3223 réponses à ce sujet

[InvincibleHero]

Ihatebadgames wrote...

So it boils down to DOOM + story is the future of RPGs.Simple combat,no stats.Streamlined.

Are you seriously suggesting all RPGs will have shooter combat? Most of them will continue to be character driven story progression with RPG elements with melee and magic as well as ranged combat in a medieval or steam punk setting as far as western RPGs are concerned.

Does adding uneccessary filler make a game better? Streamlining isn't always bad. There were hundreds maybe thousands of choice options in ME2. They didn;t abandon role playing. They left out lots of gear and XP per kill and some RPG elements that don't have to be present to facilitate RP.

The rules system or the stats don't matter at all. I don't know why people seriously believe that when every RPG system is different :different stats, different classes, different skills, units of money,  setting, and whatnot. Yet they are all RPGs hmmm. Obviously it isn't the rules that make it RP.

To be silly I can design an RPG system with balloons as PCs with str and all that. They can't talk or do anything but inflate and deflate float around and pop other ballon creature with pins. Loot is different colored strings and eye , mouth, and nose decals. it has stats, it has inventory and loot, and creatable and customizable PCs.  Is that an RPG? It has everything many (Gatt9 for one) claim an RPG must. It just isn't.

[the_one_54321]

InvincibleHero wrote...
It just isn't.

Because you decided?
Here's the thing: if I wanted to, I could play that balloon game and imgine characters and whatever else I wanted. Yes, that could be complete role playing. It just wouldn't be fun because the setting is so weird.

InvincibleHero wrote...
I don't know why people seriously believe that when every RPG system is different :different stats, different classes, different skills, units of money, setting, and whatnot. Yet they are all RPGs hmmm. Obviously it isn't the rules that make it RP.

Because the individual details of the rules don't alter the definition so long as they still function to prevent your own abilities from superseding the character's abilities. On the flip side, what you have claimed is equivalent that story and narrative cannot be the defining feature because every RPG has a different kind of story and different kinds of characters.

You say you role play by play acting.
I say I role play by managing stats.
They are equivalent.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 19 juillet 2011 - 05:33 .

[InvincibleHero]

the_one_54321 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...
It just isn't.

Because you decided?
Here's the thing: if I wanted to, I could play that balloon game and imgine characters and whatever else I wanted. Yes, that could be complete role playing. It just wouldn't be fun because the setting is so weird.

If you don't believe in the creators of D&D that birthed RPGs then I can't help you. It is true people think the ruleset/stats= rpg. It is wrong.

You could role play in your head, but the game I created would not be an RPG. They cannot talk so there is no personality whatsoever. You cnanot determine their actions but a small sub-set that i determined they could do. I suppose you could only break pink characters or lion-shaped balloons but that says nothing. It is just like people can role play with Mario or pac-man and create fan fiction. That is separate from what is provided and does not make the source an RPG.

[the_one_54321]

InvincibleHero wrote...
If you don't believe in the creators of D&D that birthed RPGs then I can't help you. It is true people think the ruleset/stats= rpg. It is wrong.

Are you serious?
Do you know how they first came up with the idea for D&D? It was a stratagy game. The whole point of the game was tactical numberically based combat. They played it much like Warhammer works, except that this was befor then. It was a game called Chain Mail. And then they decided to play just one individual character instead of an army of groups of soldiers. So they developed one character and changed the focus of the game just slightly and that's where RPGs were born. Still very much combat oriented, numerically based games, but now with character development.

[InvincibleHero]

@the_one

I can have the same paladin in different settings and stories ie static personality. I can use a personality I created for another character and apply it in a new setting. I can choose actions in any game and I can set personality in any setting. If a game is RPG then it allows that.

If it was just the ruleset and stats then every game is an RPG. It is much too inclusive. you manage stats in every game. In a flight simulator you have speed fuel amount PSI and other things so that must be an RPG. In Gears of War much derided by your set you have some type of health rating and weapons with various levels of damage and you manage that so it must be an RPG. Any game with money/resources in it is an RPG becuase accumlating it, managing it, and spending it is critcal so Star Craft is now an RPG. Get the picture?

An RPG has to be defined so that it is unique or it doesn't need to exoist as a genre.

[InvincibleHero]

the_one_54321 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...
If you don't believe in the creators of D&D that birthed RPGs then I can't help you. It is true people think the ruleset/stats= rpg. It is wrong.

Are you serious?
Do you know how they first came up with the idea for D&D? It was a stratagy game. The whole point of the game was tactical numberically based combat. They played it much like Warhammer works, except that this was befor then. It was a game called Chain Mail. And then they decided to play just one individual character instead of an army of groups of soldiers. So they developed one character and changed the focus of the game just slightly and that's where RPGs were born. Still very much combat oriented, numerically based games, but now with character development.

The ruleset was a wargame called Chainmail mid 70s. You used minitaures on a board. Role playing was introduced with D&D. I played first edition A D&D and original basic rules D&D back in the early 80s. I know my stuff. Your character now exists on paper and you determine actions with a storyline to follow instead of recreate battles to fight.

[AlanC9]

InvincibleHero wrote...

@the_one

I can have the same paladin in different settings and stories ie static personality. I can use a personality I created for another character and apply it in a new setting. I can choose actions in any game and I can set personality in any setting. If a game is RPG then it allows that.

If it was just the ruleset and stats then every game is an RPG. It is much too inclusive. you manage stats in every game. In a flight simulator you have speed fuel amount PSI and other things so that must be an RPG. In Gears of War much derided by your set you have some type of health rating and weapons with various levels of damage and you manage that so it must be an RPG. Any game with money/resources in it is an RPG becuase accumlating it, managing it, and spending it is critcal so Star Craft is now an RPG. Get the picture?

An RPG has to be defined so that it is unique or it doesn't need to exoist as a genre.

So if I read this right, you're saying that absolutely any computer game has to have stats or it couldn't be programmed, so stats can't be the essence of an RPG?

[InvincibleHero]

the_one_54321 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...
EA knows their genres

<-click me


Ok, but seriuosly, you are all aware that all forms of role playing games originall deliberately sought to completely mask your own abilities with those of the characters, right? Even LARPing does that in it's own way. In video games it's done with stats as a means of not having the player interact with the world independant of the characters abilities.

Sorry missed this one.

No. They gave you a framework to become someone else. You still did the RP on your own. it doesn't matter what abilities my PC has that is just the rule set and what he can accomplish with it. The roleplaying is what I say to a merchant orhow I treat thieves.

D&D is LARP without the constumes. Always has been.You say what he says and choose what actions you want to perform. Your PC is entirely what you want to make it.

Shepard can shoot and it doesn't matter if a stat controls it or I aim the gun. Same result. If it allows shooting of guns it doesn't matter how it is executed given the fact RPg rulesets can change. Abilities change depending on the system so it don't truly matter towards RP. You can easily enforcethat by only allowing actions if Shepard has the skills and indeed ME does. Only an adept shepard can use singularity or a vanguard charge. The how and whys don't matter. Some RPGs have fixed damage for a sword and str doesn't matter so why does it matter if you line them up and swing in Real time in Oblivion? It doesn't as it gets the same result.

[Drake_Hound]

Ihatebadgames wrote...

So it boils down to DOOM + story is the future of RPGs.Simple combat,no stats.Streamlined.

No then it falls under adventure section , everything falls under adventure section nowadays , cause almost everything has story or cinematics .

So that is already a huge postive change , sad news is offcourse deep stats skills like blades of arcania , arcanum ,megatravellers . etc is dying out .
Cause Complex Roleplay books or rules are slowly dying , everything is being streamlined back again .
Where in the past you had 10 stats , now they try to do with 5 if possible .
You see that in all RPG games , even the final fantasy serie are being scaled back .

Take for example Games and Workshop codex , 12 years ago we buy 100-200 pages codexes.
Now we are lucky if we have 75 pages .  but we pay more , the quality didn´t improve . neither did the volume or content .
So if you are saying make complex RPG system like the past , where we had limited graphics and other mechanics. everything has to be done by imagination and forgetting the flaws .
Nowadays it simply doesn´t work that way anymore .

Look achievements replaced the skills or talents . so basically in the past we chased those skill points increase.
The kids chase achievements , same principles , we would hack in air 1000 times to get 1 point , they grind something 1000 times to get a achievement .

For them roleplay is as long they still use there limited imagination , oh what if i can get that .
Just to them chasing a couple points of stats is no longer interesting , but they will go to hell for a achievement .
So to me ME2 was quite a shock that it still was roleplay , even if I have to agree the choices were severly limited.
But so far ME3 atleast deepens it with more choices and options .
That is basically the fundamental of RPG mechanics , the more choices of options , the more chances you can gimp or perfect your toon .  but for the youth who exploration of characters is no longer interesting .
They just get the perfect toon or build from the net .

Example most of us old bioware fans dislike DA2 cause of the limited options and configurations .
But give it to your kids in 5 year time , they say WOW DAD / MUM , this game is complex
Give them DA:O they will say man this stinks , way too much grind ... let me continue the story instead of grinding on my toon , for couple measy potions etc .

[InvincibleHero]

AlanC9 wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...

@the_one

I can have the same paladin in different settings and stories ie static personality. I can use a personality I created for another character and apply it in a new setting. I can choose actions in any game and I can set personality in any setting. If a game is RPG then it allows that.

If it was just the ruleset and stats then every game is an RPG. It is much too inclusive. you manage stats in every game. In a flight simulator you have speed fuel amount PSI and other things so that must be an RPG. In Gears of War much derided by your set you have some type of health rating and weapons with various levels of damage and you manage that so it must be an RPG. Any game with money/resources in it is an RPG becuase accumlating it, managing it, and spending it is critcal so Star Craft is now an RPG. Get the picture?

An RPG has to be defined so that it is unique or it doesn't need to exoist as a genre.

So if I read this right, you're saying that absolutely any computer game has to have stats or it couldn't be programmed, so stats can't be the essence of an RPG?

I was replying to his defintion of RPG. "You say you role play by play acting. I say I role play by managing stats.
They are equivalent. "

Managing stats makes any game with any form of stats an RPG in his def.

[AlanC9]

Drake_Hound wrote...
No then it falls under adventure section , everything falls under adventure section nowadays , cause almost everything has story or cinematics .

Is that how adventure games are defined these days? I always thought that you needed to have puzzle-based gameplay to make an "adventure game."

So that is already a huge postive change , sad news is offcourse deep stats skills like blades of arcania , arcanum ,megatravellers . etc is dying out .
Cause Complex Roleplay books or rules are slowly dying , everything is being streamlined back again .
Where in the past you had 10 stats , now they try to do with 5 if possible .

Same thing happened in board wargaming. Actually, I think there have been a couple of complexity waves, but the hobby never got back to the 1980 complexity peak. Complexity always competes with acccessibility.

That is basically the fundamental of RPG mechanics , the more choices of options , the more chances you can gimp or perfect your toon .  but for the youth who exploration of characters is no longer interesting .
They just get the perfect toon or build from the net .

That's not exploration of characters, it's exploration of the ruleset. Big difference.  And of course, someone has to work out those builds to put them on the net. We had some really awful DAO builds kicking around as late as three months after the game was released.

[Il Divo]

Gatt9 wrote...

Seriously.  Anyone.  Why should RPG's be the only genre to change,  and why must they change to become the other genres?

Because I'm *seriouly* not seeing the logic there that RPGs should become TPS's and Action-Adventure,  and how exactly just putting the acronym on some other genre is improvement.

It's not a matter of RPGs being the only genre which can change, although this does assume that there was a single agreed upon definition in the first place. You might as well be asking why the meaning of some words have changed, while others have remained the same. Why RPGs rather than other genres have changed isn't important. How the meaning of RPG has changed is.

For example, Bioware is regarded as one of the greatest RPG developers of our day. Every game they have created has been labeled RPG, from Baldur's Gate onward. Yet, every Bioware game has included elements which you refer to as 'adventure games' (story interaction, choices, dialogue, etc). But Bioware did not label this genre 'RPG/Adventure'. They called it an RPG, hence why those common features (also found in Bethesda/Obsidian games) are regarded as RPG elements. They also have a good basis in traditional role-playing.
 
You also run into problems because pen and paper has been played with so many different styles from very rules/combat heavy, to more narrative focused.

Modifié par Il Divo, 19 juillet 2011 - 06:34 .

[InvincibleHero]

Luc0s wrote...

InvincibleHero wrote...
No. They gave you a framework to become someone else. You still did the RP on your own. it doesn't matter what abilities my PC has that is just the rule set and what he can accomplish with it. The roleplaying is what I say to a merchant orhow I treat thieves.

D&D is LARP without the constumes. Always has been.You say what he says and choose what actions you want to perform. Your PC is entirely what you want to make it.

InvicibleHero, what is your take on JRPGs, especially Final Fantasy?

Some people here dare to say that JRPGs aren't RPGs because they don't let you alter the main character and they don't let you decide on his/her personality. For example, in FF7 you always play as Cloud Strife, a character created by Square, not by you.

Does that mean JRPGs are not RPGs? Some people think so, but I disagree, I find it rather silly to say JRPGs aren't RPGs, especially because the JRPG genre is pretty much the mother of all RPG genres. The JRPG style is really classic and stays really close to the fundamental elements of D&D and other pens-n-paper roleplaying-games.

So, what is your take on this? Why do you think a JRPG is or isn't a RPG video-game?

IMO they aren't when you have a linear story and all character personality is pre-determined and illustrated in cutscenes with no input from the player. If every story basically plays the same and the main character always say has the same girl without your choice then it can't be RPG. You have to have some determination over the character and story beyond equiping them and deciding which actions to take in battle. I can't condemn them all since I've played very few. 

Having an entirely defined PC with no decisions on my part is a deal breaker. You are cloud and so is everyone else and the game plays the same for everyone. IMO I would class FF as not RPG. I have no problem with people considering it a sub-genre of RPGs though. The MMO could be different though. I never played it so have no informed opinion.

[the_one_54321]

A game like FFXIII is one linear path and a game like DAII is 10 interchangeable linear paths. And I don't mean that as an analogy. I mean it literally. PnP is literally the one and only place you can have fully dynamic story based role playing. The only thing that distinguishes a CRPG from any other genre of video game is that when you press a button, something awesome does not happen. It's the UI and interaction mechnaics that draw the line. I don't swing the sword. I don't point the gun or pull the trigger. I tell the character who or what he should slash or shoot and then he does it on his own, independent of my capabilities. That makes him a character role that is separate from my self. And, if the game so allows it, I develop and apply a personality to that character to make it more fun and interesting to play him. But even if I have only a single linear path instead of 10, I can still play him.

InvincibleHero wrote...
Managing stats makes any game with any form of stats an RPG in his def.

I am seriously shocked that you can say things like this and not see the irony in it. Having a story and character choices is something that you can tack on to any kind of game. Any.

What you're claiming is idnetical to what you are saying is untrue in what I'm claiming.

Modifié par the_one_54321, 19 juillet 2011 - 06:57 .

[AlanC9]

the_one_54321 wrote...
The only thing that distinguishes a CRPG from any other genre of video game is that when you press a button, something awesome does not happen. It's the UI and interaction mechnaics that draw the line. I don't swing the sword. I don't point the gun or pull the trigger. I tell the character who or what he should slash or shoot and then he does it on his own, independent of my capabilities.

That would also describe tactical-level wargames.

Edit: but if someone wants to call X-COM an RPG, I wouldn't argue with him.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 juillet 2011 - 07:01 .

[the_one_54321]

AlanC9 wrote...

the_one_54321 wrote...
The only thing that distinguishes a CRPG from any other genre of video game is that when you press a button, something awesome does not happen. It's the UI and interaction mechnaics that draw the line. I don't swing the sword. I don't point the gun or pull the trigger. I tell the character who or what he should slash or shoot and then he does it on his own, independent of my capabilities.

That would also describe tactical-level wargames.

And considering the potential for creating narrative and allowing character creation or inclusion of strong pre-written characters, why not? Tatical level wargames are what gave birth to RPGs.

[AlanC9]

Hey, if you want to collapse those two genres into one, go for it.

[the_one_54321]

AlanC9 wrote...
Hey, if you want to collapse those two genres into one, go for it.

You still need some form of narrative. You and I have talked specifically about that in this very thread already.

[AlanC9]

So we have. But what counts as enough narrative? X-COM? Edit: and now we have two factors that define RPG. Just two, and an RPG is anything at the intersection?

Actually, the more I think about it, I'm not sure X-COM isn't an RPG. Characters, experience, loot,  progression, narrative -- it's more of an RPG than Wizardry 1, that's for sure.

Modifié par AlanC9, 19 juillet 2011 - 07:23 .

[Drake_Hound]

AlanC9 wrote...

That is basically the fundamental of RPG mechanics , the more choices of options , the more chances you can gimp or perfect your toon .  but for the youth who exploration of characters is no longer interesting .
They just get the perfect toon or build from the net .

That's not exploration of characters, it's exploration of the ruleset. Big difference.  And of course, someone has to work out those builds to put them on the net. We had some really awful DAO builds kicking around as late as three months after the game was released.

Part of RPG is character exploration , and even with awefull build you should continue .
You rolled a 12 18 12 10 10 10 , too bad make that toon and lets go RPG , well seems people dont play that way anymore , they just want the 6 times 16-18 rolls  .
But see you just hit the nail on the spot ,  why a lot of industry gives up on the complex builds , why waste time and effort.,If people just going to look on the net , instead of self character exploration .
So why bother coding so much work , and making it so complex , people wont use it ?

Modifié par Drake_Hound, 19 juillet 2011 - 07:11 .

[InvincibleHero]

the_one_54321 wrote...

A game like FFXIII is one linear path and a game like DAII is 10 interchangeable linear paths. And I don't mean that as an analogy. I mean it literally. PnP is literally the one and only place you can have fully dynamic story based role playing. The only thing that distinguishes a CRPG from any other genre of video game is that when you press a button, something awesome does not happen. It's the UI and interaction mechnaics that draw the line. I don't swing the sword. I don't point the gun or pull the trigger. I tell the character who or what he should slash or shoot and then he does it on his own, independent of my capabilities. That makes him a character role that is separate from my self. And, if the game so allows it, I develop and apply a personality to that character to make it more fun and interesting to play him. But even if I have only a single linear path instead of 10, I can still play him.

InvincibleHero wrote...
Managing stats makes any game with any form of stats an RPG in his def.

I am seriously shocked that you can say things like this and not see the irony in it. Having a story and character choices is something that you can tack on to any kind of game. Any.

What you're claiming is idnetical to what you are saying is untrue in what I'm claiming.

You are talking about something like wargaming with miniatures not true roleplaying. Just direct them in combat what is the point. I can play Star Craft for that I point my Zerg at some Marine and the computer does the rest. Again your defintion doesn't distinguish it from RTS games among other things. I am never going to be a zerg so I take on their role. Get it yet? I can also call it like the Show a baseball game I pick where I pitch and computer determines results. I am not Ubaldo Jiminez and he has lots of stats and certain pitches that make him different so I take on his role. So now a baseball sim is an RPG.

Yes you could and it would be an RPG if it satisfied the defintion no matter what the other gameplay components were. Gameplay mechanics are seperate. It is why ME can be a hybrid of RPG and shooter. You could add RP to any game and yes it makes it an RPG. Adding stats doesn't do it. You rolled the dice in D&D how is that different than lining up a shot in ME? Now let your DM make all your rolls then. It isn't the same experience. If you want player input in a game more is better. I think it is stupid that someone could miss with a shotgun at two feet in past RPGs like Fallout2. The mechanic doesn't hold up once TB games largely bit the dust. If they barely make sense in TB then in real time forget about it.