Information Swen Vincke on What is an RPG + Divinity: Original Sin KS Update #47

[thesheeep]

So you don't know anything about the details of the game, but you are holding it up as a paragon of RPGness?

No, I didn't. Sorry if that came across that way. I was holding it up as playing the role of a character (which is not the same as being an RPG, obviously.).

Nope, in CKII you are the leader of the dinasty, whomever that may be, the son of the starting character, the grandson, etc.

Hmm, okay, let's say you really do play a character in CKII. Something with which I really don't agree, I play a nation there, the characters are just pawns on a chess board, just like soldiers in your WW2 game, but let's just stick with it.

So we have you playing a role, C&C and stats.
Why do you not define CKII as an RPG, then?

 

[thesheeep]

Double post.

 

[Lhynn]

CKII is grand strategy with rpg elements.

 

[Delterius]

Well, having characters with stats is nice, but to qualify as an RPG you need to be that character(s). Are you a character in CKII? I think not.
You are playing a nation or dynasty. A rather abstract concept, which is normal in strategy games. The head of the nation is just a character inside the game. Which you can influence pretty much, yes, and I would agree that CKII has some minor RPG elements. But I do not consider C&C a requirement or indicator to qualify as RPG (might as well say Stanley Parable is an RPG then, or Capitalism).

I'm just recommending a game, by the way, I don't care about genre labels aside for what interesting discussions they can spawn. Like more specific ideas for stats and C&C, not really the label itself. I'd be more interested in discussing CK II's strenghts and the sandbox emergence of different factions within the map and how something like that can enrich RPGs. Not wether we should call CK II a Strategy game with RPG elements or a Vulva -- if one is so inclined.

That said, you don't play the entirety of the dynasty in CK II. In fact, you never play more than one character at any one time.

Why do you not define CKII as an RPG, then?

In part because of tradition, that's what names are. A historical construction. This is why claiming something to be a RPG just because you play a role in it is utterly pointless -- that neither changes the experience of RPGs or those of that specific game. Neither does it effectively deconstruct the historical experience of CRPG fans, accustumed to tactical and party based games and such tropes of the genre. And because of that tradition, I think, is why there's a point to be made about how CK II focuses on a much larger narrative than the heroic fantasy we normally get in RPGs. And why, of course, you think that you're playing a nation in CK II.

You're not. That's like saying the original EU III of dealing with Shogunate Japan - an abstraction of a whole country named 'Japan' - isn't that much different from splinting the realm between dozens of autonomous Daymios.

 

[mondblut]

So we have you playing a role, C&C and stats.
Why do you not define CKII as an RPG, then?

Because we do not subscribe to your rather off definition that pronounces CK2 as one?

In part because of tradition, that's what names are. A historical construction. This is why claiming something to be a RPG just because you play a role in it is utterly pointless -- that neither changes the experience of RPGs or those of that specific game. Neither does it effectively deconstruct the historical experience of CRPG fans, accustumed to tactical and party based games and such tropes of the genre.

This man speaks wise (until he begins suggesting to LARP in CK2 instead of painting the map in a most efficient way available )

 

[Machocruz]

CRPG = Compromised Role Playing Game. It's always been based on a superficial resemblance to tabletop (i.e. "true") RPGs, on structure. That's why Wizardry is a CRPG, even if it has less room to embody a character than games in other genres, because it 'looked' like a RPG from a distance, meaning the audience sees a party, stats, equipment, combat turns, randomness. It didn't look like an action game, adventure, sports, driving, etc, and none of the games in those genres looked like RPGs. CK2, Football Manager, etc. do not resemble the structure of RPGs. Since a CRPG currently can't be a "true" RPG, no matter how close they come to emulating the degree of possibility of one, superficial resemblances are an adequate signifier. Better than things like "I can talk to NPCs." Well you can do that in an adventure game. "I can play a role." Not really, not without a more complex simulation than video games are able to provide. "I can make story choices." You can do that in CYOA, adventure games. Making choices is only one part of RPG structure. You need all or most of the parts.

...At least if they want to emulate traditional RPGs. I've never played or seen any tabletop game that didn't follow the basics established by early games like DnD. I tend to believe that the original definition of a term is the most true definition for all time, and anything after that is second place, or people trying to adapt terms to serve their own agenda. Defenders of decline People tell me there are tabletop RPG systems without stats, attributes, die rolls, rules, character skill limits, etc. but I would consider these aberrations and thus not fit standards by which to judge CRPG-hood A better argument would be "stats/skill checks are unnecessary because the computer can handle all that information," which might be true if we were at a point where game engines could provide the feedback that lets us know just how strong, intelligent, charismatic, wise, dexterous, etc. are character is in relation to all other beings in the game world. But they aren't, so numerical data is still useful for measuring where we lie on the world scale. Of course, popamolers have a problem with the idea of numbers even being present on a screen, even if they never would be forced to deal with those numbers at all. Is it any wonder Kwanstain performs poorly in math?

 

[Delterius]

This man speaks wise (until he begins suggesting to LARP in CK2 instead of painting the map in a most efficient way available )

Well, ruthless conquerors are a fun role to play. Me, personally, I just larp the average GTA player.