RPGs

[Helmsman]

Okay, first time forum poster here, having not read any of the FAQ or rules I'll try to be as concise and polite as possible.

As a amateur designer of and having played pen and paper RPG's for over a decade I have to say that yes, your friend is correct in that GTA and Assassin's Creed ARE in-fact RPG's. They are Sandbox RPG's based in a fairly close to reality setting and shining examples of such. RPG is short for Role Playing Game, and as such any game where you play the role of a character be it human, alien, robot, or even an animal or diety and interact with the world around that character is an RPG. The lines blur because an RPG game could be based around a modern FPS platform, an over-the-top turn based strategy platform, or even a game where you play a god ordering one's minions about. There are lesser and greater degrees of these variables of course - the case of Black and White being an RPG is pretty flimsy after all - but the definition of Role-Playing a character is all that's needed.

 

[DJKyRo]

Okay, first time forum poster here, having not read any of the FAQ or rules I'll try to be as concise and polite as possible.

As a amateur designer of and having played pen and paper RPG's for over a decade I have to say that yes, your friend is correct in that GTA and Assassin's Creed ARE in-fact RPG's. They are Sandbox RPG's based in a fairly close to reality setting and shining examples of such. RPG is short for Role Playing Game, and as such any game where you play the role of a character be it human, alien, robot, or even an animal or diety and interact with the world around that character is an RPG. The lines blur because an RPG game could be based around a modern FPS platform, an over-the-top turn based strategy platform, or even a game where you play a god ordering one's minions about. There are lesser and greater degrees of these variables of course - the case of Black and White being an RPG is pretty flimsy after all - but the definition of Role-Playing a character is all that's needed.

My thoughts precisely, let me weave my tapestry...

I suppose just breaking it down works the best: Role Playing Game. A Game where you're playing as another individual in a fictitious scenario. If you break it down like that, then it's pretty easy to realize that a great, great deal of games are RPGs, so maybe saying GTA and Assassin's Creed are RPGs isn't too off a guess, despite my initial reaction (that being laughing out loud.).

It seems that the common misconception of RPGs is that they're the same as stat-builders; I think this is due to the fact that the two go hand-in-hand. I won't lie, I've yet to play GTA IV, but GTA SA did incorporate the stat-building element, although it was primarily a sandbox-shooter; the gauges with musculature, fat, various weapons skills, etc. But I digress.

RPGs have been attributed today with level-builders; Final Fantasy is a big part of this, being such a successful franchise. But what I would tell your friend is that a) he needs to get a life and b) that maybe he's a bit right, but have him check out some stat-builders.

 

[GenHellspawn]

Mages and priests and warriors usually but if it is futuristic stuff like engineers and stuff. Bacially games with classes in.

Like Battlefield and Team Fortress, those are great examples of RPG's.

I hate it when a game is considered an RPG just because you level up and gain items and use classes. Call of Duty 4 has all of these elements, and nobody in the right mind would call that an RPG, would they?

Okay then you define RPG.

Edit: COD 4 has levels? and classes? Also seeing as I am feeling like a dickhead of course games with CLASSES ROLES IN ARE FUCKING RPGs!!!!

Would you call Diablo an RPG, because it has those basic elements? Classes and levels are just gameplay mechanics, and don't have anything to do with the genre. STALKER didn't have levels (as far as I'm aware of), or classes, or levels, and it's a great example of an RPG. An RPG is something that makes you feel connected to the character that you are playing and the world that you are playing in. The chief objective of an RPG is immersion, and if it can't do that, then it's probably not an (or just a bad) RPG.

PS: Fallout does not have classes.

 

[MisterStaypuft]

we're having this deep discussion about "what an rpg is" and I think that's actually the wrong question. Perception is reality on this issue, so I feel like the question that needs answering for the original post is this:

If you ask me what I'm playing, and I say "an RPG," what assumptions are you going to make about what I'm playing?

I propose that you're going to assume that I'm playing a stats-based dungeon crawler (even if the "dungeon" is a spaceship or whatever)

 

[Silver]

Are you saying your definition is correct? Then what about World of Darkness, Bloodlines, Deus ex, Fallout? No classes whatsoever in any of them, and some of the most generally accepted RPG's out there. (Well, the first one rather obviously since it's an RPG system, and not a computer game)

Like to see your definition, yes maybe I could of thought mine out a little more but at least I gave one.

I've never said anything about single or multiplayer. There are NO classes in Fallout, really. Explain that statement.

As I've said, I can't define RPG's. I can give some general guidelines, which I have, but I can't fully define it. "Giving" a definition that is incorrect, or not well thought out would be detrimental to the subject, just like sharing false information. Since I can't, I won't define it, the result would be inaccurate. I can try, sure, but that's all.


And no, what an RPG is doesn't depend on one's definitions. WoW can be an RPG, but the mechanics themselves aren't enough, especially not in a static world. Dungeons and Dragons is very suited for being used as an RPG, but can be used for other things, strategy, war-simulations, whatever. Mechanics never define an RPG, that's NOT my opinion, it's fact.

An RPG game is an RPG because of the role a character is given, the choices that character can make, and the world they interact with. Planescape is an RPG not because of the stats you have, the levels you gain and the experience you acquire, but because you interact with different characters, because you choose your actions, and you play the nameless one.

In contrast, WoW is NOT an RPG because of the same things. You don't play a character, you play a collection of stats. The world doesn't interact with your character, they interact with you as a player and your characters stats. The characters in the world are completely indifferent to you, and your presence never has any effect, on anything.

There are many games that are blurring the lines, and many different ways to view choice, interactivity and character, so it's very hard to narrow down further than that.

WoW, (and any other game with multiplayer capabilities) however CAN be used as a platform for an RPG, with real characters. The only character you're going to have in WoW is going to be in your head, not in the game, you can share it with your party, you can take on different roles in the party, but since the game will never acknowledge your character as anything other than a collection of stats, it will never be an RPG game. That's what makes it a platform for an RPG rather than an RPG game.

I hope I have made my points clearer this time.

 

[MisterStaypuft]

You have made your points clearly, I just don't think the community subscribes to that opinion

 

[Silver]

Okay, first time forum poster here, having not read any of the FAQ or rules I'll try to be as concise and polite as possible.

As a amateur designer of and having played pen and paper RPG's for over a decade I have to say that yes, your friend is correct in that GTA and Assassin's Creed ARE in-fact RPG's. They are Sandbox RPG's based in a fairly close to reality setting and shining examples of such. RPG is short for Role Playing Game, and as such any game where you play the role of a character be it human, alien, robot, or even an animal or diety and interact with the world around that character is an RPG. The lines blur because an RPG game could be based around a modern FPS platform, an over-the-top turn based strategy platform, or even a game where you play a god ordering one's minions about. There are lesser and greater degrees of these variables of course - the case of Black and White being an RPG is pretty flimsy after all - but the definition of Role-Playing a character is all that's needed.

I agree partially with this view. For a GAME to be an RPG the game has to interact with you as well. Anything can be made into a platform for an RPG, you can sit with your friends in Battlefield, with very fleshed out characters, roleplaying through the chat client.

You can also roleplay or get into your character in say, Half-life or San Andreas.

But if the game doesn't interact back, and doesn't respond to your character, the GAME isn't an RPG, even if you're roleplaying your way through it.

 

[Neosage]

I've never said anything about single or multiplayer. There are NO classes in Fallout, really. Explain that statement.

You choose between stealth, close combat and ranged combat then you choose some other skills don't you? These skills define what your class is do they not?

 

[Phase_9]

I find that the most prevalent facet of RPGs are that they are primarily STORY-DRIVEN. I dare you to name one good RPG that did not focus on the story. Leveling is not the most important part of RPGs, it is a tool to help with character customization, which is important, but games don't have to be RPGs to use leveling, therefore the story-driven gameplay is the important thing. I'm not saying that other games don't use stories, but the other games use the story to explain the gameplay, and the player's action is the core of the experience, while RPGs tend to use gameplay as a supplement to the story and the main excitement is unraveling the mysteries in the story. Genre lines are blending, though, and I would never describe GTA as an RPG, but I may tentatively say that Assassin's Creed does have some RPG-like qualities.

 

[Neosage]

]*snip*

There are many games that you could attribute these factors to which people like yourself would not class as RPGs for example Bioshock, you are immersed your choices have concequences and the like.

Edit: You are great at arguing and for that I shall add you.

 

[Teachingaddict]

Perhaps my definition of RPG is incorrect but hopefully someone will agree

A role playing game, is obviously once where you take a part of a person within that game. However, this differs from a game such as COD, as (imo) that role defines the story, how you play it, and in many aspects how the story plays out. In games such as COD, Team fortress etc yes you certainly pick a role, but the role you play certainly doesnt affect the storyline, yes it may affect whether you win or lose (aka TF2) but not in the way that a defined "rpg" would.

 

[Neosage]

Finally someone who gets what I mean.

 

[SteveDave]

Story driven games are usually the basis for which I define what is or is not a RPG. GTA does have a focus on a story but the main appeal is the driving and shooting. Mass Effect is the opposite. Sure you get some decent action but the main appeal is the story and interaction with other characters.

 

[Helmsman]

I agree partially with this view. For a GAME to be an RPG the game has to interact with you as well. Anything can be made into a platform for an RPG, you can sit with your friends in Battlefield, with very fleshed out characters, roleplaying through the chat client.

You can also roleplay or get into your character in say, Half-life or San Andreas.

But if the game doesn't interact back, and doesn't respond to your character, the GAME isn't an RPG, even if you're roleplaying your way through it.

That's quite true and a very good point. The world interacting back is what separates an RPG from a platformer like MARIO 3.

 

[GenHellspawn]

You choose between stealth, close combat and ranged combat then you choose some other skills don't you? These skills define what your class is do they not?

Well, there's a difference between class selection and specialization. In Fallout, you can use whatever weapons and armor you like right from the start, but your stats will reflect how you use these abilities. Class selection usually means only being able to use specific weapons, armor, and abilities that are tailored for your class.

 

[Mr Brickjaw]

Okay, a little background and a humorous anecdote before I get into my problem: I was talking to a friend of mine today about video games. At one point, I brought up Mass Effect. He immediately said he hated it because there's too much talking (which I can sort if understand, even if it is, like my other friend put it, like saying "I hate Halo because you have to run in it"). Eventually, this discussion panned out into RPGs as a whole. When I asked what RPGs he likes, he said, and I kid you not, Assassin's Creed and GTA IV. Obviously, he has confused sandbox games with RPGs. When I called him on this, he said "well, there's a lot of freedom and you can choose what you do. Isn't that what an RPG is?" He then asked, if not, what an RPG really is. Now, I know what an RPG is, but I can't find any way to word it. All I could think of on the spot was character customization. So, I need help; what are the components of an RPG, and how can I word this in a way to differentiate it from sandbox games? I know the answer, I just can't word it.

EDIT:Another thing. In that same conversation, he called GTA IV a First Person Shooter. Just throwing it out there.

RPG's go BOOM!




no seriously though, if you want your mate to know what an RPG is then just throw Oblivion at him a couple of times, point out the differences between that and say...GTA and he should get the message...unless hes a retard...then i cant help.

 

[Silver]

Neosage:

Ah, but in Fallout I can be a fighter/rogue/engineer/medic that takes up politics on the side. It doesn't have a class system, at all. You create a character, a person, not limited by class restrictions. I won't say if it's better or worse than a class system, but it's certainly different.



To the people saying that story is the most important part of an RPG, answer me this.

Is a good story that the game focuses on enough for a game to be an rpg, or does that story have to react to the actions of your character?

San Andreas had a lot of story, I wouldn't say it focused on it, but the story was what kept me playing, not the shooting and stealing of cars. However that story is always going to be the same, no matter if CJ is a fat guy who never commits a crime (except when forced to by the story), or an athlete who picks fights with everyone he comes across. The story will always unfold in the same way. The story will always end in the same way, and CJ will always say the same things, do the same things, and have the same alliances.

In Fallout instead, there's also a lot of focus on the story. In Fallout the vault dweller is defined by you. If the vault dweller is really stupid people will react differently. If the vault dweller is really smart and charismatic, the world will react. If the vault dweller shoots people at random, the vault dweller will not be welcome amongst others. If the Vault dweller helps a lot of people instead, the vault dweller will gain a reputation for it.


One of these is an rpg, where the other is not. Why? In both games there's an advanced storyline, a pretty long plot. In both games you interact with the world. However, in one of the games the world is static, unresponsive. In the other it reacts to you, it changes. And when you leave you will have had an impact on the people you left behind. One of the games were inhabited by pixels, by loot, and by cool scenes, the other was inhabited by people. Sure, it sounds pretentious, but that's basically what it all boils down to, what makes Fallout an RPG, and what makes San Andreas "only" a shooter with a storyline.

 

[Neosage]

You choose between stealth, close combat and ranged combat then you choose some other skills don't you? These skills define what your class is do they not?

Well, there's a difference between class selection and specialization. In Fallout, you can use whatever weapons and armor you like right from the start, but your stats will reflect how you use these abilities. Class selection usually means only being able to use specific weapons, armor, and abilities that are tailored for your class.

Not necessarily you choose a class in morrowind at the start or you can generate one and you can specialize in certain stuff but you can wear all the armour from the begining.

 

[Silver]

Seriously, who cares about what stuff you can wear, that has nothing to do with classes. Some games impose even more limits on classes than others, yes. But it doesn't say anything about Fallout, and if it uses classes, which it doesn't. Just like Bloodlines doesn't use classes (admittedly, it does use clans, which are similar to classes, but the system is neither class or level based, especially not as a mortal).

 

[Helmsman]

One of these is an rpg, where the other is not. Why? In both games there's an advanced storyline, a pretty long plot. In both games you interact with the world. However, in one of the games the world is static, unresponsive. In the other it reacts to you, it changes. And when you leave you will have had an impact on the people you left behind. One of the games were inhabited by pixels, by loot, and by cool scenes, the other was inhabited by people. Sure, it sounds pretentious, but that's basically what it all boils down to, what makes Fallout an RPG, and what makes San Andreas "only" a shooter with a storyline.

By that definition no Final Fantasy game in existence is an RPG. It sounds like your idea of a reactive world is different than most people's. What you're describing is the difference between a linear scripted RPG and a game like THE SIMS. By your definition THE SIMS is more of an RPG than Final Fantasy is because the SIMS game world reacts more fluidly to the actions of the character. I won't deny that THE SIMS has RPG elements, but there's probably a lot of people here who won't give that argument credence. An RPG where the world that reacts to the player's actions via a linear script is still an RPG like the one that has a meticulously programmed world that reacts in an unscripted way via variables in the AI. One RPG might be better than the other, but neither method is any less valid.