123 réponses à ce sujet

[Chromie]

Fortlowe wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

sympathy4saren wrote...

To me, an rpg is me having complete control over a fully customizable character, character attributes and possessions, and directly influencing a story and the world it takes place in.

Take out the fully customizable character bit, and I agree with this definition.

Same but, you can take out all the customizable options and leave the narrative and setting influence, and for me you have an RPG. So yes, I consider GTAIV to be an RPG.

Wow I bet Call of Duty is an rpg to some people. After all there is leveling up and you can customize....your loadout right?

[Bryy_Miller]

Can we please not get condescending? This is an interesting topic.

[Massadonious1]

Personally, I find character customization to be a huge part of the overall definition. People like Shepard and Hawke are a little too static, but there is still plenty of opportunities to make them your own. I miss non-combat skills in this regard, as it was easier for me to define my ME1 Shepard as someone who was good at opening doors/lockers, and public speaking, than as an actual marine or soldier with such minuscule and often unnoticeable increases while leveling up weapon skills.

In that same vein, I don't think being able to lug around a huge amount of crap in some magical or mystical backpack makes me very special, either. I understand the need for an economy in certain games, and armor plays a huge part in the whole character customization thing, but it can certainly be done better. I shouldn't feel the need to field strip every dead enemy I come across just so I can bring their used and torn goods to the local town vendor to sell for a few coppers. Leave that kind of tedium to MMO's, where they need those kinds of artificial timesinks to sustain their overall economy and to keep people playing. When I recommend something like a ME1 to a friend and advertise it as a "epic 40 hour experience", it should be a solid 40 hours of gameplay and story engagement, not 37 hours of a game with 3 of that sitting in a menu/vendor screen.

[Siansonea]

RPG = Abritrary classification that I don't care about. You can call a game a big fluffy bunny, and if I like the game, I'll buy it. But I like fluffy bunnies, so if BioWare wants to start calling their games fluffy bunnies out of deference to RPG connoisseurs, well, sign me up.

Modifié par Siansonea II, 05 août 2011 - 05:01 .

[The Woodcutter]

I'll just leave these here.

http://insomnia.ac/c...-playing_games/
http://insomnia.ac/c..._rpg_conundrum/

The short version:

Role-playing games are games in which players assume the roles of fictional characters and collaboratively create stories. Players determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the actions succeed or fail according to a system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, players can improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.

Modifié par The Woodcutter, 05 août 2011 - 05:44 .

[AngryFrozenWater]

I haven't found the perfect RPG yet. I am not even even sure what that perfect one is supposed to be like. What I like is customization of my PC (both visual and in stats), great loot, great (branching) story, great gameplay, exploration, and lots of eye candy. But some games lack in some of those areas and I still love them. Having fun with a game is what matters most, I guess.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 05 août 2011 - 05:51 .

[John Epler]

Ringo12 wrote...

Wow I bet Call of Duty is an rpg to some people. After all there is leveling up and you can customize....your loadout right?

Keep it civil, or stay out of the topic.

No need to be a prat.

[Mordechaisiz]

I know its a rpg when i buy a game and dont leave me house for atleast 3 days. My girlfriend proceeds to curse me out. I call it the new game ritual.

[Maugrim]

To quote Justice Stewart "I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced
within that shorthand description; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it."

 Alternatively it's also similar to a laughing place.

"Everybody's got a RPG definition' - trouble is most folks won't take the time to respect another. For what it is for one, mightn't be for another"

I could probably keep this up all night, but I'll stop before I really embarrass myself.

Modifié par makenzieshepard, 05 août 2011 - 07:44 .

[Xewaka]

My Legend of the Five Rings rulebook defines RPG as such: "An organized form of group make-believe, with a set of rules and procedures to keep it consistent and fair".
A computer RPG should strive to reproduce that experience with a single player (or several if multiplayer is available, as in Baldur's Gate).
Complete character sheets are also important.

[Sister Helen]

What makes an RPG?

Nice clothing options.

[nijnij]

I agree with every single phrase in the OP. I find most people's notion of "real RPG/classic RPG" extremely artificial. To me an RPG is what the name says : a role-playing game. I don't see how grinding and managing endless lists of items and stats improve role-playing. In my book, you could have an RPG even without leveling-up or without combat for that matter. A good role-playing game is a game in which you get to roleplay, meaning you have as much control as possible over your character's decisions and are immersed in the story. It made me laugh when RPG codex, which seem to be on some sort of quest to bash every RPG ever made (which is fine by me), released their "top 5 RPGs of the decade" list and it contained Diablo 2. Now I loved Diablo 2 for its combat, atmosphere etc., but as far as roleplaying is concerned, all I see is a very linear game with no story/character-focused decisions, so when the Codex say they defend classic RPG, I have a feeling that they defend the tradition for the sake of it rather than ask themselves what a good RPG is supposed to be.

Modifié par nijnij, 05 août 2011 - 01:39 .

[milena87]

For me is the ability to shape the character I'm playing, be that with stats (skill, race, class, abilities, equipment) and/or with choices (moral choices, LI, different paths, different factions).

[Mr Kazett]

Immersion.

[KenKenpachi]

I have two routes I consider to meet RPG to me at least.

Customization, or a well defined character. Eitehr throw me to Fallout and Origins, or give me Hawke or Cloud Striff with a role and a look to match.

Free roam, with a multi path story, or roadmap style play with a Great Story. Either way must have a story that amounts to more than GRAB YOUR GUNS THE RUSSIANS ARE COMMING. I need to know Why the Russians are coming, why it matters a **** to me?

Stats and stating, there MUST be some form of this. I'm not a fan of going overboard, like say in Morrowind. But I like to have more than say Mass Effect 2. Part of this is why I see Fable 3 as a more Action Adventure game and not an RPG. Also an HP bar, or number stat.

Some Greater evil to beat or task to do. I mean imagine a game where you wake up and the story is "GO TO WORK!" or "BUT OUT THE FIRE IN THE STOVE HERO OF TIME!" Though technically that also is story.

Companions of some sort, or at least NPC that will help you out give you things to do. It makes the game more "Alive" to me in that reguard.

Items, I must have things to find in out of the way areas or to take from the dead. Or at least a shop that sells something.

I can name many more little things, but its mostly the story and mechanics that matter to me. I don't care if it plays out like FF7, or Fallout New Vegas. I can play as "me" or I can play as the lone set in stone named hero. But the story and involvement must be there.

Modifié par KenKenpachi, 05 août 2011 - 02:45 .

[Gabriel S.]

It's uh... light anti-armor weapon, right?

[Gabriel S.]

scyphozoa wrote...

Progression mechanics do not an RPG make. I don't care for or like RPGs, yeah I said it.

I like story-driven games. I don't care about gameplay, I will just as soon play a story-driven game like Silent Hill or Metal Gear Solid, as I would play Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed or Fallout.

Keep your dice to yourself, I'm here for the story!

I have to agree with this, though I should say games like the STALKER series, Spellforce 2, Fallout 1 & 2 (eeaaand Tactics) are very compelling as well.

STALKER has been referred to as an FPS with RPG elements - cause of the inventory mostly - but that's enough to change your entire perspective on how that genre is played.

Spellforce 2 (never played the first) is kinda like an RPG/RTS hybrid WITH A VOICED PROTAGONIST, MALE or FEMALE, and you chose the lines of dialogue just like in Dragon Age Origins. Although, to be fair, I don't think there was a whole lot of choice in Shadow Wars, merely a 'poor' illusion of choice with a few exceptions far between. Still it's quite unique.

Fallout 1 & 2 were also unique; the story and the atmosphere were very attractive somehow, and even though I'm really NOT a fan of TBS, I stomached it for the sake of an otherwise great game.

In conclusion, I think the question is less about how you personally define an RPG and more about how you can fuse the best qualities of the RPG genre to other genres. I also think there's a limit to how far personal definitions can be taken, I mean there comes a point when *your* definition of an RPG is so far off from what has been established as a video gaming genre that it's something else completely - well, maybe not completely, but you get the point.

Mass Effect 2, for example, is not entirely an RPG. At best you could say that it's a 3PS with RPG elements, and I'm be happy with that.

And remember,

A game is a game,
A frame for frame.

And that rhyme is a crime,
...not worth a dime.

[AlanC9]

The Woodcutter wrote...

I'll just leave these here.

http://insomnia.ac/c...-playing_games/
http://insomnia.ac/c..._rpg_conundrum/

The short version:

Role-playing games are games in which players assume the roles of fictional characters and collaboratively create stories. Players determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the actions succeed or fail according to a system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, players can improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.

The part that stuck with me was:

So the point of RPGs was never the tedious stat-recording and incessant battles -- indeed, the more creative gamemasters quickly discovered that all the calculations and dice-rolling often got in the way of the story, and acted accordingly to minimize it.Yet from the very beginning of computer role-playing games (CRPGs) it was clear that the stat-recording and incessant battles were the only things that could possibly survive the transition to the electronic medium, and that nothing short of the invention of human-level artificial intelligence could change that.

IOW, CRPGs emphasize only the least important elements of real RPGs.

Not a huge fan of the articles, though. The premises are OK, but manyof the conclusions simply do not follow.

[MacCready]

scyphozoa wrote...

Progression mechanics do not an RPG make. I don't care for or like RPGs, yeah I said it.

I like story-driven games. I don't care about gameplay, I will just as soon play a story-driven game like Silent Hill or Metal Gear Solid, as I would play Mass Effect, Assassin's Creed or Fallout.

Keep your dice to yourself, I'm here for the story!

Exactly. This is the only reason I stuck with Dragon Age Origins, otherwise the gameplay can go f*ck itself!

[SirLysander]

I'm assuming this isn't meant. :innocent:

For a Role-Playing game, I define it as a game having problems and choices (reference this: ) rather than a linear progression with no real change in function or internal game directon.

Now, mechanics?  Pencil, paper, many-sided dice... or no dice at all. True ROLE playing allows for a myriad of choices, not all of them foreseen by the rules-creators.  What if you wanted to hare off to Kirkwall - in DA:Origins?  Or, "I'm sorry, Captain Anderson, I don't want to be a Specter."  Or introduce Justice to the Murder Knife the moment you met him, because it really was Justice made Anders give up Ser Pounce-a-lot?  Sounds good, but those options aren't there because the system can't handle that; that choice would break the game.Computerized RPGs are, at best, "limited Role" playing compared to other mechanics systems.  This isn't meant to be detrimental to the genre of computerized role-playing games, just a recognition of limitations. 

Modifié par SirLysander, 06 août 2011 - 01:06 .

[Get Magna Carter]

For video game RPGs I have ended up with 2 separate definitions

1) "Traditional" RPGs - character's abilities/chance of success, etc depends on character's skills developed according to player's strategy (even if the strategy is simply how much level grinding has been done) as opposed to non-RPGs which depend on on player's ability to manipulate the controls (and/or predefined character ability)
2) "True" RPGs - a significant aspect of the game is the player having direct control of the character while making "choices" (either selected or free-form) reflecting what they consider to be the personality of the character they are controlling. If the character ever does something unexpected by the player then the player is not controlling and thus not playing the role.

The problem with 2) is that it largely reflects the player's playstyle as opposed to the game design so the label for the game can only be applied to a game based on how much it facilitates or encourages the "role-playing" approach. The way of the samurai series definitely fits this definition.
Though still massive room to debate what is and is not - I could argue a case for Silent Hill 2 - based on how the endings represent the "choices" made by the player in the game accumulating to a decision between loyalty to Mary, the substitute Maria, or death

[RinpocheSchnozberry]

Character, gameplay, story. It doesn't need to be any more complex than that.

Mario Brothers? No story, just a premise. Not an RPG. Grand Theft Auto 2? Character, gameplay, story. RPG.

When people have the "what is an RPG" argument, what they are really arguing about is gameplay. The threads would be better titled "how do you like your story presented?" Spreadsheet based math battles that payoff in loot and carefully doled out lore reveals? Or dialogue heavy cut scenes where people curse and demand and rage and then slap each other in the external genitalia with battle axes?

That's why "what is an RPG" threads always end up in screaming matches. There is no answer, or rather, there are as many answers as there are gamers.

Ultimately, "RPGs" are already dead. This is pure win. Now development studios can get on with packing and selling great characters doing interesting things in fun stories.

[slimgrin]

Hit the deck. Schnoz just dropped the bomb...

[Dandynermite]

1) Being able to customize your gear, and your companions/party gear, if you have them. (Dragon Age 2 and Mass Effect 2 fail at first hurdle for being RPGs) If you cannot control what your people, wear, and what effects this will give them, it's not an RPG)
2) Having an inventory (An RPG NEEDS loot, therefore needs an inventory, CoD fails here, so does Fifa.)
3) Creating your own character, without one set path (Dead Space 2, you've now also failed)
4) Main Quests having alternate endings, such as Mass Effect and Origins have, kill somebody or let them live, and having consequences later. (This is the step where games such as WoW, Runescape, etc fail)
5) In-depth characters, being able to talk to, learn about, and get to know other characters (Fallout 3, Fallout: New Vegas and Oblivion all fail here, characters not in-depth enough)
6) Alternate endings, choices reflecting end-game etc
7) Talents, spells etc
8) Levelling up (or ranking up) and unlocking new stuff as you do

Out of the games I've played, the only two that pass all these are:
The original Mass Effect
Dragon Age: Origins