Fallout New Vegas is an Action-RPG but also a Shooter-RPG Hybrid. While the combat is in real time, the player's skill to hit is still necessary unless one only attacks using VATS. This is where the "Hybrid" comes from. You can play Fallout New Vegas in 3 different ways:

1. As a fully "pure" RPG, only using VATS for attack and skipping picking Locks and hacking terminals (which require player skill over character skill).
2. As a fully "pure" shooter. Never using VATS and avoiding any character dependent skills.
   
3. As a mix of both. Which is what the majority of players will do, and it is how the game is designed to be played.

It is one of few games that is a real hybrid of two gaming genres.

Fallout 4 is less of an hybrid and more of a shooter with some RPG elements. It plays too much as a pure shooter and doesn't rely on character skill for almost any meaningful "game world" interaction. It relies too much on player skill, which breaks the "hybrid" balance. Once one genre is too prominent, it stops being a true hybrid because you can't play the game in the three ways I described before.

 

[razvedchiki]

So is new vegas an rpg or not?

 

[TemplarGR]

Any RPG with real time combat is an action RPG. For example Diablo.
But in Diablo it is still the character's skills that decide if the attack hit, if the character "dodge", etc.

Fallout New Vegas is an Action-RPG but also a Shooter-RPG Hybrid. While the combat is in real time, the player's skill to hit is still necessary unless one only attacks using VATS. This is where the "Hybrid" comes from. You can play Fallout New Vegas in 3 different ways:

1. As a fully "pure" RPG, only using VATS for attack and skipping picking Locks and hacking terminals (which require player skill over character skill).
2. As a fully "pure" shooter. Never using VATS and avoiding any character dependent skills.
   
3. As a mix of both. Which is what the majority of players will do, and it is how the game is designed to be played.

It is one of few games that is a real hybrid of two gaming genres.

Fallout 4 is less of an hybrid and more of a shooter with some RPG elements. It plays too much as a pure shooter and doesn't rely on character skill for almost any meaningful "game world" interaction. It relies too much on player skill, which breaks the "hybrid" balance. Once one genre is too prominent, it stops being a true hybrid because you can't play the game in the three ways I described before.

1) Diablo is more of a hack and slash than an RPG. The RPG elements in Diablo are extremely light

2) You can't put games like Fallout New Vegas in the same category as Diablo. Yes, both have real time combat systems, but Fallout New Vegas is outside of combat a CRPG through and through. Diablo's non-combat elements are rudimentary at best, a few item vendors to sell trash loot here and there, a few lines of lore text, and that's about it. New Vegas if it had a turn based combat system, would be a grognard CRPG proper...

Again, as i said a few posts above, an RPG is not just about the combat. An RPG game has certain elements than need to apply in order to be classified as an RPG, combat is only one of them. A big item, but still, only a part.

 

[Viata]

 

[Risewild]

1) Diablo is more of a hack and slash than an RPG. The RPG elements in Diablo are extremely light

You realize that "Hack and Slash" expression came from Dungeons and Dragons? A Hack and Slash is a RPG focused on combat. Also the RPG elements are not extremely light. Each attribute and skill influences what your character can do. The player doesn't do anything except choose where to walk, what to attack and which skills to use. That is what a RPG is.

2) You can't put games like Fallout New Vegas in the same category as Diablo. Yes, both have real time combat systems, but Fallout New Vegas is outside of combat a CRPG through and through. Diablo's non-combat elements are rudimentary at best, a few item vendors to sell trash loot here and there, a few lines of lore text, and that's about it. New Vegas if it had a turn based combat system, would be a grognard CRPG proper...

No, Fallout New Vegas is a hybrid like I said. Outside of combat the game still relies on player skill for some things that the character should do themselves. Like hacking and lockpicking.
And Fallout New Vegas is in the same category of Diablo if that category is action RPG. Because both are action RPGs, the only requirement to be an action RPG is real time combat.
Games don't have just one genre or one category, they have several. Diablo is an Isometric, hack and slash, action RPG. Fallout New Vegas is a 1st/3rd person, story driven, shooter, action-RPG. RPG is the main genre, then RPGs have all of these different categories.

Again, as i said a few posts above, an RPG is not just about the combat. An RPG game has certain elements than need to apply in order to be classified as an RPG, combat is only one of them. A big item, but still, only a part.

I am not saying RPGs have to have combat. I said it before but I will say it in a different way: As long as the characters in the game, mainly use their own skills, attributes, strengths, weaknesses, etc to interact with the world/environment/etc. It is a RPG.
That is the main factor in every single RPG and all of it's sub-genres, from Pen & Paper to cRPGs, from Tactical RPGs to jRPGs, from turn-based RPGs to action RPGs, the main characteristic is that the player usually only (mainly) need mental skill. The player decide what the character should do, and the character does it to the best of it's abilities.

 

[Swigen]

Entire thread’s premise is ridiculous. The only RPG’s are table top ones without graph paper. RPG’s are a free form give and take between a player and DM where each is literaly able to make ANY choice they want in order to fulfill a CHOSEN role. Video games are AT BEST games with RPG elements. Heralded video games within the “genre” are little more than “choose your own adventure” books and are kindergarten baby shit compared to REAL RPGs.

Tl;dr: No video games are RPG’s. Ya’ll are wasting time talking about this crap when you could be discussing how often characters blinked during Outer Worlds gameplay footage.

 

[MajorMace]

That's usually the time someone chimes in and say that video games are for degenerates.
That should wrap it up nicely, see you in 6 months for the same shit reenacted with fresh newfags.

 

[SkiNNyBane]

Video games are for degenerates.

 

[Skdursh]

A little late to the party, but I just wanted to say that OP is a retarded cuck who likes to roll around in diapers filled with baby shit while chanting the A,B,C's in a unnerving falsetto.

 

[naossano]

rpg don'T exist.