174 réponses à ce sujet

[Sylvius the Mad]

Luc0s wrote...

I completely disagree. How many RPGs give you the opportunity to create your own story?

All of them.  That's what makes them RPGs.

BG does.  KotOR does.  NWN does.  DAO does.

Not many. Most RPGs have a pre-made story, sometimes with decisions that might slightly alter the story, but never anything major, with only a very few exceptions (The Witcher comes to mind).

And the very reason why I play RPGs is because they often have such good stories!

For the purposes of this discussion, I'm asking you to ignore your own knowledge of the stories in the games.

Ignoring that there's a pre-written story in any given game (because your character isn't aware of that), do you get to make choices about what your character does and why?  Bam, there you're written a story.  It's a story about your character and his decision-making process.

Sadly, ME doesn't allow this because the dialogue system routinely contradicts whatever reasoning you just constructed for your selection.

And I'm not just anti-ME, here.  DA2's dialogue wheel does exactly the same thing.

Those decisions could only influence the character's personality if the game allows you to influence his personality.

GAAAAHH!
 
That's not what I said.  I said the decisions would be influenced by his personality.

So, when you choose the very first thing you choose in a game (whatever it is, be it a dialogue option or a weapon selection or anything else), how do you do that if you don't know what the character's personality is?

This is an important question.  The answer will drive all of our future discussion.  Please go back and try again.

That's just your personal preference, your opinion. I don't mind cutscenes as long as they are done well and make sense, like in The Witcher or Mass Effect.

No, it isn't.  Cutscenes wherein the PC does things run the risk of the PC doing things that contradict your pervious choices for him.

When a "cutscene" in Fable 2 or 3 plays out, you can still control your character, or you can press the L2 trigger and experience the scene from a movie-like camera perspective. I personally think it's awesome that Fable 2 and 3 gives the player the choice how they want to experience the cutscene.

Those aren't cutscenes, because they aren't non-interactive.  Fable 2 and 3 don't have cutscenes, which I think is great.

My game-design teacher shares your opinion. He also says Ultima 4 and Ultima 7 are the best RPGs ever made.

I love your game design teacher.

I don't recall many mundane tasks in U4, aside from perhaps the need to buy food.  Or maybe you're thinkg of reagents.  I love U4's reagent system, because I enjoy resource management.  I enjoy strategic planning.  These new games favour tactical play over strategic play (DAO did that explicitly - the devs were quite open about that during development), so there's never any need to plan things in advance.

I miss it.

And this is where your logic fails. Your imagination does not make it so.

I don't know your sexuality, so right now I imagine that you're homosexual. Does that mean that you're homosexual now? I don't think so.

No, but it means that you can safely work with that assumption without any danger of being contradicted.

As long as the game never tells me that Udina isn't gay, then I can play the game as if he's gay and not have that gameplay experience disrupted.  From the point of view of my character, Udina is gay.  Perhaps in that character's reality Udina is gay.

You're presupposing that Udina's characteristics are static and pre-written, but that's not necessarily the case.  As long as Udina is possibly gay (we don't know for sure that he isn't), then I can safely act as if he is.

We know that some things are necessarily true, because we see those things explicitly portrayed on screen, and we know some things are necessarily untrue, because they're directly contradicted by the events we've seen on screen.  But literally everything else is possibly true.  It's straight modal logic.  Everything is possibly true if it is not necessarily not true.

And that's where the roleplaying happens.

So, we know that Geralt behaves in a particular way, and we know that some states of mind are not compatible with that behaviour.  But every state of mind that is compatible with his behaviour is possibly his state of mind.  We, the players, can choose among them.

All those hundreds of roleplaying decisions are completely superficial.
Heck, even in Mass Effect those 12 or so decisions are pretty superficial. They don't have much - or any consequences.

The consequences are complately irrelevant.  It's the decisions that matter.

In The Witcher, Geralt has a specific goal. During your quest you can make decisions based on what you think brings you closer to your goal. Though almost all decisions eventually lead you to your goal, the impact on the world is amazing. Minor decisions can really change the political balance in The Witcher and not only that, it also really changes which compagnions will follow you and it changes which quests are avaiable.

And you're saying Geralt literally doesn't care which option he chooses throughout the game, and moreover, that his total indifference is guaranteed by his behaviour?

I would need to see that to believe it.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 21 juillet 2011 - 06:06 .

[blothulfur]

Geralt plays it Bogart in a lot of scenes, hes laconic and sardonic but he can be outraged if you choose those options such as with an old cannibal in the swamp and he can be earnest and honest when pressed mostly when getting hammered with old mates. He plays the tough guy but he is also like in the books a somewhat deep thinker prone to over philosophising and when frustrated lashing out in anger, you can shape him somewhat through his actions and there is even a quest to regain his identity that is informed through his actions and the memories of old acquaintances.

He's not indifferent by any means and sometimes display a stupid morality that clashes with the world weary image he wishes to portray, well that's my take on the character anyway though by the end of my games he has changed somewhat because of the events around him.

Modifié par blothulfur, 21 juillet 2011 - 06:26 .

[sp0ck 06]

Luc0s wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

ME has more "substantive decisions" that radically alter the story and characters then any other game I can think of, with the possible exception of Deus Ex. Every loyalty mission in ME2 can end in at least different ways, usually drastically different, and this affects that character for the rest of the game.

Are you kidding me? So far 99% of all the choices you make in Mass Effect are completely superficial and don't alter the story at all!

Have you played both completeky Paragon and completely Renegade in Mass Effect? If so, then tell me, how different was the story of your Paragon playthrough compared to your Renegade playthrough?

I've just recently played a 100% Renegade Shepard for the first time and I was amazed how the story is still exactly the same as the story from my 100% Paragon Shepard. The only differences are really small superficial differences.
For if you're 100% Paragon you're told that aliens think positive about humans and if you're 100% Renegade you're told that aliens think negative about aliens.

Well that depends on what you mean by "story."  Do your decisions drastically change the plot, or the ending? No.

But I consider the "story" to encompass what happens during the game.  Who am I talking to?  How do the conversations play out?  Is Tali exiled or cleared?  Does Jacob kill his father or leave him?  Does Mordin kill his student?  Who does Shepard get involved with romantically?  How does Shepard treat people, and what is motivating him?

I work in film/television, and generally when we write a treatment for a show or film, an overall storyline is established.  Numerous scripts are then generated that, while still clinging to the same plot, differ in terms of content (mostly dialogue).  That's how I look at different playthroughs of ME.  It's not just about the end, it's about the means to which you arrive at that end, and that can be very different even for two Paragon Shepards.

[sp0ck 06]

Sylvius the Mad wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

I completely disagree. How many RPGs give you the opportunity to create your own story?

All of them.  That's what makes them RPGs.

BG does.  KotOR does.  NWN does.  DAO does.

What are you talking about?  THe story of BG or KotOR is always the same, with a few choices through and a couple ending possibilities that don't even take into account any choices you made earlier in the game.  You create a unique character, but s/he is playing through the same story.

[sp0ck 06]

Luc0s wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

That's how I look at different playthroughs of ME.  It's not just about the end, it's about the means to which you arrive at that end, and that can be very different even for two Paragon Shepards.

Sure, it's not just about the end but about the journey, I get that. But even the journey stays exactly the same in Mass Effect, no matter which choices you make.

For example, when you kill the rachni queen, you just get some bullcrap from the council and after that you just go on like nothing happened.

When you save the rachni queen, it's the same story. You get some BS from the council and after that you continue as if nothing happened.

I won't argue the games couldn't have done a better job of giving the player more feedback to previous "big choices," like saving the rachni, or the Council.  But I'm talking more about the "meat" of the game, not outcomes.  Let me use Tali's trial as an example.  No matter what the outcome, it doesn't drastically affect the game (besides Tali having an extra ability or not).  No mention is made of it, except in later conversations with Tali.  It doesn't affect the overall plot (up to the end of ME2).  But depending on what choices the player makes, it creates a completely different scene.  That, to me, is a substantive decisions because it changes what happens in that moment.

Imagine if you watched a movie.  Then you watched the same movie, and in one of the scenes, the characters are saying completely different lines, resulting in a different closure to a minor story arc.  The scene being different might not change the ending of the movie, but wouldn't you still say it was different?  Take that and apply it to every scene and you might have quite a different movie.  Same plot, same physical characters, but different individual scenes.

That is the beauty of Mass Effect for me.  I agree they should have had way more reference to decisions made in ME1, but it's still an impressive piece of interactive entertainment.  You have compete control of the story (not the plot).  You decide which scene happens when, and how they play out (to a certain extent).  You have direct control of the main character, both in actions and personality.  So I'd say ME is chock-full of substantive decisions.

[MightySword]

In light of all the so called "hard-core" RPG definition in this thread, I hereby declare The Sims 3 as the ultimate RPG ever made. Any contest?

[sp0ck 06]

MightySword wrote...

In light of all the so called "hard-core" RPG definition in this thread, I hereby declare The Sims 3 as the ultimate RPG ever made. Any contest?

Haha, this was debated in the old thread.  I would say Sims is a "god game" in that its more about creating a world and watching little people play around it in, rather than having a defined character and playing through a story.  It does have many RPG elements in it.

[MightySword]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

MightySword wrote...

In light of all the so called "hard-core" RPG definition in this thread, I hereby declare The Sims 3 as the ultimate RPG ever made. Any contest?

Haha, this was debated in the old thread.  I would say Sims is a "god game" in that its more about creating a world and watching little people play around it in, rather than having a defined character and playing through a story.  It does have many RPG elements in it.

What I'm trying to say is that, for those "hard-core" who are by teeth and nails want to dictate what an RPG is word for word, than naturally The Sims 3 fit their bill, word for word if they're stuck up only on the definition.

Modifié par MightySword, 21 juillet 2011 - 09:40 .

[Sylvius the Mad]

[quote]Luc0s wrote...

All the relevant plot-points are always exactly the same, regardless of your decisions.[/quote]
Which plot points are relevant is determined by you.  The order in which they occur is determined by you.  Which plot points even occur is determined by you.  And most importantly, WHY your character does those things is determined by you.

I don't have to write the story from scratch to be the author of teh story.  If that were true, then I'd actually need to invent a new language each time I did it so as not to be assembling a story from other people's building blocks.  As Carl Sagan says, "if you wish to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first invent the universe", because the universe has already done most of the work for you.  The universe has given you apples, flour, the concept of pie - you're just assembling the pieces.

The same is true of writing a story.  And you get to do that in an RPG.

As for GTA4, I never claimed that writing the story was a sufficient condition, only that it was a necessary condition.
[quote]According to your logical I write stories in every single game I play, because in every single game I make decisions, no matter how big or small. If I couldn't make decisions then I wouldn't be playing a game, I would be watching a movie.[/quote]
Some games, though, prevent you from making decisions in other ways, though.  A game that takes control of your character and makes him do things you don't want him to do, or has him say things that go against what you would have him say - those games punish you for trying to write your own story.

Yes, you get to make some decisions in Mass Effect, but then Mass Effect comes and tells you that you're wrong about why Shepard behaved as he did by constradicting your reasoning.  So then you're left with a PC you don't know at all, and you can't possibly make decisions for him.
[quote]Not necessarily. The Witcher for example is about getting the stolen secrets of the witchers back and Geralt's amnesia plays a side-role in it. Through the game Geralt gets his memory of his past back. Depending on your decisions some characters will help you find the stolen secrets back. However, these decisions do not make the story. These decisions only fill in some details that are irellevant to the story.[/quote]
Why?  Why are you defining some of the narrative as part of the story and other parts as not part of the story.
They're all part of the story, and some of them are assembled by you.  You can't just arbitrarily decide that some of them don't count.
[quote]Simple, you just pick what you as the player prefer. If the game is designed well, it shouldn't matter what you choose, because either you're creating your own character or you already have a pre-made character (such as Geralt von Rivia) but if the latter is the chase (like in The Witcher) you can assume that every decision is directed carefully by the game-designers so your decisions do not contradict the personality of Geralt.[/quote]
That doesn't make any sense.  You don't exist in the game world.  Your preferences can't have relevance.

We just can't discuss The Witcher in particular anymore, because I haven't played the game, and I simply don't believe you when you say that you can't impart specific details onto Geralt that the writers didn't include.

I would need to play the game to prove that to you, though.
[quote]Only if the designers suck. Good game-designers make sure cutscenes do not contradict your decisions, and the other way around (decisions should not contradict cutscenes either).[/quote]
Then I have yet to see a cutscene made by a good game designer.  If the PC even walks to a different location in the room, that could potentially contradict my decisions.  Certainly if my characters says anything at all then that could contradict my decisions.
[quote]For example, none of the cutscenes in DA:O contradicted any of my warden characters. That's because BioWare does not suck and know how to orchestrate their games so that they always make sense no matter how you play them (well, most of the time...).[/quote]
When Jory dies, the Warden looks aghast.  He has an expression of horror on his face.  That was wholly out of character for one of my Wardens.

Routinely in DAO, the Warden would walk to the centre of a room to have a conversation, and that conversation would lead to combat.  Being in the middle of a room at the start of combat will usually break my characters, because I don't tend to play kick-in-the-door type warrior characters.
[quote]With your logic, we could say that the entire game Heavy Rain doesn't have cutscenes at all even though it's an interactive movie from start to finish.

Fable 2 and 3 do have cutscenes, but the players have a bit of freedom in those cutscenes. So what?[/quote]
What, then, is your definition of the word "cutscene"?  you're clearly using the word in a way I don't understand.  please tell me how you're using the word, such that I can tell whether any game component I see is a cutscene by your definition.

A universally applicable standard of what is a cutscene and what is not.  My standard is that they're not interactive.  Non-interactive cutscenes are the thing I'm complaining about.  Those should basically never happen.

And I wouldn't really count the interrupts in ME2 anyway, because you don't know what they're going to do, so you can't reasonably be said to have any control over Shepard in those scenes.

Even with the interrupts, those events in ME2 are non-interactive.
[quote]Since you never told me that you aren't gay, I can continue this discussion as if you are gay and not have the discussion disrupted.
Okay, then I'm going to continue this discussion as if you are gay and not have the discussion disrupted.
From my point of view, you are gay. In my reality you are gay.

HEY PEOPLE, HAVE YOU ALL HEARD? SYLVIUS IS GAY! BET YOU GUYS DIDN'T KNOW THAT DID YA!?[/quote]
See?  There you're playing a character who thinks I'm gay, and apparently wants to out me.  The character you're playing is kind of a dick.

If Udina is gay, and Shepard is aware that he's gay, that could well affect how Shepard interprets events surrounding Udina.  The same is true if we assume that Udina is straight (as people tend to do - I think both assumptions are unreasonable).
[quote]Possibly true =/= true[/quote]
Correct.  Possibly true does mean, however, that I can act as if something is true and then have the game not contradict me.

For example, do you know that Kaidan struggles with a gambling addiction?  Do you know that he doesn't have a gambling addiction?  If the answer to both of those questions is no, then you can simply assign truth values to the state of Kaidan's possible gambling addiction as you see fit.
[quote]Possibilities don't mean jack sh*t if you have not at least a bit of evidence one way or the other. There is no evidence that Udina is gay, but there is also no evidence that he is straight. So that means his sexuality doesn't matter and you can assume whatever the heck you want, it doesn't change anything.[/quote]
It changes Shepard's perception of him.  And Shepard's perception is the core of the game.  If Shepard is making decisions, he does so based on his awareness of what's going on around him.  So what's going on around him?  You need to fill in those gaps yourself if he's to have anything like a coherent view of the world.
[quote]Oh right, so when I decide in FF7 to buy 'sword X' with Cloud instead of 'sword Y', I'm roleplaying? I mean the consequences are completely irrelevant, it's the decision that matters right? [/quote]
If that decision is important to Cloud, then yes.

Unfortunately, FF7 is one of those games that forces specific behaviour on Cloud with no warning, so there's too great a risk that your assertion of preference would later be contradicted.
[quote]Geralt sometimes cares. He does show emotions, but only when the directors and story-writers decide he should care or show emotions. It's all scripted and it's all based on his pre-made personality. It's all carefully orchestrated and directed in such a way that it fits the Geralt that the developers and writes made.[/quote]
Then it's not an RPG.

Now, I suspect it is an RPG, and you've just misidentified its features.

[Sylvius the Mad]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

What are you talking about?  THe story of BG or KotOR is always the same, with a few choices through and a couple ending possibilities that don't even take into account any choices you made earlier in the game.  You create a unique character, but s/he is playing through the same story.

Completely false.

Right at the start of BG, you're ambushed and Gorion is killed.  What do you do next?  How do you feel?  Every time you answer those questions differently, you get a different story.

KotOR's even better, because the PC's background (from his perspective) isn't established.  Why is he on the Endar Spire?  What was he doing before that?  What are his immediate objectives?  Again, every time you answer those questions differently, you get a different story.

Modifié par Sylvius the Mad, 21 juillet 2011 - 09:56 .

[the_one_54321]

MightySword wrote...

sp0ck 06 wrote...

MightySword wrote...
In light of all the so called "hard-core" RPG definition in this thread, I hereby declare The Sims 3 as the ultimate RPG ever made. Any contest?

Haha, this was debated in the old thread.  I would say Sims is a "god game" in that its more about creating a world and watching little people play around it in, rather than having a defined character and playing through a story.  It does have many RPG elements in it.

What I'm trying to say is that, for those "hard-core" who are by teeth and nails want to dictate what an RPG is word for word, than naturally The Sims 3 fit their bill, word for word if they're stuck up only on the definition.

The role you play in The Sims is a limited god figure because you are able to alter the environment of hte setting. So, though you might otherwise be able to play the roles of the characters in the setting, the setting itself is disjointed by your alterations. Otherwise,  yes The Sims does play exactly like a poorly made RPG.

The difference here is that the label RPG has nothing to do with whether or not the game is well made or fun.

[Gatt9]

sp0ck 06 wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...


What does it take to make a good RPG?  Character based skill,  character progression through both leveling and loot,  well designed setting,  gameplay to fit the intended pacing (Meaning RTS,  RTwP,  TB),  good story,  and ultimately the ability to carve your own path through the story,  the list is in order of importance for me.

@The_One,  ty for linking me!

According to the order of importance in your list, World of Warcraft would be considered a stellar RPG.  It has a great setting, everything is stat based, enormous amount of loot, the whole game is about progression, and you can do whatever you want.

Mmmm...Wow is a good template for an RPG,  but it breaks on the necessary timesinks and limitations of trying to implement a MMO.  Meaning that it's designed to be a treadmill.

Would it pass my "Translate to PnP" test?  Sure would.  But would the resulting system be compelling as a game?  Likely not,  as the system itself is very oriented to forcing you to grind rather than progressing you through compelling story/pacing.  It hits the first couple points,  but starts falling apart on the backend for me.

Personally, while I find WoW a fun and addictive game, I would not consider it to be a great RPG.  I mean, why does every RPG have to be able to fit into a PnP system?  Any game you play is ultimately going to be about you, seeing as without the player, there is no character, there is no game.  To me, ME2, while obviously not a traditional RPG, is still a system under which role-playing occurs.  It's just a different kind of system.  It ditches the stat based character in favor of the cinematic based character.  Shepard is defined by the players choices, within the limits of the system.  You mentioned how you and your friend both played 100% Paragon Shepard's and everything turned out the same.  Well the plot may be the same, the locations...but if you choose different dialogue, different decisions in missions, that is a different Shepard.

It's not so much "Does it fit into a PnP system" as much as it is,  "Can it be translated to a PnP system".  There are levelless systems,  lootless systems,  low magic,  high magic,  sci-fi,  fantasy.  It doesn't have to be pigeonholeable,  the question is simply does this translate?

My issue with ME2 is simply that it disregards Roleplaying,  beyond even ditching character based development.  Under normal circumstances (Deus Ex,  System Shock 2) the case can be made for a levelless system of sorts.

ME2 is a problem,  it establishes "Rules" for it's Roleplaying,  and then disregards them completely.  It offers you "Choices" in dialogue,  but the outcomes are pretty much the same regardless of which you take.  It establishes the Paragon/Renegade system which should govern morality and affect outcomes in situations,  but then never uses it for anything more than conversation options.

It even waffles about on the romances,  you can sleep with tali,  talk to her after and get one line of acknowledgement,  then back to the "We'll be together soon!" dialogue,  then go and still have Jack's "Sleep with me" dialogue. 

ME2 just has major commitment issues,  it doesn't want to lock you into any commitments.

I had more,  but just got a sudden call to leave,  you bring up interesting points on the movies relation topic I hope to get back to later.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Gatt9 wrote...

Under normal circumstances (Deus Ex,  System Shock 2) the case can be made for a levelless system of sorts.

I think it's quite easy to make the argument that System Shock 2 is more of an RPG than ME2 is.

[MightySword]

the_one_54321 wrote...
The role you play in The Sims is a limited god figure because you are able to alter the environment of hte setting. So, though you might otherwise be able to play the roles of the characters in the setting, the setting itself is disjointed by your alterations.

But you can choose not to. For example when I play, I only control my sim and never control another sim. Even when I have a family, I always let wife/kids run on automate. And don't be suprise, there are a lot of Sim player going with this style of playing. 

Otherwise,  yes The Sims does play exactly like a poorly made RPG.

But going by the "hard-core" definition, it fits everything.

- Create your own character: more option than any other RPG>
- Create your own Biography: create a sim, then slap him/her with your hand written Biography.
- Be anything and do anything, and it's not a jest: frankly I don't buy into the argument "even if it does not advance or progress the game, it's still up to your choice". In the Sims 3 however, you truly do whatever you want to do, and bare decision that kill your sim, the game does progress, now that's what I call "real" option.
- Build character in anyway you want: a scientific genius or a street punk or a self-sim or anything in between, whatever role you play. Honestly combine all the other "proper" RPG together and the possibility is still probably only half in the Sims.
-100% control: while the NPC have their own will, nothing pertaining your character can happen without your concern. If your sim does anything, big or small, it is because you will it so.
- Stat Driven combat: oh yeah, this is why I specifically mentioned "Sims 3". You can fight with other Sims, you can even fight Mummies - you can even kill them, or get killed - and the outcome is totally depended on your stats (the althelic and martial art stat specifically)
- Story: create any type of story you want to exprience. Frankly, if you believe RPG should be the graphical presentation of a player imagination and desire, you can't ask for a better game.


So, what exactly make it "NOT" a RPG. It's like you try to make up a check list for what to be classified as a RPG, and than this game manage to pass all the check list, not only that they passed with flying color but you conclude it's not a RPG? I think this represents two possibilities:

+ The one who provided the check list doesn't know what they exactly want.

OR

+ It proves that trying to define RPG with a hard-definition is ultimately pointless. The Sims 3 provides every features that I see the hardcore RPGers crave for in what they call a true RPG, not only that it provides in great quantity and quality, so why it is not the ultimate RPG?

Modifié par MightySword, 21 juillet 2011 - 11:31 .

[MightySword]

Luc0s wrote...

@MightlySword:

The reason why The Sims fits the check-list yet isn't an RPG is because the checklist is wrong.

Oh I certainly agree. I just simply gather all the most "prominent" features that the I tend to see the "hardcore" people defend until that last breath (and willing tramble over such tittle as Witchers, Final Fantasy as none RPG for tha lack thereof). Let just says the check-list is a meal that cooked off their recipe, I just think it's funny when they can't eat it.:happy:

[MightySword]

Luc0s wrote...
Since when is this possible? I played The Sims and The Sims 2 and as soon as I didn't pay attention to one character the other family members didn't know how to take care of himself. One pissed his pants, the other was bored to death and the last guy managed to put the furniture on fire.

It's possible for The Sims 3 at least. I married the wife when she was a a young aldult (with about 41 days left in her lifespan). She lived a happy life till they day she died, and I never control her.

Anyway, the thing is, even if you control only 1 character, it still isn't YOU. With "you" I mean the player. You as the player are not the character you control. The character is an individual with his/her own personality and he/she is controlled by the A.I. You as the player are only a "god figure" that can tell these characters what to do, like your mom can tell you what to do.

First, the freewill thing doesn't exist for the Sim I dicrectly control, from the day he join the game world until the day he died, he never carries out a single action on his free-will. This is up to your interpretion, you say it's like my mom telling me to do thing, I say it's like I control my sim the way I would act. Don't unrestimate the RP mindset people have when it comes to the Sim, and I would be one who ranked pretty high on that scale

In The Sims, your characters have their own free will. THEY decide when they are hungry. THEY decide when they are sleepy. THEY decide when they are bored. THEY decide if they like the other sims characters or not. THEY decide what they like to do (granted, in The Sims 2 and 3 you can choose what kind of personality the character is at the beginning of the game).

No, the thing you describe is just the simulation part of the game. They get hungry just like I do, excuse me, I dont think I can control when I feel hungry in real life either. However, whether I eat or starve, find something to amuse myself or go straight into depression is my own choice. My character has the mood as part of the simulation aspect, however every action taken is controlled by me, if I want to role play as a jobless guy who are constant derpessed, I can and I will. No other RPG can ever come close to that.

So because YOU ARE NOT the characters in The Sims and you do NOT have
direct control over them, you are NOT roleplaying in The Sims

I have been playing the Sims for a good 8 years now, and my interpretation is always that I "AM" the Sim, and I DO directly control them. What you said is just an interpretation, not a basic. I provided reason above.

and so The
Sims is NOT an RPG.

Oh it's certainly not, as said above that list is actually a counter argument. However you're making the same mistake as the people who you trying to argue with. Trying to impose a hard-definition for a game base on a laundry list is as bad as dimiss one base on the same laundry list

[MightySword]

3. Again, I don't think absolute freedom is a MUST for a game to be an RPG. Any RPG has SOME freedom but it's insane to believe that as soon as a bit of freedom is taken away from the player, all of the sudden the game is not an RPG anymore. That's BS. Anyway, the Sims does give you a lot of freedom, though all the decisions you make are not roleplay-decisions. In the Sims, you make decisions as some sort of "god", not as the character themselves. Not really. Besides, all the characters have their own free will. So in my opinion: FAILED

Oh I agree. First to me there are 2 form of RPG, one that you see yourself as the character and act according to your personality. For example playing BG2 or Mass Effect, I played my PC or Shepard exactly how I would act if I was in the same situation. I was never set out to play a Paragon or a Renegade, good or evil. My Shepard usually are nice to people, but he had never fail to punch the reporter or ask his supportdinate to get in line. The other type is that when I role play a certain archetype to my imgination. Witcher is a good fit. For example, I personally hate womanizer and I look down on them with extreme prejudice. When I play the Witcher though, I hit on most every women given the opportunity because I know his personality is that of a womanizer, I don't role play my personality, I role play an archetype. They are both RP, and games fit into one or another. The sims just happen to be able to do both.

The second, well this goes back to another discuss with Silver (which frankly, I'm disagree with 99.9% of what he has to say). He claimed the reason why Western RPG is RPG while JRPG is not because in JRPG he doesn't have total control over the flow. When I asked what made it different from a WRPG since in both, he said in WRPG you can choose to advance the story as your own choice, and I called BS on that. Because simply to me, a choice between "progress the story" and "don't progress the story" is not a choice. Calling it one is just to fancy your own idea.

5. In my opinion it doesn't matter how much you control your character, it matters from what perspective you control your character. If the game places you in the perspective of the character, it's possibly the game is an RPG. With that I mean that if you experience the story from the character's point of view, you might deal with an RPG. If the game does not place you in the perspective of the character, it's not an RPG.
The Sims clearly fails in this. You do not play from the perspective of the character, you play as a "god figure". Also, the sims characters have their own free will if you do not control them and they DO make decisions on their own. So: FAILED

Already explained above.

6. Stat driven combat is indeed a huge part of the RPG genre. Without it, the game is possibly not an RPG. Now, in the Sims you can hardly speak of any combat at all. Besides, you have nothing to lose. Sure, your character could die, but if that happens, the game just goes on without the character. Anyway, I'm undecided about this, so: UNDECIDED

It doesn't. At least if you're the type of controlling one sim and RP it, since that effectively a Game Over. Also losing to a mummy and die is not as simple as that. You got a curse that you have to dispell, which is a quest that cost time and money, the adventure time is limited, so that cost you something.

7. Story. Yes, story is absolutely crucial to an RPG. An RPG is in my opinion all about experiencing a story. You play a character and as they character you experience an epic adventure. That's what makes an RPG.
The Sims does not have this. You can make up your own stories in your head, but the game itself does not provide you with a story or an adventure. So: FAILED

Not quite .... Can I assume you haven't played The Sims 3? It has a lot of enhancement on this issue. First, the life time reward can be considered a goal, or the main quest for your Sim. It's like an RPG with a single quest for the entire game, with unlimited way to achive.

There are also many side quests (the opportunity system) that offer specific goal for you sim to do, complete them will earn your reward and EXP (i.e skill point). The adventure expack set your Sim on a series of quest, solving mystery, collecting loot, fight mummy all with approriate reward. The Generation expact add a memory system (although badly done) to give your own narrative a bit flavor.


So really, going by a laundry list like I said, The Sims 3 fit the bill quite nicely, it's just a sand box RPG kinda like WoW. And yes, it is not a RPG, which in turn prove that going by a absolute list of feature is pointless.

Edit: and just so that we're absolutely clear. That was not my checklist, rather a compilation of what people in and out this discussion call on. The only reason I put it together - in case you haven't realize - is not to defend it, but to prove how insignifcant it actually is.

Modifié par MightySword, 22 juillet 2011 - 01:24 .