@Mush_Mush do not want to derail the conversation from OP - this is not as banterish, as say Eurovision fanying, lol.
So all above are RPGs, we like them for better or worse, or not.
A first person shooter encourages roleplay, because we are pre-disposed to either accept or take a role, as humans.
Fair enough.
But I had to be demonstrated to that Mass Effect was greatly loved by fans before I gave it a go. It was a case of story element being very impressive, when combat would not be naturally mine.
And I do love Mass Effect! But I would not push it unto high-low-fantasy RPG loving friend of mine, without invoking those conversations that provoked me to give it a try.
I just find gaming immersion to be more important than definitions.
I think "RPG" is used in a couple different contexts, with regard to video games. I think it's important to understand that when we use the term "RPG", we're not necessarily using the acronym literally to mean "role-playing game". It's a game term, and it doesn't always mean what its words mean.
In one sense, it's a genre, competing with Action, Adventure, Strategy, Puzzle, Sports.
As a genre, RPG refers to games that have character progression, especially a progression that the player gets to determine. It refers to games that have "quests" that you complete, and the concept of NPCs that you interact with. It refers to games with player-initiated dialogue. If it has all of those things, it's an RPG. If it has all of those things and allows you to create your own protagonist, it's a Western RPG.
---
In another sense, it's a subgenre, augmenting or modifying the game's primary genre.
As a subgenre, RPG refers to games that may include some or all of the above elements, but that don't give those elements focus during normal gameplay.
Destiny, for example, features character progression, and has "quests" (though most of the quests it includes are achievement-like bounties, which aren't really the same thing), and it has NPCs (though all of the NPCs you interact with are essentially shop-keepers; there's no character interaction beyond buying stuff). You create your own character, but you don't make choices on your character's behalf. At its core, Destiny is an Action game. Its inclusion of RPG elements gives it the "Action RPG" subgenre.
(Baldur's Gate isn't a Strategy-RPG even though its gameplay fits the Strategy genre, because its focus from beginning to end is on the character you're controlling and the choices you make.)
---
In another sense, it's just a category; saying a game is an RPG in this context is a bit like saying that Pride and Prejudice is fiction.
As a category, RPG refers to games that have a strong focus on story and character development. In today's industry, most games fit neatly into this category, because a lot of studios are investing more in their writing teams.
In the end, video games are a conduit that allows the player to experience life from someone else's perspective. When a game focuses on that experience, if it does it successfully, players are right to call it an RPG. But at this point we may need to come up with a different term; every game is an RPG to somebody. GameSpot's Danny O'Dwyer could make a good case for why Rocket League is an RPG, if he wanted to.
From this quote, to me, it follows that a game like Witcher is an RPG, even while it guides you down a story and doesn't let you fully customize your character, doesn't let you be anyone other than Geralt. I agree with this 100%.
In the same interview, David mentions that "one part of an RPG is letting the player tell their own story."
So, it's one of things that contribute to the RPG term - the player being able to tell their story. We have this freedom in Baldur's Gate, in Icewind Dale, in Might and Magic games.
To me, in Witcher games you do it by making choices that then influence the world and its inhabitants, although you're still remaining Geralt from Rivia. But there're people who think otherwise. These people often refer to this quote by Gary Gygax: "Role-playing isn't storytelling. If the dungeon master is directing it, it's not a game."
As you can see, there are two different views and people decide themselves which side they take.
- Roleplaying games are self-evidently about playing a role. "Playing a role is about making choices as if you were the character. Therefore, in order for a game to be a roleplaying game (and not just a game where you happen to play a role), the mechanics of the game have to be about making and resolving choices as if you were the character."
- When roleplaying is the game.
I agree on that;
To me, a computer RPG can combine both storytelling and roleplaying in any proportion, but these 2 factors should exist. There should be a world, there should be characters in it, but there always shoud be interactivity - so that your choices could affect the story, the world, other characters.
@Son_of_Imoen I'm glad you cracked first, I was just about to give in! Every time I see this thread title I have to resist the urge to butt in and answer "Dangerous! Take cover!".
"role-playing is what it has always been. It’s about choice. It’s about letting players do what they want to do, and having the game react to their particular way of playing the game. In the early days of CRPGs it was mostly about party choice. Players could choose to have certain classes in their party, but there were always more classes than party slots. So, players made choices, and then had to fight their way through the game with that party. In modern RPGs those choices have become much more about what type of role the player wants to play – are they good, evil, male, female, straight, gay, violent, charismatic, stealthy, etc… We talk a lot in the industry about AR and VR, but often look at the best RPGs as the best way to escape from reality, and immerse yourself in another world."
For me, a roleplaying game is one where I can "live" in the world. For this to happen, there must be sufficient interaction options with the environment to make me believe that I'm there, and I must be able to take actions that have a tangible effect on the world.
FPS games aren't RPGs because my interaction with the world is highly limited. Strategy games aren't RPGs because I don't have a physical presence in the game. Flight simulators aren't RPGs because there's no interaction with anything outside of the cockpit of my plane/helicopter - the world between the various missions doesn't exist.
Games like Baldur's Gate are RPGs because you can interact with things, and perform actions that have direct effects on the world itself.
This thought was sort of pushed to the surface again, in my case, by the OP that asked about non-verbal BG2, so I wish to ask:
Have any of you wondered if you would be so comfy of your RPG definition if you were handicapped in a significantly functional way?
I mean, for example: deaf, blind; or suffering from degenrative desease without being Stephen Hawking?
I never thought of this, to my shame, before Sir Terry Pratchett, and him becoming afflicted with Alzheimer's, and making a documentary of people whom went to Switzerland.
He had to compromise a lot, to write - and the quality of his writing suffered, because I believe it is an intimate thing. Dictating your books is never the same as being alone and private with your pen.
Yet he forced me to think what I'd miss if my physical being degenerated so much as not to handle everything I do know, and good ol' M&KB scored there... (Which also implies not walking etc)
I don't crack a joke so often, but hey, there would be the game controller... u my console bros and sis!
I admit this thinking was not comfy, but I still think we should at least welcome audio "choose your own RPG" - the deaf can still get on with it to an disadvantage, but blind or crippled hardly.
I think it is less about genre definition and more a question whenever specific games are accessible to various kinds of gamers. For instance, there already exist various RPG's for blind or visually impaired gamers: most of them are sound-based like Entombed, while others use the RPG Game Engine and Map Maker. Although other approaches also exist.
As a random note, I find it unfortunate when people define RPGs as being about "you are the character" and such. Personally speaking, I virtually never want the character to be me. That's boring. I want to be inside the head of a character I find interesting within the world as presented, not kludge myself into there.
Some exception can be made for when it is artistically necessary for an avatar to be "you", of course. Ar nosurge actually had some of best role-playing I've done in years in a game, and it forced that avatar to be "me" (though it fell down a bit with unfortunate assumptions about me, but better to have your reach exceed your grasp than to not reach at all).
But in most cases, there's a lot of characters I'd far rather see the adventures of in any game than "me".
Comments
So all above are RPGs, we like them for better or worse, or not.
A first person shooter encourages roleplay, because we are pre-disposed to either accept or take a role, as humans.
Fair enough.
But I had to be demonstrated to that Mass Effect was greatly loved by fans before I gave it a go. It was a case of story element being very impressive, when combat would not be naturally mine.
And I do love Mass Effect! But I would not push it unto high-low-fantasy RPG loving friend of mine, without invoking those conversations that provoked me to give it a try.
I just find gaming immersion to be more important than definitions.
Well, may as well be me!
They're always worth a repost.
In one sense, it's a genre, competing with Action, Adventure, Strategy, Puzzle, Sports.
As a genre, RPG refers to games that have character progression, especially a progression that the player gets to determine. It refers to games that have "quests" that you complete, and the concept of NPCs that you interact with. It refers to games with player-initiated dialogue. If it has all of those things, it's an RPG. If it has all of those things and allows you to create your own protagonist, it's a Western RPG.
---
In another sense, it's a subgenre, augmenting or modifying the game's primary genre.
As a subgenre, RPG refers to games that may include some or all of the above elements, but that don't give those elements focus during normal gameplay.
Destiny, for example, features character progression, and has "quests" (though most of the quests it includes are achievement-like bounties, which aren't really the same thing), and it has NPCs (though all of the NPCs you interact with are essentially shop-keepers; there's no character interaction beyond buying stuff). You create your own character, but you don't make choices on your character's behalf. At its core, Destiny is an Action game. Its inclusion of RPG elements gives it the "Action RPG" subgenre.
(Baldur's Gate isn't a Strategy-RPG even though its gameplay fits the Strategy genre, because its focus from beginning to end is on the character you're controlling and the choices you make.)
---
In another sense, it's just a category; saying a game is an RPG in this context is a bit like saying that Pride and Prejudice is fiction.
As a category, RPG refers to games that have a strong focus on story and character development. In today's industry, most games fit neatly into this category, because a lot of studios are investing more in their writing teams.
In the end, video games are a conduit that allows the player to experience life from someone else's perspective. When a game focuses on that experience, if it does it successfully, players are right to call it an RPG. But at this point we may need to come up with a different term; every game is an RPG to somebody. GameSpot's Danny O'Dwyer could make a good case for why Rocket League is an RPG, if he wanted to.
According to @David_Gaider, there are RPGs that let you craft your own story and there are RPGs that guide you down a story. http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/q-dragon-age-writer-david-gaider-article-1.116817
From this quote, to me, it follows that a game like Witcher is an RPG, even while it guides you down a story and doesn't let you fully customize your character, doesn't let you be anyone other than Geralt. I agree with this 100%.
In the same interview, David mentions that "one part of an RPG is letting the player tell their own story."
So, it's one of things that contribute to the RPG term - the player being able to tell their story. We have this freedom in Baldur's Gate, in Icewind Dale, in Might and Magic games.
To me, in Witcher games you do it by making choices that then influence the world and its inhabitants, although you're still remaining Geralt from Rivia. But there're people who think otherwise. These people often refer to this quote by Gary Gygax: "Role-playing isn't storytelling. If the dungeon master is directing it, it's not a game."
As you can see, there are two different views and people decide themselves which side they take.
Justin Alexander, a writer, mentions the following (http://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/6517/roleplaying-games/roleplaying-games-vs-storytelling-games):
- Roleplaying games are self-evidently about playing a role.
"Playing a role is about making choices as if you were the character. Therefore, in order for a game to be a roleplaying game (and not just a game where you happen to play a role), the mechanics of the game have to be about making and resolving choices as if you were the character."
- When roleplaying is the game.
I agree on that;
To me, a computer RPG can combine both storytelling and roleplaying in any proportion, but these 2 factors should exist. There should be a world, there should be characters in it, but there always shoud be interactivity - so that your choices could affect the story, the world, other characters.
.... must .... resist .... silly joke .....
A video game RPG is an in-game depiction of a Rocket Propelled Grenade-launcher, mostly used in first-person shooter games like Battlefield.
*Son_of_Imoen failed to resist making a silly joke
"role-playing is what it has always been. It’s about choice. It’s about letting players do what they want to do, and having the game react to their particular way of playing the game. In the early days of CRPGs it was mostly about party choice. Players could choose to have certain classes in their party, but there were always more classes than party slots. So, players made choices, and then had to fight their way through the game with that party. In modern RPGs those choices have become much more about what type of role the player wants to play – are they good, evil, male, female, straight, gay, violent, charismatic, stealthy, etc… We talk a lot in the industry about AR and VR, but often look at the best RPGs as the best way to escape from reality, and immerse yourself in another world."
FPS games aren't RPGs because my interaction with the world is highly limited. Strategy games aren't RPGs because I don't have a physical presence in the game. Flight simulators aren't RPGs because there's no interaction with anything outside of the cockpit of my plane/helicopter - the world between the various missions doesn't exist.
Games like Baldur's Gate are RPGs because you can interact with things, and perform actions that have direct effects on the world itself.
Have any of you wondered if you would be so comfy of your RPG definition if you were handicapped in a significantly functional way?
I mean, for example: deaf, blind; or suffering from degenrative desease without being Stephen Hawking?
I never thought of this, to my shame, before Sir Terry Pratchett, and him becoming afflicted with Alzheimer's, and making a documentary of people whom went to Switzerland.
He had to compromise a lot, to write - and the quality of his writing suffered, because I believe it is an intimate thing. Dictating your books is never the same as being alone and private with your pen.
Yet he forced me to think what I'd miss if my physical being degenerated so much as not to handle everything I do know, and good ol' M&KB scored there... (Which also implies not walking etc)
I don't crack a joke so often, but hey, there would be the game controller...
I admit this thinking was not comfy, but I still think we should at least welcome audio "choose your own RPG" - the deaf can still get on with it to an disadvantage, but blind or crippled hardly.
Personally I find that No Pictures Please! Visually impaired gamers: where to go & what to play! is an rather fascinating article about the subject. Albeit it doesn't merely focus on RPG's.
Some exception can be made for when it is artistically necessary for an avatar to be "you", of course. Ar nosurge actually had some of best role-playing I've done in years in a game, and it forced that avatar to be "me" (though it fell down a bit with unfortunate assumptions about me, but better to have your reach exceed your grasp than to not reach at all).
But in most cases, there's a lot of characters I'd far rather see the adventures of in any game than "me".