Why Pentiment is an RPG and should be on this forum

[ropetight]

Game Pass

No matter how cheap it is, no matter how good the games offered by the service: never support subscription models.

If you pay for Game Pass you are part of the problem.

Subscriptions are always anti-consumer, and in the end they are anti-developers/authors.
Basically, distribution monopolist forces the developers/authors to forego big percent of their income for slush fund in the manner of wholesale scalpers.

When Belmondo died, I tried to find a movie with him, Man from Rio or Professional or some other old school action movie, on my friends Netflix.
Not a single movie with one of the biggest international stars ever, but a bunch of overstretched (8 episodes, when in reality there is material for one) documentaries about every kind of serial killer, animal, food or tons of serialized woke propaganda.
You had much better choice in your small local video rental store in 80s.
I ended obtaining complete filmography from popular site for shareware materials.

I hope Netflix, Disney+, XBOX Live, Playstation Plus, Epic Store and all other scammers all go out of the business.
But I'm afraid they will take down whole industries and mediums in the process, like Marvel and DC did to American comics.

Maybe that is easy to say when you live in a rich country where 90% of your monthly paycheck is not going into survival. I have pirated games my whole life (or bought them on steep discounts through KS or years later) but with gamepass I am actually sending some money to developers. I can afford 15$ per month, I cannot afford 40+$ each month (or 2 months) to buy new games.

Sure if I lived in Germany or some other colonial power in EU I could also look at others from my high horse.

You should pirate all shitty AAA games and only pay for games that you really like.
It is cheaper and more honorable than paying subscription to those leeches.

 

[ArchAngel]

if you play games you're part of the problem

that is what my wife says :D

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Someone name a single game in which you do not play a role.

You can't. Thus all games are roleplaying games.

Roles are not what you think.

Roles = Knight, Mage, Priest, Thief, etc.

role​

noun​

1. A character or part played by a performer.
2. The characteristic and expected social behavior of an individual.
3. A function or position. synonym: function.

The dictionary doesn't even mention Knights, Mages, Priests, or thieves!

In any game, the player plays the role of "the player". Their function or position is the player. In fact, most games include a so called "player character" or "PC" that the player is playing the role of!

In reality of course nobody means that when they talk about Role Playing Games, but the problem is the "definition" of an RPG is nebulous and really comes down to expectations. When you hear a game is an "RPG" you generally expect things like experience, levels, or some form of the character(s) themselves improving. This is generally separate from the character(s) tools or weapons improving by buying upgrades or what have you. Counter-strike is not an RPG even though you can buy better weapons and equipment in later rounds depending on how well you did.

Of course, if the weapons themselves had an experience meter that went up when you killed stuff, and the weapons were upgraded in some way based on that experience, you could make the case that the game has "RPG Elements".

Traditionally an RPG involves lots of combat, and combat is the main method of experience gain and character improvement. But, Baldur's Gate 2 is still an RPG even if I get most of my XP for finishing quests and reading spell scrolls.

RPG is a marketing term at its core. When you say a game is an RPG, or has "RPG elements" you are trying to signal that it has some sort of character growth based on some form of experience points. That's all the term really means anymore, like how "roguelike" generally means permadeath and proc gen, not that the game is literally just like the game "Rogue".

 

[ArchAngel]

Game Pass

No matter how cheap it is, no matter how good the games offered by the service: never support subscription models.

If you pay for Game Pass you are part of the problem.

Subscriptions are always anti-consumer, and in the end they are anti-developers/authors.
Basically, distribution monopolist forces the developers/authors to forego big percent of their income for slush fund in the manner of wholesale scalpers.

When Belmondo died, I tried to find a movie with him, Man from Rio or Professional or some other old school action movie, on my friends Netflix.
Not a single movie with one of the biggest international stars ever, but a bunch of overstretched (8 episodes, when in reality there is material for one) documentaries about every kind of serial killer, animal, food or tons of serialized woke propaganda.
You had much better choice in your small local video rental store in 80s.
I ended obtaining complete filmography from popular site for shareware materials.

I hope Netflix, Disney+, XBOX Live, Playstation Plus, Epic Store and all other scammers all go out of the business.
But I'm afraid they will take down whole industries and mediums in the process, like Marvel and DC did to American comics.

Maybe that is easy to say when you live in a rich country where 90% of your monthly paycheck is not going into survival. I have pirated games my whole life (or bought them on steep discounts through KS or years later) but with gamepass I am actually sending some money to developers. I can afford 15$ per month, I cannot afford 40+$ each month (or 2 months) to buy new games.

Sure if I lived in Germany or some other colonial power in EU I could also look at others from my high horse.

You should pirate all shitty AAA games and only pay for games that you really like.
It is cheaper and more honorable than paying subscription to those leeches.

I would if it was possible on new Xbox. And honor has nothing to do with it. And gaming is still cheaper hobby than going to cinema, to clubs or restaurants. At least per hour spent.

 

[JarlFrank]

My PC is also old: my CPU is from 2011 and my GPU from 2019, and I still use Windows 7.
And yet, I can play pretty much everything I'm interested in.
Games are very, very cheap during Steam and GOG deep sales every winter and summer. Sometimes I can get games for 90% off and below 10€ in price.

If I really want to support a specific dev, I buy at full price, but that happens rarely and only with small indie teams. I bought Grimoire, Disco Elysium, Space Wreck, Knights of the Chalice 2, and Telepath Tactics on day one. I don't do that with big publisher games. My overall costs for game purchases per year aren't much higher than the yearly cost for game pass would be. 15€ per month? Lol I could buy a 15€ game each month instead and own it forever. What you're doing is paying rent for your games. It is temporary access. Once you stop paying, you stop playing. You are wasting 180€ per year on something temporary. If you don't play many hours in a given month, that month's subscription money was completely wasted.

Subscription models are anti-consumer because they are anti-ownership. They also encourage unhealthy consumer habits like playing too many hours or binge watching on Netflix to get your money's worth. After all, the less you play, the less value you get out of your monthly subscription fee. The more you play, the more value you get out of it.

If you buy a game for 15 bucks, you own it forever. You can install it now and play it whenever you want. Maybe in a month, maybe in a year. No rush. You can play 5 hours today and then let it rest for a month, play 5 more hours, however you want. And if in 20 years you feel like playing it again, you can do so! I still have old CDs of games I bought 20+ years ago, I can still install and play them. I have some old downloads backed up on my external HDD, same here.

Subscription models are terrible, and I'm not even going into the potential issue of subscription service exclusive games that are harder to acquire permanently and pretty much need to be pirated in order to be preserved.

I have not once in my life paid for a subscription model. Not Netflix, not Gamepass, nothing. And I never will.
If you do pay for one of these services, you are part of the decline and the reason why we can't have nice things anymore.

 

[Vic]

RPG is a marketing term at its core. When you say a game is an RPG, or has "RPG elements" you are trying to signal that it has some sort of character growth based on some form of experience points. That's all the term really means anymore, like how "roguelike" generally means permadeath and proc gen, not that the game is literally just like the game "Rogue".

No, that is not the main reason people play RPGs.

I define games based on the experience I have while playing the game. The experience I have from playing RPGs is unique to any other genre. The most important aspect of an RPG is not XP or combat or loot to me, but being isekai'd to another world and given player agency in a reactive world that acknowledges my actions while making progress through a central campaign. That is what constitutes playing a role, a role in a fantasy world, and given the freedom and feedback to act out that role. "The Player" is not a role. A thief who can sneak, backstab for critical damage, steal things, find and disarm traps and pass dialogue skill checks because he's a charismatic silver-tongued devil, that is a role.

 

[ropetight]

Someone name a single game in which you do not play a role.

You can't. Thus all games are roleplaying games.

Roles are not what you think.

Roles = Knight, Mage, Priest, Thief, etc.

role​

noun​

1. A character or part played by a performer.
2. The characteristic and expected social behavior of an individual.
3. A function or position. synonym: function.

The dictionary doesn't even mention Knights, Mages, Priests, or thieves!

In any game, the player plays the role of "the player". Their function or position is the player. In fact, most games include a so called "player character" or "PC" that the player is playing the role of!

In reality of course nobody means that when they talk about Role Playing Games, but the problem is the "definition" of an RPG is nebulous and really comes down to expectations. When you hear a game is an "RPG" you generally expect things like experience, levels, or some form of the character(s) themselves improving. This is generally separate from the character(s) tools or weapons improving by buying upgrades or what have you. Counter-strike is not an RPG even though you can buy better weapons and equipment in later rounds depending on how well you did.

Of course, if the weapons themselves had an experience meter that went up when you killed stuff, and the weapons were upgraded in some way based on that experience, you could make the case that the game has "RPG Elements".

Traditionally an RPG involves lots of combat, and combat is the main method of experience gain and character improvement. But, Baldur's Gate 2 is still an RPG even if I get most of my XP for finishing quests and reading spell scrolls.

RPG is a marketing term at its core. When you say a game is an RPG, or has "RPG elements" you are trying to signal that it has some sort of character growth based on some form of experience points. That's all the term really means anymore, like how "roguelike" generally means permadeath and proc gen, not that the game is literally just like the game "Rogue".

Making marketing term from RPG is how we got here.
Role playing sounded cool and hip to marketing departments.
It can mean everything from child play, actor training method to sexual intercourse sugar coating.
So, soon every game that their promoters wanted to be special, to stand out form rest of shooters started declaring itself as a RPG.
It sounded more abstract than shooter with loot, RTS with special units, trading card games or CYOA for mature audiences.

Changing the meaning of words over time, "getting along with the times", is the way being liberal now means that you value collective identities and state control over personal freedom - which is complete opposite from what it meant only 10 years ago.

We all know what RPG meant originally - and it certainly didn't mean CYOA, adventure, action game or some cheap edutainment from burned down industry veterans.
Only question is do you want to stretch the poor RPG even more and make it mean whatever you can correlate with roles, playing or games.

 

[JarlFrank]

Doom is an RPG because you play the role of Doomguy

 

[†††]

My favorite rpg is posting in the codex

 

[Harthwain]

That's only combat in the sense that characters are fighting on screen. How you as a player engage in that "combat" is by making a dice-roll in a dialog window, which is mechanically indistinguishable from any other dice-roll you've been making for the entire game.

Which is how PnP RPGs work.

 

[luj1]

Changing the meaning of words over time,...

It is genre politics. In other words pure bullshit.

No different from changing the meaning of gender. But I guess we are in the terminal, "reconstruction" phase of mankind.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Disco Elysium has no combat.

For all intents and purposes I can agree with that, after all it's just one fight that, like you said, is kind of static.

But, does the fact that it has no combat disqualify it from being an RPG? What if I do a pacifist run of Fallout or any other game that allows me to do so. Am I not having an "RPG experience" without killing anything?

You choose to be a pacifist in Fallout. You do not have such a choice in the visual novel.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Someone name a single game in which you do not play a role.

You can't. Thus all games are roleplaying games.

Roles are not what you think.

Roles = Knight, Mage, Priest, Thief, etc.

role​

noun​

1. A character or part played by a performer.
2. The characteristic and expected social behavior of an individual.
3. A function or position. synonym: function.

The dictionary doesn't even mention Knights, Mages, Priests, or thieves!

In any game, the player plays the role of "the player". Their function or position is the player. In fact, most games include a so called "player character" or "PC" that the player is playing the role of!

In reality of course nobody means that when they talk about Role Playing Games, but the problem is the "definition" of an RPG is nebulous and really comes down to expectations. When you hear a game is an "RPG" you generally expect things like experience, levels, or some form of the character(s) themselves improving. This is generally separate from the character(s) tools or weapons improving by buying upgrades or what have you. Counter-strike is not an RPG even though you can buy better weapons and equipment in later rounds depending on how well you did.

Of course, if the weapons themselves had an experience meter that went up when you killed stuff, and the weapons were upgraded in some way based on that experience, you could make the case that the game has "RPG Elements".

Traditionally an RPG involves lots of combat, and combat is the main method of experience gain and character improvement. But, Baldur's Gate 2 is still an RPG even if I get most of my XP for finishing quests and reading spell scrolls.

RPG is a marketing term at its core. When you say a game is an RPG, or has "RPG elements" you are trying to signal that it has some sort of character growth based on some form of experience points. That's all the term really means anymore, like how "roguelike" generally means permadeath and proc gen, not that the game is literally just like the game "Rogue".

Making marketing term from RPG is how we got here.
Role playing sounded cool and hip to marketing departments.
It can mean everything from child play, actor training method to sexual intercourse sugar coating.
So, soon every game that their promoters wanted to be special, to stand out form rest of shooters started declaring itself as a RPG.
It sounded more abstract than shooter with loot, RTS with special units, trading card games or CYOA for mature audiences.

Changing the meaning of words over time, "getting along with the times", is the way being liberal now means that you value collective identities and state control over personal freedom - which is complete opposite from what it meant only 10 years ago.

We all know what RPG meant originally - and it certainly didn't mean CYOA, adventure, action game or some cheap edutainment from burned down industry veterans.
Only question is do you want to stretch the poor RPG even more and make it mean whatever you can correlate with roles, playing or games.

Well RPG literally means Role Playing Game, so I don't know what to tell you. Sorry, the "real meaning" we all cling to of what an RPG actuallly is, is completely based on marketing. There's no emperical provable definition of an RPG, aside from the words it stands for and the dictionary definition of those words. Someone insisting RPG means combat, experience gain, dice rolls, or whatever else is the one using flexible "feelings based" definitions.

RTS is the same thing. It literally means "Real Time Strategy". Gamers associate the term with games like warcraft, starcraft, and things like that, but just using the actual dictionary definition of the words it could be almost any real time game in which the user could potentially have a strategy. In Super Mario Brothers, the gameplay is realtime, and not running into goombas is a good strategy.

It's pretty silly of you to try to connect this to state control over personal freedom. Sorry homey, but when they said Dues Ex had RPG elements that didn't mean the same thing as "It's MAAM!"

 

[ropetight]

Well RPG literally means Role Playing Game, so I don't know what to tell you. Sorry, the "real meaning" we all cling to of what an RPG actuallly is, is completely based on marketing. There's no emperical provable definition of an RPG, aside from the words it stands for and the dictionary definition of those words. Someone insisting RPG means combat, experience gain, dice rolls, or whatever else is the one using flexible "feelings based" definitions.

RTS is the same thing. It literally means "Real Time Strategy". Gamers associate the term with games like warcraft, starcraft, and things like that, but just using the actual dictionary definition of the words it could be almost any real time game in which the user could potentially have a strategy. In Super Mario Brothers, the gameplay is realtime, and not running into goombas is a good strategy.

It's pretty silly of you to try to connect this to state control over personal freedom. Sorry homey, but when they said Dues Ex had RPG elements that didn't mean the same thing as "It's MAAM!"

I don't know what you are trying to achieve with all this "it literally means" and then calling dictionary to aid.
If you apply the same logic to every term or phrase coined from couple of words, I guess we can have autistic debates over meaning of them for a very long time.

Heavy metal in context of music doesn't mean "a metal of high specific gravity", or gold, lead or mercury, and it literally says that in dictionary.
And we can debate why every "energetic and highly amplified electronic rock music having a hard beat" isn't heavy metal, even if it says so in dictionary.
Look:

heavy metal​

noun​

1: a metal of high specific gravity
2: energetic and highly amplified electronic rock music having a hard beat

Example Sentences​

He listens to heavy metal.
lead, gold, and other heavy metals

In the same dictionary there isn't exact word "role playing game", so I guess that type of games we talk about don't exist.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/role playing game

Oh, and you can't use "role playing game" in Scrabble.

 

[Alex]

Disco Elysium has no combat.

For all intents and purposes I can agree with that, after all it's just one fight that, like you said, is kind of static.

But, does the fact that it has no combat disqualify it from being an RPG? What if I do a pacifist run of Fallout or any other game that allows me to do so. Am I not having an "RPG experience" without killing anything?

You choose to be a pacifist in Fallout. You do not have such a choice in the visual novel.

But if "combat gameplay" is necessary for a game to be an (C)RPG, then choosing to be a pacifist is the same as choosing to not play. Allowing for non combat runs or scenarios in an RPG is pointless because it is the same as allowing people to ignore the adventure hook and go home.

Either combat is not strictly necessary for a game to be called an RPG, or a tabletop game session where no combat happens is just a waste of time or a different kind of game entirely.

 

[Corbin Dallas Multipass]

Well RPG literally means Role Playing Game, so I don't know what to tell you. Sorry, the "real meaning" we all cling to of what an RPG actuallly is, is completely based on marketing. There's no emperical provable definition of an RPG, aside from the words it stands for and the dictionary definition of those words. Someone insisting RPG means combat, experience gain, dice rolls, or whatever else is the one using flexible "feelings based" definitions.

RTS is the same thing. It literally means "Real Time Strategy". Gamers associate the term with games like warcraft, starcraft, and things like that, but just using the actual dictionary definition of the words it could be almost any real time game in which the user could potentially have a strategy. In Super Mario Brothers, the gameplay is realtime, and not running into goombas is a good strategy.

It's pretty silly of you to try to connect this to state control over personal freedom. Sorry homey, but when they said Dues Ex had RPG elements that didn't mean the same thing as "It's MAAM!"

I don't know what you are trying to achieve with all this "it literally means" and then calling dictionary to aid.
If you apply the same logic to every term or phrase coined from couple of words, I guess we can have autistic debates over meaning of them for a very long time.

Heavy metal in context of music doesn't mean "a metal of high specific gravity", or gold, lead or mercury, and it literally says that in dictionary.
And we can debate why every "energetic and highly amplified electronic rock music having a hard beat" isn't heavy metal, even if it says so in dictionary.
Look:

heavy metal​

noun​

1: a metal of high specific gravity
2: energetic and highly amplified electronic rock music having a hard beat

Example Sentences​

He listens to heavy metal.
lead, gold, and other heavy metals

In the same dictionary there isn't exact word "role playing game", so I guess that type of games we talk about don't exist.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/role playing game

Oh, and you can't use "role playing game" in Scrabble.

And just like RPG, not everyone will agree that a certain band or even style of rock qualifies as "heavy metal". It's a subjective term. Once upon a time Black Sabbath was heavy metal, nobody would call it that anymore. In fact, it's a marketing term. Just like RPG or Roguelike.

The point being, the only way to disqualify or qualify something as an RPG is based on the shifting opinions of the majority, because there's no way to nail it down, as it has no rational basis in the first place. It means what people think it means.

Trying to prove your definition is the "real" one without any actual way to ground it in objective fact means it's just the no true scottsman fallacy. X isn't an RPG because no true RPG fan thinks it's an RPG.

To me, a game with no combat isn't "really" an RPG because that's part of my expectation for the genre. It seems I'm with the majority here on that, but I realize I can't "prove" my point of view, at best I could take a poll, but that's hardly real proof.

 

[ropetight]

And just like RPG, not everyone will agree that a certain band or even style of rock qualifies as "heavy metal". It's a subjective term. Once upon a time Black Sabbath was heavy metal, nobody would call it that anymore. In fact, it's a marketing term. Just like RPG or Roguelike.

The point being, the only way to disqualify or qualify something as an RPG is based on the shifting opinions of the majority, because there's no way to nail it down, as it has no rational basis in the first place. It means what people think it means.

Trying to prove your definition is the "real" one without any actual way to ground it in objective fact means it's just the no true scottsman fallacy. X isn't an RPG because no true RPG fan thinks it's an RPG.

To me, a game with no combat isn't "really" an RPG because that's part of my expectation for the genre. It seems I'm with the majority here on that, but I realize I can't "prove" my point of view, at best I could take a poll, but that's hardly real proof.

Black Sabbath was heavy metal, is heavy metal and will be heavy metal.
No subjectivity or change in a way metal is played or perceived today can change that.
Simply because term didn't really exist before them and couple other bands, and some even say they invented it..


Classification of Metal, in contrast of RPGs, is very detailed and based on music theory.
http://mapofmetal.com/

We agree on combat and RPGs - all the games that started the genre had it, that's why Pentiment isn't one.
No matter how complicated and demanding cookie cutting mechanic is.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Pentiment/comments/zxfweh/minigame_issue/

 

[ERYFKRAD]

then choosing to be a pacifist is the same as choosing to not play. Allowing for non combat runs or scenarios in an RPG is pointless because it is the same as allowing people to ignore the adventure hook and go home

Disagree. Combat should not be the only solution to any obstacle or scenario solution.

 

[laclongquan]

Does Pentiment have necessary requirement to be an rpg?
Codex-devised list of RPG elements

1. Character creation has some form of in-game consequences
2. Statistics which define character(s) abilities are subject to change throughout the game
3. Character(s) have skills or abilities which may improve or be altered over the course of gameplay
4. Character(s) accrue experience which can be spent or result in gaining levels or abilities
5. Character(s) accumulate items in some form of inventory, which the player can actively use (equip, sell, destroy, trade, etc.), which enhance or otherwise alter gameplay
6. Character(s) accumulate currency which may be spent to enhance the character(s) in some way (items, guild membership, training, etc.)
7. Character(s) gain levels throughout the game which result in some form of mechanical change (not just a change in character title, or description)
8. Character(s) are able to explore over terrain, water, space, etc. ('explore' refers to free movement of main character(s))
9. The game has some form of puzzle solving, which is resolved through combat, problem resolution, or some choice made by the player
10. A choice made by the player alters the narrative, or some other significant part of the game (an item is found or lost, stats or skills are gained or lost, different ending, etc.)
11. Character(s) interact with NPCs in some form of dialogue which have in-game consequences depending on what the character(s) say.
12. Optional quests (defined here as some kind of task made available after the game has started, and which can be resolved by the player before the game ends, but is not required to complete the game) are available.

Arbitrary threshold of 'RPG'

1. Not an RPG (7 or less RPG elements)
2. Generally agreed upon as an RPG (8-12 RPG elements)
3. 8-9 lite, 10-11 normal and 12 heavy RPG

Just how many does it have, anyway~

 

[Harthwain]

Either combat is not strictly necessary for a game to be called an RPG, or a tabletop game session where no combat happens is just a waste of time or a different kind of game entirely.

OR

You can do a shitload of other stuff than fighting, meaning combat is not the best nor the only option for the player to engage in. In fact, I love the idea of combat being so lethal that the player is encouraged to seek for other solutions first as a result. The problem is - most cRPGs are shit at providing meaningful systems that allow the player to interact with the world, so they go the easy route of turning players into murderhobos who can't do much else as a result.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Disagree. Combat should not be the only solution to any obstacle or scenario solution.

Warlord: This is good, but what is best in RPGs?
Warrior: Collaborative story-telling, choice & consequences, cinematic narrative, and companion romances.
Warlord: Wrong! Conan, what is best in RPGs?
Conan: To crush your enemies, explore their dungeons, and to see the glitter of their treasure.
Warlord: That is good. [crowd cheers]

 

[Vic]

To crush your enemies, explore their dungeons, and to see the glitter of their treasure.

This might be the purest definition of an RPG. Let's get some authority endorsement by RPG-god Todd Howard (time-stamped at 5:07 for your convenience):

 

[ERYFKRAD]

Disagree. Combat should not be the only solution to any obstacle or scenario solution.

Warlord: This is good, but what is best in RPGs?
Warrior: Collaborative story-telling, choice & consequences, cinematic narrative, and companion romances.
Warlord: Wrong! Conan, what is best in RPGs?
Conan: To crush your enemies, explore their dungeons, and to see the glitter of their treasure.
Warlord: That is good. [crowd cheers]

You don't understand. There's not much I like above seeing multiple solutions to a problem and ignoring all of them in favour of combat.

 

[WhiteShark]

But if "combat gameplay" is necessary for a game to be an (C)RPG, then choosing to be a pacifist is the same as choosing to not play. Allowing for non combat runs or scenarios in an RPG is pointless because it is the same as allowing people to ignore the adventure hook and go home.

Either combat is not strictly necessary for a game to be called an RPG, or a tabletop game session where no combat happens is just a waste of time or a different kind of game entirely.

This is a complete non sequitur. Let us use immersive sims for analogy. Immersive sims, as a genre, must give you multiple ways to tackle things, else they are not immersive sims. If I choose to only use one means to defeat the game and no other, did I not play the game? Was it a waste of time because I didn't use all methods of play? Of course not. But, had they not been available, the game would not have been an immersive sim.

 

[Vic]

immersive sims are rpgs?