1133 réponses à ce sujet

[SirOccam]

Xena_Shepard wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

In Exile wrote...


I don't play PnP. I happen to think it's stupid. But it was presented in this thread as an acceptable definition of an RPG by many, so I took it that way.

WHAT???????
it's not an acceptable definition, it's the only definition possible. Anything out of the mechanics of a pnp rpg is not an rpg

I think we've finally arrived at the core problem here.

filetemo is correct you know, as I explained in a way earlier post, you can stick "RPG" by the WORD definition onto just about ANY game in existence, but if the game doesn't follow the D&D standard, it doesn't fit into the ACTUAL use of the genre word "RPG" no matter what anybody else says, if it doesn't fit into the traditional RPG mold it isn't an RPG.

It's just like how people think America is a "demoracy" when infact we are a "democratic republic" just because you label something someway doesn't make it so, which means no matter how much you wanna scream that a game is an RPG if it just lets you take the reigns of someone important, it's not an RPG if it doesn't fit into the D&D standard of game mechanics.

So should all cars function exactly like the first car did? So automatics aren't "real" cars?
Is a clock not a "real" clock if it's digital instead of analog?
How do you account for variations in things like, say, hammers? Are ball peen hammers, claw hammers, sledgehammers, etc. all real hammers? Can't there be only one "true" type, by definition?

[maxernst]

Xena_Shepard wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

In Exile wrote...


I don't play PnP. I happen to think it's stupid. But it was presented in this thread as an acceptable definition of an RPG by many, so I took it that way.

WHAT???????
it's not an acceptable definition, it's the only definition possible. Anything out of the mechanics of a pnp rpg is not an rpg

I think we've finally arrived at the core problem here.

filetemo is correct you know, as I explained in a way earlier post, you can stick "RPG" by the WORD definition onto just about ANY game in existence, but if the game doesn't follow the D&D standard, it doesn't fit into the ACTUAL use of the genre word "RPG" no matter what anybody else says, if it doesn't fit into the traditional RPG mold it isn't an RPG.

But to bring up Traveller again, one of the very first roleplaying games (1977), possibly the science fiction RPG (I'm not sure of it), it didn't happen to use the gaining levels and skills during play mechanic.  You had unique characters with skills and attributes but they were fixed (not absolutely, but mostly) when the game began, sort of like the D&D attributes strength, intelligence etc. were essentially fixed in the original game.  This probably changed with later editions of Traveller, since games without skill progression weren't as popular, mostly because it didn't give people much to shoot for, though there was still loot, and people's weapons and money increased as they completed missions.  But the experience of playing Traveller was FAR more similar to D&D than any singleplayer game could ever be.  You had a gamesmaster who set up the missions, you had a group of players who each played one character that they had uniquely created, and it was completely openended.  The specific game mechanics differed, but it was clearly a similar type of game and was absolutely marketed as such.

[Xena_Shepard]

SirOccam wrote...

Xena_Shepard wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

In Exile wrote...


I don't play PnP. I happen to think it's stupid. But it was presented in this thread as an acceptable definition of an RPG by many, so I took it that way.

WHAT???????
it's not an acceptable definition, it's the only definition possible. Anything out of the mechanics of a pnp rpg is not an rpg

I think we've finally arrived at the core problem here.

filetemo is correct you know, as I explained in a way earlier post, you can stick "RPG" by the WORD definition onto just about ANY game in existence, but if the game doesn't follow the D&D standard, it doesn't fit into the ACTUAL use of the genre word "RPG" no matter what anybody else says, if it doesn't fit into the traditional RPG mold it isn't an RPG.

It's just like how people think America is a "demoracy" when infact we are a "democratic republic" just because you label something someway doesn't make it so, which means no matter how much you wanna scream that a game is an RPG if it just lets you take the reigns of someone important, it's not an RPG if it doesn't fit into the D&D standard of game mechanics.

So should all cars function exactly like the first car did? So automatics aren't "real" cars?
Is a clock not a "real" clock if it's digital instead of analog?
How do you account for variations in things like, say, hammers? Are ball peen hammers, claw hammers, sledgehammers, etc. all real hammers? Can't there be only one "true" type, by definition?

Of course cars still work like the first car did, they just do it in a different way. Hey BioWare is free to change up the game, if you'd actually read my posts I said that DAO is STILL an RPG despite not using the D20 system JUST LIKE D&D. And to use your car analogy, if cars stopped running on gas, or using combustion to propel forward, or stopped using four rubber wheels, then yes they'd stop being cars.

And clocks still do the same thing, they tell time and calculate in 99 microseconds, 60 seconds, 60 minutes, 24 hours, if someone released a 'clock' that told you how the weather was outside it wouldn't be a clock, it'd be a weather gadge.

[filetemo]

SirOccam wrote...

 So automatics aren't "real" cars?

automatics are dumbed down cars, but still cars.

a car it's what it has been all it's life: a set of four wheels with a steering wheel.
when cars fly and are controlled by a joystick, they're not cars anymore. They will be transportating floating devices. But not cars.

[SirOccam]

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

WHAT???????
it's not an acceptable definition, it's the only definition possible. Anything out of the mechanics of a pnp rpg is not an rpg

I think we've finally arrived at the core problem here.

I'm a DM in pnp D&D and it hurts my soul to hear pnp rpg "may" be an "acceptable" definition of what an rpg is.

So just because it essentially created the genre, no variations are allowed to occur? The genre describes only that ONE particular style of doing things? That seems rather arbitrary, doesn't it?

Look at musical genres, like rock & roll. There's indie rock, punk rock, funk rock, glam rock, folk rock...and those are only a few that actually have "rock" in the name, but there's also metal, new wave, grunge, etc. Those are all part of "rock and roll," but they don't all sound like Elvis or whoever you want to say started rock (and no I really don't want to argue about who started it; that's just an example. Put in whoever you want and the point remains.).

[Xena_Shepard]

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

 So automatics aren't "real" cars?

automatics are dumbed down cars, but still cars.

a car it's what it has been all it's life: a set of four wheels with a steering wheel.
when cars fly and are controlled by a joystick, they're not cars anymore. They will be transportating floating devices. But not cars.

Glad to see someone gets it, also nice to meet a fellow DM.

[SirOccam]

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

 So automatics aren't "real" cars?

automatics are dumbed down cars, but still cars.

a car it's what it has been all it's life: a set of four wheels with a steering wheel.
when cars fly and are controlled by a joystick, they're not cars anymore. They will be transportating floating devices. But not cars.

Okay, but don't you see the contradiction? You are choosing to define "car" in a more generalized way...why can't you do that for RPGs? And what about 3-wheeled cars?



And Xena, you too:

Xena_Shepard wrote...

Of course cars still work like the first car did, they just do it in a different way.

Why can't RPGs do things in a different way?

[filetemo]

SirOccam wrote...


Look at musical genres, like rock & roll. There's indie rock, punk rock, funk rock, glam rock, folk rock...and those are only a few that actually have "rock" in the name, but there's also metal, new wave, grunge, etc. Those are all part of "rock and roll," but they don't all sound like Elvis or whoever you want to say started rock (and no I really don't want to argue about who started it; that's just an example. Put in whoever you want and the point remains.).

Ask a 60 year old what rock is. He'll tell you those new variations aren't rock.

[SirOccam]

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...


Look at musical genres, like rock & roll. There's indie rock, punk rock, funk rock, glam rock, folk rock...and those are only a few that actually have "rock" in the name, but there's also metal, new wave, grunge, etc. Those are all part of "rock and roll," but they don't all sound like Elvis or whoever you want to say started rock (and no I really don't want to argue about who started it; that's just an example. Put in whoever you want and the point remains.).

Ask a 60 year old what rock is. He'll tell you those new variations aren't rock.

Will he be right?

I say no. He won't. And right now, you guys are sounding like the proverbial 60-year olds. I played a little PnP myself, but I never once thought it was the be all and end all of RPGs.

Modifié par SirOccam, 14 août 2010 - 01:17 .

[filetemo]

SirOccam wrote...

And what about 3-wheeled cars?

technically they are propelled trycicles. And let's not talk about their commercial success.

[filetemo]

[quote]SirOccam wrote...

Ask a 60 year old what rock is. He'll tell you those new variations aren't rock.[/quote]
Will he be right?
[/quote]
from his point of view, yes.

he grew with rock, so he never knew or accepted variations, rock is what it is. Ask a 13 year old and the response changes, of course. But I'm the 60 year old who grew with D&D with my monolithic idea of what an rpg is.

[SirOccam]

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

And what about 3-wheeled cars?

technically they are propelled trycicles. And let's not talk about their commercial success.

[Morrigan]Maddening![/Morrigan]

You can just re-define things however you like and make whatever arbitrary declarations you want. I don't know why I'm bothering. I guess there's a reason why they say arguing on the Internet is like being in the Special Olympics.

[Clover Rider]

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...


Look at musical genres, like rock & roll. There's indie rock, punk rock, funk rock, glam rock, folk rock...and those are only a few that actually have "rock" in the name, but there's also metal, new wave, grunge, etc. Those are all part of "rock and roll," but they don't all sound like Elvis or whoever you want to say started rock (and no I really don't want to argue about who started it; that's just an example. Put in whoever you want and the point remains.).

Ask a 60 year old what rock is. He'll tell you those new variations aren't rock.

Will he be right?

I say no. He won't. And right now, you guys are sounding like the proverbial 60-year olds. I played a little PnP myself, but I never once thought it was the be all and end all of RPGs.

It imo is like Sentai this  is now this  see it may be new but it is the same just like RPGs .

[SirOccam]

filetemo wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

Ask a 60 year old what rock is. He'll tell you those new variations aren't rock.

Will he be right?

from his point of view, yes.

he grew with rock, so he never knew or accepted variations, rock is what it is. Ask a 13 year old and the response changes, of course. But I'm the 60 year old who grew with D&D with my monolithic idea of what an rpg is.

I don't particularly care what his point of view is. Like my question may have indicated, I'm more interested in what is right. If he refuses to consider anything else rock, that's his own problem, and yours for RPG stuff.

But it's not staying within the bounds of personal opinion, is it? You are using your rigid, inflexible opinion as a basis to slam BioWare and demand things from them. As they say, your rights to swing your fist ends where my nose begins. They have no obligation whatsoever to accede to your demands if you refuse to make any kind of effort to support your claims as having any kind of objective foundation.

Modifié par SirOccam, 14 août 2010 - 01:23 .

[Xena_Shepard]

SirOccam wrote...

And Xena, you too:

Xena_Shepard wrote...

Of course cars still work like the first car did, they just do it in a different way.

Why can't RPGs do things in a different way?

How many times have I said it now? Sure they can vary things, just like they did in DAO, DAO wasn't like D&D in a lot of ways, but if you started TAKING THINGS AWAY then it's not "changing" it anymore its...taking it away, isn't it?

To keep up with the car analogy, it's like taking the engine out of car...instead of modifying it to be better.

Modifié par Xena_Shepard, 14 août 2010 - 01:24 .

[FedericoV]

Xena_Shepard wrote...


Look up RPG in the dictionary and you get the D&D logo, D&D isn't just the definition of an RPG it's what CREATED the RPG, if it doesn't follow the D&D model (even DAO followed the D&D model it just had its own system instead of the D20 system, D20 system and D&D are two different things) then it can't be classified in the RPG game genre.

D&D was not the first RPG in the history of gaming. D&D was the most successfull RPG for some years, yes, but it has changed many times during its history, considering that there have been 4 editions so far. There are many RPGs without levels, classes, powers and so on. There are even diceless RPGs. RPGs that do not have any focus on items and inventory. Saying that games like Amber, Vampire The Masquerade, Legend of The Five Rings, Basic, Gurps or Call of Ctuluh are not RPG because they do not duplicate the D&D formula, is bull**** honestly.

D&D was created as an expansion of a war game named Chainmail. Over the years it has kept that focus on wargame features. Wich is good for D&D's sake but it's not the only way to roleplay. RPGs have evolved so much during the last 30 years. Fortunately there are different styles of roleplay for different players. I don't know what's the best definition of RPGs. Even Arneson and Gygax (the creators of D&D) has different opinion about that.

Talking about DA2, there is no way to say that the game won't be an RPG because it has/misses feature x or y. Personally I would only like to understand what kind of game will be in terms of gameplay, because while I'm pretty confident about BW storytelling skills (that has improved so much over the years and that get better with every game) I really do not understand how the game will look like in terms of gameplay from the information we have received so far.

Modifié par FedericoV, 14 août 2010 - 01:28 .

[filetemo]

SirOccam wrote...
I don't know why I'm bothering.

because it's funny!

I'll tell you what: it's 3:23 AM in Spain and I have to work tomorrow at 8:00 AM, I'm depriving myself of sleep to be on the forum. But you know what's really annoying? I have some stupid fratboys as neighbors that are playing FIFA soccer on their stupid Xbox yelling and laughing and I wouldn't be able to sleep anyways, so I'm like raging inside me, so when I see someone telling me console crowd is not that bad, sorry I have to post.

/offtopic

[SirOccam]

Xena_Shepard wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

And Xena, you too:

Xena_Shepard wrote...

Of course cars still work like the first car did, they just do it in a different way.

Why can't RPGs do things in a different way?

How many times have I said it now? Sure they can vary things, just like they did in DAO, DAO wasn't like D&D in a lot of ways, but if you starting TAKING THINGS AWAY then it's not "changing" it anymore its...taking it away, isn't it?

To keep up with the car analogy, it's like taking the engine out of car...instead of modifying it to be better.

Well this is entirely about semantics now. Both adding and removing are forms of variation, are they not? In automatic cars, they removed the clutch pedal, didn't they?

[TMZuk]

SirOccam wrote...

Xena_Shepard wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

In Exile wrote...


I don't play PnP. I happen to think it's stupid. But it was presented in this thread as an acceptable definition of an RPG by many, so I took it that way.

WHAT???????
it's not an acceptable definition, it's the only definition possible. Anything out of the mechanics of a pnp rpg is not an rpg

I think we've finally arrived at the core problem here.

filetemo is correct you know, as I explained in a way earlier post, you can stick "RPG" by the WORD definition onto just about ANY game in existence, but if the game doesn't follow the D&D standard, it doesn't fit into the ACTUAL use of the genre word "RPG" no matter what anybody else says, if it doesn't fit into the traditional RPG mold it isn't an RPG.

It's just like how people think America is a "demoracy" when infact we are a "democratic republic" just because you label something someway doesn't make it so, which means no matter how much you wanna scream that a game is an RPG if it just lets you take the reigns of someone important, it's not an RPG if it doesn't fit into the D&D standard of game mechanics.

So should all cars function exactly like the first car did? So automatics aren't "real" cars?
Is a clock not a "real" clock if it's digital instead of analog?
How do you account for variations in things like, say, hammers? Are ball peen hammers, claw hammers, sledgehammers, etc. all real hammers? Can't there be only one "true" type, by definition?

There's a clear definition to a hammer. A hammer can be a clawhammer, a sledgehammer etc, etc. They all have something in common that makes them hammers. An axe, however, isn't a hammer. A crowbar isn't a hammer.

There's a clear definition to what a car is. It can be a racecar, a lorry, a 4WD, and many other things. But a motorcycle isn't a car.

A RPG is a defined concept as well, and one Bioware seems to be leaving behind. It's about creating and assuming a personae that isn't you, and guide this creation through a number of events, where you have to choose what direction to take, if any. In order to make these choises, you have to be able to interact on multiple levels, not just be able to kill everything present. While interacting, no matter how you do it, the choises are your own, but the skills of the character should determine wether you succeed or fail, not the skill of the player.

cRPG's are limited in that sense, because you can only program so many choises and options. However, while the hardware and the programming tools gets better and better, it would seem that Bioware is insisting on creating streamlined action-adventures, where you are rail-roaded along. You meet fascinating characters, and time and time again you are in to your knees in gore, but the actual choises you have, are becoming ever more limited. It's a mad rollercoaster-ride, but like all roller-coaster rides, there can be no deviation.

ME2 had moved so far from the RPG definition, that it no longer could be called an RPG, IMO. I'm pretty certain that is where DA2 is headed as well.

Modifié par TMZuk, 14 août 2010 - 01:29 .

[Xena_Shepard]

FedericoV wrote...

Xena_Shepard wrote...


Look up RPG in the dictionary and you get the D&D logo, D&D isn't just the definition of an RPG it's what CREATED the RPG, if it doesn't follow the D&D model (even DAO followed the D&D model it just had its own system instead of the D20 system, D20 system and D&D are two different things) then it can't be classified in the RPG game genre.

D&D was not the first RPG in the history of gaming. D&D was the most successfull RPG for some years, yes, but it has changed many times during its history, considering that there have been 4 editions so far. There are many RPGs without levels, classes, powers and so on. There are even diceless RPGs. RPGs that do not have any focus on items and inventory. Saying that games like Amber, Vampire The Masquerade, Legend of The Five Rings, Basic, Gurps or Call of Ctuluh are not RPG because they do not duplicate the D&D formula, is bull**** honestly.

D&D was created as an expansion of a war game named Chainmail. Over the years it has kept that focus on wargame features. Wich is good for D&D's sake but it's not the only way to roleplay. RPGs have evolved so much during the last 30 years. Fortunately there are different styles of roleplay for different players. I don't know what's the best definition of RPGs. Even Arneson and Gygax (the creators of D&D) has different opinion about that.

Talking about DA2, there is no way to say that the game won't be an RPG because it has/misses feature x or y. Personally I would only like to understand what kind of game will be in terms of gameplay, because while I'm pretty confident about BW storytelling skill (that has improved so much over the years and that get better and better) I really do not understand how the game will look like in terms of gameplay.

As I said, you can label those games "RPG"s all you want, but unless they have the core traits of D&D they aren't RPGs are defined by the game genre, they're action/adventure.

Even ME2 was more shooter/action/adventure with some RPG tacked on somewhere along the line. People seem to think "Oh it has a story it MUST be an RPG because it has a story!!" what kind of bull**** logic is that eh? Halo has a story yet last time I checked it's nothing like an RPG.

[Xena_Shepard]

TMZuk wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

Xena_Shepard wrote...

SirOccam wrote...

filetemo wrote...

In Exile wrote...


I don't play PnP. I happen to think it's stupid. But it was presented in this thread as an acceptable definition of an RPG by many, so I took it that way.

WHAT???????
it's not an acceptable definition, it's the only definition possible. Anything out of the mechanics of a pnp rpg is not an rpg

I think we've finally arrived at the core problem here.

filetemo is correct you know, as I explained in a way earlier post, you can stick "RPG" by the WORD definition onto just about ANY game in existence, but if the game doesn't follow the D&D standard, it doesn't fit into the ACTUAL use of the genre word "RPG" no matter what anybody else says, if it doesn't fit into the traditional RPG mold it isn't an RPG.

It's just like how people think America is a "demoracy" when infact we are a "democratic republic" just because you label something someway doesn't make it so, which means no matter how much you wanna scream that a game is an RPG if it just lets you take the reigns of someone important, it's not an RPG if it doesn't fit into the D&D standard of game mechanics.

So should all cars function exactly like the first car did? So automatics aren't "real" cars?
Is a clock not a "real" clock if it's digital instead of analog?
How do you account for variations in things like, say, hammers? Are ball peen hammers, claw hammers, sledgehammers, etc. all real hammers? Can't there be only one "true" type, by definition?

There's a clear definition to a hammer. A hammer can be a clawhammer, a sledgehammer etc, etc. They all have something in common that makes them hammers. An axe, however, isn't a hammer. A crowbar isn't a hammer.

There's a clear definition to what a car is. It can be a racecar, a lorry, a 4WD, and many other things. But a motorcycle isn't a car.

A RPG is a defined concept as well, and one Bioware seems to be leaving behind. It's about creating and assuming a personae that isn't you, and guide this creation through a number of events, where you have to choose what direction to take, if any. In order to make these choises, you have to be able to interact on multiple levels, not just be able to kill everything present. While interacting, no matter how you do it, the choises are your own, but the skills of the character should determine wether you succeed or fail, not the skill of the player.

cRPG's are limited in that sense, because you can only program so many choises and options. However, while the hardware and the programming tools gets better and better, it would seem that Bioware is insisting on creating streamlined action-adventures, where you are rail-roaded along. You meet fascinating characters, and time and time again you are in to your knees in gore, but the actual choises you have, are becoming ever more limited. It's a mad rollercoaster-ride, but like all roller-coaster rides, there can be no deviation.

ME2 had moved so far from the RPG definition, that it no longer could be called an RPG, IMO. I'm pretty certain that is where DA2 is headed as well.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[filetemo]

a FPS is a FPS, if the camera is on the characters ear, it's not a FPS, it's thirdpersonshooter with close to the ear camera.



the definition of an rpg is as monolythic as a fps. it is, or it is not, there's no grey zone.

[FedericoV]

TMZuk wrote...


cRPG's are limited in that sense, because you can only program so many choises and options. However, while the hardware and the programming tools gets better and better, it would seem that Bioware is insisting on creating streamlined action-adventures, where you are rail-roaded along. You meet fascinating characters, and time and time again you are in to your knees in gore, but the actual choises you have, are becoming ever more limited. It's a mad rollercoaster-ride, but like all roller-coaster rides, there can be no deviation.

ME2 had moved so far from the RPG definition, that it no longer could be called an RPG, IMO. I'm pretty certain that is where DA2 is headed as well.

Baldur's Gate has less choices and consequences than ME2. So BG was not an RPG?

[Clover Rider]

filetemo wrote...

a FPS is a FPS, if the camera is on the characters ear, it's not a FPS, it's thirdpersonshooter with close to the ear camera.

the definition of an rpg is as monolythic as a fps. it is, or it is not, there's no grey zone.

But what if a FPS had sex with an RPG and had a baby :innocent:.

[filetemo]

Some Geth wrote...

filetemo wrote...

a FPS is a FPS, if the camera is on the characters ear, it's not a FPS, it's thirdpersonshooter with close to the ear camera.

the definition of an rpg is as monolythic as a fps. it is, or it is not, there's no grey zone.

But what if a FPS had sex with an RPG and had a baby :innocent:.

the fps would steal the kid and bring it to fpsland and call it mass effect 2