Too bad neither New Vegas nor Alpha Protocol are RPGs.
Who cares. I finished it seven times.
Too bad neither New Vegas nor Alpha Protocol are RPGs.
Here's a soundtrack for you to listen to during your debate, making it more intellectual:
Put that together and you get - building a character for the purpose of making choices that meaningfully reflect the character's persona as defined by his build. A game that enables you to do that is a game that allows roleplaying, or in short an RPG.
Betrayal at Krondor isnt an RPG. WWE games are RPGs.Put that together and you get - building a character for the purpose of making choices that meaningfully reflect the character's persona as defined by his build. A game that enables you to do that is a game that allows roleplaying, or in short an RPG.
No, that would make it a shooter only if the shooting was the most important aspect of the game - which it really isn't.
Even finding new items in adventure games is character development.
Kit Walker said:uuuhh
by that logic, having 'elements of other games' in RPG's would make RPG's part of those other genres.
Roleplaying doesn't necessarily involve weapons. Shooters by necessity have weapons in them though.
As I said, RPGs, in fact, are not a genre, there are RPG elements that we add to other genres. Wargames became RPGs when character advancement/creation was added to them.
Sure. let me try a final time. There is no gameplay that you can identify with RPGs. Even C&C can be done independently from RPGs.
Tactics, strategy, action, adventure, dungeon exploration, storytelling, you name it, you can find a game which has it and isn't an RPG.
RPGs, as I have tried to persuade people, add RPG elements, which are associated with character advancement/creation.
Today I learned the Wings of Liberty Starcraft 2 campaign is an RPG
I have always, always said that New Vegas isn't an RPG, it's a shooter. I can quote many posts where I've said this.
If we allow New Vegas to be counted as an RPG, we might as well just remove that genre from existence, it obviously doesn't mean or define anything.
If "video game history/studies" ever becomes an academic artistic discipline, who do you think they'll refer to and what is going to be referenced in the first books and dissertations?
Sacred82
Just so that you don't misinterpret or misrepresent me, I think that RPG elements can be concentrated. You can imagine a game where they are sparse and few, such as the new Thiaf, or a game like NWN2 where they are concentrated in every aspect of the game. That latter means, that in every part of the game, may it be combat or exploration or interaction, your stats/character traits contribute.
Well, I can nitpick and say that you can't build any character differently with their skill points, so the only thing you do is gain experience points, and that is a thing even CoD has now (or whatever shooter that was). That's not the point, however, since genres have to point to a cluster of specific examples, in which DOTA isn't and we all know it, exactly how New Vegas isn't. That tells me that my definition is indeed too lax, though, and I should add even more criterias, which I certainly will do.
I'm not ignoring them, I'm saying they aren't important or defining in this particular case, they are secondary to the direct shooting. Either way, the gameplay has more in common with shooters than RPGs, we can't point to any game that is considered an RPG that is like New Vegas, but we can point to all the shooters in the world and say the gameplay is similar.
Gothic 2 is awesome. I still haven't played Gothic 1, but I plan to. One of the best things about it is how they managed to make stats meaningful in an action-RPG. The more you increased the stats/training level the more fluid the controls and your fighting style became. They aren't great, but eehh. There were also very interesting ideas, like hand-drawn maps and the plants which increased your stats that could only be found by exploring. Exploration was handled well is what I'm trying to say, and it wasn't obtuse. There are very many things the Gothics did right, and some of them are mentioned already. A lot of RPG developers can learn a lot from them.
Gothic is not an RPG. It is an action game with rpg elements. In order for me to play a role my personal timing, clciking ability, and keyboard skill are irrelevant. I don't know how best to swing a sword or when, the fighter I am supposed to be playing does. If my personal reaction and dexterity are factored into combat then I am not playing a role, I am the role. Hence, I am not playing a role playing game, since I would have to play a role to be playing a role playing game, not play myself.
Melee combat in the Gothic games actually requires far more player skill than melee combat in F:NV.
And since you acknowledge Gothic 2 is some kind of RPG, when you say New Vegas isn't one, my less charitable side assumes that it really comes down to the fact that you like Gothic 2 and you dislike New Vegas.
Even finding new items in adventure games is character development.