I don't think its actually been proven that IWD is not story driven. There is a very concrete narrative, and you have to ignore it to see it as combat focused.
But combat-focussed doesn't mean there's no story. It's just that the spotlight points elsewhere (on the fighting, that is).
One difference between IWD and Diablo might actually be that the latter really has no story.
IWD is much more than Diablo. Is it possible to have IWD (an IE game) in Diablo? No, you couldn't implement the dialogs and a lot more else. Is it possible to have Diablo in IE? Yes, just cut a lot of dialog, drop at least half of the spells, disable the party (allow only 1 character) and add more spawnpoints.
Ok, one thing is in Diablo (and clones) that isn't in the IE. The random item generator. If you like auto-generated item names instead of hand-made items, you won't like the IE.
@Avenger_teambg and @CoryNewb , your criticisms and satirical digs are neither fair nor true about most Diablo clones, but only about Diablo 3, largely considered by fans of the arpg sub-genre to be a massive fail by Blizzard.
Other than the "failed" Diablo 3, the arpg subgenre has a collector's appeal that is not present in D&D or Infinity Engine games. I'm thinking specifically of sets.
For example, I'm currently playing Sacred 2. After years of playing this game, I am just beginning to get some of my toons to near level 100 (out of 200), and beginning to complete some armor sets, artifact sets, and jewelry sets.
I have a similar situation with my Titan Quest game. I have a utility for it called "TQ Vault". I have at least five years' worth of gaming in TQ collected in that utility, which allows me to easily pass gear from toon to toon, and I've barely begun to scratch the surface of potential TQ collectibles after all that time.
These kinds of game have an amazingly detailed paper doll to play with, and the in-game avatar *perfectly* shows whatever you have on your toon. This is a fun element that the IE games partially implement, but for which the contemporary aprg's are quantum leaps ahead in implementation.
There is *zero* collector's appeal in the IE games. The IE games have a compartively small set of magic items and gear, that are always there, and that an experienced player can go to and gather at will. The arpgs, on the other hand, have a comparatively *huge* set of collectible unique items and sets, all of which animate both on the inventory paper doll and on the in-game avatar, and which require constant playing the game and "spinning the wheel of fortune" in-game to get.
Some of the arpg armor sets are a graphical wonder to behold, with bright colors and shiny glowing color emitters.
Keep in mind, I'm saying all this as a fan of both types of games. But, I keep feeling like most people here have either never played a good arpg, or have tried and not appreciated or liked them, for whatever reason.
But, it's like comparing apples and oranges. Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale are not the same game type as Sacred, Titan Quest, Fate, or Torchlight. (Or even Diablo 1 or 2.)
I don't think its actually been proven that IWD is not story driven. There is a very concrete narrative, and you have to ignore it to see it as combat focused.
But combat-focussed doesn't mean there's no story. It's just that the spotlight points elsewhere (on the fighting, that is).
One difference between IWD and Diablo might actually be that the latter really has no story.
Except all of the combat is done towards completing the story. The story dictates the combat; this isn't even like BG where you galivant about the countryside. You WILL play the narrative. This is the definition of a story driven game.
Diabolo 3 is alive and well due to recent patches, changes, and console releases. It has been selling millions of copies. There is a massive audience for that game (which doesn't include me).
Diabolo 3 is alive and well due to recent patches, changes, and console releases. It has been selling millions of copies. There is a massive audience for that game (which doesn't include me).
lol... The "tl;dr" sentiment is why Diablo 3 has managed to survive despite a disastrous game launch, the attempted monetization of in-game item trades (!!! why is this point so often overlooked when Diablo 3 is brought up??), and a dumbing-down of character design that makes it look like the Mystic Quest of the genre.
... But, that tangent aside. IWD is an RPG, and it has a well-earned place in the pantheon of great PC RPGs right alongside its cousins: Baldur's Gate and Torment.
I like Diablo 3. The storyline is decent, and it makes a good stab at giving it's three companions developed backstories and personalities (especially in the expansion). The gameplay is largely button mashing, but it appears to have learned from games like BG and IWD in terms of story telling and character development.
I don't think its actually been proven that IWD is not story driven. There is a very concrete narrative, and you have to ignore it to see it as combat focused.
But combat-focussed doesn't mean there's no story. It's just that the spotlight points elsewhere (on the fighting, that is).
One difference between IWD and Diablo might actually be that the latter really has no story.
Except all of the combat is done towards completing the story. The story dictates the combat; this isn't even like BG where you galivant about the countryside. You WILL play the narrative. This is the definition of a story driven game.
I'd say that's pretty much the definition of linearity or even railroading. Story-driven to me means the story compels you to play and makes things be there for a reason. That is not what IWD does.
Railroading or linerarity are bywords for 'driven by story'. BG is less story driven than IWD for this reason. BG1 is motivated mostly by rewarding exploration, BG2 rewards by making your character more uber the more sidequests you do, though both eventually do railroad you.
Is a DnD pnp game still an rpg if the DM emphasises combat? I would say yes, if the players actually roleplay. A good DM makes sure the game is linear enough that people progress through his campaign, but gives enough options you dont feel straightjacketed. *shrug*
Is it possible to have IWD (an IE game) in Diablo? No, you couldn't implement the dialogs and a lot more else. Is it possible to have Diablo in IE? Yes, just cut a lot of dialog, drop at least half of the spells, disable the party (allow only 1 character) and add more spawnpoints.
Ok, one thing is in Diablo (and clones) that isn't in the IE. The random item generator. If you like auto-generated item names instead of hand-made items, you won't like the IE.
well implementing the item generator in the IE engine is the easiest thing to do that you said you couldn't. there is random map generation, upgradable spell levels, and more responsive controls that you couldn't do in the engine though.
as for the diablo engine running IWD, it does have multiple character support (summons, both in D1 and D2), so you can have a party. dialog choices can be implemented (D2 had a couple of these, though they didn't make a huge difference). the number of spells can be implemented (D1 simply used scrolls, and thus a large amount of spells were possible, the list was also done in a way that didn't have a cap, and in D2 you could pick more spells than your class had if you had the items that granted the skills). the sleep/memorization part of the spells might be a bit tricky though.
the diablo engines are fairly well done, but that isn't what made the IE games good, it was the content and design of the overall games. if blizzard supported modding better, then we might have seen an IWD mod for diablo. but they didn't, so we don't have one (not that doing so would have guaranteed such either, it would be a massive undertaking, more so than a mod for BG that made BG3 which never happened). mods of starcraft and especially warcraft 3 have spawned successful games, which means that blizzard was great at making engines (kinda like the whole quake>halflife>counterstrike>modern CoD games thing). black isle was just better at making games.
lol... The "tl;dr" sentiment is why Diablo 3 has managed to survive despite a disastrous game launch, the attempted monetization of in-game item trades (!!! why is this point so often overlooked when Diablo 3 is brought up??), and a dumbing-down of character design that makes it look like the Mystic Quest of the genre.
... But, that tangent aside. IWD is an RPG, and it has a well-earned place in the pantheon of great PC RPGs right alongside its cousins: Baldur's Gate and Torment.
Well, they completely removed the in-game auction house even though quite a lot of people were using it, and then completely redesigned the loot system to be much friendlier and more fun as recompense to those who did not like it and the problems it created. Patch after patch, Diablo 3 has had a lot of work done on it that has really molded it into something great, which they really didn't even need to bother doing once they had everybody's money. And, honestly, I found Diablo 3's Runes/Passive Skills system much more compelling from a character build standpoint, especially the way these mechanics could interact with Legendary items with unique abilities.
Like most things it comes down to your own definition of what constitutes an RPG.
Baldur's Gate is a journey of personal discovery, as your character slowly uncovers his/her past history and struggles to come to terms with it. There's a lot of decisions to be made based on what you learn about yourself, and your personal tale gets weaved into the larger and connected events of the Sword Coast.
Icewind Dale, on the other hand, is centered around an extraplanar feud, set against the backdrop of an ancient alliance marked by a bitter betrayal. I personally find the story to be deeper and more compelling, but the opportunities for role playing my party are substantially more limited.
If you find the important part of RPG is story-telling, you're probably going to side with IWD. If you prefer character development and personal choices influencing your world, BG will probably get the nod.
If you find the important part of RPG is story-telling, you're probably going to side with IWD. If you prefer character development and personal choices influencing your world, BG will probably get the nod.
And if you find the most important part of an RPG is being forced to play online and grind endlessly in a loot system that was geared more toward driving you to participate in an auction house-centered economy than to actually providing you with items that are in any way useful to your character, then Diablo 3's your game!
And if you find the most important part of an RPG is being forced to play online and grind endlessly in a loot system that was geared more toward driving you to participate in an auction house-centered economy than to actually providing you with items that are in any way useful to your character, then Diablo 3's your game!
Heh. As much as I loved Diablo & Diablo II, there was no way I was touching Diablo III once I saw what Blizzard had planned for it.
Yes, Icewind Dale is an RPG. Both of them. They're based on RPG mechanics, (A)DnD, they have tactical combat and have roleplaying choices.
In Icewind Dale II in particular Paladins and Monks will refuse rewards for example and both games have various responses or simply choosing to attack or persuade them.
So no, the IWD games are not ARPGs or Diablo-clones or dungeon-crawlers by any stretch of the imagination. They might be linear but they are still RPGs. And neither joinable NPCs make an RPG.
Skyrim is an open-world ARPG. Diablo is a dungeon-crawler/ARPG. The Witcher games are ARPGs but with a heavy emphasis on role-playing. Mass Effect is an third-person, three-people ARPG with an emphasis on roleplaying as well.
RPG means roleplaying game. And no, that doesn't mean just "playing a role, so Call of Duty is an RPG because you play the role of a soldier".
Roleplaying game, means that you CHOOSE and play a role. And there are options to play that role. And options mean the ones that affect the outcome of a conversation, not if you want to be a Barbarian or a Sorcerer only.
Telltale Games' The Walking Dead series are Adventure/RPGs. There are no levels or stats, but there's roleplaying involved. You make choices that affect the story or conversations all the time.
You can play a roleplaying game in forums only. No stats or levels or items. Just conversations, choosing and playing your role. That's the definition of a "roleplaying game".
And if you find the most important part of an RPG is being forced to play online and grind endlessly in a loot system that was geared more toward driving you to participate in an auction house-centered economy than to actually providing you with items that are in any way useful to your character, then Diablo 3's your game!
Heh. As much as I loved Diablo & Diablo II, there was no way I was touching Diablo III once I saw what Blizzard had planned for it.
Given that that aspect of the game has been completely reversed, it's worth a second look now.
Yes, Icewind Dale is an RPG. Both of them. They're based on RPG mechanics, (A)DnD, they have tactical combat and have roleplaying choices.
In Icewind Dale II in particular Paladins and Monks will refuse rewards for example and both games have various responses or simply choosing to attack or persuade them.
So no, the IWD games are not ARPGs or Diablo-clones or dungeon-crawlers by any stretch of the imagination. They might be linear but they are still RPGs. And neither joinable NPCs make an RPG.
Skyrim is an open-world ARPG. Diablo is a dungeon-crawler/ARPG. The Witcher games are ARPGs but with a heavy emphasis on role-playing. Mass Effect is an third-person, three-people ARPG with an emphasis on roleplaying as well.
RPG means roleplaying game. And no, that doesn't mean just "playing a role, so Call of Duty is an RPG because you play the role of a soldier".
Roleplaying game, means that you CHOOSE and play a role. And there are options to play that role. And options mean the ones that affect the outcome of a conversation, not if you want to be a Barbarian or a Sorcerer only.
Telltale Games' The Walking Dead series are Adventure/RPGs. There are no levels or stats, but there's roleplaying involved. You make choices that affect the story or conversations all the time.
You can play a roleplaying game in forums only. No stats or levels or items. Just conversations, choosing and playing your role. That's the definition of a "roleplaying game".
No, that is the definition of Roleplaying. The addition of Game infers gaminess of some kind :P
IWD is just like BG just without Joinable NPCs, long drawn out Exposition dumps, and mountains of sidequests.
If you think of it in terms of a spectrum:
BG2 is the furthest on the "Epic story, LONGGGGGG scripted story scenes, huge exposition dumps, and massive sidequest options. Fairly long pauses between combat some times."
BG1 is in the middle with "Still Epic but more focused story, average story/exposition scenes, steady mix of combat/story pacing."
IWD is on the other side "Narrow and focused story (However, no less interesting in my opinion), fairly linear progression through dungeons/areas, less NPC interaction given the isolated qualities of the region, and LOTS AND LOTS of combat. Very few pauses in combat for story/exposition dumps compared to BG1/2".
If you find the important part of RPG is story-telling, you're probably going to side with IWD. If you prefer character development and personal choices influencing your world, BG will probably get the nod.
And if you find the most important part of an RPG is being forced to play online and grind endlessly in a loot system that was geared more toward driving you to participate in an auction house-centered economy than to actually providing you with items that are in any way useful to your character, then Diablo 3's your game!
As @Fardragon points out, this has been completely changed as of patch 2.0, which came out months ago at no additional charge, and makes carving through demonic hordes for loot a blast. Not only are Legendaries and Rares more likely to drop, but the game will weigh the dice in favor of the class you're currently playing when it comes to rolling for the stats of the loot. You're right, the auction house really screwed looting. I never had a single Legendary pre-2.0 except for one I bought-with in-game gold and not real money, mind you-from the auction house. Now, I get Legendaries often enough that I feel comfortable salvaging the ones I don't like into components so I can craft the Legendaries I DO like.
The game is definitely worth a second look, especially if you have some friends with whom to delve the deeps. It's especially satisfying to build your characters to compliment one another so you can take on harder and harder difficulties (which yield even more gold and loot), like a Wizard focusing on chilling and freezing to not only slow enemies but take more damage fighting alongside a Demon Hunter with the ability to deal more damage to slowed enemies equipped.
If you find the important part of RPG is story-telling, you're probably going to side with IWD. If you prefer character development and personal choices influencing your world, BG will probably get the nod.
If you find the important part of RPG is story-telling, you're probably going to side with IWD. If you prefer character development and personal choices influencing your world, BG will probably get the nod.
*mariachi music plays and the village bursts into celebration*
But, seriously, balancing event-driven and character-driven narrative is pretty tough. BG2 isn't even that good at it, and it's considered one of the best.
But, seriously, balancing event-driven and character-driven narrative is pretty tough. BG2 isn't even that good at it, and it's considered one of the best.
I figured as much, but I couldn't resist the meme.
I think it might be easier to do in a written medium, like a novel or something. Games are trickier because you've got that player-interaction going on, rather than an audience just watching/reading the events and characters unfold.
more specifically it all depends where you draw the line. walking dead is sometimes considered an RPG, though it lacks the typical game mechanics of an RPG system. diablo is generally considered an ARPG, though it actually lacks most roleplay elements, and instead has a heavy emphasis on typical RPG mechanics. sid meier's alpha centauri has a structure for development and combat just like all typical RPG mechanics, and has at least as much actual roleplaying as diablo, yet it is rarely considered an RPG. thus in CRPGs (video game rpgs) what is generally considered an RPG is a very narrow set of conditions based mostly on the mechanics of the game. in this sense IWD is exactly the same amount of RPG as BG. in PnP RPGs the definition is more a mix of mechanics and acting/storytelling, in this regard IWD is more of an RPG than BG from the perspective of the player. the level of interactivity in the acting/storytelling is less than BG though, so from the perspective of the audience it is less.
now as for whether or it is a dungeon crawl the answer is: depends
more specifically it all depends on what you view a dungeon crawl to be. in earlier PnP days a dungeon crawl was fighting in confined spaces, typically underground. thus when playing a dungeon crawl you had different concerns and tactics than an open crawl. an open crawl was far less popular do to the difficulty of controlling the party to ensure things didn't get out of hand or have unexpected things pop up that broke immersion due to poor planning by the DM. an open crawl was fighting out in the open, allowing for more freedom of movement and tactics. diablo 1 was a dungeon crawl (a very open one, but still a dungeon crawl), while diablo 2 was an open crawl with some dungeons. you'll notice that crawl is used in both terms, this is because a crawl denotes careful advancement due to high amounts of danger, either traps or enemies. when things became computerized, the ability for interactive role playing was unable to make the transition, thus there was a big emphasis on crawls. the ability to render open environments tended the crawls to dungeon crawls. thus dungeon crawls were dubbed action heavy RPGs in video game culture, while storytelling RPGs (glorified choose your own adventures) became story RPGs. as technology evolved the dungeons opened up, but were still called dungeon crawls. story RPGs evolved into various mediums, and incorporated into all genres of games (story mode anyone?). gameplay continued to speed up as technology got faster, and as the term RPG was still used people that played PnP games saw a disconnect between cRPGs and the PnP counterpart. this resulted in a story heavy slow paced crawl genre set aside from ARPGs (diablo for example). this created a bridge between the genres which used similar systems and terminology. so is IWD a dungeon crawl? in modern video game terms the answer is no. in 1995 video game terms the answer is yes (things get faster and more actiony as time goes on, which alters the exact definitions of relativistic terminologies). in 1970 PnP standards the answer is no (it is an open crawl, or just a crawl). in modern PnP standards the answer is yes (video game influence has simplified terminologies, all crawls are lumped together).
@comport9 , are you still here? Did you read any of these responses?
We've all gone into a "feeding frenzy" arguing with each other about the definiton of "rpg", but I've seen no presence whatsoever of the OP since the intial post. Is he/she a very clever troll? Or was the question "asked and answered" in the first few posts, and the rest of us are now "beating a dead horse"?
@comport9 , are you still here? Did you read any of these responses?
We've all gone into a "feeding frenzy" arguing with each other about the definiton of "rpg", but I've seen no presence whatsoever of the OP since the intial post. Is he/she a very clever troll? Or was the question "asked and answered" in the first few posts, and the rest of us are now "beating a dead horse"?
hehe. Not trolling, just interested in all the responses. It's clear enough to me that IWD is more BG RPG than Diablo Action. Which is what I was hoping for. I guess I could/should have been clearer in what my definition of "RPG" is.
I guess what I didn't see discussed is how much "random" exploration there is? There was, IMO, very little in BG2, with each area being discovered through the story, whereas in BG there seemed to be far more opportunity to simply roam and find your own adventure. (Perhaps I did something wrong in BG2, because as big as the map seemed to be, I only discovered like 10 or 12 places...)
So thanks for all the responses, I appreciate them all.
BG2 is far more linear than BG1, and IWD is far more linear than BG2. as far as linearity it is probably on par with D2.
I felt like at times that D2 was pretty nonlinear. You can run around Act I and complete the sorta-hidden Countess quest and clear quest-involved caves out of quest order. About mid-way through Act I I often clear all the way to the Tree of Inifuss, forgetting to actually pick up the quest to go to the tree, and I can't click on it for the scroll without going back and picking up the quest. I'd call that nonlinear, at least as nonlinear as BG1&2.
Comments
One difference between IWD and Diablo might actually be that the latter really has no story.
Other than the "failed" Diablo 3, the arpg subgenre has a collector's appeal that is not present in D&D or Infinity Engine games. I'm thinking specifically of sets.
For example, I'm currently playing Sacred 2. After years of playing this game, I am just beginning to get some of my toons to near level 100 (out of 200), and beginning to complete some armor sets, artifact sets, and jewelry sets.
I have a similar situation with my Titan Quest game. I have a utility for it called "TQ Vault". I have at least five years' worth of gaming in TQ collected in that utility, which allows me to easily pass gear from toon to toon, and I've barely begun to scratch the surface of potential TQ collectibles after all that time.
These kinds of game have an amazingly detailed paper doll to play with, and the in-game avatar *perfectly* shows whatever you have on your toon. This is a fun element that the IE games partially implement, but for which the contemporary aprg's are quantum leaps ahead in implementation.
There is *zero* collector's appeal in the IE games. The IE games have a compartively small set of magic items and gear, that are always there, and that an experienced player can go to and gather at will. The arpgs, on the other hand, have a comparatively *huge* set of collectible unique items and sets, all of which animate both on the inventory paper doll and on the in-game avatar, and which require constant playing the game and "spinning the wheel of fortune" in-game to get.
Some of the arpg armor sets are a graphical wonder to behold, with bright colors and shiny glowing color emitters.
Keep in mind, I'm saying all this as a fan of both types of games. But, I keep feeling like most people here have either never played a good arpg, or have tried and not appreciated or liked them, for whatever reason.
But, it's like comparing apples and oranges. Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale are not the same game type as Sacred, Titan Quest, Fate, or Torchlight. (Or even Diablo 1 or 2.)
That said, tl;dr @BelgarathMTH
... But, that tangent aside. IWD is an RPG, and it has a well-earned place in the pantheon of great PC RPGs right alongside its cousins: Baldur's Gate and Torment.
Is a DnD pnp game still an rpg if the DM emphasises combat? I would say yes, if the players actually roleplay. A good DM makes sure the game is linear enough that people progress through his campaign, but gives enough options you dont feel straightjacketed. *shrug*
as for the diablo engine running IWD, it does have multiple character support (summons, both in D1 and D2), so you can have a party. dialog choices can be implemented (D2 had a couple of these, though they didn't make a huge difference). the number of spells can be implemented (D1 simply used scrolls, and thus a large amount of spells were possible, the list was also done in a way that didn't have a cap, and in D2 you could pick more spells than your class had if you had the items that granted the skills). the sleep/memorization part of the spells might be a bit tricky though.
the diablo engines are fairly well done, but that isn't what made the IE games good, it was the content and design of the overall games. if blizzard supported modding better, then we might have seen an IWD mod for diablo. but they didn't, so we don't have one (not that doing so would have guaranteed such either, it would be a massive undertaking, more so than a mod for BG that made BG3 which never happened). mods of starcraft and especially warcraft 3 have spawned successful games, which means that blizzard was great at making engines (kinda like the whole quake>halflife>counterstrike>modern CoD games thing). black isle was just better at making games.
Icewind Dale, on the other hand, is centered around an extraplanar feud, set against the backdrop of an ancient alliance marked by a bitter betrayal. I personally find the story to be deeper and more compelling, but the opportunities for role playing my party are substantially more limited.
If you find the important part of RPG is story-telling, you're probably going to side with IWD. If you prefer character development and personal choices influencing your world, BG will probably get the nod.
edit: spoiler tags
They're based on RPG mechanics, (A)DnD, they have tactical combat and have roleplaying choices.
In Icewind Dale II in particular Paladins and Monks will refuse rewards for example and both games have various responses or simply choosing to attack or persuade them.
So no, the IWD games are not ARPGs or Diablo-clones or dungeon-crawlers by any stretch of the imagination.
They might be linear but they are still RPGs. And neither joinable NPCs make an RPG.
Skyrim is an open-world ARPG. Diablo is a dungeon-crawler/ARPG. The Witcher games are ARPGs but with a heavy emphasis on role-playing. Mass Effect is an third-person, three-people ARPG with an emphasis on roleplaying as well.
RPG means roleplaying game. And no, that doesn't mean just "playing a role, so Call of Duty is an RPG because you play the role of a soldier".
Roleplaying game, means that you CHOOSE and play a role. And there are options to play that role. And options mean the ones that affect the outcome of a conversation, not if you want to be a Barbarian or a Sorcerer only.
Telltale Games' The Walking Dead series are Adventure/RPGs. There are no levels or stats, but there's roleplaying involved. You make choices that affect the story or conversations all the time.
You can play a roleplaying game in forums only. No stats or levels or items. Just conversations, choosing and playing your role.
That's the definition of a "roleplaying game".
If you think of it in terms of a spectrum:
BG2 is the furthest on the "Epic story, LONGGGGGG scripted story scenes, huge exposition dumps, and massive sidequest options. Fairly long pauses between combat some times."
BG1 is in the middle with "Still Epic but more focused story, average story/exposition scenes, steady mix of combat/story pacing."
IWD is on the other side "Narrow and focused story (However, no less interesting in my opinion), fairly linear progression through dungeons/areas, less NPC interaction given the isolated qualities of the region, and LOTS AND LOTS of combat. Very few pauses in combat for story/exposition dumps compared to BG1/2".
The game is definitely worth a second look, especially if you have some friends with whom to delve the deeps. It's especially satisfying to build your characters to compliment one another so you can take on harder and harder difficulties (which yield even more gold and loot), like a Wizard focusing on chilling and freezing to not only slow enemies but take more damage fighting alongside a Demon Hunter with the ability to deal more damage to slowed enemies equipped.
But, seriously, balancing event-driven and character-driven narrative is pretty tough. BG2 isn't even that good at it, and it's considered one of the best.
I think it might be easier to do in a written medium, like a novel or something. Games are trickier because you've got that player-interaction going on, rather than an audience just watching/reading the events and characters unfold.
the answer is:
maybe
more specifically it all depends where you draw the line. walking dead is sometimes considered an RPG, though it lacks the typical game mechanics of an RPG system. diablo is generally considered an ARPG, though it actually lacks most roleplay elements, and instead has a heavy emphasis on typical RPG mechanics. sid meier's alpha centauri has a structure for development and combat just like all typical RPG mechanics, and has at least as much actual roleplaying as diablo, yet it is rarely considered an RPG. thus in CRPGs (video game rpgs) what is generally considered an RPG is a very narrow set of conditions based mostly on the mechanics of the game. in this sense IWD is exactly the same amount of RPG as BG. in PnP RPGs the definition is more a mix of mechanics and acting/storytelling, in this regard IWD is more of an RPG than BG from the perspective of the player. the level of interactivity in the acting/storytelling is less than BG though, so from the perspective of the audience it is less.
now as for whether or it is a dungeon crawl the answer is:
depends
more specifically it all depends on what you view a dungeon crawl to be. in earlier PnP days a dungeon crawl was fighting in confined spaces, typically underground. thus when playing a dungeon crawl you had different concerns and tactics than an open crawl. an open crawl was far less popular do to the difficulty of controlling the party to ensure things didn't get out of hand or have unexpected things pop up that broke immersion due to poor planning by the DM. an open crawl was fighting out in the open, allowing for more freedom of movement and tactics. diablo 1 was a dungeon crawl (a very open one, but still a dungeon crawl), while diablo 2 was an open crawl with some dungeons. you'll notice that crawl is used in both terms, this is because a crawl denotes careful advancement due to high amounts of danger, either traps or enemies. when things became computerized, the ability for interactive role playing was unable to make the transition, thus there was a big emphasis on crawls. the ability to render open environments tended the crawls to dungeon crawls. thus dungeon crawls were dubbed action heavy RPGs in video game culture, while storytelling RPGs (glorified choose your own adventures) became story RPGs. as technology evolved the dungeons opened up, but were still called dungeon crawls. story RPGs evolved into various mediums, and incorporated into all genres of games (story mode anyone?). gameplay continued to speed up as technology got faster, and as the term RPG was still used people that played PnP games saw a disconnect between cRPGs and the PnP counterpart. this resulted in a story heavy slow paced crawl genre set aside from ARPGs (diablo for example). this created a bridge between the genres which used similar systems and terminology. so is IWD a dungeon crawl? in modern video game terms the answer is no. in 1995 video game terms the answer is yes (things get faster and more actiony as time goes on, which alters the exact definitions of relativistic terminologies). in 1970 PnP standards the answer is no (it is an open crawl, or just a crawl). in modern PnP standards the answer is yes (video game influence has simplified terminologies, all crawls are lumped together).
isn't semantics fun?
We've all gone into a "feeding frenzy" arguing with each other about the definiton of "rpg", but I've seen no presence whatsoever of the OP since the intial post. Is he/she a very clever troll? Or was the question "asked and answered" in the first few posts, and the rest of us are now "beating a dead horse"?
"Inquiring minds want to know."
I guess what I didn't see discussed is how much "random" exploration there is? There was, IMO, very little in BG2, with each area being discovered through the story, whereas in BG there seemed to be far more opportunity to simply roam and find your own adventure. (Perhaps I did something wrong in BG2, because as big as the map seemed to be, I only discovered like 10 or 12 places...)
So thanks for all the responses, I appreciate them all.